FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74  
75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   >>   >|  
nt. They called up for public consideration the whole problem of State organization in its several phases of (_a_) the calling of a Constitutional Convention, (_b_) the formation of a State Constitution, and (_c_) the admission of the State into the Union. They opened up a lively political discussion which was to continue for full five years. As to the propriety and wisdom of calling a Constitutional Convention there was from the beginning a decided difference of opinion. The act of February 16, 1842, had met with strong opposition in both houses of the Legislative Assembly. In the press and among the people of the Territory the question became, naturally enough, the local issue in party politics. The Democrats who had fathered the measure in the Assembly were everywhere heartily in favor of State organization, but the Whigs, who, being in the minority, would neither control the Convention nor officer the new State government, were vigorous in their opposition. Three days after the approval of the act of the Assembly there appeared in the _Iowa City Standard_ a remarkable letter. Its author was Francis Springer, a member of the Council and a Whig of considerable influence. His letter was in substance "a speech prepared by him to be delivered in the Council on the bill relating to the Convention, but not delivered because shut down by the majority." From this speech it appears that the bill relative to State organization, as originally introduced, provided for a vote of the people on the question of a Constitutional Convention and the election of delegates at the same time. This was confusing, since the election of delegates assumed a favorable vote on the question of a Convention. But Mr. Springer was opposed to the bill in any form. He thought that since the people had not expressed a contrary opinion their adverse vote in 1840 "ought to settle the question." He intimated that the bill sought to create places for disappointed politicians. Certain prominent Democrats--notably Robert Lucas and Judge Williams--had recently lost their positions. "So offices must be created for them. Hence the proposition to create a State Government." Furthermore, Mr. Springer opposed the bill because State organization would greatly increase the burdens of local taxation. Nor was the recent legislation of Congress a satisfactory reply; for in his opinion the benefits to be derived from the Distribution Act would after all be inc
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74  
75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Convention

 

question

 

organization

 

Springer

 

Assembly

 

people

 

opinion

 
Constitutional
 

delivered

 

opposition


delegates
 

create

 

election

 
Democrats
 

speech

 

calling

 

opposed

 
Council
 

letter

 

assumed


favorable

 

originally

 

majority

 

relating

 
appears
 
relative
 

provided

 

introduced

 

confusing

 

places


increase

 
burdens
 
taxation
 

greatly

 

Furthermore

 
proposition
 

Government

 

recent

 

legislation

 

Distribution


derived

 

benefits

 
Congress
 

satisfactory

 

created

 

intimated

 
sought
 
disappointed
 
politicians
 
settle