INDIANA MAGAZINE
OF HISTORY
VOLUMEXXXIII
SEPTEMBER, 1937
NUMBER
3
The Southern Influence in the Formation
of Indiana
JOHN
D. BARNHART
James Bryce wisely observed that state constitutions
furnish invaluable material and are a mine of instruction for
the history of democratic communities. If this be true, the
first constitution of a state should reveal some of the social
and political ideals of its citizens at the time of its adoption.
A study of such a document, which includes the antecedents
of the members of the convention, the contests in framing
the constitution, and the ideas of which it was formed, aids
one in understanding the part played by the settlers from the
various sections of the nation in the founding of the new
commonwealth.
The movement for statehood in Indiana was a natural
outgrowth of the contests of the earlier period. During his
governorship of the territory, William Henry Harrison became identified with the interests of the capital city of Vincennes, with the group of officials that he appointed to the
various county and territorial offices, and with the settlers
who believed that the prohibition of slavery north of the Ohio
River was excluding desirable immigrants, delaying the development of the territory and interfering with the establishment of the type of society which many preferred.'
The Harrison group came to be called the Virginia Aristocrats.* Although a number of important positions were
'Tho A m m ' m Commonwealth (London. 1891). I. 434.
'Dorothy B. Goebel, William H e n w Harrison, Indiana HMtoriccJ CoUsct+
(IndlU U D O I ~ 19%). X N (1926). 63-68: Jamb P. Dunn. I u d t a n a , A Redmnptum from
Slawor# (Batan, lWO),294416; k n n . Indiana and Indiathw, 6 rols. (Chicapo. 1919).
I
286408.
'Donn. I n d i a w
397.
Indiana Magazine of History
262
held by Virginians,’ all of the members of the group did not
come from that state. Negro servants were held in Indiana
by some of these aristocrats, although slavery was forbidden
by the Northwest Ordinance.’ Petitions requesting the modification of the ordinance were forwarded to Congress6 and a
system of indentured servitude was permitted by the territorial legislature.‘ Aristocratic manners, characteristic of the
plantation South o r of the old country had been carried into
this frontier region. General James Dill, a native of Ireland
whom Harrison appointed a prosecuting attorney, attended
court in the costume of a gentleman of the Revolutionary period, knee breeches, silver buckles, and cue “a mild protest
against the leveling tendencies of the age.8” When the candidate of this group was defeated by Jonathan Jennings in
1809 in the election of a delegate to Congress, Waller Taylor,
a Harrisonite, tried to pick a quarrel with Jennings; and
Thomas Randolph, the defeated candidate, challenged a critic
to fight a due1.O
Certain developments occurred which lessened the influence and security of the Harrison group. Illinois was separated from Indiana territory, disturbing existing relations
and reducing the number of Harrison’s supporters.1o Vincennes was no longer centrally located, and in 1813 the capital was moved to Corydon.ll Immigration increased the im‘Among these may be mentioned Waller Taylor. Chancellor of the territory, 1807.
1814. Thomas Randolph Attorney General, 180~1811:and Samuel Gwathmey. a awnber Af the legislative d y c i l . Nina K. Reid, Sketches of Early Indiana SenatoreWaller Taylor 1816-1826 Indiana Mamzins of H i s t m y IX (1913). 92-96: William W.
Woolen, Biog&hid
a& Historical Sketches o f Eariu Indiana (Idnianapolis 188S),
391-99: Dunn, Indiana, 326 : Louis B. .Ewbank and Dorothy 5 Riker (eds.). Ths Lam
o f Indiuna Territory 1809-1818. I?uhanu H w t O + i d Collectunrs, XX (1934) 1817-80*
B w g r a p h i d Direct& of
Amcrriwr Congrsse. 1774-1887 (Washington, lb8). l d
‘Dann Lsnn. Luke Decker. and David Robb will aeme aa illustrations. Skdches of
Lynn,- Witlip& H.-EngKsh Collection (University of Chleago Library), Indiana Bio.
graphic+ Sketches, L: sketches of +bb, ibid., R : y l l i a m W. Woolen, s t d . (A),
“Executive Journal of Indiana Territory. 1800-1816, Indiana Historical Society Prb
lications (Indlanapolis, 1897-). III (1900). see index for these names: Histow of Dsarborn and Ohio Countiee.. Indiana (Chicago, 1886). 100, 490: Dunn. Indiana and Indianans. I, 301: Gil R. Stormont. H i s t m u of Gibson Countu, Indiana (Indianapolis, 1914).
41-43: History o f K n o z and Dames8 Counties. Indiana (Chicago, 1886). 86-86; aee advertisement by Samuel Gwathmey in Vincennes Western Sun, ADril 30. 1814.
O.Jaq.ob P Dunn (ed.). “Slavery Petitions and Papers,” Indiana Historical Society,
Publtcattonu., I1 f,18961.
.. 443-629.
7 “Laws of Indiana Territory. 1806 ” ch. XXVI. Francis S. Philbrick (ed.), !
I
%
Laws of Indiana Territory, 1801-1809: Illinois State Historical Library, Cdlectionr
(Springfield. Illinois. 1903-), XXI (1930). 89-168.
sHistoru of Dearborn and Ohio Counties, Indiana, 148-49: 0. H. Smith, Early IndG
am Trials and Sketches (Cincinnati, 1868). 172-73; sketches of James Dill, English
Collection, Biographical Sketches, D : Dunn, Indiana and Indianians, I, 287: “Exeiutive
Journal of Indiana Territory.” Zoc. cit., 117, 164. 167. 174. 180. 201. 205. 209. 217.
