THH Season 2 Episode 3: The Rhodes Family Incident

Transcript of The Rhodes Family Incident

Jump to Show Notes

Written by Lindsey Beckley

Produced by Jill Weiss Simins

[Door opening]

Beckley: Picture a house with one entrance – no windows to let in the light, no back door for easy access to the back yard– just the one front door. In 1844, the Rhodes family lived in just such a house. John Rhodes had built his family home in such an unusual manner with one thing on his mind – protection. Protection from the threat that loomed large over everyday life on his small Westfield farm. Protection from the day that John and his wife, Louann hoped would never come. Protection from slave catchers paid to hunt down and re-enslave freedom seekers. John and Louann Rhodes, along with their infant daughter, escaped from the home of their enslaver 7 years before, in 1837. On this episode, we’ll discuss the Underground Railroad in Indiana and what came to be known as the Rhodes Family Incident.

I’m Lindsey Beckley and this is Talking Hoosier History.

[Music]

Beckley: Slave escape narratives and stories of the Underground Railroad abound in the American collective memory. These stories tend to follow a similar plot. The enslaved person is concerned about being separated from their family. They include daring and ingenious escapes. And they end just after the central figures reach the “freedom” of the North. These plot points can be seen clearly in two of America’s most well-known escape stories.

Guest speaker: After watching his wife and children sold away, Henry Brown resolved to escape slavery by any means necessary. That means, as it turned out, was to be a wooden crate marked “dry goods.” On March 23, 1849, Brown, with the help of others, concealed himself in a wooden box and shipped himself from Virginia to Philadelphia. He traveled – first by wagon, then by steamboat, and finally by railroad – for 27 hours to the home of abolitionist James Miller McKim. His daring escape was successful and he became known as “Box” Brown.

Guest Speaker: William and Ellen Craft married in 1846, despite being owned by two different families. The two dreaded a possible separation and decided to flee north. Ellen, who had a lighter complexion than her husband, posed as a white male slave owner travelling with a male slave, who would, of course, be William. The two fled their enslavement in Georgia in December 1848 and after several days – and several close calls – they reached their destination – Philadelphia.

[Music]

Beckley: But that’s not where their stories ended – Henry Brown and William and Ellen Craft all eventually moved to England to escape the possibility of recapture. People who had escaped enslavement were often forced to continue escaping for the rest of their lives.

Recapture was a constant threat to those who had escaped slavery. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 declared that any person accused of being a runaway slave could be claimed by providing proof – in the form of verbal assurance or an affidavit – that that person was their property. Not so shockingly, this honor system was often abused by people seeking to enslave other people. The act also imposed penalties on those who assisted a fugitive slave in escape or concealment after escape.

The threat of these penalties meant that any work being done to assist enslaved people in their search for freedom had to be done in secret and that led to the development of the Underground Railroad. This secrecy, as crucial as it was to the continuation of the Underground Railroad, has presented some problems for historians in the years since the abolition of slavery. The lack of documentation means that it’s difficult to verify local lore that the church – or home – or local dry goods store – was a stop. And what few documents we do have are almost exclusively from white allies of the Underground Railroad, despite the fact that free black communities were crucial in the escape stories of many people. This has created a distorted view of the UGRR as being a system of white people saving enslaved African Americans from the bonds of slavery while largely ignoring not only the work done by free black communities but also the agency of the escaping people themselves.

Luckily, every so often, there’s a story that comes through the ages that can be verified and that tells a story of formerly enslaved people fighting to remain free. This is one of those stories.

$1,100. $1,100 could buy three humans in 1836. In this case, those humans were John and Louann Rhodes and their child, Lydia. They were sold as slaves to Singleton Vaughn, of Missouri, who took them to his land to work. Little is known of the conditions of the Rhodes family while they lived on the Vaughn property. Regardless of their treatment, one fact is certain – they weren’t free. About a year later, the family learned that Vaughn planned to sell Louann and Lydia further south, splitting up the Rhodes.

They had two choices – stay and hope that such an eventuality never came to pass, or attempt an escape. Both were risky. It was common practice for slave holders to sell members of the same family to other enslavers. On the other hand, the prospect of an escape must have been daunting and the repercussions of a failed attempt could be harsh or even deadly. Surely, the two weighed their options and debated the probability of being separated. In the end, they decided that escape was the only plausible option – the risk of separation was too high.

In the middle of the night in April, 1836, John, Louann, and Lydia stole away from the Vaughn farm. They traveled lightly – they carried an axe and some clothes but little else.

[Sound of water]

Beckley: The family made their way across the Mississippi River and into Illinois. Vaughn, upon discovering their absence, sent notices to various authorities alerting them to be on the lookout. Apparently, those notices worked and the fleeing family was captured and placed in jail somewhere in Illinois.

The details of the story are vague, but somehow nearby agents of the Underground Railroad were alerted to the freedom seekers’ plight. They broke into the jail and freed the family, who continued their journey, presumably heading towards Canada. Travelling north east, the family moved through the fields of Illinois, and later, Indiana.

[Transition music]

BeckleyEventually, they made their way to Hamilton County, Indiana – just North of Indianapolis. While we don’t know for certain why they made this decision, the family decided to settle in Hamilton County, near Bakers Corner. The area was home to many free people of color who were farming and thriving – this likely fostered a sense of belonging.

[Sound of felling a tree]

Beckley: In the years after settling in the area, the family bought and cleared a 10 acre plot of land, built their house… you know, the one with just one door, and presumably lived a fairly typical life for farmers in rural Indiana. To get a glimpse of that life, we can turn to the nearby Roberts Settlement, a community of free people of color not even 10 miles north of the Rhodes family home. In the book Southern Seed Northern Soil, the preeminent work on the topic, historian Stephen Vincent writes,

Voice actor reading from Southern Seed Northern Soil:  “Throughout the 1830s and 1840s…pioneers engaged in a constant struggle to gain an upper hand on this forbidding wilderness. Much of their time and energy was devoted to clearing their forested claims, tackling the work associated with farm-making, and producing most of the food and other goods needed for survival.”

Beckley: The Rhodes family would have faced similar struggles in taming the land, along with the ever present threat of their former enslaver catching up to them. In the spring of 1844, their worst fears became reality when Singleton Vaughn appeared on their doorstep.

[Transition music]

Exactly how Vaughn learned of the Rhodes’ presence in Hamilton County is unknown. But when he heard, he, along with two agents who could confirm that he had bought the family, travelled to Indiana. Once they arrived, Vaughn applied for and received a warrant to arrest the Rhodes and return with them to Missouri. Then, in the middle of the night, the men, who were intent on re-enslaving the family within, arrived at that small home with just one front door.

[Ominous music]

They knocked on the door, but when the family realized who was calling, they refused to open. Vaughn and his men pried the door from its hinges and broke through the stick and mud chimney. Realizing that physical resistance was not only futile, but dangerous, John Rhodes turned to his intellect…he had a plan.

He and Louann surrendered themselves to the slave catchers and agreed to return to Missouri. First, though, John claimed that a neighbor owed the family $50, knowing that Vaughn would want to collect on the debt since the money would actually go to him, as their enslaver. Vaughn allowed the neighbor to be fetched, just as John had hoped. The neighbor arrived, and he was followed shortly by more neighbors – many of whom were friends of the Rhodes and protested their kidnapping.

Vaughn knew the law was on his side. In his mind, he had little to lose by going through the judicial system – he had enslaved the Rhodes lawfully, put them to forced labor lawfully, and now, he wanted to re-claim them lawfully. To that end, he agreed to have the matter put to trial in Noblesville. The group – made up of the Rhodes, who were being carried in a wagon, surrounded by Vaughn, his agents, and an ever increasing crowd of neighbors on foot – made their way toward town for some time before stopping at a farm for a few hours to break their fast. While they were stopped, their company grew even more.

Finally, they started down the road once more, moving ever so slowly towards Noblesville. They reached a fork in the road – one path led to Noblesville, the other to Westfield. The throng of neighbors – now 150 people strong, were well aware that the Rhodes had a better chance at freedom if their trial was in Westfield, which had more abolitionist leaning officials than Noblesville. That’s why, upon arriving at the fork in the road, the members of the crowd urged the driver of the wagon to proceed to Westfield. After much arguing, it had been almost decided to take their chances in Noblesville when, with a shout, the wagon driver urged his horses down the Westfield road. Vaughn and his companions attempted to follow but the fleeing wagon was too fast. The wagon escaped and with it, the Rhodes family, not to be seen by Vaughn or his associates again.

Vaughn had lost his property, but he had one more course of action at his disposal. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 states that:

Voice actor: “Any person who shall knowingly and willingly obstruct or hinder such claimant, his agent or attorney, in so seizing or arresting such fugitive from labor…shall forfeit and pay the sum of 500 dollars, for the benefit of such claimant.”

Beckley: Citing this rarely enforced section of the act, Vaughn singled out Mr. Owen Williams as being in the crowd on the day of the escape and filed suit against him in an attempt to recuperate at least a portion of his investment.

The case was brought to the Indiana Circuit Court in May, 1845, a year after the Rhodes narrowly escaped Vaughn’s grasp. The presiding Judge, John McLean gave the jury several instructions prior to trial, such as: the jury were not to make a judgement on slavery itself, but rather on the case in question, based on legal precedent, rather than their personal feelings about the practice. He also reminded the jurors that the U.S. constitution was in full effect in the state of Indiana, including those sections upholding slavery and the rights of property that went with that. It was the very last instruction that was most crucial to the case at hand, though.

Voice actor: “An owner of slaves, who takes them to the state of Illinois, and keeps them at labor six months, and then removes them to Missouri, forfeits his right to them as slaves.”

Beckley: Before Singleton Vaughn purchased John, Louann, and Lydia, they were living with their enslaver, name of Tipton, in Illinois. Tipton had moved them to Illinois, a free state, from October, 1835 to April, 1836 – that’s almost exactly 6 months. Just long enough for them to become legally free.

During the course of the trial, Vaughn provided evidence that he had purchased the family of 3 for $1,100 – $500 down with ongoing payments arranged – basically, he purchased them on an installment plan…a phrase which is typical, if you’re buying a car, but which becomes nearly unfathomable when talking about human beings. He also provided evidence that the Rhodes lived and worked on his land for 1 year. And that he had acquired the appropriate paperwork to recapture them in Indiana. He even provided evidence that he was not a cruel enslaver – not that that was necessary, as, under the law, he could treat his property however he saw fit.

On the other side, the defense presented evidence that Tipton, the Rhodes’ former enslaver, had not only lived in Illinois, but that he had made improvements to his land. And he had participated in elections. And told his neighbors he intended to stay in the state, and eventually become a citizen of the state. All of this evidence added up to prove that Tipton knowingly moved John, Louann, and Lydia to a free state for over 6 months. Thus, Singleton Vaughn could not have bought them, because they were not enslaved. Thus, the Rhodes family was free.

After both sides rested their case, the jury took only a few minutes to come to a verdict: Owen Williams did not owe Singleton Vaughn the $500 fee for aiding and abetting a fugitive, due to the fact that the Rhodes were not fugitives.

Vaughn v. Williams was not a landmark case. There was plenty of legal precedent upon which to base the decision. But it was a landmark moment in the lives of this Hoosier family. John and Louann Rhodes lived freely in Hamilton County for the rest of their lives.

