History of the Constitutions of Iowa Part 5

The first limited the veto power of the Governor by providing that bills not approved by him might, nevertheless, become laws if pa.s.sed a second time by two-thirds of both houses of the Legislative a.s.sembly.

The second likewise aimed at curtailing the powers of the Governor by authorizing the Legislative a.s.sembly to "provide by law for the election or appointment of sheriffs, judges of probate, justices of the peace, and county surveyors."

The history of a quarrel between the Governor and the first Legislative a.s.sembly, which in a great measure occasioned these amendments, is significant in throwing light upon the political ideas and the democratic frankness and determination of the people of the Territory.

On July 7, 1838, President Van Buren issued a commission to Robert Lucas of Ohio, appointing him Governor of the new Territory of Iowa. The position was a difficult one to fill; but the President's selection promised to be the very best. Lucas was neither young, obscure, nor inexperienced. Born in Virginia, he had served with distinction in the War of 1812. He had served in the Legislature of Ohio, and had twice been elected to the office of Governor by the people of that State.

In 1832 he acted as Chairman of the first National Convention of the Democratic Party.

Upon receiving his commission as Governor of Iowa, Robert Lucas repaired with all possible haste to the West. Venerable with years and political experience, he arrived at Burlington in August, 1838. Here he found that Wm. B. Conway, the Secretary of the Territory, "had _a.s.sumed_ the Executive prerogative, had issued a proclamation dividing the Territory into Judicial Districts, and was about issuing a proclamation apportioning the Representatives and ordering an election." The conduct of the Secretary provoked the Governor; and Robert Lucas was not the man to conceal his feelings or hesitate to express his mind. From that time to the death of the Secretary in November, 1839, the two men were enemies. Lucas, in a letter to John Forsyth, Secretary of State, declared that Conway "has not only done nothing to render me a.s.sistance, but _is generally believed to be the prime mover of the opposition to my proceedings, and the author_ of the doc.u.ments forwarded to Washington by the members of the Legislature."

The first Legislative a.s.sembly of the Territory of Iowa did not meet until November 12, 1838. On the first day of the session each house proceeded to organize _pro tempore_. Then they a.s.sembled jointly in the hall of the House of Representatives to be sworn in by the Governor, and to receive any communication which his "Excellency" might have to make to them.

Governor Lucas delivered his first message in person. He took pains to emphasize the fact that the Organic Act had vested the legislative power in "the Governor and a Legislative a.s.sembly," which meant that "the Executive is vested with advisory and restraining powers, and the Legislative a.s.sembly with deliberative and enacting powers." "In no place," he declared later in a communication to the Secretary of the Territory, "is there any power vested in the Legislative a.s.sembly independent of the Governor."

Throughout the message, which when printed covered ten pages of the journal, the Governor freely advised and recommended such measures as he deemed most expedient. Then near the close he boldly added: "I shall at all times take pleasure in concurring with you in acts that tend to advance the general interests of the Territory, and the prosperity of the people;--but at the same time will be compelled to withhold my a.s.sent to such acts, or proceedings, as I may conscientiously for the time being believe to be prejudicial to the public good." Robert Lucas lived up to the spirit and the letter of his declaration.

In the matter of appointments the Governor's policy was courageously set forth in these words: "I shall at all times pay a due respect to recommendations; but cannot conscientiously nominate to office any individual of _bad moral character_, or, that may be addicted to _intemperance or gambling_, if known to me. These vices are so contaminating in their character, that all public officers in my opinion should be clear of even a suspicion of being addicted to them."

Lucas, writing some years later, was of the opinion that this declaration was one of the potent causes of opposition to his administration.

After the election of permanent officers, which followed the Governor's speech, the Legislative a.s.sembly proceeded with energy and enthusiasm to the business of legislation. But not a few of its measures met with the disapproval of the Governor. It soon became evident that the relations between the Executive and the a.s.sembly were not altogether cordial. The situation was made still more embarra.s.sing by the ill feeling which existed between the Governor and the Secretary of the Territory. Indeed it is clear that Mr. Conway was instrumental in stirring up much of the opposition to Governor Lucas by confiding his private grievances to members of the a.s.sembly, by deferring to the a.s.sembly to the point of servility, and by affecting to set up an administrative department distinct and separate from that of the Governor. On November 14, he submitted to the Council and House of Representatives the first of a series of communications bearing directly upon his own position and powers as Secretary and his relations to the Legislative a.s.sembly, and indirectly upon his relations to the Governor and the relations of the latter to the a.s.sembly.