Woolen, Biographical Sketches 391-99-Dunn Indiana A Rsdemption from S ~ U Q ~ ,
398-401: Charles Kettleborough, Cdrstitution Madng in Ihiana, 8 vols. (Indianapolis,
1916). I, 64.
loDunn, Indiana, 832-83.
Logan Esarey, A History of Indiana (Fort Wayne, Indiana, 1924). 1. 242.
.
Southern Influence an Indiana
263
portance of the eastern and southern parts of the territory.’*
The voters were permitted to choose the delegate to Congress
and the members of the territorial council as well as of the
house of representatives.18 Jonathan Jennings was elected
delegate to Congress and an opposition group led by him and
closely associated with the Territorial Legislature came into
being.” The indenture law, by which the proslavery interests
had circumvented the Northwest Ordinance, was repe~1ed.l~
The only feature of the Harrison regime that was not overthrown was the governor’s control over patronage, and Jennings made attacks on that in Congress.1e
The War of 1812 gave Harrison an honorable escape from
the growing opposition. The extent to which the old division disappeared with him is disputed. Jacob P. Dunn thought
that the old issues continued until the constitution was
framed. Governor Thomas Posey, who succeeded Harrison,
was also a Virginian and a soldier.“ He had petitioned for
the admission of slaves. “It was only natural,” wrote Dunn,
“that the personal friends of General Harrison became Posey’s
personal friends; and in equally natural sequence he fell heir
to Harrison’s political estate as well as to his office.”l* The
Jennings group was determined to wrest control from this
aristocratic, proslavery circle which was strongly centered in
Vincennes and Knox County. The election of delegates t o the
constitutional convention was a great victory for the Jennings or popular party, which made possible an antislavery
constitution.
Professor Logan Esarey has disputed these points :
In the selection of delegates to the convention no definite political
Even the old issues of slavparties nor political issues appeared.
...
.
laZbid
I 230-38 Waldo F Mitchell “Indiana’s Growth 1812-1820 ” Indiana Magazine of H&tiru X (i914) 36i-96. N&
Weeklu Repieter i X (1816)’ 171 186. Dunn.
Indiana 391-9i. Ninth demu.8 0 ) the United States lb70 StiatiS&a 0 ) Po;rJbtbn
(Wasbi&bn, 1872). 26-26; Stephen B. Weeks. South& &lf... a+ SZavurg.
In Johns. Hopkins University Studies i n Nratoncd and Polrttcd Sctence, Extra Voi:
XV (Baltlmore. 1896), 261-84.
““Acts of Indiana. Territory. 1811,” ch. XVI, in Ewbank and .Rik.er (edn.!, T+
h w s of Indiana T e m t o r y , 1809-1816, 209-94: Kettleborough. Conatttutwn Making sm
Indiana. I. 66-67.
“Dorothy Riker, “Jonathan Jennings,” in Indiana Magazine of Histmu XXVUI
(1932). 223-39; Logan Esarey Messages and Pa era of Jonathun Jennings
Indiana
H i a t o r i d Collections, XI1 (1b24). 6-1, 27-28: Eiographiod Directory of the Amencan
COn~W’ess, 1917. 1149.
“Acts of Indiana Territory. 1810 ” ch XXVIII, in Ewbank and Riker (ede.). The
h w s of Indiana Tem‘tory. 1809-1816,’ 89-iO8.
laRiker. “Jonathan Jennings,” loc. cit.. 231.
I’ James Hall, “Memoir of Thomas Poser.” in Jared Sparks (ed.), The Libram of
American B i o w q h u . Second Series, 15 vols. Boston, (1862-18g6), IX (1862). 869-403:
Woolen, Biographical Sketches, 21-28.
“Dunn. Indiana, 417-18.
..
. .’.
Indiana Magazine of History
264
ery and aristocracy belonged to the era of territorial strife. The slaverp
question seems to have played a very minor part in the selection of
18
delegates and in the work of the convention.
...
Undoubtedly Professor Esarey has made a much needed
correction in calling attention to the overemphasis on the
slavery question, but it is possible that he has gone too far in
the opposite direction. Animosities and prejudices die slowly,
voters are not especially rational, and politicians hesitate to
surrender a useful issue. Jennings was a skilful politician,m
slavery was discussed,21 and something like the old division
is to be seen in a careful analysis of the work of the convention.22 Something of the aristocratic social order might be
maintained with indentured servitude, and convictions must
be honored even in defeat.
Only statehood could give the populgr party control over
patronage and the executive. A state constitution, with a
rigid prohibition of negro indenture as well as slavery, would
guard the people against the possible future introduction of
negroes, and check permanently the development of an aristocratic society that was patterned on that of the plantation
South. Of great importance, also, was the desire for complete local self-government and participation in national affairs. The old Harrison group was opposed to this develop
ment, for i t would end the regime that gave them honors and
positions.
I
After the territorial assembly petitioned for statehood
and an adequate population was indicated by a census, Congress passed an enabling act authorizing a constitutional
convention.28 The passage of the act came so shortly before
the date set for the election of delegates, that a campaign,
such as had occurred before the convention of 1802 in Ohio,H
was impossible. A few letters and editorials appeared dealing chiefly with Jennings and the slavery question.26 Timothy
Flint, who was in Indiana at the time, wrote:
Esarey, Mesaanes and Papers of Jonathun Jennings.
diana. I. 242-43, 247-49.