If the case of Vaughn v. Williams had been decided after 1857, the outcome would have been much different. The legal landscape had changed in two drastic ways in the intervening years. First, the 1793 Fugitive Slave act had been replaced by the much stricter and federally enforced Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. Second, in 1857, Scott v. Standford, more commonly known as the Dred Scott case, toppled legal precedent and ruled that a slave, in this case Dred Scott, who had resided in a free state, in this case, Illinois and Wisconsin Territory, was not thereby free. Furthermore, it was ruled that African Americans, whether they were free or enslaved, could not be citizens of the United States. Justice John McLean, who had presided over the Vaughn v. Williams case, wrote a scathing dissenting option on the Dred Scot case. In it, he underlined the legal precedent, as he had done with his jurors instructions 12 years before.

Although John, Louann, and their children were legally free in perpetuity, the anxiety of being re-enslaved was ever present, through the Civil War. As discussed at the top of the episode, all an enslaver needed to do in order to claim a person of color as their property was to convince a judge that he owned them, oftentimes with extremely tenuous, even false evidence.

For example, in the case of Vallandingham v. West, which was discussed in season 1, epsidoe 3 of the podcast, Vallandingham, who claimed that West had escaped enslavement on his property, cited the fact that he had cut off one of West’s fingers during his enslavement. Despite the fact that West did not have any such injury, it was ruled that West was to be sent to Kentucky to be put to forced labor on Vallandingham’s property. In this case, as in many other cases, there was no justice.

When people live in a place where they don’t feel protected by the governmental authorities or judicial system, they often find other ways to cope – John Rhodes built his home with only one exit in order to avoid slave catchers. Young African American boys were taught not to look at a white woman during the early 20th century in order to avoid the wrath of vigilante justice. And today, the national discussion still centers around the discrepancies in the treatment of minorities in the American judicial system.

[Talking Hoosier History theme music]

Beckley: Once again, I’m Lindsey Beckley and this has been Talking Hoosier History, a product of the Indiana Historical Bureau which is a division of the Indiana State Library. Special thanks to our guest speaker, Angela Downs, who is an administrative assistant at the Indiana State Library. Talking Hoosier History is written by me, Lindsey Beckley. Production and sound engineering by Jill Weiss Simins. Excerpts read by Justin Clark. Visit blog.history.in.gov and click “Talking Hoosier History” to see all of the sources for this episode. Find us on twitter and facebook at @talkhoosierhist and like, rate, and review us wherever you get your podcasts. And as always, thanks for listening.

[Door Closing]

Season Two Episode Three Show Notes

Other

Vaughan v. Williams, Indiana Circuit Court, May Term: 1845, Case No. 16,903, Accessed in IHB Rhodes Family Incident Historical Marker File.

Newspaper

“Pioneer Times Recalled,” Hamilton County Ledger, April 6, 1909, 1.

Articles

                C.W.A. David. “The fugitive Slave Law of 1793 and its Antecedents,” The Journal of Negro History, 9, no. 1 (January 1924): 18-25.

Heighway, David. “The Law in Black and White: The Story of a Hamilton County Family,” https://www.westfield.in.gov/egov/documents/1376663863_54293.pdf

Conklin, Julia. “The Underground Railroad in Indiana,” The Indiana Magazine of History, 6, no. 2 (June 1910): 63-74.

Shirts, Augustus. A History of the Formation, Settlement and Development of Hamilton County, Indiana, From the Year 1818 to the Close of the Civil War.

Books

                Cox, Anna-Lisa. The Bone and Sinew of the Land: America’s Forgotten Black Pioneers & The Struggle for Equality, New York: Public Affairs, 2018.

                Vincent, Stephen. Southern Seed Northern Soil: African-American Farm Communities in the Midwest, 1765-1900, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999.

 

Boiled, Burned, and Guillotined: The Inventions of Magician Lester “Marvelo” Lake

Business stationary, Lester “Marvelo” Lake, courtesy of London the Mentalist, reproduced in Julie Schlesselman’s Buried Alive Every Afternoon Burned Alive Every Evening, p. 123.

Lester “Marvelo” Lake was born in 1904 in the small town of New Trenton, Indiana, where his father owned a local dry goods store. It was in that store that Lake met a man who would change his life. The man remains unnamed in the story told to a reporter, but Lake recalled “Then came . . . an old timer that kindly showed me some tricks and very nicely ruined me forever.” Magic came to be not only a passion for the outgoing and entertaining young Hoosier. It would become his profession.

Lake’s magic career spanned from 1925 to 1960. He performed shows in theaters, parks, and nightclubs from California to Louisiana, as well as abroad in Europe and Cuba. The changes in his career reflected closely the changes in the entertainment industry. Early in his career, during the tail end of the “Golden Age of Amusement Parks,” Lake was contracted to perform multiple daily shows at Forest Park in Dayton, Ohio. As the Great Depression set in, Lake began travelling more frequently for work, going wherever he could get a gig – mostly in small theatres and nightclubs. However, Lake’s importance comes not from his performances but from his many inventions.

Lake is credited with either inventing or improving upon 300 tricks and illusions during his career. First independently, and later in conjunction with Abbott’s Magic Co. of Colon, Michigan, Lake invented and sold versions of popular illusions such as the Indian rope trick, 3-card monte, and a sword-box. Some of his most notable developments were his spectacular outdoor performance pieces – Boiled Alive and Burned Alive, as well as the Lester Lake Guillotine.

Boiled Alive

Outdoor venues such as amusement parks were the perfect venues for spectacular illusions. Lake’s first large scale outdoor illusion was Buried Alive, versions of which had been performed by the likes of Harry Houdini and Howard Thurston. After gaining some notoriety for his performance of Buried Alive, he began performing a new illusion of his own creation – Boiled Alive. The illusion is described in the Dayton Daily News:

Dayton Daily News, August 12, 1928, 22, Newspapers.com.

“Permitting himself to be bound with chains and shackled, he jumps into a tank of blazing fluid, emerging a few moments later free of all his bounds and seemingly without being any the worse for his experience. That there is not fraud in the manner in which he permits himself to be bound and shackled, he permits personal inspection of his bonds by anyone so desiring, before leaping into the tank.”

Later, Lake described some of the mechanics of the illusion in a magic magazine called The Sphinx:

“Suggested measurements for the props for this effect are a platform five feet wide, twelve feet long, which is raised twelve feet from the ground on four uprights or substantial posts. The platform needs to be braced and to have a trap door in the center four feet by four feet. This trap door has two doors opening down and a release connected with a rope which runs to the edge of the platform and hangs down . . . Around the base of the tank is laid light kindling and brush wood and excelsior . . . I filled the tank practically to the top and poured a quart of gasoline on top of the after . . . After the performer has released himself from the shackles in the water, he stays down as long as he is able in order to heighted the effect.”

Lake preparing to plunge into the Boiled Alive container, courtesy of Ken Klosterman’s Salon de Magie, reproduced in Schlesselman’s Buried Alive, p. 79.

Perhaps due to all of the equipment involved in the production of this illusion, reports of Lake performing it are confined to his time at Forest Park. His next large scale spectacular illusion would become much more wid espread.

Burned Alive

The Richmond Item, July 5, 1929, 15, Newspapers.com.

On Monday, July 1, 1929, Lester Lake unveiled his newest act – Burned Alive. The set-up of the performance was described in The Sphinx:

“A platform was built and covered with sand. Coal oil was poured around and papers scattered about and in the center was a box of zinc construction. Lake was put into it and the lid clamped down. Then someone set4 the oil on fire. The mass burned for seven and one-half minutes, after which Lake was removed from the box, hot but unburned.”

Newspapers reported that there were some adjustments to be made for future performances, noting:

At Monday night’s performance the oven in which Lake allows himself to be placed became ‘a little too hot.’ He emerged from it as per schedule, but a little too warm under the collar. A fire that is not too hot has been ordered by Lake for future performances.

Lake denied all accusations of utilizing an oxygen tank during his performances. He explained in interviews that he employed “self-hypnosis,” a type of meditation, in both his Burned Alive and Buried Alive Acts. After being closed in the coffin (a wooden coffin was used for Buried Alive and a metal coffin was used for Burned Alive), Lake would enter a “catatonic state,” allowing him to survive on a limited amount of oxygen and withstand the high temperatures.

Lake’s Buried Alive Performance, Courtesy of London the Mentalist, Schlesselman’s Buried Alive, p. 131.

Lester Lake Guillotine

Advertisement for the Lester Lake Guillotine, personal collection of Julie Schlesselman, reproduced in Schlesselman’s Buried Alive, p. 110.

Probably Lake’s most recognizable illusion, the Lester Lake Guillotine, improved upon past beheading illusions. The history of decapitation illusions can be traced back to ancient Egypt. Lake’s version of the ancient trick was different in that it was portable. Weighing about 30 lbs. and transported in a briefcase-like package, the Lester Lake Guillotine was much more feasible for a travelling show and small stage than its large, cumbersome forbearers.

The Linking Ring, 10, No. 12 (February 1931): 1557.

Unlike the Boiled Alive and Burned Alive illusions, Lake manufactured and sold the Lester Lake Guillotine, which caused him to be tight lipped on the exact construction. It is clear that, like most decapitation apparatuses that came after it, the Lester Lake Guillotine employed two blades – one above the head and one below the head – and stopper blocks hidden within the neck stock piece to stop the upper blade just before it reached the neck of the “victim.”

Lake manufactured his guillotines independently from 1931 until 1934, when he began working in conjunction with Abbott’s Magic Co. From that time on, the device became more frequently referred to as the “Head Chopper.” Later, Lake produced many similar products for the company, including The Chopper (a smaller, even more portable version of the Guillotine) and The Disecto Illusion (shown below).

The Conjurors’ Magazine, 1 No. 4 (May 1945): 47.

Lester Lake’s contributions to the world of magic are enduring. In the years after his 1977 death, magicians continued to perform and improve illusions pioneered by “Marvelo.”

THH Season 2 Episode 2: Haunted Hoosier History 2018

Transcript of Haunted Hoosier History 2018

Jump to Show Notes

Written by Lindsey from Original Research

Produced by Lindsey Beckley and Jill Weiss Simins:

Lindsey Beckley: In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, people lived a lot more closely with death than we do today. Mortality rates were much higher. Wakes were held in the family home. And relics of the dead, such as death photographs and hair jewelry, were kept as prize possessions after the wake had ended. Perhaps it’s not surprising then, that from this time came the religion of spirituality, which was based on the belief that the spirits of the dead were not only here, in this world, but could even communicate with you, if you had the right skill set. Spiritualism was fairly widespread by the late 1800s and interest in the paranormal was at an all-time high. Skepticism was also at an all-time high. Cashing in on this divide, newspapers printed a wide variety of ghost stories and paranormal investigations. On this episode, join me as we explore just a few of these ghastly tales from the pages of historic Indiana newspapers.

[Music]

Beckley: I’m Lindsey Beckley, and this is Talking Hoosier History.

Before we get to the eerie escapades of this episode, I wanted to give a bit of a warning. We’ll be exploring some rather spooky subjects today and there will be violence and there will be murder. If those topics make you uncomfortable, perhaps you should turn back now and join us again next episode. Otherwise…Welcome.

Most ghost stories start with death. And our first terrifying tale is no exception. The Logansport Journal brought us reports of a patricide in Galveston, Cass County on September 9, 1895.

[Gun Shots]

Beckley: The early afternoon calm of Galveston was ripped away in an instant as gunshots emanated from the home of Daniel Kemp, one of the oldest and most well respected men of the small town. Daniel’s son, Frank, who had lost both of his legs in an accident and so used a hand operated tricycle to get around, fetched a doctor. The doctor attended the scene and found not only had Daniel been shot, he had also been bludgeoned in the head. The good doctor did everything he could for the wounded man, but it was in vain. The injury proved to be fatal.

In the meantime, the ugly truth came to light: it had been Frank, Daniels own son, who pulled the trigger after quarrelling with his father over money.