It was early in the session that the Council and House of Representatives resolved "That when an act is presented to the Governor for his approval, he shall, within a reasonable time thereafter, make known to the House in which said act may have originated of his approval thereof; or if not approved of, the act shall be returned, with his objections thereto." For some weeks after its pa.s.sage, this resolution seems to have received no attention. Either there was delay in presenting it to the Governor, or the Governor did not give it his immediate attention. It was not until January 4, 1839, that the resolution was returned to the House of Representatives with this observation from the Governor: "I see no place in the organic law, that vests the Council and House of Representatives with the right to dictate to the Executive in the discharge of his official duties."

In the meantime the Council had taken steps looking toward the regulation by statute of all official intercourse between the legislative and executive departments of the government. On December 4, 1838, a committee of two was appointed to confer with the Governor and report a bill. The committee held the conference and reported a bill on the day following. After some discussion the bill pa.s.sed the Council on December 11, but not without important amendments. On the day following, the bill as amended pa.s.sed the House of Representatives. It was presented to the Governor on the 18th.

On December 19, Lucas returned the bill to the Council with his veto. He objected to the changes which had been made in the bill as originally reported by the committee. At the same time he took occasion to state, for the information of the a.s.sembly, the course he intended to pursue in the future. He said: "All bills, resolutions, or memorials, submitted to me, will be carefully examined, and if approved, will be signed and deposited in the office of the Secretary of the Territory. If special objections are found, but not sufficient to induce me to withhold my a.s.sent from the bill, resolution, or memorial, a special note of explanation will be endorsed with my approval. Bills, resolutions, or memorials, that may be considered entirely objectionable, or of doubtful policy, will be _retained under advis.e.m.e.nt_ or returned to the Legislative a.s.sembly, with my objections, at such time, and in such way and manner as I may, for the time being, deem to be most advisable."

In reply to all this it was "Resolved, By the Council and House of Representatives of the Territory of Iowa, That his Excellency Gov.

Lucas, is hereby respectfully requested to inform each House of the Legislative a.s.sembly, of all acts by him approved during the present session; and that he is further requested hereafter to inform the House in which a bill originated of his approval thereof immediately after the same has been given."

With a brief message, Lucas returned this resolution to the House of Representatives on January 5, 1839. He would at all times be pleased to comply with requests from the a.s.sembly, provided it "could be done with some propriety and conscience; but having neither secretary, clerk, messenger, a.s.sistant or other attendant, in public employ, at the Executive office, . . . . I must respectfully decline a compliance with your respectful request, and most respectfully invite your attention to my communication of the 19th December last."

Two days later a committee of the House of Representatives headed by James W. Grimes reported on the Governor's vetoes. They held that the "various Executive vetoes" were not only uncalled for, but were unwarranted by the Organic Act of the Territory. The phrase in the Const.i.tution which reads, "shall approve of all laws," is mandatory and leaves the Executive without discretion. The committee took the whole matter very seriously, believing that great principles were at stake.

"As representatives of the people," they declared, "we conceive that we should be recreant to their rights and true interests, if we should acquiesce in the 'veto power' as used by the Executive . . . . We believe the people should be heard through those who represent them and are responsible to them. That their wishes should be regarded, and not the wishes of the Federal Government or a federal officer. We believe the principle claimed by the Governor is a most dangerous and pernicious principle, and as the representatives of freemen we cannot acquiesce in it."

A week later the House "Resolved, That Robert Lucas is unfit to be the ruler of a free people," and appointed a select committee to prepare a memorial to the President of the United States praying for his immediate removal.

The Council committee on Territorial Affairs was no less emphatic in its condemnation of the "Executive Vetoes." They did not believe that Congress in framing the Organic Act intended to confer the power of an absolute veto upon the Governor. In their report of January 22, 1839, upon the bill regulating the intercourse between the executive and legislative departments, they exclaimed: "It is time to remonstrate. The liberty of the people should be dear to their representatives, and he who DARES not defend their sacred rights, who would not, in the hour of peril, stand as a sentinel to guard their privileges, is unworthy the name of a freeman."

In the meantime the Legislative a.s.sembly had prepared a memorial to Congress requesting an amendment to the Organic Act which would limit the Governor's veto power.

The Governor remained firm and unmoved to the end of the session.

Notwithstanding all the resolutions, reports, and memorials of the a.s.sembly, he continued to approve some measures, veto others, and endorse still others with special notes of explanation.

