THE 
 
 m STATEHOOD 
 
 ? B. STEVENS 
 
 
Book 'S±5_ 
 
 PRESENTED BV 
 
The 
 
 Travail of Missouri 
 
 for Statehood 
 
 By 
 Walter B. Stevens 
 
 Published By 
 The State Historical Society of Missouri 
 
 Reprinted From 
 
 The Missouri Historical Review. Vol. XV, No. i 
 (October, 1920). Columbia, Missouri, 1920 
 

 Gift 
 
 A-uthor 
 
 mi 15 ^2a 
 
The Travail of Missouri for Statehood. 
 
 BY WALTER B. STEVENS. 
 
 "But the agony is over and Missouri is born into the 
 Union, not a seven months baby but a man child; his birth 
 no secret in the family, but a proud and glorious event, pro- 
 claimed to the nation with the firing of cannon, the ringing 
 of bells and illumination of towns and cities." 
 
 In this enthusiastic spirit the St Louis Enquirer, of 
 March 29, 1820, commented on the passage by Congress 
 of the Missouri statehood act. The Enquirer was the paper 
 for which Benton wrote. Two years and two months had 
 elapsed since Missouri's petitions for admission to the Union 
 had been presented to Congress. In a way congratulations 
 were premature, for a year and four months were to pass 
 before President Monroe's tardy proclamation announced 
 that "the admission of the said State of Missouri into this 
 Union is declared to be complete." 
 
 As early as the fall months of 1817, petitions were being 
 circulated by men of influence in Franklin, St. Charles, Her- 
 culaneum, Ste. Genevieve, Cape Girardeau, New Madrid, 
 St. Lx)uis. They were "from sundry inhabitants of the Ter- 
 ritory of Missouri praying that said territory may be admitted 
 to the Union on an equal footing with the original states." The 
 movement was timely. Across the river, Illinois, supposed 
 to be some thousands smaller in population, was asking state- 
 hood. Seven states had been added to the original thirteen. 
 Missouri was growing faster than any of them. Rev. John 
 Mason Peck wrote in his "Memoir:" 
 
 Editor's Note: The Review is not responsible for opinions and conclusions 
 advanced by its contributors. 
 
 (3) 
 
4 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 "The newcomers, like a mountain torrent, poured into the 
 country faster than it was possible to provide corn for bread-stuff. 
 Some families came in the spring of 1815; but in the winter, spring, 
 summer and autumn of 1816, they came like an avalanche. It 
 seemed as though Kentucky and Tennessee were breaking up and 
 moving to the 'Far West.' Caravan after caravan passed over 
 the prairies of Illinois, crossing the 'great river' at St. Louis, aU 
 bound for Boone's Lick. The stream of immigration had not 
 lessened in 1817." 
 
 On the anniversary of the battle of New Orleans, January 
 8, 1818, the petition of the "sundry inhabitants of the Ter- 
 ritory of Missouri" was presented to Congress. That same 
 month the petitions from Illinois were presented. Before 
 the end of that session Congress had passed the necessary 
 legislation for Illinois. The convention met in Kaskaskia 
 and framed a constitution. Illinois was, in December, 1818, a 
 state. But Missouri waited — waited from January 8, 1818, 
 to March 6, 1820, for the first formal answer to her prayer. 
 In the meantime, a game of national politics went on. Ala- 
 bama put in a plea for statehood and it was granted. 
 
 When the Union was formed there were seven free and 
 six slave states. After that the policy was to admit alter- 
 nately a slave state and a free state. Thus was to be main- 
 tained a compromise balance of power. Missouri's peti- 
 tions upset it. Senate and House wrangled long, the Senate 
 willing to admit without restrictions; the House, having a 
 majority, insisting on conditions as to slavery. Tallmadge of 
 New York offered- a resolution to make Missouri gradually a 
 free state. This provision was that no more slaves should 
 be admitted to Missouri and that all children born of slaves 
 then in Missouri should be free at twenty-five years of age. 
 The House adopted the resolution. The Senate refused to 
 concur. There was much talk and vain effort to compromise. 
 Arkansas territory was created, but the Fifteenth Congress' 
 adjourned March 4, 1819, with Missouri waiting. 
 
B()L■\D.\R^ OF MISSOLRl AS FIRST 
 SLGt;FSTi:DI.\' IS 17 
 
 I t. Ill HLHKk■^ //!■/- of Mo . I ;. 
 
 IJOLNDARVOF MISSOLRl AS SL'GGFSTFD UVTHli 
 
 ti:rriforf\f lf;uislatlrf in isis. 
 
 Fiu.n llMLick'» I/iJl. „J Mo., I, 5 
 
 I50L'.NDARV0F MISSOLRl AS ADOPILD B'i' 
 C0\GRE6S IN 1S20. 
 
 From Houck's ffiit. 0/ A/o., I. 6. 
 
 BOUNDARY UF MISSOLRl WITH THL. I'l, AITI-. 
 PURCHASE ADDF.D. 
 
 From Houck's //jj7. V Mo., I. 12. 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 5 
 
 Tallmadge and Taylor were two northern members who 
 led the fight to make Missouri an addition to the Hst of free 
 states. At the celebration on the Fourth of July, 1819, in 
 St. Louis, Missourians paid their respects to these two states- 
 men in this toast: 
 
 "Messrs. Tallmadge and Taylor — Politically insane. — 
 May the next Congress appoint them a dark room, a straight 
 waistcoat and a thin water gruel diet." 
 
 The toast was drank and the newspaper report says it 
 was "followed by nineteen cheers and the band played Yankee 
 Doodle." 
 
 Along the Mississippi and up the Missouri, resentment 
 toward Congress spread. Prominent men of the Boone's 
 Lick country assembled at Franklin to celebrate the arrival 
 of the first steamboat. The banquet, after congratulations 
 on the opening of steamboat navigation on the Missouri, was 
 given the turn of an indignation meeting over the delay of 
 statehood. One after another, the speakers arose and pro- 
 posed condemnation of Congress. Duflf Green, who later 
 became editor of the administration organ at Washington, 
 led off with: "The Union — It is dear to us but liberty is 
 dearer." 
 
 Dr. James H. Benson offered: "The Territory of Mis- 
 souri — May she emerge from her present degraded condition." 
 
 Stephen Rector introduced a tone of belligerency in his 
 sentiment: "May the Missourians defend their rights, if 
 necessary, even at the expense of blood, against the unprece- 
 dented restriction which was attempted to be imposed on 
 them by the Congress of the United States." 
 
 Dr. Dawson proposed: "The next Congress — May they 
 be men consistent in their construction of the Constitution; 
 and whey they admit new states into the Union, be actuated 
 less by a spirit of compromise, than the just rights of the 
 people." 
 
 Nathaniel Patton, the editor, proposed a thoughtful 
 toast: "The Missouri Territory — Its future prosperity and 
 greatness can not be checked by the caprice of a few men in 
 
6 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 Congress, while it possesses a soil of inexhaustible fertility, 
 abundant resources, and a body of intelligent, enterprising 
 freemen." 
 
 Major J. D. Wilcox put his proposition in the form of 
 an ultimatum: "The citizens of Missouri — May they never 
 become a member of the Union, under the restriction relative 
 to slavery." 
 
 The St. Louis grand jury put forth a declaration that 
 "the late attempt by the Congress of the United States to 
 restrict us in the free exercise of rights in the formation of 
 a constitution and form of state government for ourselves is 
 an unconstitutional and unwarrantable usurpation of power 
 over our inalienable rights and privileges as a free people." 
 
 The grand jury of Jefiferson county returned to the court 
 a protest, saying: 
 
 "We have beheld with equal surprise and regret the attempt 
 made in the last Congress to dictate to the people of Missouri an 
 article in their constitution prohibiting the further introduction 
 of slavery in their state or debar them from the rights of state 
 sovereignty if they would not submit to such restriction. That 
 slavery is an evil we do not pretend to deny, but, on the contrary, 
 would most cheerfully join in any measure to abolish it, provided 
 those means were not likely to produce greater evils to the people 
 than the one complained of; but we hold the power of regulating 
 this, or applying a remedy to this evil, to belong to the states and 
 not to Congress. The Constitution of the United States which 
 creates Congress gives to it all its powers, and limits those of the 
 states; and although that Constitution empowers Congress to ad- 
 mit new states into the Union, yet it neither does, by express 
 grant nor necessary implication, authorize that body to make the 
 whole or any part of the constitution of such state." 
 
 One of the most notable protests against the action of 
 Congress came from delegates of "the several Baptist churches 
 of Christ, composing the Mount Pleasant Association," 
 These delegates addressed a long memorial to Congress, which 
 was printed in eastern newspapers. The memorial was 
 signed by Edward Turner, moderator, and George Staple- 
 ton, clerk. The memorial set forth: 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 7 
 
 "That, as a people, the Baptists have always been republi- 
 can, they have been among the first to mark, and to raise their 
 voice against oppression, and ever ready to defend their rights, 
 with their fortunes and their lives; in this they are supported as 
 well by the principles which organized the revolution, and se- 
 cured our independence as a nation, as by those recognized in 
 our bill of rights, and that Constitution which as citizens we are 
 bound to support. 
 
 "Viewing the Constitution of the United States, as the result 
 of the united experience of statesmen and patriots of the Revolu- 
 tion, and as the sacred palladium of our religious as well as civil 
 liberty, we can not without the most awful apprehensions look 
 on any attempt to violate its provisions, and believing that a vote 
 of a majority of the last Congress restricting the good people of 
 this territory in the formation of their constitution for a state 
 government to be in direct opposition thereto; we would enter 
 our most solemn protest against the principle endeavored to be 
 supported thereby." 
 
 The twenty-one members of the grand jury of Montgom- 
 ery county signed their names to their protest at the July, 
 1819, term against the action of Congress. 
 
 "They view the restrictions attempted to be imposed upon 
 the people of Missouri territory in the formation of a state con- 
 stitution unlawful, unconstitutional and oppressive. They can 
 not admit the right of any power whatever to impose restrictions 
 on them in the form or substance of a state constitution. 
 
 "They hope those restrictions will never more be attempted; 
 and if they should, they hope by the assistance of the genius of 
 '76, and the interposition of Divine Providence, to find means to 
 protect their rights." 
 
 Especially notable among these protests was the one to 
 which the grand jurors of St. Charles signed their names. 
 Declaring that they considered it their duty to take notice 
 of all grievances of a public nature, they said: 
 
 "We do present that the Congress of the United States, at 
 their last session, in attempting to restrict the people of Missouri, 
 in the exercise and enjoyment of their rights as American freemen, 
 in the formation of their state constitution, assumed an uncon- 
 stitutional power, having the direct tendency to usurp the privi- 
 leges of state sovereignties; privileges guaranteed by the dec- 
 laration of American rights, the Constitution of the United States, 
 the treaty of cession, and the blood of our fathers who achieved 
 our independence. That it is a restriction heretofore without 
 
8 / MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 precedent or parallel, as it regards the admission of territories into 
 the union of the states, and if persisted in by those members of 
 Congress who at the last session proved themselves opposed to 
 the growth of our happy land and luxuriant country, will be, in 
 our opinion, a direct attack and infringement on the saored rights, 
 state sovereignty and independence, and the tocsin of alarm to 
 aU friends of the Union under our republican form of government. 
 Although we much deplore any existing political differences of 
 opinion with the majority of the House of Representatives of the 
 last Congress, who introduced and supported the restriction, yet 
 we consider it our bounden duty as freemen, and as republican 
 members of the great American family, to take a dignified stand 
 against any assumption or usurpation of our rights from whatever 
 quarter it may come, and to support the Constitution of the United 
 States as the anchor of our political hope." 
 
 One hundred years ago Missouri was divided into seven 
 counties. The grand jury of every county went on record 
 in most formal protest against the attitude of Congress 
 toward Missouri. From April, 1819 to December of the same 
 year, wherever Missourians assembled, resolutions were 
 adopted or toasts were drank in defiance of the dictation 
 of Congress as to what, on the subject of slavery, should be 
 put in the state constitution. And these sentiments were 
 indorsed with many cheers. 
 
 In tliese later days people applaud by tlie watch. The 
 cheering is timed. Newspapers and partisans gauge popular 
 approval by the duration of the applause. One hundred 
 years ago the successive cheers were counted. After drink- 
 ing fervently to a sentiment, the people "hip hip hurrahed." 
 Their enthusiasm was estimated by tlie number of these cheers. 
 There was no fictitious swelling of tlie volume of sound by the 
 blowing of horns, by the ringing of bells, by the beating of 
 drums, by the stamping of feet. It was all vociferous. And, 
 when the tumult and the shouting died, everybody knew that 
 the sentiment or the candidate had been indorsed by one, or 
 ten, or twenty, or whatever the count might be, cheers. 
 Thus, at a meeting in St. Louis, over which Auguste Chouteau 
 presided, the Missouri Gazette reported that these two toasts 
 "received the largest number of cheers:" 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 9 
 
 "The next Congress, a sacred regard for the Consti- 
 tution, in preference to measures of supposed expediency, 
 will insure to them the confidence of the American people. 
 Nineteen cheers. Yankee Doodle (music)." 
 
 "The Territory of Missouri, with a population of near 
 100,000, demands her right to be admitted into the Union, 
 on an equal footing with the original states. Nineteen cheers. 
 'Scotts o'er the Border.* ' 
 
 Probably the most significant and effective of these pro- 
 testing meetings was one at which Thomas H. Benton pre- 
 sented the resolutions. These resolutions took the form of 
 what might be called an ultimatum to Congress. They were 
 passed upon by such foremost Missourians as William C. 
 Carr, Henry S. Geyer, Edward Bates and Joshua Barton 
 before being adopted unanimously by the meeting. Alex- 
 ander McNair presided. David Barton was secretary. This, 
 then, was the action of the men who were to be the first gov- 
 ernor and the first two United States Senators and other 
 acknowledged leaders of the new state. The resolutions de- 
 clared in no uncertain words "that the Congress of the United 
 States have no right to control the provisions of a state con- 
 stitution, except to preserve its republican character." They 
 denounced the action of the House of Representatives as "an 
 outrage on the American Constitution." But the concluding 
 resolution presented to Congress and the rest of the country 
 a new if not startling situation: 
 
 "That the people of this territory have a right to raeet in con- 
 vention by their own authority, and to form a constitution and 
 state government, whenever they shall deem it expedient to do so, 
 and that a second determination on the part of Congress to refuse 
 them admission, upon an equal footing with the original states, 
 will make it expedient to exercise that right." 
 
 There might be Missouri compromise in Congress. There 
 was to be no Missouri compromise in Missouri. 
 
 The threats were not few that if Congress persisted in 
 tying strings to Missouri's admission, the people of the ter- 
 ritory might reject the terms and set up an independent gov- 
 ernment for themselves. 
 
10 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 More than slavery was involved, Missourians thought, 
 in the attempt of Congress to dictate the constitution of the 
 new state. Joseph Charless said, in his Missouri Gazette, of 
 March 24, 1819: 'But the question before Congress is a 
 question of more vital importance. It is, in fact, whether 
 the inhabitants of this territory shall themselves be slaves to 
 the other states." And this was from the newspaper which 
 printed the views of the restrictionists and which was not pro- 
 slavery. 
 
 The grand jury of the circuit court for the northern dis- 
 trict of the Territory of Missouri, in a pronouncement, hinted 
 at dire possibilities if Congress continued to dictate the con- 
 stitution to be framed by Missouri. 
 
 "Altho' we deprecate anything like an idea of disunion, 
 which next to our personal liberty and security of property, 
 is our dearest right and privilege, and can not entertain for 
 a moment the most distant probability of such an event, yet 
 we feel it our duty to take a manly and dignified stand for 
 our rights and privileges, as far as is warranted by the Con- 
 stitution of the United States, and the act of cession, and 
 from which we will not depart.' 
 
 The grand jurors of the Supreme Court for the Territory 
 of Missouri uttered their protest, concluding: "And they be- 
 lieve it the duty of the people of Missouri to make it known 
 in the most public manner that they are acquainted with 
 their own rights and are determined to maintain them." 
 The grand jurors declared that the "action of Congress is a 
 gross violation of those rights." 
 
 In the summer of 1819, a movement to go before Congress 
 with new petitions for statehood was started in the southern 
 part of the territory. These petitions proposed that the new 
 state should be bounded on the north by the Missouri river 
 and on the south by the WTiite river. They received some 
 signatures, the argument being that if the territory north 
 of the Missouri was left out for later consideration. Congress 
 would be less likely to impose slavery restrictions on the new 
 state. The movement was scarcely well under way when 
 indignant remonstrances were made. St. Louis voiced ur- 
 
DAVID BARTON 
 
 Speaker of the Missouri Territorial House of Representatives 1818, President of the Missouri 
 Constitutional Convention 1820, United States Senator from Missouri 1820-1830 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 11 
 
 gent objections to a state leaving out the country north of 
 the Missouri. The Enquirer, for which Benton wrote, led 
 in the campaign against the new boundaries. It said: 
 
 "We are particularly opposed to a division by the Missouri 
 river. We should consider such a division as a deathblow to the 
 grandeur and importance of the State of Missouri. We deprecate 
 the idea of making the civil divisions of the states to correspond 
 with the natural boundaries of the country Such divisions would 
 promote that tendency to separate which it is the business of all 
 statesmen to counteract." 
 