The body was removed and buried. Frank was taken away in chains to be tried for the murder of his father. Time passed. Lives went on. Over a year later, this tragic event reared its head several miles away in Logansport, the county seat of Cass County.  On February 3, 1897, newspaper headlines announced that “A Ghostly Shape Haunts the Catacombs of the Court House.”

In that very courthouse where, a year and a half before, Frank Kemp had been found guilty of murder and sentenced to three years in prison. Two grisly reminders of this case sat in the basement of the court house, forgotten after the trial. The hand operated tricycle which Frank Kemp had used to fetch the doctor that fateful day, and the cudgel he had used to bludgeon his father’s head, still stained with blood.

[Creaking door]

Beckley: The courthouse night watchman had made it his habit to eat lunch in the basement each night. He knew the murderous story behind the relics stashed away in the basement and there’s little doubt that the brutal scene of that September day came to mind every time he saw it, only to be brushed aside as superstition. That is, until one fateful night…he was sitting there, with the bright…

Voice actor reading from newspaper: Sitting there, with the bright glow of an electric lamp over his head, he could hear the footsteps of the janitor. Beyond the bright light of the boiler room, there was darkness, black, impenetrable, save for the feeble ray of light reflected from the windows of the Journal office over the way. The shadows were blackest where reposed the mementoes of murder, and he looked with an apprehensive shiver toward this spot, there appeared to him the moving shape of a human being. Involuntarily he held his breath. With a sharp intake of air, which was more like a gasp, he half rose in his chair…his eyes opened to their widest, and his hair stood out in obstreperous points all over his head. The figure advanced with silent tread, weaving about from side to side as if mortally hurt, and, reaching the dim reflected light from the windows across the way, paused a moment as if for consideration. The figure was that of an old man, his shoulders stooped, his head crowned with silvery locks; his patriarchal beard swept his breast as he moved his head toward the speechless watcher, and his eyes glowed in their sunken sockets with a fire that was supernatural.

Tom could stand no more; with a yell that roused the workers in the room above he dashed for a window to escape from the dreadful shape.

Beckley: Others saw the same figure in the following nights but none were able to explain what they saw. It was widely believed that this was the ghost of Daniel Kemp, haunting the space where these grisly relics of his murder were being stored.

[Door closing]

Beckley: Our next phantom filled fable is from the Logansport Reporter. The Tale begins on February 18, 1899.

Voice actor reading from Newspaper:  Thornhope, a little village north-west of Logansport…is all agog over a emarkable ghost story, the details of which were made public but yesterday.”

Beckley: On February 16, 1868, John Baer set out, on foot, from Thornhope, Cass County, to Star City, in Pulaski County to purchase several head of cattle. In order to conduct his business, he was carrying $3,000, – that’s nearly $90,000 today. Somewhere between his home and that of a friend, where he was planning to stop on his way out of town, Baer disappeared without a trace. That is, until exactly 30 years later, when Gabriel Fickle was walking along the same path that John Baer had 3 traveled decades before.

Voice actor reading from newspaper: As he was returning from Royal Center to his home via the railroad he dimly decried a form approaching as he neared the old water tank. The figure was walking slowly and as Fickle approached it stopped in front of him. Fickle crossed to the other side of the track and the figure did likewise at the same time extending a hand and exclaiming, ‘Why Gabe, don’t you know me.’ Fickle replied negatively, but put forth his hand to shake hands with the friendly stranger when to his horror he found himself grasping thin air, although in other respects the apparition was life like. Before Fickle could make an effort to speak the specter further frightened him by continuing, ‘I am the ghost of John Baer, murdered on this spot thirty years ago tonight.’ Fickle declares he was seized with the most abject fear. His hair stood on end, his throat was parched and strive as he would not a sound came from his lips. He tottered past the vision of the dead, but the latter followed.

Beckley: Fickle screwed up his courage and asked the entity how he met his death. The ghost confirmed that he had been murdered for the money he carried and stated that those guilty of the egregious crime were still living in the area. The specter then demanded that Fickle not speak a word of this encounter for exactly one year. Fickle, eager to be gone, gave his word and fled the site. One year later, his account was published by the Reporter, lacking one important detail – the identity of the murderers. Fickle explained that the ghost had not yet given the names of the guilty parties but he assured them that he would attempt to meet the spirit again, and this time he would demand to know who among the towns’ people had murder in their hearts.

Before that could happen, though, the apparition appeared in front of a railroad worker and said,

Voice actor reading from newspaper: Tell Thornhope people that my bones are crying out for vengeance and they are the instruments through which my murderers are to be brought to justice.

Beckley: However, the ghost must not have been too keen for justice because even after several conversations with Fickle, spanning the next year, Baer still refused to reveal the names to him. Yet, even as late as April of 1900, newspapers report that the truth was forthcoming.

Voice actor reading from newspaper: Gabe Fickle of Thornhope claims to have had another visit from John Baer’s ghost, warning him to keep a compact to meet the specter at an old well, at midnight, when the names of Baer’s murderers would be divulged. Fickle hesitates about going to the well alone, and can induce no one to go with him. The ghost threatens to haunt him all his life if he does not keep the appointment.

Beckley: Whether or not he attended that last meeting, we will never know as the Thornhope ghost – or indeed the names of Gabe Fickle or John Bear – never appear in the pages of newspapers after that.

Beckley: Our next tale is about another justice seeking shade, only this time, he’s not in pursuit of those who caused his death…rather, he’s looking to safeguard his legacy. The story can be found in the July 19, 1914 issue of The Indianapolis Star.

[Music]

Beckley: James Whitcomb served as Governor of Indiana from 1843-1848. He was once described as “one of the most cautious and timid men in the world.” The same could not be said of his ghost.

Upon his death in 1852, Whitcomb left his large, eclectic library to DePauw University in Greencastle, Indiana. He apparently put little faith in the security of the library because, instead of spending his afterlife in paradise or roaming the halls of his home or tormenting his enemies, he took to haunting the stacks. His will had specified that the books in his collection were strictly for reference and were not to go into circulation. But mistakes were made and on a few occasions a book was allowed to leave the doors of that stately institution.

Each bible-transgression incurred the wrath of the wraith. The governor’s ghost hunted down each tome like a hound. The article says there were several different instances of book related hauntings on campus but one in particular stood out among the others.

A freshman, browsing the books of the Whitcomb collection, happened across one in particular that caught his eye. A rather old volume with a faded cover bearing the name “The Poems of Ossian.” The book, written in the mid-1760s, is purportedly a collection of ancient Scottish folklore, collected by James Macphereson. It was also Governor Whitcomb’s favorite tome.

Voice actor reading from newspaper: This book the freshman carefully slipped into his pocket and carried away. That night the freshman buried himself in the weird lore of this eighteenth century poet until long past the midnight hour. Before retiring he carefully concealed the stolen treasure beneath his pillow. He turned out the light, retired and for a considerable time lay listening to the intermittent noises of the night, made vastly weird by the thoughts his reading had induced… A midnight visitor suddenly stood at the foot of the startled student’s bed. Although no door hinge had squeaked, the vapor figure in the habiliments of the coffin loomed gigantic against the black background of the room. A menacing arm protruded from the shroud and pointed at the student, who, moved by fright, crowded against the headboard and imagined he felt the fingertips of the uncanny intruder brush his face. He threw his arm over his head as if to ward off the blow. Fright had paralyzed his tongue. Then in cavernous voice spoke the ghost: ‘Osion, Osion! Who stole Osion?’

Beckley: The words were repeated again and again as the young man lay frozen in fear. After some time, the apparition, along with its accusing words, faded into the darkness. He spent a sleepless night waiting for the library to open its doors the following morning and was the first patron of the day.

[Owls hooting]

Beckley: Not all ghosts have such a specific purpose behind their ghastly wanderings. Take for example this account from the Muncie Evening Press from July 31, 1905.

[Train whistle]

Beckley: Residents of Flaherty’s Siding, near LaPorte, upon arriving at the nearby train station would see nothing out of the ordinary…unless, that is, they were arriving after sunset. Then they would see…well…a ghost, of course.

Voice actor reading from newspaper:  Headless, and acting for all the world like an animate thing, the apparition occurs intermittently. It makes its appearance with unfailing regularity, and standing on the platform with dinner pail in hand, it swings its arms back and forth as if it were flagging an approaching train. Then it disappears, and, in disappearing, frequently gives unearthly shrieks, as though suffering terrible pain.

Beckley: It was widely believed that the phantom was the spirit of Columbus Cole.

Voice actor reading from Newspaper: Cole, who was a well-known and popular resident of the vicinity of Flaherity’s, was run over by an engine within a few feet of the spot where the water tank stands. In the accident his head was completely severed from his body.

Beckley: Some of the young men of the town, dubious of the claims, set off to reveal the ghost as some sort of hoax, or trick of the imagination. Their first night of investigation resulted in nothing but lack of sleep – nary the shadow of a ghost was glimpsed. The second night, however, was a different story, as one of the young men reported,

Voice actor reading from newspaper: Reaching the station early in the evening, we prepared to take things easy, for we felt sure no ghost would be seen. However, we had hardly been there an hour when one of the boys raised his hand and cried: ‘Hush!’

We looked, and right before us, and but a short distance from the old water tank, we saw a strange apparition – a form, headless and carrying a dinner pail. It was the ghost and not a delusion of the eyesight. We would plainly see the real, clear outline of Columbus Cole as we knew him in life, and it was even the same dinner pail that he invariably carried to and from his work.

For 5 minutes or more we watched the apparition as its arms swung back and forth…Presently, as if spurred on by one united impulse, we rushed to the spot where we had seen the headless figure. But upon reaching the spot nothing but vacancy greeted us. Cole’s ghost had entirely disappeared and we stood and looked at one another in silence, marveling at the supernatural incident. But our curiosity had been satisfied and we were no longer skeptics, but believers.

Beckley: This apparition, unlike others we have covered, seemed to not realize it had passed from the realm of the living. Columbus Cole was there, waving down the train that would kill him, for years after his death.

That’s all the time we have for ghost stories. We’ll be back next month with more Hoosier History, this time without the haunts.

[Talking Hoosier History Theme Song]

Beckley: I’m Lindsey Beckley and this has been Talking Hoosier History. Talking Hoosier History is a product of the Indiana Historical Bureau, a division of the Indiana State Library. Talking Hoosier History is written by me, Lindsey Beckley. Production and sound engineering by Jill Weiss Simins. The voice of newspapers on the show is Justin Clark, project assistant for Hoosier State Chronicles, Indiana’s digital historic newspaper program. Find more alarming anecdotes of the supernatural from the pages of historic newspapers at newspapers.library.in.gov. To see the sources for this episode, and all of our episodes, go to blog.history.in.gov and click on Talking Hoosier History at the top. Keep up with us on Facebook at Talking Hoosier History or on Twitter at @TalkHoosierHist. Subscribe, rate, and review us wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks for listening!

Season Two Episode Two Show Notes

                “A Ghostly Shape.” The Logansport Journal, February 3, 1897. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Farm Boiler Explodes.” The Indianapolis Journal, November 15, 1903. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Frank Kemp’s Awful Crime.” The Logansport Journal, September 10, 1895. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Ghost Walks Again.” Logansport Reporter, February 26, 1899. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Ghost Will Not Lie.” The Hamilton County Ledger, April 27, 1900. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Headless Ghost Grows Uneasy.” Muncie Evening Press, July 31, 1905. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Kemp Sentenced.” The Logansport Daily Reporter, September 23, 1895. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Shade of Baer.” Logansport Reporter, June 17, 1899. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Talked With a Ghost.” Logansport Reporter, February 18, 1899. Accessed Newspapers.com.

