CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Great Plains Quarterly Great Plains Studies, Center for 1990 More than Statehood on Their Minds: South Dakota Joins the Union, 1889 John E. Miller South Dakota State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly Part of the Other International and Area Studies Commons Miller, John E., "More than Statehood on Their Minds: South Dakota Joins the Union, 1889" (1990). Great Plains Quarterly. 394. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly/394 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Studies, Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Plains Quarterly by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. MORE THAN STATEHOOD ON THEIR MINDS SOUTH DAKOTA JOINS THE UNION, 1889 JOHN E. MILLER "I T'S A GO," read the jubilant headline in southern Dakota, were not likely to gain ad­ the Huron Daily Huronite on 21 February 1889, mission. It was the 1888 election replacing the one day after Congress passed the Omnibus Bill Democratic Cleveland with Republican Sena­ admitting four new states into the Union­ tor Benjamin Harrison of Indiana and returning South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, and Republican majorities in both houses of Con­ Washington.! The following day, despite spec­ gress that turned the tide. Few doubted that the ulation that he might veto the legislation, Pres­ Republicans would push forward legislation to ident Grover Cleveland signed the bill into law, admit several new states, including South Da­ setting into motion a process that formally con­ kota. With an estimated population of 400,000 ferred statehood on South Dakota on 2 Novem­ and twenty-seven years as a territory, southern ber 1889. For almost a decade momentum had Dakota was in the forefront of the statehood been building in southern Dakota for this day, drive and generally was considered the most and people's frustrations with Congressional in­ deserving. During the 1880s Senator Harrison action had grown apace. 2 had been South Dakota's most outspoken cham­ No state had entered the Union since Col­ pion; now he would be in a position to act. 3 orado in 1876, and as long as Democrats con­ The lame duck fiftieth Congress, seeing the trolled the House of Representatives, territories handwriting on the wall, moved ahead and at with heavy Republican complexions, such as the end of the session passed an omnibus bill admitting four new states. South Dakota's suc­ cessful campaign for statehood had been the most important force in breaking the Congres­ sional deadlock. 4 Along with it during 1889 and John E. Miller, a professor of history at South Dakota 1890 came five other Northern Tier states into State University, has published articles and books on the Union-North Dakota, Montana, Wash­ agrarian radicalism and on South Dakota history. He spent the summer of 1990 as a participant in an NEH ington, Idaho, and Wyoming. seminar at Brown University. Joyous as people were with the news that they were finally to become a state, South [GPQ 10 (Fall 1990): 206-2171 Dakotans had more than statehood on their 206 SOUTH DAKOTA JOINS UNION 207 minds in 1889. Severe challenges faced them flooded their representatives with petitions, and and important decisions had to be made. Sev­ a prohibition bill passed, only to be vetoed by eral issues carried significant implications for Governor Louis Church, who said he believed the future of the state and also illuminated the that the issue should be resolved by the people historical context in which statehood emerged­ themselves through the constitutional process prohibition, women's suffrage, the location of at the time of statehood. 8 Then in March, three the new state capital, the opening of the Sioux weeks after President Cleveland signed the Reservation for settlement, and agricultural dis­ statehood law, prohibition workers met in con­ tress. All five of these questions generated con­ vention at Huron for a two-day conference to troversy. Most were connected with broader organize for the coming struggle. They endorsed national trends and developments. Most of them a constitutional prohibition clause, pledged more also are likely to be forgotten in all the hoopla than $6,000 to fund the campaign, and estab­ connected with South Dakota's centennial, but lished a seven-member executive committee to a critical investigation of them provides useful run it. Its chairman was attorney V. V. Barnes perspectives and insights. of Yankton, a Republican with political ambi­ tions. 