No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2009
Some years ago Charles G. Sydnor made a rather revolutionary interpretation of politics in the ante-bellum South. He argued that the location of political power was for themost part to be found in the counties and, more particularly, in the county courts, which were usually the governing bodies of the counties. He, furthermore, suggested that county government was in many ways the most influential and meaningful government for the majority of the southern citizenry. Not many people, he contended, had direct dealings with either state or national governments because of the limitations and locations of power, the problems of communication and transportation and the essential provincialness of most of the nation. The business of most was with the various agencies and agents of county government. Regrettably scholars have ignored Sydnor's imaginative interpretation and its implicit challenge to investigate more completely the workings of county government in the South. Few revealing accounts have been published on the political realities of local government below the Mason-Dixon line. This article will seek partially to correct this historiographical deficiency by attempting to identify and explain the majorthemes of the politics of county government in antebellum Kentucky.
1 Sydnor, Charles, The Development of Southern Sectionalism (Baton Rouge, 1948), pp. 33–53Google Scholar.
2 The statutory powers of the county courts may be found in Littell, William and Swigert, Jacob (comps.), A Digest of the Statute Law of Kentucky… (2 vols.; Frankfort, 1822), I, 356–366Google Scholar; Morehead, C. S. and Brown, Mason (comps.), A Digest of the Statute Laws of Kentucky… (2 vols.; Frankfort, 1834), I, 502–516Google Scholar; and Loughborough, Preston S. (comp.), A Digest of the Statute Laws of Kentucky…. (Frankfort, 1842), 186–193Google Scholar.
3 See, for example, Acts of Kentucky, 1829–30, Ch. 357; Acts of Kentucky, 1837–38, Ch. 898; and Acts of Kentucky, 1842–43, Ch. 324.
4 The Convention (Frankfort), 07 17, 1847Google Scholar.
5 The Convention (Frankfort), 03 27, 1847Google Scholar.
6 Constitution of 1799, Art. IV, sec. 8. From 1792 to 1799 the governor alone appointed justices of the peace.
7 Constitution of 1799, Art. III, sec. 31 and Art. IV, sees. 8 and 10; Acts of Kentucky, 1797–98, Ch. 10, sec. 1; Acts of Kentucky, 1799–1800, Ch. 200, Acts of Kentucky, 1828–29, Ch. 118, sec. 1. Before 1800 sheriffs and coroners were elected. Constitution of 1792, Art. VI, sec. 1.
8 Constitution of 1799, Art. Ill, sec. 31.
9 See the remarks of Prince Nuttall in Report of the Debates and Proceedings: Kentucky Constitutional Convention, 1849 (Frankfort, 1849), 385Google Scholar.
10 See, for example, a letter from William A. Ragland to Governor William Owsley, Nov. 23, 1844, Papers of Governor William Owsley (All papers of governors hereafter cited are located at the Kentucky State Historical Society, Frankfort), Jacket 568, in which it is alleged that the clerk of the county court of Morgan refused to furnish a copy of the court's records to a frustrated seeker of the county sheriffalty.
11 See, for example, a petition to Governor John Breathitt (circa 1833) from citizens of Bracken county describing the political power of the county attorney. Papers of Governor John Breathitt, Jacket 338.
12 My source for this conclusion is the unpublished research conducted by James Ramage, a graduate student in history at the University of Kentucky.
