History of Nebraska - Chapter 20



Page 449

CHAPTER XX
SLAVERY IN NEBRASKA

   THE complete contrast between the attitude of the first territorial 
legislature and that of the seventh toward the negro question indicates 
the rapid growth of anti-slavery sentiment in the Northwest after the 
discussion and passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act. As we have seen a bill 
"prohibiting the settlement of free negroes and mulattoes in the territory 
of Nebraska" passed the lower house of the first legislature and was 
favored by four of the eleven councilmen who voted on the question of its 
passage. At the third session a bill for the same purpose was introduced 
in the house by Mr. Singleton, representing Pawnee and Richardson 
counties, but it was indefinitely postponed. A similar bill was also 
introduced in the council, and it was laid on the table, Bradford and 
Reeves of Otoe and McDonald of Pawnee county voting against the motion. 
The nearer to the negro slave state of Missouri these lawmakers dwelt the 
farther away they wanted to keep the negro. At the sixth session Mr. 
Houston Nuckolls of Richardson county introduced a bill of the same 
purport in the house, but on motion of Hanscom it was loaded with an 
amendment prohibiting slavery, and the enacting clause was stricken out.

   Mr. T. M. Marquett of the committee made a report which reflects the 
conservative opinion of many anti-slavery men at that time on the slavery 
question:

   In opposing the passage of this bill, the undersigned does not wish to 
be understood as desiring to have negroes or mulattoes among us. It is not 
desirable to have them here, either as freemen or slaves. It never was 
intended that we should live with them. He who created us and them, 
alloted different portions of this earth's surface to each. They are among 
us, however, by no voluntary immigration, by no act of their own, but by a 
violation of nature's law, which, as it made them a different race, also 
gave them a different place on the earth to live. . .

   The undersigned admits that it is a great evil to have negroes or 
mulattoes among us.

   Gentlemen cannot be in earnest in passing a bill which subjects a 
colored person to fine and imprisonment merely because they are so 
unfortunate as to be a negro, and on Nebraska soil. To pass this bill 
would be to pander to the vitiated prejudices of those whose highest and 
holiest ambition is to perpetuate slavery, hence they have commenced the 
persecution of a few negroes for the sole purpose of driving them into 
bondage. We see, here, when a proposition is made to make the soil of 
Nebraska free, it is followed by one to persecute the few negroes that may 
be so unfortunate as to be here. It is our policy to steer clear of the 
negro worshiper, the negro enslaver, and the negro persecutor. There is 
another and a better way to get rid of this evil; one more in accordance 
with the impulses of this enlightened age; and that is to colonize them to 
Africa, or some other southern clime, to extend to them the hand of 
philanthropy rather than that of tyranny.

   Therefore, the undersigned would recommend that this bill and the whole 
subject matter be referred to the committee on federal relations, with 
instructions to inquire into the expediency of memorializing congress to 
adopt some plan by which all the free negroes in the United States, and 
more especially those of our own territory may be colonized in Africa or 
some other southern clime.

   By 1858 northern anti-slavery sentiment, which had been precipitated by 
the repeal of the Missouri Compromise in the Nebraska act, was 
crystallizing into form. The politicians, perceiving the opportunities of 
the new party, were quick to use every advantage for the promotion of its 
fortunes. Democrats of Nebraska especially, would be estopped by con-

Page 450

sistency from objection to the application of the popular sovereignty rule 
to the Nebraska case. And so Samuel G. Daily laid the foundation for his 
political career by introducing in the house, at the fifth session, a bill 
to abolish slavery, which was referred to a special committee. The 
majority of the committee -- Daily, James Stewart of Douglas, and John 
Taffe of Dakota -- made a report whose adroitness was equal to, and whose 
effect was perhaps enhanced by its buncombe:

   Your committee, to whom was referred a bill for the abolition of 
slavery in this territory, having had the same under consideration, beg 
leave to make the following majority report:

   The abolition and prohibition of slavery in this territory is so 
clearly in accordance with the spirit of the age, and the wants of a 
progressive and enlightened and free people, that your committee deem it 
time wasted to stop to prove it to a highly civilized and christianized 
people; were we living in the dark ages of the world's history -- in a 
semi-civilized state, instead of the latter half of the nineteenth 
century -- such a work might not be unnecessary.

   And that the legislature of this territory has the power legally to 
enact such a law, we have only to refer to the ever living principles of 
all free and republican governments, towit: That the people rule, 
acknowledging no superior dictator, making their own laws in their own 
way. And in no case, in all our glorious history, do we find this grand 
principle more fully recognized, or more clearly expressed than in our 
organic act, where it is declared that it is not the "intention of this 
act to legislate slavery into any territory or state, or to exclude it 
therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and 
regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the 
constitution of the United States."

   And it is upon this doctrine -- that the people are the fountain of all 
power -- that your committee plant themselves, wholly disavowing the 
doctrines contained in President Buchanan's message, that this territory 
is as much a slave territory as South Carolina or Georgia.

   The report was well met by the democratic minority, Benjamin P. Rankin 
of Sarpy and William C. Fleming of Richardson:

   The minority of the select committee to whom was referred the bill for 
an act to abolish slavery in the territory of Nebraska, have had the same 
under careful consideration, and respectfully ask leave to submit the 
following report:

   Your committee deeply regret the introduction into this House of a bill 
of this character, and greatly fear that it was done at the prompting of 
political ambition, rather than through a sincere desire to advance the 
useful and legitimate legislation so loudly called for by the wants and 
necessities of our people. It is unfortunate for our history as a 
territory that the halls of legislation have at times witnessed scenes of 
strife and angry controversy. Sectionalism in territorial matters has 
hitherto distracted our people and done much to embitter our social 
relations, and to destroy those feelings of brotherhood which should ever 
exist amongst the pioneers of a new country whose peculiar duty it is to 
help one another in molding and directing the destinies of a young empire, 
which we trust will be our pride and the glorious heritage of our children.

   The duties of a laborious and protracted session were about drawing to 
a close, and congratulations were general amongst the members that the 
records of one term at least of the Nebraska legislature would not be 
stained with the foot-prints of strife. We were felicitating ourselves 
upon the passage of criminal and civil codes, a revenue law, and other 
laws of a general nature which the public wants demanded. But a few days 
of the session still remained, and upon their labors hung the fate of the 
school law, a homestead law, and a license law, which were second to none 
in their importance and in their effect upon the well being of society. It 
is to be deplored that there was a single member in this hall who would 
not rather consecrate his efforts to the passage of these laws rather than 
to the introduction of a measure which can have no practical effect other 
than to sow dissension and discord amongst our people.