“Governor’s Ghost Guards Library.” The Indianapolis Star, July 19, 1914. Accessed Newspapers.com.

Season Two Episode Two Audio Credits

Music:

Ross Bugden, “Scary Horror Music – Haunted,” (Copyright and Royalty Free), accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOrxwqvfD2E

Mattia Cupelli, “Dark Choir Music,” (Download and Royalty Free), accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GuD1rs9Z5I

Kevin MacLeod, “Horrorific,” FreePD, accessed https://freepd.com/horror.php

Kevin MacLeod, “Creepy Haunted House Music / This House / Ambient Dark Creepy Music,” Soul Candle – Relaxing Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCKQgJ0Eqlg

Kevin MacLeod, “Deep Horrors,” (No Copyright Music), Audio Library, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7URbQvJzztI

GoSoundtrack, “Mystery,” [No Copyright Music], Audio Library, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TKy9bzrk24

Alexander Nakarada, “Hor Hor,” FreePD, accessed https://freepd.com/horror.php

Rafael Krux, “Lonely Mountain,” FreePD, accessed https://freepd.com/epic.php

Syd Valentine’s Patent Leather Kids, “Rock and Gravel,” PublicDomain4U, accessed publicdomain4u.com

Sound Effects:

OXMUSEXO, “DoorCreak,” File: 168650_0xmusex0_doorcreak, FreeSound, https://freesound.org/people/0XMUSEX0/sounds/168650/

FunWithSound, “Door Slam,” File: 361167_funwithsound_door-slam, FreeSound, accessed https://freesound.org/people/FunWithSound/sounds/361167/

Nura Studio, Scary Footsteps sound effect free download, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spDzJCAL5lk

Topschool, “Gasp,” File: 360469_topschool_gasp, FreeSound, accessed https://freesound.org/people/Topschool/sounds/360469/

Epicdude959, “Creepy Ghost Scream,” File: 352508_epicdude_959_creepy-ghost-scream, FreeSound, accessed https://freesound.org/people/epicdude959/sounds/352508/

Jaredi, “Rattling Locks,” File: 215312__jaredi__rattling-locks, FreeSound, accessed https://freesound.org/people/jaredi/sounds/215312/

Xdrav, “Frozen Window Opening,” File: 112841__xdrav__frozen-window-opening, FreeSound, accessed https://freesound.org/people/xdrav/sounds/112841/

Benboncan, “Tawny Owls,” File: 64544__benboncan__tawny-owls-2, FreeSound, accessed https://freesound.org/people/Benboncan/sounds/63842/

KRC Videos, “TRAIN Sound Effects – Steam Train Start and Whistle,” accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oJAVJPX0YY

HaraldDeLuca, “Horror Ghost,” File: 380510__haralddeluca__horror-ghost-sound, FreeSound, accessed https://freesound.org/people/HaraldDeLuca/sounds/380510/

 

THH Season 01 Bonus: Hoosier: A Brief Overview

Transcript of Hoosier: A Brief Overiew

Jump to Show Notes

[Sound of television channels changing with various commercials with the word “Hoosier” in them]

Lindsey Beckley: People from Florida are called Floridians. People from Maine are called Mainers. People from Washington are called Washingtonians. And people from Indiana are called…Hoosiers? On this episode of Talking Hoosier History, we’ll explore the history of what is probably the most famous demonym of any state in America.

I’m Lindsey Beckley and this is Talking Hoosier History

[Transition music]

Beckley: One of the most common questions we’re asked here at the Indiana Historical Bureau is “What is a Hoosier,” and that’s followed quickly by “Where did that word come from?” As it turns out, people have been asking just that question for nearly two centuries.

Hoosier, spelled in the now ubiquitous “H-O-O-S-I-E-R” spelling as well as several other phonetical versions, can be traced back to the American South, where it was used as a derogatory term for uneducated, uncouth people. But just when the word began to be used specifically to refer to people from Indiana is hard to know.

According to Indiana University Archives, the earliest known written use of the word can be found in a letter dated February 11, 1831. In the letter, written by G.L. Murdock to John Tipton, Murdock replied to an advertisement and offered to deliver goods by steamboat to Logansport, Cass County. In closing, he mentioned,

Voice actor reading from letter:  Our boat will be named the Indiana Hoosier.

[Transition music]

Beckley: The earliest known printed instance of “Hoosier” can be found in a letter to the editor of the Vincennes Gazette, just 8 days after the Murdock letter was penned. In the letter, the author, who identified themselves as Rackoon, noted the increasing population of Indiana, saying,

Voice actor reading  from the Vincennes Gazette: The ‘Hoosher’ country is coming out, and the day is not far distant, when some states which have hitherto looked upon us as a kind of outlandish, half-civilized race, will have to follow in our train. Let the ‘Half-horse, half-alligator’…country look to it.

Beckley: It’s pretty obvious by the lack of explanation that the authors of both of those passages expected that their readers would already be familiar with the word “Hoosier” so it’s safe to assume that the word was in use, at least locally, before 1831. Throughout the early 1830s, usage increased significantly, but it was still mostly found in traveler’s accounts and local documents. That changed with the publishing of ex-state Representative John Finley’s poem “The Hoosher’s Nest” in 1833. It’s quite a long poem – 155 lines, in fact, so we can’t recite it all here, but this excerpt should give you a good feel for it:

Voice actor reading excerpt:

The emigrant is soon located-
In Hoosher life initiated:
Erects a cabin in the woods,
Wherein he stows his household goods.

Erelong the cabin disappears,
A spacious mansion next he rears;
His fields seem widening by stealth,
An index of increasing wealth;
and when the hives of Hooshers swarm,
To each is given a noble farm.

Beckley: This version of a “Hoosier” lacks the negative connotations associated with the original usage in the southern United States. Gone is the uneducated, uncouth backcountry man, and he’s replaced by an industrious farmer who is moving up in the world. It’s likely that the moniker was first used as an insult towards people from Indiana but they took it and made it their own, much as colonial Americans had done with the term “Yankees” in the 1700s.

The publishing of “The Hoshiers’ Nest” cemented the use of the word on a national scale, as it was picked up by other papers and published far and wide. And it wasn’t long before the first article examining the origins of this most “singular” term appeared. Just 10 months after poem was published, the Cincinnati Republican ran a piece simply titled “Hooshier.”

Voice actor reading from Cincinnati Republican: “The appellation of Hooshier has been used in many of the Western States, for several years, to designate, in a good natural way, an inhabitant of our sister state of Indiana. Ex- Governor Ray has lately started a newspaper in Indiana, which he names “The Hoshier” [sic]. Many of our ingenious native philologists have attempted, though very unsatisfactorily, to explain this somewhat singular term.”

Beckley: It goes on to list two unsatisfactory explanations of the etymology of the word before getting to the “real” root of the word.

Voice actor reading from Cincinnati Republican: “The word Hooshier is indebted for its existence to that once numerous and unique, but now extinct class of mortals called the Ohio Boatmen. — In its original acceptation it was equivalent to “Ripstaver,” “Bulger,” “Ring-tailroarer,” and a hundred others, equally expressive, but which have never attained to such a respectable standing as itself. By some caprice which can never be explained, the appellation Hooshier became confined solely to such boatmen as had their homes upon the Indiana shore, and from them it was gradually applied to all the Indianians, who acknowledge it as good naturedly as the appellation of Yankee — Whatever may have been the original acceptation of Hooshier this we know, that the people to whom it is now applied are amongst the bravest, most intelligent, most enterprising, most magnanimous, and most democratic of the Great West, and should we ever feel disposed to quit the state in which we are now sojourning, our own noble Ohio, it will be to enroll ourselves as adopted citizens in the land of the “HOOSHIER.”

Beckley: Again, this examination totally lacks any negative connotation with the word, instead it highlights the virtues of being a Hoosier.  The next serious look into the word comes from historian Jacob Piatt Dunn, who wrote and rewrote his article entitled “The Word Hoosier” to near perfection – in fact, the monograph that came from his articles, published in 1907, is still seen as one of the most thorough and accurate studies on the topic. It’s not often that academic treatises stand the test of time like that. So, what did he have to say on the subject?

Well, basically, he said that we don’t know exactly where we got the word Hoosier, but dismissed many of the existing explanations as utterly ridiculous. He did, however, put forward three options which he thought plausible. First he theorized that the word migrated up from the South as a slang term used for uncouth countrymen – this is the theory with the most evidence and seems to be the one Dunn favored. He included a multitude of examples of this usage in the book. Second, he proposed an English root to the word. There are some similar terms found in early English dictionaries, such as “hoose,” “hoors,” and “hoozy, that could conceivably have been corrupted into Hoosier. His third proposal sounds rather improbable on the surface. He conjectured that “Hoosier” came to America from India by way of England. According to Dunn, the Indian word “huzur” is “a respectful form of address to persons of rank or superiority.” He admitted that it seems like quite a stretch but gave some examples of other words, such as Khaki, that made the same etomological journey.

But as soon as he finished reciting these possibilities he was quick to assure the reader that he wasn’t claiming that these were definite answers, just that they were possibilities,

Voice actor reading from Dunn: It is not my purpose to urge that any one of these suggested possibilities of derivation is preferable to the other, or to assert that there may not be other and more rational ones.

Beckley: The one thing he was sure about was that the word existed before it was used to describe a native Indianan…man, as a born and bred Hoosier, it feels downright blasphemous to use that word.

[Transition music]

Beckley: Although many many people have discussed, debated, and disputed the true origin of the word “Hoosier” in the years since Dunn’s 1907 essay, the only work to rival that of Dunn is Jeffrey Graf’s article “The Word ‘Hoosier,’” written for the Indiana University Libraries. He examines Dunn’s work as well as many subsequent scholars who followed in Dunn’s footsteps. Graf’s 100 plus page article is as thorough as it gets – if you want to pursue all the many various theories of the word Hoosier, you can find a link to his article, and all of our sources, in the shownotes. We could probably have a whole podcast dedicated exclusively to exploring the outlandish “Hoosier” theories people have come up with. But, unfortunately, we don’t have time to do that. But we do have time to cover a few of the more…colorful origin stories to come about, though.

[Transition music]

Beckley: Frontier Indiana was a rough place that produced rough people. Rough but strong. Some of those rough, strong people found that the daily work of cutting down trees, farming, building houses with their hands, and chopping fire wood didn’t do quite enough to prove their strength to their fellow man. So they fought. They fought at house-raisings and log-rollings. They fought in the fields and in the woods. Those who were particularly adept at this so-called “wrastlin” were referred to as hushers, for they could quell their opponents into silence. One such husher found himself in New Orleans working as a boatmen when he felt the urge to demonstrate his rather remarkable strength. So, he fought not just one, but four men…all at once. And he bested them all. In his enthusiasm, he sprang up, shouting “I’m a Hussher!” But with his accent, it came out sounding more like “I’m a Hoosier!” The story goes that this episode was picked up by some of the New Orleans newspapers and the “Hoosier” pronunciation came to refer to all boatmen from Indiana, and later all people from Indiana.

This next one is my personal favorite theory of how the term Hoosier came into use – in fact, I included this version in a report I did for my 4th grade Indiana history class – it comes to us from the Hoosier poet himself, James Whitcomb Riley. His version of the story includes the same stereotype of a bunch rough frontiersmen fond of fighting as did the “Hussher” theory.

[Folk music]

Beckley: These settlers often congregated in taverns to share the news…and maybe a drink or two. When they got a bit into their cups, they always fell to fighting. And what fights they were – so vicious that participants routinely lost bits or their noses and ears. The morning after these ferocious rows, the barkeep would walk through the bar room and, seeing a stray ear on the floor, push it aside with his foot with a careless “Who’s ear?” This became so commonplace that it slowly morphed into “Whose year” and then to “Hoosier.”

