TheMISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW. CONTENTS The Liberal Republican Movement in Missouri Thomas S. Barclay Mark Twain Memorials in Hannibal Franklin It. Poage Early Gunpowder Making in Missouri \ William Clark Breckenridge The Osage War, 1837 Roy Godsey ; The Warrensburg Speech of Frank P. Blair Huston Crittenden The Story of an Ozark Feud j A. M. Haswell Personal Recollections of Distinguished Missourians— Sterling Price Daniel M. Grissom Little Visits with Literary Missourians—Rupert Hughes Catharine Cranmer Historical Notes and Comments Missouri History Not Found in Textbooks Historical Articles in Missouri Newspapers Published Quarterly by The STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY of MISSOURI Columbia VOL. XX OCTOBER, 1925 NO. 1 THE MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW VOL. XX OCTOBER, 1925 NO. 1 CONTENTS The Liberal Republican Movement in Missouri 3 THOMAS S. BARCLAY Mark Twain Memorials in Hannibal 79 FRANKLIN R. POAGE Early Gunpowder Making in Missouri 85 WILLIAM CLARK BRECKENRIDGE The Osage War, 1837 96 ROT GODBEY The Warrensburg Speech of Frank P. Blair 101 HUSTON CRITTENDEN The Story of an Ozark Feud 105 A. M. HASWELL Personal Recollections of Distinguished Missourians—Sterling Price 110 DANIEL M. GRISSOM Little Visits with Literary Missourians—Rupert Hughes 112 CATHARINE CRANMER Historical Notes and Comments 120 Missouri History Not Found in Textbooks 148 Historical Articles in Missouri Newspapers 163 FLOYD C. SHOEMAKER, Editor The Missouri Historical Review is published quarterly. The sub­ scription price is $1.00 a year. A complete set of the REVIEW is still obtainable—Vols. 1-19, bound, $57.00; unbound, $26.00. Prices of separate volumes given on request. All communications should be addressed to Floyd C. Shoemaker, Secretary, The State Historical Society of Missouri. "Entered as second-class matter at the post-office at Columbia, Mis­ souri, under act of Congress, October 3, 1917, Sec. 442." CONTRIBUTORS THOMAS S. BARCLAY, native Missourian, is assistant professor of political science in the University of Missouri, from which institution he received the degrees of A. B. and A. M. His work, The Liberal Republican Movement in Missouri, is a dissertation submitted to the faculty of political science of Columbia University, New York City, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy. FRANKLIN R. POAGE, native Missourian, is pastor of the Park Methodist Church in Hannibal. He is a contributor to magazines, and a volume of his essays, Masonic Meditations, has just come from the press. •WILLIAM CLARK BRECKENRIDGE, of St. Louis, is Missouri's foremost bibliographer. His private collection of Missouriana is one of the most valu­ able in the state. ROY GODSEY, native Missourian, is in charge of the publicity department for the Missouri National Guard. He has done journalistic work for a number of newspapers and is the author of several series of articles on Missouri. His first book, History of Missouri Governors, will soon be published by Macmillan. HUSTON CRITTENDEN, of Kansas City, is a son of the late Governor Thomas T. Crittenden. He is a graduate of the University of Missouri. He has held prominent positions in public life and as curator of the Missouri Valley His­ torical Society has been active in urging the establishment of a National Mili­ tary Park commemorative of the Battle of Westport. A. M. HASWELL, a Missourian by adoption, was born in Maulmain, Bur- man, where his father was a missionary. Since 1868 Mr. Haswell has lived in Southwest Missouri and the Ozark section, and has served one term in the Missouri General Assembly. He is an author and lecturer. His home is near Mansfield, Missouri. DANIEL M. GRISSOM, a native of Kentucky, came to Missouri in 1853. From that year to 1888 he engaged in journalistic work on the St. Louis City newspapers. He served on the Evening News, was editor of the Union, worked on the Dispatch, and for nearly two decades held a position on the Missouri Republican. His historical articles on Missouri have received wide circulation. His home is in Kirkwood. CATHARINE CRANMER is a native of Cooper county, Missouri. She has taught school, written for magazines, etc., and at the time these interviews were written was doing advertising work in New York. At present she is engaged in publicity work in Chicago. (2) THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT IN MISSOURI BY THOMAS S. BARCLAY CHAPTER I THE TRIUMPH OF THE RADICAL REPUBLICANS "The Constitution of 1865 is simply an attempt of a faction to retain power in their hands which they know the people of the State had not confided to them, and which they know they could not maintain if they went to the people for their votes. There­ fore, they endeavored to disfranchise all, as far as they couldt who were opposed to them, and thus retain the power which never rightfully belonged to them. This Constitution is sub­ versive of every principle of Republican government. It is per- nicious from its deepest root to its topmost leaf.'1 