   Slavery does not exist in this territory in any practical form, and 
cannot so exist without affirmative legislation, recognizing the right of 
property in slaves, and regulating the mode of protecting and controlling 
them, and of enforcing that right. The abstract right under the 
constitution which is claimed by some, is in fact only an inchoate right, 
which can have no practical importance in the absence of local police 
regulations; upon the subject. In the absence then of any such legislation 
upon the subject -- in the absence of any effort on the part of any member 
of either branch of the legislature to introduce legislation for the 
protection of slavery the minority

Page 451

of your committee deem it not only unnecessary but extremely unwise and 
unpatriotic, in the present state of the public mind, to hurl this fire-
brand of strife into our peaceful territory. The page of blood which 
Kansas has furnished to the history of the world should have been a 
warning to the fell hand which has attempted to strike such a blow at our 
peace and quiet.

   The minority of your committee would therefore recommend the indefinite 
postponement of the bill. Let the pages of our journals be ever free from 
an allusion to the subject, and Nebraska will grow old in her career of 
glory, and the word slavery, either for negative or positive purposes, 
will never disgrace the fair pages of our statute book.
All of which is most respectfully submitted,
B. P. RANKIN.
WM. C. FLEMING.

   Both of the reports were chiefly palpable political fencing, and Daily, 
Taffe, and Rankin, if not the others of the committees, were thus training 
and posing for popularity in the coming congressional lists. The bill 
passed the house by the following vote: Ayes, Bennet, Briggs, Collier, 
Davis of Cass, Davis of Washington, Daily, Dean, Doom, De Puy, Gwyer, 
Hall, Kline, Lee, Marquett, Mason, Norwood, Roeder, Seymour, Steele, 
Stewart, Taffe, Wattles, Young; nays, Bramble, Clayes, Fleming, Ramsey, 
Rankin, Steinberger. The bill was indefinitely postponed in the council by 
the following vote: Ayes, Bowen, Crawford, Doane, Donelan, Furnas, Moore, 
Miller, Porter, Scott; nay, Dundy.

   The politician in legislative bodies may habitually neglect matters of 
real importance to the public, but he never sleeps on a catchpenny 
partisan scheme. Near the beginning of the sixth session, Turner M. 
Marquett of Cass county introduced in the house "a bill for an act to 
abolish and prohibit slavery or involuntary servitude within this 
territory." But since the institution of slavery could not be shown to 
exist in the territory, it was deemed more plausible to assume that it 
might be established in the future, and so Hanscom's motion to strike out 
the word "abolish" prevailed by a vote of 19 to 16. The democrats in 
general voted no, presumably for tactical reasons. The bill now merely 
prohibited slavery in the territory, and in this form it passed the house 
by a vote of 21 to 17. This was not of course a party vote, for the house 
comprised 26 democrats to 13 republicans, and the council 10 democrats to 
3 republicans. But republican politicians led in the project and they were 
followed by members of both parties. Such names, well known to present day 
Nebraskians, found in the affirmative list, are: Andrew J. Hanscom, George 
B. Lake, Dr. William S. Latta, Turner M. Marquett, Samuel Maxwell, and 
John Taffe.

   Like its predecessor of the fifth session, this bill was indefinitely 
postponed in the council, as follows: Ayes, Collier, Doane, Donelan, 
Little, Miller, Reeves, Scott; nays, Boykin, Cheever, Dundy, Furnas, 
Porter, Taylor. Of those voting against postponement, Boykin, Furnas, and 
Porter were democrats. The next day the bill was recalled from the house 
by vote of the council for the purpose of reconsidering its postponement, 
but the motion to reconsider was defeated by a vote of 6 to 7, Furnas, 
Porter, and Reeves, democrats, voting aye.

   Mr. Doane then offered the following as a joint resolution:

   Whereas, slavery does not exist in this territory, and there is no 
danger of its introduction therein,
   Therefore, Be it resolved by the Council and House of Representatives 
of the territory of Nebraska, that we deem it inexpedient and unnecessary 
to waste the time of the legislative assembly in enacting or to blot the 
pages of our statute books in publishing acts either to regulate, abolish 
or prohibit slavery in the territory of Nebraska.
   Resolved, further, That being opposed to the introduction of slavery in 
this territory, and asserting the exclusive power of territorial 
legislatures over the whole subject of slavery in the territories, by 
right of inherent sovereignty in the people to regulate their domestic 
institutions in their own way, and by virtue of the provisions of the 
Kansas and Nebraska bill, this legislature is prepared in any proper and 
practical way to take whatever action may be necessary to prohibit or 
exclude slavery from this territory at any time when Stich legislation may 
become necessary.
   Resolved, further, That believing the agitation of this question at 
this time, by the attempt to legislate upon the subject of slavery in this 
territory, to be ill-timed, pernicious and

Page 452

damaging to the fair name of our territory, the members of this 
legislature will oppose all such attempts.

   But the council was bent on prohibiting slavery, and another joint 
resolution to that end was passed by a vote of 6 to 5. Doane's point of 
order that a similar resolution had been postponed by the council at this 
session was overruled by the president, and the ruling was sustained by 
the council, on appeal.

   When this resolution went to the house it was referred to a committee 
consisting of Turner M. Marquett of Cass county, George B. Lake of Douglas 
county, and Milton W. Reynolds of Otoe county. Marquett and Lake joined in 
the following report:

   Mr. Speaker: A majority of your committee, to whom was referred C. B. 
No. 58, having had the same under consideration, would beg leave to submit 
the following report:
   That the bill be amended as follows:
   Striking out in the title the words "joint resolution" and insert "a 
bill for an act," and likewise add the following: "Section 2d. This act to 
take effect and be in force from and after its passage." Those amendments 
are to be seen on the face of the bill; they need no comments. The 
question, disguise it as you will, which is involved in this bill, is the 
great question of the age. Our entire union is divided into two great 
parties on this question; one party struggles ever to uphold the 
principles of this bill, the other labors as earnestly for its overthrow, 
and we are now called to take one side or the other of this great question.
   The power to prohibit, in the opinion of the majority of your 
committee, is conferred on us by our organic act, and, by this measure, 
the opportunity is given to us to test our fidelity to the freedom, and 
opposition to the extension of slavery.
   The opponents of this measure have not a single reason to advance why 
this bill should not pass; they put forth, however, some excuses for 
opposing it. They come forth with the miserable plea that they are opposed 
to blotting our statute books with useless legislation. Sir, this is not 
so much a plea against this law as it is in favor of blotting our 
territory with slavery.
   They say that slavery does not exist here, and that this measure is 
useless. This excuse will not now hold good, for a president's message has 
just reached us in which it is declared, and in this opinion he is backed 
with a powerful party, that men have the right to bring slaves here and to 
hold them as such, and that this is slave territory.
   We, it is true, may not be of the opinion that this doctrine is true, 
but, sir, if men declare that they have a right to make this a slave 
territory, shall we not prohibit them in this act, and prevent the wrong 
they would do us? If the friends of slavery insist that they have a right 
to hold slaves here, shall we tamely submit to it? If they insist on 
making this a slave territory, which they do, shall we not insist that it 
shall be forever free?
   With the amendments proposed, a majority of your committee would report 
the bill back to the House and earnestly recommend its passage.
All of which is respectfully submitted:
T. M. MARQUETT.
GEORGE B. LAKE.