 In the late autumn of 1819, The St. Louis Enquirer told 
 of the rapid growth of population: 
 
 "Notwithstanding the great number of persons who are held 
 in check by the agitation of the slave question in Congress, the 
 emigration to Missouri is astonishing. Probably from thirty 
 to fifty wagons daily cross the Mississippi at the different ferries, 
 and bring in an average of four to five hundred souls a day. The 
 emigrants are principally from Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia 
 and the states further south. They bring great numbers of slaves, 
 knowing that Congress has no power to impose the agitated re- 
 striction, and that the people of Missouri will never adopt it." 
 
 A meeting at St. Ferdinand, in what is now St. Louis 
 county, where, according to tradition, was the earliest settle- 
 ment of Americans in Missouri, by two or three families from 
 North Carolina adopted this sentiment: 
 
 "The Territory of Missouri — May she be admitted into 
 the Union on an equal footing with the original states, or not 
 received in any other way." 
 
 This toast, the reporter of 1819 tells, was "drank stand- 
 ing up — twenty-two cheers." 
 
 No wonder, Thomas Jefferson, growing old and, perhaps, 
 somewhat pessimistic, viewed the deadlock in Congress and 
 the defiance of the territory with dismal forebodings. He 
 wrote to John Adams: "The Missouri question is a breaker 
 on which we lose the Missouri country by revolt and what 
 more God only knows." 
 
12 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 Jefferson knew and remembered what the Congress of 
 1819 seemed to have forgotten, that Missouri had a claim 
 to statehood beyond that of Illinois, or Alabama or Maine, 
 all of which were being given precedence. It was a claim 
 based on international treaty. When the United States ac- 
 quired the great Louisiana Purchase, it was solemnly stipulated 
 with France that the inhabitants of the vast region west of 
 the Mississippi "shall be incorporated in the Union of the 
 United States and admitted, as soon as ppssible, according to 
 the principles of the Federal Constitution, to the enjoyment 
 of all the rights, advantages and immunities of citizens of tlie 
 United States." Sixteen years had elapsed since the United 
 States had given that pledge by treaty to France, and Mis- 
 sourians were still waiting. Two years and two months after 
 the presentation of the petition for statehood supported with 
 the facts and argument justifying admission, Congress, in 
 March, 1820, passed the bill permitting Missouri to frame a 
 state constitution without restriction as to slavery, but pro- 
 viding that slavery should be excluded from the rest of the 
 Louisiana Purchase territory west and north of Missouri. 
 That was the "Missouri Compromise" which vexed American 
 politics for thirty-seven years, only to be declared unconsti- 
 tutional by the United States Supreme Court in March, 1857. 
 
 Acceptance of the Missouri Compromise came about in 
 the early days of March, 1820, through the action of eight 
 senators and fifteen representatives from the North in voting 
 with the South to leave with the new state the settlement of 
 the slavery question. Some of these northerners who yielded 
 were denounced at mass meetings of their anti-slavery con- 
 stituents. One of the senators, Lanman of Connecticut, was 
 burned in effigy at Hartford. Benton's paper, the St. Louis 
 Enquirer, commenting on the course of these northerners, 
 used language intimating that their votes had far-reaching 
 effect in the direction of preventing disunion: 
 
 "In all eight senators and fifteen representatives who have 
 offered themselves as sacrifices upon the altar of public good to 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 13 
 
 save the states and to prevent the degradation of Missouri. Their 
 generous conduct deserves a nation's gratitude, and let a grateful 
 nation deliver it to them. Let public honors wait upon their steps, 
 and public blessings thicken round their heads. Let fame with her 
 brazen trumpet, from the summit of the Alleghany, proclaim their 
 honored names thru' out the vast regions of the South and West." 
 
 In the manuscript collection of John H. Gundlach, of St. 
 Louis, is a letter from Congressman Stokes, of North Caro- 
 lina, written to John Branch, the Governor of that state. 
 The date of the letter, February 27, 1820, shows that it was 
 sent just at the time when a majority of Congress was deciding 
 to accept the Missouri Compromise. The letter is far more 
 enlightening upon the action of Congress than scores of 
 speeches and pages of newspaper editorials which were 
 prompted by the Missouri Question during the months it was 
 uppermost in the public mind : 
 
 "The question of compelling the people of Missouri to form 
 their constitution, so as to forever prevent the introduction of 
 slavery in that state, has occupied both houses of Congress for 
 some weeks, and has not yet been settled. You have seen, and 
 will hereafter see, volumes of speeches on the subject, most of which 
 (not having been listened to in either house), are intended for home 
 consumption. As I have differed from my honorable colleagues 
 upon some propositions for accommodating and settling, for years 
 to come, this all-important contest, which is agitating the people 
 of the United States in a great degree everywhere; but which, 
 in some of the northern states, has produced a delirium and phrensy 
 approaching to madness; I have thought it proper to state the 
 grounds upon which my conduct has been, and probably will be, 
 maintained and defended. Those who are opposed to this un- 
 constitutional restriction and upon the people of Missouri can- 
 not and do not expect that Missouri will be admitted into the Union 
 without the restriction, unless some concession or agreement shall 
 take place excluding slavery from a portion of the west territory 
 beyond the Mississippi. This is not mere opinion; it has been 
 ascertained by several votes in the House of Representatives 
 that a considerable majority of that body are in favor of restric- 
 tion as to all the country purchased from France under the name 
 of Louisiana. It is useless to examine at this time, whether this 
 is a correct principle or not. The majority have satisfied their 
 own minds upon the subject, and are determined to enforce the 
 restraint. All that we from the slaveholding states can do, at 
 
14 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 present, is to rescue from the rapacious grasp of those conscientious 
 fanatics, a considerable portion of Louisiana, including all the 
 inhabited parts of that extensive country. I can see no means, 
 either now or hereafter, of accomplishing this object but by con- 
 senting that slavery may be prohibited in the northern portion 
 of the Louisiana Purchase. By agreeing to this conception, I 
 believe we may secure the remaining portion of that Purchase as 
 an asylum for slaves already too numerous to be comfortably sup- 
 ported in some of the southern states. With this view I have con- 
 sented that slavery may be excluded, by an act of Congress, from 
 the territory lying west of the contemplated State of Missouri, 
 and north of the parallel of thirty-six degrees, thirty minutes of 
 north latitute; nor do I think the Constitution violated by this 
 act in as much as Congress are only legislating upon a territory, 
 in which there is not one citizen of the United States settled at this 
 time. By this prudent and proper concession we shall quiet the 
 minds of many people who have already been excited by bad men 
 to commit daring acts of injustice and outrage. And although 
 I can not respect members of Congress who, in violation of their 
 obligations to the Constitution, are endeavoring to enforce this 
 restriction upon the free people of Missouri; yet I do and always 
 shall have a charitable and respectful regard for the feelings and 
 even the prejudices of that great portion of the people of the north- 
 ern states who are averse to slavery in any shape; and who would 
 join with me in pursuing and promoting any constitutional measure 
 to get rid of the evil. These are my views and the motives which 
 have influenced my conduct upon this very important subject; 
 and I can safely appeal to my conscience and to my God to justify 
 the purity of my intentions. 
 
 "I have thus taken the liberty, my dear sir, of writing to you, 
 that it may be recorded as my deliberate opinion and referred to 
 in case of misrepresentation hereafter." 
 
 One of the arguments advanced in favor of allowing Mis- 
 souri to settle the slavery question for herself was that, as 
 the national government had stopped the importation of 
 slaves, a scattering of the slaves already in the country would 
 help toward the gradual abolition, rather than toward an 
 increase. Six days after President Monroe signed the Mis- 
 souri Compromise, Jefferson wrote a letter upholding this 
 argument. His letter of March 12, 1820, was to Hugh Nelson : 
 
 "Of one thing I am certain, that as the passage of slaves from 
 one state to another, would not make a slave of a single human being 
 who would not be so without it, so their diffusion over a greater 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 15 
 
 surface would make them individually happier and proportionately 
 facilitate the accomplishment of their emancipation, by dividing 
 the burden on a greater number of coadjutors." 
 
 Even after the stage had been set for the passage of the 
 Missouri Compromise, it required parliamentary fine work 
 to reach the desired result. The vote on the compromise 
 was taken in the House on the second of March, 1820. It 
 was 90 to 87. Passage was made possible by three members 
 absenting themselves and four changing their votes. 
 
 Frederick W. Lehmann, late Solicitor-General of the 
 United States, addressing the Missouri Historical Society 
 in 1914, said the compromise "did not draw all of the repre- 
 sentatives of the South to the support of the measure, and 
 it was bitterly antagonized by the radical element, among 
 whom was Randolph, who characterized the eighteen northern 
 members supporting it, and without whose votes it must 
 have failed, as 'doughfaces,' a name from that time applied 
 in our politics to northern men with pro-slavery principles. 
 On the morning following the adoption of the report of the 
 conference committee, Randolph moved a reconsideration of 
 the yote on the Missouri bill, but was held by the Speaker, 
 Clay, to be out of order until the regular morning business 
 was disposed of. While the morning business was on, Clay 
 signed the bill, and the clerk took it at once to the Senate. 
 When, at the close of the morning hour, Randolph again rose 
 and moved a reconsideration, he was told that he was too 
 late as the bill was no longer in the possession of the House. 
 The relations between Randolph and Clay were already 
 strained and what Randolph felt was a trick on Clay's part 
 did not serve to improve them." 
 
 The enmity between the two statesmen grew until it 
 led to a bloodless duel, of which Benton was a spectator and 
 of which he wrote a fascinating description. Northern Con- 
 gressmen who voted for the bill were denounced by their 
 angry constituents and, in one or two cases, burned in eflfigy. 
 President Monroe had his doubts as to the constitutionality 
 
16 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 of the measure. Much had been brought out in the debate 
 on that point. Mr. Lehmann further said: 
 
 "When the bill came to President Monroe for signature, 
 he submitted to his cabinet the question whether Congress 
 had constitutional authority to prohibit slavery in a terri- 
 tory. And they all, Adams, Crawford, Calhoun and Wirt, 
 answered yes. He asked further whether the provision in- 
 terdicting slavery 'forever' applied to the territorial status 
 alone or was binding as well on the state formed out of the 
 territory. The southern members, Crawford, Calhoun and 
 Wirt, held that it applied only to the territorial status, while 
 Adams held it was binding on the state. To preserve the 
 appearance of unanimity, the question was changed to, 'Is 
 the eighth section of the Missouri bill consistent with the 
 Constitution?' Each of the secretaries having in mind his 
 own construction of the bill answered yes." Monroe decided 
 to sign. 
 
 The first newspaper "extra" issued in Missouri appeared 
 on the streets of St. Louis March 25, 1820. It announced 
 "the happy intelligence" that the Missouri state bill had 
 passed Congress "without restrictions." The St. Louis En- 
 quirer told, in its next regular number, how the news was 
 obtained from Washington and how the extra was received 
 by the Missourians. It used headlines for perhaps the first 
 time in the history of Missouri journalism. 
 
 "GRATIFYING NEWS FROM WASHINGTON; KING 
 AND CLINTON DEFEATED; THE SENATE TRIUMPH- 
 ANT; FINAL PASSAGE OF THE MISSOURI STATE BILL 
 WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS." 
 
 "A traveler from Cincinnati arrived in town Saturday eve- 
 ning (25th of March), bringing with him a copy of the National 
 Intelligencer of the 4th of March, containing the proceedings of 
 Congress to the 3rd. A handbill announcing the happy intelli- 
 gence contained in the paper was immediately issued from this 
 office amidst the ringing of the bells, the firing of cannon and the 
 joyful congratulations of the citizens." 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 17 
 
 Congress had acted, but the bill did not receive the Pres- 
 ident's signature until March 6th. The news was three 
 weeks in reaching St. Louis. Not satisfied with the impromptu 
 celebration, St. Louis proceeded in a more formal manner. The 
 two papers contained this "Notice." 
 
 "Upon the request of many citizens of the town of St. Louis, 
 it is resolved by the board of trustees that an illumination of the 
 town be recommended to the citizens on Thursday night, 30th 
 inst., to commence precisely at 8 o'clock p. m. in consequence of 
 the admission of Missouri into the Union upon an equal footing 
 with the original states. 
 
 "A national salute under the direction of the trustees will 
 be fired previously at 8 o'clock. 
 
 "Pierre Chouteau, 
 
 "Chairman.'^ 
 
 St. Louis at that tim.e was incorporated as a town, gov- 
 erned by a board of trustees. The incorporation as a city 
 came three years later. 
 
 In the issue of the 29th, which told of the Enquirer's en- 
 terprise in getting out the extra, was this congratulatory edi- 
 torial in the best style of Benton: 
 
 "But the agony is over and Missouri is born into the 
 Union, not a seven-months baby, but a man child; his birth 
 no secret in the family, but a proud and glorious event, pro- 
 claimed to the nation with the firing of cannon, the ringing 
 of bells and illum_ination of towns and cities." 
 
 In the Enquirer of April 1, 1820, the celebration of the 
 30th of March was described : 
 
 "The town was illuminated on Thursday evening, according to 
 the notice given by the board of trustees. It was entirely general, 
 the whole town not presenting above four or five instances of ex- 
 ception. To these no sort of molestation was offered, and the 
 evening passed off without a single occurrence to interrupt the 
 harmony of the town, or to mar the festivity of the scene. Among 
 the names which appeared in transparencies were those of the 
 'eight senators' and 'fifteen representatives' from the nonslave- 
 holding states, who supported the rights of Missouri at the risk 
 of their own personal popularity. Mr. Lanman's name occurred 
 most frequently. Some were in favor of burning the effigy of 
 
 No. 1—2 
 
18 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 an adversary senator (Mr. King) in retaliation for the indignity 
 offered him (Mr. Lanman) at Hartford; but the idea was dis- 
 couraged and it was not done. 'Our faithful delegate,' Mr. Scott, 
 was duly noticed. To enumerate all our friends from the south 
 and west who deserve the gratitude of Missouri would be to repeat 
 the list of their names as published last week. 
 
 "Among the transparencies was noticed at Dr. Heely's a 
 beautiful representation of the American Eagle, from the beak the 
 words 'Missouri and no Restriction.' Underneath was the Irish 
 harp and the motto 'Erin go Bragh.' " 
 
 Missourians celebrated what they firmly believed was the 
 birth of statehood Candles burned in nearly all of the win- 
 dows in St. Louis on the night chosen for the formal ratifica- 
 tion. The cartoonist of one hundred years ago was equal to 
 tJie occasion He executed a transparency showing a negro 
 dancing joyously because "Congress had voted to permit the 
 slaves to come and live in such a fine country' as Missouri." 
 As the news traveled slowly up the rivers, bonfires burned on 
 the hilltops at night and jollifications were held in the day 
 time. Charles J. Cabell told an old settlers' reunion at Keytes- 
 V lie in 1877 that he could not rem.ember another day like 
 that in his long Missouri life time. 
 
 But one note of comment showed how determined were 
 the Missourians tliat Congress should not continue to trifle 
 with their rights, and that the memorial adopted by the St. 
 Louis meeting a few weeks before was not an idle threat. In 
 the St. Lonis E^iqtnrer, the paper for which Benton wrote, 
 there appeared a paragraph on t]ie thirty-first of March, 1820, 
 which recalled the action of the m.eeting and told what would 
 have been done by the Missourians if the passage of the com- 
 promise bill had been longer delayed: 
 
 "The people of the United States would have witnessed a 
 specimen of Missouri feeling in the indignant contempt with which 
 they would have trampled the odious restriction under their feet 
 and proceeded to the formation of a republican constitution in the 
 fullness of the people's power." 
 
 If Benton gauged the strength and extent of the Missouri 
 sentiment at that time, Missouri m^ay have been nearer the 
 formiation of an independent republic, to come into tlie Union 
 
|i )ll\ kK'l', |nM-,s 
 
 i'V.iii \l::,V~. II.-: \}, ill 
 
 .^t"5,-. 
 
 joiix scivri'. 
 
 I't-.-,., ||,„Kk- /// ;, 1/^-- 111 
 
 JUN \rii W R \,\lS\'i 
 
 V-.'-.n 11. ..,.!,■■ //,.; M.. Ill 
 
 H. II KI.IA l,> 
 
 ii.ucr. ii'i \i! UK jv 
 
 IIIRAM II K\!;i R 
 
 Ki.^ni H^huk':. //,./. U' 111 
 
 SOMI'-. DI'-LI'dA-fl'S TO riiP. MlSSOl Rl CONS II 11 IK ).\ \l 
 
 e'o.w i-:.\'ii().\ isjo. 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 19 
 
 later, as Texas did, than the historians have told. Possibly 
 Jefferson was correct in his judgment that the course of Con- 
 gress threatened the loss of "the Missouri country and what 
 more God only knows.' 
 
 According to a report in the Enquirer, these toasts were 
 drank at the celebration of the Fourth of July, 1820, in St. 
 Louis: 
 
 "The State of Missouri— the last created member of the Fed- 
 eral Compact — may she, like the after-piece of universal creation, 
 be the acknov/ledged Head of the Union! By the vice-president." 
 