. .. 6-12 ; id.,
Historv oj k
=Riker, “Jonathan Jennings,” bc. dt., 239.
a Vincennea Western Sun, February 8. March 2, SO, 1818 ; T’plotEy Flint,
lectwns of the Last Ten Years (New York, 1932). 67; Dunn. Indtcrna A Redempha,
from Slaweru, 219 ff.. and Dunn, I n d i u m and Indianians, I. 290-91 ; Kettiebborough Cat.
stitution Making in Indiana, 1, xv-xvii.
Below, pp. 264-276.
e, Francis N. Thorpe ( o ~ m p . ) , Federal and Stat8 Constitutions
and Other Or.
ganic Laws
, 7 vola (Washington. 1909). II, 1036-1066; Esarey, HistotV of I n d i o y
I, 242-47.
John D. Barnhart. “The Southern Influence in the Formation of Ohio,” Journal
of Southern History (Baton Rouge, 1936-), 111 (1937). 28-42.
Vincennea Western Sun, January 27, February 3. March 2, 80, April 20. May 8, I t
and June 1, 1316.
&+.
...
...
Southern Influence in Indiana
265
The question in all its magnitude, whether it should be a slaveholding state or not, was just now agitating. I was often compelled to
hear the question debated by those in opposite interestes with no small
degree of asperity.26
The most valid argument against statehood was the expense it would involve, although the objection to the haste
with which delegates must be chosen was not entirely pointless. The election resulted in a victory for the popular or Jennings party, to which almost two-thirds of the delegates appear to have belonged.
A survey of the members of this group is instructive.27
Although its opponents were called Virginians, the Old Dominion was the birthplace of the largest group of delegates
who were members of the popular party. Four of them came
from the Piedmont2* and one from the Valley of Virginia.2Q
They may have been a part of the exodus of farmers who
emigrated as the plantation system spread to the weStward.*O
RecoUectione, 67.
“The political alipnment of the delegates was estimated on the basis of the r e
corded roll calls of the convention. Those who voted similarly were sdllluned to-belong
to the same group or party. The likelihood of error was greatest in classfymg the
&ksaten who were moderate or independent. The roll calls are found in “Journal of
the Convention of the Convention of the Indiana Territory.” in State Bar Association
of Indiana, Report of the Sizteenth Ann& Meeting (Indianapolis. 1912). 187-231. Very
Wef biographical notes about members of the mnvention are fo.nnd in “Members of
the Indiana Constitutional Convention of 1816,” in Indiana Magazine of Hiat0l.y. XXVI
a Flint,
(19SO). 147-61.
a h u e l Smock was born in Berkeley County. Virginia. He lived In Kentucky for
WemI years and was married while there; sketch of Smock in English Collection. BiomDhfeal Sketches, S : “Executive Journal of Indiana Territory,” loo. cit. 167, 166. 168,
171 202 206 220. Jacob Vawter. “Early History of Madison,” in India& Magazine of
R&#,’XII’ (191i). 227-231.
John D. Barnhart “Sources of Southern Migration into the Old Northwest,” In
M W p P i VaUev Hietokcal Review (Cedar Rapids. 1916-). XXII (1986). 49-62, S e e
6667. and references cited.
Indiana Magazine of History
266
The exact nativity of two has not been determinedPl Four
of the seven lived in Kentucky for a time before moving to
Indiana and all but one received appointments from Governor
Harrison.
Four other members of the popular party were born in
Maryland, and they seem to have been connected with the
population movements in the “Old West.” One was born in
Hagerstown, all but one later lived in Kentucky, and the other
spent much of his life on the frontier. Not one of these was
appointed to office by Harrison.8a
Only two of Kentucky’s native sons were members of
the popular group. One was a Quaker, an active supporter
of Jennings, and an opponent of slavery.88 He was not given
an office by Harrison, but the other Kentuckian, who was
John DePauw, a son of Charles DePauw, the friend and
associate of Lafayette, was appointed a judge and an official
in the militia.84 The influence of Kentucky was heightened
because nine other members of the controlling party had resided there before coming to Indiana.86
=These were Davis Floyd and John Bennefield. Floyd wan said to be a m e m k
of a famous Virginia family. He became a friend of Harrison and waa appointed to
a number of official positions, but became involved in the Burr conspiracy. Hir commissions were revoked and no further appointments were given to him by H.rrirOn.
He c a d to he a member of the Harrison group. became a member of the DopaLr
party and wan made clerk to the lower house of the Territorial Assembly. Sketch of
Floyd, English Collection, Biographical. Sketch:#, F: 1J. Cox, “The Burr CUBs p i r n q in Indlsna” in Indtona Maoaano of Hutoru, XXV (1929). 11-80: ‘‘Execdm
Journal of Indiana Territory.” &c. cit., 101, 112. 121. 122, 184. 137, 147, 186. 187. 197:
Lerington, Indiana W s s h Ea&. April 1, 1814. Colonel Bennefield WM a VirglnIu~,
but he waa the only successful candidate in Knox County who waa not a member Oi
the Harrison group and who held antislavery views: H. V. Helms to John C. Br
and John C. B r i m to W. H. English in English Collection. Biopraphid Sketches!!:
Dunn, Indiana and Iudhnam, I. 296.
“They were the Reverend Hugh Cull. Thomas Carr, William H. Eads, and Chula
Polk. Cull was horn in Havre de Grace of Catholic parents with whom he went to
Pennsylvania at an early ape. As a young man he went weat to Kentucky whera ha
waa married.
