TITUS DORT & Michigan Statehood: PART I
(Background)
‘…But now the song they sing to us
Is—trade away that land,
For that poor, frozen country,
Beyond Lake Michigan…’
When we think of Michigan’s 19th century bid for statehood, we are likely reminded of the contested strip of land marking its southern border—and the civil war that could have been waged over it. But in the summer of 1836, Congress stepped in and created a “take-it-or-leave-it compromise” for territorial Michigan: If (and only if) you give up the Toledo Strip to Ohio, we’ll welcome you into the Union as the 26th state. And, as part of the bargain, we’ll throw in the remaining 2/3 of the Upper Peninsula wilderness as a consolation prize. Hence, the Toledo War Song from which the opening lyrics are derived, effectively expressed Michigan’s bitter reaction to this unbalanced trade-off.
[SPOILER ALERT: Michigan would eventually accept the “Toledo Compromise” and become the 26th state of the Union on January 26, 1837. But there is much more to the story…and our ancestor, Titus Dort, played an important role in the complicated plot as will be shown in PART II.]
In the 1830’s, the region encompassing the Upper Peninsula was considered to be “20,000 square miles of howling wilderness on the shores of Lake Superior,” as one writer put it.
By contrast,
the disputed narrow strip of borderland claimed by both Michigan and Ohio—less
than 500 square miles and only 8 miles wide at its broadest point—was
considered the real prize and would give only one of the claimants the
exclusive rights to the western terminus of Lake Erie with access to the
expansive Maumee River and its up-and-coming port of Toledo. With this real estate
linked to the Erie Canal system, the “winner” of this prized property would
have the economic advantage by becoming an important conduit of maritime transportation,
commerce, and westward settlement, influencing the future development of a growing
nation.
Michigan based its claim to the Toledo Strip on the territorial provisions of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 and the congressional Act of 1805 with boundaries defined by early maps as exemplified in this detail of Michigan from the 1757 MITCHELL MAP of British and French holdings in North America:
(Note: John Mitchell’s crude map above was used as a primary map source during the 1783 Treaty of Paris). Cartography slowly improved over time as seen below in this 1831 map of Michigan by David H. Burr:
(Below) Detail from the 1831 BURR MAP: note red line showing the border between Michigan and Ohio—with the mouth of the Maumee River shown by arrow ABOVE the boundary line—in Michigan Territory:A letter dated September 3rd, 1835 was submitted to the FIRST CONVENTION OF ASSENT promising that “A minute and detailed report accompanied by a proper map to illustrate it will be forwarded as soon as it can be prepared. (signed) H. SMITH, NATHAN HUBLE. A true copy, KINTZING PRITCHETTE, Sec’y of State.”
A map created by Andrew Talcott in 1835 and subsequent detailed report were prepared. The map surveyed the disputed region between Michigan and Ohio and located the heart of the long-held controversy as stated in a later report prepared by Sears C. Walker:
ARTICLE V.
Determination of the Longitude of several Stations near the Northern
Boundary of Ohio, from Transits of the Moon, and Moon-culmi¬
nating Stars, observed in 1835, by Andrew Talcott, M. A. P.
late Capt. U S. Engineers.
By Sears C. Walker, M. A. P. S. (read March 2, 1838)
SECTION i.
In the summer of 1835, Captain Talcott was employed by the govern-
ment of the United States to make a series of observations near
the southern boundary of Michigan. The object of this mission was
to settle the long disputed question of the Northern Boundary of Ohio,
which, on the occasion of the proposed admission of Michigan into the
Union, had been made the subject of a controversy, that threatened, for
a while, to disturb the peaceful relations between the neighbouring
states.
Indeed, such was the pertinacity of the rival claimants, that
an armed force was arrayed on each side, and a nice geographical question
was on the point of being decided by a tribunal, of all others, least
competent to do justice to its merits.
The cause of this controversy, which fortunately terminated without
fatal consequences, may no doubt be traced to an error in the map
used by the parties to the original charter of Ohio.
