NATIVISM IN KENTUCKY TO 1860

BY

SISTER AGNES GER... L\.LDINE McGANN, M.A.

of

The Sisters of Charity of Nazareth Nazareth, Kentucky

~ ~issetbdinn

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES OF THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA WASHINGTON, D. C. 1944 Copyright, 1944 by

THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS

The Abbey Press, St. Melnrad, Ind. NATIVISM IN KENTUCKY TO 1860

This dissertion was conducted under the direction of Professor Richard J. Purcell, Ph.D., LL.B., as major professor and was approved by the Reverend John Tracy Ellis, Ph.D., and Assistant Professor Edward P. Lilly, Ph.D., as readers.

TO THE CONGREGATION OF THE SISTERS OF CHARITY OF NAZARETH

PREFACE It is the purpose of this study to trace the rise, progress, and decline of Nativism as an anti-foreign, anti-Catholic social and political movement in Kentucky prior to the Civil War. The terms, Native American, American, and Know­ Nothing, are used interchangeably so far as fundamental concepts are concerned, but the popular appellation, Know­ Nothing, is generally restricted to the resurgence of Na­ tivism in the decade before the War between the States. The activities sponsored by these groups, however desig­ nated, were designed to advance the interests of native-born citizens to the exclusion of the rights of naturalized citizens, especially those affiliated with the Catholic Church. At one period the anti-foreign aspect of the opposition predomi­ nated; at another, the anti-Catholic feeling, but frequently the two phases were fused. Attention has been focused on Louisville, Kentucky's leading city, because there the bulk of foreign-born citizens dwelt, the Catholic Church claimed more numerous adherents than elsewhere in Kentucky, and it was there, also, tnat the Louisville Journal, the principal state organ of the Know-Nothing party, found its home. Again, Covington and Newport, comparatively small towns with a predominantly German population in the fifties, have received_ less attention because their history merged with that of "greater Cincinnati" of which they form part. With the exception of passing references to Kentucky by Arthur Charles Cole in an essay, "Nativism in the Lower Mississippi Valley," Proceedings of the Mississip'JYi Valley Historical Association, VI ( 1913), 258-75; a study of the significant relationship of political sentiment and the soil in "Sectionalism in Kentucky from 1855 to 1865" by James R. Robertson of Berea College in The Mississippi Valley Histor­ ical Review, IV (June, 1917), 49-63; and a casual, slight account of Know-Nothingism in Kentucky, written over fifty years ago, by Thomas J. Jenkins in The Catholic World, LVII (July, 1893), 511-22, there is nothing of a mono- vii viii Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 graphic character on this subject. This study is one of a series of published doctoral dissertations, brochures, and un­ published masters' essays on the general subject of political Nativism, instituted and directed by Professor Richard J. Purcell, some of which are available in print and others i~ manuscript form in the Mullen Library of the Catholic Uni­ versity of America.1

1 The following from the Purcell series have proved valuable as a background for this study: John P. Barry, "The Know-Nothing Party in the District of Colum­ bia" (1933); Sister M. Regina Baska, "Archbishop Bedini's Tour in America" ( 1927) ; Sister M. Fabian Buonocore, "Political N ativism in Syracuse, N. Y." (1935); Sister Xavier Dehner, "The Know-Noth­ ing Party in Virginia, 1852-1860" (1942); Sister Marie Leonore Fell, "Bishop Hughes and the Common School Controversy,, ( 1936) and The Foundations of Nativim,, in A.merican Textbooks, 1783-1860 (Washington, 1941); Sister M. Angela Fitzmorris, Four Decades of Catholicism in Texa,s, 18!0-1860 (Washington, 1926); Sister Theo­ phane Geary, A History of Third Parties in Pennsylvania (Washing­ ton, 1938) ; Sister Mary de Lourdes Gohmann, Political Nativism in TennesBee to 1860 (Washington, 1938); Sister Denise Fra~cis H~ey, "New York State in the Election of 1856" (1943); Mother. Mary Boniface Henze, "Political Nativism in New Jersey" (1938); Sister Callista Hynes, "The History of the American Protective Association in Minnesota' '(1940); Sister M. Augustine Kwitchen, "Toledo Blade and the National Elections, 1840-1860" (1943); Sister Marie Carolyn Klinkhamer, "Attitudes of Congress toward Foreigners, Immigration, and Colonization, 1789-1825" (1941); Sister M. St. Henry Mccon­ ville, "Nativism in Pennsylvania" in Records of the American Catholic Historical Society, XLVII ( March, 1936), 5-48; Sister M. St. Patrick Mcconville, Polit-ical Nativism in the State of MMyland, 1830-1860 (,Vashington, 1928); Sister Blanche Marie McEnery, Catholics a:nd the Mexican War ( Washington, 1937) ; Sister Agnes Geraldine McGann, "The Know-Nothing Movement in Kentucky" in Re<»rds of the American Catholio Historical Society, XLIX (December, 1938), 291-329; Sister Paul of the Cross McGrath, Political Nativism, in Te~as, 1815-1860 (Washington, 1930); Sister M. Eunice Murphy, "The History of the American Protective Association in Ohio" (1939); Carroll John Noonan, Political Nativism in Connecticut (WashingtonJ 193~); Sister M. Felicity O'Driscoll, ''Political Nativism in Buffalo, N. Y., 1830-1860," in Records of the American Catholic HisthTica.l Society, XLVIII (September, 1937), 279-318; Sister M. Cecilia Pa- . Preface 1X

Unpublished manuscripts and ne,vspapers have been con­ sulted in the following Kentucky depositories : the Filson Club, the Jefferson County Courthouse, and the Kentucky Room of the Free Public Library, Louisville; the archives of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Nazareth ; the librar­ ies of the University of Kentucky and Transylvania Col­ lege, Lexington; the Lexington Public Library; the Ken­ tucky State Historical Society and the State Capitol Library, Frankfort; and the Public Library of Covington. Some of the correspondence of Bishop Martin John Spalding has been found at the Baltimore Cathedral Archives. The ar­ chives of the Archdiocese of Louisville, however, contain no material of value for this dissertation. The evacuation of manuscripts from the Library of Congress has prevented a careful rechecking of the Crittenden Correspondence which was used in writing an earlier master's essay on a phase of this subject. The Breckinridge and Donelson Papers which might have yielded pertinent material were unavailable for the same reason. The Calendar of the Papers of John Jor­ dan Crittenden (Washington, 1913), a chronological, an­ notated list, contains eight or ten items--correspondence of Albert T. Burnley, Garrett Davis, Robert P. Letcher, and luszak. "The Catholic Telegraph on Contemporary Affairs and Pol­ itics" (1940); Joseph Panzer, "Attitude of the American Quarterly Register towards Catholicism and Immigration" (1938); Richard J. Purcell and John F. Poole, "Political N ativism in Brooklyn" in Journal of lrisk American Historical Society, XXXII (1941), 10-56; Daniel F. Reilly, O.P., The School Oontroversy, 1891-1893 (\Vashington, 1944); James P. Lauer, O.S.B., "Contemporary American Attitude toward Catholic Emancipation" (1930); Sister M. Lucy Josephine Selig, "Know-Nothingism in Florida" (1944); Sister Beatrice Solensky, "Elections of 1853 to 1859 in Alabama" (1943); Alfred G. Stritch, "Political Nativism in Cincinnati, 1830-1860" in Reoords of the AmeT­ ica.n Catholic Hiatorical Society, XLVIII (September, 1937), 227-78; Sister Evangeline Thomas, Nativism, in the Old Northwest, 1850-1860 ( Washington, 1936) ; George Welsh, "The Fillmore Campaign of 1856" (1934); Sister M. Symphorosa Wlodkowaska, "Political Na­ tivism in Cleveland" (1938). X Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

George Robertson-which would be, in all probability, of value. I am happy to have this opportunity to acknowledge my indebtedness to Professor Richard J. Purcell for his guid­ ance during my years of study. I wish also to thank him for the suggestion of this subject and for his careful direc­ tion of its development. I extend my gratitude likewise to the Reverend John Tracy Ellis and to Assistant Professor Edward P. Lilly for a constructively critical reading of the manuscript. To the members of my Congregation who have furthered this work by their kindness and interest, and to all who have in any way aided in bringing it to completion, I am deeply grateful. Nazareth, Kentucky March 19, 1944 CONTENTS Chapter Page

I. Nativism Seeks a Footing ...... 1

II. Nativism in the Constitutional Convention of 1849 . . 29

Ill. The Know.Nothing Movement . • • • . • . • . . . • • • • • • 48

IV. A Bloody Election • • . • • • • . • . • . • • • . . • . . . . . • • • 86

V. The Know-Nothings in Power • . . • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • 114

VI. The Decline of Know-Nothingism • • • • • . • • . • . . • • • 141

Bibliography ...... 159

Index ...... 167

xi

CHAPTER I NATIVISM SEEKS A FOOTING Nativism may be designated as a species of racialism which would promote a protective policy of favoring the native-born inhabitants of the country against immigrants and aliens who allegedly are objectionable for ~acial, social, religious, economic, or political reasons. This being so, it might be assumed that the leveling influence of frontier democracy should have tended to abolish any narrow pro­ scription, and that in areas where foreign immigrants were few in number a restrictive program should have found little or no quarter. If religious bigotry in its anti-Catholic aspect be accepted as a principal incident characterizing N ativism, then, too, intolerance should have surrendered to constitutional liberalism. In theory, both of these cor­ rectives were possible, yet actually, neither was realized in Kentucky during the two decades prior to the Civil War, however artificial the local brand of Nativism may have been as compared with the eastern variety. Throughout the thirties, nativistic editors had ·asserted repeatedly that the "papal conquest" of the United States has bee·n confided to the Society for the Propagation of the Faith which had been established in Lyons, France, in 1822, and to the Leopoldine Society, founded at Vienna in 1829, in response to a plea of Frederic Rese, vicar-general of the Diocese of Cincinnati.1 Chiefly by means of financial con-

1 \Vriting to a friend in Europe, Bishop Flaget, whose diocese (Bardstown) had received considerable assistance from the Society for the Propagation of the Faith, said: "Had I treasures at my disposal, I would multiply colleges and schools for girls and boys. I would build hospitals and public houses." In a word, he would compel all his Kentuckians to love and admire a religion so · benefi­ cent and generous, and perhaps he would finish by converting them. The Republic, I (NewYork, 1851), 79. For a history of these mission­ ary societies see Edward J. Hickey, The S-0ciety fM the PTopagatiofl of the Faith, 1822-192! (Washington, 1922), and Theodore Roemer, Ten Decades of Alms (St. Louis, 1942). 1 2 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 tributions for educational and missionary work were these organizations to accomplish the purpose so audaciously ascribed to them. In 1837 a Presbyterian ,vrote: It is well known that the Pope and his clergy regard their missions in America as far more important than any others, and that the principal means by which they expect to extend their influence in our country, is the education of youth. And it should be understood by Protestants, that their efforts are especially directed to female education. In the State of Kentucky they have ten female establishments of which five are con­ ducted by the Sisters of Charity and [five] by the Sis­ ters of Loretto ....2 It is true that in Kentucky, Catholic Sisterhoods spon­ sored "ten female establishments" which offered an educa­ tion beyond first lessons, then inadequately provided under public and Protestant auspices :3 five were conducted by the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth; four, by the Sisters of Loret­ to; and one, by the Dominican Sisters. As for financial con­ tributions, the Diocese of Bardstown (later Louisville) had been one of the first in the United States to receive material assistance from the Society for the Propagation of the Faith. There is no record, however, that these private academies shared in this society's allocation of funds or in the dona­ tions of two similar societies, the Leopoldine and the Lud­ wig-Missionsverein, whose primary but not sole objectives were to aid German Catholic communities and parishes.4

2 The Presbyterian, quoted by The Catholic Advocate (Louisville), Aug. 26, 1837. The Catholic Advocate, official organ of the Diocese of Bardstown, later Louisville, first published in 1836, suspended publication in 1848, whereupon The CathoUo Telegraph of Cincinnati carried items of interest to Kentucky Catholics until The Guardian appeared in Louisville, 1858-1862. The Catholic Advocate reap­ peared in 1869 and ten years later gave place to The Record, only official organ of the Diocese of Louisville ( created an archdiocese in 1937) since The Catholic Advocate of 1836. 3 Cf. F. Garvin Davenport, "Crusaders for Public Education," Ante-Bellum Kentucky (Oxford, Ohio, 1943), pp. 60-79. 4 From 1822 to 1867 the Society for the Propagation of the Faith contributed nearly $160,000 to the Kentucky missions. The Leopoldine Nativism Seeks a Footing 3 Furthermore, the religious orders in charge were American foundations with a personnel comprised almost exclusively of native-born Kentuckians, emigrants from Maryland, or American converts to the Catholic faith. The first supe­ riors of the two pioneer societies of religious women in Ken­ tucky were natives of Maryland: Ann and Mary Rhodes of the Sisters of Loretto and Catherine Spalding of the Sis­ ters of Charity of Nazareth. 5 This consideration alone should have removed these communities from the suspicion of foreign domination ; yet, contrariwise, the activity of these religious in the field of education ,vas often viewed askance by their Protestant fell ow citizens, and their schools were regarded as nothing but proselytizing schemes on the part of the Roman hierarchy.6 In order to offset the effects of Catholic education, Rev­ erend Nathan L. Rice, D.D., a Presbyterian minister and the founder of The Western Protestant, established a female academy at Bardstown, the seat of one of the first Catholic dioceses in the United States, and the first in the West.7 The American Home Mission Society was spurred to greater activity, especially in the Mississippi Valley, and specific in-

Society of Vienna and the Ludwig-Missionsverein of Munich both gave considerably smaller sums. Theodore Roemer, Ten Decades of Alms (St. Louis, 1942), pp. 79, 148. 5 For biographical sketches of Ann and Mary Rhodes see Anna C. Minogue, Loretto: Annals of the Century (New York, 1912), pp. 23-29; for Catherine Spalding see Richard J. Purcell in the Dictionary of American Biography, XVII, 421-22. (Hereafter cited DAB.) 6 Cincinnati Journal, July !7, 1831, cited by Alfred G. Stritch, ''Political Nativism in Cincinnati, 1830-1860," Records of the Ame,-­ ican Catholic Historical Society, XLVIII (Sept., 1937), 259. 7 Cf. Richard J. Purcell, "Irish Teachers in Early Kentucky," The Catholic Educational Revi.ew, XXXIV (1936), 360-69. In 1836, Dr. Rice published in his paper a libelous charge against the Rev. D. A. Deparcq, ecclesiastical superior of the Sisters of Loretto. Suit was instituted by clerical friends of the maligned priest and the jury found the defendant guilty of libel. Cf. Ben. J. Webb, The Centenary of Catholicity in Kentucky (Louisville, 1884), p. 244 n. 4 Nativism in Kentu.cky to 1860 structions to Protestant parents to send their children to institutions of learning under the patronage of their own churches were not uncommon.8 The columns of Kentucky newspapers disseminated sectarian reports from religious conferences which played up the "Catholic menace," as for instance: It is manif est, that the Roman Church proposes to · secure the ascendancy in this country, chiefly by means of literary institutions of every grade, in which, by aid of foreign funds, they are able to hold out extra­ ordinary inducements, to gain the patronage of the com­ munity, and are seeking, especially in this way, to bring the Protestant youth of this country under their in­ fluence. 0 For those Protestant parents who preferred having their children educated within the State, there was usually no alternative but to send them to a private academy. Since the public school system of Kentucky was not given consti­ tutional status until 1849, and even then not well established until 1870, private academies, many of which were under sectarian control, had pre-empted the field. Whereas these schools, notably Salen1 Academy at Bardstown, Kentucky Academy at Pisgah, and Science Hill at Shelbyville, con­ tributed appreciably to the instruction of the youth of I{en­ tucky, they were inadequate to meet all demands, with the result that Protestants, either of choice or necessity, patron­ ized Catholic schools conducted by religious orders of men and women. By the mid-forties Catholic schools were numerous.10 Among the institutions for boys were St. Joseph's College,

& See Colin B. Goodykoontz, Home Missions on the American Fron­ tier ( Caldwell, Idaho, 1939), pp. 271-72, for a Protestant interpre­ tation of "Manifest Destiny." 9 From resolutions adopted at the Methodist Episcopal Conference of Tennessee, Louisville Morning Courier, Dec. 18, 1844, quoted by The Catholic Advocate, Dec. 21, 1844. 10 The first school in Kentucky owed its foundation to an Irish Catholic, Mrs. William Coomes, who in 1775 began teaching at Fort Harrod. Thomas D. Clark, A History of Kentucky (New York, 1937), Nativism Seeks a Footing · 6

Bardstown, established as a diocesan college in 1819- but transferred to the Society of Jesus in 1848; St. Mary's Col­ lege, Marion County, founded in 1821 and alternately under diocesan and Jesuit control; Mt. Merino Seminary founded in 1839 but discontinued after five years; St. Ignatius Literary Institution, Louisville, also known as St. Aloysius College, 1844-1852.11 The schools for girls which had caused concern to The Presbyterian were scattered throughout the State as the following list indicates : Loretto Academy established at St. Charles in 1812 and transferred to Loretto in 1824 ; Cal­ vary Academy, Marion County, 1816; Bethlehem Academy, Hardin County, 1832, to which was added the school for girls founded in 1823 in Breckinridge County; and St. Bene­ dict Academy, Portland, 1842, all of which were conducted by the Sisters of Loretto. Nazareth Academy established in 1814 on St. Thomas' farm near Bardstown and trans­ ferred in 1822 to Nazareth, its present location; Bethlehem Academy, Bardstown, ~819; St. Vincent Academy, Union County, 1820; St. Catherine Academy, S~ott County, 1823, removed to Lexington in 1833; and Presentation Acade­ my, Louisville, 1831, were all under the supervision of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth. The Dominican Sisters established near St. Rose, in 1822, St. Mary Magdalen Academy, later renamed St. Catherine of Sienna. p. 303. The items in the two paragraphs following are taken from a master's essay by Sister Agnes Immaculata Markham, "Catholic Secondary Education in Kentucky 1805-1885," Catholic University of America "(1938); pp. 55, 56 and .the Metropolitan Catholic Alm.anac (Baltimore). 11 Other Catholic schools which had served for ·some years and then been discontinued were the Trappist school in Marion County, 1806-1808, established for "the gratuitous education of male children of any· denomination," and the College of St. Thomas of Aquin, gen­ erally designated St. Thomas College, begun late in 1808 by Father Samuel Thomas Wilson, O.P., and continuing through twenty· suc­ cessful years. · Jefferson· Davis attended this school in his · early youth. ·V. F. O'Daniel, O.P., -A ·Light ·of the Chu,-ch in Kentuck11 (Washington, 1932), pp. 151, 179-207. · 6 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

At Louisville in 1844, a league of Presbyterian, Baptist, and Methodist ministers conducted a series of lectures de­ signed to acquaint the unwary with the "startling doctrines of the church of Rome" on purgatory, celibacy, and papal supremacy. Their joint theological efforts were supple­ mented by an occasional itinerant preacher : 'The League' has received an accredited ally from Ul-. ster .... The Rev. Mr. Simpson seems to be a Scotch Irish Presbyterian parson, who patrols this country abusing Ireland.12 As the stronger element both numerically and intellectual­ ly, the Presbyterians, strengthened by Robert Jefferson Breckinridge, an advanced nativist, controversialist, politi­ cian, and emancipationist, were undoubtedly the league's guiding spirit.13 Before their synod of Kentucky held in Louisville, October 13, 1849, the Reverend Edward P. Hum­ phrey delivered A Discourse on the Spiritual Poive1· of the Roman Catholic Clergy, in compliance with ''a standing order" of the synod ,vhich required that "a discourse on Popery be delivered at each of its annual sessions."14 The minister discharged his duty by expounding the opposing doctrines of the Catholic and Presbyterian Churches on the interpretation of the Bible and on the sacerdotal character

12 The Catholic Adoocate, April 13, 1844. The follo,ving ministers were members of the "league": ,v. L. Breckinridge, E. P. Humphrey, ,v. W. Hill (Presbyterians) ; A. D. Sears and T. W. Malcolm (Bap­ tists) ;H. H. Kavanaugh and G. W. Brush (Methodists). A Kentucky print of the time reads as follows: "Romanism as it is . exhibited in the life, death and salvation of Adam Horn who murdered two wives, on his way to heaven through purgatory ...."Library of Con­ gress, Broadside Portfolio, 22, No. 35. 13 Dr. Breckinridge, during his residence in Baltimore, was editor of the leading anti-Catholic magazine of the South, The Baltimore Literary and Religious Magazine. While pastor of the First . Pres­ byterian Church of Lexington (1847-1852), he served as state super­ intendent of education. u The sermon was printed in pamphlet form in Louisville in 1850. Copies may be found in the Huntington Library and in the New York Public Library. Nativisrn Seeks a Footing 7 of the priesthood; namely, an authoritative versus a pri­ vate interpretation of the Scriptures; and a priesthood essential to the very existence of the Catholic Church as a society versus a ministry subject to the control of the Pres­ byterian Church and non-essential as an element of its existence. 15 Humphrey and other ministers of the Louisville League edited conjointly a semi-monthly paper, the True Catholic, which found its views regularly challenged by The Ca.tho lie Advocate, then the official organ of the Diocese of Louisville. Meanwhile, from the pulpit of St. Louis Church, which, in 1841, had become the seat of the episcopate on its transfer from Bardstown, Fathers Ignatius Reynolds, John McGill, and John Larkin, S.J., defended their creed when assailed.16 In Maysville a Presbyterian divine, Reverend Robert Cald­ well Grundy, organized the Maysville Protestant Association which assembled to hear a speech by a visiting lecturer, the noted Lyman Beecher, and thereupon adopted several resolu­ tions, among which were the following: That our government is essentially Protestant in its origin and structure, and that in view of the efforts which the Papacy is now making for ascendancy in this country, every Protestant citizen is called upon to exert his influence to defeat an object the accomplish­ ment of which must prove our ruin. That the Roman Catholic Religion is opposed to free government in its principles and spirit, and, that the signal of its victory and its triumph in this country, will be the death knell of our liberties. --That we cordially extend to Roman Catholics the same toleration and privileges which are enjoyed by the other citizens .... so far as they are willing, in com-

15 Edward P. Humphrey, A Discourse on the Spiritual Powe-r of the Roman Catholic Cle-rgy (Louisville, 1850), p. 4. 16 For John Larkin, S.J., and Bishops McGill and Martin John Spalding, cf. biographical sketches by Richard J. Purcell in-the DAB, X, 616; XII, 49-50; XVII, 424-26. 8 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

mon with all Protestants, to renounce all allegiance to any f ore1gn• power.... 1T Of the two remaining resolutions, one expressed the fear that the Pope of Rome intended to spare no pains, with the aid of the despots of Europe, to possess the western coun­ try-an echo of Beecher's earlier slogan, "Save the Val­ ley"-and the other, the opinion that the only hope of saving the country from the Pope would be by the diffusion of information among the people.18 Father John McGill, the competent editor of The Catholic Advocate, granted considerable space to· an examination of these resolutions which sought to divorce principles of the Catholic religion from the institutional organization of the Church in order to fall within tolerationist ideals. A more common practice among Protestant controversialists, one which, indeed, was encouraged, was to declare Church dogma and ecclesiastical discipline identical : A very strange timidity has been manifested in bring­ ing the religious and moral system of Romanism, under discussion; as if those aspects of it, were beyond the pale of political enquiries, or as if they had no connec­ tion with the political aspects of Romanism. The Court of Rome, and the See of Rome, are no doubt easily dis­ tinguishable; but t4ey are, nevertheless, indissolubly united.18 11 Reprint from the Maysville Eagle in The Catholic Advocate, March 1, 1845. Lecturing in Louisville in 1847, Bishop Spalding said, "It is one strange evidence of the perversity and blindness of popular prejudice in our regard, that, whereas in England and in Europe, Catholics have been often held up to public odium as the enemies of monarchy, in this country, they are represented as the secret enemies of republicanism!" Martin J. Spalding, General Evi­ dences of Catholicity (Louisville, 1847), pp. 343-44. '18 At least one Methodist preacher, B. T. Kavanaugh of Lebanon,. Illinois, attempted to dispel the notion that Catholics were getting control of the "Valley," as he maintained that for every ftve educa­ tional institutions under Roman Catholic influence- there we.re thirty under Protestant ·influence. The Catholic. Advocate, -May 19, 1839. 19 Replies of ·the Louisville JournaJ to the Letters .of "A Kentucky Ca.tholic'' (Louisville, 1856), p. 7. Nativism Seeks a Footing 9 The correspondent who undertook the analysis of the Maysville Resolutions signed himself "Freedom of Con­ science." He cited the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and the following sections of the Con­ stitution of Kentucky ( 1799), which guaranteed freedom of religion and recalled their prototype, the famous Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom ( 1785) : Art. X, Sec. 3: That all men have a natural and in­ defeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; that no man shall be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent; that no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious societies or modes of worship. Sec. 4: That the civil rights, privileges, or capacities of any citizen shall in no wise be diminished or enlarged on account of his religion. He then proceeded to affirm that this is not a Protestant government, for "it is in no wise a mere protesting negative organization; but a positive universal good to its citizens of all sects and denominations ...." 20 Neither was the Catholic Church dependent for its existence in the United States on the conditional toleration of factious, politico­ religious meetings. "Freedom of Conscience" felt that since no proofs had been offered in the resolutions to the very grave charges against the Catholic Church, a serious refu­ tation might imply that some credence had been granted to the assertions. This statement evidently called forth a de­ fense from the author of the resolutions, for· The Catholic Advocate soon carried a consideration of Grundy's first de­ fense. To the minister's charge that "the Roman Catholic religion is, in its essential principles, opposed to republican institutions, and necessarily subversive of them," it was sug­ gested that he consult the Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas

20 The Catholic Advocate, March 1, 1845. '10 Nativi,sm in ·Kentucky· "to 1860 and publish -Aquinas' views ·on the relationship between the civil and the ecclesiastical power. 21 The challenge was not accepted. A second defense was summarized by the correspondent of The Catholic Advocate as consisting of two parts; first, irregular discursive remarks touching the reviewer himself, and secondly, four arguments to show that our government is essentially Protestant in its organization and structure. The consideration of the Maysville Resolutions and their de­ fense was concluded two months after their proposal when "Freedom of Conscience" exclaimed : How unenviable the position of Parsons in this free country, who, under constitutions guaranteeing to every Christian teacher the right to teach his own creed, en­ deavor to manufacture, by public meetings and false resolves a public sentiment against others, whose only fault is their great success .•..22 Ten years later ( 1855) the founder of the Maysville Prot­ estant Association was still actively engaged in warning his fellow citizens "against error which is alike dangerous to the church and the state." In a sermon which subsequently appeared in pamphlet form under the title, The Temporal Power of the Pope. Dangerous to the Religious and Civil Liberties of the American Republic,23 the Reverend Robert . 21 Ibid., April 19, 1845. The familiarity with St. Thomas Aquinas' views on temporal power, together with an allusion by the editor of The Catholic Advocate to a "valuable communication from an intelligent friend near Springfield," suggests that "Freedom of Con­ science" may have been a Dominican from St. Rose's Priory. St. Thomas in Sentences: Lib. II, Sent. dist. XLIV holds that "the higher and lower powers are related to each other in s~ch a way as both to arise from some supreme power, which subjects one to the other as it wills. In that case one is superior to the other only in those matters in which it has been made so by the supreme power, and only in those is the higher power to be obeyed rather than the ,, Iower .... 22 Ibid., May 10, 1845. 23 Printed at the Maysville Eagle Office, 1855. Na.tiv·is1n Seeks a Footing 11

Grundy reviewed a speech of Representative Joseph R. Chandler of Pennsylvania, delivered in the House the pre­ vious month. Chandler, a convert to the Catholic Church, had denied that the Pope, as the supreme and infallible head of the Catholic Church, has any power over and imposes upon American citizens any oath inconsistent with their obligations or in any sense incompatible with their patriot­ ism. Grundy contested the Representative's statement and then entered into the highly provocative question of the na­ ture and extent of the Pope's supremacy. He presented the opinion of St. Thomas Aquinas on the deposing power of 2 the Pope, ' and the theory of the indirect power of the papacy as upheld by St. Robert Bellarmine. As final proof of the menace to America of loyalty to the Holy See, he of­ fered an oath supposedly taken by every Catholic, "and I promise and swear true obedience to the Roman Bishop" : This is the oath of allegiance to the Pope which the creed of the church imposes upon every lay member of the church, even in these United States.... How com­ patible such an oath, as the above, to a foreign spiritual and temporal prince, holding and promulgating such sentiments, is with the obligation and fealty of an 2 American citizen, judge ye ! ~ . This perplexity which confronted Dr. Grundy and which may be reduced to the interrogation, "can .a good Catholic be a good American citizen?" was perennially recurrent. American Catholic bishops at the Second Plenary Council of

24 Although never defined as an article of faith, it is the common teaching of theologians that the indirect power of the Papacy extends to deposing a ruler whose conduct is so :flagrantly in opposition to religion and morality as to entitle his subjects to be released from their allegiance to him. This power is exerted in temporal matters only is so. far as they intrench upon religion and in this way cease to be purely temporal. Cf. Harold Vogler, The New Catholic D-ic­ tionary (New York, 1929), p. 289. 25 R. C. Grundy, The Temporal Power of the Pope Dangerous to the Religious and Civil Liberties of the America-n Republic (Mays­ ville, Ky., 1855), p. 11. 12 Na.tfvism in, Ke1itucky to_ 1860

Baltimore in 18~6, .aware of its persistence, .made it the sub­ ject of a joint pastoral letter which re.ad .in part: The enemies of the Church fail not to represent her claims as incompatible ·with the independence of the Civil Power, and her action as impeding the exertions - of the State to promote the well-being of society. So far from these charges ·being founded in fact, the authority and influence of the Church will be found to be the most efficacious support of the temporal authority by which society is governed. The Church, indeed, does not proclaim the absolute and entire independence of the Civil Power, because it teaches with the Apostle, that 'all Power is of God'; that the temporal magistrate is His minister, and that the power of the sword he wields is a·delegated exercise of authority committed to him from on high. 26 The year 1844 which ushered in a somewhat definite or­ ganization of activity against Catholics in Kentucky also witnessed the memorable Henry Clay campaign with ·an­ other defeat for Kentucky's idol. Throughout the campaign a special appeal was made for the votes of naturalized citi­ zens through an extra weekly edition of the Louisville J our­ nal. The following excerpts suggest with what uncommon courtesy these prospective voters were treated: A deep and unaffected interest in the course you shall take in this election induces us, once more, and for the last time, to address· you as a class distinct from the great body of the people. If it is not known to you it should be .... that all men naturalized according to existing laws are beyond the power of any tribunal in the country and cannot be dis­ franchised. Their right of citizenship is a vested right.... The law which would disfranchise them would be an ex post facto law. Such of the foreigners as are lovers of law and order, and the Germans are peculiarly· so, will find their natural affinities with the Whigs.

28 Peter Guilday. (ed.), The. National .Pastora.Zs . of. the. American. . . Hierarchy 1792-1919 (Washington, 1923), p. 205. Nativism_ Seeks a Footing 13 Our staunch old German Whigs, men of character, men of substance, men above office, can do immense good by going among their countrymen and talking with them. The Whig party, in every· quarter, has repudiated all connection or sympathy with the Native Americans. According to the genious of our. institutions the right of suffrage should be extended to foreigners on liberal terms.21 ·

28 Clay carried· Kentucky· by a majority of 9,267 votes1 but it was soon appar~nt that in this close election a national victory would depend upon the vote of New York. "God grant that she may have done her duty and saved the coun­ try," prayed George Dennison Prentice, statesman, wit, journalist, a native of Connecticut and a graduate of Brown University, who, induced by the Whigs to go to Kentucky in 1830 to write a life of Henry· Clay, had made that State his :adopted home. To the bitter disappointment of Clay and his numerous admirers, New York's electoral vote. went to Polk. Because the antislave~ voters of the Empire State had cast their ballots for the candidates of the Liberty party·and.the naturalized citizens. had voted with the Democrats~ Clay failed to .carry:_ New York, thereby losing. the election. to his opponent. It is not altogether strange that this frustration should have resulted in a .rising tide of° hostility· against the foreign-born who ·were held responsible for Clay's defeat. The attitude of Clay toward the annexation of Texas is more commonly held accountable for his failure to attain the presidency. George Rawlings Poage in his.Henry Clay and the Whig Party presents Clay's own views of his defeat which the statesman insisted was due to "a most extra­ ordinary combination of adverse circumstances" : If there had been no native party, or if all its members had not all been united against him, or if the foreign Catholics had not been arrayed on the -other side, or if the Abolitionists had been true to their avowed prin-

21 Louisville Journalt Aug. 2, 8, 15, 1844. . 28 Whig Alma-nae and Politicur:ns' Register (New York, 1845), p. 62. 14 Nativ·isni in Kentucky to 1860

ciples, or if there had been no frauds, he declared he would have triumphed.29 Defeated Whigs in Kentucky through Prentice as spokes- man expressed apprehension for the future: If the election of Mr. Polk decides anything in regard to great public measures, it certainly decides that free­ trade shall be the policy of the country. It may decide other things-it may, for instance, decide against a National bank and in favor of a Sub-treasury-but the great question at issue, the great argument concerns the policy of protection. so In view of the conviction of most Whigs that Polk owed the presidency to the vote of foreigners, 31 an aversion to the foreign-born, greater than any heretofore displayed in Ken­ tucky, swept the State, although slight was the problem this numerically small group created. Two opinions concerning foreigners prevailed at this time in Kentucky, according to a European sojourner, Augustus J. Thebaud, S.J. The majority favored opposition but not violence to foreigners, while an articulate minority felt that the existing naturaliza­ tion laws had worked well in this country, and that to the influx of immigration was chiefly due its prosperity. The latter group upheld the educational ,vork of foreign priests, Bishop Flaget and his companions in Bardstown and the surrounding country, as they declared: "The young men whom they are educating are born Americans and will con­ tinue Americans all their lives. What has been done here by foreigners has taken place in all the States of the Union." Thebaud concluded from this tolerant assertion and from

29 George R. Poage, H en1~ Cl,a,y and the Whig Party ( Chapel Hill~ N. C., 1936), p. 150. Cf. also Ulrich B. Phillips, "The Southern Whigs 1834-1854," Turner Essays in American History (New York, pp. 218-19. 30 Louisville JiOUrnal, Nov. 14, 1844. 31 Writing to Clay, Nov. 11, 1844, Millard Fillmore who had just been defeated for governor of New York asserted that it was due to "abolitionists and foreign Catholics" that they both owed their de­ feat. Letters of Millard Fillmore (New York, 1907), II, 26'l-68. · Nat·ivism Seeks. a Footing 15

other observations during his travels "that fanaticism was not for the whole country the chief root of Nativism in 1844" ; rather were Southern Whigs alarmed at the pre­ ponderance of Democrats due to foreign accessions and at the consequent increase of political and economic power in the North.32 The Louisville Journal quite naturally exhibited less en­ thusiasm for the naturalized citizen after the election than before. German Locofocos 33 of Louisville were singled out for censure because of their resolution to proscribe as an enemy of the German nation anyone who dared to join the Whig party. The foreign-born were accused of acting to­ gether on the principle of promoting the commerce and manufactures of their native countries, to the detriment of the United States. It was further held that the election had been carried by a violation of the existing ·naturalization laws. This did not mean, however, that the right of voting should be denied the foreigner altogether. What the editor of the Louisville Journal intended to make clear was that he. liked to see "honest, industrious, and intelligent for­ eigners seeking homes in this country," but he would erect a· barrier against the "loathsome and putrid tide of toreign pauperism."34 Before the campaign of 1844 had ended, a Baptist preach- er, Reverend Dr. William C. Buck, had sounded the alert: Such have been the high-handed and daring encroach­ ments of the Papists in this country, upon our Repub­ lican institutions, and particularly upon the elective franchise, and the use of the Bible in schools; and so clearly is the insidious policy of the Pope and the papal

32 Augustus J. Thebaud, S.J., Th'Yee-quarlers of a Century (1807 txJ 1882): A Retrospect. Edited by Charles G. Herbermann (New York, 1904), III, 240. 33 The term "Loco Foco" was applied to the National Democratic party between 1837-1860 by its opponents. For its origin see a brief account by W. B. Hatcher, Dictionary of American History, III, 292. u Louisville Journal, Dec. 6, 14, 1844. 16 Nativ-ism ·in Kentuci,y to 1860 sovereigns of Europe, against the·peace and permanen­ cy of our government evinced, especially in the over­ whelming immigration of hordes of Catholics to our shores ; that our politicians have taken the alarm, and Native American Associations are beginning to spring up in every direction. We opine, that as soon as the present Presidential election is over, new political com­ binations will be formed, and Whigism and Democracy will be merged into N ativeism and Anti-nativeism. 35 Brother Buck's. brand of nativism was so blatantly anti­ Catholic that it elicited a prompt reply from Father McGill who expr~ssed ·surprise that the purPQse of Native Amer­ ican Associations should be so .frankly admitted. Were Catholics to understand that their religion, which under the Constitution stood equal to every other, was to be assailed by a powerful political party organized for its destruction? If this were the real objective of these associations, it would be better for Catholics to know this in time so that tliey might not be foolish enough to aid a party which was organ­ ized with such a proscriptive purpose. 36 From Lexington, home of the "Sage of Ashland," came a cry of humiliation and alarm at the control which foreign countries and foreign interests were exercising in the coun­ try. A change in the naturalization laws was proposed as the most effective means of ending.this domination, but Ken­ tuckians were warned neither to let the iss·ue assume a· party aspect nor to permit religious considerations to enter into the discussions.37 The Whigs, moreover, were exhorted to pursue a calm, temperate course and not to be beguiled by those who thought it expedient to join the Native American party in order to effect this purpose. By remaining staunch Whigs they could accomplish more than by joining a party which would surely be looked upon with suspicion if its leading principle was so tenuous as "opposition to a large