He served aa a I d preacher in the Methodist Church after he moved
to Indiana Sketches of Cull. Endish Collection. Biomaphical Sketches. C: Wiley,
“Methodism in Southeastern Indiana’’ in Iudicmua lKag&nd of HiSto?r. XXIII. 81. 87.
88. Thomas Carr lived in Maryland until he grew to manhood and waa marrled. He
moved to Faye+ County: Pennnylmnia and from there to Indiana Territory. Sketcha
of Carr. English Collection. Biographid Sketches. C. William H. Eads wan born in
Hagerstown from which he moved to Kentucky and then on to Indiana He is Mid
to have been an Episcopalian and a Federalist. E. J. M!!on
to W. Enpl
December 13, 188!,, English Collection. Biographical Sketches. E : Executive Journal%
Indiana Territory loc. cit 258. Charles Polk was horn in Maryland married into
Virginia family. &d during’the Revolution moved to the northern panhrkdle of Virplnk
He later moved to Kentucky. where the Indians captured his family. Many years sita
he was reunited with his wife and children, he moved to Indians. He WM a BaptLt
preacher and held antislavery views. He WBB the father of William Polk who wan alm
a member of the convention, hut an adherent of the opposition. Sketch of Polk, English Collection, Biographical Sketches. P: Logan Esarey. “Indian ,$aptives In Early Indiana.” in Zndiana Mauazins of History. IX. 96-112: James Polke, Some Memoire of tho
Polke.
and Mathes Families,” ibid., X, 88-89; William Bruce, “Memoirs of the Bmm
Family. ibid., XXIII, 66.
This was Joseph Holman : sketch. of Joseph Holman. English Collection. Biographical Sketches, G (misfiled) : Dunn. Indtona, A Rsdsrnptron from Sloueru. 891-96.
Sketch of John De Pauw. English Collection, Biographical Sketches, P (misfiled) :
“Executive Journal of Indiana Territory,” &a. &t., 196. 206: History of t
h Ohio Fa&
C i t k and Their CountisS, 2 vols. (Cleveland. Ohio, 1882). 11, 280.
“These were Pennineton. Cull Eads William Graham Brownlee, Noble, Smock.
Cotton. and Charles Polk. B i o g r a p i f d d k a for each of these is given on pp. 6-8 and
notes 26-42 Of t h b paper.
.,,.
Southern Influence in Indiana
267
Each of the Carolinas contributed a native son to the
Jennings party. Robert Hanna, who seems to have been something of a “character,” came to Indiana from South Carolina
about 1800. He was fond of drilling the local militia although the cornstalks which many carried in the place of guns
contrasted strangely with his own elaborate uniform. He is
reported as having had an “innate prejudice” against slavery
and slaveholders but as being careful about speaking of it in
the early days when it was not popular and when he was a
friend and an appointee of Governor Harrison. No doubt this
prejudice affected his alignment in the convention with the
popular party, and his fondness for office would tend to bring
him over to the majority.*O William Lowe, a native of North
Carolina, was not a Quaker, but was considered to be very
favorable to the adherents of that faith.37
Jonathan Jennings, who was the leader of the popular
group and the president of the convention, and six other delegates who aided him in the convention came from the Middle
States. Four of the five Pennsylvanians seem to have been
connected with the “Old West” or the Trans-Appalachian
movement.38 One delegate came from D e l a ~ a r e . ~After
~
coming to Indiana, Jennings, who was pmbably a native of
New Jersey, saw the opportunity of championing the “antislavery, capital-moving, and anti-Harrison forces” at a time
when they were already in the as~endancy.’~This resulted
in his election as delegate to Congress, where he endeavored to
strip Harrison of some of his appointive powers and to discredit him in various ways, bringing the enabling act safely
through Congress as the climax of his efforts. Two other
members of the popular party came from the North. They
were New Englanders, being natives of Connecticut, one of
DO Indianapolis Jqurnal. November 22, 1868 : John H. B. Nowland, Earlv Rsminiseencse of Indianapolur (Indianapolis. 1870). 193-96: sketch of Robert Hanna English
Collection. Biographical Sketches, H : Hubert M. Skinner, “Broolnrille’s Roudded CenJune, 1908,” in Ind$zna Magazine of H i e b r u , VI (1910). 81-86; “Executive Journal of Indiana Territory. loc. cit., 168, 191.
Sketch of William Lowe. English Collection, Biographical Sketches, L.
=The four were Jeremiah Cox, John K. Graham, Samuel Milroy. and James Brownlee. The fifth, Robert Mchtire, may have been for he WBB born In Gbeskr County.
Pennsylvania ; sketch of McIntire, English Collection, Biographical Sketches, M. For Cox.
see sketch in English Collection, Biographical Sketches, C ; “Memoir of David Hoover.”
in Indiana Magazine of Historu 11 (1906) 17-27. See sketch of Graham in English
Collection. Biographical Sketches: G , and Hiator# of ths Ohio FaUe Citiss and Their
Counties. 11, 247. A sketch of Milroy is to be found in the English Collection, Biographical Sketches. M. See a sketch of Brownlee by his son. John Brownlee. and a n undated
newspaper clipping in the English Collection, Biographical Sketchen. B.
This was Solomon Manwaring ’ “Executive Journal of Indiana Territow.” loo. cit..
167. 206, 233 : Historv of Deurborn ’and Ohio Countim, Indiana, 633. 822-23 : A m o s W.