 "The People of Missouri — Willing to contend for their just 
 rights with moderation, ready to defend them at the point of the 
 bayonet!" 
 
 "The State of Missouri — A bright link in the chain of the 
 Union — her laws are mild, her sons brave; if any doubt it, let 
 them come and try." 
 
 These toasts were printed in the East and prompted some 
 criticism. Niles' Revister said : 
 
 "Persons warmed by a luscious feast of good things ofttimes 
 express themselves imprudently, and what they say is forgiven or 
 forgotten as the ebulition of a moment — but when sentiments like 
 the following are reduced to writing and deliberately printed in a 
 public newspaper, they should not be passed over so lightly." 
 
 While the constitutional convention was working on 
 that part of the organic act providing for the permanent 
 capital of the state. Delegate McFerron proposed that the 
 name be "Missouriopolis," instead of Jefi'erson City. This 
 suggestion struck the classical taste of Eenton as eminently 
 fitting. The St. Louis Efiquirer supported the proposition, 
 mentioning several European cities which bore names of like 
 derivation and referring to Galliopolis, Demopolis and An- 
 napolis in the United States. The Enquirer said that the 
 name offered for the capital of the new state "translated 
 means City of Missouri:" 
 
 "Men of letters throughout Europe and America, hearing it 
 pronounced, will know what is spoken of and where it is. Letters 
 started from London, Paris or Boston, will arrive at their destina- 
 
20 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 tion without mistakes, and without the circumlocution of a tedious 
 address, without making a pilgrimage to forty places of like names, 
 or having a treatise of geography written on their backs to keep 
 on the right road." 
 
 Benton was not a member of the constitutional conven- 
 tion. He expected to be. A caucus to decide on "candidates 
 opposed to restrictions on slavery" was held the tenth of 
 April. It was a secret affair. Benton supposed that he 
 would be one of the eight agreed upon. He had led the fight, 
 as writer of the editorials in the St. Louis Enquirer. But when 
 the vote was taken in the caucus the eight men selected were 
 William Rector, David Barton, John C. Sullivan, Alexander 
 McNair, Bernard Pratte, Edward Bates, Wilson P. Hunt 
 and Pierre Chouteau, Jr. St. Louis county was entitled to 
 eight members in the convention. The caucus ticket went 
 through at the polls, with a single exception. Thomas F. 
 Riddick was elected instead of Wilson P. Hunt. 
 
 Following the announcement of the caucus action, the 
 absence of the name of Benton caused a good deal of talk. 
 A call was issued upon Benton to become a candidate. It 
 referred to the "accidental result" of tlie caucus: 
 
 "The undersigned have long calculated on your services in the 
 state convention, and wish to avail themselves of them. We do 
 not consider ourselves bound by the accidental result of the late 
 meeting of the friends of those opposed to the restriction or limita- 
 tion of slavery; especially, in point of fact,,the voters are not bound 
 by it; and many others are still before the public who were not 
 represented in that meeting; so the end in view has not been 
 attained, and we are still subjected to the danger of division and 
 want of concert in voting, without having our choice of candidates 
 — under these circumstances we request you let your name be used 
 as a candidate for the convention." 
 
 The call had 138 signatures. Benton replied, acknowl- 
 edging the letter "in which you request me to let my name be 
 used as a candidate for the convention." 
 
 "Until the 10th inst., it was my expectation that it would 
 have been so used. On that day the friends of the candidates 
 met to agree upon the names which should be supported. My 
 name was not so agreed upon. You have the kindness to advert 
 
Idsi-.i'ii ell \Ri.i:ss. 
 
 ..m ll...i.k' ///■/ .1/ III 
 
 . I III i\l \S II Kl-,\1( i\. 
 l-n.m ll..iu:k^ Hit. M ,. Ill 
 
 i;i)\\.\Ri) I'. \ri^ 
 
 hiniii llouck\, //; / .1/'. Ill 1 
 
 \l I \ \M)I-.I< \K\ Ml 
 
 y. Il'-,uk\ II, '. M . Ill 
 
 I'll Rkl'. (.IIOI I'k.Al . IK. 
 Ii..m II, .lick's //,./. \/.. Ill j;|. 
 
 Will I \\i c;. I'l-.l II S 
 
 I :. 11 II >,JsV- II, :. M 111 
 
 SOMI'. PROXIINIA I Sr. I.ol l^-WS i\ iS:o. 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 21 
 
 to the circumstance and to say that you do not consider yourselves 
 bound by the accidental result of that meeting. Neither do I. 
 But it has operated upon me with the effect of an obligation, be- 
 cause I could not afterwards stand a poU without dividing the 
 ^strength of our own side, and endangering the success of a cause 
 which I have long labored to promote." 
 
 The Missouri Gazette could not let go by the opportunity 
 to hold up to ridicule the "co-editor" of the Enquirer for hav- 
 ing been turned down by the "accidental result" of the caucus. 
 Referring to the call upon Mr. Benton to run, the Gazette 
 said: 
 
 "I should have been glad that a list had been also made of the 
 persons who refused to sign in favor of Mr. Benton. Some say 
 that their number and respectability would have disclosed the 
 secret, and satisfied everyone that prudence had also some share 
 in actuating him to decline standing the poll." 
 
 This and more the Gazette printed upon Benton's re- 
 lations to the convention campaign. Two hours after the 
 Gazette was off the press the following occurred : 
 
 "The editor of the Missouri Gazette, whilst on the way from 
 his office to his house, between one and two o'clock, on Wednesday, 
 was assailed without any previous intimation, warning or apparent 
 quarrel by Isaac N. Henry, one of the editors of the St. Louis En- 
 quirer, and received several blows with a heavy cudgel, which 
 blows he returned with a stick disproportionately small; the com- 
 batants closed, fell and struggled for awhile. The Rev. Joseph 
 Piggot, who was accompanying Mr. Charless and was going to 
 dine with him, twice endeavored to part them, but was as often 
 prevented by a certain Wharton Rector, who drew a pistol from 
 his bosom and declared he would blow him through if he inter- 
 fered. Mr. Piggot then called for help, being determined to part 
 them; presently two men came up and the contest ended." 
 
 The Gazette attributed the attack to Benton and quoted 
 him as having said there were two or three hundred citizens 
 who "at one word would tear to pieces any person whom he 
 would point out." 
 
 A feature of the unfriendly press propaganda in the East, 
 aggravating to Missourians, was the repeated argument in 
 
22 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 the newspapers that Missourians were unfit morally for state- 
 hood. Under the heading "Western Morals and Fashions," 
 a newspaper in New York State published the following in 
 the summer of 1820: 
 
 "The ladies as well as the gentlemen (says a letter to the 
 editor from St. Louis) wear dirks by their sides; and dirking is very 
 fashionable here. This fact is, of itself, a sufficient commentary 
 on the state of society and morals in Missouri." 
 
 An alleged letter, widely printed on the Atlantic seaboard, 
 was denounced by the St. Louis Enquirer which republished 
 it with this comment in the issue of August 2, 1820: 
 
 "An infamous publication, purporting to be from a Virginian 
 at St. Louis to his friend in Richmond, Va., is going the rounds 
 of the free state papers. It was made in the lie manufactory of 
 this town on the spur of the late election, and sent over to Edwards- 
 ville to be ushered into existence from the sympathetic press of 
 that place. No Virginian ever saw it until it was in print. It is 
 copied into this day's paper from a Philadelphia paper which 
 tfeok it from a New York paper; and is shown to the citizens of 
 Missouri to let them see what infamous stories are sent abroad 
 to blacken the character of the place and the avidity with which 
 the filthy morsels are swallowed up by the free state editors." 
 
 From the New York Daily Advertiser. 
 
 "A letter from a gentleman who had lately arrived in St. Louis, 
 to his friend in Richmond, Va., gives him an account of what he 
 witnessed the first week, to enable him to form some idea of the 
 state of society in that section of the country. 
 
 "He arrived in town on Wednesday, the same day Mr. Char- 
 less, the editor of the Missouri Gazette, and opponent of slavery, 
 was violently assaulted by Mr. Isaac N. Henry, editor of the St. 
 Louis Enquirer, a friend of slavery. The Rev. Joseph Piggott 
 was in company with Mr. Charless, and endeavored to separate 
 the combatants, when Mr. Wharton Rector, the friend of Henry, 
 drew a pistol from his pocket and declared he would blow him 
 through if he interfered. Mr. Charless is a man about fifty years, 
 his opponents twenty and twenty-five. Mr. C. used the shillelah 
 to great advantage; when the battle ended the amount of damage 
 sustained fell upon Mr. Henry, whose shoulder was unjointed. 
 