35 Baptist Banner and Western Pionee:r,. Nov. 14,.1844. 3e The Catholic Advocate, Nov. 23, 1844. 81 Lexington Observer and Reporter, Nov. 16, .1844. . Nati1Jism· Seeks a Footing 17 class of voters because of the accident of birth."38 In every light that we can view it, the editor concluded, we should consider. the formation of an exclusively Native party as unwise. Henry Clay exerted his powerful influence to restrain the Whigs from merging with the Native Americans whose banner, he admitted, they showed a tendency to unfurl: Whilst I own I have great sympathy with that party, I do not perceive the wisdom, at present, either of the Whigs absorbing it, or being absorbed by it. If either of these contingencies were to happen, our adversaries would charge that it was the same old party, with a new name, or with a new article added to its creed. In the mean time they would retain all the foreign vote, which they have consolidated; make constant further accessions, and perhaps regain their members who have joined the Native American party. I am disposed to think that it is best for each party, the Whigs and the Natives, to retain their respective organizations dis­ tinct from each other, and to cultivate friendly relations together. 39 This open avowal of sympathy with the tenets of the American party is interesting in the light of Clay's earlier statements. In a speech before the United States Senate in 183240 when he was a candidate for the presidency, Henry Clay edified -his audience with a glowing eulogy of the pa­ tient, industrious German who was "always ready to fly to the · standard of his adopted country, or of its laws when called by the duties of patriotism," and of the Irishman who, of all foreigners, amalgamated so quickly with the native­ born. Alluding to this speech, George Prentice remarked that, "the sentiments- avowed in the Senate ...- . with no motive but to utter the opinions and feelings by which he

as Article in Lexington Observer and Reporter, Dec. 18, 1844, re-· printed from the Buffalo C&nimercial Adviser. a9 Quoted, Mary Crittenden Coleman (ed.), The Life of J. J. ·Crit­ tenden ( Philadelphia, 1871) , I, 224. • 0 Regiate,- of Deba~a in Congress, 22nd Congress, 1st session, February 2, 1832, p. 266. 18 lvativi.s1n in Kentucky to 1860

has always been governed, are of much more value than the 'public opinion' that is made for special occasions." A decade later, the same editor wrote: There wasn't at that time a Democratic editor in the United States but swore that the eulogy was as vile a specimen of hypocrisy as ever was uttered, that it was designed for no other purpose than to cheat the Irish out of their votes, and that the whole course of Mr. Clay and his friends proved conclusively that they hated and scorned the Irish at heart with the bitterest hatred and scorn.41 Writing in 1837 to Prince Demetrius Gallitzin, 42 pioneer priest of Pennsylvania, the Kentucky statesman defended his action in presenting to Congress a petition from some of his constituents regarding naturalization: They had a rig ht to petition, and without sharing their prejudices, their very ignorance made me more anxious to fulfill the duty of presenting their petition. I neither expected nor wished that they would obtain their object and accordingly the Committee reported against it. You do me no more than justice in suppos­ ing me incapable of any feelings of prejudice, or enter­ taining any spirit of intolerance towards the Catho­ lic religion. 43 Later, Clay was credited with saying that he never believed Catholic doctrines were either anti-American or hostile to civil liberty.u It is not too great a shock, however, to find the defeated Clay writing to John Crittenden in November, 1844: If petitions be presented to alter the naturalization laws, they ought to be received an.d respectfully dealt with. 41 Louisville J-0urnal, March 29, 1844; May 9, 1855. 42 Demetrius Augustine Gallitzin (1770-1840) was born at The Hague, where his father, at one time privy counselor of Catherine II, was Russian ambassador. After ordination by Bishop John Carroll in 1795, Gallitzin (who went by the name of Father Schmidt) found­ ed the Catholic colony of Loretto on the Pennsylvania frontier. Cf. Richard J. Purcell in the DAB, VII, 113-15. 43 The Catholic Telegraph (Cincinnati); March 30, 1887. •• Kentucky Statesman (Lexington), July 24, 1855. , Nat-ivism Seeks a Footing 19

There can be no doubt of the greatness of the evil of this constant manufacture of American citizens out of foreign emigrants, many of whom are incapable of justly appreciating the duties incident to the· new character which they assume.45 Nor was it surprising to find the Whig press stre~sing, dur­ ing the closing months of 1844 and well on into the follow­ ing year, the advisability of at least a slight modification of the naturalization laws. To Clay, though, the effort seemed premature. This agitation for a revision of the naturalization laws and the organization of militant Prot­ estants for activity in pulpit and press aroused among a considerable portion of Kentucky's population the quiescent antagonism to,vard the foreign-born and, in particular, toward Catholics. At the first Native American convention in Philadelphia, July 4, 1845, Ke·ntucky was represented by Walter Newman Haldeman, eldest son of John Haldeman and Elizabeth New­ man, both natives of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, who had set­ tled in Maysville- prior to 1820.46 A member of the Presbyterian Church and editor of the American Democrat and Courier" of Louisville, whither his family had moved in 1837, Walter N. Haldeman served as one of the vice­ presidents of the convention whose spi~it he thoroughly im­ bibed. Upon his return to Kentucky he appealed to all

45 Mary C. Coleman (ed.). Lile of Crittenden, I, 224. 46 The Haldemans were of Swiss descent; their ancestors emigrated from Berne and settled in Pennsylvania in 1727. The family boasted an eminent scientist, Samuel Stehman Haldeman (1812-1880), pro­ fessor of natural science at the University of Pennsylvania and- a con­ vert to the Catholic Church. Writing from Philadelphia, April 25, 1843, to Rev. Martin J. Spalding at Bardstown, Bishop Francis Patrick Kenrick mentioned having just baptized "S. S. Haldeman, Professor of zoology ,vhose essays recently appeared in the Herald over the signature of N eophilus." Archives of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Letter Book, II, 53. · 47 The Louisville Courier remained a \Vhig paper with Native American tendencies until 1855, when it espoused the Democratic party's cause. 20 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

native Democrats to "rebuke, by manifestations of sternest displeasure, this debasing, this enslaving demagoguism,. which throws you a suppliant at the feet of f oreignism­ and declare - AMERICANS AND No ONE ELSE CAN AND SHALL RULE AMERICA." With local elections impending it did not seem feasible to interpose a new party : Heretofore, no effort has been made to consolidate the American Party in Kentucky. This course has bee·n pursued, because we did not wish to interfere with the two existing parties in their arrangements for the elec­ tion· now close at hand.'8 With the election settled, however, there was to be no further delay in organizing a party. On July 19, 1845, the Louisville Courier carried a conspicuous announcement : On Wednesday evening, the sixth day of August .... an American meeting will be held in this city, for the purpose of adopting measures for the thorough or­ ganization of the American Party in Louisville and throughout the State of Kentucky. Friends of American principles in the State were urged to hold similar meetings in their respective counties as the necessity of complete organization was reiterated. On the morning of the meeting, Haldeman's paper an­ nounced that at early candlelight the American Democrats would assemble in the courthouse where Stephen Fitz-James Trabue49 and several distinguished speakers from the East would address them. The editor, not without lapsing· into the familiar· 1anguage of the turf, declared: This. is the first demonstration made in K~ntucky, gl_Q­ rious old Kentucky, American in all her feelings and -,s Americatn. Democrat and Weekly Courier (Louisville),· July 19, 1845.. • 9 S.- ·F... J. Trabue, a native of Bourbon County~ a graduate of Transylvania University aild an able lawyer, was· descended from an old and distinguished family of Huguenots. In· July, 1847, the ·Native Americans· at Georgetown, Kentucky, supported Trabue for Congress~ but -he was defeated. A· second attempt in ·1849 met: with the same result. Nativism Seeks a Footing 21 sympathies .... for the purpose of organizing a political party upon principles purely American.•.. This day closes the last match between the foreign stock over the Kentucky political race courses. Hereafter, the Native blood will be in the field, and it will be seen when the trial is made, whether a 'foreign infusion' is wanted to accelerate its speed. 50 Apparently respecting the secrecy exacted by the American party of its members, the Louisville Courier suppressed a detailed report of the proceedings. Would the American party find recruits in Kentucky? The answer depended, in a measure,. on whether or not it could prove that it would never sacrifice Southern interests. Rather than attempt such proof, the party sought to avoid the issue and directed its attention to the menace of the foreign-born and to Catholics-two "safe bets" in the minds of a number of influential Whigs who seemed willing to disregard Clay's warning against being absorbed by the American party. In the last analysis, many Whigs, espe­ cially in Kentucky, had been followers of Clay by personal attachment. Ever a compromiser, he had succeeded in pro­ ducing a momentary harmony among his followers, but Southern Whigs were restive. They sympathized with the objectives of the Native American party in so far as these were calculated to remedy the "evils of immigration," but they could not join this party without giving up, as Prentice expressed it, all the great national policies for which they had stood. These policies included a national bank and a sound circulating medium, a protective tariff, the supremacy of the Constitution, the distribution of the proceeds of pub­ lic lands among the states, and the preservation of national faith and integrity by opposing the annexation of Texas. The Native American party, it was maintained, disregarded all these questions and considered only the revision of nat­ uralization laws.!) 1

50 American Democrat and Morning Courier, August 6, 1845. 51 Louisville J owrnal, Nov. 23, 1844. 22 Nat-ivis,rn -i-n Kentu.cky to 1860

\iVith Clay's defeat in 1844, the agitation for a change in naturalization laws had threatened the defection of those Whigs who felt that this object could be attained most effec­ tively by alliance with the Native American party. In July, 1845, the leading Whig organ of Kentucky, Prentice's Louis­ ville Journal, sought to rally dejected Whigs with the follow­ ing exho1tation: We can not believe that the Whigs are so cast down by the unexpected result of November, that they will not rouse themselves to the performance of their duties in the coming elections. If they did not succeed in elevat­ ing their own candidate to the presidency, they succeed­ ed in what must be regarded as greatly more important, namely, in widely disseminating their principles, and even in compelling the opposite party, in whole States, to embrace the most important of their measures ....52 Between 1846 and 1848, the issues of ,var and the possible extension of slavery overshadowed all other issues. Conse­ quently, the expectation of founding a distinct political party on a nativistic basis was frustrated temporarily. Writing in June, 1848, to a committee of leaders in Louis­ ville, Clay expressed his fear "that the Whig party is dis­ solved, and that no longer are there Whig principles to ex­ cite zeal and to stimulate exertion."53 A break between proslavery and free-soil Whigs occurred at the Kentucky constitutional convention of 1849. Those who suspected the Native American movement to be a step towards free-soil­ ism and abolitionism broke with all Whigs having such tendencies. 54 The existence of Nativism in Kentucky has been consid­ ered "one of the peculiar facts of its political history,"55 probably because the foreign-born group was of no alarming

52 Ibid., July 15, 1845. M Calvin Colton (ed.), The Works of Henry Clay (New York, 1855), IV, 567. 54 Lucius P. Little, Ben Hardin: His Times and ContemporMies (Louisville, 1887), p. 521. 55 Cf. J. R. Robertson, "Sectionalism in Kentucky 1855-65," Mis­ sissippi Valley Historical Review, IV (lDl 7), 52. Nativism Seeks a Footing 23 size and because Catholics constituted an unobtrusive, in­ dividually respected, and minor portion of the population. The Seventh Census ( 1850) indicated that of 771,424 per­ sons only 4 per cent (31,420) were born abroad, chiefly in Germany, Ireland, England, and France.56 The geographi­ cal distribution of these foreign-born was unequal, over one­ half of the approximately 29,000 being centered in Jefferson County, whose chief city, Louisville, boasted a total popula­ tion of over 43,000. In Louisville alone there were 12,461 foreign-born, with the Germans (7,357) and the Irish (3,105) far outnumbering the seven other nationalities re- presented. 51 At this time the metropolis of Kentucky had attained the rank of a flourishing manufacturing center and shipping port and, hence, offered strong inducement to the more thrifty immigrants who made their way as far ,vest as the Ohio River. Else,vhere in Kentucky, railroad contractors were busy recruiting cheap foreign labor for the construc­ tion of the Maysville and Lexington, the Big Sandy, and various branch roads. 58 Among the first colonists to Kentucky were immigrants of Irish descent from Maryland, many of ,vhom professed the Catholic faith. The eminent historian of the Catholic Church in the United States, John Gilmary Shea, has pointed out the essential difference between the status of these Irish Catho­ lics and those in eastern dioceses. Along the Atlantic coast

56 J. D. B. DeBow, Mortality Statistics of the Seventh Census of the United States 1850 (Washington, 1855), pp. 36, 39. It is of interest to compare the relatively higher percentages of foreign-born in other states where nativists were active: Massachusetts, 16.18%; New York, 21.04%; Pennsylvania, 12.75%; Maryland, 10.82%. There were slight variations in the several editions of De Bow, Compendium of the Seventh Census. 57 Ibid., p. 399. 58 An item from the 1lfaysville Eagle reprinted in the Lexington Observer and Reporter, Feb. 25, 1852, reads: "On Tuesday night last, a row occurred between a party of Fardowns and a party of Corkonians, employed on the Licking division of the Maysville and Lexington railroad, which resulted in the death of one of the party and the wounding of several others." 24 Ncitivism in Kentucky to 1860

the relatively small number of Catholics was lost amid the overwhelming majority belonging to the dominant sects. In Kentucky, on the other hand, these sturdy backwoodsmen who were the peers of those around them helped to found and build up a new commonwealth.59 The missionary priests who came to labor among them contributed their share to Kentucky's development. Outstanding among these pio­ neers were such well-educated and cultured priests as Fa­ thers Charles Whelan, O.M.Cap., William de Rohan, Stephen Badin, Michael Barriere, Michael Fournier, Anthony Sal­ mon, John Thayer, Charles Nerinckx, and William Tuite and Samuel Wilson of the Order of Friars Preacher.60 This fact of itself did not preclude prejudice against Catholics who were believed generally to be enemies of free institu­ tions. Many of the early Irish settlers became influential citizens in the growing towns, proprietors of general stores, news­ paper publishers, and school teachers.61 Among family names of this early period still familiar to Kentuckians might be cited the following: Byrne, Carrol, Dougherty, Durbin, McGill, O'Hara, and Whelan. Yet, strangely enough, few from this group rose to prominence in the political life of the State. It has been suggested that their failure in this respect may be ascribed to the perpetuation in Ken­ tucky, as in Maryland, of a self-confessed inferiority trace­ able to earlier penal laws.62 As the Irish became more numerous, local societies ,vhich had the undesirable effect of segregating the naturalized citizens from the native-born were commonly organized. In

159 John Gilmary Shea, The History of the Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1890), III, 264-65. 60 German Catholics were attended by Fathers Joseph Ferneding and Joseph Stahlschmidt. 61 Sister Mary Ramona Mattingly, The Catholic Church on the Kentucky Frontier (Washington, 1936), pp. 51-57. 62 Richard J. Purcell, "Irish Teachers in Early Kentucky," The Catholic Educational Review, XXXIV (1936), 362. Nativism Seeks a Foot-ing 25

1841, the Louisville Public Advertiser announced a meeting of the "Friends of Ireland" at the courthouse in Louisville to hear a speech by Mr. Mooney, of the Young Men's Repeal Association of New York. The following resolution was adopted by that assembly : WHEREAS, It appears to this meeting that the I1·ish peo­ ple have endured unexampled oppressions at the hand of the successive governments of England. . . . Resolved, That we highly approve the moral and constitutional efforts latterly made by the Irish people to obtain the blessings of Self Legislation, and we pledge ourselves to them, and to our fellow-citizens throughout the Unit­ ed States, to co-operate fully with them until the last manacle that binds Ireland shall be knocked off. At the same meeting, results were announced of a sub­ scription to the Irish Repeal Fund. The subscribers includ­ ed fourteen citizens designated as native-born Americans, and fifty-nine were identified with the names of the county of their Irish origin. 63 The foreign-born in Louisville did not escape the charge commonly leveled against their kinsmen in large eastern cities; namely, that they overtaxed the capacity of hospi­ tals, jails, and almshouses. A plausible explanation of such a condition, wherever it actually existed, was proposed by Ben. J. Webb: This is clearly an unfair mode of reckoning. Our own citizens seldom engage in those avocations wherein their health or lives are exposed to more than ordinary danger. The exposed situations of labor are always filled by foreigners, and principally by the much abused Irish.... Such being the case, it is not at all wonderful that in the midst of such a population, there should be frequent instances of broken down constitutions and helpless families .... I have myself been often taunted by Protestants, some of whom, at least, to my personal knowledge, were indebted to the labor of foreigners for their present affluence, with the fact that a large pro-

i>3 Louisville Public Advertiser, Dec. 18, 1841. 26 Nativisni in Kentucky to 1860 portion of the public and private charities of our own city are contributed for the benefit of Irish Catho- . 64 1lCS . ••. Yet Webb was acutely aware of the justification for some of the complaints against alien indigents, as he maintained: American Catholics are as much opposed to the recep­ tion into this country of European paupers as any re­ ligious body in the land. The system pursued by some of the European governments to impose upon us the worthless portion of their populations, including crim­ inals and paupers, is one which every Catholic will denounce as highly reprehensible, and which justly calls for such legislative action as will effect its abatement. But the honest and hardy laborer, who seeks within our wide domain a home for life, even though unpos­ sessed, upon his arrival, of means to insure a week's support, is no pauper.65 Louisville has been classed with St. Louis and New Or­ leans as an example of a Southern city whose problems with foreigners were little different from those of her sister cities of the North.66 A comparison of statistics (1850) for the

64 Ben. J. Webb, The Catholic Question in Politics (Louisville, 1856), pp. 16-17. Benedict (Ben.) J. Webb (1814-1897), legislator, editor, and author was born of a Quaker father, Nehemiah Webb, a convert to the Catholic Church, and Clotilda Edelin of the Pottinger Creek settlement. After an attendance of seven years in· the primary and secondary departments of St. Joseph's College, Bardstown, he was em­ ployed in the office of the Bardstown Herald and later in .that of the Louisville Journal. In 1836, he published The Catholic Advocate on whose staff he served as an able apologist for the Catholic Church against attacks of a political nature. An old-line Whig prior to 1854, Webb became a Democrat when the attempt was made to merge the Know-Nothings and the Whigs. In 1839, he married Sarah Ann McGill, sister of Father John McGill, later Bishop of Richmond. J. Stoddard Johnston, "Benedict J. Webb, Kentucky Historian," The Filson Club History Quarterly, VI (1932), 205-207. 65 Ibid., p. 18. 66 Cf. Arthur C. Cole, "Nativism in the Lower Mississippi Valley," Proceedings of the Mississi'PPi Valley Historical Association, VI (1913), 260. Nativism Seeks a Footing 27 states in which these cities are located suggests that Ken­ tucky did not fit into this classification: Paupers l Criminals I Deaf & Dumb Insane 1 Native Foreign Native ForeignNative ForeignNative Foreign Ky. 971 155 I 126 34 508 4 472 30 Mo. 1248 1729 i 242 666 234 23 204 44 La. 133 290 I 197 100 77 8 87 61 67 Most numerous among the foreigners attracted to Ken­ tucky were the Germans who, by 1850, totaled 13,607. Ken­ ton and Campbell Counties, each with slightly over three thousand foreign-born, had active German groups in their largest urban centers of Covington and Newport. Even at that early date, however, these two towns were part of a "greater Cincinnati" which to a large extent controlled their economic well-being and concomitantly, we may suppose, their political views.68 In Lexington, Maysville, Paducah, and their. environs there were small scatterings of Germans, about 1,800 out of a total population of 16,000. Bands of German farmers were attracted to the northern counties of Kentucky where they contributed to these rural communities without affecting the political outlook.60 The German settlers who made Louisville their home toward the latter part of the decade 1840-1850 comprised more than half the foreign population of the city at the time of ~he Seventh Census. They found that while the contri­ butions of their countrymen to culture and industry had been in large measure recognized and appreciated here, yet the hostility of George Prentice's Louisville Journal had gone far toward making them political suspects in this Whig

67 De Bow, Compendium of the Seventh Census (1850), pp. 112, 163, 165. As a matter of passing interest, the Sisters of Loretto were in charge ·of an asylum for the deaf and dumb. 68 G. von Korner, Das Deutsche Element in den Vereinigten Staaten von Nordam,erika, 1818-1848 (Cincinnati, 1880), p. 856. 69 During the Whisky Rebellion in Pennsylvania a number of Ger­ mans migrated to Kentucky. Some settled in Bourbon County where they distilled Kentucky Bourbon instead of the Monongahela whisky of their Pennsylvania days. 28 Nat·ivi~1n in Kentu.cky to 1860 stronghold. During the election campaign of 1844, German Democrats had been forced to seek a vindication of their rights as naturalized citizens through the columns of their own weekly, the Be.obachter am Ohio, but without appre­ ciable success, since election day was marred by disorders at the polls between native and naturalized citizens. 70 With elections out of the way, however, differences were settled, and two years later the German-born citizens were treated ,vith greater deference as their enlistments were welcomed in Kentucky's volunteer regiments for the Mexican War. There were two companies in the First Regiment of Ken­ tucky Foot Volunteers comprised exclusively of citizens of German descent under Captains Florian Kern and Conrad Schroeder.11 In addition to these separate companies, Ger­ man names appeared on the roll call of other companies, as Braun, Buckholtz, Griswold, Hauk, Kauffman, Rhineland, Stattman, Switzer, Vardeman, Vetter, and Weiner.12 Against this background of racialism the third Constitu­ tional Convention met in Kentucky in 1849. Significant of the attitude that was developing-despite the fact that the foreign-born had occasioned no serious problem in the State -was the proposal affecting the status of aliens and natur­ alized citizens presented to the CQnvention by a minority group early in its sessions.

7°Cf. G. von Korner, Das Deutsche Element, p. 354. The Beobachter am Ohio was established in Louisville as a weekly in 1844 and became a daily in 1849. 71 From 1852 until 1855, Captain Schroeder held the office of inter­ preter in the magistrate's court in Louisville. When the Know­ Nothings gained control of the City Council in 1855, he was dis­ missed and replaced by an illiterate German whose parents had anglicized their name. Ludwig Stierlin, Der Sta.at Kent1tcky und Die Stadt Louisville mid besonderer Berucksichtigung des De1ttschen Elementes ( Louisville, 1873), p. 165. 72 Report I()! the Adjutant General of the State of Kentucky. Mexi­ can War Veterans. Printed by authority of the Legislature of Kentucky, 1889, Sam E. Hill, Adjutant General, passim. CHAPTER II NATIVISM IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1849 One hundred delegates from all the counties of Kentucky assembled in the Statehouse at Frankfort on October 1, 1849, for the purpose of readopting, amending, or changing the Constitution of the Commonwealth.1 It has been com­ puted that the personnel comprised forty-two lawyers, thirty-six farmers, and twenty-two physicians, merchants, preachers, and clerks-all American-born. The principal subjects for discussion concerned slavery, the popular elec­ tion of state officials, the constitution of the several courts of the State, the common school system, and the prevention of dueling. A Democrat, James Guthrie of Louisville, who later served as Secretary of the Treasury under Franklin Pierce, was elected president of the convention in preference to his Whig opponent, Archibald Dixon of Henderson Coun­ ty, a former lieutenant-governor. Relieved of the restraint imposed upon a presiding officer, Dixon became one of the prominent speakers and a champion of the naturalized citi­ zen whose status in Kentucky was the subject of an early resolution of the convention. 2 On the fourth day after the delegates had convened, Gar­ rett Davis (1801-1872) of Bourbon County, a lawyer with a long period of service as a representative in the legislature and as a Whig member of Congress, submitted the foil owing resolution to restrict the privileges of aliens: Resolved, That foreigners of the following descriptions and classes, only, shall be entitled to vote for any civil officer, or shall be eligible to any civil office, or place 1 By popular referendum, a total of 101,828 votes out of a possible 141,620 was cast in favor of the convention. Richard H. Collins, HistoTy of Kentucky (Covington, Ky., 1874), I, 57. 2 In 1855, this erstwhile champion of the foreign-born, in a right­ about-face letter to the HendeT8'

of trust or profit under the Commonwealth of Ken­ tucky: 1. Those who, at the time of the adoption of this amended Constitution, shall be naturalized citizens of the United States. 2. Those who, at the time of the adoption of this amended Constitution, shall have de­ clared their purpose to become citizens of the United States, in conformity to the laws thereof, and who shall have become citizens. 3. Those who, twenty-one years previously thereto, shall have declared their purpose, according to the existing provisions of the laws of the United States, to become citizens thereof; and who then shall be citizens of the United States. 4. Minors, who shall have migrated with their parents, or parent, to the United States, twenty-one years after their names, ages, and· a particular description of their per­ sons, shall have been entered on the records of some court of record of the State of Kentucky, or some other of the United States.... 3 This controversial measure, which had attracted attention in Kentucky intermittently since the Clay campaign of 1844, 4 was introduced without prelude and considered with reluctance as a substantial embodiment of the ideals of the Native American party. Several substitute proposals were offered : one, by Char,es A. Wickliffe, a former congressional representative from Kentucky (1823-33) and Whig governor (1836-1840) ;5 the other, by Archibald Dixon. Wickliffe was confident that it was the deliberate and fixed opinion of those assembled that no provision or amendment restricting the right of free suffrage as it then existed under the Constitution of

3 Report of the Debates and Proceedings of ·the Convention for the Revision of the Constitution of the State of Kentucky 1849 (Frankfort, Ky., 1849), p. 29. (Hereafter cited Debates and Proceedings.) 4 In the local elections of this year, the charge had been made that the Locofocos had procured naturalization for several hundred for­ eigners who for the first time voted in this election. Louisville Journal, Aug. 8, 1844. 5 Bi.ographical Directory of the American Congress 1774-1927 (Washington, 1928), p. 1697. Constitutiona~ Convention of 1849 31

Kentucky6 ought to be inserted in any constitution pro­ claimed by the convention. More positive was the resolution offered by Mr. Dixon: Whereas, The people of the United States, in the 1st article and 8th section of the Federal Constitution, have given to Congress the exclusive power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization; and whereas, it was contemplated by the framers of the Constitution of the United States, that the citizen naturalized should, in all respects, touching the right of suffrage, be placed on an equal footing with the native born citizen. There­ fore, Resolved, That it would be inexpedient to incor­ porate into the Constitution of Kentucky, any prin­ ciple whereby any invidious distinction should be made in favor of the native born over the naturalized citizen, in the exercise of the right of suffrage.7 These resolutions were ordered to be printed, and their dis­ cussion followed naturally when the time came for consider­ ing Davis' proposal which was made a special order for December 15, along with other questions of minor im­ portance to the assembled delegates. At the evening session of the day assigned to him, Davis obtained the floor for a three-hour speech in support of his resolution offered more than two months earlier. Who can deny that he was justified in the complaint that his resolu­ tion had been so long suspended as to have lost its anima­ tion? He would, nevertheless, debate the question since he had so distinctly avowed to do so, but it would be with no purpose of winning notoriety or popular favor or any office or distinction whatever. In a few preliminary re­ marks he stated that from his first examination of the mo­ mentous question of naturalization he had been a Native American, and during eight years of service in Congress he

6 Kentucky Constitution (1799) Art. II, See. 8. "In all elections for representatives, every free male citizen (Negroes, mulattoes, and In­ dians excepted) who, at the time being hath attained to the age of twenty-one years, and resided in the State two years .... shall enjoy the right of an election." 1 Debate8 and Proceedings, p. 36. 32 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 had been pledged to an extension of the naturalization period. While he admitted that foreigners in Kentucky were comparatively f e,v in proportion to the total population, yet they were numerous enough and were rapidly increasing. The adoption of his proposal would help to stay their in­ fluence and would affect not only Kentucky government and policy, but would have a small but direct influence upon Congress. Furthermore, Kentucky would thus establish a precedent for other states when they met to revise their constitutions : Would it not be reasonable to conclude that the example of Kentucky, deciding and incorporating as a funda­ mental provision in her constitution, that her govern­ ment belonged to, and should be administered by, her native born sons, and not by foreigners, would have a most powerful and salutary influence upon our sister states?8 Many proofs, as he saw them, were adduced for the neces­ sity of holding in check the f oreign~born : they constituted an uninformed, unreasoning, and to a great extent unmoral power. Most of them born and reared in ignorance were without mental or moral culture, with but a vague con­ sciousness of human rights, and no knowledge whatever of the principles of popular constitutional government. Even when honestly intended, the interference of such a group in political administration would be about as successful as that of the Indian in the business of civilized private life, the· speaker maintained. With a certain diffidence Davis attacked another view of the subject, one peculiarly delicate to touch upon; namely, the preponderance of Roman Catholics among the immi­ grants. After asserting that he was not concerned with the religion of Catholics as a rule of moral conduct in private life, Davis alluded to the designs of the Church of Rome-­ that "all-ambitious, all-grasping religious-politico institu­ tion, claiming the whole earth's sceptre, spiritual and tern-

s Ibid., p. 1002. Constitutional Convention of 1849 33 poral. ..." To this religion of the Catholic immigrant, in so far as it ,vas political and its object temporal power, he avowed utter hostility. These were, indeed, bitter charges for the six Catholic delegates to listen to with quiet acceptance. 9 To put them at ease, the orator next turned his attention to them and ,vith magnanimous condescension assured them that no one else present had a larger share than they of his esteem and confidence : My belief is, I know no better men any where-none more fit to assume the responsibilities of self-govern­ ment, or to discharge the duties of good citizens, both public and private. These men, and all Catholics born and educated in this country of light and liberty, are, and were, by me, intended to remain far from the operation of any principle which I have submitted to the convention; because our country and its institu­ tions were as much their birth-right as mine, and they, as ,vell qualified to take charge of both as myself, or any others. But not so the foreigner .10 As for these aliens, he added: "Let us withdra,v from the newcomers the premium of political sovereignty. These strangers have neither the· right nor the competency to govern the native-born people, nor ought they be allowed the power to misgovern them."11 At the conclusion of this long discourse, William Preston of Louisville arose in defense, stating that he could not

9 To the statement "I [Davis] did not know before I commenced my speech that there were more than two Catholics in the house," Spald­ ing replied, "There are six." Debates and Proceedings, p. 1024; cf. also below, p. 45. Ben. J. Webb, on the other hand, stated that, so far as he knew, the only Catholics in the convention were Charles C. Kelly, Ignatius A. Spalding, and James Rudd. The Centenary of Catholicity in Kentucky (Louisville, 1884), p. 304 n. 1o Debates and Proceedings, p. 1009. 11 Ibid., p. 1017. Shortly before the state elections of 1855, the Louisville Journal advertised Davis' speech on the Native American question for sale at $5.00 per 100. 34 No.,t-ivis1n ·in Kentucky to 1860 permit such remarks to pass unnoticed.12 Indeed, he trem­ bled for the fate of his country as he perceived with what marked attention the house received and the galleries ap­ plauded utterances so pernicious. To him it was evident that such a proscriptive policy offered two "stabs" at liber­ ty: one at the rights of the foreigner, the other at freedom of religious opinion. Yet, "where around us are the evi­ dences of the mischievous power of the poor foreigner?" he asked. Numbers of them were citizens of Kentucky, but ·not a single delegate present was born in a foreign land ; moreover, no foreigner had ever filled the governor's chair; few, if any, had ever held offices of honor or profit in the State, and thousands after naturalization had passed their lives in unobtrusive obscurity and peace._ What is more, they had made positive contributions of inestimable value in subduing forests, draining marshes, building up our state­ ly cities, fighting in our battles, and increasing our pros­ perity in peace. "The danger, then, exists only in the imagination, and these apprehensions are mere phantoms of the brain."13 In terse sentences he insisted : We have but few aliens upon our soil. We have a large and thinly settled territory. We are not encumbered with them. There are not four thousand foreign votes in the state.... ·when we are so remote from the At­ lantic border, where the pressure of the foreign popula­ tion-if it be a pressure- exists, why is it necessary for Kentucky, first of all the thirty states of the con­ federacy, to take the alarm and pass naturalization laws, when no other state has done it.... Sir, we are the last state of the Union that ought to be terrified at such illusory dangers .... Shall we then in Kentucky,

12 It may be surmised that the Catholic delegates, appreciating the advantage of having an apologist not of their Faith, arranged with Preston to speak first in their behalf. 13 Ibid., pp. 1017-18. A newspaper reporter accused Preston of being ambitious of political distinction and of seizing this opportunity for making himself prominent, as he continued: "We imagine he will find that in the end he will lose more than he can gain by his pander­ ing to foreignism." Louisville Courier, Dec. 18, 1849. Constitutional Convention of 1849 35 be the first to manifest a timidity so unnecessary on the subject of the foreign vote ?14 That the dangers were illusory and the measure merely a pretext for a further curtailment of suffrage, Preston was convinced. He warned the assembled delegates that once poverty be regarded as a crime among the foreign-born in order to disfranchise them, soon it would be declared a crime in the native-born: "Tolerate this assault on the right of suffrage .... and you have commenced a career of injustice ,vhich will terminate in burying not only the rights of the aliens, but of the poor native American also ...." 15 Charles Wickliffe, who obtained the floor more than any other member throughout the sessions, so1ne 230 times, next spoke in defense of Catholics and foreigners.16 Briefly he related that he had been born in the first Catholic settlement west of the Alleghanies11 and that he had witnessed in no portion of Kentucky's population more devotion to the true interests of the country, no stronger allegiance and attach­ ment to her laws and institutions, than among these Catho­ lics, both native-born and naturalized. The speaker feared that the policy ~of Davis would place side by side, so far as political rights were concerned, the foreign-born and the free Negro, thus excluding from Kentucky every foreigner fit to be a citizen. It would drive from the State "the enter­ prising and industrious, the honorable and high-minded, the wealthy and talented foreigner, and only permit [ entrance

14 Ibid., p. 1021. President Guthrie had said earlier in the conven­ tion: "There are, according to the best estimate I have been able to make, some three thousand naturalized citizens in the commonwealth of Kentucky, who are entitled to vote.'' Debates and Proceedings, p. 556. 15 Ibid., p. 1022. 16 John McGill, a protege of Wickliffe who read law in the judge's office, later became bishop of the Diocese of Richmond. 17 Charles Wickliffe was born at Cartwright Creek in 1788, the year after a Catholic group from Maryland had settled there. Actual­ ly, the Pottinger's Creek settlement ( 1785) under Basil Hayden ,vas the first Catholic settlement in Kentucky. Sister Mary Ramona Mat­ tingly, The Catholic Church on the Kentucky Frontier (1785-1812) (Washington, 1936), pp. 22-23. 36 Na.tiv·ism in Kentucky to 1860 to] the worthless vagabond, the man incapable of appreciat­ ing liberty.... " 18 ·Furthermore, it ,vould leave the good to settle in other states, and take the bad as Kentucky's portion. Wickliff e's remarks were followed by a further denial that Catholics pledged temporal allegiance to the Pope. The speaker, James Rudd,10 a Catholic citizen of Louisville, ex­ horted: Let the German and the Irish come, and receive them on our shores, and give them a Christian reception, for they have done much for our country, and let religion stand on its own foundation. The Catholic religion wants no props. It stands on the eternal word of God, and does exist, and will exist, to the consummation of the world, nothwithstanding the gentleman's [Davis'] opposition and calumny. 20 At this juncture, although Davis urged that the question be put to a vote, Beverly Clarke of Simpson County appealed to the assembly to grant an opportunity for a studied reply to this speech of Davis which struck up the worst feelings and arrayed one portion of the citizens against the other. The assembly acceded to Clarke's appeal and adjourned after designating the evening session two days later for a continuation of the discussion. Preparations for a satis­ factory refutation of these racial and religious charges ,vere hastily made and, at the session designated, Ignatius Aloy­ sius Spalding, a farmer from Union County and a native of St. l\f ary's County, Maryland,21 and Charles Kelly of Wash-

18 Debates and Proceedings, p. 1023. 19 Captain James Rudd, successful merchant and one of the original trustees of the Church of St. Louis, is said to have submitted the manuscript of his proposed speech to Father James M. Lancaster of Frankfort for suggestions. Ben. J. Webb, op. cit., p. 304 n. 20 Jbi.d., p. 1025. 21 Ignatius Aloysius Spalding was the father of Ignatius Spalding, a prominent Union County lawyer who figured conspicuously in the Kentucky Constitutional Convention of 1890, and grandfather of Jack J. Spalding, outstanding layman of Atlanta, Georgia, Knight of St. Gregory, and the choice of the University of Notre Dame for Laetare medalist in 1928. Constitutional Convention of 1849 37 ington County spoke in rebuttal. In a prefatory remark, Spalding admitted that he was more accustomed to handle a plough, and that he was surely no match for the skillful and learned Davis. Yet, in a simple, straightforward man­ ner he set forth the true principles of his religion and quoted at length from Judge William Gaston's speech in advocacy of religious and civil freed om delivered at the convention to revise the Constitution of Norlh Carolina in 1835. The point at issue, on that occasion, had involved the substitution of "Christian" for the word "Protestant" in the disqualify­ ing clause of the existing state constitution,22 that is: That no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State shall be capable of holding any place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.23 Since the original Constitution of Kentucky (1791) and its first revision ( 1799) had contained no similar disqualifi­ cation, Ignatius Spalding rightly regarded Davis' caustic remarks against his co-religionists as incongruous in the light of the legal toleration of the Kentucky Commonwealth. The seco·nd speaker of that memorable evening, Charles C. Kelly, lawyer and native-born Kentuckian, consumed nearly as much time in his defense as Davis had spent in his ad­ dress. He affirmed that if the off ending speaker who, he said, had delivered one of the most remarkable speeches which it had ever been the misfortune of a deliberativ_e body to hear, had confined himself to the political character of Native Americanism, he would have been content to let his remarks pass. An attack on his religion, he could not over-

22 Richard J. Purcell, "Judge William Gaston: Georgetown Univer­ sity's First Student," The GeoTgetown Law Journal, XXVII ( May, 1939), 875. 23 Francis N. Thorpe (ed.), The FedeTal and State Constitutions (Washington, 1907), V, 2793. 38 Nativism.in Kentucky to 1860

2 look. j He proceeded, therefore, to present lengthy scrip­ tural quotations and historical data to offset his opponent's attacks. One hesitates to ascribe to the persuasive force of these remarks and observations the outcome of the vote on the resolution of Garrett Davis. Whatever the influence in favor of the foreign-born, the vote of the delegates was definitive in revealing their disapproval of the measure un­ der consideration. The resolution failed to be incorporated into the revised constitution by a vote of eighty to six. The six affirmative votes .were cast by Garrett Davis and George W. Williams of Bourbon County, James Dudley of Fayette County, Andrew Hood of Clarke County, Johnson Price of Garrard County, and Michael L. ·Stoner of Cumber­ land and Clinton Counties. 25 The second article of the nascent constitution, "Concern­ ing the Legislative Department," comprised several sections which also elicited an expression of opinion regarding the foreign-born citizen. Two apparently unequivocal resolu­ tions: one, to regard only counties in the apportionment of senatorial representation to the Kentucky chamber; the other, to insure uniform and equal representation based on the number of qualified voters, initiated the discussion. Those who favored the first resolution feared that the agri­ cultural, slave-owning interests of the State would be at the mercy of the manufacturing and commercial interests of the cities along the Ohio River. The rapid gro,vth of these cities was eyed cautiously since some feared that a population "generally hostile to the institution of slavery, and disposed to go hand in hand with its enemies that live

24 Debates and Proceedings, p. 1035. 25 Ibid., p. 1052. Only sixty-eight names are listed under the nega­ tive voters although sixty-nine is given incorrectly. On the following day, December 18, twelve delegates who were absent ,vhen the vote was taken obtained the somewhat irregular permission to have their negative votes recorded, hence, the total, "eighty." For identification of G. W. Williams, cf. below, p. 47. Constitutional Convention of 1849 39 across the river" accounted for the increase. 26 One means of checking the power of these "uncompromising enemies of the rights of the slave interest" ,vould be to restrict their repre­ sentation in the senate. The suggestion came from Garrett Davis, himself the uncompromising foe of the immigrant and the champion of Kentucky's interest in slaves which he evaluated at eighty million dollars. Davis maintained that the immigrant, upon his arrival in Kentucky, found that the Negro ,vas his most formidable competitor and that under the existing slave system he had little chance of employment. From the strong motive of self-interest, therefore, the immigrant became an abolition­ ist. "He generally is such, and in my section of the state [Bourbon County] he is so known, and is claimed and relied upon by the emancipation party," the speaker held. He continued: In Louisville, Covington, and Maysville, they [immi­ grants] are rapidly and greatly increasing. These peo­ ple, reared in the midst of ignorance and despotism, unacquainted with our institutions and the principles upon which they are founded, opposed to one of our great property interests and the most of them speaking other languages, and having imbibed some wild notions of a superstitious religion, which is revolting to a large majority of our people, ought not to share equally with the native born citizen political power.21 Davis obtained only a feeble support for his nativistic views. "At some future day," Ben Hardin promised to advert to the sentiments that his friend from Bourbon County had advanced, since he, too, desired to see some wholesome amendment to the naturalization laws. 28 Wickliffe, the chief spokesman for the naturalized citizen throughout the convention, urged that he had observed the