   The measure, amended into the form of a bill, passed the house, 19 to 
17, the council concurring by a vote of 7 to 3. As a matter of course it 
was vetoed by Governor Black; for in all walks of life, and notably in the 
devious pathway to political preferment, environment, especially as it 
bears upon self-interest, has a more potent influence in shaping our 
principles and determining our beliefs than our weak moral vision is able 
to perceive or our weaker moral courage is willing to confess, and 
Governor Black had been appointed from President Buchanan's own state, and 
artfully, if not naturally, reflected the president's subserviency to the 
southern, pro-slavery school of politics.

   The veto message of this mouthpiece of Buchanan shows the portentous 
width of the breach between the administration and Douglas factions of the 
democratic party. The puerile technicalities employed by the governor in 
his attempt to prove that the organic act did not intend to invest 
territorial legislatures with authority over slavery indicates his 
ignorance of the debates over the bill and of the specific declarations by 
Douglas upon that point. In a heated colloquy with Green of Missouri, who 
was insisting in a speech in the Senate, January 12, 1860, that the Dred 
Scott decision had denied any authority of Congress over slavery in the 
territories, Douglas said:

Page 453

   When the time comes for discussing it, I will show that at that period, 
on the very night the Kansas-Nebraska bill was passed, I stated that the 
sole object of the repeal of the Missouri restriction was that the people 
of the territory might introduce or exclude slavery through the 
territorial legislature while a territory, as well as after they became a 
state; and no man who heard me then, can have an excuse for not knowing 
that I held that the territorial legislature, in the territorial capacity, 
could do it. The record in the Globe will sustain me. . . In the House of 
Representatives, after the Kansas-Nebraska bill was passed, the question 
was put to Colonel Richardson, as the democratic nominee for speaker, 
whether he thought a territorial legislature could exclude slavery by a 
territorial enactment during its territorial existence, and he answered in 
writing; and after that answer every southern member but three voted for 
him as sound on the territorial question.

   In the course of these attacks on Green, which were made with his usual 
terrific force, Douglas insisted that the Dred Scott decision had not 
decided the question as to the power of Congress to prohibit slavery in 
the territories:

   I receive the Dred Scott decision as an authoritative exposition, but I 
deny that the point now under discussion has been decided in the Dred 
Scott case. There is no one fact in that case upon which it could have 
arisen. The lawyers engaged on each side never dreamt that it did arise in 
the case . . . The understanding was that when a territorial legislature 
passed an act on this subject, of which any man complained, he should be 
able to bring the matter before the supreme court; and to facilitate that 
court in getting jurisdiction, we amended the bill by putting in a 
peculiar clause providing that a case affecting the title to property in 
slaves might be taken up to the supreme court without reference to the 
amount involved. That clause was inserted in order to get this judicial 
question before the supreme court of the United States. How? On a 
territorial enactment. Nobody ever dreamt that the court was going, in a 
decision on any case that did not affect that question, to decide this 
point without argument and without notice, and preclude the rights of the 
people without allowing them to be heard. Whenever a territorial 
legislature shall pass an act divesting or attempting to divest, or 
impairing, or prejudicing the right to slave property, and a case under 
that act shall be brought before the supreme court, I will abide by the 
decision, and help in good faith to carry it out . . . But the difference 
between the senator from Missouri and myself is, that I assert that this 
question never arose. But suppose I am mistaken. You assert that the 
question has been decided; I assert that it has not been. Why cannot you 
wait for it to come before the court regularly? If you are right, the 
court will decide it in the same way that you think they have already 
decided it. I do not believe they will ever decide that way; but why not 
allow the question to come before the court on a proper case, and allow 
the argument of it? Let my friend from Ohio [Pugh] argue the case before 
the court.

   Though the specious technicalities of the veto message sound to us now 
like a voice from the tomb of a buried past, yet they were well expressed, 
and will doubtless be read as an interesting illustration of an important 
phase of Nebraska's early development.

   It was hopeless to attempt to pass the bill over the veto, and when the 
question came before the council it was laid on the table on motion of 
Porter, one of its supporters.

   A newspaper synopsis of the debate on the abolition bill discloses in 
an interesting way the differing attitude of the two parties, and of the 
two factions of the democratic party, toward the slavery question. Mr. 
Marquett insisted that the legislature had the right and power to prohibit 
slavery under the organic act. In the second place he said that the 
enemies of the bill objected to it because they were opposed to cumbering 
the statute books with abstract questions. "I look forward to the time 
when the state convention meets to see the same parties raise the cry of 
abstraction there. Why, sir, the Declaration of Independence was an 
abstraction; the way our forefathers secured to us the blessings we now 
enjoy was by declaring abstractly their rights and maintaining them; hence 
it was said by Daniel Webster that the Revolution was fought on a 
preamble; and in the days of the Revolution men who opposed the right 
merely because it was an abstraction were called tories." To the objection 
that the bill created unnecessary agitation, be said that, "We can not 
injure the territory by proclaiming to the world that the footprints of a 
slave

Page 454

shall never curse her soil. . . But, sir, it is not an abstraction; there 
are slaves in this territory. I have been informed that there are no less 
than seven or eight at Nebraska City. I have also been informed that there 
are some fifteen slaves near Ft. Kearney; and from the political 
complexion of the people of that section, I am ready to believe it. 
Slavery does exist here, and if it is wrong to hold a thousand slaves it 
is wrong to hold one. If there is only one slave here then there is a 
necessity for this law."