13 Constitution of 1799, Art. III, sec. 31 and Art. IV, sec 8.
14 Petition to Governor Breathitt (circa 1833), Papers of Governor John Breathitt, Jacket 338.
15 Petition to Governor John Adair, May 11, 1820, in Papers of Governor John Adair, Jacket 216.
16 Obadiah Hendricks to Governor Isaac Shelby, July 14, 1815, in Papers of Governor Isaac Shelby, Jacket 128.
17 Petition to Governor James Garrard (circa 1802) in Papers of Governor James Garrard, Jacket 28.
18 See the report of the special committee of the house of representatives of the general assembly on buying and selling of county offices in Journal of the House of Representatives, 1845–1846, pp. 338–339. Americans early established a tradition of selling public offices, for the practice occurs throughout the colonial period. Greene, E. B., The Provincial Governor in the English Colonies of North America (New York, 1898), pp. 11–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 114. During the Ante-bellum period the practice of selling county sheriffalties and clerkships was likewise widespread in Kentucky's parent state, Virginia. See Sailing V. McKinney, 1 Leigh 42 (1829)Google Scholar. Furthermore, town constabularies and other local offices are known to have been sold before the Civil War in such northern states as Massachusetts, New York, Vermont and Wisconsin. It is impossible to determine the exact date when the practice commenced in Kentucky or elsewhere, but it is probable that it was fairly well entrenched there and in Virginia by the late eighteenth century, at which time county sheriffalties and clerkships became offices of profit as well as prestige.
19 William Littell, an early compiler of Kentucky statutes, maintained that English statutes outlawing the farming or sale of public office were in force in Kentucky. Littell, , The Statute Law of Kentucky (5 vols.: Frankfort, 1809–1819), I, 578–579Google Scholar. William Lapsley of Hardin county was indicted for selling the office of sheriffalty, but this was a rare event indeed. Chas. G. G. Wintersmith to Governor Robert Letcher, May 21, 1843. Papers of Governor Robert Letcher, Jacket 468. The state Court of Appeals assumed the sale of public office was legal. Combs v. Brashears, 6 J. J. Marshall 631 (1831)Google Scholar.
20 In 1847 it was estimated that there were 1,492 justices of the peace and 827 constables in the state of Kentucky. The Convention (Frankfort), 01. 9, 1847Google Scholar. A correspondent to the same newspaper wrote that constableships sold for $400 in Fayette county. “C” to Editor, The Convention (Frankfort), 07 17, 1847Google Scholar.
21 James C. Rodes bought the clerkship of Fayette county in 1817 for $6,000.00. Commonwealth v. Rodes, 1 Dana 595 (1833)Google Scholar.
22 There were sixteen sheriffs of Fayette serving between 1833 and 1851. Eight were Whigs and eight were Democrats.
23 Because of the lack of available evidence it is impossible to determine the party affiliations of all of the constables of Fayette county from 1833 to 1851. Both parties claimed the other had a majority. See, for example, the Democratic claim in The Kentucky Gazette (Lexington), 12. 7, 1844Google Scholar, and the Whig claim in the Lexington Observer and Reporter, Dec. 2, 1844. From the available evidence it is estimated that each party “bought” its fair share, approximately one-half.
24 Commonwealth v. Rodes, 6 B. Monroe 174 (1845)Google Scholar.
25 List of county officers of Boone county in Papers of Governor Letcher, Jacket 388.
26 The Frankfort Commonwealth, Aug. 1, 1843.
27 A study of 20 counties reveals that five of them were dominated by political parties largely unsuccessful at the polls. Democrats controlled four Whig counties: Fayette, Franklin, Montgomery and Woodford; Whigs controlled one Democratic county, Harrison.
28 The Kentucky Reporter (Lexington), 07 27, 1831Google Scholar.
29 For an interesting debate on the politics of patronage in Fayette county see The Kentucky Gazette, Nov. 30, and Dec. 7, 1844, and the Lexington Observer & Reporter, Nov. 27, and Dec. 2, 1844.
30 The Frankfort Commonwealth, August 8, 1843.
31 Petition to Governor Robert Letcher (circa February, 1843) in Papers of Governor Robert Letcher, Jacket 482.
32 Journal of Governor Joseph Desha, 1824–28 (Kentucky State Historical Society, Frankfort), 295, 299, 300, 303, 324, 339, 417, 450 and 451.
33 See, for example, The Convention (Frankfort), 03, 6, 1847Google Scholar, and the speech of James P. Hamilton, delegate from Larue county at the 1849 Constitutional Convention in Debates of the Constitutional Convention, 705.
34 For the petition to Governor Breathitt and other papers relating to the Bracken county episode, see Papers of Governor John Breathitt, Jacket 338.