Frank P. Blair. "In the name of Truth, of Justice, of Freedom, and of Progress, God has permitted us a political triumph, bringing with it the solemn responsibility of promoting those great princi­ ples by an enforcement of the fundamental law for securing the peace, happiness and prosperity of the people of the State." Thomas C. Fletcher. On January 6, 1865, the Missouri Constitutional Con­ vention assembled in St. Louis. It had been authorized by an act of the General Assembly, which had been approved by the electorate in November, 1864, by a majority vote of 29,000. At trie same time the delegates to the convention had been elected1. As the convention was called to order by the un­ compromising Radical leader, Charles D. Drake, there was a conscious feeling among the members that the Radicals had come, at last, to control the situation and to direct, without ^Missouri Laws, 1864, pp. 24-26; W. F. Switzler; History of Missouri (St. Louis, 1879), pp. 451-52. (3) 4 MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW .serious interference, the political destinies of the state. Fully three-fourths of the convention were radical Unionists who could be relied upon to support the measures of the leaders. Elsewhere in Missouri, also, the situation was equally promis­ ing. In the election of 1864, the first election for state execu­ tive officers which had been held since the outbreak of the war, the Radicals had gained notable victories. Their candi­ date for governor, Thomas C. Fletcher, received as large a majority as did Lincoln, and in both the state senate and the house of representatives the Radical control was secure. Of the nine members elected to Congress eight were Radicals, while the officials in fully eighty of the one hundred and fourteen counties of the state could be considered as partisans of the new regime. To the leaders of the Radical Republicans, the triumphs of 1864 were but evidence that the people of Missouri had approved their policies and their program. Such recognition was, they thought, amply justified and long delayed. The more militant among them had been angered and humiliated by the course of political events in Missouri from the autumn of 1861 until the election of 1864. The question of the political status of Missouri had been settled by August, 1861, when it became evident that the state would remain in the Union. The proceedings of the convention called early in 1861, primarily to consider the relations between the government of Missouri and the govern­ ment of the United States, indicated that public sentiment in the state was unquestionably in favor of the continuance of Missouri in the Union. The subsequent and spectacular events during the spring and summer of 1861, culminating in the political elimination and military defeat of the disloyalists, rendered certain the ultimate success of the Unionist cause.2 ^General accounts of these earlier struggles can be found in: Switzler, op. cit., pp. 322-406; J. G. Nicolayand John Hay, Abraham Lincoln, A History (New York, 1890), Vol. IV. pp. 206-227; T. L. Sneed, The Fight for Missouri, (New York, 1886), passim; LucienCarr, Missouri a Bone of Contention, (Boston, 1888), pp. 267-341; S. G. Harding, Missouri Party Struggles in the Civil War Period, Annual Report Amer. Hist. Asso., 1900, (Washington, 1900), pp. 87-97. A more detailed study of the period is S. B. Laughlin, Missouri Politics during the Civil War. Dr. Laughlin kindly permitted me to use his MSS. THE LIBERAL REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT IN MISSOURI 5 From September, 1861, until January, 1865, the para­ mount issue in the state was the question of emancipation. Over it, the original Unionist party split into two groups, each suspicious and hostile toward the other. The more con­ servative element among them, led by the provisional governor, Hamilton R. Gamble, favored a system of gradual emancipa­ tion. These conservatives, or "Claybanks," as they were contemptuously designated by their radical opponents, were able at the last session of the State Convention, held in June, 1863, to secure the passage of an ordinance decreeing the gradual emancipation of slaves in Missouri after 1870.8 The enactment of the emancipation plan by the convention did not tend to lessen in the slightest degree the hostility of the Radicals toward the Conservatives. They regarded the plan as a weak compromise under which the institution of slavery would remain untouched for seven years, subject to all the contingent changes in public sentiment which might occur. Until the summer of 1863, the two factions of the Union organization remained intact. After the passage of the emanci­ pation ordinance, however, there came a definite break. In the judicial election of that year each group nominated candi­ dates, and the designations of Radical or "Charcoal," and Conservative or "Claybank" came to have a definite party meaning.4 The Conservative candidates for the Supreme Court were elected by narrow majorities.6 It proved to be the last victory which the Conservatives won.