Butler, “Notes Concerning Brookville, Ind., A Century Ago,” in Indiana Magazine of
Hiatorr, XIII (1917). 146-60.
* Riker, “Jonathan Jenninga.” in Indiana Magazine of Histmu, XXVIII. 239.
tury,
268
Indiana Magazine of History
them a Baptist preacher. Neither had lived in the South an&
neither received an office from Governor Harrison:’
From Ireland came two other delegates of the Jennings’
faction. Both had lived in Pennsylvania, one moving west
by way of Tennessee, the other through Kentucky. One wa8
a prominent Quaker.’*
Altogether fifteen of the popular party were natives of
the South, seven were born in the Middle States, two were
New Englanders, and two were Irishmen. In addition to the
fifteen natives, four others had resided in the South, and a
number had married southern women. Only seven of the
group were not natives or former residents of the South, but
the evidence indicates that the southerners were from the
Upland not the Lowland South. Not more than one-third of
the popular party had been appointed to office by Harrison,
Natives of the Old Dominion were also more numerous
than the sons of any other state in the party of the Virginia
Aristocrats, numbering five out of a total of sixteen. Two
were born in Piedmont
and a third was born in the
northern panhandle above Wheeling.44 Four of the five lived
for a time in Kentucky45and all were appointed to office save
one who was a Baptist minister. Patrick Shields, who was the
sole native of the Virginia coastal plain, was born upon a
UThese were Ezra Ferris and Nathaniel Hunt. Ferris was born in Stanwich. Connecticut. H e came t o Cincinnati as a child, but returned to New England for his education. H e became a Baptist preacher, a school teacher, a physician, and a drugpi&
E z r a Ferris, “The Early Settlement of the Miami County,” Indiana Historical Society
Publications, I (1897). 243-364 : sketches of Ferris. English Collection. Biographical
Sketches, F : “Executive Journal of Indiana Territory.” loc. cit., 241. Hunt was born
in Litchfield County, Connecticut. He moved to Dayton, Ohio, and later to Madison.
Indiana. Simon H u n t to William H. English, November 24. 1886. English Collection.
Biographical Sketches, H.
”These were Patrick Beard and William Graham. Beard was brought to Pennsylvania as a n infant. With his parents he moved to North Carolina, and later, when a
young man, he moved to Tennessee, before coming t o Indiana. Sketch of Beard, Endllb
Collection, Biographical Sketches, B. Graham also came to Pennsylvania as a child.
When a young man he moved to Kentucky, and ten years later he came to Indianr
Indianapolis Gazette, March 1. 1825, a newspaper clipping i n English Collection, Blo.
graphical Sketches, G. Beard was a leading member of the Quaker organization.
“These were the Reverend Alexander Devin and James Smith. Devin was born
i n Pittsylvania County, Virginia. He moved to Kentucky when thirty years of age and
to Indiana ten years later. H e was a Baptist minister. Sketch of Devin i n the English
Collection, Biographical Sketches. D. Smth, who was born in Orange County, Virgin&
moved t o Kentucky, and then to Indiana, where he became a justice of t h e peace in
Knox County, and a captain in the militia. Sketch of Smith in the English Colleotion, Biographical Sketches, S : “Executive Journal of Indiana Territory,” Zoc. cit., lT8,
179-80.
“This was William Polk, a son of Charles Polk, who was also a member of the
convention. H e spent much of his early life In Kentucky before coming to Indiana.
H e was one of the Indian captives referred t o in nupra, note 32. I n addition to the
references rited there, seen a n obituary said to have been copied from the Fort Wayne
Times. Enalish Collection. Biographical Sketches. P : Dunn, Indiana and Zndianuns, I.
293 : and “Executive Journal of Indiana Territory.” b e . cit., 150. 238.
a These were Devin. Smith, William Polk, and Daniel C. Lane. Lane was a IU.
tive of Virginia. After corning to Indiana, he was appointed a judge, and later s e d
as state treasurer and as a representative in the legislature. Sketch of Lane, Endllh
Collection, Biographical Sketches, La “Executive Journal of Indiana Territory,” loc.
cit., 221.
Southern Influmce in Indiana
269
plantation. He was educated at Hampden-Sydney and at William and Mary where he became a friend of William Henry
Harrison, who appointed him, at a later time, a judge in Harrison County, Indiana T e r r i t ~ r y . ~
In~the convention he was
more of a moderate than a partisan.
Three members of this aristocratic or opposition party
were natives of Kent~cky.~’One of these, Doctor David H.
Maxwell, was descended from a Virginia family that had
moved along the Shenandoah Valley on the way from Pennsylvania to Albemarle County, Virginia. Although he and his
wife were slave-owners by inheritance, they crossed the Ohio
“to get clear of slavery.”4s Maxwell’s practise of medicine may
have kept him from being interested in office, but the other
Kentuckians, one of whom was a slave-owner, were appointees
of Harrison. Daniel Grass, who attended too few sessions of
the convention to be classified with either4egroup, was also a
native of Kentucky. John Boone, the sole Marylander in the
opposition, had been for several years a resident of Kentucky.60
Three important members of the opposition came from
the Middle States. Benjamin Parke, a native of New Jersey,
moved to Kentucky as a young man, studied law, and was
married, before emigrating to Vincennes where he became
an intimate friend and partisan of Harrison. He was appointed attorney general for the territory, served in the territorial legislature, became a delegate to Congress, and, for
eight years, was a territorial judge. After Indiana became
a state, he was appointed a federal district
John
~
@Above. note 8.