26 Ibid., p. 448. 27 Ibid., p. 494. In the vicinity of Maysville (Limestone), which is on the Ohio River in Mason County, are located a Germantown and a Murphysville. 28 Ibid., p. 478. 40 Nativis-ni in Kentucky to 1860 progress of the so-called Native American party which had sprung up of the mushroom tribe, and "like all other parties whieh are based on injustice," could exist only temporarily. Never could it form the basis of a successful national p~rty since it was founded on injustice to human rights and hu­ man liberty. The speaker then warned his audience of the result of a state policy which would affect adversely a group composed of the oppressed and liberty loving of all nations who "by our la,vs, by our constitution, by the sympathies of our people .... have been and still are invited to our shores": All the wealth and enterprise of future foreign immi­ gration, much of which we now have and enjoy, in all the departments of science and labor, would stop short of the borders of your state. These men will avoid your state as a man would a pestilence, and we shall have none but those who care nothing for your institutions, who value not the rights of citizenship. The true Amer­ ican policy is, so long as you permit them to come within the confines of the state, to make them citizens, and impress them, by that very act, with the importance of the new character they have acquired. 29 Wickliffe further pointed out that the freeman, who owes allegiance to government but who feels that he is not equal in political rights, is ever ready to lend his physical ener­ gies to those who seek to disturb the order of society and the steady operation of its laws. The principle behind the second resolution; namely, that representation in both houses of the state assembly should be related to the number of qualified voters, was one which William Preston felt should never be compromised: "As Kentucky was the first state of the confederacy that extend­ ed the privilege of universal suffrage to every freeman upon her soil, I trust God she will be the last to commence the process of curtailing that right." Shoul~ this basis of repre­ sentation be limited, then would the cities of Kentucky be in much the same situation as Birmingham under the English

2e Ibid., p. 507. Constitutional Convention of 1849 41 rotten-borough system, according to President Guthrie. A citizen of Louisville, he naturally felt a keen interest in the measure under consideration and, although presiding officer of the convention, he grasped the opportunity of speaking a favorable word in behalf of the naturalized citizen. During his thirty years' residence in Louisville, ,vhere the largest group of foreign-born was congregated, he had found them a ''sensible, industrious, frugal, economical people."30 Louisville's third delegate arose in defense of the maligned foreigner, with what admixture of motives, one cannot de­ termine. James Rudd excoriated those who had come to the convention advocating the "pure republican principle of equal representation according to numbers" and were ready at once to abandon it: Gentlemen have argued that the institution of slavery is .to be endangered by the growth of Louisville, and the kind of population that is forming that growth. And this population has been described as the off scourings of the jails of Europe, as the renegades from the north­ ern and eastern states, and as not desirable citizens of 31 the great state of Kentucky. · Rudd could see no basis for the apprehension that Louisville would cast her influence against the institution of slavery. He believed, regardless of the arguments of Garrett Davis, that the Ge1mans had exhibited their good will during the recent slavery convention by responding readily to the sug­ gestion that it was against their true interests to subvert any of those institutions under which they had prospered. 32 After protracted debate in committee and again on the floor, the two resolutions were incorporated into the constitu­ tion33 in a form acceptable to the friends of the naturalized citizen. The opponents of the measures included Garrett Davis and those delegates who had voted with him on his proposal for restricting the privileges of naturalized citi­ zens. A single exception occurred in the affirmative vote

30 Ibid., pp. 453, 556, 1018. 32 Ibid. 31 Ibid., p. 568. aa Art. II, Secs. 6, 6. 42 }.lativis1n in Kentucky to 1860 cast by James Dudley of Fayette County in favor of regard­ ing only counties in the apportionment of senatorial repre­ sentation. Not entirely out of accord with the tendency to proscribe those of the Catholic persuasion ,vas the substance of a memorial signed by Stuart Robinson, a Presbyterian min­ ister, and George W. Brush, a Methodist p1·eacher of Frank­ fort. This memorial, presented by Garrett Davis, protested the incorporation into the constitution of a section to bar the clergy from eligibility to the general assembly and read in part: "No person, while he continues to exercise the functions of a clergyman, priest, or teacher of any religious persuasion, society or sect, .... shall be eligible to the Gen­ eral Assembly.... " 34 While, in itself, the measure was non­ discriminatory so far as religious sects were concerned, the ensuing debate introduced a distinction between ministers and priests. For ministers, it was alleged, the holding of civil office presented nothing incompatible with their func­ tions; for priests, the same could not be said : Now if the minister of religion be a priest-a man apart from the mass of Christian people, by the myste­ rious sacredness of his office, and if in virtue of his office, he have a spiritual power which can be sho,,rn to be incompatible with the free suffrage of the people in any way-there might be some good reason for de­ barring him from civil office. 35 In the mind of John D. Taylor of Mason County, who felt that the exclusion act should bear equally on all clergymen, the memorial was a planned attack o~ the Catholic priest­ hood. The ablest opponent of the controverted section, how­ ever, was himself a minister of the Gospel, the Reverend John L. Waller, of Woodford County. He spoke in support of the memorial, but denied that the memorialists intended to cast any reflection on the Catholic religion : "I know they believe as firmly as I do, that the Catholic priests have 34 Kentucky Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 27. Francis N. Thorpe (ed.), The Federal and State Constitutions (Washington, 1909), III, 1296. 35 Debates and Proceedings, p. 746. Constitutional Convention of 184-9 43 as much right to be regarded as eligible as any other teacher of religion." Three or four other speakers contributed ar­ guments either pro or con, after which by a vote of seventy­ four to seventeen the section excluding the clergy from serv­ ing in the general assembly was reincorporated into the con­ stitution. Of more general interest than clerical exclusion from the legislature ,vas the report presented by John D. Taylor, chairman of the committee on education, according to ,vhich the system of common school education should henceforth be safeguarded by a constitutional guarantee.36 Should the delegates insure the permanent security of the school fund in this manner, or should each county take care of her por­ tion of the fund? Was this assembly authorized to tax the citizens of the State f(?r educational purposes, or should this be left to the legislature? How fair was it to burden a county which provided adequately for its children in private institutions with a tax for the support of the common school system? It was in discussing this last question that Catholics again received a measure of attention. Ben Hardin, a lawyer and a professed friend to the diffusion of education, reviewed at length the financial aspects of the school question and the particular situation in his own Nelson County. Boastfully he called attention to the pride of Nelson County ; namely, the Catholic college of St. Joseph, the Catholic incorporated school of Nazareth, a first-rate Presbyterian school, and a superior Methodist school. After inveighing against the incompetence of the common-school teachers, he extolled the work of Catholic teachers : They devote more money, time, and energy to the edu­ cation of their children, than any other religious de­ nomination in the state; and I say it, because coming from a Protestant, I hope the admission will be taken as true.37

36 Ibid., p. 377. 31 Ibid., p. 883. Hardin has been characterized as the "celebrated Ben Hardin, that commanding, eagle-eyed individualist, than whom 44 The idea that Catholics should be taxed for schools to which they could but would not send their children and in which they could expect no share of management was repugnant to democratic Ben Hardin, if his words are to be accepted at full face value. In final admonition he warned that the constitution could never be ratified with this clause. In a mild rejoinder, the chairman of the committee on education explained further his reasons for supporting the bill. He believed that Hardin's prediction, that Catholics would oppose the system, was decidedly an overstatement: "I will not do them the injustice to believe this imputation upon their patriotism and intelligence." On a more vin­ dictive note, however, the speaker continued : I understand they have some of the best schools in Ken­ tucky-I know they have been esteemed the steadfast friends of education. They will not send their children, 'tis said, to free schools. Be it so. Let them educate their own children ; they have the right to do so, and the ability, too .... But, sir, if the Catholics oppose a constitutional system of public instruction, that very opposition is, with me, the strongest reason why the system should exist; and the very declaration that they oppose it, has but increased my anxiety to incor­ porate it in the constitution.38 The committee's report, slightly modified by a substitute amendment of Mr. Wickliffe, was adopted ~s Article Eleven of the constitution, thus insuring a fund "to be held in­ violate, for the purpose of sustaining a system of Coinmon Schools." A close scrutiny of Kentucky newspapers reveals rather meager press notices of the proceedings of this convention which remained in session for ninety-one days. Although it had been rumored that Ben Hardin was endeavoring to the state has produced no superior in mastery of sarcasm, ridicule, and native wit on the stump." Hambleton Tapp, "Robert J. Breckinridge and the Year 1849," The Fils,on Club History Quarterly, XII (July, 1938), 137. as Debates and Proceedings, p. 892. Constitutional Convention of 1849 45 have the convention dispense with the services of reporters, they were actually admitted to all the debates. One of their number, however, persisted in signing himself, "The Ex­ cluded," in all his communications to the Louisville Courier. Reporting on the resolution of Garrett Davis regarding naturalization he predicted : When this resolution shall come to be acted upon by the Convention, we will hear the master speech of the session from the master mind [Davis'] of the Conven­ tion. If possible I will let you know of it in time for you to come and hear it. The Democrats to a man will oppose the principle of the resolution, and so, I think, will a majority of the Whigs. But this remains to be seen.39 The Louisville Courier's acco~nt of Davis' speech affirmed that he had taken a bold and decided stand and that his powerful and magnificent effort was enthusiastically cheered by those who crowded the galleries and lobbies to hear him. Incidentally, the audience included many representatives of ''the beauty, fashion and intelligence of the city." But there were others present who reacted differently to this speech: There are six Catholics in the Convention, and Davis' remarks in relation to the fearful influence of P.opery, stirred them considerably. Judging from their ma­ neuvers, I think it reasonable to conclude, if they had the power, they would have him burnt as a heretic.40 The efforts of those who challenged Davis' views were dis­ missed as of little weight: Mr. Rudd's efforts were like those of an ant laboring to overturn a mountain ; Mr. Pres­ ton replied in quite a pretty rhetorical effort, but did not answer an argument; "pompous Charley Wickliffe" simply made a speech in opposition. The Louisville Anzeiger allotted first place in its editorial columns to convention news during the opening days, but as the convention •progressed reports became infrequent. Concerning the common schools, the editors hoped that

39 Louiwille Courier, Oct. 6, 1849. ,o Ibid., Dec. 18, 1849. 46 ]Vntivism in Kentucky to 1860 "something would be done for them"; with reference to Davis' resolution, it was deemed expedient to pay their "whole attention" to Native Americanism as expressed by the delegate from Bourbon County.41 Oddly enough, when the discussion of this resolution was in progress, the An­ zeiger made no comment, although the measure so intimate­ ly concerned the German-born. When the new constitution was completed, however, the entire text was printed in this. German paper.42 The debates on the resolutions concerning foreigners and Catholics thus received slight notice, although they afforded ample opportunity for editorial vie,vs. D. C. Wickliffe, editor of the Lexington Observer a·nd Reporter, did seize· the occasion in a eulogy of Garrett Davis to remark : It appears, indeed, that in that body he has acted with a minority on several questions-with regard to the restrictions proper to be imposed on the foreign immi­ grant, and with regard to an elective judiciary. As to the former, although Mr. Davis has not found a majori­ ty to agree with him in the Convention, the general idea he maintained has met ,vith numerous friends amongst the honest voters of the country.43 In the convention, itself, the speakers who manifested sufficient interest to defend or condemn naturalized citizens. were few in number. By far the most conspicuous was Garrett Davis, whose subsequent career as a member of the Order of United Americans and the choice of the American party as candidate for the presidency in 1856, confirmed the· sincerity of his sentiments as set forth during the conven­ tion. Davis was regarded by many as "one of the first, if not the very first man in the Convention," and was looked upon as the leader of the Whigs in that body.44

41 Louisville Anzeiger, Oct. 4, 8, 1849. 42 Ibid., Dec. 24, 1849-Jan. 3, 1850. 43 Lexington Observer and Reporter, Dec. 19, 1849. 44 Louisville Courier, Oct. 13, 1849. Subsequently, Davis supported the Constitutional Union ticket of Bell and Everett in 1860, was elect­ ed as an old-line '\Vhig to the United States Senate to fill the vacancy caused by the expulsion of J. C. Breckinridge in 1861, and was re- Constitutional Convention of 1849 47 George W. Williams, a proclaimed descendant of Roger Williams, a successful farmer of Bourbon County, and one of the five delegates to vote with Davis in favor of his naturalization measure, was the only one of this group who actively sponsored the Native American movement. In 1854, he was nominee for governor of the State on the ticket of the Temperance party which gradually became identified with the Know-Nothing party. The following year he served as a member of the committee on the platform at a Know-Nothing convention in Philadelphia. Finally, he pre­ sided over the first Republican state convention in Kentucky in 1864.45 The influence of the small anti-foreign, anti-Catholic group in the convention was negligible in so far as the·final draft of the constitution can be regarded as a criterion. No dis­ crimination in the right of suffrage was incorporated, and the sections of the Bill of Rights pertaining to freed om of religion are as detailed and protective as the average state constitution boasts.46 With the signatures of all the delegates present on the closing day of the convention, u the new, and third, Constitu­ tion of the Commonwealth of Kentucky was adopted on May 7, 1850, by a popular majority of 51,351 votes.48 elected as a Democrat to serve from 1867 until his death in 1872. Biographical Directory of the American Congress 1774-1927, p. 884. 45 Connelley, William E. and Ernest M. Coulter, History of Kentucky (Chicago, 1922), II, 846-47; Covington Journal, Dec. 10, 1854. 46 Cf. above, p. 9, for pertinent sections of the Constitution of Kentucky. 47 Garrett Davis had resigned because of his opposition to an elective judiciary. 48 Lewis Collins, History of Kentucky (Covington, 1874), I, 60. George Prentice, who had led the Whigs of Louisville in opposing the new constitution, affirmed that if a majority of all potential voters of Kentucky had been demanded, the constitution would not have been adopted. His warfare against the constitution ceased, however, when the majority of votes cast favored its adoption. Louisville Journal, May 9, 1850. CHAPTER III THE KNOW-NOTHING MOVEMENT Unmistakable signs of the passing of Whig supremacy were discernible in 1851. "The days of the misrule of Whig­ gery in Kentucky are numbered," cried an ominous voice from Green River.1 The presidential campaign of 1852, centering largely about the issue of anti-foreignism, was prosecuted vigorously in Kentucky. It was in this year that the Order of the Star-Spangled Banner, enlarged by an addition of recruits from the Order of United Americans, commenced to take a hand in politics and soon emerged as the Know-Nothing party.2 Six months before the election, George Prentice took issue ,vith the Whig press of the North for speaking disparagingly of the strength of the party throughout the South : "We sincerely believe that it is stronger now than it was at the last Presidential election, and that, under favorable auspices, the Whig triumph south of the Potomac in November next will be overwhelming."3 The Louisville Journal canvassed Kentucky Catholics for the Whig nominee, General Winfield Scott, with the pro­ found appeal that his daughter had been educated in a "Nun­ nery." Naturalized citizens had occasion to hear the gen­ eral himself. Several months before the election, Scott, ac­ companied by General Wool and Surgeon General Lawson, traveled to Blue Licks, Kentucky, ostensibly to select a site for a west~rn military asylum. In reality, it was charged, the primary purpose of the trip was to furnish Scott ,vith an

1 Kentucky Statesman (Lexington), March 8, 1851. 2 Humphrey J. Desmond, The Know-Nothing Party (Washington, 1905), p. 51. The party was popularly designated "Know-Nothing" because its adherents observed secrecy concerning their tenets. Pro­ fessor Wilfred Binkley in his recent volume, American Political, Parties (New York, 1943), p. 189, credits Horace Greeley with having coined the appellation. The need of a more dignified title may have suggested the substitute, "American," as the party entered national politics. 3 Louisville Journal, May 3, 1852. 48 The Know-NQthing Movement 49

opportunity to deny that he entertained any hostile senti­ ments toward adopted citizens.4 While passing through Lexington, the party visited Clay's home, "Ashland." At Frankfort, the presidential nominee acknowledged an ad­ dress by James Harlan, an influential nativist and the father of Mr. Justice John Marshall Harlan of the Supreme Court of the United States, with the concluding words: For this reception, I thank you all, my countrymen. And by this term, permit me to say, I include all classes-Democrats and Whigs-native-born and adopt­ ed citizens. Upon the arrival of General Scott in Louisville, Mayor James Speed and John Crittenden welcomed him in the name of the Whig party.5 As part of their appeal to Catholics, the Whigs naturally contrasted the friendly attitude of Scott with the fact that his opponent,-Franklin Pierce,6 had come from New Hamp­ shire where Catholics were denied complete civil rights. Pierce and Democrats in general were guilty, the Louisville Journal, charged, of criminal indifference to the removal of the "odious and infamous religious test" in the Constitu­ tion of New Hampshire. In order to prove this assertion documents, allegedly prepared by Catholics of New Hamp­ shire in denunciation of Pierce, were printed with the fol­ lowing explanation :

4 Congressional Globe (1853), 32nd Congress, 2nd session, Feb. 25, 1853, p. 846; Louisville Journal, Sept. 30, 1852. 5 Ibid., Oct. 2, 1852. During the same week a. number of prelates of the Catholic Church had arrived in Louisville for the dedication of the new . Cathedral .of the Assumption. Bishop, later Cardinal, McCioskey of Albany; Archbishop Purcell of Cincinnati, Bishop Por­ tier of Mobile were among the number. The Louisville Journal of October 2 also announced that Generals Scott, Wool, and Lawson were expected to attend the dedication. 6 "No doubt, Pierce was personally in favor of Catholic emancipa­ tion and disappointed that his state and its Democratic Party could be branded throughout the Union with intolerance." Richard J. Purcell, "Franklin Pierce: A Forgotten President," The Catholic Educational Review, XXXI ( 1933) , 137. 50 Nati-vis1n in Kentucky to 1860 We are not in the habit of making appeals to Roman Catholics as a class or to Irishmen as a class, but we may venture to hope that no Roman Catholic or Irish­ man "rill neglect to give these documents an attentive perusal.1 Democratic leaders, on the other hand, warned Catholics against Scott's sincerity as they maintained that, "a short time since, ere native Americanism had culminated in its short career, General Scott was identified as a member of that faction, and loudly claimed as a disciple."8 Lest natu­ ralized citizens be deluded through the efforts of the Demo­ cratic press to arouse prejudice against Scott, Prentice cited the following incident designed to elicit admiration in its stead: Scott had been instrumental in saving the lives of some Irishmen taken prisoners at Queenston on the Cana­ dian frontier during the War of 1812. These prisoners, al­ though naturalized citizens of the United States, had been transported to England on the charge of illegally expatriat­ ing themselves. Upon the capture of Fort George several months later, twenty-three English soldiers taken captive by Winfield Scott were, through the General's insistence, con­ fined within the United States pending the fate of the Irish­ men. Consequent upon this action, England released the prisoners and returned them to New York in July, 1815.9 It was early in the Scott-Pierce campaign that the Hun­ garian rebel and patriot, Louis Kossuth, visited Louisville upon the invitation of a popular meeting. Kossuth had been urged by Senator Pierre Soule of Louisiana to influence the foreign vote in behalf of Pierce. This fact, along with a lack of discretion and a waning popularity, may have deter­ mined the predominantly nativistic city council to withhold any official recognition. Notwithstanding this obvious dis-­ approval, the revolutionary patriot's visit attracted wide

1 Louisville Journal, Oct. 2, 1852. 8 Louisville Times, March 20, 1852. 9 Loitisville Journal, July 6, 1852. Cf. Ralph Robinson, "Retaliation for the Treatment of Prisoners in the \Var of 1812," The American Historical Review, XLIX (October, 1943), 65-70. The Know-Nothing Movement 51 public interest, supported as it was by the Democratic Louisville Times which urged its readers to give him "a re­ ception befitting his genius."10 He was, indeed, cordially received and entertained by Colonel William Preston, a Mexican War hero who had prepared for Yale at St. Joseph's College, Bardstown, and by Joseph Holt, Post­ master-General (1841-1845) and later, Secretary of \Var, and Judge-Advocate General in the famous trial of ~Irs. Surratt.11 I{ossuth was then presented to Governor-elect Povvell, after ,vhich he addressed an assembly, estimated by the press at from twenty to thirty thousand people, in a tobacco warehouse behind the Galt House."12 The title of the exiled patriot's discourse of nearly a cen­ tury ago, "The Importance of Foreign Policy and of Strengthening England," strikes a peculiarly familiar note. The follo,ving excerpts from it reveal a similarly familiar anti-isolationist appeal: Whatever be the immediate issue of that discussion about foreign policy, which now so eminently occupies public attention throughout the United States, from the Capitol and White-house at .Washington down to the lonely farms of your remotest territories, one fact I have full reason to take for sure, and that is: That when the trumpet-sound of national resurrection is once borne over the ,vaves of the Atlantic announcing to you that

10 Louisville Times, March 2, 1852. The staten1ent that there was no public interest in Louisville over Kossuth's visit is scarcely ac­ curate. Cf. John B~ch McMaster, History of the People of the United States, VIII, 154. 11 Holt received his education at St. Joseph's and Centre Colleges, became a local partner at law of the celebrat~d Ben Hardin, and mar­ ried a daughter of Charles A. "'\Vickliffe, a Jacksonian Democrat, who succeeded to the governorship on the death of James Clark. Later, Holt became Postmaster-General (1841-1845). Mary B. Allen, DAB, IX, 181-83. 12 Louisville Times, March 4, 5, 1852. Curiously enough, Kentuckians had played a major, albeit unwitting, share in Kossuth's American visit. He was convoyed to this country in a war vessel commanded by Lieut. William Nelson, U .S.N ., a Kentuckian, and one of his first interviews to challenge public notice had been with Henry Clay. 52 Nativism in Ken,tucky to 1860 nations have risen to assert those rights to which they are called by nature and nature's God-when the roar­ ing of the first cannon-shot announces that the combat is begun which has to decide which princi pie is to ru~e over the Christian ,vorld-absolutism or nationaJ sover­ eignty-there is no power on earth which could induce the people of the United States to remain inactive and indifferent spectators of that great struggle, in which the future of the Christian world-yes, the future of the United States themselves-is to be decided. 13 The election returns in the State registered only a slight majority for Scott who received 57,068 votes as opposed to 53,807 for Pierce.14 Thus Kentucky was one of the four states carried by the Whig national ticket. The Democrats elected their nominee, Governor Lazarus Powell, by the scant margin of 850 votes over his Whig opponent, Archi­ bald Dixon. Slowly had the Democrats forged ahead in the Whig stronghold of Kentucky.15 As hosts to a national convention of the Order of United Americans in 1852, Kentuckians were made acquainted with the Order's proscriptive features which appealed to a small group, at least, as the "Bedini incident" illustrates.16 When Monsignor Gaetano Bedini, Archbishop of Thebes and Apostolic Nuncio at the Court of Brazil, visited the United States from June, 1853, to February, 1854, anti­ Catholic demonstrations attended his arrival in many cities.

1a Francis ,v. Newman (comp.), Select Speeches of Kossuth (Lon­ don, 1853) , p. 229. u In this election the voters of Nelson County, which was pre­ dominantly Catholic, cast 958 votes for the Whig candidate and 487 for Pierce. Tribune Almanac (New York, 1856), pp. 60-61. 15 Perhaps the most significant feature of the Democratic victory was the triumph of John C. Breckinridge in the strongly Whig district of Ashland. W. E. Connelley and E. M. Coulter, History of Kentucky (Chicago, 1922), II, 843. 16 The Republic (New York, 1851), II, 143; Sister M. Regina Baska, "Archbishop Bedini in the United States: An Episode in American History," master's essay, Catholic University of America, (1927); Peter Guilday, "Gaetano Bedini," Historical Records and Studies, XXIII (New York, 1933), 87-170. The Knoiv-Nothing Movenient 53 Hostility against the Nuncio had been aroused by the report of his alleged responsibility for the execution of Ugo Bassi, a military prisoner, court-martialed at Bologna during Monsignor Bedini's sojourn there as Papal Commissioner.11 The charge was denied by "a Kentucky Catholic" who chided Prentice for repeating the accusation: This matter has often been put in so clear a light, that there is no excuse for your being ignorant of the facts connected with it. Mr. Cass, our Charge at Rome, whose letters were published in the American papers two years ago, says that the Austrian Military Gov­ ernor of Bologna was alone responsible for that act, and that neither Pius IX, nor his Nuncio, Archbishop Bedini, had anything to do with it.18 The outbreak in Cincinnati, which was among the most violent of the anti-Bedini exhibitions, had a slight reper­ cussion in Louisville whither the Nuncio had been invited by Bishop Spalding. Shortly after the visitor appeared in the city, the Louisville Journal carried the following un­ obtrusive announcement: M. Bedini, the Pope's Nuncio, arrived in our city a day or two ago, and delivered a short address on Sunday morning, at -st. Louis Cathedral. His remarks ,vere in French and translated by Bishop Spalding.10 On Sunday afternoon, Archbishop Bedini accompanied by Bishop Spalding pontificated at solemn vespers at St. Boni­ face Church, the first church dedicated for German Catholics in Louisville. 20 Tradition has it that in the course of the

17 Sister M. Regina Baska, op. cit., pp. 22-23. 18 Ben. J. Webb, Letters of a Kentucky Catholic (Louisville, 1856), p. 109. For a biographical sketch of "a Kentucky Catholic," cf. above, p. 26, n. 64. 19 Lou·isville Journal, Dec. 20, 1853. Old St. Louis Church had been replaced by the Cathedral of the Assumption, dedicated in October, 1852. 20 The Nuncio's visit to the German church may have been without significance, although trustee trouble had disturbed the parish when, in 1851, the St. Boniface Benevolent Society, wishing to be completely independent of ecclesiastical control, had refused to turn over to the 54 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 afternoon "a .crowd met at the market place, and marched to the intersection of Market and Floyd streets, where the Archbishop's effigy was burnt amid the most insulting jeers."21 Upon the prelate's return to Cincinnati there occurred the riots which evoked much interest among a revolutionary group of "Free Germans" of Louisville. 22 At a meeting in this city on January 25, Mr. Brown, a delegate of the "Free­ men's" Society of Cincinnati, gave an account of the recent riot and censured the police for their cruelty. Resolutions were adopted condemnatory of Monsignor Bedini and the Cincinnati police, and a collection taken up to prosecute the latter. This newspaper report of the meeting was given at first without commentary, but later the Louisville Times strongly deprecated the violence against the Pope's repre­ sentative.23 A committee appointed by the St. Vincent de Paul Society communicated in writing to "His Excellency" its grief on learning of "the vile and atrocious calumnies that were heaped upon his fair name and character, and the consequent violence attempted upon his person in Cincin­ nati, by a certain Atheistical Society, miscalled 'Free­ men.' "H In a letter to Archbishop Francis Patrick Kenrick of Baltimore, Archbishop John B. Purcell of Cincinnati testi­ fied to his own zealous efforts to avert the unfortunate occurrence: The Almighty knows that I ,vrote what I could to place Mgr. Bedini right before the American people-as far as my little influence extended-and that I covered him as well as I could with my little person to protect him from the dagger of the assassin when passing before Bishop the deed of a cemetery for poor Catholics. John B. '\Vuest (comp.), Onei Hundred Years of St. Boniface Parish (Louisville, 1937), p. 49. The Protestant Preston family were among the earliest benefactors of St. Boniface Church. The Record, Feb. 2, 1889. 21 Wuest, St. Boni{ace Parish, p. 52. 22 Cf. below, pp. 60-65. 23 Louisville Times, Jan. 26, 27, 1854. 24 The Catholic Te:legraph and Advocate (Cincinnati), Jan. 28, 1854. The Know-Nothing Move·ment 55

Frei-Manner's Hall and visiting German Churches and schools. If he find fault, I hope God will not. And at his request I wrote to the Propaganda to testify that nothing that turns out adversely could be attributed to any want of prudence, devotedness, or skill, on the part of the Nuncio.... For many years I have never felt secure of my life in this city, a single night. The mar­ tyrdoms of our bodies will be a trifle. 25 Even after Bedini had returned to Rome, his case ,vas again brought to the attention of the citizens of Louisville. General William Pilcher, who was to run for lieutenant­ governor on the Democratic ticket a year later, published a withdrawal of his name from resolutions of censure of Senator Lewis Cass26 for attempting to exonerate Arch­ bishop Bedini. Cass had informed the Senate that there was nothing in the arrival of this agent, whatever might be the character of his duties, which should alarm the most jealous sectarian. The Nuncio to Brazil had come as a representative of a temporal prince who ruled a considerable portion of Italy; therefore, the demonstrations against him in this country had violated all the guarantees of the laws of nations. The resolutions adopted in Louisville by a meeting of "Freemen" over which General Pilcher had pre­ sided denounced this defense of the Senator from Michigan. Later, the General expressed his disapproval of the action of this assembly and his regret at having been a partici­ pant.21 As a final note on Monsignor Bedini, Bishop Spalding's observations to Archbishop Kenrick suggest that American Catholic bishops disapproved of the extended sojourn of this unfortunate visitor :28

25 Baltimore Cathedral Archives, 31 C 13. 28 Lewis Cass, Jr., son of the Senator from Michigan, was American Minister to the Papal States at this time. 27 Congressional Globe, 33rd Congress, 1st session, Jan. 23, 1854, p. 223; The Catholic Telegra,ph and Advocate, April 8, 1854. Later, Pilcher was elected vice-president of the state council of the Know­ Nothing party. 28 Professor Stock in U.S. Ministers t-0 the Pa,pal States (Washing- 56 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

It seems that the authorities at Rome, however, ap­ proved of Monsignor Bedini's protracted stay in this country. The more I reflect upon it, the more I incline to your opinion that it has all happened providentially. 29 The "Bedini incident" served merely as a minor prelude to the organized activity of the Kno,v-Nothing movement of the fifties. There can be little doubt that the anti-Catholic aspect of this revived Nativism, this "decennial madness," as John Gilmary Shea styled each recurring outburst, o,ved its vitality to a certain apprehension that the Catholic Church ,vas progressing too rapidly. Its growth in Kentucky was reviewed by the Catholic press on the occasion of the erec­ tion of the new episcopal see of Covington in 1853, upon the division of the Diocese of Louisville. After comparing the status of the Catholic Church in the North and in the South, a reason, said to be obvious, was adduced for the disparity in the two sections; namely, that the great element in the increase of Catholic population, immigration from Ireland and Germany, was not so active in the slave as in the free states.30 As was well known, most of these immigrants belonged to the laboring classes and, in their endeavor to avoid the competition of slave labor, either remained in the large cities of the East, or made their way to the North,vest ,vith its cheap land and free labor. One result of the astonishing growth of the free states was the corresponding progress of the Catholic Church, while an inevitable out­ come of the almost stationary population in the slave states was a less flourishing church. Notwithstanding these unfavorable circumstances in the South, the Diocese of Louisville had c_ontin.. ued steadily to • ton, 1933), p. 97 n., remarks: "He [Bedini] also broached to some officials at Washington the question of an appointment o:( a papal nuncio to the United States but Postmaster Gene.ral Campbell, a Catholic, did not encourage such a project." 29 Baltimore Cathedral Archives, 32 A, N 14, 14.~rch 24, 1854. so Archives of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Clipping Book No. 2, 33. The Know-Nothing Movement 57 advance in membership and in the number of churches and institutions of learning and social service, as the erec­ tion of a new diocese indicated and as these semi-official statistics attest: 1845 1852 18li6 1860 Churches and Chapels ... . 50 60 77 91 Other Stations ...... 75 85 133 Clergymen ...... 54 60 81 93 Colleges for Young Men .. 3 3 2 3 Female Academies ...... 11 11 11 10 Schools for Boys (and Girls in 1860) . . . . 4 12 Charitable Institutions . . . 4 Orphan Asylums ...... 3 3 Infirmary ...... 1 1 Total Catholic Population . 30,000 40,000 56,000 80,00031 However gratifying this progress may have been to Catholics, there still remained a sufficient disproportion in the relative strength of Catholic and Protestant adherents, on the basis of the number of churches in 1850, to have reassured the preponderantly Protestant population that it was in no danger of losing the ascendancy : Churches Churches Baptist ...... 803 Union ...... 30 Methodist ...... 530 Episcopal ...... 19 Presbyterian ...... 224 U niversalist ...... 7 Christian ...... 111 Lutheran ...... 5 Catholic ...... 48 Minor Sects ...... 3432 Free ...... 34 31 The Metropolitan Catholic Almanac (Baltimore), 1845, p. 139; 185!, p. 120; 1856, pp. 195, 199; 1860, pp. 101, 114. Statistics for the Louisville and the Covington dioceses are combined for 1856 and 1860. While .these statistics are probably more suggestive than ac­ curate, they at least indicate the steady increase· in Catholic popula­ tion. 32 George W. Colton, Atlas of tke World (New York, 1855), I, fol­ lowing map 38. In Louisville, however, Catholics claimed 5,000 com­ municants out of 11,727 representing ten denominations. The com­ paratively small number of Catholic churches with a limited seating capacity suggests very inadequately the Catholic population, since the pews of these churches were filled and refilled several times on Sundays. 58 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

In the entire State, Catholics numbered about 35,000, or 3 per cent, of a total population of approximately 982,000.33 Gradually, however, the proportion of Catholics increased. When Bishop Spalding made his first diocesan visitation early in the fifties, thirteen out of every one hundred persons 3 confirmed were converts from Protestantism. ' Another encouraging circumstance, according to the Ken­ tucky correspondent of Cincinnati's The Catholic Telegraph, was "less open bigotry and a much higher and more con­ servative tone of feeling in the slave than in the free states." The city of Louisville was singled out as an example of tolerance: Such exhibitions of low bigotry as often disgrace the Eastern cities, and Cincinnati, would not be tolerated by public sentiment in cities of the South, and especial­ ly Louisville. Such adventurers as Kossuth, Kirkland, and Gavazzi,35 could make no impression whatever in Louisville though they created quite a sensation in Cin­ cinnati. 36 The "blackguard street-preacher, Kirkland," as he was styled in the semi-libelous terms of The Catholic Telegraph, was "drummed out of the city by the Protestant population," neither would any Louisville paper publish anything of his "f9r either bigotry or money." In words of high praise the editor concluded: "Honor to the Press and the people of Louisville! What a noble contrast between theirs and the conduct of the bigots of Cincinnati !-"37 Again, attention was called to the toleration prevailing in Kentucky's largest city:

33 The Met,ropolitan Catholic Almanac (1850), p. 162. 84 John L. SpalcHng, Life of Martin John S'fKJ,lding (New York, 1873) , p. 186. ' 35 Gavazzi spoke in Indianapolis, Nov. 1, 1853, on "the evils of the Church of Rome, against Catholic schools, and of the horrors of the Inquisition." Carl F. Brand, "The History of the Know-Nothing Party in Indiana," Indiana Magazine' of History, XVIII (1922), 53. 36 Archives of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Clipping B'ook No. 2, 33. 11 The Catlwlic Teleg,raph, Aug. 13, 1853. The Know-Nothing Movement 59

The people of Louisville are profoundly American, and appreciate the doctrine of equal rights for all. A com­ mittee was appointed by the common council to visit the Orphan Asylums of the City. This committee re­ ported favorably of them all-Catholic as well as Prot­ estant, and recommended that all should be furnished with fuel at the public expense.... Honor to Louis­ ville !38 The attainment by the Know-Nothings of a short-lived power in Kentucky is traceable, in part, to principles in­ seminated by the secret Order of United Americans, which organized councils in the State in 1854. 39 These councils espoused the anti-foreign, anti-Catholic policies of the old Native American party which, it was hoped, would bind together the North and the South on an issue dissociated from the slavery question. Would the slave-holding con­ servative aristocracy, which was in search of a powerful op­ position party since the disruption of the Whigs, find com­ mon ground with the rising capitalist whose interests were essentially those of the successful planter ?4° There was serious probability. Were not all foreigners marked by pre­ conceived prejudices against slavery? Was not the grow­ ing political strength of the North due to the foreign vote? Finally, could not old religious bigotries and racial feelings of superiority among Anglo-Saxon Kentuckians be relied upon to cement the bond ?41 With the arrival in Kentucky of some of the revolutionary Forty-eighters, a recrudescence of hostility to the foreign­ born was bound to occur. Their attempts to transplant to American soil reforms frustrated in their native land were

38 Ibid., Dec. 24, 1853; Louisville. Journal, Dec. 15, 1853. 39 Across the Ohio River from Louisville a council of the secret Order was organized at New Albany, Indiana, during the same year.. Brand, op. cit., pp. 58-59. •° Cf. Arthur C. Cole, The. Whig Pa,,,.ty in the South (Baltimore,. 1914), p. 841. 41 See Richard J. Purcell and John F. Poole, "Political Nativism in Brooklyn," Journal of the Irish American Historical Society, XXXII (1941), 10. 60 Nativi.sm in Kentucky to 1860 nowhere more zealous and systematic than in Louisville. This city had become, indeed, "the rendezvous for the most intelligent as well as the most fantastic element ,vhich the waves of reaction cast upon our shores."42 Upon the outbreak of revolution in Germany in 1848, as­ sociations of sympathizers had been organized in Louisville, and a German newspaper, the Louisville Anzeiger,43 had been founded by George Philip Doern and Otto Schaefer.44 The object of the editors ,vas to furnish the latest reports from the Vaterland in which its children retained a per­ petual interest. It was precisely this perpetual interest in the events of the fatherland, joined to a persistence in re­ taining the native language and customs, which became a contributing factor in stirring up against the newcomers a native racialism which ran into the excesses of bigotry. On January 9, 1850, a meeting was held in Kentucky Hall for the purpose of organizing a labor union modeled on the one established in Philadelphia.45 Apparently, no. union

42 G. von Korner, Das Deuts~he Element in de'fn Ve-reinigten Staaten von Nordamerika, 1818-1848 (Cincinnati, 1880), p. 355. 43 In addition to the partial files of the Louisville A nzeiger noted in the Gregory list, the Filson Club at Louisville, Kentucky, possesses a nearly complete though unclassified set from the first number in 1849 to 1938 when the Anzeiger ceased publication. It is recorded that on this occasion the publisher, Richard J. Schuhmann, remarked: "After all, we are all Americans." The Louisville Times, March 22, 1938, added: "Quite so, and Louisville Germans are excellent Amer­ icans in nearly every case; they were excellent World War period Americans ...they are first-rate anti-Nazis now." 44 G. P. Doern, a native of Nassau, came to Louisville in 1842 where he married Barbara Tomppert, daughter of Philip Tomppert who was elected mayor of the city in 1865. Besides editing the Anzeiger he was president of the Louisville Building Association and vice-president of the Protestant Orphan Asylum. Otto Schaefer retired from the Anzeiger staff in 1852. J. Stoddard Johnston, Memorial History of Louisville ( Chicago, 1896), II, 69. 45 The summons to the meeting was signed by Joseph Bender, M. Bille, George Braun, Lorenz Dietrich, W. Fassig, Magnus Gross, Diedrich Henke, C. Muhlensehlager, Jakob Scheitlin, G. Schneider, Louis Schumann, Edward Wasserbier. Louisville Anzeige-r, Jan. 9, 1850. The Know-Nothing Movement 61 materialized at this time because of the impracticable aims of certain representatives present who were said to enter­ tain "hazy French communistic and socialistic ideas."46 Shortly afterward, however, we find members of a labor union according an enthusiastic welcome to August Willich when he visited Louisville in 1852, in the interest of his "hobby," communism.47 Willich, a member of the Com­ munist League of London along with Karl Marx and Fried­ rich Engels, and a proponent of "scientific socialism," ,vas prominent in the ranks of the socialists who fought on the Union side during the Civil War. He was elected to the rank of brigadier general of volunteers before that conflict had ended. A fellow socialist, Wilhelm Weitling, a leading figure in the German labor movement in the United States and an advocate of the "exchange bank,"48 lived in Louisville for a short time and there found followers.49 To,vard the end of the year 1853, the conservative Louisville Journal, quite opposed to such combinations, announced that the head of the labor union in the city was a German revolutionist, Carl Heinzen, a former editor from New York who was still actively engaged in spreading his doctrines through the Herold des Westens.50 The activities of the various German unions were viewed disdainfully by skeptical Kentuckians who confidently be­ lieved that these agitators intended to establish a socialist republic in the country, and who previsioned the decline of