In this charter it was ordained that the northern
boundary of Ohio should be the line running due east from the southern¬
most point of Lake Michigan, and terminating in the southernmost
point of North Cape, in the eastern extremity of Lake Erie.
Subsequent observations by Captain Talcott have shown that North Cape is
in latitude 41° 44' 8", while the South Bend, so called, of Lake Michigan,
is in 41° 37' 6 7, leaving a discrepancy of about eight geographical miles.
In 1817, deputy-surveyor Harris traced a boundary
line from North Cape, Lake Erie, S. 87° 42y W., towards South Bend,
Lake Michigan. This was recognised by the citizens of Ohio as their
true northern boundary, though differing from a parallel of latitude
required by the other condition of the charter.
On the contrary,
another line fulfilling this condition of the
charter was drawn by deputy
surveyor Fulton in 1818, being a continuation eastward of the parallel
of South Bend, Lake Michigan, to Lake Erie, seven miles south of the
stipulated point, North Cape, and cutting off from Ohio the mouth of
Maumee river, and the greater part of Maumee bay. This line was
claimed as their true southern boundary by the citizens of Michigan,
and hence the controversy referred to, for the facts of which I am
indebted to Mr Henry S. Tanner. (from pp. 241-242 of report)
Detail of the disputed area from 1833 TANNER MAP:
TALCOTT'S MAP clearly shows the carefully-surveyed boundary lines:
(RED: boundary claimed by OHIO; BLUE: boundary claimed by MICHIGAN)
What does this all mean?
It would seem
that Ohio was wrong and Michigan was right all along. But it would take TWO,
not one, CONVENTIONS OF ASSENT for the territorial delegates of Michigan to
come to agreement over the border issue. Ultimately, the territory of Michigan
would find that they had little choice in the matter when the state of Ohio had
all the clout in Congress and they had none, as these lines from Toledo
War Song continue:
“They say that we must surely trade, or we shall be cast out;
That we shall lose our five per cent as sure as we do not;
“That we can’t be admitted into the bold union,
But that we must, like
the fifth calf, stand back and just look on.
“And if we’re not admitted, a member we can’t send,
All for to represent us
to be good and honest men…”
In PART II, we will find that the FIRST CONVENTION OF ASSENT—typically shadowed by the more familiar “Frostbitten SECOND Convention of Assent”—was where the initial expectation of “assent” to meeting Congress’ conditions for Michigan statehood was, instead, met with “dissent.” Twice.
Titus Dort was a delegate at that First Convention of Assent, held in September of 1836. Part II explores why they refused the Toledo Compromise.
SOURCES:
[1757 MITCHELL MAP] Description: A part of the Mitchell Map - A map of the British and French dominions in North America,...; 1757; Excerpt showing Michigan area. (between 1755 and 1757) This map is available from the United States Library of Congress's Geography & Map Division
[1831 BURR MAP] Description: Map of Michigan counties while still a territory around 1831 Source http://archive.lib.msu.edu/maps/MSU-Scanned/Michigan/843-A-1831.jpg. MSU Libraries catalog record: http://catalog.lib.msu.edu/record=b12049205~S39a Author David H. Burr
[1833 TANNER MAP] Henry S. Tanner: A New Map Of Michigan With Its Canals, Roads & Distances,1833. Philadelphia. Found at http://highlandtownshiphistoricalsociety.com/ Highland%20Photo%20Tour/Maps/1833_Tanner01.htm
[1835 TALCOTT MAP] Hood, W., Haas, P. & Talcott, Andrew. (1835) Map exhibiting the position of the several lines connected with the settlement of the Ohio boundary question. [Washington, D.C., ?] [Map] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/75690625/. (Originally accompanied a report of Capt. Andrew Talcott, Dec. 14, 1835, concerning the Ohio boundary. Report found at https://dn790000.ca.archive.org/0/items/determinationofl00walk/determinationofl00walk.pdf)
[REPORT] Determination of the longitude of several stations near the northern boundary of Ohio, from transits of the moon, and moon-culminating stars, observed in 1835, by Andrew Talcott. Found at https://ia601007.us.archive.org/0/items/determinationofl00walk/determinationofl00walk.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment