TITUS DORT ~ Michigan Pioneer
Titus Dort, jr. (1806-1879)
3rd GREAT GRANDFATHER to GloverSmith Gen. 1
STORY INDEX:
TITUS DORT & Michigan Statehood: Part I
TITUS DORT & Michigan Statehood: Part II
TIMOTHY DART Revolutionary Patriot (Titus' grandfather)
TITUS DORT & The Great Free Highway
TITUS DORT & How MSU Got Its Start
A GRAVE CONUNDRUM: The Mystery of Titus Dort’s Grave
~
Older posts about Titus Dort:
Life of TITUS DORT, in his own words
TITUS DORT & Michigan Statehood: PART II
PART II (The First Convention of Assent
Dissent)
‘Come all ye Michiganians, and lend a hearing ear;
Remember, for Toledo we once took up sword and spear,
And now, to give that struggle o’er and trade away that land,
I think it’s not becoming of valiant-hearted men.’
(1st verse from TOLEDO WAR
SONG)
TITUS DORT’S RECOLLECTIONS OF THE 1ST CONVENTION OF ASSENT:
“In August, 1836 I was elected one of the delegates of Wayne county
to meet in a convention at Ann Arbor, in September of that year to
accept or reject the proposition of Congress for our Territory to be ad-
mitted into the Union of the States.
“The people of the TERRITORY OF MICHIGAN, by their representatives, met
in a convention at the city of Detroit, in the month of May, 1835, under
an act of the Legislative Council, and formed a State constitution, and
declared what the boundaries of the State should be, which conflicted
with what the State of Ohio claimed as a part of her boundary.
The CONSTITUTION was approved by the people and transmitted to Congress,
and that body refused to accept the boundaries as declared, and sent to
the people the propositions referred to — [CONGRESS] changing the boundary between us and Ohio. This was rejected by the convention at Ann Arbor, in
September, 1836.
[SECOND CONVENTION OF ASSENT] But the people in their primary capacity, without the authority of law, got up another convention — they went through
the forms of an election by ballot in the month of November — the dele-
gates met at Ann Arbor in the month of December of that year [THE ‘FROSTBITTEN’ CONVENTION] and accepted said propositions, which gave us the Upper Peninsula in lieu of what was given to Ohio [TOLEDO STRIP], and in January, 1837, the constitution was accepted and we were admitted into the union.
“The delegates in the first convention from Wayne county [INCLUDING TITUS] voted to accept the said propositions of Congress, but a majority [28] was against it.”
By 1836, Titus Dort had already established himself in Wayne County as a brickmaker—having been contracted in 1833 by the U. S. War Department to supply building materials for the completion of the U. S. Arsenal in Dearborn. Within that timeframe he was appointed by the governor and legislative council to the position of Justice of the Peace.
To be chosen at the age of 30 as one of forty-nine county representatives who would decide the fate of Michigan’s entry into the Union as a state, indicates the caliber of public service this young man had already begun to demonstrate—ultimately being elected to numerous public offices in Wayne County as well as six terms served in the Michigan House of Representatives and Senate.
At the time of his attendance at the September Convention of Assent, Titus and his wife Deiadamia were expecting their first, and only, child who would be born only days before Michigan officially became the 26th State on January 26, 1837. The child’s name honored the out-going President of the United States: their son, born on the 9th of January, 1837 was christened Andrew Jackson Dort.
EXCERPTS
FROM THE RECORD FOR 1ST CONVENTION OF ASSENT, SEPTEMBER 1836:
Wednesday, Sept. 28, 1836.
On motion of Mr. Wilkins, the convention proceeded to the consideration of the preamble and resolution dissenting from the proposition of Congress relative to the admission of this State into the Union, heretofore offered by Mr. Clark of Monroe…
Mr. McDonell moved to amend said preamble and resolution by substituting the following:
Resolved, By the people of Michigan, in convention assembled by their delegates, in pursuance to an act of Congress of the U. S. approved June 15th, 1836, entitled “An act to establish the northern boundary of the State of Ohio, and for the admission of the State of Mich. into the Union on the conditions therein expressed.” That we ASSENT to the terms therein expressed, but nevertheless, reserving to the said state, and to the people thereof, every right secured to them by the ordinance of 1787, and PROTESTING against the right of the Congress of the U. S. to alter the conditions of the said ordinance without the common consent of the parties thereto.