9 The Sioux Falls convention's inclusion of PROHIBITION prohibition in the proposed constitution marked On the Fourth of July, seventy-five dele­ the first major victory of the prohibition forces. gates-----fifty-two Republicans and twenty-three The Women's Christian Temperance Union, Democrats-----gathered in Germania Hall in Sioux long dedicated to the elimination of liquor, Falls to hammer out a constitution for the new stepped up their activities. On 11 September state of South Dakota. For the most part their the eighth annual convention of the Dakota task was not all that difficult and they finished W.C.T.U. convened in Yankton with two it in early August. They started with the Sioux hundred leaders present. All over the Territory, Falls Constitution of 1885, which the voters prohibitionists held meetings in halls, school had approved in May, as a framework then con­ houses, and other places. Petitions were signed, sidered alterations and made slight modifica­ statements made, and letters sent. 10 Captain O. tions in order to satisfy the requirements imposed R. Van Etten of Highmore, widely reputed as by Congress and to fill in gaps. 5 a temperance orator, hit the trail for constitu­ One of the largest, most controversial ques­ tional prohibition. tions was the liquor issue. 6 A prohibition clause Most Republican politicians, from Arthur had been a prominent feature of the 1885 con­ Mellette-who had been elected "governor" of stitution, but on this subject nothing ever South Dakota during the extra-legal elections seemed to be final. It was continuously debated held in 1885---on down, were either actively and heatedly fought throughout the territorial or passively on the prohibition bandwagon. period. The Flandreau Enterprise anticipated Their state convention in Huron, meeting in what lay ahead when it observed in May, "The the same opera house that just a day earlier had hardest political fight that Dakota has ever ex­ hosted an enthusiastic prohibition rally, ap­ perienced is now opening. It is the fight over proved a platform declaring in favor of consti­ the question of constitutional prohibition." A tutional prohibition. The Democrats, on the month later the Pierre Free Press commented, other hand, came out against itY Two argu­ "The prohibition workers of South Dakota are ments were generally raised in opposition: first, preparing to make a big hustle to carry the day that it unduly restricted individual freedom; sec­ for their cause, and this issue bids fair to overtop ond, that it would be impossible to enforce. the capital campaign before it is settled."7 The Sioux Falls Argus-Leader, convinced that During the legislative session at Bismarck at no response would be forthcoming, demanded the beginning of 1889, prohibition advocates to know what success prohibition had ever 208 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, FALL 1990 achieved in practice. Liquor dealers put to­ Anthony, for years one of the most visible na­ gether an active organization in June to prevent tional advocates of women's rights, argued for their own elimination. They noted that be­ separating the two issues, although she was an tween 1880 and 1885 six of seven states voting ardent prohibitionist herself. But other women, on the issue had approved prohibition, while such as Marietta Bones of Webster, a leading between 1885 and 1889 nine states voting on South Dakota suffragist, insisted on linking the issue had all rejected it. 12 them. Internecine conflict over strategy unfor­ In approving a constitutional prohibition tunately intensified personal acrimony and un­ clause on election day, the voters were express­ dermined the chances for success. 13 ing a deep-felt desire prevalent among a large Most decisive in the failure of women to get segment of the population to establish control the vote in South Dakota was the refusal of the over their situation and their environment. two major political parties to lend their support Temperance, which was a national-indeed an to the cause. Their stance became crucial when international-movement, had special appeal the constitution-makers at Sioux Falls inserted in a frontier environment where forces threat­ a clause scheduling a vote on women's suffrage ening chaos and societal breakdown seemed es­ at the first general election after the constitu­ pecially dangerous. Environmental conditions, tion went into effect. Almost before the state­ economic stringencies, ethnic conflict, the In­ hood celebrations were over, therefore, South dian presence, even wild animals-all of these Dakotans confronted another big question­ things engendered fear and concern. Liquor and votes for women. The campaign began in No­ its ally, the saloon, divided the community into vember 1889, and continued throughout the imbibers who enjoyed a drink and thought there following year. 14 was nothing wrong with it and abstainers who Susan B. Anthony arrived in South Dakota deplored drunkenness and worried about the in early November and immediately set to work potential dangers posed by any amount of drink­ carrying her message to the public. 15 She had ing. A yawning cultural gap split the two groups.