46 Ludwig Stierlin, Der Staat Kentucky and Die Stadt Louisville (Louisville, 1873), p. 117; Louisville Anzeiger, Jan. 9, 1850. 47 Stierlin, op. cit., p. 133. 4s John R. Commons and Associates, History of Labour in the United States (New York, 1918), I, 512; "exchange bank"-an in­ stitution in which each producer could deposit his product in the cen­ tral depot, and receive in exchange a paper certificate of equivalent value, which would enable him to purchase, up to its face value, any articles at cost in the bank store. ~9 Stierlin, op. cit., p. 63. 50 Louisville Journal, Oct. 8, 1858. The following paragraphs are largely a literal translation of Stierlin, op. cit., supplemented by notes from the Louisville Anzeiger. 62 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 revealed religion with the spread of their pantheistic system and, in some cases, atheistic ideas. Puritan sects began to consider that their "inner mission" was to labor for the con­ version of these modern heathens.51 A Presbyterian com­ mittee composed of Reverend W. W. Hill, earlier a member of the Protestant League of Louisville, Reverend H. H. Cam­ den, and Reverend J. P. Curtis issued a formal summons to make true Christians of the Germans of this country through the various Evangelical churches, and to make them thorough Americans in their administrative views. Far from achieving success with the group of Forty-eighters in Louisville, these ministers were to be further alarmed by the developments of 1854. The events and, more importantly, the principles of the revolutionary movement which reached its crest in Germany in 1848 had been discussed in the German press of Louis­ ville which, by 1852, numbered three papers, the Louisville Anzeiger, the Beobachter am Ohio, and the Herold des Wes tens, organ of the "free thinking" or radical Germans who had formed Der Bund Freier Manner in 1854. The ideas set forth in the Herold may be said to have culminated in a German manifesto, the Louisville Platform, drawn up by a committee headed by Carl Heinzen, editor of the Herold until its cessation in 1854.52 After a week's labor the com­ mittee presented its platform at a meeting in Apollo Hall, February 19, 1854, under the title, "Union of the Germans." The introduction announced that "Freedom, Prosperity, Education for All" (Freiheit, Woklstand, Bildung fur Alle), the great principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, were imperiled by a train of evils which forthwith were enumerated: slavery, privileges of race and class, oppression of the people by clique-dominated parties, friendliness with the agents of European despotism, open

51 Stierlin, op. cit., pp. 154-55. 52 The other members of the committee were Messrs. Burgler, Domschke, Stein, Vortriedte, and Wittig. Louisville Am:eiger, Feb. 21, 1854. The Know-Nothing Movement 63 alliance of the representatives of the people ,vith the dark­ est of all powers, and the deadly enemies of all freedom­ the power of the papacy and Jesuitism. Additional com­ plaints were offered: in Congress every measure in favor of the privileged was promoted and every one in favor of the people was defeated; the wealth of the nation was made the spoils of covetous swindlers ; crudity and crime were gaining the upper hand because lawmakers and executive authorities ,vere more taken up with selfish projects than with the true interests of the people. _ If that fate, the thought of ,vhich made Jefferson tremble, was not to befall the Republic, this condition of affairs would have to be ended-what disloyal representatives of the peo­ ple had done amiss, the people themselves must correct. To this correction of abuse the Louisville Union of Germans pledged itself as true adherents of republican freedom and as jealous guardians of democratic rights. Difference in language, it was stated, prevented the efficacious union with "true Americans" for the accomplishment of the aforesaid aims, but eventually this union would be realized. Finally, the long introduction ended with the significant declaration that in all elections the free Germans would support only the persons and parties that would bind themselves to the sup­ port of their principles or that would off er the best security for their accomplishment. There followed a platform of twelve points with numerous subdivisions advocating the most varied reforms ranging over political, religious, social, and economic fields : woman suffrage ; direct election by the people of all officials ; the release of public lands to cultivators and for the support of poor colonists; political and social equality of the Negro with the white; the discontinuance of oaths on the Bible and of prayer in Congress; the denunciation of the Catholic religion as the destroyer of the Republic; abrogation of capital punishment; the abolition of slavery; free trade; the completion of public works out of national resources; 64 Nat-ivis·m in Kentucky to 1860 the discontinuance of temperance legislation.53 Of con­ siderable interest from a socio-economic point of view were the measures foreshadowing the Homestead Act and a ten­ hour working day, and the pronouncement that since work is the creator of property, the laws of inheritance should be so modified as to make impossible a non-working moneyed or landed aristocracy. In Kentucky a small town paper, the Paris Western Citi­ zen, devoted much space to what it considered the most im­ portant section of the platform; namely, the third point which contained measures for the welfare of the people. Here the Germans had fearlessly stated with regard to the free cession of public lands to actual settlers that "it is high time that the ruinous traffic with public lands should be abolished, that the wasting of them by speculation should cease, and that the indigent people enter upon their rightful possession." Such "radical" ideas so boldly set forth by an antislavery group were destined for a scornful reception by proslavery Kentuckians. A further far-sighted recommen­ dation was made that a special office of colonization and immigration should be created as a particular department of the United States government: Such a board would have to provide for the various in­ terests of emigrants who are now helplessly exposed to so many sufferings, wrongs, and abuses from the place of embarkation in Europe to the place of their settle­ ment in America. The admission to citizenship, moreover, should be rendered as easy as possible and once this is accomplished the welfare of the nation should be permanently secured by releasing the laboring classes from the oppression of the capitalist: Labor has an incpntestable claim to the value of its products. Where it is prevented, by the want of the necessary capital, [from securing] this claim, it is of course referred to an alliance with the capital of others. But if no just agreement can be obtained by this asso­ ciation with the capitalist, then the State, as the arbi-

53 Stierlin, op. cit., pp. 63, 158-59. The Krww-Nothing·Moveme-nt 65 trator of all contending interests, has to interfere. This must either aid the associations of working men by credit banks, or mediate between the claims of the laborer and the capitalist, by fixing a minimum of wages equaling the value of the labor, and a maximum of labor ans,vering the demands of humanity. The time of labor shall not exceed ten hours per day. To the laissez-faire minds of the pre-Civil War era such ideas were pernicious heresy : "Nothing could be more n1is­ chievous than these crudities, sprung from the hotbeds of French and German jacobinism, and transplanted into this country to take the place of a rational system, based upon the fullest experience, and under which all classes have pros­ pered."54 If the Louisville Platform had received only local circula­ tion, it still would deserve more than a passing mention. As it was, plans for its systematic and effective propagation beyond the confines of the city ,vere immediately devised by an executive committee, under the chairmanship of L. Wit­ tig, which reported its progress through the Louisville An­ zeiger. This committee report indicated that the three Ger­ man newspapers55 of the city had collaborated in an English translation of the platform, in its distribution to President Pierce and his cabinet, members of the state legislature, and congressmen, and in its publication in twenty-seven papers in fourteen states-Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, ·Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, N e,v York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin. 56 The appearance of this English translation was said to have aroused virulent editorial attacks upon the "infidel" Germans who dared to dictate to native-born Americans what they should do. 57 Meanwhile, German refugee radicals

54 Western Citizen (Paris), July 27, 1855. 55 The Pwnier, which had replaced the Herold des Westens, the Be­ obachter am Ohio, and the Louisville Anzeiger. 56-Louisville Anzeiger, May 2, 1854. 57 The Louisville Journal and the Louisville Daily Democrat were singularly silent on the question of the "Louisville Platform" which 66 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

in other states were quick to adopt the principles of this Louisville Platform. 58 At least one writer, whose experience as a journalist presupposes more than a superficial knowl­ edge of local trends, ascribed the Know-Nothing hostility to the foreign-born in Kentucky to the Louisville Platform. 59 Kentuckians felt justified in opposing such a revolutionary program, but they failed, in many instances, to discriminate between the comparatively few radicals who held these ad­ vanced ideas and the long-established, conservative majority of the foreign-born in Louisville and throughout Kentucky. As the German population increased to nearly one-third of the total population of Louisville in 1852, a corresponding religious, social, and economic development followed. On every side there were evidences of a flourishing and, as some thought, non-assimilable racial and language group. The city possessed ten German churches, eight of which were Protestant and two Catholic.60 A male orphan asylum sup­ ported exclusively by German Catholics, which permitted children of English parentage to constitute one-third of its inmates, a Baptist orphanage, t,vo parochial schools, a bank, a native press, and political and social organizations testified to the activity of this recently naturalized group. 61 In 1854, out of deference to the German element, their language was was taken up, however, by the Louisv·ille Times. The Times is not available for the desired dates. 58 Three months after its adoption in Louisville, the German citizens of Texas met in San Antonio to draw up a platform similar in many details. Sister Paul McGrath, Political Natf,vism, in Texas: 1825- 1860 (Washington, 1930), pp. 72-76. 59 Ludwig Stierlin who served as editor of the Louisville A nzeiger for a number of years. 60 Between 1853 and 1859 the Ludwig-Missionsverein contributed 2,400 gulden and 770 marks (about $1,145) to the support of the German Catholics in the Diocese of Louisville. Theodore Roemer, The Ludwig-Missiomverein (Washington, 1931), p. 107. 81 The Metropolitan Catholic Almanac (Baltimore, 1855), p. 120. German Benevolent Societies with their bands of music were assigned a special place in Bishop Flaget's funeral procession, 1850. Martin John Spalding, Life ,of Bishop Flaget (Louisville, 1852), p. 358. The Know-Nothing Jl,f ovenient 67 introduced into those public schools whose classes warranted such instruction. The First Ward school employed Adam Frey as teacher of German at a salary of $650. Two teach­ ers, William Gross and Miss Frida Zeh, were attached to the Second Ward school. 62 In no other city of the United States, it was claimed, had the German-born risen to such an influential role in pro­ fessional and business life. 63 In the opinion of a contem­ porary historian, these "foreigners" belonged to the best class in the city. They were a considerate, assiduous, aspir­ ing people, growing each day in public esteem, fast becoming identified with the native-born, and influencing the com­ munity by their aesthetic tastes. 64 A less sympathetic view of the foreigners was entertained by those natives who saw cause for alarm in their organizations of a politico-social nature. Stirrings against the foreign-born were audible in Ken­ tucky as local elections approached and rumors of the formation of Know-Nothing lodges spread. Covington was among the first to report the institution of a "wigwam" of the party. 65 In this city, with its substantial foreign-born group, the Covington Journal published a protest against a meeting held by Irish and German citizens : In political affairs we protest against all attempts to create classes, to excite the prejudice of one portion of the people against another portion, to all clannishness, and any nationality save American nationality.88

62 The scale of salaries varied: Professor of Ancient Language, $1200; of Modern Language, $1000; of German, $650 for the prin­ eipal teacher, $325 for an assistant. Annual Report of the IJ,oa,rd of Trustees of the University and Public schools (Louisville, 1855), pp. 17-18. 63 Louisville Anzeiger, March 1, 1898 (souvenir edition). 64 Ben Casseday, The History of Louisville (Louisville, 1852), pp. 247-49. 65 Covington Journal, May 20, 1854. 66 Ibid., April 1, 1854. The foreign-born population of Kenton Coun­ ty in which Covington is located was 3,364 out of a total of 17,038 68 Na.tivis·ni in Kentucky to 1860

On the eve of the election there seemed to be less than the usual amount of excitement among the voters at large, but more bewilderment among party leaders : Political calculators are sadly perplexed. Old party ties and associations seem to be broken up; and the un­ certainty, as to how far the 'Know-Nothing' movement may affect the result, destroys the basis of all com­ putation. While the candidates and old party managers are distressed with doubts and fears the People seem to be taking the matter coolly, as though satisfied things were going about right. 67 According to the opposition p1"ess, the Democrats who had met to define their position with regard to the Know-Noth­ ing movement, and in so doing prevent their members from being led astray, frankly admitted that the naturalized citi­ zens had in some measure provoked the movement against themselves by their "indiscreet and ill-advised course" con-­ cerning the common scho!)ls, among other things. 68 Only a fe,v months earlier Bishop Spalding had expressed publicly his views on public. school administration.69 At the state capital the movement was reported under way in the month of August: For a week or more we have heard that an organization of Know-Nothings is contemplated in this city. As a matter of course, expectation is on tip-toe, and all are more or less anxious to know something about this new­ fangled institution, its doctrines and its objects; and not a few have been heard to express a desire to be­ come worthy and well qualified members.70 according to the census of 1850. J. D. B. DeBow (ed.), Compendium of the Seventh Census (Washington, 1854), p. 243. 61 Covington Journal, July 22, 1854. 68 Ibid., July 29, 1854. The allusion in this Covington paper is evidently to the prolonged controversy over the use of the King James' version of the Bible in the common schools of Cincinnati. Cf. Sister Evangeline Thomas, Nativism in the Old Northwest, 1850-1860 (Washington, 1936), p. 107. 69 Spalding's views on the school question are set forth in chapter VL 70 Tri-Weekly Kentucky Yeoman (Frankfort), Aug. 1, 1854. The Know-Nothing Movement 69 To this notice the editor subjoined the comment that he knew nothing of the party except by its fruits, and from these he had an unfavorable opinion of its objects. That it was an organization of the old-Native American party, he had little doubt. Writing from Frankfort, January 23, 1855, former Governor Robert P. Letcher informed John Crittenden that the Know-Nothings were said to be on the increase but that he, himself, was persuaded that they did not exceed 35,000 members· throughout the State. 71 A Know-Nothing convention in session in Louisville was quickly denounced by the Louisville Times, a militant anti­ nativistic sheet established by Theodore O'Hara,12 in 1852, and later edited by Coio·nels John 0. Bullock and John C. Noble. To all citizens of every political party having at heart the welfare of the country, the views of Thomas Jef­ ferson on secret political organizations were recommended for serious consideration. 73 To this end, that statesman's letter to Jedediah Morse, noted geographer and father of Samuel F. B. Morse, inventor of the telegraph and sturdy anti-Romanist, was printed in full with comments to the effect that the party which met with Jefferson's disapproval held public deliberations and was, moreover, a philanthropic association; that is, a society for the civilization and im-

71 Crittenden Correspondence, R. P. Letcher to John J. Crittenden, Frankfort, Jan. 23, 1855. 72 Sketches of Theodore O'Hara by G. H. Genzmer, DAB, XIV, 5, and by Major E. E. Hume, Southern, Sketches, Number 6 (Charlottesville, Va., 1936). The editors of the Times endeavored, from time to time, to impress the public with their disinterested motives: "We are not champions of the Catholic Church. Whatever of religious sentiment we possess is in direct conflict with its dogmas, but if our boasted religious liberty is not falsehood, the right to believe in those dogmas is as thoroughly and completely protected by the Constitution as any other religious opinion." Louisville Times, Jan. 13, 1855. 73 In declining to become a member of a projected society for the im­ provement of Indian tribes, Jefferson took the occasion to distinguish between private associations of laudable views and "those whose mag­ nitude may rivalize and jeopardize the march of regular ·government." Andrew A. Lipscomb (ed.), The Writings of Tkom,a,s Jefferson (Wash­ ington, 1903), XV, 356-62. 70 Nativi$m in Kentucky to 1860 provement of Indian tribes. The Know-Nothing party, on the other hand, was of a secret politico-religious character, the most unfortunate of all possible combinations, for it was pervaded by "an intolerant and belligerent spirit, mak­ ing distinctions, broad and odious, between different classes of our people, and ambitious of monopolizing all political power, and of directing permanently the whole machinery" of state and federal governments.14 From Lexington there came forth·a reprint of a resolution of the Massachusetts Know-Nothing convention in which it was maintained : That there can exist no real hostility to Roman Catho­ licism which does not embrace slavery, its natural co­ worker in opposition to freed om and republican institu­ tions. The editor's note on this dogmatic pronouncement was mere­ ly this, that "no absolute despot demands more implicit obedience of his serf, than does this Kno,v-Nothing organi­ zation of its members."15 Although rumors were widespread in Democratic circles that the Whigs would abandon their organization and iden­ tify themselves with the Know-Nothings, the Louisville Times at first appeared optimistic : \Ve wish they would try it in Kentucky. Unless ,ve are mistaken, there is too much intelligence and patriotism in this State for 'Know-Nothingism' to flourish very extensively. Later the same journal announced that the Whigs were go­ ing almost bodily into the Kno,v-Nothing party.76

74 Louisville Times, Jan. 4, 1855. Simultaneously, Know-Nothing lodges were established across the river in Indiana so that by July, 1854, some thirty to fifty thousand members were claimed for the party. Sister Evangeline Thomas, op. cit., p. 155. 75 Kentucky Statesman (Lexington), Dec. 29, 1854. 76 Louisville Times, June 17, 1854; ·Jan. 12, 1855. In fact, it was believed by some that the Know-Nothing movement was but an at­ tempt to resurrect the Whig party which was "Hindoo-like, interred with the ashes of its great Pater f amilias, Henry Clay." Covington American Sentine'l, May 2, 1855. The Know-Nothing J.t/o·ve·me·nt 71 Varied explanations have been proposed to account for the winning of Kentucky '\Vhigs by the Know-Nothing group. Whiggery, fearing the election of an opponent, fused with the Know-Nothings to accomplish what it -otherwise could not have done; the great majority of the Whigs, without a national party and "with a strong aversion to joining the Democrats, grasped the idea of the Know-Nothing party and swarmed into it."11 The year following the party's appearance in Kentucky was marked by a rather phenomenal success, a success ,vhich can be attributed largely to the vigorous efforts of George Prentice, founder of the Louisville Journal. This paper became for its editor a means of attaining a political in­ fluence greater, according to his noted successor, "Marse" 8 Henry Watterson, than any political writer of · the time. 7 This influence, utilized for the Whig cause while the party flourished was transferred to the Kno,v-Nothing movement in the mid-fifties. Political opponents of the former Whig leader hastened to contrast his past with his present attitude toward the foreign-born and Catholics, with the expectation of reveal­ ing an inconsistency. In 1844, Prentice naturally had made a bid for the votes of these two groups in behalf of Clay. Very frankly he admitted his motive: No matter how unfavorable our individual opinion of the tendencies of the Roman Catholic creed might have been, we should certainly have felt it our duty to make any true statement in our power calculated to ,vin the important support so ardently desired. With still more ingenuous candor he added that it would have been no affair of wonder if, when the issue seemed suspended upon the Roman Catholic vote, he had allowed himself to make "remarks too liberal to Catholics."79

11 Louisville Times, Jan. 10, 1855; Connelley and Coulter, History of Kentucky, II, 845. 1s LouiB1Jille Courier-Journal, Dec. 13, 1903. 79 Louisville Journal, July 18, 1855. 72 Nativis1n i11, Kentucky to 1860

The Scott-Pierce campaign of 1852 had witnessed a repe­ tition of the appeal for the vote of naturalized citizens and Catholics on the part of the Louisville Journal. Until t,vo months immediately preceding the election of 1855, Prentice had paid little attention to the alleged anti-republican char­ acter of the teachings of the Catholic Church. After ma­ ture consideration, however, and after an intensive study (of two months), he had resolved to combat the political prin­ ciples of the "Romish Church" and to preserve the institu­ tions of our Union from the machinations of foreign political power, under the cloak of ecclesiastical sovereignty. He was now firmly convinced that the Papacy "possesses a terrible power to bind the superstitious soul; and its organization, its discipline, and its principles are alike despotic."80 At the very beginning of the year 1855, an anomalous one in Kentucky politics, a growing apprehension of Prentice's position was expressed : The editor of the Journal seems exercised about the Know-Nothings, but manages to be a sort of ~pologist for them, at the same time non-committal. How can he tolerate the proscription of Catholics? Has he for­ gotten his zeal in their behalf in 1852 ?81 And again: "The Journal of this city is itching to find some plausible excuse for embracing the 'Nothings.' " 82 Prentice, himself, was charged with the following admission: The evident policy of the Whig party in Kentucky, awakened, as it is, by the powerful Know-Nothing organization, is that of quiescence, a sort of armed neutrality, ready to aid the side-Democratic or Know­ Nothing-that, by approximating to our principles, shall challenge the sympathy of patriotism by an ex­ hibition of devotion to the peace and welfare of the 83 country. • Commenting on this equivocal stand, the Louisville Demo- crat, financed by James Guthrie who, it will be recalled, pre-

80 Ibid., July 16, 1855. 81 Louisville Democrat, Jan. 1, 1855. s2 Louisville Times, Jan. 11, 1855. ss Louisville Democrat, March 27, 1855. The Know-Nothing Movement 73 sided at the Kentucky constitutional convention in 1849, in­ jected the sectional issue with the query : "Are the Demo­ crats or the Know-Nothings of the North more regardful of the rights and interests of the South?" This he followed with the opinion : For Union and proslavery Whigs to aid the Know­ Nothings of Kentucky at the suggestion of the Louis­ ville Journal, backed by the Whig editors generally, ,vould be not only to declare in favor of religious in­ tolerance and fraternal discord, but to give 'aid and comfort' to the declared enemies of the rights and in­ stitutions of the Southern States and people. 84 Nevertheless, it was precisely this religious intolerance and fraternal discord which the subsequent activity of Pren­ tice was to abet. His journal became the organ of the new party and he himself assumed the rank of a party leader. Without claiming the right to speak for the Know-Noth­ ings, Prentice wrote in April, he would speak of them.85 With this prelude he entered the campaign "with all the ardor of a leader contending for supremacy under a new issue, after witnessing the downfall of the party for which he had battled for a quarter of a century.''86 Or as another critic has noted: "It became a question for George D. Pren­ tice to be a Whig leader without a party, a Whig editor with­ out subscribers, or to metamorphose himself, against all the precedents and sentiments of his past career, into a Know­ Nothing." 87 Whether Prentice was actually alarmed at the influence

84 Ibid. 85 In the same issue of his Louisville Journal, April 17, 1855, Pren­ tice challenged the Louisville Times to prove its accusation that he "daily fulminates his anathemas against the Pope and Popery." 86 J. Stoddard Johnston (ed.), Memorial History of Louisville (Chi­ cago, 1896), I, 99. s1 James A. McMaster in the New York Freernan's Journal, Aug. 25, 1855. For a sketch of James Mc Master cf. Richard J. Purcell in DAB, XII, 140; also Sister M. Canisius Minahan, "James A. McMaster: A Pioneer Catholic Journalist," Records of the American Cath-Olic Historical Society, XLVII (June, 1936), 87-131. 74 Nativism in Kentucky t-0 1860 of the foreign-born, or whether such propaganda offered the most effective means of striking a blow at the Democratic party, as a political editor he used to advantage his powerful Louisville Journal to mold public opinion. In a lengthy editorial ten days before the elections of August, 1855, the power and influence of foreigners considered as a political element were described. He first addressed those who, in good faith, denied that the influx of foreigners into our country gave just cause for apprehension. Granted their contention that the native-born outnumbered the aliens three to one, this was no cause for complacency since neither physical force nor rebellious manifestations needed to be feared: "What it becomes us now to guard against is the growth of a political power in the hands of foreigners, that may be wielded, on occasion, to subvert our government and destroy our free institutions."88 In an attempt to make a practical application to the pend­ ing elections of the menace of this foreign influence, Pre·n­ tice gave figures to show that every fourth vote cast in a national election was that of a man of foreign birth. Any election, theref ore, in which the foreign voters were united and the native voters nearly equally divided, would result most certainly in the triumph of the party with which the foreigners coalesced. The editor continued : It is notorious, that, for years past, the great control­ ling question with the Democratic party, when a can­ didate was to be nominated for any office, was, can he secure the foreign and the Catholic voters? Avail­ ability and not capability was the test by which aspir­ ants to office were tried. Prentice had nothing but contempt for the suggestion that an effort be made to divide the foreign vote so that its pre­ ponderance would cease to be dangerous. Too many hidden and mysterious agencies were at work to prevent a division : The indefatigable perseverance, with which Rome works out her dark schemes in furtherance of Papal supremacy, indicates, with almost unquestionable cer-

88 Louisville Jiournal, July 26, 1856. The Kruno-Nothing Movement 75

tainty, that to the secret influence of that mysterious power that sits enthroned at Rome, f1·om whence it sends its mandates to willing subjects scattered all over the world, we must refer this unity of political action by foreigners in this country.89 To further substantiate this declaration, the editor of the Louisville Journal maintained that even though the for­ eigners be the Germans and the Irish who "socially hate each other" and who "cannot live peaceably in the same neighborhood," yet, if they are Catholics, they always vote alike. Against this assertion "a Kentucky Catholic" op­ posed a contrary view as he wrote several months later: It is known to you that my political affinities have al­ ways been towards the Whig party, as have also been those of a large majority of the Roman Catholics of Kentucky. The foreign element of the Catholic popula­ tion-and the same may be said of that of every Prot­ estant denomination, the Protestant Episcopal Church, perhaps excepted, is as well known to you to be Demo­ cratic in its tendencies. If the Catholic clergy have used the supposed influence appertaining to them as spiritual guides to induce the Catholic people to vote in any particular way, how do you account for this diver­ sity of political predilection bet,veen the two classes of native and foreign-born Catholics ?90 In a final note on the evils of foreign influence Prentice sounded a warning: "It is not merely the five millions of foreigners, or the three millions of Catholics, that ,ve have to fear, but it is those ,vho unite with them."91 As attacks upon the Catholic Church by visiting lecturers in Protestant churches and before local organizations be­ came more frequent and severe, Bishop Spalding took measures to .neutralize their effects. On January 4, 1855, the notorious Italian renegade, Giovanni Giacinto Achilli,02 89 lbid. 90 The Catholic Telegraph and Advocate (Cincinnati), Oct. 6, 1855. 91 Louisville Journal, July 26, 1855. A more conservative estimate of Catholics in the United States in 1850 is 1,233,350. The Metro­ politan Catlwlic Al?nanac (Baltimore, 1850), p. 231. 92 American Catholics had offered financial aid to Father John 76 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 addressed the Young Men's Christian Association of Louis­ ville at the Walnut Street Baptist Church. His lecture en­ titled, "Popery Unmasked and Revealed to American Youth," was one of a series "embracing subjects of novelty and interest," according to the Louisville Journal. 93 The editor of the Louisville Times in announcing the same "dis­ tinguished Italian exile" expressed the wish that the bishop might give the public the benefit of an answer, since it was quite evident that the lecturer was in some way connected with Know-Nothingism, and that his remarks were intended "to pander to the prejudices already current relative to Catholicism, or 'Popery.' "94 Bishop Spalding did reply, and on Sunday evenings at seven o'clock the Cathedral of the Assumption attracted a crowd of Catholics and Prot­ estants to hear his apologia for the Catholic faith. The series which he styled "Popular Prejudice against the Catho­ lic Church" included such subjects as the "Anti-Popery Crusade," the "Power of the Pope," and the "Confessional and Secret Societies." Since the cause of the disputants was championed by the newspapers of the city, the controversy was one of general interest and the method of reaching the public at once both effective and popular. 95 In Lexington, Dr. Robert J. Breckinridge at the request of a number of the city's most influential citizens delivered a lecture on "Popery" in the Christian Church. In the words of the press notice : The high reputation of the speaker, the deep interest of his subject, and the excitement of the public mind upon

Henry Newman, later Cardinal, during the famous court proceedings against Achilli. 93 Jan. 8, 1855. The Y.M.C.A., having as yet no building of its own, regularly met in the basemfnt of the \Valnut Street Baptist Church. 9 4 Louisville Times, Jan. 4, 1855. 95 A lecture entitled, "The Decline aud Destruction of Popery," by Rev. S. Bonhomme, a Christian Israelite of the Cumberland Pres­ byterian Church, was announced for January 12 at the First Pres­ byterian Church. Louisville Journal, Jan. 12, 1855. The Know-Nothing Movement 77 the American question, ,vhich necessarily involves that of Popery, drew together one of the largest audiences that ever assembled in the city. 96 From time to time the suggestion had been made that the Know-Nothings abandon their secrecy: It would be a gratification to us, we confess, to see the new party come· before the people, with their platform of principles laid down by authority, and offered for discussion, and for rejection or acceptance.01 Shortly after this appeal, the entire platform of the Ameri­ can, or Know-Nothing party, as adopted at Philadelphia in June, 1855, appeared in the Louisville Journal. Prentice, himself, while attending the Philadelphia convention had assisted in drawing up a compromise offered by Colonel George W. Williams, Kentucky member of the committee on the platform.98 Although this was not accorded serious consideration, Prentice generously acclaimed the adopted platform as presenting a common ground and a comprehen­ sive faith where Democrats, Whigs, and Native Americans might all unite. Adopted citizens, too, would find here the assurance of defense for their civil and religious liberty, provided that the religion which they professed be not also a system to control political action. Should this be the case, then Americans must resist the encroachment as one hostile to the spirit of free institutions.99 The enthusiasm of Prentice failed to convince the Demo­ crats that their opponents were really united on a common platform. This they attempted to disprove by a careful analysis o~ what they claimed to be the actual vacillating stand of the party on the question of naturalization laws, the Catholic status, and slavery. Shall the period of resi­ dence before naturalization be changed, and for how long? Or shall naturalization laws be repealed altogether? "The

96 Lexington Observer and Reporter, April 18, 1855. 97 Western Citizen (Paris), April 27, 1855. 9s Crittenden Correspondence, Albert T. Burnley to John J. Critten­ den, Philadelphia, June 12, 1855. 89 Louisville Journal, June 19, 1855. 78 1Vat-ivis1n in. Kentucky to 1860 Know-Nothings," as the Louisville Democrat sa,v it, "are not agreed on a single point that will be presented for action should they succeed. . . . Mr. Morehead in his speech here, could say nothing definite. The members of Congress must devise some wise measure. He had none to propose." Yet, the editor advised, any remedy that Congress might propose would not exclude the naturalized citizen from state offices, for over these Congress had no control; consequently, the Know-Nothings must keep up agitation until they carry every state : This will ultimately lead to another sectional contest, for the great unpeopled Northwest will never consent to a suicidal policy, and foreign immigration will naturally flow where it finds most liberality. Finally, if the naturalization laws should be repealed altogether, as some suggest, the question would arise wheth­ er the original power of naturalization did not rest in the states. Congress has no power to nullify the rights of naturalization entirely. The editor thus summarized his arguments on the vexing problem : Foreign immigration ,vill continue, and instead of dis­ tribution, it will only accumulate in more favorable localities; and all the evils will be aggravated for the more you restrict men's privileges, the less valuable as citizens they become, and the less interest they have in the country of their residence.100 Neither was there unanimity of sentiment among Know­ Nothings on the Catholic status, the Louisville Democrat maintained. Although a third of the grand council of Know­ Nothings had voted to admit Catholics, candidate Morehead had expressed himself as opposed to their holding public office if they professed belief in the temporal power of the Pope. All the while his partisans were declaring that he repudiated the Know-Nothing doctrine of excluding Catho­ lics: "Indeed, the platform is ambiguous on this subject. Hostility to Catholics is plainly expressed, but entire ex­ clusion is left to be infen·ed rather than distinctly stated."

'loo Louisville Democrat, June 26, 1855. The Know-Nothing Move-m,ent 79

Yet Prentice avowed that he had no desire to convert a political campaign into a religious controversy and that he earnestly and sincerely deprecated the results of such a blunder. On the other hand, he maintained that the political history of both Protestantism and Roman Catholicism could not be denied, and against the "commixture of political tyranny with religious intolerance of the Romish Church" there must be some protest.101 As for the question of slavery, an even greater diversity of opinion prevailed. The Southern Know-Nothings were proslavery; the Northern were antislavery; and both the Know-Nothings and Aboli­ tionists had united on the same delegates to a convention in Cincinnati a fortnight earlier. While his party was being thus censured, George Pren­ tice was making some rather definite statements of his views on the questions opened for discussion. He held that if there was any one principle of the American party upon which the South should be united to a man, irrespective of former political affiliations, it ,vas in requiring a revision of the laws regulating immigration ·and naturalization for, "foreigners have antislavery tendencies, and the refore, for the safety of the South, they ought to be excluded from the ballot-box and from offi.ce."102 The "foreigners," however, with whom Prentice had closest contact and whose attitude must have caused him most concern had on one important occasion, at least, allied themselves with the proslavery party. In the election of delegates to the Constitutional Convention in 1849, the majority of the German voters of Louisville had supported the proslavery delegates, Guthrie, Rudd, and Preston.103

101 Louisville Journal, July 11, 1855. 102 George Prentice, as quoted by the Louisville Democrat, June 29, 1855. This accusation the Democrat sought to deny by recalling that in 1849 the anti-ema:ncipationists received the largest vote in the first ward which was composed mostly of foreigners. 103 Ludwig Stierlin, Der Sta.at Kentucky und Die Stadt Louisville Louisville, 1873), p. 109. The Louisville Courier, May 7, 1849, denied 80 Nativ-ism in Kentucky to 1860

When the new constitution was accepted it included safe­ guards for slavery. Although by temperament and economic interest actually opposed to slavery, Germans of Louisville and elsewhere in Kentucky had been won over by slavery leaders in the Democratic party who charged that the emancipation question had been stirred up by the Whigs in order to procure cheap Negro labor and thus to lower the price of labor for the whites. Only the liberal Forty-eighters and a small number of followers of a certain Dr. Edward Caspari, in whose office German and American friends of emancipation were accustomed to meet, had remained staunch emancipationists.104 It is quite true, on the other hand, that these Forty­ eighters because of their social and intellectual background had far greater influence than their numbers might indicate. Some had entered the field of journalism while other force­ ful figures among them had taken a much more active part in public affairs than their conservative Catholic and Lutheran countrymen of the ordinary immigrant classes; to wit, the adoption of the Louisville Platform in which slavery was listed as a major social and economic evil.105 That Prentice recognized the potential force of the Ger­ mans of Louisville, whose number he estimated at twenty thousand, is evident from a statement published a month before his advocacy of revised naturalization laws. In an appeal for funds for a German Baptist Church the editor alluded to the German citizens as "destined to affect largely the commercial, political, and religious character and in­ terests of our city and State." Moreover, he continued, they were very inadequately provided with places for religious instruction and hence were exposed to the "imposture of that the proslavery leaders had succeeded in winning the Germans to slavery perpetuation. 104 Stierlin, op. cit., p. 108. The Louisville City Directory (1851-52), p. 82, lists Edward Caspari, physician, with an office and home on Jefferson Street between Second and Third. 105 Ibid., p. 159. The Know-Nothing Movement 81 superstition on the one hand, and the demoralizing ten­ dencies of Turnerism on the other."106 As election day approached, Prentice expressed his con- cern over the outcome: Though we have always been warm partisans, we have rarely if ever felt so intense an interest in a pending election as we feel in this. It is an unquestionable truth that a large majority of our political opponents in this canvass in the city of Louisville are Germans, Irishmen, and other foreign-born citizens. Some few foreigners go with the American party, and quite a number of American-born politicians go with the Anti-Americans, but the fact is undeniable that nearly the whole of the American party is native-born and a very great majority of the Anti-American, Sag-Nicht, or Demo­ cratic party, as it sometimes calls itself, are foreign­ born. The general issue is between Americanism and f oreignism.101 Synonymous with ''foreignism," to many minds, was the phantasm of papal supremacy in the temporal order. That the "Romish Church" held to such a doctrine, the editor of the Louisville Journal believed had been conclusively proved by Colonel Humphrey Marshall, a product of West Point and grandson of the first historian of Kentucky, in a speech in which he cited, as proof, works endorsed by the Arch­ bishop of St. Louis and by ''his Holiness, the Pope him­ self." 108 Catholics, however, were not refused a request to publish in the Louisville Journal a lengthy extract from a recent pastoral explaining Catholic teaching on the subject, even though the request came in the form of a polite cen­ sure, "I feel sure that you will, after admitting to your col­ umns so much calculated to cast suspicion upon a large class

106 Louisville Journal, May 25, 1855. The Turners were primarily a gymnastic organization but they always had political leanings. Many Turners affiliated with the Free-Soil party and subsequently became members of the Republican party. Albert B. Faust, The Gennan Element in the United States (New York, 1927), pp. 189-90. 101 Loui8ville J,ourno,l, July 9, 1855. 1os Jbid., June 21, 1855. 82 Nat-i-v'ism in Kentucky to 1860 of citizens as to their fidelity to the country and its Consti­ tution and laws, publish the accompanying": To the grievous and utterly false charge of disloyalty to this free government, your best answer wHl be to continue doing-what you have all along sought earnest­ ly and sincerely to do-discharge faithfully all your duties as citizens of the republic, rendering to Caesar the things that belong to Caesar, without, at the same time, forgetting to render to God the things that belong to God. The Catholic religion exists and flourishes under all forms of civil government ; it is the visible king­ dom of Christ on earth, which is not of this world; -it is incompatible with no well ordered form of human government, because it interferes with none. Its sphere of action is essentially different from, and infinitely higher than that of any merely human organization. Its end, its means of action, its doctrines, its sacraments, and its government, all belong and look to the spiritual order.... She unceasingly tells her children to be sub­ ject to the higher powers, for there is no power but from God, and those that are, are ordained of God ...... We appeal to you, beloved brethren, whether these have not been the lessons which we have uniformly taught you, both in our public and official communications, and in our most private conversations; and whether we have not always instructed you that the power of the sovereign Pontiff, which is spiritual in its objects and in its sphere of action, cannot by possibility clash with your civil allegiance, or with the different classes of duties which you owe as good citizens to the govern­ ment under which you happily live. You will all bear us witness, without one dissenting voice, that such has been our invariable teaching on this subject, and that this has been also your constant belief. And such being obviously the fact,-proclaimed, both of­ ficially and unofficially, more than a hundred times,­ you may well disregard the injurious imputations on your loyalty as citizens, originating with men who seek to do you an injury for their own selfish purposes. God will judge us all, and his day of reckoning is not dis­ tant for any one among us. We should rather pity and pray for the conversion of those well-meaning, but mis­ guided men, ,vho, in endeavoring to injure our charac- The Know-Nothing Movenient 83 ter as citizens, are really themselves inflicting the great­ est injury upon the country by marring the social har­ mony of its citizens, and impairing that brotherly love ,vhich should bind us all together.... JOHN BAPTIST, Archbishop of Cincinnati PETER PAUL, Coadjutor Ad-min·istrator of Detroit AMADEUS, Bishop of Cleveland MARTIN JOHN, Bishop of Louisville MAURICE, Bishop of Vincennes GEORGE ALOYSIUS, Bishop of Covington FREDERICK, Vicar-Apostolic of Upper Michigan100 Cincinnati, May 20, 1855 Even in the halls of Congress, a Kentuckian, Leander Cox, who was elected as a Whig to the Thirty-third Congress and as an American to the Thirty-fourth, was being heard on the subject of the Know-Nothing party: A mysterious political association has arisen in the land, which has, in silence and without strife, tri­ umphantly discomfited every political leader whom they deemed unfitted for the station he filled or sought, and this mighty agency at the ballot-box has produced ter­ ror and consternation in the hearts of thousands of aspiring politicians. Their objects are said to be pro­ scriptive, unholy, and unconstitutional. If so, they ought to be put down. But I have yet to see the proof of the charges brought against them.110 The speaker affirmed that he did not intend to defend the party. On the contrary, he opposed the idea of a religious test for office, but he had no complaint to offer if Know­ Nothings only intended to vote for Protestants in preference to Catholics. That was their right. Obviously, any Protest­ ant who withheld his vote from a Catholic believed that a political sentiment, not in harmony with American ideas of popular rights and free government, lurked in the Catholic

1.00 [bid., June 29, 1855. This copy co1·.responds with the letter as printed in Pastoral Letter of the First Pro·vincial Co-u·ncil of Cin­ cinnati to the. Clergy a-nd Laity (Cincinnati, 1855), pp. 15-21. no Congressional Globe, 33rd Congress, 2nd session, Appendix, Jan. 11, 1855, p. 71. 84 Nati-vism in Kent-ucky to 1860 faith. This might be erroneous, the speaker admitted, but Catholics must convince their Protestant brethren of the utter groundlessness of the suspicion. Representative Cox next alluded to the charge of the Know-Nothing proscription of foreigners, which he sup­ ported on the customary grounds of fear of labor deprecia­ tio•n and the misuse of the franchise. Whereas in his own native Kentucky the economic competition of foreigners scarcely constituted a problem, it was not at all unlikely that artisans probably superior to the native variety had found their way thither. Cox then asked : "If elections in particular sections of our country are controlled by men unenlightened by free principles of civil liberty, is it sur­ prising that native Americans should want to curb their in­ fluence ?"111 It was in order to restrain this influence that the Know-Nothings directed their efforts during 1855. Prospects of success in Kentucky seemed favorable as dispatches from Covington and Lexington reported that the entire municipal ticket had been carried by the American party in both cities.112 Elections in Louisville, too, had re­ sulted in an easy victory for the new, secret party. The defeated party, wholly taken by surprise, complained that it had little time to organize and that the disturbances in the first, second, and eighth wards where the bulk of the natu­ ralized citizens of German and Irish descent lived accounted for the victory.u3 Prentice attributed these disturbances to the recent organization of foreign-born citizens into Sag Nicht societies which, he felt, had the natural effect of ex­ citing and exasperating the American mind. The Demo­ cratic press ascribed them to the unprecedented succession of outrages against the foreign-born in Louisville since the

111 Jbid., p. 72. 112 Louisville Democrat, April 9, 11, 1855; Louisville Journal, May 11, 1855; Lexington Kentucky Statesman, May 8, 1855. 113 Louisville Journal, May 11, 19, 1855; Louisville Democrat, May 30, June 30, 1855. The organization of German- and Irish-born citizens into a counter-society of Sag Nichts was alleged to have taken place in Newport, Kentucky, April 9 of this year. The Know-Nothing Moveme-nt 85 installation of Know-Nothingism-"outrages worthy of the execration of all thinking men." Early in the year 1855, the Know-Nothing, or American party, claimed a membership of fifty thousand throughout the Commonwealth of Kentucky.114 This claim appears credible in view of over 69,000 votes cast, seven months later, for their gubernatorial candidate, Charles Slaughter Morehead. It was during this campaign that the dis­ turbances occurred in Louisville which gave to that election day the title, "Bloody Monday."