[image caption: MILTON W. REYNOLDS (KICKING BIRD)]

   Mr. Belden of Douglas county, Buchanan democrat, said that he voted to 
reject the bill on the day of its introduction because he believed it was 
introduced for mischievous purposes. He was unwilling to enter on a 
crusade against the rights and interests of the South. What had that 
section of the country ever done that her institutions should be 
continually and persistently assailed by the abolition press and party of 
the country? Then, again, there was no necessity for this legislation. It 
would do no harm to declare that the sun should go on in its accustomed 
course, still he had no idea that anybody would think of introducing a 
bill for any such purpose. The country had been thrown into constant 
agitation for no other purpose than to build up a sectional party. The 
speaker then read the resolution from the Philadelphia platform which 
declared that Congress had sovereign power over the territories, and in 
the exercise of that power it was their duty to prohibit slavery. "If 
Congress has this power how can the territorial legislature have it too?"

   George B. Lake, afterward judge of the, supreme court of the state of 
Nebraska, made a very positive and forcible speech, forecasting his 
ultimate desertion of the democratic party upon the issue in question. 
This speech created a sensation in the house. Mr. Lake was willing to meet 
this question today, and was opposed to occupying much time. He was 
prepared to canvass the question and record his vote. He believed we had 
the right to exclude slavery, and was not one of those who were willing to 
be driven from the position he had taken during the recent canvass; 
therefore he said emphatically and candidly, that the people of the 
territories, through their legislatures, had sovereign power over this 
subject. That principle was clearly defined in the Cincinnati platform. 
Mr. Buchanan, in his letter of acceptance, recognized it in the most 
emphatic terms. He then read from Mr. Buchanan's letter of acceptance:

   This legislation is founded upon principles as ancient as free 
government itself, and in accordance with them has simply declared that 
the people of a territory, like those of a state, shall decide for 
themselves whether slavery shall or shall not exist within their limits.

   The democracy fought the campaign of 1856 upon that issue. That was the 
issue made on every stump in all the free states of this Union. It was to 
this living principle alone that the democracy was indebted for its 
success in that struggle. "Does the gentleman believe we should have 
succeeded upon any other ground? This is a principle that is dear to every 
friend of free government. Men may change but principles never do. The 
president may declare, as he has since done, that 'slavery exists in all 
the territories of

Page 455

this Union as much as in Georgia or South Carolina,' if he pleases; but 
whenever he or his cabinet meets the Little Giant of the West, the 
language of his letter of acceptance must stare them in the face." His 
colleague had said that this bill was the vitalizing principle of the 
republican party. "That may be so. But if the democratic party in this 
legislature carry out in good faith the principles promulgated in the 
organic act, and are not driven to take ground against the principles 
advocated on the stump during the recent canvass, the originators of this 
bill will be but little benefited by its introduction." He hoped this bill 
would pass the house. If it did not, and if the majority took ground in 
opposition to its passage, the democratic party would be driven into a 
hopeless minority in this territory. No party could stand for a single day 
if it took the ground his colleague had taken. The principle of popular 
sovereignty was so deeply implanted in the public mind that they would be 
satisfied with nothing short of it. If this question was of sufficient 
importance to require us to meet it as we had to upon every stump, and 
explaining, as we did, that the people had the right to exclude slavery, 
it seemed to him that every democrat would see the necessity of meeting 
this question promptly and deciding it by forever excluding slavery from 
this territory.

   The attitude of intelligent and leading democrats of this time toward 
the slavery question is well illustrated by the remarks, in this debate, 
of Mr. Milton W. Reynolds, for several years editor of the Nebraska City 
News. After asserting that "the object of the bill and its introduction at 
this time is evidently for the purpose of creating a little stock in trade 
for the next election," Mr. Reynolds proceeded:

   Slavery has no existence in this territory. The few persons, amounting 
to but five or six, held ostensibly as servants, are really in a of 
willing or voluntary servitude. When their Masters emigrated from Missouri 
to Nebraska, they voluntarily and cheerfully accompanied them. Their 
condition is by no means deplorable, and I cannot consider them as objects 
of extraordinary commiseration or worthy of the far fetched philanthropy 
of gentlemen ever on the alert to discover objects of pity beyond the 
limits of their own communities and their own neighborhoods. The only 
persons alleged to be held in a state of servitude in this territory are 
three or four in number at Nebraska City. These three or four beloved 
servants are in an infinitely better condition than a majority of the 
white servants of this very city in which is located the seat of 
government of the territory of Nebraska. Theirs is a paradise compared 
with nine-tenths of the white servants of the north. They fare better and 
go better dressed, and are treated more kindly and affectionately than the 
hotel servants throughout the entire northern states. In behalf of these 
servants I protest against the passage of this bill. Have they petitioned 
and prayed your honorable body to pass any such enactment? Do they desire 
its passage? Do you not know that it will operate most detrimentally, 
seriously and most prejudicially to their best interests? Driven out from 
their homes of quiet ease and luxury, they will be obliged to seek a bare 
and scanty subsistence in that cold, cheerless and already crowded 
charcoal district in Canada, or they will be transported to the cotton 
fields and rice plantations of the south.

   On the third trial -- at the seventh session -- the prohibitory measure 
was enacted into law.

   The bill was passed over the veto -- in the house by 31 to 2, Downs and 
Porter voting nay; and in the council by the same vote as it received on 
its original passage.

   While the democrats had coöperated with the republicans in the 
formality of prohibiting slavery in the territory, the leaders of the 
party dashed from their lips the cup of advantage which would have accrued 
to them through this moderation, by persisting in their violent opposition 
to anti-slavery principles or tendencies.

   At the twelfth session, Augustus F. Harvey of Otoe county introduced a 
bill to remove distinctions on account of race and color in the school 
laws of Nebraska, "by providing separate schools for negro children." The 
following minority report discloses the question at issue:

   Mr. Harvey from the select committee on the bill, by unanimous consent, 
submitted a minority report, as follows, on House File No. 9 -- An act to 
remove the distinctions on ac-

Page 456

count of race and color in the school laws of Nebraska.
   That they do not agree with the recommendation of the majority of the 
committee. The bill as referred to the committee provides for the 
education of colored youth. It gives them all the privileges and 
advantages of the common school system, the means of a free education, and 
lays the foundation of their usefulness to the extent of their ability as 
humble members of the body politic. To the proposition of the original 
bill, authorizing the boards of education to provide separate schools for 
colored children, the undersigned agree, and will heartily concur in any 
action of the House which may adopt it.
   But the amendment proposed by the majority of the committee 
contemplates the admission of colored children to our schools on all equal 
footing with white youth. This is reaching too far in advance of the age. 
The people of Nebraska are not yet ready to send white boys and white 
girls to school to sit on the same seats with negroes; they are not yet 
ready to endorse in this tacit manner the dogma of miscegenation; 
especially are they yet far from ready to degrade their offspring to a 
level with so inferior a race.
   The undersigned do not believe the intention of the majority of the 
committee can be carried out by the people; and we do not believe that the 
legislative assembly should force upon the people a measure so obnoxious 
to their wishes and habits and the established principles of political 
equity.
   We therefore offer the following as a substitute for the recommendation 
of the majority of the committee:
   Resolved, That the amendment to H. F. No. 9, viz., to strike section 2 
and 3 thereof, do not pass.
AUG. F. HARVEY.
E. P. CHILD.