Nor did the indignation of the members of the Legislative a.s.sembly subside as the session neared its close. They now hoped to get rid of the Governor. So they addressed a memorial to "His Excellency Martin Van Buren, President of the United States," in which they enumerated at length "the faults of Governor Lucas' administration," and asked for his immediate removal from the office of Chief Executive. In the House of Representatives the minority offered a preamble and resolution praying that they be allowed to forward a counter memorial to the President, but on the motion of James W. Grimes their preamble and resolution were rejected.

This remarkable memorial concerning Robert Lucas reads much like the arraignment of King George III in the Declaration of Independence. In the political history of Iowa it stands as the declaration of the independence of the will of the representatives of the people as over against the will of the administration. It stands as the protest of Democracy against the exercise of arbitrary power. Its significance lies not in any statement or misstatement of historical facts, but in the spirit of independence, courage, and democracy which pervades its lines.

When the Legislative a.s.sembly met in November, 1839, the storm had pa.s.sed. The Const.i.tution of the Territory had been amended. Robert Lucas was still in office. But, reflecting upon the situation, he could truthfully say in his message: "It is with heartfelt grat.i.tude to Almighty G.o.d . . . . that I am, through His _special Providence_, permitted again to address the Legislative a.s.sembly."

IX

AGITATION FOR A STATE CONSt.i.tUTION

The early agitation for the establishment of a State government cannot justly be interpreted as opposition to the Const.i.tution of the Territory, or as disaffection with the Territorial government. On the contrary, it was altogether natural for the people who settled in the new Territory west of the Mississippi to look forward to the early establishment of a State government. Never in the history of the United States had Territories been viewed as permanent. In fact it was everywhere understood that the Territorial organization was at most a temporary arrangement which in time would give way to the more perfect Const.i.tution of the Commonwealth. Then, too, in the case of Iowa there was such a rapid growth of population that admission into the Union could not be long delayed under any circ.u.mstance. Mr. Shepard was right when in 1838 he said: "If the Territory of Iowa be now established, it will soon become a State."

The movement for the establishment of a State government was inaugurated by Robert Lucas in his message to the second Legislative a.s.sembly which met at Burlington on November 4, 1839. The Governor was of the opinion that in view of the "rapidly increasing population, and advancing prosperity of the Territory" the a.s.sembly might "with propriety proceed to measures preparatory to the formation of a Const.i.tution and State government." He knew that some would object to such measures as premature, "inasmuch as our expenses are defrayed by the United States,"

while the financial burdens of a State government would all have to be borne by the people. But, argued the Governor, did not prosperity and improvement within the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan languish during the Territorial period, and then advance "with rapid strides from the moment of their several admissions into the Union as independent States?" To his Excellency these historical "facts" were conclusive. The inference was clear in his mind. Prosperity and improvement result from the establishment of State government. So he earnestly recommended to the Legislative a.s.sembly "the early pa.s.sage of a memorial to Congress, respectfully asking of that body the pa.s.sage of an Act, at their ensuing session, granting to the inhabitants of Iowa Territory the right to form a Const.i.tution and State Government, and to provide for their admission into the Union upon an equal footing with the original States." Furthermore, he recommended "the pa.s.sage of a law to provide for the calling of a convention to form a state const.i.tution, so soon as Congress may grant by law the privilege to do so." The Governor was seriously in earnest. He even went so far as to recommend definite boundaries for the proposed Commonwealth.

Lucas was not alone in these advanced views. The newly elected President of the Council, Stephen Hempstead, thought that, notwithstanding the fact that the "Territory is yet in the bloom of infancy," only a "short period will elapse before Iowa will become a State." "You, gentlemen," he said, addressing the members of the Council, "are placed here for the purpose of maintaining her rights as a territory, to enact salutary laws for her government and to prepare her for an admission into the Union, under the great principles of civil liberty."

But the Legislative a.s.sembly was more conservative. At the regular session of 1839-40 it neither memorialized Congress on admission into the Union nor pa.s.sed a law providing for the calling of a Convention to form a Const.i.tution. In opposition to the recommendations of the Governor and the views of a minority in the a.s.sembly, it was argued (1) that the establishment of State Government would increase the burdens of taxation "which must render the new State government burdensome as well as odious to the people," (2) that "it could not add to the prosperity of the agriculturalist, the merchant, the miner, or the mechanic; nor could it render any more fruitful the sources of profit which are open to honest industry and application," and (3) that the people of the Territory enjoy under the acts of Congress ample liberty and freedom in self-government. The second Legislative a.s.sembly of the Territory was not willing to a.s.sume the responsibility of measures looking toward so radical a change in the political status of the people of Iowa. On January 17, 1840, it adjourned only to meet again in extra session later in the year.