[Transitional music]

With just 65,000 people living Indiana in 23 million acres of Indiana, many people saw Indiana as a land of opportunity in the early years of the state. The opportunity to own land, the opportunity to make a decent living, and the opportunity to start over…all drew people to the state. Families made their way from all parts of the country to settle on the fertile soil of Indiana. And as they traveled those roughhewn roads, those families would sometimes come across a lone cabin in the wilderness.

[Folk music]

Beckley: Weather they were looking for shelter, company, or both, often they would approach the cabin with a shout of “Who’s here?” to let the occupants know someone was coming. At this, the door would be opened and the guests welcomed. This scene played out again and again throughout the southern part of the state. Eventually, “Who’s here?” slowly morphed into “Whosere” and later to “Hoosier.” In the course of time, “hoosier” came to describe all people from Indiana.

[“Back home again in Indiana”]

It seems like there is an endless line explanations, each more amusing than the last, all claiming to be the origin of the word Hoosier. All of these theories have one thing in common – they’re almost certainly apocryphal. I mean, the “Whose Ear” theory was said as a joke by Riley and picked up and repeated so often that people began to think of it as a real possibility… and it doesn’t even make sense that you would walk up to someone else’s cabin asking “Who’s here?” Like…the owner of the cabin is there, who else would it be? And when you really think about it, how likely is it that one man yelling something that sounded a bit like Hoosier 700 miles away in New Orleans became a nickname for every single person from Indiana?  Seems rather improbable to me.

[Sound of television channels changing with various commercials with the word “Hoosier” in them]

It’s unlikely that we’ll ever know with any certainty exactly where the word “Hoosier” originated, but from the 1986 film “Hoosiers,” widely considered to be one of the best sports movies ever made, to the Indiana University Hoosiers, to the 4,500 businesses with the word “Hoosier” in their names in the state, it’s safe to say that it’s here to stay – in fact, in January, 2017, after a bipartisan effort by Indiana Senators Joe Donnelly and Todd Young, it became official – the U.S. Government Publishing Office updated their Style Manual and changed the demonym of Indiana so that there are, officially, no Indianans in Indiana….only Hoosiers.

Once again, I’m Lindsey Beckley and this has been Talking Hoosier History. Talking Hoosier History is a product of the Indiana Historical Bureau, a division of the Indiana State Library. We’re proud to announce that THH has been awarded an Award of Merit winner by the Leadership in History awards committee of the American Association of State and Local History. It really is an incredible honor.

Talking Hoosier History is written by me, Lindsey Beckley. Production and sound engineering by Jill Weiss Simins. The voice of newspapers on the show is Justin Clark. To see the sources for this episode, and all of our episodes, go to blog.history.in.gov and click on Talking Hoosier History at the top. Keep up with us on Facebook at Talking Hoosier History or on Twitter at @TalkHoosierHist. Subscribe, rate, and review us wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks for listening!

Show Notes for Hoosier: A Brief Overview

 

Episode Fourteen Show Notes

Books

Dunn, Jacob Piatt. The Word Hoosier. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1904. https://books.google.com/books?id=bgPVAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+Word+Hoosier+Indiana+Historical+Society&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiF8KWzqoraAhWG7YMKHbuGAfAQ6AEILTAB#v=onepage&q=The%20Word%20Hoosier%20Indiana%20Historical%20Society&f=false

 

Articles

                Graf, Jeffrey. “The Word ‘Hoosier.” Reference Services Department Herman B. Wells Library, Indiana University Libraries – Bloomington. Accessed: https://libraries.indiana.edu/sites/default/files/The%20Word%20Hoosier-Revised-and-Expanded-2018.pdf

Haller, Steve. “The Meanings of Hoosier: 175 Years and Counting.” Traces of Indiana and Midwestern History, Vol. 20, Number 4, Fall 2008. Accessed: http://images.indianahistory.org/cdm/compoundobject/collection/p16797coll39/id/4805/rec/47

Piersen, William D. “The Origin of the Word ‘Hoosier’: A New Interpretation.” Indiana Magazine of History, Vol. 91, Issue 2, June 1995. Accessed: https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/imh/article/view/11454/16618

Websites

Chronicling Hoosier, accessed May 5, 2018: http://centerfordigschol.github.io/chroniclinghoosier/index.html

Indiana Historical Bureau Website, accessed Mary 1, 2018: https://www.in.gov/history/2612.htm.

Special Thanks

Jill Weiss Simins is the producer and sound engineer for Talking Hoosier History. She records the audio, chooses the music and samples, and engineers the mix.

Justin Clark, project assistant with the Hoosier State Chronicles newspaper digitization project, lent his voice to Lincoln’s neighbors and other “extra’s” in the episode.

The Word “Hoosier:” An Origin Story

People from Florida are called Floridians. People from Maine are called Mainers. People from Washington are called Washingtonians. And people from Indiana are called…Hoosiers?

One of the most common questions we’re asked at the Indiana Historical Bureau is “What is a Hoosier,” and that’s often followed by “Where did that word come from?” As it turns out, people have been asking just that question for nearly two centuries.

Hoosier, now spelled ubiquitously “H-O-O-S-I-E-R,” as well as several other phonetical versions, can be traced back to the American South, where it was used as a derogatory term for uneducated, uncouth people. But just when the word began to be used specifically to refer to people from Indiana is hard to know.

According to Indiana University Archives, the earliest known written use of the word can be found in a letter dated February 11, 1831. In the letter, written by G.L. Murdock to General John Tipton, Murdock replied to an advertisement and offered to deliver goods by steamboat to Logansport, Cass County. In closing, he mentioned, “Our boat will be named the Indiana Hoosier.” The earliest known printed instance of “Hoosier” can be found in a letter-to-the-editor of the Vincennes Gazette, just eight days after the Murdock letter was penned. In the letter, the author, who identified themselves as Rackoon, noted the increasing population of Indiana, saying,

The ‘Hoosher’ country is coming out, and the day is not far distant, when some states which have hitherto looked upon us as a kind of outlandish, half-civilized race, will have to follow in our train. Let the ‘Half-horse, half-alligator’… country look to it.

John Finley, courtesy of Find a Grave.

It is pretty obvious by the lack of explanation that the authors of both of those passages expected that their readers would already be familiar with the word “Hoosier,” so it’s safe to assume that the word was in use, at least locally, before 1831. Throughout the early 1830s, usage increased significantly, but was still mostly found only in traveler’s accounts and local documents. That changed with the publishing of former state Representative John Finley’s poem “The Hoosher’s Nest” in 1833. The version of a Hoosier found in the following excerpt lacks the negative connotations associated with the original usage in the southern United States:

The emigrant is soon located-
In Hoosher life initiated:
Erects a cabin in the woods,
Wherein he stows his household goods.

Erelong the cabin disappears,
A spacious mansion next he rears;
His fields seem widening by stealth,
An index of increasing wealth;
and when the hives of Hooshers swarm,
To each is given a noble farm.

A compilation of versions of the song “Yankee Doodle,” published in 1857. Courtesy of the University of Tennessee Knoxville.

Gone is the uneducated, uncouth backcountry man. He is replaced by an industrious farmer who is moving up in the world. It is likely that the moniker was first used as an insult towards people from Indiana, but they appropriated it and made it their own, much as colonial Americans had done with the term “Yankee” in the 1700s.

The publishing of “The Hoosher’s Nest” cemented the use of the word on a national scale, as it was picked up by other papers and published far and wide. It was not long before the first article to examine the origins of this most “singular” term appeared. Just ten months after “The Hooshers’ Nest” was published, the Cincinnati Republican ran a piece simply titled “Hooshier.”

The appellation of Hooshier has been used in many of the Western States, for several years, to designate, in a good natural way, an inhabitant of our sister state of Indiana. Ex- Governor Ray has lately started a newspaper in Indiana, which he names “The Hoshier” [sic]. Many of our ingenious native philologists have attempted, though very unsatisfactorily, to explain this somewhat singular term.

It goes on to list two unsatisfactory explanations of the etymology of the word before getting to the “real” root of the word.

The word Hooshier is indebted for its existence to that once numerous and unique, but now extinct class of mortals called the Ohio Boatmen. — In its original acceptation it was equivalent to “Ripstaver,” “Bulger,” “Ring-tailroarer,” and a hundred others, equally expressive, but which have never attained to such a respectable standing as itself. By some caprice which can never be explained, the appellation Hooshier became confined solely to such boatmen as had their homes upon the Indiana shore, and from them it was gradually applied to all the Indianians, who acknowledge it as good naturedly as the appellation of Yankee — Whatever may have been the original acceptation of Hooshier this we know, that the people to whom it is now applied are amongst the bravest, most intelligent, most enterprising, most magnanimous, and most democratic of the Great West, and should we ever feel disposed to quit the state in which we are now sojourning, our own noble Ohio, it will be to enroll ourselves as adopted citizens in the land of the “HOOSHIER.”

Again, this examination lacks any negative connotation with the word. Instead, it highlights the virtues of being a Hoosier.  The next serious look into the word comes from historian Jacob Piatt Dunn, who wrote and rewrote his article entitled “The Word Hoosier” to near perfection – in fact, the eventual monograph that came from his articles, published in 1907, is still seen as one of the most thorough and accurate studies on the topic. It’s not often that such academic treatises stand the test of time.

Jacob Piatt Dunn, courtesy of “Indiana and Indianans.”

Even after putting years of work into his article, Dunn concluded that we do not know exactly from where the word “Hoosier” derived, but dismissed many of the existing explanations as utterly ridiculous. He did, however, put forward three options regarding its origins.

First, he theorized that the word migrated up from the South as a slang term used for uncouth countrymen – this is the theory backed by the most evidence and seems to be the one Dunn favored, as he included a multitude of examples of this usage in the book. Second, he proposed an English root to the word. Similar terms can be found in early English dictionaries, such as “hoose,” “hoors,” and “hoozy,” that could conceivably have been corrupted into “Hoosier.” His third proposal sounds rather improbable on the surface. He conjectured that “Hoosier” came to America from India by way of England. According to Dunn, the Indian word “huzur” is “a respectful form of address to persons of rank or superiority.” He admitted that it seemed like quite a stretch but gave some examples of other words, such as “Khaki,” that made the same etomological journey.

But as soon as he finished reciting these possibilities he was quick to assure readers that he was not claiming these to be definitive answers, merely possibilities, saying, “It is not my purpose to urge that any one of these suggested possibilities of derivation is preferable to the other, or to assert that there may not be other and more rational ones.” The one thing he was sure about was that the word existed before it was used to describe a native Indianan.

Although many people have discussed, debated, and disputed the true origin of the word “Hoosier” in the years since Dunn’s 1907 essay, the only work to rival that of Dunn’s is Jeffrey Graf’s article “The Word ‘Hoosier,’” written for the Herman B Wells Library at Indiana University. He examines Dunn’s work, as well as that of other scholars who followed in Dunn’s footsteps. Graf’s 100+ page article is as thorough as it gets.

Not much has been added to the academic discourse in the last 100 years. It seems like most subsequent scholars begin with the goal of finishing the work Dunn started, covering the same ground he did, then throwing their hands in the air in frustration. One thing they have in common is a list of the various and sundry theories proposed throughout the years and we would be remiss not to cover at least a few of the more colorful origin stories to come about.

Theory 1

Crowd watched pair wrestle, courtesy of Brigham Young University. Accessed Digital Public Library of America.