…the question was taken on the substitute offered by Mr. McDonell and decided in the negative, by Yeas and Nays as follows:
Yeas—21. [Titus Dort voted ‘yea’]; Nays—28.
The Resolution to Assent failed by seven firm votes. The “strong-armed” aspect of the issue had become a matter of principle that the majority of delegates could not, and would not, abide. The idea of attaching “terms and conditions” (heavily weighted in Ohio’s favor) to Michigan’s application for statehood—when other states had none—was deemed unfair and constitutionally wrong.
~
There is no doubt that the delegates to this First Convention of Assent were deeply divided on the terms of the “Toledo Compromise” when they were voted down—knowing it would block them from becoming a state anytime soon. By Thursday of that week, the twenty-one delegates who voted “Aye” to reluctantly accept the government’s “conditions to statehood” wished to clarify their “dissent to the voted dissent” by inserting into the record the following protest of the 28-21 voted-down proposal:
PROTEST [excerpts] …Mr. McDonell, pursuant to previous notice, offered the following protest, which was ordered to be entered on the journal:
The undersigned, delegates from the counties of Wayne, Lenawee, St. Clair, St. Joseph, Calhoun, Branch, Hillsdale, Chippewa, Ottawa, Ionia, Kent, Clinton, Allegan and Barry—having in accordance with the wishes of their constituents voted against the adoption of the [dissenting] resolution of the convention in regard to the assent contemplated by the third section of the act of congress of June 15, 1836, respectfully desire to record on the journal of the proceedings of the convention their protest against the [28-21] vote which has been expressed.
Because, with the most cordial respect for those who, on this question differ with us in opinion—we honestly entertain the belief—
That the Congress of the U. S. have the power, at its discretion, to admit or not to admit states into the Union. That although we do most solemnly protest against any right of the legislature to prescribe any condition relative to the admission of a state into the Union, yet, as that branch of our general government have deemed it proper to attach a condition to the admission of Michigan to accept the terms proposed, and become one of the sovereign states of the United States of America.
Inasmuch as by such act we become a component part of the general government, and have a voice in the proceedings of the Congress of the U. S.—secure and promote tranquility and order—place our local judicial proceedings beyond all cavil and doubt.
And furthermore, we do not conceive any advantage to be gained by dissent.
Without our assent, Ohio has the jurisdiction of the disputed district, and we do not contemplate that our act of dissent can alter, repeal or modify an act of congress.
Moreover, we would not, nor do we desire by our votes, to surrender any right which Michigan had guaranteed to her by the irrepealable ordinance of 1787...
We do not recognize the act of congress to alter the terms of the ordinance of 1787; but honestly conceive that our assent, in the way proposed by the act of congress compromits no honor and forfeits no right.
But that it would place us in the attitude of bringing the question before the judiciary of the U. S. and remove all disputation in regard to the acts of our state legislature, and give Michigan the voice to which she is justly entitled, by her population and position in the councils of the country.
We voted against the proposition of dissent, adopted by the majority of the convention…
Ann Arbor, Sept. 29, 1836.
John McDonell,
David C. McKinistry,
B. B. Kercheval,
Titus Dort,
Eli Bradshaw,
H. A. Noyes,
Louis Beaufait,
Ammon Brown,
[these were the Wayne Co. delegates]…
[additional names include the rest of the 21 members who voted against the resolution of dissent backed by the majority of 28.]
SOURCES:
[“A PERSONAL REMINISCENCE” by Titus Dort, Dearborn, Michigan.] from "Pioneer Collections, Vol. 1," by the Pioneer Society of the State of Michigan. 1877. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (begins p. 508)
[Record of 1st CONVENTION OF ASSENT] https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/003931098
“Journal of the proceedings of the Convention of delegates chosen by the electors of the state of Michigan in pursuance of an act of Congress of June 15, 1836, and an act of the Legislature of said state of July 25, 1836, for the purpose of taking into consideration the proposition of Congress relative to the admission of the state of Michigan into the Union, begun and held at the Court house in the village of Ann Arbor, on Monday, the 26th day of September, A. D. 1836.”
[MARKER] https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=156703 photo credit: Joel Seewald of Madison Heights, Michigan