 "On Sunday evening a gentleman, on returning home, found 
 his quarters occupied by a friend, who extended his friendly visits 
 to rather too great a length. The door being locked, it was broken 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 23 
 
 open by the oAvner; the visitor jumped out of the window; a 
 battle ensued; the man was stuck with a knife. 
 
 "On Monday evening a battle royal ensued. It happened at 
 the theater and originated in politics, although that was not the 
 immediate origin; the causes and eireumstanees it is useless to 
 mention. The result was that one of the combatants received 
 several stabs in his back with a dirk — the other had a black eye. 
 One of the spectators, who interfered, received a stab in his hand; 
 another in the arm, and a third was knocked down with a porter 
 bottle. 
 
 "On Tuesday two gentlemen engaged in the river trade, vul- 
 garly called boatmen, fought on the subject of polities, which re- 
 sulted in one of the combatants having his leg broken, and the 
 other having his nose bit off. 
 
 "On Wednesday one of the combatants of Monday evening 
 attacked one of the wounded, and gave him several blows; but 
 the other, being wounded in the arm, did not return them. To 
 finish the events of this week, a lady of color flogged her husband, 
 a white man, which so enraged him that he fixed his gun and shot 
 himself." 
 
 Illinois had been admitted to statehood without any 
 question raised as to the customs and morals of the people, 
 when Dr. Richard Lee Mason came over the national road 
 from Vincennes to St. Louis. Dr. Mason was from Phila- 
 delphia and was coming west to settle. After visiting Kas- 
 kaskia and Alton and seeing something more of the settled 
 part of Illinois, Dr. Mason made his home in St. Louis. He 
 died in 1824 and his funeral was the occasion of a large pro- 
 cession escorted by Captain Archibald Gamble's troop. The 
 burial of Dr. Mason was the first interment in the new Masonic 
 graveyard on Washington avenue near Tenth street, a loca- 
 tion which was abandoned because it was too wet. Dr. Mason 
 wrote a journal of his trip from Philadelphia to St. Louis in 
 the fall of 1819 In that journal he told of the dangers along 
 the road in Illinois. After giving the names of half a dozen 
 men, he added: 
 
 "This chain of villains extended for eighty miles through all 
 the dreary and lonesome prairies. We were informed that when 
 they were not engaged in robbing or murdering they were very in- 
 dustriously employed in manufacturing banknotes, which they im- 
 
24 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 posed on travelers at every opportunity. For the convenience 
 of travelers, a new road has been made through this country, 
 instead of going by Shawneetown, and those villains have posted 
 themselves along the road under the name of tavern keepers, 
 watching for their prey whenever it may pass. Indeed, I conceive 
 it impossible for any man who has cash enough to make him worth 
 killing to travel this road alone. 
 
 "Who could believe that a human being could be so depraved 
 as to fall upon a defenseless and unoffending traveler and murder 
 him under the pretense of sheltering him from the storm and giving 
 him a hearty welcome to his table? Who could believe that even 
 devils in human shape could cut the throats of two traveling stran- 
 gers to obtain two watches, S80 and a pair of saddlebags? I shudder 
 at the blackness of the crime. It occurred only yesterday and we 
 are at this moment near the spot where the horrid deed was com- 
 mitted. Two other murders have lately been committed near 
 this place. A stranger was found hung on a tree and a traveler 
 was murdered near Shawneetown by the same men whose names 
 have been mentioned." 
 
 Dr. Mason visited Kaskaskia, then the capital of the new 
 state of Illinois. He told his impressions of the people he 
 found there: 
 
 "The inhabitants are all generals, colonels, majors, land specu- 
 lators, or adventurers, with now and then a robber or a cutthroat. 
 I have to keep my long knife sharp and my eyes open. Went 
 to church at night. A fellow tried to pick my pocket. Had my 
 hand on my long knife. 
 
 "Illinois is the hiding place of villains from every part of the 
 United States, and, indeed, from every quarter of the globe. A 
 majority of the settlers have been discharged from penitentiaries 
 and gaols, or have been the victims of misfortune or imprudence. 
 Many of those will reform, but many, very many, are made fit 
 for robbery and murder." 
 
 When the Missouri Compromise act was nearing final 
 passage in the early days of March, 1820, the House, which 
 had yielded only after prolonged debate and delay to the com- 
 promise, deliberately voted down the proposition, the last 
 stand of the free state members to require that the constitu- 
 tion Missouri might adopt be submitted to Congress for ap- 
 proval. This action *seems to have sustained the contention 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 25 
 
 of the Missourians that when their constitution was framed 
 and the state government was formed, Missouri was a state 
 in the Union. The official proceedings of the House on this 
 point read : 
 
 "Mr. Taylor then renewed the motion which he had made 
 unsuccessfully to committee, to amend the last section of the bill, 
 by striking out the words 'and the said state, when formed, shall 
 be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original 
 states,' and inserting in lieu thereof the following: 'And if the 
 same (the constitution) shall be approved by Congress, the said 
 territory shall be admitted into the Union as a state, upon an equal 
 footing with the original states.' 
 
 "The question was briefly supported by the mover, and was 
 opposed by Messrs. Scott, Lowndes, Mercer, Floid and Hendricks; 
 and 
 
 "The question being taken thereon, it was decided in the nega- 
 tive, by Yeas 49 and Nays 125." 
 
 There was no doubt in the minds of Missourians that 
 statehood began in the summer of 1820. The constitution 
 was signed on the nineteenth of July. It opened with: 
 
 "We, the people of Missouri, inhabiting the limits hereinafter 
 designated, by our representatives in convention assembled at St. 
 Louis on Monday, the 12th day of June, 1820, do mutually agree 
 to form and establish a free and independent republiek, by the name 
 of the State of Missouri, and for the government thereof do ordain 
 and establish this constitution." 
 
 According to the Enquirer, the promulgation of the con- 
 stitution was made an impressive public event: 
 
 "The constitution of the State of Missouri was signed at noon- 
 day on Wednesday, the 9th instant, amidst a great concourse of 
 citizens, and under a national salute of twenty-four guns, fired by 
 the St. Louis Guards. 
 
 "The entire instrument is published in this day's paper, to 
 the exclusion of other matter, and we trust w-ill be joyfully received 
 by the people as the proof that Missouri is a sovereign state and 
 as a pledge that she will remain so." 
 
 A few days later, McNair, in announcing himself as can- 
 didate for governor, addressed his "Fellow Citizens, of the 
 new State of Missouri." 
 
26 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 McNair was elected Governor by 6,576 votes against 
 2,656 for Clark. The Governor appeared before the general 
 assembly September 19, 1820, and delivered his inaugural. 
 In the course of it he said: 
 
 "I congratulate you, gentlemen, in the happy change which 
 has just taken place in our political affairs. From the dependent 
 condition of a territorial government, we have passed into a sover- 
 eign and independent state. We have formed for ourselves a 
 constitution, which, though perhaps not free from the imperfections 
 incident to all human institutions, does honor to the character and 
 intelligence of our infant state, and gives us every reason to expect 
 that we shall, without further difficulty, be admitted into the 
 federal union." 
 
 So well satisfied was the Governor that Missouri had be- 
 covne a state and would be immediately recognized as in the 
 Union, that his principal recommendation in his address was 
 that the General Assembly proceed to pass the legislation 
 necessary for participation in the presidential election. He 
 said: 
 
 "It is deemed advisable to remind you that the election of 
 president and vice-president is approaching, and that it will be 
 necessary to make provision as soon as possible for the election of 
 three electors in this state, in order that we may have a voice in 
 filling those highly important offices." 
 
 One of the earliest laws passed by the General Assembly 
 provided that tlie presidential electors should be chosen by 
 the Assembly. 
 
 The first section of the act of March 6, 1820, for the admis- 
 sion of Missouri provided "that the inhabitants of that por- 
 tion of Missouri included within the boundaries hereinafter 
 designated, be, and they are hereby, authorized to form for 
 themselves a constitution and state government, and to as- 
 sume such name as they shall deem proper; and the said 
 state, when formed, shall be admitted into the Union, upon 
 an equal footing with the original states in all respects what- 
 soever." 
 
ALEXANDER McNAIR 
 
 (Courtesy St. Louis Catholic Historical Society.) 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 27 
 
 The act set forth the boundaries of the state, the repre- 
 sentation of the several counties in a constitutional conven- 
 tion and the time of holding such convention. It further de- 
 clared: "That, in case a constitution and state government 
 shall be formed for the people of said Territory of Missouri, 
 the said convention, or representatives, as soon thereafter 
 as may be, shall cause a true and attested copy of said con- 
 stitution, or frame of state government, as shall be formed 
 or provided, to be transmitted to Congress." 
 
 There was one condition to guide the action of Missouri 
 and that was, "Provided that the same, whenever formed, shall 
 be Republican, and not repugnant to the Constitution of the 
 United States." This gave the free state men their oppor- 
 tunity to raise an issue against the formality of admission to 
 the Union. Section 26 of the Missouri constitution, referring 
 to the Legislature, read: "It shall be their duty as soon as 
 may be to pass such laws as may be necessary to prevent free 
 negroes and mulattoes from coming to and settling in this 
 state under any pretext whatever." The free state men 
 claim.ed this was in violation of the Constitution of the United 
 States. 
 
 Under the caption, "Imprudence — or Worse," Niks' 
 Register took up the intimations that Missourians proposed 
 to stand on their rights and commented in the ssue of August 
 26, 1820: 
 
 "The St. Louis Enquirer, intimating that the restriotionists 
 intend to renew their designs at the next session of Congress, says; 
 Missouri will then appear 'as a sovereign state, according to the 
 law of Congress, and not as a territorial orphan'; that her people 
 will, in that case, 'give fresh proof to the world that they know 
 their rights and are able to defend them.' What signifies such 
 language as this? All things considered, we wish that the Missouri 
 question may be suffered to rest where it is, as the lesser evil, but, 
 if Congress wishes to take it up again, and refuses to admit the 
 territory under the constitution which its convention has formed 
 and is without power to enforce its determination, it is high time, 
 indeed, that a new organization of affairs should take place." 
 
 Before the constitution of Missouri reached Congress, 
 Niles' Register pointed out that the clause directing the legis- 
 
28 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 lature to pass laws "to prevent free negroes and mulattoes 
 from coming into and settling in the state, on any pretence 
 whatever" would block admission into the Union. The 
 Register cited the provision in the Constitution of the United 
 States, "that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to 
 all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states." 
 The Register continued: 
 
 "This is a very plain, simple and imperative sentence. 
 Free blacks and mulattoes are 'citizens' in all the states, I 
 believe, east of the state of Delaware, as well as in the states 
 northwest of the river Ohio, and they can not be dispossessed 
 of their right to locate where they please." 
 
 The Register said that if Missouri did pass such laws 
 as its constitution demanded, they would be declared un- 
 constitutional by the United States Supreme Court, and thus 
 disposed of. But it made the point that Congress could not 
 now consistently approve a state constitution which contained 
 a provision "in evident opposition to a striking provision 
 of the Constitution under which they, themselves, directly 
 act." The Register's prediction was verified by the course 
 of Congress in insisting upon the so-called "solemn public 
 act." 
 
 That Congress had no right to impose upon Missouri 
 any restrictions as to slavery seems to have been the convic- 
 tion of Missourians generally. All through 1819, while the 
 deadlock prevailed in Congress, there were expressions of 
 this conviction in a variety of forms. The Gazette, which 
 was much more conservative than the Enquirer for which 
 Benton wrote, declared its position in these words: 
 
 "Our fellow citizens of the United States are assured 
 that the people of Missouri understand the extent of the powers 
 of Congress over this country, and their own rights to self- 
 government as will be shown hereafter." 
 
 In September, 1820, when the state government was about 
 to be organized, Joseph Charless, retiring from the owner- 
 
-MANSK'N IIOLSI'." 1 lOl !■; 
 
 ■ ■,■■•■■■ ;! c'..n>r!u;-Ki ■! m;.-. 
 
 
 'f if. i^ 1 i i? 
 
 •-""i^^ffi 
 
 |^^g^2r^~*~" 
 
 . • -^'^' 
 
 111'. -MISSul Rl l|n|i:i. 
 
 iho j-irst Si.-.ic I. 
 
 • i II, .a l',.rMHi.iv R..:,.!) 
 
,fc 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 29 
 
 ship of the Gazette, which he had established and kept going 
 twelve years, said, in his valedictory: 
 
 "Missouri has beeomo a free and independent state, and the 
 people, assuming the government themselves, have taught aristo- 
 crats a plain lesson of truth and have placed in the government of 
 the state, 'the men of the people'." 
 
 Mr. Charless, at the same time, took occasion to vindi- 
 cate the position of the Gazette throughout the travail of 
 statehood : 
 
 "It has been said that the Gazette advocated the restriction of 
 Missouri by Congress. The base fabricator of this charge is defied 
 to prove it. Examine the files and they will be found to pursue 
 the uniform course. Open to all decent eommunifations, the 
 editor has never hesitated to state his opposition to the interference 
 of Congress, but still felt desirous that some limitation should be 
 put by the people to the importation oi' slaves." 
 
 Missourians held sturdily to the belief that statehood 
 had been fully established in 1820. When he returned to 
 Washington in the fall of tliat year, John Scott, who had been 
 a territorial delegate in the previous session of Congress, 
 insisted on being addressed as a Representative in Congress, 
 by virtue of the election which Missouri had held under the 
 new State Constitution, The Missouri Gazette, which had 
 been conservative, much more so than the Enquirer for which 
 Benton wrote the editorials, made this comment in January, 
 1821, on the action of the House of Representatives which 
 was delaying the proclamation of admission: 
 
 "Congress may look out of the window, if they choose, and 
 say to a territory, 'if you wish to become a member of the Union, 
 put on the garments you would wear, and if we like them, we will 
 open the door of the Union and admit you.' By this overture 
 Congress have reserved to themselves the power of further act 
 as necessary to admission. 
 
 "But if they should say, as they have to Missouri, 'The door 
 is open to you; if you wish to become one of the sisterhood of 
 state; put on your garments and enter' — Missouri having done 
 so, oiie is installed with the rights of a member of the sisterhood. 
 Their Constitution embraces her. Congress can not expel her. 
 If her garments have any flounces or furbelows which the Consti- 
 
30 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 tution of the sisterhood does not permit, the only consequence 
 is that she is not allowed to use them. 
 
 "That this is the true construction of the act of Congress and 
 the act of our state there can be no doubt. Missouri is a state 
 of the Union, equal in sovereignty to her sister states; the denial 
 of any of the rights of sovereignty, and especially a participation 
 in the councils of the nation, is a violation of the Constitution." 
 
 In his painstaking investigation of tlie records, Senator 
 Cockrell found that while the credentials of Senators Barton 
 and Benton were not presented in the Senate until 1821, 
 these Senators were "certified to have attended, Barton from 
 November 14, 1820, and Benton from November 18, 1820, 
 each to March 3, 1821, and they were paid their regular per 
 diem salary and m.ileage, just as other senators w^ere." 
 
 Dating back the salaries of the Senators was only one 
 of several acts by the United States Government which treated 
 Missouri as a state in 1820. William Clark had been Gov- 
 ernor of Missouri Territory by appointment. Washington 
 stopped Governor Clark's salary when the state government 
 went into operation. The territorial government was left 
 in the air. John Scott addressed this letter to the Secretary 
 of State, John Quincy /dams: 
 
 "Governor William Clark of Missouri desires to know what 
 eye of the general government he now occupies. The law author- 
 izing the people within certain lines specified, in the then Missouri 
 territory, to form a constitution and state government, made no 
 disposition as to the remainder of the territory. He advises me 
 that he is still possessed of the public acts and documents, and that 
 an immense tract of country remains unprovided for, in which 
 there are several large tracts of land to which the Indian title has 
 been extinguished. He drew for his pay as governor, but his drafts 
 were only paid up to the 26th of September, the time when the 
 state government went into operation. It is now necessary for 
 him to know whether the government still considers him in office, 
 within the State of Missouri, or whether in office as to that por- 
 tion of the country out of the lines of the state, or both? And also 
 that ho have some discretion as to the disposition he is to make of 
 the public acts, records, and documents which would properly 
 belong to the state. An early reply will oblige him and your 
 obedient respectful servant." 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 31 
 
 After Benton had been elected to the Senate, the edi- 
 torials of the St. Louis Enquirer underwent some change. 
 While the two houses of Congress were still divided on the 
 question of admission because of the clauses in the Missouri 
 constitution prohibiting the admission of free negroes into 
 Missouri, and while Benton was waiting to take his seat, 
 in the winter of 1821, the Enquirer gave Missourians this 
 advice : 
 
 "This paper has labored for a long time to awaken the people 
 to the criminal designs of the men who wish to expel Missouri 
 from the Union. This audacious undertaking is now verging 
 to a crisis. What shall Missouri do if rejected? Fall back into 
 the territorial grade? We hope not. Set up for herself? We 
 hope not. The former would be to succumb to the Catalines of 
 the North; the latter would be to promote their views. The 
 restrietionists wish to divide the Union; and if Missouri would 
 attempt to break off, it would be into their hand; their object 
 would be aecompHshed and the blame thrown upon her. But let 
 Missouri continue her efforts to enter the Union; preserve all 
 her relations with the general government as far as her amphibious 
 condition will permit it to be done; be calm and dignified in as- 
 serting her rights, and a reaction may be produced which will 
 prostrate those Hartford convention men who now predominate 
 in the North, and give the victory to the friends of the Union and 
 to the republicans of the Jeffersonian school. Eventually, Mis- 
 souri must succeed, and good may grow out of evil; the men who 
 have raised this portentous storm may yet perish in it. Let Mis- 
 souri preserve all her friends; do nothing to mortify them, or to 
 please her enemies, and the sober reason of the people must ulti- 
 mately resume its empire and consign to infamy the men who have 
 sought their own aggrandisement upon the ruins of their country." 
 