114 Loui81'ille Ti-mes, Jan. 7, 19, 1855. CHAPTER IV A BLOODY ELECTION The gubernatorial contest in Kentucky in 1855 was sig­ nificant at the time as a sweeping victory for Know-Noth­ ingism in the State. It presented a vivid picture of the con­ fusion in party politics attendant on the formal disbanding of the Whigs who had controlled Kentucky for nearly twen­ ty years prior to the death of the Great Compromiser. A contemporary historian, J. Stoddard Johnston, who was ad­ mitted to the councils of the Democratic state leaders, analyzed the local political scene in an historical supplement to the Louisville C ourie1'"-J ournal, November 7, 1897. His description was substantially as f ollo,vs. The Know-Nothing party, dominated by the Native Amer­ ican elements which equally opposed the Whig and Demo­ cratic organizations, took steps at an early date to put a ticket in the field for the elections in August. At a conven­ tion held in Louisville in February, William V. Loving of Warren County was nominated for governor along with seven other state officers, all of whom were Whigs. With the selection of their nominees, the Native American manip­ ulators felt sure of their power, ,vhile the Louisville J our­ nal, the leading Whig paper, pursued its wonted course and did not then place the ticket at its masthead. Fearful of this apparent fusion of Whigs and Know-Noth­ ings, in view of the slight margin of its victory in the pre­ ceding gubernatorial election, the Democratic party was not hasty in proclaiming a ticket. Its leaders, too, were aware that many prominent Whigs had refused to ally themselves with the Know-Nothings. Accordingly, they considered the propriety of nominating some old-line Whig who was op­ posed to the proscriptive principles of Know-Nothingism, with the hope of thus gaining the support of that schismatic _Whig element.1 The man whom they thought most avail-

1 "Democracy is dead," said Prentice, and "that is why it must combine with Old Line Whigs." Quoted, Louisville Daily Democrat, May 31, 1855. 86 A Bloody Election 87 able was Charles Slaughter Morehead, ,vho had been promi­ nent in Whig councils for twenty years, several times a member of the legislature and three times its speaker, twice a member of Congress from the Ashland district, proponent of strong Southern principles, and the owner of a cotton plantation in Mississippi. A further recommendation lay in his supposed opposition to the proscriptive tenets of the Know-Nothing party on the evidential basis of his marriage to a Catholic. 2 As Democratic leaders were preparing to off er Morehead the nomination, their suspicions were aroused by a circular from the Know-Nothing executive committee revoking the decree that marriage with a Catholic created a disability for prospective officeholders.3 In a few days the Louisville Journal, which on May 19 had first printed the "American Ticket" at its masthead with no editorial comment, an­ nounced that in consequence of continued ill health Judge Loving had withdrawn from the canvass and that Morehead had been nominated as candidate of the American party for governor of Kentucky.4 As may be surmised, the announcement caused no little

2 Morehead had 1narried Amanda Leavy and upon her death, her sister, Margaret. They were the daughters of \Villiam Leavy of Lexington, ''an Irish gentleman and an orthodox Catholic Papist," according to the Weekly Kentucky Y eowan (Frankfort) , July 20, 1855. A parallel case was that of Colonel John Rowan, Jr., a mem­ ber of an old ruling family long represented in Congress and states­ craft by another John Rowan. The Colonel declined to run for the gubernatorial office because his wife, Rebecca B. Carnes, daughter of Major P. A. Carnes of Baltimore, ,vas a Catholic and· he feared thus to imperil the prospects of the Democratic party. Louisville Times, Jan. 14, 1855. 3 Article II of the Constitution of the Know-Nothing party which was adopted in June, 1854, reads in part as follows: "A person to become a member of any subordinate council must .... be a Protes­ tant, born of Protestant parents, reared under Protestant influence, and not united in marriage with a Roman Catholic." 4 Early it was rumored that Morehead had joined the Know-Noth­ ings according to a letter, Jan. 25, 1855, from Robert P. Letcher of Frankfort to Crittenden, in Crittenden Correspondence. 88 Nativ·ism in Kentucky to 1860 surprise and indicated to the Democrats the lapse of another large element of the Whig party which hitherto had been neutral. It resulted, furthermore, in the accession to the Democrats of several leading Native Americans and the withdrawal from active support of the Know-Nothing ticket of one or more influential papers, which felt that they had been discriminated against by the elevation of the Louisville Journal as the organ of the Know-Nothing party.5 Thus there was a confusion of issues equal to the con­ fusion of party loyalties. The surviving influential leaders of the Whig party were bent upon preserving their political power in the State. Meanwhile, the revivified Native Amer­ ican party under the title Know-Nothing, or American, was alluring former Whigs into its ranks. Finally, the Demo­ crats who had settled on Beverly Clarke of Simpson Coun­ ty as their nominee for governor were endeavoring by every means in their power to muster sufficient strength to defeat the opposition.. 6 Aliens, naturalized citizens, and Catholics were subjects for editorial tilts in the local press for several months prior to the general elections. 1 At first the imputations against them were mild: The Papacy as an Empire, whether temporal or spir­ itual, is devoid of the popular element, a·nd is, there­ fore, anti-Republican and anti-American. The apprehensions which we entertain as to the effect of the vast foreign immigration at present pouring in upon us are not chimerical.

5 Louisville Courier-Journal (historical supplement), Nov. 7, 1897. 6 For Beverly Clarke's efforts in behalf of the naturalized citizen during the constitutional convention of 1849, cf. p. 7 In Frankfort, the Tri-lVeeldy Yeoman printed the oath of the Know-Nothings: "I, of my own free will and accord, in the presence of Almighty God and these ,vitnesses, my right hand resting on the Holy Bible and Cross, and my left hand raised toward Heaven, in token of my sincerity, do solemnly promise and swear that I will not vote, nor give my influence for any office in the gift of the people, unless he be an American Born Citizen, in favor of Americans born ruling America, nor if he be a Ro1nan Catholic.... " A Bloody Election 89 They [foreign potentates] cannot conquer us, but they can subvert our government by the introduction .... of the scum and filth of their own over-populated king­ doms. The Pope of Rome too 'has designs upon' our country and 'will aid' in its destruction. Foreigners made the last President, and they will con­ tinue to make Presidents in all future time, unless de­ termined and efficient resistance be made through a harmonious organization to prevent it. 8 When Catholics began to withdra,v their subscriptions to the Louisville Journal as a measure of protest, the editor was not surprised. He considered the reaction quite natural after he had expressed his opinion that "a well-informed and consistent Roman Catholic must necessarily consider himself under spiritual obligations inconsistent in many contingencies with his obligations to the government of the United States."9 In reply to an article published in the Louisville Democrat under the pen name of "A True Prot­ estant," Prentice agreed that "the principles of the Papal Church are both anti-Christian and anti-republican." He stated, furthermore, that it would be quite lawful to oppose such anti-republican principles by refusing to vote for those who hold them. On election morning Prentice set aside any restraint that he had exercised hitherto, as the following excerpts from his Louisville J ourna-l demonstrate: Rally to put down an organization of Jesuit Bishops, Priests, and other Papists, who aim by secret oaths and horrid perjuries, and midnight plottings, to sap the foundation of all our political edifices--state and na­ tional. Until the light of Protestantism shone in the world there was no religious freed om. Popery, with its iro·n heel, tread out the life of religious liberty as fast as it was born.

8 Louisville Jo'wrnal, July 7, 9, 26, 1855. 9 Ibid., July 10, 1855. 90 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

The Romish corporation, under the pretense of being the Bride of Christ, has ever been the prostitute of Satan.10 In view of these and similar outbursts, Bishop Spalding apparently felt justified in writing to Archbishop Kenrick of Baltimore that "the devil appears to be unchained in this country; but good will grow out of the evil."11 The Louis­ ville Times maintained that the object of this "iniquitous assault" could be none other than to array religious feelings against Catholics and thereby strike a blow at the Demo­ cratic party.12 With the obvious intention of checking collisions between American and foreign parties during the elections, Mayor John Barbee issued a notice to the city marshal stating that all policemen were to be put on at eight o'clock each eve­ ning and all supernumerary watchmen were to be sum­ moned when needed until August 6. 13 These precautionary measures of an American partisan mayor did not satisfy the Democrats who maintained that police should be chosen from both political parties. Had not, it was asked, numbers of Know-Nothing police officers, whose duty it was to pre­ serve the peace, been among the most active participants in the scenes of disorder which marred the spring elections for local officers ?14 When the Louisville board of aldermen met, a message was read from the Mayor announcing the appointment of fifty persons as extra police to be placed in the first, second, and eighth wards on election day; whereupon, a resolution approving the appointments was rejected by a four to two vote.15 Still another safeguard was proposed; namely, the selection of a suitable number of citizens from each party

10 Ibid., Aug. 6, 1855. 11 Baltimore Cathedral Archives, Feb. 23, 1855, 32 A Supplement,, N 13. 12 Louisville Times, Aug. 5, 1855. 13 Ibid., July 22, 1855. 14 Louisville Democrat, Aug. 4, 1855. u; Louisville Journal, Aug. 4. 1855. A Bloody Electi-On 91 whose social position would thereby exercise a moral in­ fluence on persons disposed to be disorderly.16 This pro­ posal, too, was set aside. Last-minute canvassing attracted the usual crowds, as several thousand Americans assembled at the courthouse to hear John Jordan Crittenden, former Whig leader, laud and expound the tenets of their party. The association with the Know-Nothing movement of this nationally known and esteemed Kentucky statesman was certain to influence many who would have been unimpressed by a speaker of less re­ no,vn. One press account of his speech called attention to his ''lucid and truthful" explanation of the principles of the American party on the slavery question, Roman Catholicism, and f oreignism. "vVe had been told," the Louisv-ille Journal's editor remarked, "that Mr. Crittenden had not endorsed the American platform in full upon the Catholic question. In his speech last night he did not avoid or in any manner slight a single point or principle of the platform .... and showed that it is the political policy of the Church and not the religious piety of the Catholics to which Americans ob­ ject."11 In one last summary of all the arguments of the preceding months the Louisville Journal besought every Kentuckian to read, think, and ponder for himself the evils of foreign immigration ; "the early history of that intolerant and per­ secuting church, which thrives on the spoils of misery and ignorance" ; and "the impudent and arrogant claims and declarations made by its American teachers." Prentice was convinced that a victory was imperative, for "if now we overwhelm the anti-American party in Kentucky, our future triumphs throughout Kentucky and the Union are in­ evitable, whilst, on the other hand~ if we are prostrated, we may never be able to rise in our strength again."18 Nothing

16 This suggestion had 1nuch to commend it at a time when police, not provided with uniforms, often conveniently lost themselves in the crowd, if the situation grew beyond control. 11 Louisville Journal., Aug. 3, 1855. 18 Ibid., Aug. 4, 1855. 92 Nativ·ism in Kentucky to 1860 remained to be done now but to give the final directions and warnings to voters, and these were forthcoming from both parties. All naturalized citizens were instructed to take their papers to the polls and were encouraged to remember that, as f reen1en, they were as fully entitled to vote as if born in this country. In the exercise of this right, they ,vere to stand boldly up against the usurpation and proscriptive policy of the Know-Nothing party.10 "The police believe that only the Germans are subject to the law," complained the Anzeiger.2<> German voters, apprehending difficulty, were thought by the "American," George Prentice, to be re­ maining away from the polls, but in the event that they should change their minds, they were warned to go "with none but proper intentions," which \Vas the equivalent of supporting the Know-Nothing ticket. The leading anti­ Know-Nothing daily, the Louisville Times, hopefully sug­ gested that the meditated violence would be averted by "that conservative feeling in every man" which should discoun­ tenance such action. But moderation played an insignificant role in the Louisville election of August 6 when, amid riots which have caused the day to be designated "Bloody Mon­ day," the Know-Nothings won a complete victory. Success was not won without fraud openly practiced. In view of the fact that three-fourths of the election officers were Know­ N othings, it may reasonably be held that the polls were con­ trolled by the party in power.21 A charge of fraud against attorney-general James Harlan involved also t~e Louisville Council, which was accused of disfranchising between t,velve and fifteen hundred Democratic supporters by fail­ ing to provide additional voting places in the first, second, and eighth wards.22 It was in these wards, with the bulk of the German and

1 0 Louisville Time.i;, Aug. 5, 1855. 2 0 Louisville Anzeiger, Aug. 4, 1855. 21 Tri-Weekly Kentucky Yeoman, Aug. 5, 1855; Louisville Times, Aug. 1, 5, 1855. 22Louisville T-imes, Aug. 1, 5, 1855. A Bloody Election 93 Irish population, that the scenes of greatest violence oc­ curred. Such discriminatory measures, coupled with occa­ sional clashes between Americans and foreigners, produced well-grounded fears for the freed om of the elective fran­ chise. For the incidents of the day one must rely almost exclusively upon the highly partisan accounts in the local press. On election morning, according to anti-Know-Nothing reports, the American party took possession of the polls. In accordance with preconcerted plans, every stratagen1 was to be employed to hinder the vote of those who could not shO\Y the "yellow ticket" of the Know-Nothing order. Large crowds were stationed at entrances to ward off Democratic voters, while side and back doors of polling places ,vere pro­ vided for the entry of American-party men.23 Democrats maintained that the first foreign-born citizens ,vho offered to vote ,vere assaulted and driven off. Thus, so they claimed, by direct acts of intimidation, through fear of consequences, or from lack of proper facilities, citizens of Louisville were deterred from exercising their franchise. Throughout a great part of the day and night the city was in possession of bands of infuriated nativists. Property damages were costly. Ambruster's brewery, on Jefferson Street, was burned on the pretext that a shot had been fired from one of the windows at a mob in pursuit of a German. A loss of over $25,000 resulted. There followed immediate­ ly a sacking of German residences in the vicinity. A news­ paper reporter's account of a general row on Shelby Street suggests the serious nature of the disturbances: Here it was that while the preliminaries of battle were being arranged the Americans received a volley of shot, and then the engagement followed. In this fight Officer \Villiam was peppered with small shot; Joe Salvage received ten shots; Fra.nk Stout was shot slightly in the arm and side ; William Richardson received a charge of small shot indiscriminately over his body; Vard. Morris was slightly injured, and William Atchi­ 2 son received several bad wounds. • 23 Louisville Courier, Aug. 8, 1855. 94 Na.tivism in Kentucky to 1860

Acting on the supposition that ammunition was stored in the basement of Catholic churches, a crowd broke into St. Martin's Church, Shelby Street. Mayor Barbee, apparently aware of the responsibility of his office, intervened, ex­ amined the church premises, and reported "no powder found." He assured the crowd that they had won the elec­ tion and ordered them under command of Captain Lovell Rousseau, 25 whom he had authorized to organize a company of citizen police, to return to their wards. Instead, they proceeded to the courthouse and took possession of a can­ non and some small arms.26 From the steps of the building, Judge W. F. Bullock and William P. Thomasson, a former Whig member of Congress, made earnest but futile speeches to check the frenzied mob. With the seized cannon fully manned for action, approximately fifty men armed ,vith muskets and bayonets made their way up Main Street. Grave was the danger of an attack on the Cathedral of the Assumption on Fifth Street. Bishop Spalding, in fear of its destruction, called upon the Mayor and handed him the keys of the recently constructed edifice as he told him that he would be held responsible for any damages to church property in the city. As a result, the following notice was issued: We, the undersigned, have in person carefully examined the Cathedral, and do assure the community that there are neither men nor arms concealed there; and further that the keys of said Cathedral, on Fifth Street, are in the hands of the city authorities. JOHN BARBEE, Mayor27 T. W. RILEY J. A. GILLISS Councilmen

25 Captain Rousseau was later to serve as major general in the Union Army and in 1867 to be appointed brigadier general with brevet rank of major general in the Regular Army. Biographical, Direct-Ory of the American Congress 1774-19!7, p. 1481. 26 Louisville Times, Aug. 8, 1855. 21 Louisville Journal, Aug. 8, 1865. A Bloody Election 95 It was the eighth ward, however, which suffered the most deplorable consequences of this outburst of arson and mur­ der. A row of buildings on Main Street, between Tenth and Eleventh, owned by Francis Quinn and occupied chiefly by Irish tenants, was surrounded by an excited, well-armed mob and set on fire. 28 It is difficult to ascertain the number who perished, so varied were the reports. One victim, the owner of the properties, was first shot and then left to be consumed by the flames. Two sons of Robert Long, an Irish groceryman, were burned to death. An infant was reported to have been shot in its mother's arms. According to one account, five men were roasted to death; according to an­ other, the dead totaled from twelve to fifteen with an equal number who were more or less dangerously wounded; still another report placed the number of victims at more than twenty. This last report approximates the total number of those who were killed throughout the entire day. The fol­ lowi:ng names of victims appeared in the local public press during the ,veek of election Monday: Joseph Allison, - Bar­ rett, George Berg, - Cassidy, John Chevers, Martin Con­ nelly, John Felden, William Graham, John Hudson, William Mouldry, Patrick and Walter Murphy, Francis Quinn, Theo­ dore Rhodes, Denis 'Riordan, Paul Rothhaupt, John Vogt, Paul Weber, and two sons of Robert Long. The childhood impressions of Bloody Monday as com­ mitted to writing by Mary Carroll (1851-1938), Sister Christine of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, provide interesting side lights.29 Her father, John Carroll, an immigrant from Dublin who had married Honora Cotter of Queenstown ( Cobh), Ireland, kept a large store in the center of the Irish district (the eighth ward) where the "principal

28 An act of the general assembly at Frankfort, approved Feb. 27, 1856, provided that "all persons, aliens and all others .... shall take as heirs and distributees of said Francis Quinn as if they had been native born citizens of this Commonwealth.... " Acts of the General Assembly (Frankfort, 1856), pp. 333-34. 29 Archives of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Nazareth, Ky. !)6 Nat-ivism in Kentucky to 1860

Irishmen" assembled in the evenings. This circumstance, together with the fact that he was a Catholic, made John Carroll a "marked character," but friends among the Protestants saved him, as his daughter recalled: "One of their number every evening for a week, in a closed carriage, took him .... to his home for the night. My father returned each morning as no man was attacked until night." Further excerpts from this seemingly reliable but reminiscent account continue : The Know-Nothings brought their cannon and placed it before our house, shouting 'Blow down John Carroll's castle of a house,' at that time the largest building in that section. Mr. Dupont,30 owner of 'The Paper Mills,' and one of themselves, stood with his negro servant in the middle door of the store and told them they would · blow it down over his dead body. They would not dare hurt him, so they moved the cannon three doors above, in front of Denis Long's house, to blow that down, but Mr. Dupont stationed himself in the gateway and dared them to shoot. The rabble left, shouting and cursing.. Not much attention was paid to me and I remember running to the different windows to watch the crowd and the fires. The Know-Nothings wore masks and were running hither and thither through the middle of the street. Mrs. Long, mother of Denis Long, saw her two sons hanged to the banister of her home, and the house burned down over them. She devoted her remaining years to piety and works of charity. I often accom­ panied her to early, daily Mass. Rhodes' son, twenty-one years of age, although a Prot­ estant, was shot down while crossing at Chapel Street. Many of the men without families borro,ved money of my father and took passage on boats leaving Louisville.

30 There were Duponts in the French colonization project of the Tarascon brothers at Shippingport and Portland. Sister Mary Ra­ mona Mattingly, The Catholic Church on the Kentucky Frontier (Washington, 1936), p. 90. Biderman and Alfred of the Delaware family of Duponts came to Louisville in 1854 and set up the paper mill mentioned here. A Bloody Election 97 Years after the death of my father, they returned and paid back the money to my mother. The next day they carted away the dead and charred bodies to the court-yard where they held a mock trial. No one would buy the ruined property, so it remained for years a blackening testimony to the bigotry of Louisville. In consideration of the fact that the narrator was a child of four years when the events described took place, her ver­ sion of affairs probably indicates memories controlled by family tradition. Nevertheless, it corresponds closely with contemporary news items: A Mr. Rhodes, in company with two friends, all Amer­ ican citizens, was quietly passing upon Main Street, near Chapel, when they were set upon by a party of ten Irishmen.... Fifteen shots were fired upon them. Rhodes was killed. An Irishman who shot Graham while he was taking care of Rhodes, an American who had been shot, was hung, but cut down before he died. We learn that some of the Germans, alarmed for their safety, have fled to the country. There was a grand evacuation yesterday. On Fifth Street, below Main, and also in the lower part of the city many of the Irish families residing there left. The bodies of a man and a woman burned, both Irish and residents on Main Street, above Eleventh, are also deposited in the courthouse. The result as far as we can learn is that fourteen men have been killed, six of whom were Americans. Three others· are expected to die. We have not been able to ascertain how many have been wounded; we have heard of about thirty more or less wounded. 31 Until midnight, the mob congregated outside the offices of the Louisville Times and Democrat, but, apparently satiated with the depredations of the day, little damage resulted beyond the breaking of window-panes and the burning of

s1 LouiS1Jille Journal, Aug. 7, 8, 1855. 98 Nativ'isni in Kentucky to 1860 the Times' office sign. In the upper part of the city, the fire raged until after one o'clock, and acts of terrorism were reported in other sections. On the following day unofficial investigations were begun in order to determine the responsibility for the outrages. With the fear of further violence deterring both native and foreign-born residents from permitting their names to be made public, authentic evidence as to the origin of the riots was vainly sought by supporters of each party. Recrimina­ tory charges ,vere circulated. The Lou,isville J o-urnal, which had promised to present its readers with the proof that the outrages were first committed by foreigners, attributed the beginning to "indiscriminate and murderous assaults com­ mitted by foreigners, chiefly Irish, upon inoffensive citizens .... at some distance from any of the voting places." These statements were substantiated by testimony allegedly sworn to before various notaries public of the city. The Louiwille Journal went further to suggest that the assaults were instigated by direct instructions of men who controlled, in large measure, the passions and were able to dictate the actions of these foreigners. 32 In reply to this blanket charge, presumably directed against the priests of the city, Bishop Spalding answered through the secular press. In restrained yet positive lan­ guage, he denied that he or any of the Catholic clergy had been instrumental, directly or indirectly, in bringing about the recent lamentable outrages. On the other hand, his voice had been uniformly for peace and, with an earnest appeal to all whom his voice would reach, he concluded: I beg to say that I entreat them, in the name of Jesus Christ, the God of peace, to abstain from all violence; to remain quietly at home or attending to their business; to keep away from all excited assemblies, and, if they think they have been injured, to return good for evil, and to pray for those who have wronged them ..•. I entreat all to pause and reflect, to commit no violence, to believe no idle rumors, and to cultivate that peace

a2 Jbid., Aug. 7, 14, 1855. A Bloody Election 99 and love which are the characteristics of the religion of Christ. We are to remain on earth but a few years ; let us not add to the necessary ills of life those more awful ones of civil feuds and bloody strife.33 The same notice was printed in full in the Louisville J o-u·rnal, whose editor denied that he wished to cast suspicion on Bishop Spalding whom he had always regarded as the friend of law and order. A communication from Archbishop Ken­ rick to the Bishop conveyed the former's syn1pathy in the "sad calamities" recently witnessed. "For a year past," the Archbishop continued, "I have felt that we ought to be prepared for martyrdom .... [but] all things are directed by that Providence which makes the malice of man sub­ 3 servient to its high counsels." ' In Democratic circles, blan1e for initiating the riots was directed not toward the unbridled rage of the mob, but toward the schemes of influential, wealthy, and enlightened officers of the so-called American councils of the city. Accusations against George Prentice were especially sharp and persistent, as the following indictment of Ben. J. Webb indicates: For a considerable time, before and after the last August election, it was plainly perceptible, that there existed in the minds of a large portion of the citizens of Louisville an intense bitterness of feeling against their Catholic neighbors. This hostility, as I thought then, and do still think, was mainly engendered through the agency of the Louisville Journal. Mr. Prentice has al­ ways exerted an almost unbounded influence in molding public opinion among a large portion of the people of Kentucky, and the recent Know-Nothing victory in this

33 Louisville Times, Aug. 9, 1855. When Bishop Spalding died as Archbishop of Baltimore in 1872, his services in behalf of peace were recalled: "In his native State many of the best years of his life were passed, and through the fitful fever of Know-Nothingism his voice alone was of the few respected and listened to by the leaders of that unhappy movement." New York Herald, Feb. 11, 1872. s4 Letters to Archbishop Spalding, Baltimore Cathedral Archives, Aug. 17, 1855, 34 J 24. 100 Nativis·m in Kentucky to 1860 State, is to be attributed, almost ,vholly, to the energy displayed by him in the canvass. Summaries of the major charges, as printed in two of the leading newspapers of Louisville, exhibited the divergence to be expected from partisan journalists. The Know-Noth­ ing opposition felt that the Common Council of Louisville, in failing to appoint additional polls or to provide extra poll books and in appointing American party election officials, shared the responsibility for the outrages with the Louisville Journal whose incendiary articles set off the con­ flagration. Not only were the polls seized, but foreigners were subjected to harsh, even violent treatment at the voting places, it was charged. The Know-Nothings, in turn, blamed the foreign-born for having instigated the violence, as they called on the public to judge "whether a victorious party that at noon was over 1,300 votes ahead, was likely to get up a riot."36 Charges that the Irish had been seen molding bullets in a cellar were offered to the public by the Journal. Conflicting factions mutually accused each other of soliciting aid from outside the city: \Ve are credibly informed that fifty-seven swaggering, armed bullies, and nearly as many boys, came over from Jeffersonville, on Monday, to aid their Know-Nothing brethren in our city. ,ve have been told that there were several Irishmen engaged in the riot who did not belong to the city, but had been summoned here for the especial purpose of aiding their countrymen in the outrages contemplated by them on Saturday night and actually perpetrated on Monday afternoon. 37

35 Letters of a Kentucky Catholic (Louisville, 1856), pp. 7-8. 36 Louisville Journal, Aug. 9, 1855. 37 Louisville Daily Democrat, Aug. 11, 1855. A number of Ken­ tuckians, it was alleged, had participated in election riots against the Germans in Cincinnati. Having been repulsed and bent on re­ venge, it was anticipated that they would be present for elections in Louisville. A Bloody Election 101

On one point only was there agreement; namely, that no justifiable cause existed for the plunder, arson, and murder of that fatal election day.

The main issue of the choice of representatives and a governor was eclipsed by the reprehensible means employed to control the vote. In the wards in Louisville where the greatest disturbance occurred, there was a noticeable dis­ crepancy between the number of potential voters and the number of actual votes cast, if the following figures from a Democratic paper are to be credited:

Voters Votes Cast First Ward ...... 1,000 111 Second Ward...... 600 62 Eighth Ward .....- ...... 620 218 2,220 39138

The final returns for the State revealed a strength suf­ ficient to bring victory to the Know-Nothing party. Of one hundred and three counties, fifty-three voted for Know­ Nothing representatives, and fifty-two for a Know-Nothing governor. The vote by counties for the seventh district was as follows:

COUNTY CONGRESS GOVERNOR Marshall Preston Morehead Clark K.N. Dem. K.N. Dem. Henry ...... 824 923 806 944 39 Jefferson •••• 4,370 2,370 4,417 2,311 Oldham ...... 424 483 424 485 Shelby ...... 1,314 602 . 1,820 611 6,932 4,378 6,967 4,35144

ss Louisville Courier, Aug. 9, 1855. 39 The City of Louisville is located in Jefferson County. • 0 Tribune Almanac (New York, 1856), p. 60. 102 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 The exactness with which the new party "slipped into the strongholds of the old time Whigs" substantiates rather con­ clusively the charge that the Whigs were going in large numbers into the Know-Nothing party.41 Forty counties which had voted as Whigs in 1852 elected the Know-Nothing ticket in 1855. In other parts of the State there were less fatal, yet serious, disturbances on -election day. The report f ro:r;n Paducah, then a city of approximately 2,500 with a small foreign contingent, suggested a miniature Bloody ~1:onday:

We never saw half so much excitement in our city as there was on Monday. The fighting commenced imme­ diately after breakfast, and continued, with scarcely any interruption, until after night. Pistols were fired, Bowie Knives used, clubs, sling shots, etc., etc., and strange to relate, no one was killed although several persons ,vere pretty severely wounded. By Monday night, at 11 o'clock, however, the city was as quiet and peaceable as we have ever seen it.

In Lexington, relative calm prevailed: The election at the Courthouse passed off quietly and ,vithout interruption. At the other city poll, there was considerable excitement and some fighting; but noth­ ing very serious.42

The attack on freedom of opinion and of elections made on Bloody Monday had more than local significance. The press, secular and sectarian, throughout Kentucky and the nation reprinted the details of the day and speculated on

n James R. Robertson, "Sectionalisn1 in Kentucky from 1855 to 1865," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, IV (1917), 51. A com­ parison of the 1852 with the 1856 presidential vote in Indiana proves that here, also, the major portion of the Know-Nothings came from the ranks of the '\Vhigs. 42 Paducah Weekly A·me·rican, Aug.. 8, 1855; Kentucky Statesma,n, Aug. 7, 1855. A Bloody Electi.on 103 the causes with results similar to those reached in Louisville; that is, for or against the Know-Nothing party as their political or religious predilections dictated. The Lexington Observer and Reporter called attention to this widespread editorial interest and to the partisan flavor of the reports: It is almost impossible to take up a paper from any section of the Union that is not filled ,vith statements in relation to the recent bloody and disastrous riots in Louisville. Never in the history of our country has so large a portion of the political press of the nation shown itself to be so completely under the control of a fierce and blinded partisan spirit, as in the last few days, while discussing these riots and detailing the horrid incidents which attended them. 43

In the state capital, the T·ri-Weekly Kentucky Yeoman reprinted a Canadian view of responsibility for the riots as ascertained by the Montreal Commercial Advertise,·: In the Louisville riots the weight of testimony throws the aggression upon the Native American; the inten­ tion was to prevent the foreign population from voting at all .... The ,veakness of democratic governments has always been found in their liability to degenerate into anarchy, the suddenness with which popular commo­ tions arise, their virulence and the paralysis of the Executive. 44

The Washington Union, organ of the Democratic party, inclined to the opinion that the responsibility lay with the Know-Nothing organization and with "a portion of the pul­ pit and an unprincipled partisan press."45 The Paducah Weekly A mer-ican, after asserting that Louisville was fast

43 Lexington Observer and Reporter, Aug. 22, 1855. 44 Tri-Weekly Kentucky Yeoman, Aug. 23, 1855, quoting the It!on­ treal Commercial Advertiser, Aug. 15, 1855. 45 Ibid., quotirig the Washington Union, Aug. 14, 1855. 104 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

· 89 88 87

·- KENTUCKY , IO ao M .. NWUI woo.-a PCll.,colltlt l'IIOJUT.. ~ ...... ,.. • ...... ,,. aw••••.. 8FJIN....,,...