4’ These were Doctor David H. Maxwell, Dan Lynn, and James Lemon. Lynn brought
his slaves with him when he moved from Kentucky to Indiana. He is said t o have
liberated them when Indiana entered the Union. See above, note 6. for referencen on
Lynn. Information about James Lemon is very meager. consisting largely of the statement that he was said to have been horn in Kentucky, and a record of the offices he
held in Indiana. Sketch of Lemon, English Collection, Biographioal Sketches, L ; and
“Executive Journal of Indiana Territory,” bc. cit., 132. 1 6. 176. 204. The ariatocratic
party, being the minority element in the Constitutional Convention. will be referred to
as the opgosition.
18 Sketch, of Maxwell by a so?, James D. Maxwell : another sketch signed W. H. J. :
and a clipping from the Blqomington. Indiana. N e w s Letter, J u n e 24, 1864, in the
Albert Gallatin Porter Collection. Indiana State Library. Indianapolis. Indiana. These
Items were brought t o m y attention by Miss Esther McNitt of the Indiana State Library. See also sketch of Maxwell in English Collection Biographical Sketches, M : and
Louise Maxwell, “Sketch of Dr. David H. Maxwell,” in Indiana Maganize of History.
VII (1912), 101-08.
Sketch of Daniel Grass, English Collection, Biographical Sketches, G ; “Executive
Journal of Indiana Territory.” Zoc. cit., 148. 188. 214, 218.
Sketches of John Boone. English Collection. Biographical Sketehea, B : “Executive
Journal of Indiana Territory,’’ Zoc. cit., 150.
61 George S. Cottman “Benjamin Parke ” in Dictionary of American Biomaphy 20
vols. (New York 1928-1436) XIV (1934) ’209-10. Woolen, Biographical Sketches. k7383. 384-90: “Minkes of the’ Indiana Histbrical &ciety.” in Indiana Historial Society
Publications, I, 3-76, passim; “Executive Journal of Indiana Territory.” loc. cit., 109,
146, 196 : undated obituary notice in English Collection, Biographical Sketches, P.
270
Indiana Magazine of History
Johnson was a Pensylvanian, a proslavery leader, and an
owner of at least one negro servant. He, too,served as attorney general, being one of the ablest lawyers in the territory
and one of the most consistent leaders in the Harrison party."
A third of the Harrison men from the Middle States was born
in Washington County, Pennsylvania. He moved to Kentucky,
studied law, medicine, and theology, before moving to Indiana,
where he was appointed a prosecuting attorney and a judga6*
Three strong men were found among the four members
of the opposition who were foreign by birth. Jean L. Badollet,
friend of Albert Gallatin and registrar of the land office at
Vincennes, was a native of Switzerland. An idealist, he entertained antislavery views which occasioned disagreement
with Governor Harrison. There was no open break and both
Badollet and his son accepted office from the governor.K4The
second of these foreign born adherents of the opposition wa8
General James Dill, already noticed as a "gentleman of the
last century." Born in Dublin, brought to America when an
infant, he lived in Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Ohio, before
coming to Indiana. He saw service with Anthony Wayne and
studied law in the office of General Arthur St. Clair, whose
daughter he married. He joined the Harrison group and was
rewarded with several offices.66 The third of this group was
David Robb, one of Harrison's friends who owned slaves. He,
too, was born in Ireland and was brought to America in childhood. Like Dill, he lived in Kentucky and became a friend
and appointee of Harrison after coming to Indiana.68 Frederick Rapp, who came from Germany, was the adopted son of
the founder of Harmonie. Elected from Knox County, the
stronghold of the Harrison party, he voted with the opposition
in the convention.8'
Nine of the sixteen members of the opposition were nativefi of the South. Most of these were from the Upland
"Will of John Johnson, a commission signed by WIlliam Henry Harrison. and a
sketch of Johnson. English Collection BiomaDhical Sketches. I - J * Dunn, Indiana A
Redsmption from Slaverv. 239. 322, 823-28, et passim; Dnnn. India& and India%ian&I.
293: "Executive Joraanl of Inbana Territory," &a. cit.. 146. 169, 192.
""hi8 waa James Scott. See a elipDing from the Clark County Indiana, RecenZ,
August 7. 1886, and a sketch of Scott in the English Collection, Biograihical Sketches, S:
"Executive Journal of Indiana Territory," be. cit., 168, 196, 197.
""Executive Journal of Indiana Territory." loc. cit 129. 132. 192: Henry A d a .
The Life of Albert Gallatin (PbiladelDhia. 1880). 404-0;;
sketchy of Badollet. English
Collection. Biographical Sketches, B : Henry S. Cauthorn. A Haatorv of tha Cttv of
Vincenne-s (Terre Haute, Indiana, 1902). 184-85; Goebel. Harlison. 81-82: Dunn, IndG
a m and Indiamn.9. 11. 129, 132. 192, 29s.
"Above. 2 and note 8.
"Above. note 6.
E.
Sketch
'
of Frederick RapD. English Collection, Biographical Sketches, R : George B.
Lockwood. The New H a m u hlovsment (New York, 1906). 11, 25-26.
Southern Influence in Indiana
271
South, but at least one came from the Lowland. Three were
natives of the North, while four were of foreign birth. Altogether thirteen of the sixteen had lived in the South.