   The amendments of the committee were agreed to by a vote of 19 to 13, 
and the bill passed 25 to 10. The bill passed the council by the following 
vote: Ayes, Doane, Doom, Majors, Neligh, Presson, Reeves, Sheldon, 
Stewart, Wardell; nays, Bates, Baumer, Freeman. Following is a copy of the 
bill:

   An act to remove the distinctions on account of race and color in the 
school laws of Nebraska.
   Section 1. Be it enacted by the Council and House of Representatives of 
the territory of Nebraska, That the word "white" in the fourth line of 
section eight of chapter XLVIII (forty-eight) of the revised statutes of 
Nebraska, entitled schools, and found upon page 354 of the printed volume 
of said revision, and the proviso at the end of section 48 of same chapter 
as found upon page 372 of said printed volume, be and the same are hereby 
stricken out, and shall hereafter be of no effect.
   Section 2. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after 
its passage.

   Secretary A. S. Paddock was acting governor at this time on account of 
the absence of Governor Saunders, and he interposed the following veto:

The Honorable, the House of Representatives:
   I return herewith to your honorable body, in which it originated, "an 
act to remove the distinctions on account of race and color in the school 
laws of Nebraska," without my approval.
   The amendments to the present school law, provided for in this act, 
contemplate the enumeration of the colored youths, and the taxation of 
colored persons in the territory for school purposes. I cannot think it 
was the design of the legislative assembly to accomplish only these things 
by this act. I am quite sure it was intended to give the children of 
colored persons who are to be taxed for school purposes the privilege of 
education at the public expense; yet the act itself does not sanction this.
   You will agree with me that all who are thus taxed should be allowed 
their proportion of the school fund for the education of their own 
children. Any other rule would be oppressive and unjust. I shall gladly 
unite with the legislative assembly in the enactment of a law providing 
for the education of the colored youths of the territory, as well as for 
the taxation of colored persons for school purposes. Permit me, however, 
to suggest that better results could be expected in the education of both 
white and colored youths if separate schools could be provided for each.
   Much as we may regret it, we cannot. close our eyes to the fact that a 
strong prejudice exists in the public mind against the intimate 
association of the youths of the two races in the same public schools, 
which no amount of legislation can eradicate. It cannot be otherwise than 
that in populous towns, contentions will arise between the two classes 
which must certainly retard the educational advancement of both.
   I think we should act wisely if, in changing the law so that the 
children of this unfortunate class of our fellow-citizens who are now 
excluded, are to receive education at the

Page 457

public expense, we should provide for separate schools where the number of 
scholars is large enough to warrant it. This should not be compulsory, but 
optional with the citizens of the locality specially interested.
   Very respectfully your obedient servant, ALGERNON S. PADDOCK.

   On the morning of February 14th the house directed the sergeant-at-arms 
to return the message to Mr. Paddock because Governor ,Saunders had 
returned to the territory on the 13th, the day of the date of the message. 
Appeal was made to Governor Saunders but he declined to interfere as 
follows:

Omaha, Neb., Feb. 14, 1867
To the Honorable, the Speaker of the House of Representatives:
   Sir -- Your communication of this date, in which you state that "you 
are of the opinion, (a majority of the House agreeing), that in the case 
arising, in which the secretary has today returned certain bills as Acting 
Governor, that the House can receive no such communications," is received.
   In reply, I beg leave to state that I returned to the territory on the 
evening of the 13th inst., but it was at too late an hour for ordinary 
business, and I therefore gave no notice of my return, to the secretary, 
until today, the 14th inst.
   I have this day assumed the duties of my office, and I can see no 
impropriety in the acting governor returning, today, the business of 
yesterday and prior days of the session; but, of course, I do not assume 
to legally decide this question for the House.
I have the honor to be, sir, very respectfully.
ALVIN SAUNDERS,
Governor of Nebraska.

   The intent of the amendment plainly was to throw open the public 
schools to negro children; but possibly Acting Governor Paddock was right 
in assuming that, though they were to be enumerated and the property of 
negroes was to be taxed with that purpose in view, yet, without a positive 
provision in the law that these children should be admitted to the 
schools, they would be excluded. The house evidently distrusted its act, 
for no attempt was made to override the veto. Illustration of the fact 
that republican policy had now settled determinedly for general negro 
suffrage, and of the no less determined opposition of the democrats, is 
found in the majority and minority reports of the select committee to whom 
was referred that part of Acting Governor Paddock's message which 
disapproved of impartial suffrage. The majority report, made by Isaac 
Wiles of Cass county and George Crow and William Daily of Nemaha county, 
was as follows:

   We hold that the dogma of partial suffrage is a dangerous doctrine and 
contrary to the laws of nature and the letter and spirit of the 
Declaration of Independence. "We hold these truths to be self evident, 
that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator 
with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and 
the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are 
instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the 
governed." Your committee is of the opinion that there should be no law 
prohibiting any portion of our people from the exercise of the right of 
suffrage on account of race or color; and that the qualifications for the 
elective franchise should not be based on education, but patriotism, 
manhood, and natural intelligence. Entertaining these views your committee 
cheerfully endorses the action of congress in so changing the organic acts 
of the territories that henceforth, in any territory now organized, or 
hereafter to be organized, there shall be no denial of the elective 
franchise, on account of race or color.

   The opposing minority report, presented by Steritt M. Curran of Douglas 
county and Augustus F. Harvey of Otoe county, was as follows:

   We hold that the dogma of impartial suffrage is a dangerous doctrine 
and contrary to the laws of nature and the spirit of the Declaration of 
Independence.
   We hold that the right to the elective franchise is not a natural and 
inalienable prerogative, but is one which may be granted or taken away at 
the pleasure of the primary governing power, that is, in a democratic form 
of government by the people.
   We hold also, that the dictation by congress, directing the people of 
any territory to confer the elective franchise upon any race or class is 
without warrant in the constitution of the United States, without 
precedent in the history of national legislation, and a gross usurpation 
of the most sacred rights of the people.