''i

♦l ♦• •♦ ♦ • ♦ • •t f♦ _J __ ++J.--....t

89 88 87

Map of Kentucky reproduced by courtesy of McKnight & McKnight; sectional maps from James R. Robertson, "Sectionalism in Ken- A Bloody Election 105

-•• ~■••-- ~- L tucky from 1855 to 1865," MVHR, IV (June, 1917), 61-52, 54, with permission of the Mississippi Valley Historical Review. 106 Nati-vism in Kentucky to 1860 gaining a reputation for the facility with ,vhich she could get up a mob, added editorially: While we are no apologists for mobs, and loathe and despise them from the bottom of our heart, we can but think that the foreign population of Louisville brought this about by their o,vn acts alone. 46 From the deep South came expressions of dismay at the disgrace which the events cast upon popular institutions, at the destroying effects upon domestic peace, and at the weak­ ness ,vhich they disclosed where the nation should be strongest, in the freedom of elections and of opinion.47 A Ne,v York Catholic journal referred to the riots as "a stigma upon our country, and common justice, and our national pride."48 Elsewhere the affair was regarded as "the bar­ barity of a small detachment of a broken and routed army." One of the sanest criticisms came from Philadelphia whose citizens remembered the riots and church burnings of 1844 :•9 It is impossible now to state which party was the aggressor-though we fear both were too ready for a broil. One thing, however, is evident, that the City Government is to blame for want of foresight or effi­ ciency. If they had power to increase the number of voting places-they ought to have done it. Knowing the state of public feeling, and warned by the recent riot at Cincinnati, a large force of special police should have been preserved at all hazards-against all parties. It seems evident, however, that the City Gov­ ernment either winked at the riot, or else was deplor­ ably inefficient. 50 46 Paducah Weekly American, Aug. 15, 1855. 47 New Orleans Picayune, Aug. 19, 1855. One of the editors was Alexander C. Bullitt, a Kentuckian and a graduate of St. Joseph's College, Bardstown. 48 New York Freeman's Journal, Aug. 25, 1855. 49 Joseph L. J. Kirlin, Catholicity in Philadelphia (Philadelphia, 1909), pp. 304-29. 50 The Saturday Evening Post, Aug. 18, 1855. It is interesting to note that by act of the General Assembly, approved March 10, 1856, the number of election districts in Louisville was increased. A Bloody Election 107 That a majority of Kentuckians held similar views regarding the city's responsibility was indicated by an Act of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Ken­ tucky, approved February 29, 1860, which permitted the filing in chancery of suits for a recovery of damages incurred on Bloody Monday.51 Apparently the bill had been pending for four years, since Bishop Spalding ,vrote in March, 1856 : "The K.-N. legislature of Kentucky has prepared a bill in­ demnifying sufferers in property destroyed by mobs in the cities and towns of Kentucky. I have not yet seen the pro­ visions of the Bill, but hope it ,vill not turn out to be nugatory."52 Payment ,vith interest from the date of the riots, the amount to be. ascertained by the chancellor of the Louisville Chancery Court, was authorized. To this point the act promised a fair redress ; but, unfortunately for would-be claimants, a "proviso" appeared foreboding: "That said city shall not be compelled to pay any person ,vho, or whose ancestor, by unlawful acts engaged in the mob or riot, or by unlawful acts contributed to the destruc­ tion of his own property.... " 53 A search of the cases in which the City of Louisville ,vas made defendant in the decade following 1860 revealed that only three pertained to Bloody Monday losses ; namely, those of Patrick Flynn, Patrick Lang, and \Villiam Ambruster. 54 The petitions in equity of Messrs. Flynn and Lang were made in April, 1860; one for the recovery of $184 damages, the other for $60. In lieu of the signatures of petitioners, their marks were affixed. In the case of Patrick Lang, counsel for the city proved to the satisfaction of Mayor Crawford, no disinterested party, before whom the answer was s,vorn, that the said plaintiff by his unlaw-

51 Acts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (Frankfort, Ky., 1860), II, 475-76. 52 Spalding to Kenrick, Baltimore Cathedral Archives, March 12, 1856, Letterbook 32 A, N 23. 53 Acts of the General Assembly...• , loc. cit. 54: The old Louisville Chancery Court records are filed at the Jeffer­ son County Courthouse. 108 Na-t-iv·isrn in Kentucky t-0 1860 ful acts helped to excite and to arouse the mob and thereby contributed to the destruction of his own property.1~5 In neither bill .,vas action taken, and the amounts involved scarcely justified the expenses incurred. The matter of William Ambruster, on the contrary, was settled with more satisfaction to the plaintiff, or at least to his heir-at-law. His was the only kno,vn case where a property owner received any damages for property destroyed by the mob, though the destruction was in no small part due to the negligence of legal duties on the part of officers of the municipal corporation. Mr. Ambruster, a man of considerable business ability, who had been a resident of Louisville for a number of years prior to August, 1855, owned a brewery and a brick dwelling house on the south side of Jefferson Street, east of Wenzel. Both were "unlawfully burnt and destroyed by riotous assemblages of persons" on election day, 1855. In filing his petition the plaintiff presented an itemized list of shop equipment and household furnishings amounting to $24,075 as a bill of damages sustained, quite exclusive of the loss of profits because of the destruction of his business. 56 The depositions filed by witnesses for both parties amounted to the charge and the denial that plaintiff had stored firearms on his property and had therefore contributed to the destruction of his own property. A demurrer of the defendant denied the jurisdiction of the Chancery Court and held that the facts were insufficient to constitute a ca use of action. The case dragged on for years and until after the death of Ambruster, whereupon a compromise upon the claim was petitioned by his wife and executrix. The local press manifested a laudable civic interest in Widow Ambruster's case, spurring the City Council to take a favorable view of the petitioner's prayer. The city had manifestly failed in its duty of protecting property. It should settle the amount, therefore, apart from all political

55 Louisville Chancery Court, No. 15,806. 56 Louisville Chancery Court, No. 15,812. A Bloody ·El_ec~ion 109 considerations, "for whatever was the political feeling ,vhich caused the loss, all are ashamed of it at this distant day." Then with an encomium, perhaps not rare in 1870, the editor concluded his plea: "Ambruster was a good and thrifty citizen, who paid his taxes and was entitled to protection to his property. The city having failed to grant the protection she owed to this property, ought ~o pay for its loss."57 On March 11, 1870, there was entered in the record of state at the direction of Chancellor Thomas B. Cochran the following order of dismissal : This suit having been brought by William Ambruster for compensation for property destroyed by a mob _in 1855 and having after the death of Pltff. been revived in the name of Sophia Ambruster, Executrix; and the same having been by the Executrix compromised with the city it is therefore ordered that the same be dis­ missed agreed, and that the Plaintiff pay the costs thereof. BRAMLETTE & DURRETT A ttys. for Pltff. 58 The claim allowed by the municipal Council, twenty thousand dollars in bonds, was procured for the claimant through Colonel Reuben Durrett, one of her attorneys. 59 For days after Bloody Monday, the city feared a renewal of hostilities. Business houses in the first ward were closed, and about fifty German stone masons left their work on the customhouse because of the violence committed against their countrymen.60 In an attempt to restore and maintain order, Mayor Barbee issued a proclamation requiring all good citizens to aid the police when called upon by any of them ; "\\"arning all viciously disposed persons from assembling to do mischief to persons or property ; and recommending

57 Louisville Courier-Journal, Sept. 11, 1869. 68 Louisville Chancery Court, Order Book No. 75, March 11, 1870. 59 Louisville Courier-Journal (historical supplement), Nov. 7, 1897. The records of the Louisville Common Council stored in the attic of the City Hall are inaccessible for use at present writing. 6o Louisville Times, Aug. 8, 1855. 110 }lativ·wrn ·in Kentucky to 1860 parents and masters to keep their sons or apprentices out of the streets, especially after dark. 61 The most immediate and evident effect of the riots was. the exodus of foreigners, against ,vhom the fanatical out­ break had been directed. Press notices, however unreliable for actual numbers, suggest a more than casual emigration: "About three hundred Irish citizens left on the mailboat for Cincinnati .... not,vithstanding the assurance of the Mayor that they would be protected" ; "we have heard of four hundred German families who have nearly completed their arrangements for removing from Louisville to Kansas" ; "we . note the flight of our well-to-do German citizens to other States."62 Several emigration societies were formed among the Germans for the purpose of organizing migra­ tions to other cities, especially to 1\1:ilwaukee, St. Louis, and Chicago. 63 One notice stated that a "party of eighteen­ with their families left the city bound for Minneapolis, via Jeffersonville, Chicago and Galena."64 The Know-Nothing'press met these announcements with a summary contradiction : the Irishmen who departed by steamboat had been brought in by the Sag-Nichts; some fev,, some very fe,v indeed, respectable, honest, and honorable gentlemen may in the meantime have sought ho1nes elsewhere; a very large portion of the foreigners. ,vho thus took their departure up the river were men who had come down the river less than a week before and colonized themselves in order to vote or fight or both for the 65 anti-American party. · The cities that received these refugees ,vere enriched

a1 Louisville Journal, Aug. 8, 1855. e2 Ludwig Stierlin, Der Staat Kentucky und Die Stadt Louisville mit besonderer Berilcksichtigung de8 Deutschen Elementes (Louis­ ville, 1873), p. 171; The Catholic Telegraph and Advocate, Oct. 6,. 1855; Louisville Anzeiger, Aug. 11, 1855. 63 Louisville Anze-iger (souvenir edition), ·March 1, 1898; Stierlin,. op. c,-it., p. 173. 64 Tri-Weekly Kentucky Yeoman, Aug. 23, 1855. 65 Louisville Journal, Aug. 10, Sept. 4, 1855. A Bloody Election 111

while Louisville was impoverished by their loss and by the loss of prospective settlers ,vho cautiously turned away; for, obviously, future immigrants were deterred from settling in a city where their property might be so ill­ protected.66 Foreigners who remained in residence took precautions. The Louisville German Mutual Insurance Association was incorporated by Act of the General Assem­ bly, February 9, 1856. The following clause has special significance in the light of the costly fires of election day, 1855 : " .... for the purpose of insuring their respective dwelling houses, and such stores and places of trade or business as may be kept in their dwelling houses, and their household furniture, fixtures and merchandise, against loss or damage by fire." 67 One consequence of the property losses, it has been seen, was felt years later when the city was called upon to pay the damages of the Ambruster case. No less perceptible was the setback to the city's pros­ perity, repeatedly adverted to during the years following the riots in such phrases as : " .... results which are now crushing her business and sapping every spring of her pros­ perity"; "they [the Know-Nothings] have already blighted the prospects of the city" ; " .... whose progressive develop­ ment was suddenly interrupted" ; " .... this sudden wither­ ing up of their city's pro~perity"; "Know-Nothingism has brought this city near to bankruptcy."68 In attempting to silence the last statement which, indeed, it printed in order

66 " •••• the only effect of the temporary triumph was to give Ken­ tucky a bad name among immigrants, from which it has never recovered, as shown by the fact that in her population of two mil­ lions she has but sixty thousand persons of foreign birth within her borders." J. Stoddard Johnston (ed.) , Memorial History of Louis­ ville (Chicago, 1896), I, 133. The economic plight of Louisville was partially due, no doubt, to the depression of 1857 with its ill effects upon agriculture which reverberated in urban centers. 67 Acts of the General Assembly (Frankfort, 1856), I, 266. 68 Kentucky Statesman, May 19, 1857; Spalding to Kenrick, Balti­ more Cathedral Archives, June 20, 1857, 32 A, N 25; Louisville Anzeiger~ March 1, 1898; The Catholic Telegraph and Advocate (Cincinnati), April 26, 1856; Louisville J owrnal, March 17, 1897. 112 Na.tivisrn in Ke1itucky to 1860 to refute, the Louisville J ou·rnal described business as unusually brisk; real estate as rapidly appreciating in value; and trade full of "progress, promise, and profit." Apprais­ ing the result at a distant day, however, the Journal, now the Courier-Iournal, admitted to its columns the dictum: There can be no doubt that it [Bloody Monday] serious­ ly affected the city's prosperity, and even to this day there exists an uncertainty about the absolute freedom of religious ,vorship, which is vouchsafed to every citizen of the republic. 69 The assertion that Know-Nothingism was annoying btit not detrimental in the long run finds general confirmation ln the aftermath of the movement in Kentucky.10 When Bishop Spalding made his episcopal visitation towards the end of 1855 and again in 1856, he witnessed an aroused in­ terest in the faith. In the courthouse at Hardinsburg he preached before an attentive crowd of Catholics and Prot­ estants in answer to the charges lately proffered against the Catholic Church by the Know-Nothings. At St. Martin's Church in Meade County, the Bishop was gratified at the renewed zeal which was ascribed to the recent "persecu­ tions" by which "not only are Catholics rendered more fer­ vent, but many Protestants are stimulated to make diligent inquiry after the truth.... " 11 Crowds gathered from all the adjoining counties to hear Bishop Spalding preach at St. Michael's Church, Fairfield, where, as elsewhere, Know­ N othingism had awakened an interest which attracted crowds to attend the Catholic Church in order to hear expositions of a faith so violently abused by time-serving and interested politicians. 72 Through the medium of the press, also, the attention of the public was drawn to reasoned refutations of charges

69 Louisville Courier-Journal, Nov. 7, 1897. 1° Cf. Richard J. Purcell, The American Natwn (Boston, 1933), p. 422 n. 11 The Catholic Telegraph and Advocate, Nov. 17, 24, 1855. 12 Ibid., Oct. 18, 1856. A Bloody Election 113 that had been periodically advanced by nativists against the Catholic Church. A series of letters addressed to George Prentice, Esq.,· by "a Kentucky Catholic" (Ben. J. Webb) appeared in the Louisville Times. 13 They were written to disprove Know-Nothing slanders against Roman Catholics, and their author expressed the hope that his Protestant fellow citizens might weigh fairly the evidence presented. Patent charges were met and their implications denied: "Roman Catholic Bishops are for the most part aliens"-in reality, one-third were native born and all the foreign-born had taken the oath of allegiance ;74 "Catholic ecclesiastics, in general, are guilty of political aggression"-on the con­ trary, they had never perverted the pulpit to political pur­ poses, nor did the Catholic laity hold one-tenth of the offices of trust and profit to which thei1· numerical strength fairly entitled them ; ''the Catholic system is peculiarly uncon­ genial to our political latitude"-conversely, Christianity ad taught by the Catholic Church is not unsuited to any form of civil government, "My kingdom is not of this world."75

73 These letters were later published as the Letters of a Kentucky Catholic, The Catholic Question in Politics ( Louisville, 1856) and were reprinted in The Catholic Teleg'raph and Advocate and the New York Freeman's Journal. They were answered by Caleb W. Logan through the columns of the Louisville Journal. Ben. J. Webb, The Cente-nary of Catholicity in Kentucky (Louisville, 1884), p. 485 n. 74 Martin John Spalding, a Kentuckian by birth, was at the time Bishop of the Diocese of Louisville. u Letters of a Kentucky Catholic, pp. 37, 38, 43-45, 89. CHAPTER V THE KNOW-NOTHINGS IN POWER What would the Kno,v-Nothings in Kentucky make of their victory of August, 1855? Their men held key posi­ tions: Governor Morehead at Frankfort; John J. Critten­ den, his secretary of state, shortly to return to the United States Senate for two terms; James Harlan as attorney­ general ;1 Humphrey Marshall and five confreres, John P. Campbell, Leander l'.1. Cox, Alex I(. Marshall, Samuel F. S,vope, and \iVarner L. Under\vood, elected to the Thirty­ fourth Congress ; and the editor, George Prentice, eager to profit by the triumph that he had helped win. In addition, Kentucky Know-Nothings had attained acer­ tain national prominence through the choice of one of their members to the highest office in the Order. At a convention in Philadelphia in June, 1855, Major Edward B. Bartlett of Covington, a former Democrat and clerk of the circuit court of Kenton County, was elected president of the National Council of the Order of United Americans on the sixth ballot by a vote of ninety-four to fifty-four.2 A biographical note from his home-town paper at the time of his election indicated that for years he had been a consistent and leading member of the Baptist Church, that heretofore he had acted with the Democratic party whose national con­ vention he had attended as a delegate in 1852, and, finally, that on the question which then threatened the integrity of the Union he ,vas as "sound as a dollar."3 The oblivion to ,vhich his name has since been consigned reflects the ephem­ eral nature of the movement which he sponsored. A fe,v ,veeks after the Bloody Monday affray, the Know­ Nothings at their regular quarterly session in Louisville

1 For attorney-general Harlan's opinion on the naturalization of foreigners, cf. below, p. 141. 2 lVestern Citizen (Paris), June 15, 1855; Louisville Democrat, June 14, 1856. 3 Covington ,Journal, June 16, 1855. 114 The Know-Nothings in Poiver 115 elected Bartlett to the presidency of the state council ; Wil­ liam S. Pilcher of Louisville to the vice-presidency; and A. D. Madeira, editor of a Know-Nothing weekly, the American Sentinel published at Covington, to the secretary­ ship.4 In the first issue of his paper, Madeira had printed the American platform, an extract from the speech on naturalization made by Garrett Davis in the state constitu­ tional convention of 1849, and an editorial entitled "Our Position" in which he instructed all "Americans" to with­ hold from Catholics the administration of government : "We shall maintain that the Roman Hierarchy is such an associa­ tion [ one whose nature is invasive of the Constitution] that the liberty of conscience declared by the Constitution to the American people, is, in effect, abrogated by the Papal authorities.... " 5 Furthermore, he affirmed, the political bea1·ings of Catholics were manifested in diverse ways; as for example, in the gratuitous disposition of vacant lands among actual settlers, and in the perennial question of the common-school funds. In Kentucky, as in other states where nativism flourished for a time, the attitude of Catholics toward the public school system had been.called into question, with Bishop Spalding and editor Prentice the protagonists. Little fault can be found with the dictum of the Bishop that in this free country, a minority which feels aggrieved by the majority has a clear right, and is even compelled by duty, to state its grievances, and to continue to do so, temperately but boldly, until the wrong be redressed.6 In the mind of Bishop Spalding the public school system, especially as it was func­ tioning in Kentucky in the fifties, was manifestly a human

' T·ri-Weekly Kentucky Yeom.an, Aug. 25, 1855. General Pilcher was ,vell-enough known in national Kno"\\·-Nothing circles to be called on to address a meeting of the Order in New York. Co·vington J our­ nal, June 30, 1855. 5 American Sentinel (Covington), May 2, 1855. 6 The Guardian (Louisville), Sept. 18, 1858. Cf. John Lancaster Spalding, The Life of the Most Rev. M. J. Spalding, D.D. (New York, 1873), chapter XVI. 116 Nat-ivism· in Kentucky to 1860 organization and hence liable to "many imperfections and grievous abuses." These abuses, as the Bishop saw them, constituted a grievance in which as a citizen of the United States and of Kentucky he had no intention of passively acquiescing. The ministerial callings of the directors of public education certainly laid the system open to the suspicion of sectarian influence.1 In spite of the fact, how­ ever, that the state school system was a fixed institution, it was yet in its infancy; therefore, when could one better attempt to remedy its defects? The Reverend John Healy Heyw,ood, a Unitarian minister, native of Worcester, Massachusetts, and president of the Louisville Board of Education for fourteen years, afforded Spalding. a "providential opening" for suggesting remedies. Early in 1854, he presented a copy of the local school regula­ tions for the Bishop's opinion. This opinion was committed to writing at .the minister's request, as was indicated by the following excerpt from a letter addressed to Archbishop Kenrick of Baltimore : In answer to questions put to me by an influential member of our Common School board of trustees, and to obviate misunderstanding growing out of my previous vei-bal answer to his questions, I have at his request, written a letter to the Board of Trustees, defining my position in regard to the Common Schools. I think it likely that they will make no reply to the letter, the republican principles of which they can scarcely controvert. I thought it a providential open­ ing, and if they wish discussion, they can have it to . their hearts' content. In case you should have any documents showing what is the practice in regard to virtually separate schools in England, Ireland, Prussia, or Scotland, I would be much obliged to you, if you would send them ; or let me know where I could be

7 The office of superintendent was first discharged by Rev. Jos. J. Bullock, D.D. (Presbyterian), and after him by a line of Protestant ministers including H. H. Kavanaugh (for thirty years Bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church South); Rt. Rev. B. B. Smith (Prot­ estant Episcopal), Dr. Dillard (Baptist), R. J. Breckinridge and J. D. Matthews (Presbyterian), and G. W. Brush (Methodist). The Know-Nothings in Power 117

likely to obtain such information on the Common School system of Europe as would weigh with Prot­ estants in the present controversy. 8 Bishop Spalding's letter to the Board must have left no doubt in the minds of the trustees as to his position with regard to the common schools. First, he objected to the reading of the Bible in the school at the opening of daily sessions, because in translation and in entire books no one version could be selected which would not meet with con­ scientious objections from one or another class of the com­ munity, as he argued : In schools which are for the benefit of all, and which are supported by the money of ALL, there should be no regulation which would offend the conscience of ANY ; and this both as a matter of principle and of sound policy. · Although aware that imparting religious instruction in the common schools as then organized would be imprac­ ticable, the Bishop felt that "religious education should be left entirely to parents and pastors, who might possibly be able to supply the deficiency at home, or in their respective churches."9 In the opinion of- Prentice, parental rights would be conserved if Catholics would consent to a free choice of versions in Bible reading; moreover, the Bible ,vas to be read without comment, and no child with conscien­ tious scruples was obliged to be present. Secondly, Spalding held-in common with many religious non-Catholic citizens-that the most effectual system was one "which would make education, like other important branches of human pursuit and enterprise, a matter of free competition." Under such a plan any denomination could establish and conduct a school, so far as religious training was concerned, according to its own judgment, provided that certain specified branche~ be taught to the satisfaction of a

8 Spalding to Kenrick, April 1, 1854, Baltimore Cathedral Archives, Letterbook, 32 A, N 15. 9 Spalding's letter of March 25, 1854, The Gua1·dian, Nov. 13, 1858. 118 ~lati-v·isni in Kentucky to 1860 board of visitors empowered to examine the pupils and to report the number so taught as a basis for the pro rata distribution of the comnion-school fund.10 Thereby the State ,vould still retain the fostering care of educating youth, but the sacred rights of parents in controlling the education of their children would be respected. As a funda-­ mental principle, he urged that "Catholics believe that re­ ligion is the 'one thing necessary,' and that it is an essential part of the child's training.... " 11 This participation by religious denominations in the benefits of the public taxes ,vas interpreted by the Louisville Journal as opposition to the education of the people: Virtually the question is, a public education or no educa­ tion for the people. Left to individuals, the work will not be done. To the Church and State together it never can be committed. The State must do it, if done at all.12 To this objection Bishop Spalding replied that such a con- clusion might be justified if there were no state tax. Then, indeed, parents and churches might grow listless and in­ different in the cause of the popular education of their charges .• With a tax involved, however, all would naturally be anxious to share in the common fund created by them­ selves and open to the participation of all alike. Prentice, on the other hand, felt that such a plan would result in the prostration of anything like a common or uniform system and in a scramble for funds.13 His opponent persisted in maintaining that, "an experiment which has been tried with a success so signal and brilliant in less favored nations is certainly worthy of a trial among us."14 10 Such a compromise shared features in common with the Lowell plan, abrogated by the Massachusetts town in 1852, and the less fa­ vorable Poughkeepsie and Faribault plans of forty years later. James A. Burns, The Catholic School System in the United States (New York, 1908), pp. 285, 370 n. Cf. Daniel F. Reilly, O.P ., The School Controversy 1891-1893 (Washington, 1944). 11 The Guardian, Nov. 13, 1858. 12 Ibid., Oct. 2, 1858, quoting the Louisv-ille Journal. 13 Louisville J-0urnal, Nov. 12, 1858. 14 The Guairdian, Oct. 2, 1858. The Know-Nothings in Power 119

Finally, Bishop Spalding stated that every impartial American must readily admit that it would be a great hard­ ship, amounting in fact to an odious tyranny, to force Catho­ lics to pay taxes for the support of a system from which in conscience they could derive no advantage, and thereby force them to establish and build their own schools and employ their own teachers at enormous expense. "All we ask," he ,vrote, " .... is simply and only this, that all should be fully equal before the law, that all should be treated alike, and that no portion of the people should be taxed without receiv­ ing a benefit corresponding with the tax."·15 The reply to this proposition was that Protestants were also subject to the same double burden in supporting their own church schools. The precise effects of the prolonged discussion of the public school system cannot be ascertained. It is likely that one effect was an increased public interest in state aided and controlled education and, another, a renewed zeal among Catholics to support their own institutions. The idea of a common school system developed slo,vly in Kentucky. Its growth may be traced through various stages: the organization of the Kentucky Educational Society (1829) ; the setting apart of $850,000 for educa­ tional purposes from surplus federal government funds ( 1837) ; the Public School Act drafted by William J. Bul­ lock and passed by the legislature ( 1838) ; the appoint­ ment of the Presbyterian minister, Reverend Joseph J. Bul­ lock, as the first Superintendent of Public Instruction ( 1838) ; the elevation of the system from a creature of the legislature to a constitutional status ( 1850) . Progress in public education was retarded partially be­ cause of the demands for a participation in the school fund by the various denominations which maintained academies and more advanced schools.1- 6 It has been observed that in

15 Ibid., Nov. 13, 1858. 18 It was just such a belated appeal that Bishop Spalding made in 1858. 120 Nativis1n in Kentucky to 1860 Kentucky "the early history of higher education was bound up with the educational activities of religious bodies, par­ ticularly the Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist, and Bap­ tist settlers."17 Yet, attempts to encourage free education ,vere made from time to time. In 1840, John B. Helm as candidate for lieutenant-governor previsioned the blessings of an era of widespread popular education, as he said in part: Let us confidently look forward to the time, when habits of industry and rural life will be preferred to idleness or hazardous speculations ; when every neighborhood shall have its free school, and every child receive a business education at the public charge.18 The L00,isville Daily Democrat, in 1855, appealed for unity: We have Presbyterian schools, Methodist, Baptist, and Catholic schools and colleges. Most of the friends of education have their own views of religion and a religious education. Whether they can all unite and support a common system, is a question. Let Christian Protestants clear their skirts of this influence adverse to public schools before they point at Catholics.19 Not until after the Civil War was the public school system well-established throughout Kentucky. By that time Catho­ lics, too, were provided with better educational facilities for offering a truly Christian education to a growing Catholic population. Resuming the charges of political aggressions on the part of the Catholic hierarchy advanced several months earlier by the Covington American Sentinel, Prentice and his Louis-

11 Richard J. Gabel, Public Funds for Church and Private Schools ( Washington, 1937), p. 251. 1.s Louisville Public Advertiser, July 10, 1840. The Advertiser, es­ tablished in 1818 by Shadrach Penn, became a daily paper in 1826. It was discontinued in 1841 when Penn, eclipsed by his editorial foe, Prentice, moved to St. Louis. The Advertiser Vlas the first daily paper published in the \Vest. Thomas. D. Clark, A History of Ken­ tucky (New York,1937), pp. 340-41. 19 Louisville Daily Democrat, March 24, 1855. The Knoiv-Nothings in Power 121 ville Journal ,vere met with the challenge that the charges be specifically proved : "Being political, as you say, they must consist either in overt acts against the Constitution and Ia,vs, or else treasonable endeavors on the part of the hierarchy tending to the subversion of the Constitution, and to rendering the laws inoperative."20 The challenger, Ben. J. Webb, the "Kentucky Catholic," forthwith endeavored to point out what he termed the misrepresentations penned by Prentice ; namely, that the Catholic system is "peculiarly uncongenial to our political latitude," that the Catholic laity are subservient to the clergy with reference to the fran­ chise, and that the Pope is unceasingly invading the natural and indefeasible rights of men guaranteed by the Consti­ tution of Kentucky. All of the editor's articles were permeated, so Webb declared, with the intense selfishness of Americanism, most inconsistent with the generally re­ ceived idea of Christian charity : To be an American is a very good thing, and so I esteem it; but it does not necessarily carry with it a hatred of all that is not American.21 This defense and counterattack were followed by more attacks in the Louisville Jourrwl in which allegat~ons more puerile than adroit were advanced, such as charging a well­ kno,vn academy conducted by the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth near Bardstown with harsh treatment of a stu­ dent who had refused to receive the sacrament of penance. "The Miller Fable," as the incident was styled in a Louis­ ville paper, ran as a feature article for a few days during which the Protestant students of the Academy loyally under­ took the defense of their Alma Mater in an open letter to the Bardstown Gazette. 22

20 Louisville Courier, quoted by The Catholic Telegraph, Sept. 8, 1855. 21 The Catholic Telegraph, Sept. 22, 1855. 22 Cf. Sister Mary de Lourdes Gohmann, Political Nativi.Bm in Tennessee t,o 1860 {Washington, 1938), p. 156. The Catholic Tele­ g·raph printed an account of the affair in its numbers of March 12 122 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 At the sessions of the National Council of the Know­ Nothing Order in New York in June, 1856, presided over by Edward Bartlett, Kentuckians were represented by a dele­ gation second to none in numbers, although the total attendance was admittedly small. Two Kentucky Congress­ men, Humphrey Marshall and Warner Lewis Underwood, came up from Washington for the occasion, and three other delegates including George Prentice were present with their credentials when the meeting was called to order on the opening day. 23 From the meager reports in the New York Times one might conclude that the two days' sessions were dull, a token of the languishing state of the Order, that the proceedings were of insufficient consequence to warrant a detailed account, or that the rule of secrecy had been re­ spected. The question of secrecy had come up for discussion and was one of the items which found its way into the press. Marshall appeared as the most persistent advocate of the policy to abandon secrecy. He could not understand how the party could present itself to the country as a national party unless it was "homogeneous in all its parts." The idea of having a secret party in New York and a public party in Kentucky was to him an absurdity. He favored a resolution, theref ore, to present the American party to the country not as an order, nor as a society, but "as a broad, comprehensive, conservative national party, standing, like other political parties, openly before the country, and inviting into its fellowship all who adopt its sentiments and participate in its convictions."24 After re-electing Bartlett to the presidency for the ensuing year, the meeting was adjourned. In the nation's capital, attention was focused anew on the slavery question by a Kentuckian, Representative Leander M. Cox, with the expressed intention of widening the gulf between the American party and the abolitionists. and 28, 1857. Shortly before this, the Good Shepherd nuns ~ad been annoyed by threatening letters sent by the Know-Nothings. 23 New York Times, June 4, 1856. 2• Jbid .• June 5, 1856. The Knuw-Notkings in Power 123 Some twelve months earlier, Cox had said that the accusa­ tion of abolitionism against Know-Nothingism was unfounded: "It is all a bugbear, held out to frighten south­ ern men, and force them into a different political direction from that which they have long pursued."25 The speaker also took the opportunity to deny that his party was hostile to religious liberty. As for himself, he would vote for a Catholic as soon as for anybody else when he was convinced that "he is not at all affected in his political conduct by the conduct of his superiors, and the obedience which he gives to the precepts of his church."26 That he was not to be con­ vinced, a speech before the· House in July, 1856, bore witness: But the Pope claims that he possesses the right and power to guide the conscience of every member of the Church in any and all conflicts with the temporal and civil authorities under which he may live, and to dis-· pense with his obligation to obey the laws and civil magistrates of the country whenever he (the Pope) shall determine that obedience to the law and magistrate would be contrary to the interest of Holy Church; and whenever the Pope shall determine that any law enact­ ed by the legislative power of the Government is con­ trary to the interest of the Church, he can command his subjects to refuse obedience and they must obey him, he being supreme director of the consciences, and clothed with a higher authority than the temporal magistrate. 21 During the same Thirty-fourth Congress, an honored son of Kentucky, Senator Crittenden, presented a petition oppos­ ing the facility of access to citizenship which the existing naturalization laws afforded aliens and praying for a change : "I think _it is the cor.amon opinion of this country that Am_erican citizenship has been made too cheap-a price­ less thing in itself, it is given to all who ask it."28 The

25 Congressional Globe, 33rd Congress, 2nd session, Appendix, Jan. 11, 1865, p. 72. 26 Ibid., 34th Congress, 1st session, Appendix, Dec. 21, 1855, p. 41. 21 Ibid., 34th Congress, 1st session, Appendix, July 25, 1856, p. 1138. 28 Ibid., 34th Congress, 1st session, Aug. 16, 1856, p. 2167. 124 Nativi.s1n in Kentucky to 1860 motion was tabled since it had been offered too late in the session for action. In the approaching presidential campaign of 1856, the American party, although considerably weakened by a breach between Northern and Southern Americans over the slavery issue, hoped to consolidate its gains nationally.29 Kentucky's share in the effort was considerable, although unsuccessful. In preparation for the national convention of the Know-Nothing party scheduled for Philadelphia, February 22, a press campaign, a state convention, and local meetings were conducted. A mass meeting in Louis­ ville resolved that the vital qualification for a candidate was that he be "anti-Nebraska." Prentice was quoted as warn­ ing that, "if the Know-Nothing party in the North and in the South cannot nationalize itself by the adoption and main­ tenance of principles co-extensive with the whole Union, its decline will be as rapid as has been its rise."30 The protracted delay in choosing a speaker and, hence, in organizing the House of Representatives in Congress elicited the attention of the Kentucky legislature. An American party caucus at Frankfort attributed the dilatory action to an effort of the Republican and Democratic parties to make political capital out of the slavery agitation. 31 The Demo­ cratic press assigned the failt1r.e to organize to factional­ ism in the American party, as it commented: .... alas for the great National American party! There they are in Congress-two _factions, as before--a majority of them voting for Campbell and Banks, abolitionists, and a small minority of some twenty or thirty voting for Marshall, Fuller, and others. Why can't they unite on some good brother and make him Speaker at once. 32 29 In southern Indiana, the party conducted a vigorous campaign in which "American orators from Kentucky assisted." Carl F. Brand, ''The History of the Know-Nothing Party in Indiana," Indiana Magazine of H~tory, XVIII (1922), 283. so Louisville Times, Jan. 11, 1856. 31 C01Ji.ngton Journal, Jan. 12, 1856. 32 Louisville Times, Jan. 11, 1856. Tke Know-Nothings in Power 125 In the face of the observation of Governor Morehead that "the same fell spirit of fanaticism which has produced schisms in other parties has done its work here also," a reso­ lution was adopted to the effect that the American party alone stood on the true conservative ground on which the battle against sectionalism should be fought and could be \VOll.33 In Frankfort the Commonwealth endeavored to create atmosphere for the coming state convention with an editorial on the "Catholic Church and Civil Liberty," with a report of the speech of Garrett Davis to the Grand Council of the American Order, and, more importantly, with the platform of the Nativist party.34 Delegates from sixty-six counties, representing the most influential members of the Know­ Nothing Order in Kentucky, were present for the opening session, January 23. Grand President Bartlett presided and Reverend Cadwallader Lewis of the Buck Run Baptist Church was chosen as grand chaplain. Among those whose credentials were accepted were some whose names figured conspicuously from the beginning of the nativistic move­ ment in Kentucky and others who had recently risen to prominence: Judge George Robertson, W. S. Pilcher, A. D. Madeira, A. T. Burnley, and E. B. Bartlett. That Kentucky Americans hoped to play no secondary role in national affairs, one of their first resolutions certified: Resolved, That we present the Honorable Garrett Davis to the . National Nominating Convention of the American Party, as a suitable candidate for the Presidency, at the ensuing Presidential Election. 35

3 3 Covington J ou:rnal, Jan. 12, 1856. 34 Commonwealth (Fra~kfort), Jan. 23, 1856. 35 Ibid., Jan. 24, 1856. Although the Biog·raphical Directory of the America.n Congress, p. 884, states that Davis declined the Ameri­ can party nomination, he actually appeared as Kentucky's nominee at the national convention in Philadelphia and there received twelve votes. Cf. below, p. 131. 126 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 The selection was a judicious one. It is unlikely that Ken­ tucky could have yielded a more consistently anti-foreign, anti-Catholic candidate. In this respect, however carefully his_ record should be scrutinized, the opposition would find no flaw. In the late state constitutional convention Davis, who claimed that it was as a professed Native American that he had served eight years in Congress, further iden­ tified himself ,vith the Native American movement when he said: Native Americanism is not a mushroom of yesterday. It dates back in the United States several generations; and has the weight of illustrious names to sanction it. To repel, in some degree, the imputations cast upon it, that it originates in small insignificant adventures, I will read to the convention a fe,v extracts.... 36 During this same convention, it will be recalled, Davis set forth his anti-Catholic views quite at length, and offered the resolution to restrict the right of suffrage among naturalized citizens. In 1851, his qualifications received national recognition when the Order of United Americans proposed him for office, with the comment concerning him and his running mate: "Both of these are gentlemen of ability, and are widely known as able and consistent advocates of their party." 37 Notwithstanding the eminent qualifications of Davis as candidate of the American party, there were some who pre­ ferred John Crittenden who had gone over to the Know­ Nothings upon the downfall of the Whig party. Although a national figure and a militant advocate of restricting the privileges of aliens, especially with regard to their rights to the public lands, Crittenden had not engaged in open denunciation of Catholics in which Davis always specialized. Certainly, the prestige of John J. Crittenden's name, his talents, his respectability had gone far towards building up the Know-Nothing party in Kentucky. In fact, he was

36.Debates and Proceedings (Frankfort, 1849), pp. 1002-3. 31 The Republic (New York, Sept. 1851), II, 143. The Know-Nothings in PouJe-r 127 credited ,vith having "given it his consent to live."38 As control passed from the hands of the moderate and conser­ vative Whigs and was assumed by religious bigots, they spurned Crittenden and chose Davis. In the metaphor of the Louisville Times: "in this effervescence of the political elements, the scum will be floated to the surface, and the solid and conservative men of the party will go down as Crittenden has done."39 In Washington, meanwhile, Crit­ tenden's popularity had suffered no reverse: The friends of Mr. Crittenden are certainly most active among those of the 'National American' party-aspirants at this point. Indeed, he alone of his party ·appears to have in Washington a well drilled, energetic and dis­ creet band of advocates and adherents .... An effort is certainly being made here to induce the Republican party leaders to discountenance e:ff orts to make a nomination of some one standing on their platform, against Mr. Crittenden. This movement, by the by, is rather on the part of lukewarm Republicans than on that of Mr. C's immediate friends and supporters, who are too sagacious men, we take it, to entertain the idea that he can be supported by the Republicans without giving pledges which will strip him of the support of every man who honestly favors the National American party-creed. 40 The "evident slight" which Crittenden had received in the preference of Davis would eventuate in serious consequences for the party, it was believed: "Rely upon it, he is the head and front, the heart and soul of the organization -about Frankfort, and after what has transpired, both his followers and himself are bound to cool off ."41 But Crittenden, very likely a,vare of the sentiment in favor of Davis, had indicated, in a letter to A. T. Burnley from Washington, his intention to support him : And of all the persons who have been named for that high office, I prefer our friend Davis. I would throw

as LouiS1Jille Times, Feb. 2, 1856. 59 Ibid. ,o Washington Sta't", Feb. 7, 1856. n Ibid., Feb. 13, 1856. 128 Nat·ivism in Kentucky to 1860 no obstacle in his way to a nomination, and would support that nomination with all the little power or influence I may have. Mr. Davis's friends and mine are to a great extent the same, and I hope they may remain so, and that no paltry jealousy will be a1lowed to produce any alienations. 42 The presidential nominee having been elected, the state council proceeded to confirm delegates to the national con­ vention; namely, George Prentice and E. B. Bartlett with Leander Cox and Thomas Todd as alternates.43 In the meantime, Know-Nothing members of the legisla­ tive committee on federal relations gained some publicity for the objectives of their party by publishing a resolution concerning the foreign-born: Resolved, That we condemn the transmission to our shores of felons and paupers, and, while we recognize as brothers those foreigners who, from love of liberty or hatred of oppression, have sought an asylum in our midst, we are convinced that it is detrimental to the best interest of the country that the foreign immigra­ tion should be, as ,ve believe it now is, greater than can be conveniently absorbed by the native population ; and we are, therefore, in favor of a radical revision and modification of the laws regulating immigration and naturalization. 44 The Democrats had assembled some ,veeks earlier in Frankfort to appoint delegates to the forthcoming national convention in Cincinnati. The occasion furnished an oppor­ tunity to adopt resolutions censuring the Know-Nothing party as "bigoted enemies to religious liberty, and foes to our constitution, our laws and our free government." Deny­ ing that they recognized any distinction among citizens of the United States based upon the aristocratic principle of birth, the Democrats denounced as dishonest the practice

• 2 Mary C. Coleman (ed.), The Life -of John J. Crittenden. (Phila­ delphia, 1871), II, 120-21. f 3 Reve1·end Robert Breckinridge had been the choice of Davis. A. T. Burnley to Crittenden, Jan. 28, 1856, Crittenden Correspond­ ence. • 4 Covington Journal, Jan. 26, 1856. The Know-Nothings in Power 129 of subjecting naturalized citizens to the full burdens while refusing them the full benefits of American citizenship.45 Judge George Robertson, lawyer, professor at Transylvania University,4'6 and a Know-Nothing of considerable repute, drafted a counterresolution which was adopted : Resolved, That the charge of factious agitation and· hostility 'to civil and religious liberty,' recklessly made against the American Party by a Democratic caucus at the National Capitol, and echoed by a late Democratic convention at our own State Capitol, comes with a bad grace from leaders of a sinking party, standing on an anti-Union platform, and encouraging foreign tyranny over the minds of American citizens; and that the charge, thus denounced in the form of party resolu­ tions, is an unfounded calumny on a large majority of the native born citizens of Kentucky, and a majority of the same class in other States, and can truly be con­ sidered only as the offspring of either inexcusable ignorance or a selfish ambition for unrighteous power.41 During the sessions of the Democrats, the August elec- tions in Louisville were instanced as a glaring fraud upon the elective franchise instigated by a "secret oath-bound, jacobinical society, reproducing in America the savage scenes that stained the supremacy of their kindred frater­ nities in the French Revolution."48 Assuredly, the excesses of Bloody Monday had gone far to discredit the Know­ Nothings, but if there still remained conservative Southern Whigs who sincerely believed that the mission of the Know­ Nothing party was to preserve the Union and silence the slavery agitation, the Democrats would summon every pos­ ~ible proof to dissuade them. No little evidence was at hand.