A comparison of the two groups is interesting. The popular party contained two New Englanders who were members of the convention. These and the seven natives of the
Middle States made a total of nine or thirty-five per cent of
the popular party born in the North. In contrast only three
of the opposition were born in the North and they constituted
but nineteen per cent of their group. More than half of both
groups were southern by nativity, fifty-eight per cent of the
popular party and fifty-six of the opposition. Only one of the
delegates is known to have come from the Lowland South,
although the opposition seems to have desired to establish in
Indiana a type of life somewhat approximating that of the
plantation area. In the popular party were certain individuals who were much opposed to this. They included two
Quakers, two Baptist preachers, one Methodist preacher, one
delegate said to have been friendly to the Quakers, and the
two New Englanders. In the opposition, however, were four
men who owned negroes either as slaves or servants. The
distribution of the appointments made by Harrison serves
to connect the convention with the differences of the territorial period. One-third of the popular party, including those
who had left the circle of Harrison's friends, had received
appointments, while three-fourths of the opposition party of
the convention had been favored under Harrison.
Not only was the popular group and the opposition more
than half composed of natives of the South, but the total number of native southerners was twenty-five of the forty-three
members of the convention, o r fifty-eight per cent. Adding to
this number the members who had resided in the South but
had not been born there, the total of those who had come in
contact with life in that section before coming to Indiana was
thirty-two or seventy-four per cent of the convention.
The convention began its work by choosing as its president Jonathan Jennings and by authorizing him to appoint a
number of committees.6* He did not act in a partisan manner, for he chose from the opposition as many committee
chairmen as from his own group. The marked ability of
several members of the opposition made this a very reasonm"Journal of the Convention of the Indiana Territory." in State Bar Association
of Indiana Report of the Sizteenth Annual Meetinn. 141-64.
272
I n d i u m Magazine o f History
able procedure. However, most of the committees were in
the hands of the majority group, but this was to be expected
for the majority was almost twice as numerous as the opps
sition.
The votes of the members of the convention do not reveal
a strict partisan alignment, but they do indicate that there
were two groups whose views were not alike.6Q The absence
of a strict alignment is proved by two facts: the members
voted independently and sometimes inconsistently, even on important matters ; and more than half of the recorded roll calls
were not party votes, but were generally concerned with minor
affairs about which there was general agreement or a lack of
party understanding.
On the other hand, certain votes reveal differences between the two parties. The first difference concerned the
size of a quorum, the Jennings group favoring a majority ot
those elected, while the opposition preferred two-thirds.60 The
latter would have given the opposition a powerful parliamentary weapon. Even in the face of the victory of the statehood
movement, six of the opposition voted against establishing a
state government."' The group in control inserted a prohibition of slavery and involuntary servitude which declared that
the constitution could never be changed to introduce either
into the state. The opposition did not oppose the antislavery
clause, but did oppose the accompanying declaration, and,
when defeated in an effort to eliminate it, proposed striking
out a statement that a future convention could revise the constitution. When this, too, was defeated, Johnson, one of the
leading members of the minority, proposed to strike out the
prohibition of involuntary servitude, but this was negatived
without a record roll call.62 It is unfortunate that it cannot
be learned how the members voted on this matter, for it was
the only vote that was directly concerned with slavery. In
the absence of such information, it is only possible to point
out that the opposition did not take a stand in favor of slavery
although some of its members had favored it in the past. It
seems that they wished to preserve as much freedom of action in regard to the future as possible. Several votes indicate
"The votes are scattered through ibid., 141-231.
"Zbid., 147.
Ibid.. 149-60.
e* Zbid.. 186-87.
Q
Southern Influence in Indiana
273
the hostility of the minority to the old legislative group,63and
this hostility may have resulted in strengthening the executive
department. Hostility to the majority was shown by the refusal to repeal, at the request of a Quaker delegate, the exemption from militia service which assessed fines upon those exempted. The Quakers formed an important element in the
dominant group. A similar explanation may account for the
opposition to increasing the representation in the Legislature of Wayne and Washington counties, two of the counties
that had sent delegates favoring the r n a j ~ r i t y . ~ ‘
The constitution, which was the result of these contests,
was very similar to the constitutions of other Ohio Valley
states.e6 Although this has been recognized, a more detailed
inquiry is needed.66
The bill of rights (article one) shows marked resemblance
to the constitution of Ohio, especially where i t followed rather
closely to the constitutions of Kentucky, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania. About one-third of this article is more like these
constitutions than that of Ohio, and this similarity is strengthened by the omission of some of the more original sections of
the Ohio bill of rights.67 Article two, requiring a separation
of powers, was almost exactly a reproduction of a part of the
constitution of Kentucky,6s which was, word for word, a portion of Jefferson’s draft of a constitution for Virginia. The
provisions for the Legislature (article three) resembled article one of the constitution of Ohio, while the latter was
largely modeled upon the constitution of Tennessee.60 Both
Indiana and Ohio rejected the property qualifications for legislators which was a part of the Tennessee document. Indi“ A limitation upon the power of the legislature to regulate the franchise wtu supported by a larger portion of the opposition than oP the majority (ibid.. 166-66). Proposals to give the power to chose the secretary of state to the legislature rather than
the governor and to remove a restriction on the power of the legislature over the militia
were opposed by the opposition, while a n effort t o reduce the daily stipend for leglalators was supported and a salary limitation applying t o executive officials was opposed (idid., 282-93,221. 22.3). A larger portjon of the minority than of the majority
voted to defeat a proposed elimination of a t a x payment requirement for office holders.
a proposal to reduce the term of a state senator from three to two years, and the term
of a justice of the peace from five to three years (ibid.. 188-89. 199-200).
“ I b i d . . 193, 226-26.