In the meantime the Committee on Territories in the House of Representatives had reported a bill enabling the people of Iowa to form a Const.i.tution and State government. This gave Lucas an opportunity of directing attention again to the matter in which he was so deeply interested. When the a.s.sembly met in extra session July 13, 1840, he was prepared with a suggestion that was as reasonable as it was democratic.

He would have the whole question referred to the people for decision.

Presuming that the bill before Congress would pa.s.s, Lucas ventured to "suggest to the Legislative a.s.sembly the expediency of providing by law for taking the sense of the people of this Territory on the subject of a convention at the next ensuing annual election." "It appears to me," he said, "that there can be no objection to submitting the subject to the people for their consideration, as an expression of public opinion through the ballot-box would enable the ensuing Legislative a.s.sembly to act understandingly, and in accordance with the expressed will of the people on this important subject."

Following the suggestion of the Chief Executive the a.s.sembly provided by law for obtaining the wishes of the people at the annual August elections. All who favored the calling of a Convention were required to write "convention" on their ballots; while all who opposed the proposition were required to write "no convention." The law having been approved by the Governor on the last day of July, very little time was left for its consideration by the electorate before the elections.

When the official returns were counted the Governor in a proclamation declared the result to be 937 votes for and 2,907 votes against a Convention. The defeat, which was decisive, indicated that the squatters had not yet paid for their claims. And so the Organic Act of 1838 continued to serve the people of Iowa as the code of fundamental law.

Robert Lucas was disappointed, but he had to admit that the Territory went on increasing in population and wealth with phenomenal rapidity, notwithstanding the "facts" in the history of the Old Northwest. Not even the "imperfect conditions of Territorial government" seemed to affect in the slightest degree the economic prosperity and improvement of this frontier community.

The overwhelming defeat of the Convention proposition at the polls checked for a time all agitation in favor of a State Const.i.tution. Even the Governor, who up to this time had been its most sanguine advocate, declared in his message of November that since the people had expressed their preference for Territorial Government, "all further legislation on the subject at the present session" is precluded. The question now remained in _statu quo_ for over a year, that is, from August, 1840, to December, 1841.

In the meantime Robert Lucas had served out his full term of three years. There was no chance for his reappointment since the Democrats had lost the Presidency in the elections of 1840. The new Whig President, William Henry Harrison, appointed John Chambers, of Kentucky, to succeed the Ohio statesman. Again Iowa was fortunate in securing as Governor a man of experience and of National reputation.

When Governor Chambers sent his first message to the Legislative a.s.sembly in December, 1841, he thought he had reason to believe that if the question of a Convention were again submitted to the people there would be evidenced by them a marked change in sentiment. Why? The answer was clearly set forth in the message. First, the population of the Territory had increased phenomenally since August, 1840. Secondly, Congress had pa.s.sed the "Distribution Act" which provided (_a_) that Iowa should partic.i.p.ate in the _pro rata_ distribution, along with the twenty-six States and three Territories, and the District of Columbia, of the net proceeds of the sales of public lands, and (_b_) that five hundred thousand acres of land for internal improvements should be granted to every new State that should be admitted into the Union. John Chambers thought the liberal provisions of the Distribution Act would remove the grounds of all objections based upon the argument that State organization would be followed by burdensome taxes. In the light of these considerations he recommended that the question of a Convention be again submitted to the people.

Following this recommendation, the third Legislative a.s.sembly pa.s.sed "An Act to provide for the expression of the opinion of the people of the Territory of Iowa, upon the subject of the formation of a State Const.i.tution and Government, and to enable them to form a Const.i.tution for the State of Iowa," which act was approved February 16, 1842. Its provisions were as elaborate as its t.i.tle.

A poll was to be opened at each electoral precinct at the time of the general election in August. As the qualified electors approached the polls they were to be asked by the judges of election whether they were in favor of or against a Convention. Thereupon the electors were to answer simply, "Convention" or "No Convention." The clerks of election were charged with keeping a record of these _viva voce_ votes.

The act provided further, that should a majority of the votes polled be found to favor a Convention, then eighty-two delegates to such a Const.i.tutional Convention were to be elected on the second Tuesday in October next after the election aforesaid. On the first Monday of November next following their election, the delegates elected were to meet at Iowa City "and proceed to form a Const.i.tution and State Government, for the Territory of Iowa."