FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103  
104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   >>  
I THE CONSTITUTION OF 1844 DEBATED AND DEFEATED BY THE PEOPLE While Congress was discussing the boundaries of Iowa and carefully considering the effect which the admission of the new State might possibly have upon matters of National concern, the Constitution of 1844 was being subjected to analysis and criticism throughout the Territory. Moreover, it is interesting to note that the only provision of the Constitution which was held up and debated in Congress was the very one which was generally accepted by the people of the Territory without comment. Whigs and Democrats alike were satisfied with the _Lucas boundaries_. Nor did the people of Iowa at this time think or care anything about the preservation of the "balance of power." Their adoption of, and adherence to, the _Lucas boundaries_ was founded upon local pride and commercial considerations. Opposition to the Constitution of 1844 was at the outset largely a matter of partisan feeling. The Whigs very naturally opposed the ratification of a code of fundamental law which had been formulated by a Democratic majority. Then, too, they could not hope for many of the Federal and State offices which would be opened to Iowans after the establishment of Commonwealth organization. And so with genuine partisan zeal they attacked the instrument from Preamble to Schedule. Nothing escaped their ridicule and sarcasm. By the Democratic press they were charged with "an intent to keep Iowa out of the Union, so that her two Senators shall not ensure the vote of the United States Senate to Mr. Polk at the next session." But the Whigs were not altogether alone in their opposition to the proposed Constitution, not even during the early weeks of the campaign. There was some disaffection among the Democrats themselves, that is, among the radicals who thought that the new code was not sufficiently Jeffersonian. The editor of the _Dubuque Express_, for example, was severe in his criticisms, but he intimated that he would vote for the Constitution in the interests of party discipline. The _Bloomington Herald_, on the other hand, although a strong organ of the Democracy, emphatically declared through its editorial columns that "admission under the Constitution would be a curse to us as a people." As a party, however, the Democrats favored the Constitution of 1844, defended its provisions, and urged its adoption by the people. They held that as a code of fundamental law it was all
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103  
104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   >>  



Top keywords:
Constitution
 

people

 

Democrats

 

boundaries

 

Congress

 

adoption

 
partisan
 
Democratic
 
fundamental
 

Territory


admission

 

States

 

emphatically

 
Senators
 

United

 

Democracy

 

ensure

 

declared

 

columns

 

session


favored

 

defended

 

Senate

 

provisions

 
sarcasm
 

ridicule

 

editorial

 

Schedule

 
Nothing
 

escaped


charged

 

altogether

 
intent
 

opposition

 
severe
 

Preamble

 

Express

 

Herald

 
discipline
 

interests


intimated
 
criticisms
 

Dubuque

 

editor

 

campaign

 

Bloomington

 
proposed
 

disaffection

 

sufficiently

 

Jeffersonian