   The majority report was adopted by a vote

Page 458

of 23 to 9, and the minority report was defeated by a like vote.

   Following is a sample Mortonism from the News: "Sir William Daily, 
member from 'PrU,' as he spells it, has prepared twenty-seven bills for 
striking out the word white in Nebraska laws. Trouble with the 
apportionment bill alone prevented him from striking out Brown in 
Brownville, and inserting 'without distinction on account of race or 
color.'"

   The first local record of slaveholding in Nebraska is in the Palladium 
of August 16, 1854. As the climax of a severe rebuke of critics of the 
popular sovereignty principle the editor asserts that, "an Omaha squaw is 
the only negro owner in the territory." The News of November 27, 1858, 
notes that on the day of the first appearance of the Press, the opposition 
organ, "two negro women were enticed from our worthy townsman, Stephen F. 
Nuckolls, by some white-livered abolitionist," and that Mr. Nuckolls had 
offered a reward of $200 for their apprehension and return to him. The 
Dakota City Herald tells of the arrest of a fugitive slave, Phillips by 
name, who had been at that place about a year; but he was rescued by 
citizens from the Iowa side of the river.

   A case that well illustrates the method of search employed by pursuing 
parties is that of the escape of the Nuckolls slaves through Iowa, the 
incidents of which are still vivid in the memories of some that witnessed 
them. Mr. Nuckolls, of Nebraska City, Nebraska, lost two slave girls in 
December, 1858. He instituted search for them in Tabor, an abolitionist 
center, and did not neglect to guard the crossings of two streams in the 
vicinity, Silver Creek and the Nishnabotna river. As the slaves had been 
promptly dispatched to Chicago, this search availed him nothing. A second 
and more thorough hunt was decided on, and the aid of a score or more 
fellows was secured. These men made entrance into houses by force and 
violence, when bravado failed, to gain them admission. At one house where 
the remonstrance against intrusion was unusually strong the person 
remonstrating was struck over the head and injured for life. The outcome 
of the whole affair was that Mr. Nuckolls had some ten thousand dollars to 
pay in damages and costs, and, after all, failed to recover his slaves.

   The Underground Railroad (Siebert) collects from the letters of the 
Rev. John Todd, Tabor, Iowa, which were published in the Tabor Beacon in 
1890-1891, the following account of the pursuit of his abducted slaves:

   Eliza, a slave of Stephen Nuckolls, who had escaped late in 1859, was 
arrested in Chicago on the 12th of November, 1860, and to escape a mob of 
excited negroes the United States marshal was compelled to give the woman 
to the city police, who lodged her in the armory for safe-keeping. On the 
24th the same paper relates that Eliza had been taken from an officer of 
the government and sent "kiting to Canada." The Omaha Nebraskian quoted 
approvingly the comment of the Chicago Times and Herald on the incident:

   A runaway slave belonging to Hon. S. F. Nuckolls, of Nebraska City, was 
recently captured in the city of Chicago, but almost immediately forcibly 
taken from the officers by a mob of drunken negroes and black republicans. 
In commenting on the affair, the Times and Herald of that city says:

   "In the presence of thousands assembled, a mob of drunken and 
infuriated negroes forcibly overrides the constituted authority of the 
constitution of the United States, and rescues a fugitive from the custody 
of the law, amid general rejoicings and midnight howls! Who can doubt 
henceforth the strength of the federal government? Who can question our 
loyalty to the constitution? Let the south dare to talk of seceding, with 
this glorious evidence of our fidelity to our obligations to the law? 
Grand government! Magnificent civilization! Down with the lawless southern 
barbarians! Stocks rising! Illinois banks sound! Niggers going up! The 
jubilee of freedom actually come!

   "Go it darkies! Hurrah for free speech, free homes, free mobs, and free 
negroes. The day of jubilee has come!"

   Cyrus H. McCormick, the famous manufacturer of reapers and mowers, was 
the owner of the Times and Herald at this time.

   In 1860 Mr. Nuckolls brought suit in the district court of the 
territory against Reuben S. Williams, George B. Gaston, Lester W. Platt, 
and thirteen other citizens of Civil Bend, Iowa, for carrying off two of 
his slaves to Iowa and then to Canada in 1858. Judge Miller, overruling a 
demurrer, decided that in this territory, where there had been no leg-

Page 459

islation on the subject, under the constitution and laws of the United 
States, an action might be entertained against parties carrying away 
persons owing service or labor.

   The Missouri-Kansas line of John Brown's "underground railroad" system 
for running off slaves into Canada ran through southeast Nebraska. It 
passed through Lawrence, Topeka, Horton, and. Albany, Kansas, crossing the 
Nebraska line opposite the last named place. It then ran through Little 
Nemaha, Camp Creek, and Nebraska City, crossing the river here to 
Percival, about seven miles northeast, in Fremont county, Iowa; then on to 
Tabor, which was a sort of rendezvous. From this place there were several 
roads, but all toward the northeast. In December, 1858, Brown made a raid 
into Missouri and led away twelve slaves over the route described, and 
then on to Canada and freedom. The party of fugitives passed through 
Nebraska City on the 11th of February, 1859, and the News -- Milton W. 
Reynolds, editor -- gives them a God-speed little less than ferocious. The 
headlines of the notice were: "Horse thieves and nigger stealers. Fit 
associates, Boon companions! Old John Brown of Osawatomie passes through 
Nebraska City with a troupe of Niggers and a gang of Horse Thieves. Read! 
Read! Ye who are attacked with Negrophobia!" The exciting cause of this 
tempestuous outbreak of epithet follows:

   John Brown, Captain John Brown, Old John Brown of Osawatomie, the "Old 
John Brown" who Gerrit Smith, when leading on the cohorts of the simon-
pure abolitionists in the last campaign of New York, being a little at the 
outs with the straight black republicans, declared had done more for the 
freedom of Kansas than the whole republican party, passed through this 
city late last Friday evening at the head of a herd of stolen niggers 
taken from southern Missouri, accompanied with a gang of horse thieves of 
the most desperate character. They had a large number of stolen horses in 
their possession -- two of which were taken and are now held by the deputy 
sheriff of this county.