45 Louisville Times, Jan. 11, 1856. 46 Chartered by the Virginia Legislature in 1783, Transylvania Seminary united. with Kentucky Academy in 1795 to form Transyl­ vania University. This venerable institution which dominated Ken­ tucky education for nearly half a ce.ntury is today active in the educational field and is known as Transylvania College. Cf. F. Gar­ vin Davenport, Ante-Bellum Kentucky (Oxford, Ohio, 1943), pp. 37- 49. 41 Commonwealth, Jan. 24, 1856. 48 Louisville Times, Jan. 24, 1856. 130 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

The Third, or Union, Degree in which Know-Nothings ,vere to pledge unswerving loyalty to the Union had been proposed by a Southern delegate to an earlier national convention in Cincinnati, though it was looked upon with suspicion by antislavery men. Could any party silence the slavery agitation? The twelfth section of the party plat­ form of 1855 which upheld the existing laws of slavery had been omitted in the new platform of 1856, and a neutral policy adopted which was not completely acceptable to either Northern 01" Southern delegates. 49 Alluding to the bolting of Northern delegates over the twelfth section, Representative Cox from Kentucky avowed that he "would rather vote for Archbishop Hughes for the Presidency, than for any one of those who refused to acquiesce in the twelfth section.... " 50 What has Know-Nothingism done for the South? mused "a Kentucky Catholic" : It has only given aid and comfort to the enemies of the South. In the North it has thrown the weight of its influence in favor of the antislavery fanaticism; and in the South it has sought to divide the people upon issues manufactured for the occasion by the leaders of . the movement in the sole hope of being able thereby to promote their own selfish ends, regardless of the momentous question which abolitionism is forcing on us, and which should unite us all as one man. 51 There ,vas little possibility of unity in a party which held such divergent views; to wit, proslavery and proscription of Catholics and foreigners in Philadelphia; abolition and proscription of Catholics, but admission of foreigners, in Cleveland; proslavery and proscription of foreigners, but admission of Catholics, in Louisiana; with Louisville play­ ing the most infamous part with some councils standing for full proscription features, others admitting Protestant for-

49 Carroll J. Noonan, Nativism in Connecticut (Washington, D. C., 1938), p. 276. 5° Congres8ional Globe, 34th Congress, 1st session, Appendi.x, Dec. 20, 1855, p. 31. 51 The Catholio Telegraph, June 7, 1856. Tke Know-Notkings in Poiver 131 eigners a~d still others, American Catholics. 52 Indeed, it ,vas alleged, "they totally disagree in the Southern States ; and, clearly, their disagreement in the South must, for folks in their right mind, upset any conclusion to be drawn from their alleged agreement in the opposite region."53 After serious efforts to nationalize the party, chiefly by adopting a neutral policy with regard to slavery, Know­ Nothing delegates assembled in their national nominating convention in Philadelphia, February 22, 1856. Ken­ tucky's nominee, Garrett Davis, fared badly with only twelve votes from Massachusetts, Virginia, Tennessee, Penn­ sylvania, and Kentucky. Five of the twelve votes were from Massachusetts. A Democratic organ of Louisville calling attention to this "unnatural position" occupied by Kentucky, which since 1828 had voted in presidential elections with Massachusetts and other Ne,v England states, suggested that the time was ripe for a change: "we think every indication is favorable for a change in the political character of Kentucky."54 As the balloting progressed, Bartlett changed his vote from Davis to Fillmore whom he thought acceptable to all Kentucky.55 Fillmore, with Andrew Donel­ son of Tennessee as his running mate for the vice-presi­ dency, won the nominations with 179 votes. However well­ satisfied the Know-Nothings may have been with their candidates, who were also endorsed by the remnant of the Whigs, they could only view with alarm the lack of unanimity within their own ranks over the slavery issue. The platform of the new Republican party, lead by John C. Fremont in the campaign of 1856, sponsored four freed oms : "free soil, free speech, free labor, free men."

52 Louisville Times, July 19, 1855. 53 fbid., Jan. 27, 1855. 54 lbid., March 11, 1856; for a lucid explanation of the view that there was nothing "unnatural" about this alliance between Northern and Southern conservatism, cf. Arthur C. Cole, The Whig Pa,rty of the South (Baltimore, 1914), pp. 341-42. ss Covington Journal, March 8, 1856. 132 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 The Democrats with James Buchanan at their head and the Kentuckian, John C. Breckinridge as partner, advocated squatter sovereignty, condemning the Know-Nothings and promising an asylum to the oppressed of every nation. The Know-Nothings ,vith ex-President Fillmore as nominee offered a vague platform designed to attract old-time Native Americans, anti-Catholics, and both proslavery and anti­ slavery men. · Finally, the Whigs resolved that "without adopting or referring to the peculiar principles of the party which has already selected Millard Fillmore as their candi­ date, we look to him as a well-tried and faithful friend of the Constitution and the Union ...." 56 The leading argument used by the Democrats in their bid for the votes of the vacillating Whigs has been described by Professor Cole. Since there was a strong feeling in the South that Fillmore could not be elected, a vote for him would virtually mean a vote for the Republican Fremont. Consequently, many Southern Whigs abandoned Fillmore for Buchanan. In Kentucky, the historian of the Whig party in the South further noted that Crittenden canvassed for Fillmore and Donelson, while the old-line Whigs, Wil­ liam Preston and James B. Clay, joined the Buchanan supporters. 57 In Congress, James B. Clay's Democratic allegiance occasioned some not entirely fanciful theorizing about his illustrious father: I might well ask here, sir, what right have the cham­ pions of the Know-Nothing party to take upon them­ selves the defense of Mr. Clay at this juncture? I have no doubt that, if living today, he would be like his son, James B. Clay, cooperating with the Democratic party; for in the last speech that he ever made to the people ,vho had so long honored him, he stated in substance, that whenever the Whig party was found degenerating into a mere faction, he would cooperate with that party v,hich ,vas national and conservative in character.58

56 Kirk H. Porter, National Party Platf-0rms (New York, 1924), p. 51. 57 Cole, The iVhig Party . ... , p. 324. 58 Congressional. Globe, 34th Congress, 1st session, Appemlix, July Tke Know-Nothings in Power 133 American demonstrations and Fillmore ratification meet­ ings were held throughout the State with George Prentice and Roger Hanson, a Know-Nothing elector, as prominent canvassers. 59 In Congress; Crittenden viewed the approach­ ing election in the light of foreign influence. Since the presidency was an office which none but an American could hold, "it was never intended that any but Americans should confer it." He beheld with alarm what he considered the "stock market" aspect of elections : "The candidates are rated as stock in market. 'Whom is the German vote going for?' Today it is supposed for Buchanan; next day for Fremont; the . next day all go against Mr. Fillmore.' " 60 Attention had previously been drawn in Congress to the influence which the "free Germans" of Louisville had long planned to exert in the elections of 1856 : The free Germans of the Union have found it necessary to organize themselves for the purpose of being able to exercise a political activity proportionable to their number and adapted to their principles. The free Germans furthermore indulge in the hope that it will be possible to form a powerful reform party, embrac­ ing all who want that liberty now so much endan­ gered .... They wish, after having completed their organization, to establish, with the aid of their liberal­ minded fellow-citizens, such a power of votes as to be able, in 1856, to decide the victory in favor of true reformers. LoUISVILLE, KENTUCKY, March, 185461 In preparation for the election day in Louisville the Mayor called upon Bishop Spalding to use his influence in behalf of

28, 1856, "Speech of Hon. H. C. Burnett of Kentucky," p. 978. The editor of the Kentucky Statesm,a-n (Lexington), Nov. 30, 1858, made a similar conjecture that Clay would have voted for the Democratic nominees in 1856. 69 One schedule included twenty-three towns, among them: Shelby­ ville, Taylorsville, Elizabethtown, Bardstown, Springfield, Lebanon,. Danville. C011tmonwealth, June 27, 1856. 6° CongTessicmal Globe, 34th Congress, 1st session, Appendix, Aug. 16, 1856, p. 2167. 411 Ibid., June 16, 1856, p. 1411. 134 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 law and order. Complying with the request, the latter issued a card to the public, similar to the one of 1855, imploring all to curb undue excitement and to cultivate those kindly feelings of brotherly love ,vhich the Gospel so strong­ ly inculcates, as he added: While it is clearly not our province to interfere with the political discussions of the day, it is surely competent for us, under present circumstances earnestly to exhort all our fello,v citizens to claim nothing which the la,vs do not secure to them, to exercise even their undoubted civil rights with due forbearance, and moderation, scrupulously respecting the feelings and rights of others, and, in general, to exhibit themselves as good citizens by a strict compliance with all the requirements of la,v.62 Election day was unmarred by the outrages of the preceding year. The Democrats, their prestige raised in Kentucky by the presence of John C. Breckinridge as Buc~anan's running mate, carried the State for the national ticket for the first time in twenty-eight years.63 While the American party showed waning power, yet it was able to poll 67,416 votes for Millard Fillmore, as opposed to 74,642 for James Buchanan; and, in Jefferson County, whose county seat is Louisville, the Know-Nothings lost none of their earlier strength. Fillmore received relatively the same majority over Buchanan that the Know-Nothing nominee for Congress had received over the Democratic nominee in the infamous Bloody Monday election. The vote ran : American Party, Fillmore, 4,982, and Marshall, 4,370 ; Democratic Party, Buchanan, 2,972, and Preston, 2,360.64 Victory for the Democrats naturally evoked resentment on the part of the opposition which, in one instance at least, ascribed the outcome of the election to the naturalized citi­ zens' votes. The editor of the Covington Journal felt that

6 2 Nov. 1, 1856, Clipping Book No. 2, p. 63, Archives of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth. · 63 Jackson had received the vote of Kentucky in 1828. 6 4 Tribune Almanac (1855-68), p. 52. The Know-Nothings in Power 135 the election in question should have clearly demonstrated to the minds of the masses the imperative necessity of a revision of the naturalization laws, "unless they are pre­ pared to ground arms and submit everything to the tender mercies of freshly landed foreigners, and their desperate leaders."65 Bishop Spalding in alluding to the same contest remarked that "Protestant ministers became generally strong political partisans, and made their pulpits resound with impassioned political harangues, often verging on the weapon of bitter denunciation of the Catholic Church and Catholics as enemies of free institutions, in an effort to disfranchise United States citizens.66 In the choice of Representatives to the Thirty-fourth Con­ gress, Kentucky Know-Nothings retained a majority of six out of ten. While their identity was disguised under the classification, "Republican," not one denied that he had pro­ cured his seat in the House as a Know-Nothing, or American. In order to prove his statement that among the 234 members of the House, 120 were elected as Know-Nothings, Repre­ sentative Samuel A. Smith of Tennessee had the roll called. The following Kentucky Representatives, designated as Kno,v-Nothings, or Americans, offered no objections: John P. Campbell, Warner L. Underwood, Humphrey Marshall, Alex K. Marshall, Leander M. Cox, and Samuel F. s,vope. Had the influence of these men in behalf of the American party been proportionate to their local reputation or, in sev­ eral cases, to their national renown, it would have been im­ pressive, indeed. John· Pierce Campbell, Jr. (1820-1888), a native Kentucky lawyer, served as president Qf the Henderson and Nashville Railroad after one term in Con­ gress and devoted the latter years of his life to his large

65 Covington Journal, Nov. 29, 1856. 66 These remarks appeared in a note in the published Lectures on th·e Evidences of Catholicity (p. 415) delivered by Bis~op Spalding in the Cathedral at Louisville.· First published in 1847, the above citation is taken from the revised edition of 1866. 136 Nativ·ism in Kentucky to 1860

landed estates.67 Warner Lewis Underwood (1808-1882), uncle of liberal Senator Oscar W. Underwood of tariff fame, ,vas a graduate of the University of Virginia, a member of the Kentucky assembly, Congressman of the American party during the Thirty-fourth and Thirty-fifth Congresses, and consul at Glasgow (1862-1864). The most prominent mem­ ber of the group, Humphrey Marshall (1812-1872), West Point graduate, Whig member of Congress for two terms, minister to China (1852-1854), American party Repre­ sentative in Congress ( 1855~1859) , and a brigadier general in the Confederate forces, had on several occasions addressed Congress in the interests of his party. In the House on December 18, 1855, Marshall, after asserting that he favored the largest liberty of conscience and religion for every Catholic, added : .... if you will exhibit to me a Catholic who believes that he owes a political allegiance-concealed, if you choose, under the term of ecclesiastical rule or other rule-to a spiritual master beyond the seas higher than the duty he owes to the Constitution, I neither vote for that man, nor support him, nor entertain him for any political station.68 Less consequential than Humphrey Marshall was his fellow Congressman Alexander Keith Marshall (1808-1884), a graduate of the medical department of the University of Pennsylvania in 1844, and a member of the Kentucky Consti­ tutional Convention of 1849. Leander M. Cox ( 1812-1865) ,69 who served consecutive terms in the House as a ·Whig and a Know-Nothing and whose views have been heretofore noted, and Samuel Franklin Swope (1809-1865) of Bourbon County, who was several times a member of the state assem-

81 This and the following sketches are based upon the Biographical Directory of the American Congress. 68 Congressional Globe, 34th Congress, 1st session, Dee. 18, 1~55, p. 49. 69 It has been noted that Leander Cox spent much of the 34th Congress making violent speeches against · Catholicism, "to no ap­ parent purpose other than to satisfy the constituents who had placed him in office." Billington, Proustant Crusade, p. 409. · The Kn

10 Congressional Globe, 34th Congress, 1st session, Appendix, July 1, 1856, p. 717. 71 Ibid., March 14, 1856, p. 656. 72 Ibid., Aug. 16, 1856, p. 2167. In this hostility to the foreign­ born, Crittenden shared the suspicions of Clay whom he supported for twenty-five years. 138 Na.t-i·vism in Kentucky to 1860 self, had been passed over for the office, "spurned in his old age by the party which he [had] built up and by the men into whose political bodies he [had] breathed the breath of life."13 The Louisville Times attributed his overthrow to his refusal to proscribe Roman Catholics. This interpretation had supporting evidence. As a member of the legislature, Crittenden had furthered the cause of Catholic education in l{entucky by favoring the grant of a charter to the Nazareth Literary and Benevolent Institution conducted by the Sis­ ters of Charity of Nazareth. 74 His speeches in behalf of the Know-Nothing party had been uniformly anti-foreign rather than anti-Catholic, and it was believed that it was due to his tempe19 ing influence that the Know-Nothing lodges were saved from being solely a refuge for religious bigots. At no time did this statesman exhibit greater enthusiasm for the party that had harbored him since the dissolution of the Whigs than at the last national meeting of the Know­ Nothing Council, called to order in Louisville on June 3, 1857, by President E. B. Bartlett of Covington with Blanton Duncan as secretary pro tem.15 Between eighty and a hun­ dred delegates representing thirteen states were reported in attendance.76 With pertinacious loyalty to a dying cause

7a Louis-ville Times, Feb. 2, 1856. 74 Ann Mary Critte_nden, daughter of the Senator by his first wife, Sallie 0. Lee, was graduated from Nazareth Academy in 1826. She later married Chapman Coleman and compiled the life of her father in two volumes. The noted Ben Hardin also had supported the bill to grant a corporate charter to Nazareth with the incontrovertible argument: "While so much has been done for the education of males, shall nothing be done for females who form so interesting and im­ portant a portion of the com1nunity?" Anna B. McGill, The Sisters of Charity of Naza·reth, Kentucky (New York, 1917), p. 50. 75 Duncan had been chairman of the compaign committee in the notorious election of 1855, and it has been said of him that while he may not have counseled the brutality and the unlawful interference with the election, he certainly accepted the issue as it was, and suc­ ceeded in having his man elected. Louisville Courier-Journal, Nov. 7, 1897. 16 Kentucky Statesman, June 5, 1857. The Kn

11 Louisville Journal, June 4, 1857. 18 This remark of Crittenden and the ones immediately following are from the Louisville J o·u:rnal, June 4, 1857. 140 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 tion laws, to which were affixed the signatures of delegates from New York, Maryland, Indiana, Missouri, Michigan, Arkansas, Connecticut, Mississippi, Ohio, Illinois, the Dis­ trict of Columbia, and from Kentucky, John Crittenden, the "adopted member." The opposition press presented a less favorable picture of the convention. Agreeing that their most important act, "if any action of so insignificant a faction can claim impor­ tance," was the readoption of the platform of 1856, a Lexington editor79 declared that while he was present the delegates were engaged in a heated discussion of the pro­ priety and policy of continuing the Know-Nothing organiza­ tion : " 'To be or not to be' was the question, and upon either side found its warm advocates. Thus the wrangling ,vent on with v1hat result we do not know."80 Bartlett, although he begged to be released after a period of two years as president, was re-elected for the ensuing year and the meeting was formally adjourned, June 4, to meet again at the call of the Executive Committee.81 An Indiana reporter for the New Albany Tribune pre­ sented the f ollo,ving explanation which corresponds with the traditional belief that the oaths and degrees of the Know­ Nothing Order were abolished at this convention : The usefulness of the national council had ended with the defeat of Fillmore, so the members now decided to adjourn it forever. A new plan of organization was adopted in which there was no provision for a grand council. The party in each state and territory was left to organize as it saw fit. The national officers were elected for the ensuing year and a national central com­ mittee of thirteen was provided for, with power to reconvene the council if the need for it arose. 82

79 T. B. Monroe, Jr. 8° Kentucky Statesman, June 5, 1857. st Loui8ville Journal, June 4, 1857. 82 Carl F. Brand, "The History of the Know-Nothing Party in Indiana," Indiana Magazine ,of History, XVIII (1922), 295. CHAPTER VI THE DECLINE OF KNOW-NOTHINGISM

The Know-Nothing party ceased to be a potent national force after the defeat of 1856, although locally the party died slowly and with occasional signs of resurgence. One of the last serious efforts to restrict legally the rights of naturalized citizens in Kentucky followed the local elections of 1857. The case arose in Lexington when James Dudley, one of the judges of election, refused to receive the vote of John Morgan, a citizen naturalized under the Act of Con­ gress (1802) by the city court of Lexington in July, 1857. From the adoption of the Constitution of Kentucky in 1792, naturalized citizens had enjoyed the elective franchise immediately upon the issuance of their final papers. This privilege was recognized generally by the courts of the State until the wave of anti-foreignism in the fifties threatened its continuance. Foremost among those who contested this privilege and who even questioned the power of courts of record to naturalize were Kentucky's attorney-generalJ James I-Iarlan, and Judge George Robertson, both Know­ Nothings of local reno\vn.1 Harlan, on one occasion, had denied the claim of the Campbell Circuit Court that the Mayor's court of Covington had the po,ver to grant citizenship to aliens.2 On another occasion, the attorney-general had asserted that a residence of t,vo years in Kentucky after final naturalization should be required of every former alien. 3 In the case of John Morgan, noted above, action was brought in the Fayette Circuit Court against the judge of the election for denying Morgan the privilege of voting. Dudley, the judge, filed a demurrer to the plaintiff's petition 1 For identification of Harlan and Robertson, cf. .above, pp. 49, 129 . 2 Covington Journal, July 21, 1855. The votes of certain Newport (Campbell County) citizens who had obviously been naturalized in Covington (Kenton County) were being questioned. s Kentucky Statesman (Lexington), Aug. 2, .1857. 141 142 Na.t-ivis1n in Kentucky to 1860 assigning for cause that the Lexington city court had no authority to grant a certificate of naturalization and that the residence of plaintiff since naturalization was not suf­ ficient to entitle him to vote. The circuit court sustained the· demurrer and rendered a judgment against the plaintiff, from which judgment he appealed to the Court of Appeals of Kentucky. In this court the counsel for the plaintiff, Judge Charles B. Thomas and M. C. Johnson, presented a comprehensive survey of legal precedents concerning naturalization which were answered by the learned jurist, George Robertson, for the appellee. A fundamental point at issue concerned the power of a state court to naturalize aliens. After citing the Constitution, in which Congress is empowered exclusively to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and a decision of the Supreme Court,4 in which naturalization is pronounced a judicial act, the counsel for the appellant continued: The argument which denies to State tribunals the power to perform the process of naturalization errone­ ously assumes, for its premises, that the performance of that act renders it necessary for them to be invested with some jurisdiction in addition to that which they already possess. This, however, is an evident mistake, and hence the fallacy of all the reasoning that is based upon such an erroneous assumption. Any court of record, having common law jurisdiction, is fully adequate to the performance of everything required to be done in the process of naturalization, as prescribed by the act of Congress.5 The Lexington city court was created a court of record with a clerk, a seal, and with limited common law jurisdiction by the act incorporating the city. It followed that the power of naturalization was within its jurisdiction and the decision of the circuit court was reversed.

4 Art. I, Sec. 8, 'l'he Constitution of the United States: The Con­ gress shall have power ... to establish a uniform rule of naturaliza­ tion ... ; Spratt v. Spratt, 4, Peters, 393. 5 Kentucky Statesman, March 26, 1858. Cf. 57 Kentucky 552: (1857), pp. 669-70. The Decline of Know-Nothingism, 143

A second point of general interest related to the term of residence after naturalization, required as a qualification for suffrage. The court again decided in favor of the interpreta­ tion of the law, acquiesced in for a half century; namely, that naturalized citizens were entitled to vote immediately upon the issuance of final papers making them United States citizens. By way of summarizing the decision, a Lexington Democratic paper published the following propositions which had received the court's approval: A voter may sue the judges of election for illegally and corruptly refusing to permit him to vote. Naturalization in a State Court, in pursuance of the act of Congress, is valid and confers citizenship. The Lexington City Court is authorized by the act of Congress to naturalize aliens. According to the Constitution of Kentucky a naturalized citizen having the other qualifications as a voter is authorized to vote as soon as naturalized.6 In those localities in Kentucky where Know-Nothings still held the ascendancy after the national defeat of 1856, effort was expended continuously to gain control of all elective offices, but with alternate success and defeat. The state and congressional elections of this same year marked a defeat for·the American party with a choice of eight Democrats and two Americans as Representatives in Congress and seventy­ four Democrats and forty-six Americans winning seats in the state legislature. A victory of an American judge of the court of appeals (1857) elicited a rebuke from the Bards­ town Gazette, which opposed nominations to a judicial office by party caucus as an innovation of Know-Nothingism that aimed at subordinating the judiciary to political and partisan influence : This Know-Nothing party is nothing more nor less than a sworn body of men attempting to take the govern­ ment of the country out of the hands of the people where the Constitution has placed it, and subject the

6 Kentucky Statesman, Jan. 29, 1858. 144 Nativisrn in Kentucky to 1860

civil, social, political and religious rights of the citizens of this commonwealth to this government within a government, State within a State.1 Municipal elections in several cities during the year 1858 favored the Nativists, but the party's waning strength may be ascertained partially from the returns of the contest for clerk of the court of appeals. The Democratic party ob­ tained a majority of nearly 1,400 votes in seven districts; the American party, a majority of slightly more than 500 in three districts. 8 Democrats expressed the opinion that partisan Americanism was no longer dangerous and that the war upon Catholics and naturalized citizens had ceased : . The order claims no national existence, and is hopelessly prostrate in the State. In a word Know-Nothingism is defunct, intense Americanism an obsolete idea. 9 A similar apprehension, modified by a ray of hope, found expression in a journal of the decaying party : The Whig party is nominally dead ; the American party may also die in the same manner, but it will be a death of body only, not of soul. We think we see that under some name, Whig, American, Union, or something else, the time is not distant when from insufferable corrup­ tions the conservative party ,vill again triumph.10 Know-Nothings maintained that conservative Kentucky was never intended for a Democratic state and that the presence in theh· American party of the leading commercial, financial, agricultural, and professional men would insure its resur­ rection.11 Editorials on the reorganization of parties replaced the customary essays on the threat of f oreignism and the danger of papal designs. A contemporary Democratic editor noted the change, as he wrote :

1 Bardstown Gazette, June 10,. 1857. 8 Lexington Observer and Reporter, April 7, Aug. 4, Sept. 11, 1858. n Kentucky States1nan, Nov. 30, 1858. 10 lA!xington Observer and Reporter, May 12, 1858. 11 Jb-id., June 9, 1858. The Decline of Know-Nothingism 145 None of the principles of the late American Order are now at issue in Kentucky. The Know-Nothing leaders no longer advocate any of the distinctive tenets to which the secret brotherhood once swore fealty. _They have raised a new issue--one of general, indefinite opposition to democracy, without specification and upon it now go before the people. This is the sole issue with our people. The proposition to "consolidate the opposition" has been made and agreed to by the organs and leaders.12 The points of debate between Democrats and the opposi­ tion pertained to tariff, to the distribution of western lands, and especially to slavery. Antislavery tendencies had been charged to Know-Nothings from the first appearance of their party in Kentucky in 1854.13 As the year 1858 wit­ nessed the controversy over the admission of Kansas under the Lecompton constitution, H the criterion of loyalty to the South was set by proslavery ·Democrats at supporting or rejecting this measure. The opposition was no less divided on the measure than the Democrats. • Prominent opposition organs expressed divergent views ranging from the denun­ ciation of Douglas as a traitor, to the rejection of the Lecompton constitution as a fraud and a swindle.15 The formal organization of the opposition party took place in February, 1859, when about two thousand delegates from eighty-four counties in Kentucky convened in Louis­ ville "to organize a State opposition to the further rule of the self-styled Democratic party, and to propose such an opposition by all good men throughout the nation."16 George Prentice had commented editorially on the necessity for such an opposition and the grounds for its formation :

12 T. B. Monroe, Jr., in Kentucky Statesman, May 28, 1858. 13 Cf. above III, 7, 9, 13; V, 5, 10. u This measure, it will be recalled, guaranteed the right of property in slaves and caused Stephen A. Douglas to break with the pro­ slavery faction of the Demoe.rats. 15 Le~ngton Observer and Reporter and Maysville Eagle, quoted in Kentucky Statesman, March 9, 1858. 16 Louisville Journal, Feb. 23, 1859. 146 . Nat-ivis·m in Kentucky to 1860 Sewardism, in idea at least, directly excludes the citi­ zens of the South from the common possessions of the Union. It is however impracticable. Douglasism, in fact as well as idea, achieves the same end indirectly. Buchananism substantially forces slavery into the Ter­ ritories and coerces States to adopt it.... Against these equally heretical isms the Opposition of the South proudly oppose constitutionalism.11 Robert Letcher, former Whig governor of Kentucky, pre­ sided over the assembly which included prominent Know­ Nothings, particularly, Charles Morehead, George Robert­ son, Leslie Combs, James Harlan, James Dudley, Garrett Davis, John Barbee, Stephen Fitz-James Trabue, and Blan­ ton Duncan.18 A platform was adopted which stressed the so-called evils of Democracy, but which failed to enunciate any distinctive policy other than preserving the Union and giving peace to the nation on the slavery question.19 Notice­ ably absent from the platform was any reassertion of American tenets. The opposition party proposed no reform in the naturalization laws and no imposition of disabilities on Catholics. 20 Prentice, a leader of this party as he had been of the Know-Nothings, ceased to caution his followers against the "designs of the Catholic hierarchy" and the "dangers of foreign influence," from which a Catholic editor concluded that "these bug-bears of a day had lost their in­ fluence to create fear, and the editor knew it."21 Either this was the case, or else the inexpediency of antagonizing those ,vhose support would strengthen the opposition was recog­ nized. vVith the hope of recovering those who had left their ranks solely because proscriptive measures appealed to their prejudice against Catholics and foreigners, Democrats emphasized the fact that the recently organized opposition party had abandoned these proscriptive tenets:

17 lb-id-~ Jan. 31, 1859. 18 Ibid., Feb. 24, 1859. rn Ibid., Feb. 25, 1859. ~0 Ibid.; Kentucky Statesman, March 4, 1859. 21 The Guardian (Louisville), March 19," 1859. The Decline of Know-:Nothingism 147

Let us ask what is the inducement for men who left the democratic party by reason of their native American or anti-Catholic feeling, to remain longer in co-opera­ tion with the opposition. Addressing ourself to such men, we would ask if, as you assert, you left the democratic party to aid in reforming the naturalization laws, and not because of a disapproval of any of its measures, why hold out in opposition when those with ,vhom you have allied no longer propose the measures you favor? .... The opposition disclaims the measures of the American party, proposes none of its reforms, and professes no friendship for its tenets. Upon what ground, therefore, a democrat can continue his affilia­ tion with such a faction and against the regular party to which he professed allegiance in times past, ,ve are at a loss to divine.22 Styling the newly fledged group "negative opponents" and the "Objection party," the Democrats scored the "mongrel character" of the gathering: The delegates to the Louisville Convention do not profess to be the representatives of any political organi­ zation; they are not summoned to promulgate the principles or define the platform of any distinct party, nor do they propose to present to the people as candi­ dates for their suffrages men who can be regarded as the exponents of any distinct political faith. All the creeds, persuasions, doctrines and shades of political faith antagonistic to any tenet of democracy, ,vill find in that body its representative. Men holding the most diverse theories of constitutional construction, differ­ ing essentially upon the policy and principles of govern­ ment, but agreeing in common hostility to the party in po,ver, there act in concert. 23 All, except disunionists and abolitionists, ,vere invited to join the party, although Democrats declared that even these ,vere not excluded : Aliens born and proscriptive natives, Catholics and know"'.'nothing Protestants, Lecompton w_higs and anti­ Lecompton democrats, protectionists and dissatisfied

·22 Kentucky Sta-tesman, March 4, 1859. 23 Ibid.," Feb. 22, 1859. 148 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 free-leaders, slavery propagandists and free-soilers, conservatives and progressives, latitudinarians and strict constructionists, are invited, and tendered seats in the strange assembly. 24 The convention accomplished its purpose of nominating candidates for the state elections. Joshua F. Bell of Boyle County was named for the governor's chair over George W. Williams of Bourbon County and William Kinkead of Covington; James Harlan of Franklin County was renominated for the office of attorney-general. 25 A partisan journal outside the State commended the selection : We judge that the opposition in Kentucky have put up a very good ticket. If the old whigs who have been repelled by nativism should mainly come back, this ticket will be elected. 26 The strength of the opposition proved insufficient for victory, although the defeated candidate, who was per­ sonally popular, had a large following. Bell with 67,283 votes lost to Beriah Magoffin, Democratic nominee, who received 76,187 votes.27 The Democratic majority was rela­ tively the same for the remaining seven state officers. 28

~~ Ibid. 25 Ibid., Jan. 14, 1859. Joshua Bell, who served as secretary of s:a te under Governor Crittenden, was a Clay Whig who endorsed the Lecompton constitution, repudiated the tenets of the American party, disapproved of the administrative policy of the De1nocrats, and regarded the Republican party of the North as "a fanatical and sectional party, whose policy, if carried out, will shatter the Union in fragments, and drench the land in fraternal blood." Ibid., March 22, 1869; Biographical Encyclopaedia of Kentucky ( Cincinnati, 1877), p. 722. 26 New York Tribune, quoted in Kentucky Statesman, March 11, 1859. 27 On the eve of this election the Louisville Anzieger, July 31, 1859, predicted that the chances for a Democratic victory were better than ever, adding: "We hope to announce to the Union that the Germans in Louisville have given the death blow to Know-Nothingism and that the beginning of a new era for Louisville is possible." 28 Kentucky Statesman, Sept. 2, 1869. The Decline of Know-Nothingism 149

A comparison of the votes of Kentuckians in the major elections from the advent of the Know-Nothing party through 1859, reveals an initial victory followed by a progressive decline: 1855 Morehead (Know-Nothing) ...... 69,816 Clarke (Democrat) ...... 65,413 Know-Nothing majority ...... 4,403 1856 Buchanan (Democrat) ...... 74,642 Fillmore (Kno,v-Nothing) ...... 67,416 Democratic nuijority ...... 7,226 1857 Garrard (Democrat) ...... 65,590 Jones (Know-Nothing) ...... 53,416 Democratic majO'rity ...... 12,174 1858 Revill (Democrat) ...... ·. . 68,294 McKee (Know-Nothing) ...... 55,199 Democratic majority ...... 13,095 1859 Magoffin (Democrat) ...... 76,187 Bell (Opposition) ...... 67,283 Democratic majority ...... 8,90429 Larger issues than the disfranchisement of aliens and Catholics claimed the attention of political groups as the sixties approached. The Know-Nothing party's narrow anti-foreign policy had been scarcely justifiable in Kentucky. Numerically, aliens constituted no problem; socially, many of them were on equal footing with the native-born-except in the instances where their greater prosperity may have aroused jealousy; economically, their occupations caused no depreciation of wages; politically, however, their alleged antislavery bias and their Democratic sympathies might • have aroused distrust, and the extreme ideas of the small but influential group of radical Forty-eighters were plainly reprehensible to conservative Kentuckians. Never­ theless, anti-foreign propaganda was recognized as of tremendous weight and, hence, such leaders as John Critten­ den30 and George Prentice employed it with telling effect.

29 Ibid., Aug. 26, 1859; Tribune Almanac (New York, 1860), p. 56. 3° Crittenden labored unremittingly to restrict the privileges of 150 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

The nativistic proscription of Catholics, based on the patronizing presumption that all native-born Protestants ,vere superior to all foreigners, especially to all Irish Catho­ lics, was peculiarly distasteful in a democratic state whose material prosperity and cultural growth had been increased appreciably by the contribution of these same Catholics to its economic well-being, and more importantly, to religion, education, and social service.31 Yet, manifestly, these con­ tributions ,vere disregarded-as the anti-Catholic campaign of the influential Loitisville ·Journal bore witness-and only by degrees were Catholics to assume their rightful place in the social, political, and economic life of the State, so reluctantly does individual intolerance · yield even in America. The influence of Prentice's Journal had been long recognized as exerting a powerful control of public opinion and popular action: Where, sir, is the whig politician who is anxious to rise in the political world, who will dare to stand opposed to the Louisville Journal? He cannot be found. Let any whig in this state but incur the displeasure of that paper, and down he sinks like Lucifer, never to rise again. Let the same paper place its stamp of approval upon any individual and up goes his flag-he at once rises in the political scale-he walks into the legislature, congress and the senate of the United States. This, sir, is an influence and a power greater than that which will spring from any excess of population. 32 If these claims for the Whig organ seemed an exaggera- aliens, especially with regard to their rights of entry on the public lands. Doubtless, he was motivated by the fear that the influx of foreigners would so increase the strength of the North as to en­ danger the influence of the South in the councils of the nation. 31 At the close of· the decade of the fifties, the Catholic Church in Kentucky counted ninety-one churches, ninety-three clergymen, an ecclesiastical seminary, three colleges, twelve free schools, ten acade­ mies, three orphan asylums, and an infirmary. The Metropolitan Catholic Almanac (Baltimore, 1860), pp. 101, 114. 32 From a speech of John D. Morris of Christian County in Report of the Debates and Proceedings of the Convention for the Revision of the Constitution of the State of Kentucky 1849, ·p. 566. The Decline of Knoiv-Noth-ingism 151 tion ,vhen they were advanced in 1849, they were amply sup­ ported by its subsequent course as the principal opposition medium for anti-foreign as well as anti-Catholic propa­ ganda. The Lou-isville Jou.1·nal's editor, former friend of Catholics and, in the opinion of a Catholic contemporary, a man whose integrity was unimpeachable, who would have scorned to use, for any supposed political advantage, means not consistent with self-respect and a just regard for the religious feelings of his fellow-citizens, had changed his role. In the midst of the election of 1855, Ben. J. Webb lamented this display of fickleness: The Louisville Journal, to which we were wont to look for well-seasoned, calm and logical articles upon the political topics of the day, now comes to us filled, morn­ ing after morning, with most unwarrantable and bitter denunciations of inoffensive and unoffending Catho­ lics.33 Whether or not, in editorial practice, Prentice was merely conforming to "an American fashion of the time, which demanded virulence in newspapers," whether he actually apprehended danger to the government on account of Roman Catholics, 34 or whether he acted merely through policy and from political motives, he employed his invective skill against the Catholic Church with the result that his personal responsibility for the Know-Nothing activities which cul­ minated in the riots of August 6, 1855, was greater than that of any other single influence in Kentucky. 35 In later

33 Ben. J. Webb in the Louisville C-0u.1~er, copied by the New York Freeman's Journal, Aug. 11, 1855. 34 Webb ridiculed such an explanation: "If there be any man so credulous as to believe that the leaders of the Know-Nothing party ... were actuated by motives of true patriotism, and really feared for the safety of our peculiar institutions, because of principles sup­ posed to be held by Roman Catholics dangerous to the same, he is greatly mistaken." Letters of a Kentucky Catholic, p. 64. 35 By a curious anomaly Prentice's two sons-according to his ac­ count in the Louisville Journal, Dec. 8, 1855-were baptized in the Catholic Church: "Many years ago, the young mother of our children, [Henrietta Benham, daughter of Colonel Joseph Benham, a distin- 152 Nativ·ism in Kentucky to 1860 years, he expressed regret that he had been allied with Know-Nothingism: From the Hon. B. J. Webb I have learned that four of the leaders of the Know-Nothing party in Louisville [George D. Prentice, Gen. Humphrey Marshall, Mayor Barbee, Judge Caleb Logan] afterwards expressed in his presence sincere regret that they had ever had any connection with the movement.38 A second altercation with Bishop Spalding over the use of public school funds claimed Prentice's attention during 1858. While not necessarily associated with the editor's nativistic views, the controversy ·served to keep before the reading public a subject which, intermittently, had aroused animosity against Catholics. Spalding h;µi published a re­ view of a report by Joseph Kay on common school education in Europe (1821-1878). The author was a traveling bachelor for Cambridge University who, after spending four years inspecting the social conditions of the poorer classes in northern Europe, embodied his findings in several vol­ umes one of which was entitled Tke Condition and Educa­ tion of Poor Children in English and in German Towns (Manchester, 1853) .37 In substance this English economist had concluded that religion occupied the first place among the branches taught and that, in order to secure actual religious liberty and to guarantee parental rights, separate guished lawyer of Louisville] then but recently from the very excel­ lent Roman Catholic female seminary of Nazareth near Bardstown, influenced by love and admiration for the nuns and by a feeling of almost reverence for the venerable Father David, and entertaining perhaps, in consequence of what she had seen and heard at school, a sort of partiality or half-partiality for the Catholic Church though without having formed any definite opinion on the subject, expressed to us a desire that the children should be baptized in that church. We, having no faith in the dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church, rather regretted her desire, and gave utterance to our regret, yet we felt unwilling to make any strong opposition to her wishes . . . so our two little ones were baptized in the Roman Catholic Church." 36 John L. Spalding, Li,fe of Archbishop Spalding (New York, 1873), p. 187 n. 37 C. W. Sutton in Dictionary of National Biography, XXX, 249-50. The Decline of Know-Nothing-ism . 163 schools supported out of the common funds were allowed ,vhenever the minority, whether Catholic or Protestant, saw fit to establish them. Since this report offered a practical illustration of the plan which had been proposed to the Ken­ tucky School Board some years earlier, and since his views had not changed substantially, Bishop Spalding grasped the opportunity to use this material, as he wrote: The principles of education settled by long experience in Europe are not to be lightly rejected, nor is the com­ bined wisdom of the most civilized countries of the world-always of course excepting our own-to be mocked at or treated with silent contempt. And if the lessons which even the despotic monarchies of Europe furnish us, on this subject of Common School educa­ tion, lie in the direction of greater religious liberty and of greater respect for parental rights than we are our­ selves willing to accord, they merit for this still greater consideration and respect at our hands.38

Scant consideration was accorded this proposal. With his usual zeal for controversy, George Prentice ran a series of forceful and logical articles criticizing the review and regretting the useless agitation of settled questions. Bishop Spalding, no mean controversialist himself, reiterated his aversion, as an American and a Kentuckian, to tame submis­ sion, and published simultaneously a series of letters on "Our Public Schools" in his diocesan weekly. 39 These letters reflect the sound conviction of a prelate who had endeavored conscientiously to carry out the exhortations and admoni­ tions of the plenary and provincial councils of his church relating to the establishment of Catholic schools, but who yet deprecated the double burden on his people and feared