35 In the governments of some counties partisan politics apparently played a relatively minor role and one party never did dominate the court. Studies of 20 counties reveal that seven of them (Nicholas, Jefferson, Madison, Henry, Clarke, Estill and Wayne) were probably never controlled by either Whigs or Democrats. Furthermore in four of these counties (Henry, Clarke, Estill and Wayne) normally fewer than a majority of the members of the courts were politically active.
36 For an account of the Democratic coup in Campbell county, see the letter of Benjamin D. Beale to Governor Robert Letcher, Nov. 10, 1840, in Papers of Governor Robert Letcher, Jacket 390.
37 For an account of the Democratic coup in Breathitt county, see the petition of the seven Whig justices of the peace to Governor William Owsley (circa July, 1846) and a copy of the order of the county court in Papers of Governor William Owsley, Jacket 620. Owsley's reluctance to look behind the order of the county court may have been influenced by an opinion of the state attorney general issued in 1843 holding such an act invalid. See opinion of O. G. Oates in Papers of Governor Letcher, Jacket 481.
38 The relevant papers (many letters, some petitions, and a few accounts of meetings) concerning the affair of Robert D. Hayman are to be found in Papers of Governor Owsley, Jackets 651 and 705.
39 For the relevant papers including the petition of the Brush Creek area, see Papers of Governor Owsley, Jacket 566.
40 Notation by Governor Letcher on petition to same from citizens of Carroll county, March 2, 1841, in Papers of Governor Letcher, Jacket 408.
41 See the preceding footnote.
42 For the Kouns affair (essentially letters and petitions), see Papers of Governor Owsley, Jackets 612 and 651.
43 David R. Bullock to Gov. Letcher, May 5, 1843, in Papers of Governor Letcher, Jacket 471.
44 Relevant factors regarding the Franklin county jailer dispute can be extracted from the following sources: Franklin County Order Book, 1839–1848 (Franklin County Court House, Frankfort), pp. 265–267, 290, 295–297 and 325–326; The Frankfort Commonwealth, 10. 14, 1845Google Scholar, Nov. 4, 1845, Nov. 25, 1845, May 5, 1846, June 23, 1846 and June 30, 1846; The Kentucky Yeoman (Frankfort), 12. 18, 1845Google Scholar; The Lexington Observe & Reporter, 06 27, 1846Google Scholar; Gorham v. Luckett, 6 B. Monroe 146 (1845)Google Scholar.
45 Relevant factors to Governor Owsley, Oct. 28, 1846, and Richard Brown to Gov. Owsley, Oct. 26, 1846, in Papers of Governor Owsley, Jacket 611.
46 See Samuel Ensworth to Governor Letcher, July 6, 1843, plus other relevant documents in Papers of Governor Letcher, Jacket 481.
47 Regions of counties calling themselves “districts” may have been referring to their constabulary districts. Each county court was required to lay off the county into constable's districts. Acts of Kentucky, 1797–98, Ch. X, sec. 1. No such requirement applied to justices of the peace.
48 On January 20, 1845, Governor Owsley vetoed a bill providing inter alia, that an additional justice of the peace should be allowed county, Ohio “to reside at or near Briggs' Mill, on Caney.” House Journal, 1844–1845, pp. 146–147Google Scholar. The house overwhelmingly sustained the veto, 87 to 2.
49 John Wash to Governor Letcher, March 15, 1842, in Papers of Governor Letcher, Jacket 433.
50 For the Logan county episode, see George J. Blakey to Gov. Owsley, March 22, 1847, and E. A. Hawkins to Gov. Owsley, May 24, 1847, in the Papers of Governor Owsley, Jacket 650 and The Convention (Frankfort), 05 22, 1847Google Scholar.
51 Recently, historian Lynn Marshall contended that the “local gentry” of ante-bellum America, which he found “established as leading county lawyers, justices in local courts, and sheriffs,” were generally anti-Jacksonian in politics and that the followers of the general therefore had to circumvent this gentry in order to function effectively at the local level. Marshall, , “The Strange Stillbirth of the Whig Party” American Historical Review, LXXII (01, 1967), 451–453Google Scholar. The results of my study partially disprove Marshall's thesis as applied to Kentucky.