 In other, and fewer words, what Senator Benton advised 
 for Missouri in its anomalous condition of statehood outside 
 of the Union, was "watchful waiting." 
 
 Notwithstanding the hitch at Washington over admis- 
 sion, Missouri continued to assert statehood. The circuit 
 court for the county of St. Louis began its first session on 
 the eighteenth of December, 1820. The lawyers presented 
 and discussed various questions of law raised by the strange 
 situation. The court decided that — 
 
32 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 "The state government was not only theoretically formed 
 but in full and constitutional operation, as regarded the con- 
 stitution of the United States and that of the State of Mis- 
 souri." 
 
 All of the winter of 1820-21 the controversy in Congress 
 over Missouri's status went on. There were members who 
 maintained that Missouri was already in the Union and that 
 nothing further was necessary. The time came for tlie count- 
 ing of the electoral votes — the seventeenth of February. To 
 avoid raising of any issue as to Missouri's right to vote for 
 President and Vice-President, the Senate, where there was 
 a majority in favor of Missouri, adopted this form to be used 
 in the announcement of the electoral vote: 
 
 "Resolved, That if any objection be made to the votes of Mis- 
 souri, and the counting, or omitting to count which shall not es- 
 sentially change the result of the election; in that case they shall 
 be reported by the president of the Senate in the following manner: 
 Were the votes o^^j.Iissouri to be counted, the result would be for 
 
 A. B. for President of the United States votes; if not counted, 
 
 for A. B. for President of the United States votes; but in 
 
 either event A. B. is elected President of the United States; and 
 in the same manner for Vice-President." 
 
 After much debate, Mr. Clay succeeded in getting this 
 resolution through the House on tlie very day that the votes 
 were to be counted. 
 
 The House resolved to "receive tlie Senate standing and 
 uncovered" — so the formal proceedings read. The joint ses- 
 sion was opened; the announcemicnt of the returns from the 
 several states went on until Missouri was readied, where- 
 upon Mr. Livermore, of New Hampshire, arose and said, 
 "Mr. President and Mr. Speaker, I object to receiving any 
 votes for President and Vice-President from Missouri, be- 
 cause Missouri is not a state in the Union." 
 
 That started trouble. The Senate withdrew and the 
 House wrangled. Mr. Floyd, of Virginia, offered a resolu- 
 tion "That Missouri is one of the states of this Union, and 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 33 
 
 her votes for President and Vice-President ought to be re- 
 ceived.'' 
 
 The debate continued for an hour. Niles' Register said 
 of the turmoil, "It is irnpossible to give such an account as 
 ought to be given." Mr. Clay at last got the upper hand 
 of the warring factions and the Senate was invited to come 
 back. The official proceedings were — 
 
 "The votes of Missouri were read, and the result of all the 
 votes having been read — 
 
 "The president of the Senate announced that the total num- 
 ber of votes for James Monroe, as President of the United States, 
 was 231, and, if the votes of Missouri were not counted, was 228; 
 that in either event James Monroe had a majority of the whole 
 number of votes given; and in the same form announced that 
 Daniel D. Tompkins had a majority of the whole number qf votes 
 for Vice-President of the United States. 
 
 "The president then proclaimed that James Monroe is elected 
 President of the United States for four years, commencing on the 
 fourth day of March next; and that Daniel D. Tompkins is elected 
 Vice-President of the United States for four years from the fourth 
 day of March next. 
 
 "While this proclamation was making, :o members of the 
 House of Representatives claimed the floor, to enquire whether 
 the votes of Missouri were or were not counted, apparently with 
 a view to founding some proposition on the answer. 
 
 "Here arose a scene of some confusion, which resulted in 
 the gentlemen being declared out of order, and required by the 
 Speaker of the House to resume their seats. 
 
 "The president of the Senate having finished the annuncia- 
 tion, the Senate retired, leaving Mr. Randolph on the floor at- 
 tempting to be heard by the chair. 
 
 "The House being called to order — 
 
 "Mr. Randolph, after a few remarks, suggested a motion re- 
 specting the votes from Missouri, which he reduced to writing, 
 as follows: 
 
 " 1. Resolved, That the electoral votes of the state of Missouri 
 have this day been counted, and do constitute a part of the ma- 
 jority of 231 votes given for President, and of 218 votes given for 
 Vice-President. 
 
 " 2. Resolved, That the whole number of electors appointed, 
 and of votes given for President and Vice-President has not been 
 announced by the presiding ofiicer of the Senate and House of 
 
 No. 1—3 
 
34 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. 
 
 Representatives, agreeably to the Constitution of the United States, 
 and that therefore the proceeding has been irregular and illegal. 
 
 "Whilst writing these resolves — 
 
 "A motion for adjournment was made. 
 
 "Here arose another scene of unusual character, a gentleman 
 claiming to have possession of the floor before the motion for 
 adjournment was made. 
 
 "The Speaker decided to the contrary, however, and the ques- 
 tion on adjournment was decided, by yeas and nays. 
 
 "For the adjournment, 95. 
 
 "Against. 60. 
 
 "So the yeas had it; and 
 
 "The House adjourned." 
 
 After the contest over the Missouri electoral vote, Mr. 
 Clay produced a second Missouri Compromise to complete 
 the admission of Missouri. This was known as the "Clay 
 Formula." This required Missouri, as a further condition 
 to admission, to pass a "solemn act," that the "restrictive 
 clause" excluding free negroes and mulattoes from settling 
 in the state should not be construed to affect any citizen of 
 any other state, in the rights guaranteed under the Consti- 
 tution of the United States. Missourians thought this was 
 ridiculous. 
 
 In his address before the Missouri Historical Society, 
 Frederick W. Lehman said the Legislature "passed what it 
 called a solemn public act by which it declared in effect that 
 the fundamental condition was contained in the constitution 
 of the state: that it was a piece of impertinence on the part 
 of Congress to require this express assent; that it made no 
 difference whether the assent was given or withheld and so 
 the state solemnly gave it. Free persons of color, citizens 
 of other states, were not forbidden entry to Missouri. But 
 such conditions were imposed upon their living here, that few, 
 if any, cared to come." 
 
 The preamble of the "solemn public act" in its entirety, 
 as adopted at a special session of the Legislature in June, 
 1821, was a wonderful document, charged with satire. It 
 was sent to President Monroe who issued his proclamation 
 
TI-.MI'ORARV CAl'l lOI. Ul- I HI 
 
 
TRAVAIL OF MISSOURI FOR STATEHOOD. 35 
 
 of August 10, 1821, declaring the admission of Missouri 
 "complete." 
 
 In a variety of official acts, the national government 
 continued to recognize Missouri as a state from September, 
 1820, but in a condition of transit into the Union. Before 
 the action of Congress on the constitution of Missouri, a 
 bill was introduced "to provide for the due execution of the 
 laws of the United States in the State of Missouri." Mis- 
 souri was referred to as a "state" even in the resolution mak- 
 ing admission dependent on the passage of "a solemn public 
 act which shall declare the assent of the said state to the said 
 fundamental condition." No fewer than four times in the 
 resolution which paved the way for admission, was Missouri 
 referred to as "said state." 
 
 While the resolution calling for the "solemn public act" 
 was pending in the House, Mr. Adams, of Massachusetts, 
 opposed it "on the ground of the defect of power of Congress 
 of the United States to authorize or require the legislature 
 of a state, once admitted to the Union, to do the act pro- 
 posed by the resolution to be demanded of the legislature of 
 Missouri." The resolution was passed by a vote of 87 to 81. 
 It went through the Senate by a vote of 28 to 14. 
 
 John Quincy Adams, secretary of state, transmitted the 
 resolution to "His Excellency, Alexander McNair, Governor 
 of Missouri," and referred to it as 'the resolution of Congress 
 for admitting the State of Missouri into the Union." The 
 department of state had cut off the territorial government of 
 Missouri in September, 1820. 
 
 And when President Monroe issued his proclamation 
 of the tenth of August, 1821, he concluded in this significant 
 form: 
 
 "The admission of the said State of Missouri into this 
 Union is declared to be complete." 
 
 V 
 
k 
 
,''',MM?°"=O^SRKS