38 The Guardia-n, Sept. 18, 1858. 39 In a report to the American and Foreign Christian Union, No­ vember, 1858, the ·Reverend John McDevitt stated, "\Ve are now at the commencement of one of those annual tirades against our public schools which Romanists are in the habit of making here, as else­ where." The American and Foreign Christia.n Union (New York, 1858), IX, 190. 154 Z..lativ-is1n in.Kentucky to 1860 the control of political partisans.40 That the public schools, erected and supported by the money of all alike, should be "constantly dragged down into the arena of angry political strife" was, indeed, a cause for complaint. The particular grievance which aroused Bishop Spalding's deepest indignation was the alleged adoption among the, public schools of "the well-known sectarian school on Sixth Street, under the general superintendence of the Reverend John McDevitt ...." 41 The annual report (1858) of the Board of Trustees of the Public Schools noted a salary of $500 for Mrs. Elizabeth McDevitt, principal of the Sixth Street School. This sum was increased to $700 in the reports for the two following years-a relatively high salary, it may be noted. Under this thin disguise Spalding believed the common school funds were being diverted to sectarian uses. But there was no disguise for McDevitt's activity in attempting to convert the children of "Irish Papists." In a report to the American and Foreign Chris­ tian Union,42 dated June, 1858, that missionary gave a detailed account of his success : i have distributed in Romanist families 13 Bibles, 50 Testaments, and a great number of other religious books, given by some kind ladies here. I have distribut­ ed several thousand pages of tracts, and established during the year two new Sunday schools in the destitute 40 Bishop Spalding had prepared the pastorals issued by the three- Cincinnati Councils of the Catholic Church in 1855, 1858, 1861, all of which contained pronouncements on Catholic sehools. Peter Guil­ day, A History of the Councils of Baltimore (New York, 1932), p. 188. 41 The Guwrdian, Sept. 25, 1858. John J. McDevitt (Rev.), city missionary, is listed in the Louisville Directory (1859-60) as residing on Fifth Street between Maine and Water. An Irish Mission School located on Water between Fifth and Sixth is listed in the same directory. This is undoubtedly the Sixth Street School over which Mrs. McDevitt presided as principal. ~2 A recent writer has described the American and Foreign Chris­ tian Union as a federation ''dedicated to fighting popery with mis­ sions." Carlton Mabee, The American Leonmrdo: A Life of Satmuel F. B. Morse (New York, 1943), p. 180. The Decline of Know-Nothingism 155

parts of this city, and have an average attendance every Sunday, of from two to three hundred children, besides our industrial sewing school, averaging from 60 to 100 pupils. I am very happy to be able to report several families who have left Popery, and are now learning the way of life. They number in all 13. They are now under Gospel training. May the Lord revive his work throughout the length and breadth of our land, and to his name be the praise evermore !43 He complained, though, that the priests had started Sunday schools for religious instruction "at the same hour as mine, to keep the children from our schools." Prentice took issue with the Bishop's charges against the Sixth Street School by asserting first, that McDevitt was given no general supervision of the school by the trustees; secondly, that Mrs. McDevitt's salary was granted on the same terms as that of any teacher in the public schools; thirdly, that Spalding had confused the industrial and the Sabbath schools, conducted by means of private funds, with the Sixth Street School which had been transferred to the Board of Trustees and thereupon withdrawn from sectarian 4 control. • Prentice's explanation ,vas in all probabEity accurate enough as fa1· as the letter of the law or his definition of sectarian went. Mrs. McDevitt, the wife of the "city mis­ sionary" who labored in the interests of the American andi foreign Christian Union, was employed by the city of Louis­ ville as a teacher in the Sixth Street School. Her school which had an average enrollment of eighty-five children was classified as a primary mixed school by the school board and as an "Irish Mission School" in the city directory. It was visited by the usual board of examiners. In 1859, this board reported that the children ,vere doing well under the ener­ getic superintendence of the principal. The report con­ tinued:

43 The Anierican and Foreign Christian Union (New York, 1858), IX, 190. « Louis,dlle Journal, Nov. 5, 1858. 156 Na-tivisrn in Kentucky to 1860 The children spelt and read well, all things considered. The Principal has no assistant, and it is quite im­ possible for one to teach rapidly so numerous a school, when all are mere beginners. 45 In a commencement address delivered at the University of Louisville in 1859, Honorable George W. Morris, presi­ dent of the board of trustees, alluded to those who withheld patronage from the public schools because of the sectarian proclivities of these institutions. The speaker, a Presbyte­ rian elder, stated: "We meet this objection by a general denial of the allegation that these schools are sectarian in their character.:'46 Prentice commended the common school system particu­ larly because it brought together children of different denominations, caused them to fraternize, and thereby tended to diminish the manif old evils of sectarianism. To this line of reasoning Spalding rejoined that such a removal of sectarianism with the consequent substitution of latitu­ dinarianism would gradually but most surely lead to indif­ f erentism. Nearly a decade later, as Archbishop of Baltimore and presiding Apostolic Delegate of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore ( 1866), he declared in f ormu­ lating the recommendations relating to Catholic schools : "In these schools, carried on under the eyes of the pastors, the dangers which ... inhere in the public schools will be avoided ; the pupils will be kept free from that indifferent­ ism which is now so rampant... ." 41 The concluding note of the discussion on the public schools appeared in the Louisville Courier over the signature of "Lay Catholic Democrat." The writer, Ben. J. Webb,

45 .Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Un-iversity and Public Schools (Louisville, 1859), p. 18. 4 a Ibid., pp. 33-42. 47 "Hisce in Scholis, sub Pastorum oculis ordinatis, vitabuntur pericula quae gymnasiis publicis inhaerere jam diximus; defendentur pueri ab illo indifferentismo adco nunc grassante; viam Catholicam insistere, jugumque Domini ab adolescentia portare addiscent." C.on­ cilii Plenarii BaUi-morensis 11 ... Acta et Decreta (Baltimore, 1894), ~--"'"1 . The Decline of Know-Nothingism 157 objected to the statement that the Roman Catholic family, at the instance of the Church, refused any control to the State. This assertion involved a double misstatement, he main­ tained, "for, in the first place, Catholics do not refuse a reasonable control to the State, and, secondly, it is not mere­ ly 'at the instance of the Church,' but from their own con­ scientious convictions bas~d upon sad experience, that they are compelled to decline sending their children to the public schools, to support which they are nevertheless heavily t axed ...."48 Prentice, it will be recalled, was not a native Kentuckian, but a Northerner and not unlikely under Northern influence. There were Kentuckians of note, however, who, either for political reasons, or personal prejudice against the Catholic Church, or fear of the so-called "menace of foreignism," or possibly a combination of the three, sponsored Nativism in one or the other of its aspects : such men as John J. Crit­ tenden, Humphrey Marshall, Garrett Davis, Walter N. Haldeman, George Robertson, Stephen F. J. Trabue, Edward· B. Bartlett, Robert J. Breckinridge, Leander Cox, William Pilcher, James Harlan, Charles S. Morehead, and a host of lesser lights. The identification of these influential men with a movement so unsound and short-lived tended to confuse the rank and file of Kentuckians who, heretofore, had regarded such leaders as reliable guides. The dissolution of their party had made of every Kentucky Whig a potential American at a time when the Know-Nothing party was emerging as an active political f orce.49 Staunch Whigs could not be enthusiastic about allying themselves with their foes, the Democrats ; this new party offered a refuge. Yet, old­ line Whigs there undoubtedly were who declined to join the Know-Nothings. Typical among this group were those Catholic Kentuckians whose political affinities were with the 43 As reprinted in The Guardian, Nov. 13, 1858. • 9 In the presidential campaign of 1852, which centered largely about the issue of anti-foreignism, may be seen a rehearsal for the state and congressional elections of 1855, in which Nativism tri­ urnphed in Kentucky. 158 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860 Whigs. "It would be wonderful, indeed," remarked Webb, "if the Catholic were not, to a man, ranked among the oppo­ nents of the Know-Nothing faction."50 At the same time, other public-spirited men of prominence arose to decry the un-American principles of the American party: William Preston, Theodore O'Hara, Ben. J. Webb, Lazarus Powell, James Guthrie, Martin John Spalding, and Abraham Lincoln in his oft-quoted letter of August, 1855, addressed to a Kentuckian, Joshua Fry Speed: I am not a Know-Nothing; that is certain. How could I be? How can anyone who abhors the oppression of negroes be in favor of degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation we began by declaring that 'all men are created equal.' We practically read it 'all men are created equal, except negroes.' When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners and Catholics. 51 As sectional issues came to the fore the short and atypical career of the Know-Nothing party, which had avoided sectional issues, came to a close. Various attempts were made to secure its continuance, 52 as has been indicated, but a party which was a mere aggregation of dissimilar parts with no positive, constructive program could scarcely sur­ vive. N ativism had subsided, at least until its reappearance in the ephemeral American Protective Association of the eighteen-nineties.

5o Ben. J. Webb, Letters of a Kentucky Catholic (Louisville, 1856), p. 66. 51 This passage has been taken from the original letter printed in The Filson Club Hisoory Quarterly, XVII (April, 1943), 120. 52 The biography of John J. Crittenden, now in preparation by Professor Allen Ragan of Tusculum College, Tennessee, will supply­ in all likelihood-a welcome addition to the meager material available on the Constitutional Union Party. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Manuscript Materials Archives of the Sisters of Charity of _Nazareth Letters, Newspapers, Personal Papers. · Baltimore Cathedral Archives Letters from: Bishop Martin John Spalding to Archbishop Francis Pat­ rick Kenrick; Archbishop Kenrick to Bishop Spalding. J efl\·rson County Courthouse · Chancery Court Cases: No. 15806, No. 15812. Index to Chancery Court Records for the City of Louisville, 1860-1870, 2 vols. Order Book No. 75, 1870. Library of Congress Crittenden Correspondence Letters from: Albert T. Burnley and Robert P. Letcher to John Jordan Crittenden. Broadside Portfolio, 22, No. 35. Printed Sources Acts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, 1855-1860. Frankfort, 1855-1860. Annual Report of the Board of Trustees ,of the University and Public Schools to the General Council of the City of Louisville, 1855- 1860. Louisville, 1860. Congressional Globe. 33rd-36th Congress. Davis, Garrett. Spee·ches of Hon. Garrett Davis Upon His Proposi­ tion to Impose Further Restrictions Upon Foreign Immigrants. Frankfort, 1855. General Statutes of the Comm,onwealth of Kentucky. Frankfort, 1873. Grundy, Robert Caldwell. The Temporal Power of the Pope Danger­ ous to the Religious and Civil Li.berties of the American Re­ public: a Review of the Speech of the Hon. Joseph R. Chandler delivered in the House of Representatives of the United States, Jan. 10, 1855. Maysville, 1855. Guilday, Peter, comp. The National PastOTals of the American Hierarchy 1792-1919. Washington, 1923. Humphrey, Edward P. A Discourse on the Spiritual Power of the Roman Catholic CleTgy. Louisville, 1850. Kentucky Broadsides. Manuscript Division, Library of Congress. Marshall, Humphrey. Speech in the House of Reyresentatives, Ja,n. 19, 1859. Washington, 1859. 159 160 Nat-ivism in Kentucky to 1860

The Metropolitan Catholic Almanac. Baltimore, 1845-1860. Newman, Francis \V., comp. Select Speeches of Kossuth. London, 1853. Pastioral Letters of the First Provincial Council of Cincinna.ti to the Clergy and Laity. Cincinnati, 1855. Reg·iste·r of Debates in Congress. 22nd Congress. Replies of the Louisv-ille Journal to the Letters of "A Kentucky Catk­ olic" with an introductory article by an Eminent Kentuckian. Louisville, 1856. Report of the Deba.tes and Proceedings of the Convention for the Revision of the Constitution of the State of Kentucky, 1849. Frankfort, 1850. ~palding, Martin John. Lectu-res on the Evidences of Catholicity: Delivered in the Cathedral of Louisville. 4th ed. Louisville, 1866. Stock, Leo Francis. United States Ministers to the Papal States: Instructions and Despatches 1848-1868. Washington, D.C., 1933. Thebaud, Augustus, J., S.J. Thre·e-quarters of a Century (1807- 1882) • .. A Retrospect. Edited by Charles G. Herbermann, Ne,v York, 1904, III. Thorpe, Francis Newton, ed. The Federal and State Constitutions. Washington, 1909, III, V. Tribune Alma-nae, 1855-1868. New York, 1868. Webb, Ben. J. The Catholic Question in Politics: Com'P'rising a Seri.68 of Letters Addressed to George D. Prentice, Esq., of the "Louisville Journal." Louisville, 1856. Young, Bennett H. History and Texts of the Three Constitutions of Kentucky. Louisville, 1890. Zegli, John B., comp. Directory of the City of Louisville, 1851-1860. Louisville, 1851-1860.

American Derrwcrat and Weekly Cowrier (Louisville), June-August, 1845. A nier-ican Sen.tin el (Covington), May, 1855. Baptist Banner and Western Pioneer (Southwest), November, 1844; June, 1845; :March, April, 1847. Bnrdsto@n, Ga:=ette, May, June, 1857. The Catholic Advocate (Louisville), 1841-1846. The Catholic Telegraph and Advocate (Cincinnati), 1834; 1837; 1852-1857. Cincinnati Weekly Atlas, April, 1847. Commonwealth (Frankfort), January, 1856. Biblwgraphy 161

Covington Journal, July, December, 1854; March, July, August, 1865; January, November, 1856. The Gtmrdia-n (Louisville), 1858-1860. Kentucky State Flag (Paris), June, 1855. Kentucky Statesr,nan (Lexington), October, 1844; January, 1850; March, 1851; December, 1854; July, August, 1855; June­ August, 1857-1858; January-March, 1859. Lexington Observer a:nd Re'porter, :November, 1844; December, 1849; 1852; 1855; April-~eptember, 1858. Louisville Anzeiger, 1849; January, February, 1850; 1852; May, 1854; 1857; 1859; 1898 (souvenir edition). Louuwille Courier-Journal, September, 1869; November, 1897; De­ cember, 1903. Louisville Daily Dem,ocrat, 1855; June, 1856; September-November, 1859. Louisville Journal, March, December, 1844; 1845; May, 1850; 1852; 1853; 1855; 1857; November, 1858; January, February, 1859. Louisville Morning Courier, December, 1844; May, October-December, 1849. Louisville Public Advertiser, July, 1840; December, 1841. Louisville Times, March 1852; 1854; January, 1855; 1856. Maysville Eagle, January-July, 1855. New Orleans Picayune, August, 1855. New York Freeman's Journal and Catholic Register, Augu~t, 1855. New York Times, June, 1856. Paducah Weekly American, November, 1854; February-August, 1855: Paducah Weekly Journal, March, July, 1855. Saturday Evening Post, August, 1855. Tri-Weekly Kentucky Yeoman (Frankfort), July-November, 1855. Washington Star, February, 1856. Western Citizen (Paris), April-June, 1855.

Special Studies, Local and General Histories The American and F,oreign Christian Union. New York, 1858, IX. American Home Missionary Society. New York, 1849. A nnales de la Propagation de la Foi. Lyons, 1828, 1851, III, XXIII. Berger, Max. The British Traveller in America, 1836-1860. New York, 1943. Binkley, Wilfred E. American Political Parties. New York, 1943. Bruncken, Ernest, German Political Refugees. Milwaukee, 1904. Burns, James Aloysius. The Catholic School System in the United States. New York, 1908. Casseday, Ben. The History of Louisville from Its Earliest Settle­ ment Till the Year 185!. Louisville, 1852. 162 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

Clark, Thomas D. A History of Kentuck-y. New York, 1937.

Clift, G. Glenn. Governors 1of Kentucky 1792-1942. Cynthiana, 1943. Cole, Arthur Charles. The Whig Party in the South. Baltimore, 1914. Coleman, Mrs. l\iiary Chapman, ed. The Life .of John J. Crittenden. 2 vols. Philadelphia, 1871. Colton, Calvin, ed. The Private Correspondence of Henry Clay. New York, 1856, IV. Commons, John R. and Associates. History of Labour in the United States. New York, 1918, I, II. Connelley, William E. and Ernest M. Coulter. Hist-Ory of Kentucky. 5 vols. Chicago, 1922. Collins, Lewis. History of Kentucky. 2 vols. Covington, 1874.. Davenport, F. Garvin. Ante-Bellum Kentucky. Oxford, Ohio, 1943. Davidson, Rev. Robert. History of the Presbyterian Church in the State of Kentucky. New York, 1847. Eaton, Clement. Freedom of Thought in the Old South. Durham, N. C., 1940. Faust, Albert Bernhardt. The German Element in the United States. New York, 1927. Franklin, Mary Katherine. "The Life of James Guthrie," master's essay, University of Kentucky, 1932. Gabel, Rev: Richard J. Public Funds for Church and Private Schools. . Washington, 1937. Goebel, Edmund J. A Study of Catholic Secondary Education Dur­ ing the Colonial Period Up to the First Plenary Council of Baltimore, 1852. New York, 1937. Gorman, Robert. Catholic Apologetical Literature in the United States (1784-1858). Washington, 1939. Guilday, Peter. A History of the Councils ·of Baltimore (1791-1884). N e,v York, 1932. Hamlett, Barksdale. History of Education in Kentucky. Frankfort, 1914. Hickey, Edward John.. The Society for the Propagation of the Faith, 1822-1922. Washington, 1922. Hume, Edgar Erskine. Colonel Theodore O'HMa. Southern Sketch­ es, No. 6, Charlottesville, 1936. Johnston, J. Stoddard, ed. Memorial History of Louisville From Its First Settlement to the Year 1896. 2 vols. Chicago, 1896. Kay, Joseph. T~e Education of the Poor in England and Europe. London, 1846. Korner, Gustav von. Das Deutsche Element in den Verei-nigten Staaten von Nordamerika 1818-1848. Cincinnati, 1880. Bibliography 163

Levin, H., ed. The Lawyers and Lawmake1·s of Kentucky. Chicago, 1897. Lewis, A. F. Histor1J of H-igher Education in Kentucky. Washington, 1889. Lit~le, Lucius P. Ben Hardin: His Tirnes and Contenipo-ra·ries. Louisville, 1887. Mabee, Carleton. The American Leonardo: A Life of Sar,1,uel F. B. Morse. New York, 1943. McElroy, R. McNutt. Kentucky in the Nation's History. New York, 1909. McGill, Anna Blanche. The Sister3 of Charity of Nazareth, Kentucky. Ne,v York, 1917 Minogue, Anna C. Lo·retto: Annals of the Century. New York, 1912 ---. Pages from a Hundred Years of Dcnnin:ican History. New York, 1921. Morris, Robert. The History of Freemasonry in Kentucky. Louis­ ville, 1859. Myers, Gustavus. History of Bigotry in the United States. New York, 1943 Nevins, Allan, Frem>0nt. New York, 1928. Nichols, Roy F. Franklin Pierce, Philadelphia, 1931. Nicolay, John G. and John Hay. Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, New York, 1886-1905, II. Orr, Benjamin F. The Papal Power in Politics, or Rome against Liberty. Owensboro, 1881. Palusak, Sister Mary Cecilia. "The Opinion of the Catholic Tele­ graph on Contemporary Affairs and Politics 1831-1871," mas­ ter's essay, Catholic University of America, Washington, 1940. Perrin, William Henry. History of Bourbon, Scott, Harrison and Nicholas Counties, Kentucky. Chicago, 1882. ---. Kentucky: A History of the State. Louisville, 1887. Peter, Robert. History of Fayette County. Chicago, 1882. Phillips, Ulrich B. "The Southern Whigs 1834-1854," Tu·rner Essays in American History. New York, 1910. Poage, George Rawling. Henry Clay and the Whig Pa;rty. Chapel Hill, N. C., 1936. Porter, Kirk Harold, comp. National Party Platforms. New York, 1924. Purcell, Richard J. Biographical sketches in the Dictionary of American Biography: "John Baptist Mary David," V, 89-91; "Benedict Joseph Flaget," VI, 445-47; "Demetrius Augustine Gallitzin," VII, 113-15; "Francis Patrick Kenrick," X, 339-41; "John Larkin," X, 616; "John McGill," XII, 49-50; "James 164 Nativisni in Kentucky to 1860

Alphonsus McMaster," XII, 140; "John Baptist Purcell," XV, 266-68; "Catherine Spalding," XVII, 421-22; Martin John Spalding," XVII, 424-26; "Augustus J. Thebaud," XVIII, 416-16. Ranck, George \V. History of Lexingtron, Kentucky: Its Early Annals and Recent Progress. Cincinnati, 1872. Robertson, George. The ,1merica;n Pa-rty. Lexington, 1855. ---. Scrap Book on Law and Politics, Men and Ti-mes. Lexing- ton, 1855. ---. An Outline of the Life of Goorge· Robertson. Lexington, 1876. Roemer, Theodore. Ten Decades of Alms. St. Louis, 1942. ---. The Ludwig-Missionsverein and the Church in the United States. Washington, 1931. Rowell, Elsie. "The Social and Cultural Contributions of the Ger­ mans in Louisville from 1848-1855," master's essay, University of Kentucky, 1941. Shaler, N. S. Kentucky: A Pioneer Comonwealth.· Boston, 1884. Shaughnessy, Gerald. Has the Immigrant Kept the Faith? New York, 1925. Spalding, John Lancaster. The Life of the Most Reverend Martin John Spalding, D.D. Ne,v York, 1873. Spalding, Martin John. Miscellanea: Comprising Reviews, Lectures,. and Essays, on Historical, Theological, and Miscellaneous Sub­ jects. Baltimore, Louisville, 1869, I. ---. Sketches of the Life, Times, and Character of tke Right Reverend Benedict Joseph Flaget, First Bishop of Louisville. Louisville, 1852. . Starling, Edmund L. A History of Henderson County, Kentucky. Henderson, 1887. Stierlin, Ludwig. Der Staat Kentucky und Die Stadt Louis·ville mit besonderer Beriicks·ichtigung des Deutschen Elementes. Louis­ ville, 1873. Stuart, Ehrich J. "Benedict J. Webb: A Study in Catholic Lay Leadership," master's essay, Catholic University of America, Washington, 1933. Sweet, William Warren. Methodism in American History. Chicago, 1933. ---. The Story of Religions in America. New York, 1930. Thompson, Robert Ellis. A History of the Presbyterian Churches in the United States. New York, 1895. Thorning, Joseph Francis. Religjous Liberty in Transition. Wash­ ington, 1931. Van Deusen, Glyndon G. The Life of Henry Clay. Boston, 1937. Bibliography 165

Von Bosse, George. Das Deutsche Eleraent in den Ve-reinigten. Staa­ ten. New York, 1908. Watterson, Henry. Marse Henry. Louisville, 1919. ,vebb, Benjamin J. Tke Centenary of Ca.tholicity in Kentucky. Louis­ ville, 1884. ---. Sham Patriotism in 1896. Knownothingism as it was and A.P.A-ism as it is. Louisville, 1896. Willis, George Lee. Kentucky Detnocracy. 3 vols. Louisville, 1935. \Vuest, John B., comp. One Hundred Years of St. Boniface· Parish Louisville, Kentucky. Louisville, 1937. Zarek, Otto. Kossuth. Translated from the German by Lynton A. Hudson. London, 1937.

Periodical Literature Billington, Ray Allen. "Miscellany: Tentative Bibliography of Anti­ Catholic Propaganda in the United States (1800-1860), "The Catholic Hisk>rical Review, XVIII (January, 1933), 492-513. Brand, Carl Fremont. "The History of the Know-Nothing Party in Indiana," Indiana Magarine of History, XVIII (1922), 47-81; 177-206; 266-306. Guilday, Peter. "Gaetano Bedini," United States Catholic Historical Society, Historical Records and Studies, XXIII (1933), 87-170. Jenkins, Thomas J. "Know-Nothingism in Kentucky and Its De­ stroyer," The Catholic World, LVII (July, 1893), 511-22. Johnston, J. Stoddard. "Benedict J. Webb, 1814-1897," The Filson Club History Quarterly, VI (1932), 205-207. Kincaid, Robert L. "Joshua Fry Speed-1814-1882: Abraham Lin­ coln's Most Intimate Friend," The Filson Club Quarterly, XVII (April, 1943), 63-123. Oliver, John W. "Louis Kossuth's Appeal to the Middle West-1852," The Mississippi Valle··y Historico.-l Review, XIV ( March, 1929), 481-95. Minahan, Sister Mary Canisius. "James A. McMaster: A Pioneer Catholic Journalist," Records of the American Catholic Hi~­ torical Society, XLVII (June, 1936), 87-131. Purcell, Richard J. "Father John Thayer of New England and Ire­ land," Studies (Dublin, June, 1942), pp. 171-85. ---. "Irish Teachers in Early Kentucky," "The Catholic Educa­ tional Review, XXXIV ( 1936), 360-69. ---. "Judge William Gaston: Georgetown University's First Stu­ dent," The Georget-OW?i Law Journal, XXVII (May, 1939), 839-83. Ragan, Allen E. "John J. Crittenden, 1787-1863," The Filson Club History Quarterly, XVIII (January, 1944), 3-28. 166 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

Rober~n, James R. "Sectionalism in Kentucky 1855-1865," The Mis_­ sissippi Valley Historical Review, IV (1917), 49-63. Robinson, Ralph. "Retaliation for the Treatment of Prisoners in the War of. 1812," The American Historical Review, XLIX (O~­ tober, 1943), 65-70. Scrugham, Mary. "George Dennison Prentice," Reg,ister of the Ken­ tucky Historical Society (September, 1915). Stevenson, George M. "Nativism in the Forties and Fifties with Special Reference to the Mississippi Valley," The Mississippi Valley Historical Re,view, IX (1922), 185-202. Tapp, Hambleton. "Robert J. Breckinridge and the Year 1849," The Filson Club Hist()ry Quarterly, XII (July, 1938), 125-50. Webster, A. J. "Louisville in the Eighteen-Fifties," The Filson Club History Quarterly, IV (July, 1930), 132-41. INDEX Achilli, Giovanni G., lectures at Breckinridge, John C., 132, 134 Walnut Street Baptist Church, Breckinridge, Robert J.: lectures 75-76 on "Popery," 76-77; mentioned, Ambruster, William, 93, 107, 108- 6,. 157 109 Brush, George, W ., 42 American and Foreign Christian Buck, William C., 15-16 Union, 154, 155 · Bullitt, Alexander C., 106 n.47 American Home Mission Society, Bullock, Joseph J., 119 3 Bullock, W. F ., 94 American party; see Know-Noth­ Bullock, William J., 119 ing party and Native Ameri­ Burnley, Albert T ., 125, 127 can party Calvary Academy, 5 .American Sentinel, 115, 120 Camden, H. H., 62 A nzeiger ,· see Louisville A nzeiger Campbell, John P., 135 Badin, Stephen, 24 Carroll, Mary; see Sister. Chris­ Barbee,John,90,94, 109,146,152 tine Carroll Bardstown, Diocese of, 2 Caspari, Edward, 80 Bardstown Gazette, quoted, 143- .Cathedral of the Assumption: 144 dedicated, 53 n.19; mentioned, Barriere, Michael, 24 76, 94 Bartlett, Edward B., 114-115, Catholic Advocate, historical 122, 125, 128, 140, 157 sketch, 2 n.2 Bedini, Gaetano, Papal Nuncio, "Catholic menace," 4 52-56 Catholic TelegTaph, 58 Beecher, Lyman, 7 Catholics: assisted by Society for Bell, Joshua, 148 n.25, 149 the Propagation of the Faith, Benham, Henrietta, wife of Leopoldine Society, Ludwig-Mis­ George D. Prentice, 151-152 sionsverein, 2; at Constitution­ n.35 al Convention, 33, 45 ; early Beiobachte,- am Ohio, 62 opposition to, 6, 12, 15-16; re­ Bethlehem Academy, Bardstown, ligious communities of women, 5 2, 3; statistics, 57-58; status Bethlehem Academy, Hardin of, 56, 78 County, 5 Chandler, Joseph R., 10-11 Bloody Monday: affects city's Clarke, Beverly, 36, 88 - prosperity, 111-112; chancery Clay, Henry: campaign of 1844, court suits, 107-109; Know­ 12-14, 17; on aliens, 17-19; on Nothings victorious, 92; men- American party, 17; to Crit­ ·tioned, 85, 102, 129; precau­ tenden, 18 tions against disorders, 90-91; Clay, James B., 132 property damages, 93; respon­ Cochran, Thomas B., 109 sibility for, 97-106; row on Cole, Arthur C., on election of Shelby Street, 93 1856, 182 167 168 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

Combs, Leslie, 146 Dudley, James, 38, 41-42, 141, Constitutional Convention of 146 1849: Catholic delegates, 33, Duncan, Blanton, 146 45; Constitution adopted, 47; Dupont family, 96 convenes in Frankfort, 29; Durrett, Reuben, 109 1nentioned, 79; resolution pro­ Election of 1844, 12-16 posed to restrict privilege of Election of 1852, 48, 52 aliens, 29-80, 38 Election of 1855, 101 Constitutional Union party, 158 Election of 1856, 124, 134 n.52 Elections from 1855-1859, 149 Covington: diocese erected, 56; "Exchange bank," 61 Mayor's court, 141; mentioned, Fayette Circuit Court, 141 ix; municipal ticket carried by Flaget, Benedict Joseph, 1 n.1, American party, 84 14 Crittenden, Ann Mary, 138 n.'74 Flynn, Patrick, 107 Crittenden, John Jordan: attitude Foreign funds, 4 to,vard aliens, 123, 133, 13'7, Foreign-born: attitude of Ken­ 140, 149; biography in prepara­ tuckians toward, 14-15; tion, 158 n.52 ; Clay to Critten­ charges against, 25-27; emi­ den, 18; correspondence, xi; grate from Louisville, 110; lauds American party tenets, Henry Clay's attitude toward, 91; mentioned, 126, 127, 138- 17-19; speech of Garrett Davis 139, 149, 157; supports Gar­ on, 31-32, 39 rett Davis, 124-128; welcomes Forty-eighters, 59-66; e1nancipa- Scott, 49 tionists, 80 Curtis, J. P ., 62 Fournier, Michael, 24 Davis, Garrett: American party's "Free Germans," 54, 55, 133 candidate for p:residency, 125- "Freedom of Conscience," 9, 10 127; biographical note, 29; de­ n.21 feated in presidential race, Fremont's freedoms, 131 131; mentioned, 39, 41, 42, 45, Gallitzin, Demetrius, 18 n.42 ; 46, 115, 137, 146, 157; opposes Clay to, 18 ten1poral power of Catholic Gaston, \Villiam, 37 Church, 32-33; resolution on Gavazzi, 58 aliens, 29-32 German Free Liberal Society; De Rohan, William, 24 see "Free Germans'' Diocese of Bardstown; 2 Germans: attitude toward Dixon, Archibald: champion of slavery, 79-80; in Kentucky, naturalized citizen, 29, 31; de­ 27; in Louisville, 27-28, 66-6'1; feated for governorship by in Mexican \Var, 28; union of, Powell, 51 61-62 Doern, George P ., biographical Good Shepherd nuns, 122 n.22 note, 60 n.44 Grundy, Robert Caldwell, 7, 10, Dominican Sisters, 5 11 Index 169

Gubernatorial contest 1855, 86 gent tenets, 129-130; member­ Guthrie, James: favors foreign­ ship, 84; national convention, born, 40-41; mentioned, 72, 79, 124 ;· oath of, 88 n.7; oaths 158; presides at Constitutional abolished, 140; organization of, Convention of 1849, 29 67-70; origin of title, 48 n.2; Haldeman, ,v alter Newman, 19 power wanes, 134, 144-145; n.46, 20, 157 proscription of foreigners un­ Hanson, Roger, 133 justifiable in Kentucky, 149; Hardin, Ben, 43-45 term defined, ix Harlan, James, 49, 92, 141, 146, Kossuth, Louis, 50, 58 148, 157 Lang, Patrick, 107 Heinzen, Carl, 61 Larkin, S. J ., John, 7 Herold des W estens, 61, 62 Leopoldine Society, 1, 2 Heywood, John Healy, 116 Letcher, Robert, 146 Hill, ,v. \V., 62 Letters of a Kentucky Catholic, Holt, Joseph, 51 113 n.73 Hood, Andrew, 38 Lewis, Cadwallader, 125 Humphrey, Ed,vard P., 6 Lexington, 84, 102, 141, 142 Irish Mission School, 155 Lexingbon Observer and Re- porter, eulogizes Garrett Davis, Johnson, M. C., 142 46 Johnston, J. Stoddard, 86 Liberty party, 13 Kay, Joseph, report on common Lincoln, Abraham, quoted, 158 school education, 152 Locofocos, 15 Kelly, Charles C., 36 Logan, Caleb, 152 Kenrick, Francis Patrick, 54, 90, Loretto Academy, 5 99, 116 Louisville A nzieger: at Filson Kentucky Academy, 4 Club, 60 n.43; cited, 62, 65, 92; "Kentucky Catholic"; see Ben. J. reports Constitutional Conven­ Webb tion, 45-46 Kentucky Constitutional Conven­ Louisville Courier, 45 tion of 1849 : considers a ppor­ Louisville Journal: announces tionment, 38-42; convenes, 29; Bedini 's arrival, 53; canvasses discusses education bill, 43-44; Catholics for Scott, 48-49; in­ press notices of, 44-46, reso­ fluence of, 150-152; Know­ lution on aliens, 29-30 Nothing organ, ix, 71-7 4, 88; Kentucky Court of Appeals, 142 opposes German labor unions, Kinkead, William, 148 61; Whig organ, 86 Kirkland, 58 Louisville Protestant League, 6- Know-Nothing party: aftermath, 7 111-112; attracts Whigs, 71, Louisville PJatform: drawn up, 101; constitution quoted, 87 62-66 ; mentioned, 80 ; twelve n.3; decline of, 141, 144-145; points, 63-64; translated into defeated in 1857, 143; diver- English, 65 170 Nativism in Kentucky to 1860

Lou,isville Time·s, 51, 54, 76, 92 Order of the Star-Spangled Ban­ Loving, William V., 86, 87 ner, 48 ·Ludwig-Missionsverein, 2 Order of United Americans: na­ tional convention in Kentucky McDevitt, Mrs. Elizabeth, 154, 1852, 52; organizes councils, 155 59 MeDevitt, John, 154-155 McGill, John, 7, 8, 16 Paducah, 102 Madeira, A. D., 115, 125 Papacy, attacked, 88-90 Magoffin, Beriah, 148 Pastoral of Cincinnati Council of Marshall, Alex K., 135, 136 1855, 82-83 Marshall, Humphrey, 81, 122, Pierce, Franklin, 49 135, 136, 152, 15'7 Pilcher, W. S., 55, 115, 125, 157 Maysville Protestant Association: Powell, Lazarus, 52, 158 discussion of resolutions, 8-10; Prentice, George Dennison: ac- organized, 7; resolutions of, 7- claims American party plat­ 8 form, 77; advocate of Know­ "Miller Fable," 121 Nothing movement, 71-75; and Morehead, Charles Slaughter, 78, Clay campaign of 1844, 71; and 81, 85, 86-87 n. 2, 125, 135, 136, Scott-Pierce campaign of 1852, 141-148, 146, 147 72; biographical note, 13; com­ Morris, George W., 156 mends common schools, 156; Mt. Merino Seminary, 5 delegate to American party convention, 128, to national Native American party: (see al­ council sessions, 122 ; founder so Know-Nothing party) anom­ of Louisville Journal, 71; held aly in Kentucky, 22-28; anti­ responsible for Bloody Monday, Catholic aspect, 56 ; attracts 99-100; influence in Know­ \Vhigs, 16-17, 21; first national Nothing circles, 151; leads op­ convention, 19; mentioned, ix, position, 145-146; mentioned, 1, 80; hostile to foreign-born, 48, 50, 53, 92, 113, 133, 152, 13-16, 20-21, 40; opposes 153, 155, 157; on Catholics, 88- foreign-born, 40; organization 90; on foreign-born, 79, 81, of, 19-20 88-89, 91; quoted, 14, 17-18, Naturalization laws: attitude of 124; sons baptized in Catholic American party toward, 77-78; Church, 151-152 n.35; sum­ suggested revision 134-135, 139- marizes arguments of Ameri­ 140, 141 can party, 91 Nazareth Academy, 5, 43, 151- Presbyterian, The, quoted, 2 152 n.35 Presentation Academy, 5 N erinckx, Charles, 24 Preston, William, entertains Kos- suth, 61; favors foreign-born, "Objection party," 147 33-85, 40, 45; mentioned, 79, Opposition party, 145-147 158 O'Hara, Theodore, 158 Price, Johnson, 38 Index 171

Public school system, 4, 114, 152 Scott, vVinfield, 48-49, 50 Shea, John Gilmary, 23-24, 56 Quinn, Francis, 95 Shnpson, Rev. Mr., 6 Racialism, 1, 60 Sister Christine Carroll, S.C.N., Rese, Frederic, and the Leopol- account of Bloody Monday, 95- dine Society, 1 97 Reynolds, Ignatius, 7 Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Rhodes, Ann, 3 2, 3, 5, 95, 121, 151-152 n.35 Rhodes, Mary, 3 Sisters of Loretto, 2, 3, 5 Rice, Nathan, L., 3 Slavery, 22, 38-39, 41, 79-80 Riots, 54 Society for the Propagation of Robertson, George, 125, 129, 141, the Faith, 1, 2 142, 146, 157 Society of Jesus, 4 Robinson, Stuart, 42 Spalding, Catherine, 3 Rousseau, Lovell, 94 n.25 Spalding, Ignatius Aloysius, 36- Rowan, John, Jr., 87 n.2 37 Rudd, James, 36, 41, 45, 79 Spalding, Martin John: episcopal visitations, 112; invites Bedini 81, 84, 110 Sa.g-Nichts, to Louisville, 53; mentioned, 90, St. Aloysius College, 5 94, 98-99, 107, 133-134, 158; on St. Benedict Academy, 5 Catholic schools, 156; on elec­ St. Boniface Church, visited by. tion of 1856, 135; on public Archbishop Bedini, 53 schools, 114-119, 152-153; re­ St. Catherine Academy, Scott plies to Achilli, 75-76; state­ County, 5 ment to Archbishop Kenrick, St. Catherine of Sienna Academy, 55-56 5 Speed, James, 49 St. Ignatius Literary Institution, Speed, Joshua Fry, 158 5 Stoner, Michael L., 38 St. Joseph's College, 4, 43, 51 Superintendents of education, as St. Louis Church, 7 ministers of the Gospel, 116 St. l\Iartin's Church, Louisville, n.7 94 Swope, Samuel, F., 135, 136-137 St. Martin's Church, Meade County, 112 Taylor, John D., 42, 43, 44 St. Mary Magdalen Academy; Thayer, John, 24 see St. Catherine of Sienna Thebaud, S. J ., Augustus J ., 14 Academy Thomas, Charles B., 142 St. Mary's College, 5 Thomasson, ,vnliam P., 94 St. Michael's Church, Fairfield, Thompson, J. B., 137 112 Todd, Thomas, 128 St. Vincent Academy, 5 Trabue, Stephen Fitz-James, 146, Salem Academy, 4 157 Salmon, Anthony, 24 Transylvania College, 129 n.46 Science Hill Academy, 4 Tuite, O.P., \Villiam, 24 172 Na.tivis1n in Kentucky to 1860

Under,vood, ,varner, 122, 135, ,vhig party: attitude toward 136 change in naturalization laws, 19, 21, 22; decline, 48; elec­ \Valler, John L., 42-43 tion of 1844, 12-17; supports \Vatterson, "Marse" Henry, com­ Fillmore, 132 ments on Prentice, 71 Whickliffe, Charles A., 29, 44, \Vebb, Ben. J., biographical 45; defends Catholics and sketch, 26 n.64; criticizes foreigners, 35, 39 Louisville Journal, 151; "Lay \Vickliffe, D. C., 46 Catholic Democrat," 156-157, Williams, George W., 38, 47, 77, 158; Letters of a· Kentucky 148 Catholic, 113 n. 73; mentioned, \Villich, August, 61 53, 75, 121, 130, 158; on aliens, Wilson, 0. P., Samuel, 24 25-26; quoted, 99-100 ,vittig, L., 65 W eitling, Wilhelm, 61 Y. M. C. A., and Giovanni Achilli,, \Vhelan, O.M.Cap., Charles, 24 76