   There is an appropriateness and fitness in nigger stealers being 
associated with horse thieves that the rankest black republican cannot 
fail to appreciate. A fellow feeling makes them wondrous kind. Their 
practices are similar, and it is not to be wondered at that they exhibit 
little discrimination in the selection of their chattels. If the amount of 
the property stolen is to regulate the heinousness of the crime, it must 
be confessed the profession of the horse thief is the more liberal and 
dignified calling. Osawatomie Brown and the notorious Montgomery have 
carried on their depredations during the last few months in a high-handed 
manner. Brown and his precious gang have eluded their pursuers; they have 
gotten into Iowa and may now be considered as safely on "tother side of 
Jordan."

[image caption: JOHN BROWN The abolitionist]

We clip from the Daily St. Joseph Gazette an account of their escape from 
Kansas:

   A gentleman from Atchison, upon whose statements we can place the 
utmost confidence, informed us late last evening, of some new outrages in 
Kansas. He states that Osawatomie Brown, with eleven runaway slaves had 
been surrounded by a posse of men under the U. S. marshal, in a little 
town called Eureka. The marshal did not deem his force sufficient to 
attempt a capture of Brown, and sent to Atchison City for a reinforcement. 
Fourteen men left this latter place on Sunday evening to join the Marshal 
whose whole force, counting the men from Atchison, numbered but

Page 460

twenty-five, and with which he marched to Eureka to accomplish his 
purpose. On reaching this point, however, it was discovered that Brown had 
about seventy-five men well armed, besides the eleven negroes, and not 
deeming it safe to make an attack upon him, they commenced to retreat. One 
of the marshal's party named William Green lost a horse in the retreat, 
and three others, Dr. Hereford, Charles Deitman and Joseph McVey, 
volunteered to go back with him to Eureka to recover it. They were set 
upon by Brown's men when near that place and all taken prisoners, and are 
now in his camp. The marshal has sent to Fort Leavenworth for troops to 
assist him in arresting Brown, if possible, before his escape into 
Nebraska."

   But Siebert says that Brown had "a mere handful of men," and he states 
that, "at Holton a party of pursuers two or three times as large as 
Brown's company was dispersed in instant and ridiculous flight and four 
prisoners and five horses taken . . . Under an escort of seventeen 'Topeka 
boys' Brown pressed rapidly on to Nebraska City." When the fugitives 
reached Grinnell, Iowa, they were entertained by J. B. Grinnell in his own 
house.

   The democratic territorial newspapers were from the first hostile to 
anti-slavery sentiment and propaganda, and this hostility became bitter 
and almost violent when the republican press became aggressive against 
slavery. The Nebraska City News refers to the Omaha Republican as "our 
woolly neighbor" and "our African contemporary"; and, under the head 
"Dignified and Courteous Lying," in charging the Republican with the 
heinous offense of issuing a map of the gold regions which shows Fort 
Kearney as lying north of a line due west from Nebraska City while it is 
in fact a mile and a half south of that line, calls the Republican "an 
organ of the great moral and religious black republican party. It rolls up 
its ebony eyes from under its woolly eyebrows in pious horror, and shows a 
pair of white ivory teeth when we call things by their right name in our 
criticisms upon its party." Mr. Theodore H. Robertson, editor of the 
Nebraskian, in the course of a trip to the East in the spring of 1860, 
passed through Oberlin, Ohio, and in his paper he assailed that place as, 
"The plague spot of creation, the hotbed of fanaticism, the carbuncle upon 
Ohio, and the black stain upon her fairest escutcheon, where treason is 
taught as a virtue and where hideous murder is regarded as no crime, where 
abolitionism is taught from pulpit as more sacred than the gospel of 
Christ. In Oberlin, John Brown, the cruel murderer, the experienced and 
skillful horse-thief, is canonized as a holier person and better saint 
than the world ever before saw. The peculiar institution of Oberlin is 
nigger."

   The Nebraska Advertiser attacks Governor Black's veto of the slavery 
prohibition bill and quotes severe criticisms of the veto message by the 
Chicago Times, the Philadelphia Press, the Pittsburgh Post, and the 
Cincinnati Enquirer. The Times said: "In his message, the governor, Hon. 
Samuel W. Black, furnishes the legislature with a literary and legal 
production which is a weak, very weak, condensation of the other Black's 
famous argument. . . If slavery cannot be repealed or prohibited in 
Nebraska by the legislature because the constitution protects and 
guarantees security to it as property, how can Governor Black as a lawyer 
. . . maintain that the people of Nebraska, by a state convention, can 
displace and overrule the constitution of the United States?" The Press 
said: "The executive authority of the territory is vested in Colonel 
Samuel W. Black, of Pittsburg, who was appointed governor by Mr. Buchanan, 
and who, while always an ardent democrat, was at no very remote period, a 
warm advocate of the Wilmot proviso, and we believe the author of the 
resolution incorporated in the platform of the democratic state 
convention, adopted at Pittsburgh in 1849, in favor of the Wilmot proviso. 
In the campaign of 1856, Colonel Black was an earnest champion of the 
doctrine of popular sovereignty as then understood in our state: and few 
who heard his eloquent speeches at that time . . . . when he advocated the 
right of the people of the territories to control their 'domestic 
institutions,' with special reference to the slavery question, would have 
supposed that he entertained the slightest doubt about the power to decide 
whether sla-

Page 461

very should or should not be tolerated among them." The Press made the 
same point as that made by the Times, that Governor Black imitated 
Attorney-General Jeremiah Black's argument, and that in citing the 
Louisiana treaty he proved too much, because if the people of the 
territory could not override the treaty in the passage of laws, neither 
could they do so in forming constitutions. The Pittsburgh Post, published 
at Black's old home, and the Cincinnati Enquirer both charged him with 
recreancy to the principle of popular sovereignty.