Frontier Indiana was a rough place that produced rough people. Rough but strong. Some of those rough, strong people found that the daily work of cutting down trees, farming, building houses with their hands, and chopping fire wood didn’t do quite enough to prove their strength to their fellow man. So they fought. They fought at house-raisings and log-rollings. They fought in the fields and in the woods. Those who were particularly adept at this so-called “wrastlin” were referred to as hushers, for they could quell their opponents into silence. One such husher found himself in New Orleans working as a boatmen when he felt the urge to demonstrate his rather remarkable strength. So, he fought not just one, but four men at once. And he bested them all. In his enthusiasm, he sprang up, shouting “I’m a Hussher!” But with his accent, it came out sounding more like “I’m a Hoosier!” The episode was picked up by some of the New Orleans newspapers and the “Hoosier” pronunciation came to refer to all boatmen from Indiana, and later all people from Indiana.


Theory 2

Marcus Mote, “The Hoosier’s Nest.”

With just 65,000 people living in 23 million acres of Indiana, many people saw Indiana as a land of opportunity in the early years of the state. The opportunity to own land, to make a decent living, and to start over drew people to the state. Families made their way from all parts of the country to settle on the fertile soil of Indiana. And as they traveled the roughhewn roads, those families would sometimes come across a lone cabin in the wilderness. Weather they were looking for shelter, company, or both, often they would approach the cabin with a shout of “Who’s here?” to let the occupants know someone was coming. At this, the door would be opened and the guests welcomed. This scene played out again and again throughout the southern part of the state. Eventually, “Who’s here?” slowly morphed into “Whosere” and later to “Hoosier.” In the course of time, “Hoosier” came to describe all people from Indiana.

Theory 3

This theory comes to us from the Hoosier poet himself, James Whitcomb Riley. His version of the story includes the same stereotype of rough frontiersmen fond of fighting as did the “Hussher” theory. These settlers often congregated in taverns to share news and maybe a drink or two. When they got into their cups a bit, they always fell to fighting, often so violently that participants lost bits of their noses and ears. The morning after these ferocious rows, the barkeep would walk through the bar room and, seeing a stray ear on the floor, push it aside with his foot with a careless “Who’s ear?” This became so commonplace that it slowly morphed into “Whose year” and then to “Hoosier,” much like “Who’s here” supposedly did.


It seems like infinite theories exist, each more amusing than the last, all claiming to be the origin of the word Hoosier. All of them have one thing in common – they’re almost certainly apocryphal. It’s unlikely that we’ll ever know with any certainty exactly where the word “Hoosier” originated. However, from the 1986 film “Hoosiers,” to the Indiana University Hoosiers, to the 4,500 businesses with the word “Hoosier” in their names in the state, it is safe to say that there are no Indianans in Indiana–only Hoosiers.

THH Episode 13: Reaching toward Peace: Robert F. Kennedy on the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Transcript of Reaching Toward Peace: Robert F. Kennedy on the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Jump to Show Notes

Written by Lindsey Beckley from research using various sources (see show notes for details)

Produced by Lindsey Beckley and Jill Weiss Simins

Recording of Robert Kennedy: And that is that Martin Luther King was shot and was killed tonight in Memphis, Tennessee.

­­­­­­­­­­Lindsey Beckley: Across America, there are schools, parks, and roads all bearing the name of Civil Rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. Many small towns and nearly every big city in the nation has at least one Martin Luther King Jr. elementary school or boulevard. And Indianapolis is no exception. On Broadway Street,   north of 16th Street in Indianapolis, you’ll find the 14 acre Martin Luther King Jr. Park. The park features a variety of trees, shelter houses, playgrounds, and even a community swimming pool. It’s also home to a remarkable memorial. Approaching the memorial, you pass between two metal walls. Above you, reaching out from those walls, are the likenesses of two men , one black, one white leaning out over your head, arms outstretched towards each other. As you pass beneath them, you probably recognize one figure as being Martin Luther King Jr. But chances are, unless you know why this memorial was constructed, you wouldn’t recognize the second.

That second figure is that of Robert Kennedy and the memorial is called the Landmark for Peace Memorial. On this episode of Talking Hoosier History, we will explore the events that inspired the creation of this striking piece of public art. And stick around after the main episode for a discussion with Reverend Dr. Frank Thomas. We’ll talk about how these inspiring leaders use moral imagination.

[Talking Hoosier History theme music]

Hello and welcome to Talking Hoosier History, brought to you by the Indiana Historical Bureau. For over a century, we’ve been marking Hoosier history. Now, it’s time to start Talking Hoosier History. I’m Lindsey Beckley and I’ll be your host.

[crowd noises and music]

On March 16, 1968, Robert Kennedy began his presidential campaign when he declared:

Voice actor reading from Robert Kennedy speech: “I am today announcing my candidacy for presidency of the United States. I do not run for the presidency merely to oppose any man, but to propose new policies. I run because I am convinced that this country is on a perilous course and I have such strong feelings about what must be done, and I feel that I’m obliged to do all I can.”

Beckley: He planned to win the Democratic Party’s nomination through the popular support of voters in primary elections, a strategy that had worked for his brother John F. Kennedy 8 years earlier. To this end, he announced that he intended to enter the Indiana Democratic primary on March 27 and arrived in Indianapolis to do just that the following day. Kennedy’s Indiana primary campaign was set to begin on April 4, 1968.

[Transitional music]

Beckley: Throughout this same time, Martin Luther King Jr. was also in the midst of a campaign, although his was not one for political power. It was one for social change and it was known as the Poor People’s Campaign. Dr. King and the Southern Christian Leadership Committee, or SCLC, had been planning to expand their mission to include economic equality for some time. During a SCLC staff retreat Dr. King said:

Voice actor reading from King: “I think it is necessary for us to realize that we have moved from the era of civil rights to the era of human rights.”

Beckley: To that end, King announced the Poor People’s campaign in November 1967 and outlined its goals: more jobs, unemployment insurance, a fair minimum wage, and improved education. To accomplish this, he planned a series of protests culminating in a takeover and mass occupation of the National Mall in Washington D.C., where protesters would live in a shanty town for the duration of the rally.

[Transitional music: “We Shall Overcome”]

Beckley: Just as Robert Kennedy headed to Indiana to start his primary campaign, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr headed to Memphis, Tennessee to assist with a strike being conducted by the sanitation workers of the city. The workers had been striking for higher wages and better working conditions for over 11 weeks.  While his Poor People campaign was focused on affecting change in Washington, King saw that the objectives of the strike fit well with his own and decided to adopt it as part of the campaign. So, that’s how King and Kennedy came to be involved in two different campaigns in two different states on April 4, 1968. Although they were hundreds of miles apart, the events of that day would forever link the two men in the pages of history.

[Transitional music: “We Shall Overcome”]

Beckley: Both men had busy schedules on Thursday, April 4th. King was sequestered in closed meetings throughout the day, likely with other local and national civil rights leaders. Kennedy gave campaign speeches in South Bend and Muncie before flying to Indianapolis for a rally in a majority black neighborhood. Around 6 o’clock that evening, King was preparing for dinner. Kennedy was in the midst of a speech to the students of Ball State University. King stepped out onto the balcony of the Lorraine Motel and was shot by a sniper. Kennedy stepped onto a plane and received news of the attack on King. King was pronounced dead at around 7:00 pm. Kennedy arrived in Indianapolis and was told that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was dead. He recoiled at the news, almost as though he himself had been struck. He put his hands to his face and lamented, “Oh, God. When is this violence going to stop?”

In the days leading up to April 4th, Indianapolis Mayor Richard Lugar had shown reservations about allowing Kennedy to hold a rally in the majority black neighborhood at all. He thought it dangerous. But Kennedy and his team felt otherwise. Now, with the news of Kings’ assassination, the Chief of Police advised the group not to attend the rally and warned that his force would not protect them if they did. Kennedy was determined to go. As his car entered the neighborhood, their police escort melted into the background.

As Kennedy and his team arrived in front of the assembled crowd of around 2,000 people, the crowd was festive, if a bit restless. Kennedy was over an hour late and they had been standing in the windy street waiting for some time. Kennedy climbed onto a flat-bed truck, his face “full of anguish.”  What followed was an impromptu speech so impactful it’s been credited with “Saving the city of Indianapolis,” a claim we will discuss at some length later. The audio of this speech is one of the most impactful recordings I have ever heard. Kennedy asks off mic if the crowd knew of the assassination, then he delivers the news, and it’s followed by gasps and wailing from the audience. Following is a condensed version of that powerful speech.

Recording of Robert Kennedy in Indianapolis: Ladies and gentlemen, I have some very sad news for all of you, and I think sad news for all of our fellow citizens, and people who love peace all over the world. And that is, that Martin Luther King was shot and was killed tonight in Memphis, Tennessee.

[Cries from the crowd]

Recording of Robert Kennedy in Indianapolis: Martin Luther Kind dedicated his life to love and to justice between fellow human beings. He died in the cause of that effort. In this difficult day, in this difficult time for the United States, it’s perhaps well to ask what kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in. it’s perhaps well to ask what kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in. For those of you who are black – you can be filled with bitterness, with hatred, and a desire for revenge. We can move in that direction as a country, in greater polarization. Or we can make an effort, as Martin Luther King did, to understand and to comprehend…and love. What we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love and wisdom and compassion toward one another and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer in our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.

[Crowd cheers]

Recording of Robert Kennedy in Indianapolis: It is not the end violence. It is not the end of lawlessness. And it’s not the end of disorder. But the vast majority of white people, and the vast majority of black people in this country want to live together, want to improve the quality of our life, and want justice for all human beings that abide in our lands. Let us dedicate ourselves to that. And say a prayer for our country, and for our people. Thank you very much.

[Crowd cheers]

[Transitional music]

Beckley: In the wake of Dr. King’s death, grief and anger spread through the black communities of America. In the days and weeks following, the already high racial tensions came to a breaking point. In over 100 cities across the United States, this resulted in civil unrest, and even rioting. There were over 40 deaths and 4,000 injuries. Chicago, Cincinnati, and Louisville all fairly near Indianapolis and with similar demographics, all had various levels of rioting. Indianapolis, however, did not.

[Inspiring music]

As Robert Kennedy finished his speech in Indianapolis, he urged those in attendance to go home and pray, and many did. Meanwhile, the riots were already starting in Washington D.C. and by the time they ended 4 days later, over 1000 buildings had been reduced to ash and 12 people were dead.

The next day, on April 5th, Baptist Reverend Melvin Girton organized a memorial in honor of Dr. King at the Soldiers and Sailors Memorial. Hundreds of people attended. Sam Jones, the leader of the Indianapolis Urban League addressed Indianapolis’s black community, saying

Voice actor reading Newspaper article quoting Same Jones: “For Indianapolis, I appeal for calm and reason during this period. This should be a time for prayer and soul-searching for all of us.”

Beckley: Meanwhile, violence erupted in Chicago, ending with 11 deaths and 500 injuries.

On Sunday, April 7th, special services were held at St. John’s Missionary Baptist church, where Indianapolis’ Mayor Richard Lugar, on the suggestion of African American leaders, announced that all African Americans in the city were excused from work and school  on the day of King’s funeral as part of a day of tribute to Dr. King. Three more commemorative services were held at Trinity Episcopal Church, where Reverend G. Ernest Lynch  continued the calls for peace, saying:

Voice actor reading from Newspaper article quoting Lynch: “Martin Luther King was primarily a Christian, and so the motivation of his life was the power of unarmed truth, nonviolent and unconditional love.”

Beckley: On the same day in Baltimore, the unrest in the city exploded into rioting and by the end of the day, the city called in 6,000 troops from the National Guard in an attempt to take back the city.

