CHAPTER V.

STEPS TOWARD STATEHOOD.

As James Duane Doty had been one of the first to agitate the expediency of organizing Wisconsin as a territory, so he was early in the field to promote her admission into the Union. The first official move in that direction was made by the Congress when an enabling act was passed August 6, 1846, to authorize the people of the territory to take the necessary steps to attain the desired end. But it took some time to accomplish it. In 1838, ten years before the State Constitution went into effect, Governor Dodge advised the Legislature to make provision for taking a popular vote upon the subject. The next year the Governor renewed his recommendation, and advised that a vote be taken at the next election to be held in August, but little attention was paid to it. In 1840 a vote was taken, and the returns to the Secretary of the territory showed 92 for it, and 499 against it. The next year the second vote showed 619 for it, and 1,821 against it, with eleven counties making no returns. In 1843 the vote stood 541 for and 1,276 against it. The proposition was denounced in some papers as "Doty's hobby," and the people generally, as the vote showed, looked upon it with disfavor, and as a scheme. of the politicians to provide for more fat places for themselves at the public crib. While the territorial form of government existed, Uncle Sam defrayed a good share of the expenses; whereas, they argued, in case of statehood, that burden would be wholly transferred to the shoulders of the taxpayers. In 1844 the subject was again brought to the attention of the Territorial Council, but was indefinitely postponed. In 1845 a bill on the subject was killed in the House; but in 1846 a bill was finally passed and the question was again submitted to a vote of the people for the last time, and was carried by a large majority. The law provided for a con

vention of 124 delegates to frame a constitution, and for the submission of the instrument to a vote of the people. The delegates were accordingly chosen and the convention met in Madison on the 5th of October, 1846, and adjourned December 16, after being in session 72 days. The convention was composed of some of the brightest and ablest men in the territory, and as the delegates were mostly selected on account of personal fitness and adaptation for the work before them, rather than because of their political opinions, the personnel of the convention was first-class. As a matter of course, the Democrats being in the majority, and having been charged with the management of affairs ever since the territory had been organized, it was natural that the members of that party would organize the convention and take the laboring oar in framing the organic act. No Legislature that has convened since Wisconsin has been a State has contained such an array of familiar names, and, excepting the second convention, no assemblage of men, representing either political party, has ever met for any purpose that could compare in learning, experience in public affairs, usefulness and personal achievement, with the members of the first constitutional convention. They not only framed the constitution which, with a few slight amendments, has stood the test of half a century, but they have helped to pass and execute our laws and make our great success possible.

The

The first convention contained only 10 foreign-born citizens— 7 from Ireland and 3 from Germany, out of 124 members. All the others were native Americans. Nearly one half of the delegates were born in New York and Vermont. New York contributed one third of the entire number. Perhaps that is the reason our laws so closely resemble those of the Empire State. farmers had the votes in the convention, but the lawyers had the brains, and took the lead. The oldest man was 65, the youngest was 23. The average age was about 37 years. If you would call the roll of the leading men they would line up about as follows: E. G. Ryan, James Duane Doty, Marshall M. Strong, Moses M. Strong, George B. Smith, D. A. J. Upham, William R. Smith, Alexander W. Randall, David Noggle, Frederick S. Lovell, Moses Meeker, Stoddard Judd, George Hyer, Hiram Barber,

J. Allen Barber, Warren Chase, A. E. Elmore, John H. Tweedy and others. Many of these gentlemen held high official positions after the State was admitted. They were chief justices, governors, State officers, members of Congress, and some of them were the unsuccessful candidates of their party for the highest offices in the gift of the people. That the work of these able and conscientious men should have been rejected by the people by the decisive vote of 20,232 nays to 14,119 ayes, will astonish the reader more and more as he investigates the subject. Many things conspired to defeat the constitution. Although party lines were not drawn in the selection of delegates, nevertheless, as all the territorial offices had been filled by Democrats, and they were very much in evidence. everywhere, the new constitution was generally looked upon by the Whigs as a Democratic affair, for which that party was responsible. The Whigs contended that the doctrines of the National Democracy had been incorporated in the new constitution to some extent, especially in regard to banks and banking, and they did not like it. Many of the leading Democrats opposed the adoption of the constitution because they disliked some of its provisions. Marshall M. Strong, one of the leading men in the convention, resigned his seat and went home with the obvious. intent of opposing it. It has been charged that D. A. J. Upham, the president of the convention, looked upon its rejection with Christian resignation. Some thought it was too radical; others thought it was not liberal enough.

There is no doubt that it was defeated at the polls because it had not the cordial support of all those who had helped to make it. In the newspapers and on the stump the points raised against it were generally stated to be: (1) The clause in relation to the rights of married women; (2) the article on exemption of property from forced sale for debt; (3) the articles on banks and banking; (4) as to the number of senators and members of the Assembly; (5) the elective judiciary; and (6) the omission of an article on corporations. These were considered its obvious defects, and against these articles the guns of the opposition were leveled. The result was fatal; the instrument was rejected by a decided majority and another convention was called to try again.