   The People's Press of Nebraska City, insisted that slavery was an 
issue: "Democracy has made this slave territory. In your own courts -- 
almost within the shadow of your own homes -- servile laborers are 
employed in places that should be open to the independent competition of 
the free laboring man of Otoe county." This republican organ also insisted 
that "the people have, and should exercise the power of sovereignty, of 
prohibiting slavery." The same paper said: "Leave it to the control and 
operation of those laws of nature upon which the democracy ask us to rely 
for the making of this a free state and Nebraska will inevitably be a 
slave state." The Press insisted that those who were able to buy or hire 
slaves would do so for the purpose of making them household servants, if 
nothing more. The wealthy complained that housekeepers were constantly 
annoyed by the overbearing and independent conduct of servants. The 
expression was common that, "If I were sure that I would be protected in 
holding slaves I would buy a man and woman to work around the house; and 
then if they did not do as I wanted them to I would make them." In the 
rapid, revolution and the slower evolution of our institutions and 
conditions, domestic service appears to remain in the same desperate 
status as it was when it impelled housekeepers to yearn even for domestic 
slavery as a remedy. A call for a democratic meeting in Nebraska City to 
ratify the nomination of General Estabrook as delegate to Congress said: 
"All who believe in the sovereignty of the people, who deny that the acts 
of the territorial legislature are subject to the regulations of congress, 
who are in favor of dedicating the free soil of Nebraska to free white men 
are invited to be present." At a democratic meeting at Nebraska City, held 
for the purpose of nominating delegates to the constitutional convention, 
a resolution asserting the constitutional right of the territorial 
legislature to establish, regulate, or prohibit slavery within territorial 
limits was laid on the table by a vote of 26 to 15, Governor Black's 
influence prevailing over squatter sovereignty, which was supported by 
Judge John F. Kinney. Stephen F. Nuckolls and Augustus F. Harvey sustained 
Black. A compromise was arranged by the adoption of the national platform 
of 1856, the Plattsmouth platform of 1859, and a resolution to the effect 
that Nebraska must be a free state. The county convention held 
subsequently could not elect delegates on account of filibustering on the 
part of the anti-Black men, and adjourned in confusion.

   Mr. Reynolds, editor of the News, said that he voted against the bill 
to abolish slavery when he was a member of the legislature because it had 
no legal existence in the territory, and because he was opposed to the 
monstrous doctrine that the constitution had carried it here. "Partly for 
spite, but mostly to get disunion into Democratic ranks, the Republican 
members of the last Nebraska Legislature attempted to abolish slavery in 
Nebraska"; and that was "an imaginary evil that had no sort of legal or 
practical existence; three or four persons only were held as slaves and 
these only ostensibly, by citizens of Nebraska City."

   Even far-off Nebraska signalled the approaching disruption of the 
democratic party. On the passage of the bill two of the leading democratic 
members explained their votes, but arrived at opposite conclusions from 
substantially the same premises. George W. Doane expressed his opinion 
that President Buchanan, in his late message, had seen fit to step far out 
of his way "to throw this agitating question upon the country and upon the 
democratic party; and if he can stand it to

Page 462

introduce this agitation, I can." Mr. Doane denounced as heresy the 
President's contention that the people of the territories had no right to 
legislate upon the slavery question, and he voted for the bill to 
emphasize his dissent from that doctrine. William A. Little, who was 
elected judge of the supreme court at the first state election, but died 
before taking the office, was even more fiery than his colleague, Judge 
Doane, in his dissent from Buchanan's opinion:

   If we could actually see a black cloud rising in the south, and should 
a horde of slaves be precipitated upon our fair soil today, no one would 
vote quicker than I, to repel such an evil from the land. But where is the 
danger? Where is this dreaded African spectre that like Hamlet's ghost 
flits ever before the hallucinated vision of the supporters of this bill? 
Our soil is yet unstained with slavery; we are free, and surrounded with 
free soil; Iowa on the east, is free. Kansas on the south, is free, and is 
there danger on our northern and western borders?

   Sir, I too, like the gentleman from Burt, take issue with Mr. Buchanan. 
I believe congress has no power over the territories upon this question. 
But I shall not vote for what is now uncalled for. This bill had its 
origin in black republican buncombe. As a democrat, I shall not vote to 
honor their political caprices, and exercising common sense, I shall not 
vote to dispel a phantom. Sir, I vote "no" upon this bill.

   In the issue of June 30, 1860, the News relates that six negroes had 
deserted and escaped from Alexander Majors of Nebraska City. "We can 
hardly think that our city is infested with such misguided philanthropists 
as nigger thieves and abolitionists. This dirty work is doubtless left for 
the nasty abolitionists of Civil Bend and Tabor." The republican 
commissioners of Otoe county returned "these negro servants or persons as 
property and taxed them as such."

   In August, 1860, nineteen "niggers" were run through Nebraska City on 
the underground railroad and kept at a storehouse over night at Wyoming by 
the editor of the republican paper there. As we have already seen, the 
census of 1860 showed that there were eighty-one negroes in Nebraska, ten 
of whom were recorded as slaves. The Omaha Nebraskian of August 18, 1860, 
notes that the Falls City Broad Axe says that a cargo of six or more 
fugitive slaves passed through Salem, escorted by thirty or forty whites, 
armed to the teeth.

   The following resolutions were adopted by the democratic convention of 
Otoe county: "The democracy of Otoe county are in favor of making Nebraska 
a free state, and we will vote for no man as a candidate to the convention 
who will not pledge himself to vote for a clause in the constitution 
prohibiting slavery in the state of Nebraska." The Nebraska City News 
demanded a law excluding negroes and negro laborers from the territory of 
Nebraska: "Cannot this be kept sacred as a home for white men -- a field 
for white labor; or shall it be made, as Kansas is, an elysium for 
vagabond niggers? Will some of our Africanized journals give us their 
opinion upon-this question? Will the abolition sheets at Omaha, Brownville 
and Nebraska City state whether they are upon the side of white men or 
negroes? . . Do we of Nebraska want a population of niggers? Do the whites 
of Iowa want a population of niggers? Does anybody, except the blatant 
abolitionists, want the two races to intermingle, amalgamate. and die out, 
as all hybrids do? If yes! support the black republican abolitionized 
party now in power and you can have your desires." The same paper notes 
that no less than five or six "newly imported niggers," some escaped 
contrabands and some free, were in the city and offering to work for six 
dollars a month; and the laboring classes of the North are warned of the 
disastrous end of the emancipation schemes of the republicans which this 
incident indicates.

   The News referring to a bill just passed by the legislature striking 
out the word "white" from the school laws, observes: "The Nebraska 
legislature has enacted that nigger children shall attend school with 
white children and upon the same benches learn the same lessons. . . The 
high school building at Nebraska City is a magnificent edifice. Our people 
in paying taxes for its erection and sup-

Page 463

ort may console themselves with the proud reflection that in its broad 
aisles and throughout its spacious halls, their own children may mingle 
freely with little niggers and enjoy the luxury of the aroma arising 
therefrom, untaxed." The Press had observed exultantly that "our high 
school building of which we are justly proud, was built on the broad 
principle of equity and no distinction on account of color"; whereupon the 
News retorted: "The attention of the Press man is called to the fact that 
a distinction on account of odor may yet be made by which both himself and 
the genuine nigger may be excluded."

Page 464

[image caption: Captain James H. Cook was a famous guide and scout in the 
Indian campaigns of the '70's and '80's. Afterward he became one of 
Nebraska's big ranchmen.]