This pattern continued – leaders of the Indianapolis African American community called their people together to mourn the loss of their spiritual leader. The people gathered. These black leaders called for continued peace. And Peace continued. All the while, other cities were in chaos.

Some sources credit Robert Kennedy and his April 4th speech as the sole savior of the city during what became known as the Holy Week Uprisings. His show of support and call for peace in the face of violence certainly helped soothe the tensions in the crowd – for instance, directly after his speech, he and Civil Rights leader John Lewis attended a meeting and met with a group of people who Lewis described as “black militants.” Lewis said that the young black men entered the meeting with hostility and bitterness, saying that “establishment people” are all the same: “Our leader is dead tonight, and when we need you we can’t find you.” In response, Kennedy said,

Voice actor reading from Kennedy: “Yes, you lost a friend, I lost a brother, I know how you feel…. You talk about the Establishment. I have to laugh. Big Business is trying to defeat me because they think I am a friend of the Negro…”

Beckley: Before the men departed, they pledged their support to the Kennedy campaign.

You can tell from that exchange that Kennedy’s words did have an impact on the African American population of Indianapolis, but to say that he single handedly saved the city – I mean, I found one recent article literally titled “How RFK saved Indianapolis” – and that ignores the huge part played by black leaders in the community.

In the end, it was the strong network of African American leaders in the city, in conjunction with Kennedy’s speech that “saved Indianapolis.” It took more than one man to save the city. It took a variety of people in a variety of positions, all calling for peace in a time of anger and grief. Looking at the Landmark for Peace memorial, you see this sentiment reflected. You see two men , one black, one white, on either side of a divide, reaching towards each other. Reaching towards peace.

[Inspiring music]

Once again, I’m Lindsey Beckley and this has been the last episode of season one of Talking Hoosier History. But don’t worry – we’ll be back in a few months with season two. Until then, we’ll leave you with this one last segment.

[Transition music: “We Shall Overcome”]

Beckley: In the run up to the 50th anniversary of this tragic piece of history, I sat down with Dr. Frank Thomas, director of the PhD in African American Preaching and Sacred Rhetoric program at the Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis. His new book, How to Preach a Dangerous Sermon, uses this speech, along with others, to talk about the use of language to ignite what he calls “moral imagination” to call people to a better future.

[Transition music]

Beckley: We’ve got Dr. Frank Thomas here today, and we’re going to be talking his new book, “How to Preach a Dangerous Sermon.” Thank you so much for being here with us today, Dr. Thomas.

Frank Thomas: Well, thank you so much for having me. It’s an honor.

Beckley: Your book focuses a lot on moral imagination and I think it’s important probably for the listeners to get an idea of what that is before we go into talking about how people used it, so, uh, could you give us just a brief explanation of moral imagination?

Thomas: Yea, it’s the, the fact that we’re faced with ethical delimas, you know, in much of our lives, in our politics, in our religion. And there are people who are able to find creative alternatives. In essence, it’s the ability to look at ethical delimas and choose options that are in the common good, rather than simply what’s good for one tribe, or one group, rather than the whole.

Beckley: So, in the – in the book, you kind of go chanpter by chapter and look at how different people have utilized the, uh, the moral imagination in different ways. And what fit so well into this particular episode is that you start with Robert Kennedy and  his April 4, 1968 speech, which is a great example of, of moral imagination – imagining a world that is better than the one we live in. Could we talk a little bit about some of the particular ways in which he utilized it?

Thomas: Well, I think his entire campaign was about moral imagination. He said that what he wanted to do was to solve the race problem in America, and resolve poverty.

Beckley: Ambitious goals.

Thomas: Yes. But I haven’t heard a single politicial address that since he died. So he was able to see the possibility that we would be a ble to work on these solutions and that they were connected, you know, poverty and race, and that we could solve it. Now, in the speech that he gave on the night of the death of Martin Luther King, he used those themes, and I call it the four qualities of moral imagination. Number one, he showed up. He showed up on 17th and Broadway in an African American community to do a campaign speech, when in fact, King had been killed that very night, and everybody said that, “Don’t go, don’t go, don’t go. There’s going to be violence.” But he went. When he got there, he had a level of empathy, you know, when you show up and you actually dialogue with people, it creates empathy. The third thing that I say is a part of moral imagination is the wisdom of the ages. He drops some heavy, heavy wisdom. Greek tragedy, a quote from escolous. And then, fourthly, his rhetoric – his speech – lifted up, um, it was uplifting and it touched the chords of wonder, mystery, and hope. I call those the four characteristics of the moral imagination. And in the book I do a very detailed explanation of the speech right here in Indianapolis, Indiana, and I have not seen – very few people generate this level of moral imagination.

Beckley: It definitely, when you listen to it, it’s probably on of the more powerful speeches I’ve heard, especially given that it was rather impromptu. He had a speech prepared and then, all the sudden, that was kind of, you know, ripped away, and he kind of came up with that – I think, on the, on the plane here. It’s impressive to me that he came up with such a powerful and, um, emotive speech, kind of, off the cuff, more than, more than anything.

Thomas: well, I think that, um, he gave people what was in his heart and what was in his imagination. He had been thinking about these things, and he had actually lived – so one of the points in the speech that he says is that he tell the crowd, speaking directly to African Americans in the crowd, that “my brother was killed by a white man.” And he creates a level of empathy and so he had been thinking about these things, and the Greek tragedy and escolous helped him to come to terms with his brother’s death. So, what the crowd is experiencing and he also – the death of Martin Luther King, my sense, or what I say in the book is, he just gave them the hope that he himself had received. So that’s why, to me, it’s so gripping. It is, uh it’s anchored in his soul.

Beckley: It’s not just platitudes and, and him trying to quell an audience – It’s, it’s him really connecting with them and giving them what he’s learned through the death of his brother.

Thomas: Exactly, feeling what he felt, it’s not to get votes, it’s not to be reelected, you know, as a matter of fact, in the first part of the speech, he tells them, “Could you take – could you take them campaign…”

Beckley: The banners.

Thomas:  Yea, the banners. “Could you take them down?” And I interpret that as “this is not a political speech.” This is about the direction of our country. This is about what kind of people we want to be. This is not the end of violence and lawlessness, he says, but the majority of people in America want to live in peace, harmony, justice for all. And the audience claps, I mean, it’s an amazing speech. He announces that King has been killed and veious parts of the audience scream because they haven’t heard it. And by the time he finishes, there are two places in the speech where the audience claps, and both times, it’s about speeking to, what I say, the moral imagination. That we can create a society or a nation where white and black can live in harmony with justice for all, with justice for everybody. I call that moral imagination, and I don’t see many people, though we talk the language of it, the implementation of it has to do with showing up.

Beckley: and I think that kind of goes to, uh, the point about using moral imagination for social and political change – it doesn’t only have to be a spur of the moment, talking out of tragedy or, you know, a preacher at the pulpit, but it can be our political leaders giving us a picture of a better world and telling us how they’re going to accomplish it.

 

Thomas: Exactly. And also, inspiring us. So, if our leaders, we say in the book, I quote an author, who says that imagination rules the world, and we become who our leaders imagine us to be. And so, if our leaders don’t have moral imagination, if our leaders can’t envision equality, see, the argument I make is this: if you can’t see people as equals, in your mindset, you must see hierarchy – one group has to be over another group, or, or…then you set up a moral hierarchy. Well, this group is over that group. Then, after you establish the moral hierarchy, then you create laws to enforce the moral hierarchy. And then, you find religious leaders to bless the laws – and it’s a whole system.

Beckley: it’s kind of backwards from what it should be in a just and equal society.

Thomas: Exactly. Exactly. So, this whole concept of moral imagination is very critical and we see it exhibited around us every day: there is such a lack of moral imagination, even if we use the language, we do not have the, the concrete steps or the showing up. So one of the things that I say is that a lot of us will pontificate about what’s needed in neighborhoods that we’ve never been in. You’ve never shown up. You never talked to the people. How you gonna come up with solutions for a community, and you don’t go to the community, you don’t talk to any of the people in the community, you don’t put any people of the community on your leadership team- on your cabinet – on your board of trustees. But you are spouting off what we need to do for the community. It’s a lack of moral imagination. So the people experience it as paternalism.

Beckley: So, when you look at what you want people to take away from this book – obviously, the book is written towards preachers, and people of the clergy, but I found it very enlightening and there are a lot of things that everyday people, and leaders, and political leaders can take away from it as well. Could you sum up what you want people to take away from this book?

Thomas: Well, thank you so much. I-it is not just meant for the clergy, though I am a clergy person, and so I kind of write, and I think that the religious and spiritual community has a tremendous amount to say about moral imagination that we’re not saying. But what I want people to take away is really four things – the four qualities of moral imagination. You have to show up. You must show up. You cannot pontificate about people that you’ve never shown up to their community, you’ve never sat down and had food with them, you’ve never shared with them. So you have a bunch of uninformed information when you have not actually talked to a community – a community different than your community. Second, uh, when you get there and listen more than speak, when you go to learn more than you go to teach, or you go to learn and teach, then you develoep empathy, and empathy creates bridges for new decisions about peace and justice. When you start to work on new directions for peace and justicve, you’re going to have to anchor that somewhere. In a traditioin. In spiritual traditions – call it the wisdom of the ages – in political arenas, the constitution, the Bill of Rights – you have to anchor it somewhere. You know, so, you’re going to need the wisdom of the ages, and the fourth thing I want people to take away from it is that our talking, our speech, our, um, our rhetoric, our sermons, have to lift and inspire people and have to put them in touch with wonder, mystery, and hope.

Beckley: If people are interested in finding the book, uh, where, where can they find it.

Thomas: Uh, it’s on Amazon, and you can kindle it, you can get the physical copy.

Beckley: I’ve got it on my phone here.

Thomas: Well, I’m glad, see, I have it in a physical copy but I don’t have it on the phone yet. But I would hope that people would take it and maybe make it a discussion in some groups, so people could discuss it and, um, I did a presentation recently for a group here in Indianapolis, and it was a wonderful time we had, just, everybody doesn’t have to agree, but it’s the discussion that’s the critical thing.

Beckley: It’s kind of the start of something new there.

Thomas: Right, right, right.

Beckley: Well, thank you so much for coming in and talking with us today. We really really appreciate it.

Thomas: well, thank you so much. It’s my honor to be here. Thank you for taking the book, reading the book, and taking it so very seriously and thoroughly. Thank you.

Beckley: As always, thanks to Jill Weiss-Simins, producer and sound engineer extraordinaire, and Justin Clark, the voice of Newspapers here on the podcast. Remember, find us on Facebook and follow us on twitter at @TalkHoosierHist and to subscribe, rate, and review us wherever you get your podcasts! Thanks for listening!

Show Notes for Reaching Toward Peace: Robert F. Kennedy on the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Books

Boomhower, Ray. Robert F. Kennedy and the 1968 Indiana Primary, Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press, 2008.

Schlessinger, Arthur. Robert Kennedy and His Times, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1978.

Newspapers

                “City Pays Tribute To Dr. Martin Luther King.” The Indianapolis News, April 5, 1968.

“City To Hold Memorials For Dr. King.” The Indianapolis News, April 6, 1968.

“King Moves to Confrontation.” The Leaf-Chronicle, April 4, 1968.

“Leaders Of Races Urge Calm After Tragedy.” The Indianapolis News, April 5, 1968.

“Negroes Excused For King Funeral.” The Indianapolis News, April 8, 1968.