-These constitutions may be found in Thorpe (comp.). Federal and State Constitutions. The Indiana constitution is found in I1 1067-73, the Ohio i n V 2901-13. the
Kentucky constitutions of 1792 and 1799 in 111, 1264-92. the Tennessee in Vi. 3414-26. and
the Pennsylvania in V, 3092-3103.
ee Esarey, History of Indiana. I, 249-60.
$‘These a r e sections 26-27 of article VII.
Article I, sections 1 and 2 of the constitutions of 1792 and 1799 : Arthur N. Holcombe. State Government in the United States (New York, 1926). 664-70 for Jefferson’s
draft of a constitution for Virginia.
“ T h e smilarity of the constitution of Ohio of 1802 to other constitutions has been
discussed and more adequate references given in Barnhart. “The Southern Influence In
the Formation of Ohio,” in Journal of Southern History, 111, 28-42.
274
Indiana Magazine o f Mistory
ana did not model its executive department (article four) after
that of Ohio, where the difficulties between the legislature
and the governor in the territorial period caused the convention to establish an executive with little power. The executive
department of Kentucky, which was very similar to that of
Pennsylvania, was follewed by the Indiana convention, and
the governor was given power of appointment, of remitting
fines and forfeitures, and of vetoingbills. A popularly
elected lieutenant governor was to succeed the governor in
case of the death of the latter or his removal from office. The
judiciary article (article five) was more original than any
of the preceeding articles, but it established substantially the
same system as existed in Ohio. The supreme court w a to
meet at the capital and not in each county as the New Englanders had persuaded the Ohio convention to require of the
supreme justices of that state.'O The governor, rather than
the Legislature as in Ohio, appointed the members of the
supreme court. The election of lesser judges and clerks was
more democratic than the methods in use in Ohio. Suffrage
(article six) was extended to white males, while Ohio had limited it to white males charged with, or paying, a tax. The difference was probably very slight, but it was in the direction
of greater democracy. The remainder of the article was somewhat like article four of the constitution of Ohio. Provisions
for the militia, generally taken from the constitutions of Ohio
and Kentucky, were contained in article seven. They were
longer and more democratic as a general rule. The article on
amendments (article eight) prohibited any change which
would permit slavery, as did the constitution of Ohio. Article
eleven contained a prohibition of slavery and of any further
contracts for indentured servitude, the latter being milder
than a similar provision of the constitution of Ohio. Other sections of this article came from the constitutions of Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, while several of those from Ohio had
been modeled after similar parts of the constitution of Tennessee. The antislavery provision was the chief difference
that distinguished the Indiana constitution from those adopted
to the south of the Ohio.
Probably the most important parts of the constitution of
Indiana were those for which there was little or no precedent
in earlier state constitutions. The convention contained men
'ofbid.. 39-40: Julia P. Cutler. Life and Timea of Ephmim Cutbr, prspcursd
f r o m his Journal and Correspondence (Cincinnati, 1890). 70-73.
Southern Influence in Indiana
275
for whom new paths held no terrors. It is significant that
real educational progress was made by this convention which
was controlled by members of southern origin. The article
devoted to education (article nine) noted the importance of
knowledge and learning to free government, provided for the
use of lands granted for educational purposes, and required
the general assembly to establish a “system of education, ascending in a regular gradation, from township schools to a
state university, wherein tuition shall be gratis, and equally
open to all.” Money paid for exemption from military service should be used to establish county seminaries, a penal code
should be founded upon principles of reformation, one or more
farms should be provided as an asylum for the aged and unfortunate, and ten per cent of the proceeds of lot sales in each
new county seat should be used to establish libraries. A small
part of the phraseology came from the constitution of New
Hampshire, but if family tradition may be trusted, the principal person involved in framing this article was a descendant of a Virginia family who was born in Kentucky. A dislike
of banks, foreshadowing the Jacksonian movement was revealed in the tenth article, which prohibited private banks
with note issuing powers.
It may be noted, by way of conclusion and summary, that
the Indiana constitution was an outgrowth of the territorial
period, because the desire for greater self-government was a
natural consequence of larger numbers and added wealth, and
because statehood was necessary to give the popular party a
complete victory over the older Virginia aristocrats. The
election, following a very brief campaign, was a victory for
the popular party, which was representative of the immigrants
from the Upland South, including the Quakers, and others
from the Middle States and New England. It opposed the
desire of the older Harrison party to establish in Indiana
social and political conditions based upon the plantation South.
The opposition party was composed of men from the Upland
South and the Middle States, but men who seem to have acquired a belief in ideals that resembled in some measure those
of the more aristocratia South. The contest was therefore
largely between two groups of southerners, one holding to
the democratic ideas of the Upland South, the other to parts
of the philosophy of the Lowland South. The constitution,
which the convention adopted, was modeled very largely upon
276
Indiana Magazine of History
the Ohio and Kentucky constitutions. To a lesser extent, it
resembled the constitutions of Tennessee and Pennsylvania,
because of direct borrowing and because the Ohio constitution
was much like that of Tennessee, and the constitutions of
Kentucky and Tennessee were quite similar to that of Pennsylvania. The antislavery provisions distinguish i t from those
adopted south of the Ohio River, while its democratic features
represent the more complete operation of the frontier influence. Its similarity to the above mentioned constitutions, and
its antislavery and democratic features indicate that it embodied the ideas of an expanding Upland South. The advanced educational stand taken by the convention proves that
the southern influence was not entirely hostile to educational
progress.