Websites

                The King Center Archive: http://www.thekingcenter.org/archive

Martin Luther King, Jr. encyclopedia: http://kingencyclopedia.stanford.edu/encyclopedia/encyclopedia/enc_poor_peoples_campaign/

Poor People’s Campaign: https://poorpeoplescampaign.org/index.php/poor-peoples-campaign-1968/

Other

The Indiana Historical Bureau. “Robert F. Kennedy on Death of Martin L. King” Historical marker file.

Special Thanks

                Dr. Frank Thomas, director of the PhD in African American Preaching and Sacred Rhetoric program at the Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis, joined us on this episode for a discussion of his book “Preaching a Dangerous Sermon.”

Jill is the sound engineer for Talking Hoosier History. She does everything from set up the recording equipment to selecting the music featured in each episode as well as actually mixing.

Justin Clark, project assistant with the Hoosier State Chronicles newspaper digitization project, voiced all newspaper clips in this episode.

Monster Meetings at the Senate Avenue YMCA

Senate Avenue YMCA membership drive. Photo from “The Senate Avenue YMCA for African American Men and Boys.”

Two or three black men brought segregation of Indianapolis’s YMCA into sharp focus in 1888, when they attempted to join the organization. Although the YMCA lacked an official policy mandating segregation, they denied the black mens’ applications. Two years later, a group of African American men formed a Young Men’s Prayer Band in Indianapolis. By 1902, this band merged into a “colored Y.M.C.A.”

The Y opened at the tail end of a major influx of African Americans to the city following the Civil War and Reconstruction. In the forty years between 1860 and 1900, the African American population of Indianapolis grew 3,000 percent. Many white residents did not welcome these newcomers. Oftentimes, African Americans were relegated to segregated areas of the city due to housing discrimination and exclusion from facilities. Indiana Avenue was at the center of the largest African American community in the city, with 30,000 black residents living within a ten mile radius of the Avenue by the 1950s.

The establishment of this YMCA provided facilities for those men who had been excluded from the central organization. In an Indiana Magazine of History article, Dr. Stanley Warren points out that:

the necessity of finding a way to survive within a limiting system driven by segregationist tendencies has been the base from which many great African-American traditions and organizations have begun.

In the capital city, the organization then called “The Indianapolis Colored YMCA” served as an example of these great African-American traditions. Emerging out of the discriminatory practices of Indianapolis, this branch of the “Y” grew into one of the largest and most influential black YMCAs in the country.

Senate Avenue YMCA Building Circa 1920-1940. Photo courtesy of University of Minnesota Libraries, Kautz Family YMCA Archives.

Before that could happen though, they needed a building able to accommodate their rapidly growing membership. By 1911, just nine years after its formation, the YMCA outgrew its building located at California and North Streets in the city. To remedy this, they proposed the construction of a new building. The building cost an estimated $100,000, a figure that seemed unobtainable to many in the community, where even the working professionals barely got by due to the limited job opportunities available to them.

Fortunately, just as the YMCA members began to plan their fundraising strategy, they gained a rather unlikely ally in a white, Jewish, Chicago businessman. Julius Rosenwald, part-owner of Sears, Roebuck, and Company, announced that he would give $25,000 to any community able to rise $75,000 towards the construction of a Colored Young Men’s Christian Association. With this support, members of the Indianapolis Colored YMCA joined forces with the white members of the Central YMCA for an incredible fundraising push. Two teams formed, one for the white members and one for the black members, and they set out on their mission. In just ten days, they surpassed their $75,000 goal. African American entrepreneur Madam C.J. Walker was one of the largest contributors to the YMCA’s Building Campaign Fund.

Dedication of the Senate Avenue YMCA. This group includes: “George Knox, publisher of the Indianapolis Freeman; Madam Walker; behind her F.B. Ransom, attorney for the Walker Company; next to Madam is Walker Booker T. Washington; Alexander Manning, editor of Colored World; behind him wearing a light colored suit Dr. Joseph H. Ward; Charles H. Bullock, Secretary Louisville YMCA; and Thomas Taylor, Senate Avenue YMCA Secretary,” image courtesy of the Indiana Historical Society, Digital Images Collection.

On July 28, 1912, with a crowd of over 5,000 people in attendance YMCA committee men broke ground on the site of the new building. Three months later another celebration with thousands of spectators was held for the laying of the cornerstone. Workers completed construction on the building, located at the corner of Michigan Street and Senate Avenue in downtown Indianapolis, in July 1913.

Booker T. Washington, 1903. Photo courtesy of Library of Congress.

YMCA members held a week of festivities and ceremonies in celebration of the opening of the new Senate Avenue Y, as it was called. Celebrations-attended by both black and white residents-included a ladies night, fraternal night, and athletic night. The highlight of the week, though, was Tuesday July 8 – the official dedication, which featured an address by Booker T. Washington, civil rights activist and founder of Tuskegee institute.In his address, Washington commended the citizens of the city, black and white, for banding together to make the Senate Avenue Y a reality. Then, he said:

I am proud of being a member of the Negro race and never
more so than tonight. I spurn the men who sympathize with me because I am a member of the Negro race. We have work to do and difficulties to overcome . . . Let the white people know about the good deeds in our race. In too many cases white people hear only of crime. They do not hear about the hard-working, industrious, sober colored men, and Indianapolis has many of the latter class.

In many cases, African American churches were the heart of the black community. The Indianapolis Colored YMCA, itself a Christian organization, became another center of the African American community in Indianapolis. Majority black neighborhoods such as this did not have access to the same social, recreational, and charitable organizations as the white communities. Because of these segregationist policies, black communities had long provided these facilities for themselves, often led by their churches. This is where the Senate Avenue Y stepped in, building on and expanding the work of African American churches.  The Senate Avenue Y was located in the heart of the Indiana Avenue African American community and offered adult education classes, held bible studies, provided meeting space for a variety of organizations, and even established an amateur basketball team.

Dance at the Senate Avenue Y, no date, courtesy of IUPUI University Library.

According to historians, these Senate Avenue programs:

fostered self-respect and self-reliance and tried to provide young men with proper role models and male companionship . . . [they] served as sanctuaries which preserved African American Masculinity and prepared black men and boys for their leadership role in the struggle for equality that lay ahead.

In order to reach more and more young men and boys, the Y held annual membership drives. These campaigns borrowed military organizational structures, dividing members into divisions of “enlisted men.” These men worked hard to recruit as many new members as possible. Those groups that enlisted the most new members were inducted into the Society of High Producers and The Royal Order of the Spizzerinktum, meaning “the will to succeed.” These tactics worked fabulously; membership jumped from just fifty-two in 1903 to over 5,000 by 1930.

Senate Avenue YMCA welcome ceremony. Photo courtesy of University of Minnesota Libraries, Kautz Family YMCA.

These wildly successful membership drives turned the Senate Avenue Y into one of the largest African American YMCA branches in the country. But being large does not necessarily make an organization important or influential. To understand the influence of the Y, we need to go right back to the very beginning of the branch, to the establishment of Monster Meetings.

The roots of the Senate Avenue YMCA Monster Meetings can be traced to the very early years of the Indianapolis Colored YMCA, and executive secretary Thomas Taylor. He instituted public forums where men, and later women, could gather on Sunday afternoons between November and March to listen to lectures on a wide variety of topics. Originally, Taylor wanted to call the forums “Big Meetings” but the proposal was rejected by the Central YMCA board because their annual meeting was already being called the Big Meeting. So, Taylor one-upped them and labeled his forum series the “Monster Meetings.” Taylor could not have known how fitting that name would become.

In the Taylor years, the meetings featured local religious leaders speaking almost exclusively on religious matters, but in 1916 a new executive secretary took the meetings to a new level. That executive secretary was Faburn Defrantz. (In 1947, he successfully spearheaded the effort to convince IU to allow African American basketball player Bill Garrett to play for the school’s varsity team. A “gentleman’s agreement” had barred African Americans from playing in the Big Ten).

Faburn DeFrantz in his Senate Avenue YMCA office. Photo from “The Senate Avenue YMCA for African American Men and Boys.”

During DeFrantz’s tenure, Monster Meetings continued to feature local ministers delivering religious messages. But they soon expanded to include some of the most well-known African American leaders in the nation, speaking on a variety of hot-button issues. In his seminal article “The Monster Meetings at the Negro YMCA in Indianapolis,” Dr. Stanley Warren provided a list that sampled some of the hundreds of speakers and topics featured at Monster Meetings during the DeFrantz years. These included authors, NAACP leaders like Walter White, professors, university presidents, politicians like Governor Paul V. McNutt, newspapermen, famous athletes such as Olympic gold medalist track star Jesse Owens, religious leaders, and former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt. Unfortunately, I have not located a collection or archive containing the speeches given at these Monster Meetings. Luckily, some snippets of some of the lectures are preserved in the pages of newspapers like the Indianapolis Recorder.

The lectures bespoke major events and concerns of the period. In 1930, months after the 1929 stock market crash, Freeman B. Ransom, attorney for the Madam C. J. Walker Company, discussed “Unemployment and How to Solve It.” In 1931, during the Prohibition Era, Reverend Charles H. Winders and Boyd Gurley debated the question “Prohibition: Shall Indiana Stay Dry?” Dr. George Washington Carver, Director of agricultural research and professor of chemistry at Tuskegee University, asked in 1932 “Great Creator, What Is a Peanut, Why Did You Make It?”

In 1940, as World War II raged in Europe, Dr. Max Yergan spoke on “Democracy: A Goal to Defend.” After U.S. entry into World War II, Dr. Lorenzo Greene spoke on “The Negro in National Defense,” Phillip Randolph lectured about “The Negro in War and Peace,” and William Hastie discussed “The Fight Against Discrimination in the Armed Forces.”

In 1947, one year after the Froebel School Board in Gary, Indiana voted for desegregation after hundreds of white students staged a walk out in protest of integration, Joseph Chapman spoke on “Democracy in Gary Schools.” In the early Cold War era, Former Crispus Attucks teacher and the first African American woman to study at the University of Oxford spoke about “Education and International Good Will” in 1952. Former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt spoke to a desegregated audience at the Murat Temple about “International Human Rights” in 1953.

And finally, leading up to and during the Civil Rights Movement, speeches such as “Integrated Society or a Segregated Society,” “The Civil Rights Crisis and American Democracy,” and “The Civil Rights Resolution in America” demonstrated that the black citizens of Indianapolis’s discussed and debated the same issues as those around the nation. The following details some of the most prolific speakers at the Monster Meetings:

Dr. Mordecai Johnson. Photo courtesy of The Atlantic.

Dr. Mordecai Johnson was a fixture of the Monster Meeting schedule, opening the meeting season for over forty consecutive years. He got involved with the YMCA in 1916, when he served as a student secretary and became a life-long supporter of the association. In 1926, Dr. Johnson became the first African American president of Howard University, one of the nation’s historically black universities. He served in that capacity until 1960. During his decades speaking at Monster Meetings, he covered a wide range of topics, including:

  • “Anti-Semitism and the Negro Ministry”
  • “Civilization’s Civil War”
  • “Implications of the Atomic Bomb”
  • “Ghandi and the Liberation of India”
  • “Segregation is Suicide”

Described as a man who “made people listen even when they did not believe,” Johnson was a powerful speaker and he lent his skill to important topics. As Cold War tensions mounted, he spoke of the dangers American segregation posed to the nation. He said:

“Through our nation’s moral weakness caused by segregation, we are committing scientific and technical suicide. We are five years behind militarily due to this moral weakness. Oh my brothers, let us pray it is not too late – only Almighty God knows whether it is not too late already…”

He went on to address the recent affirmation of Brown Vs. Board of Education, which declared segregated schools unconstitutional.

“It is my judgement that the death knell of segregation has been sounded. I see no disposition on the part of the Supreme Court to yield to the opponents of integration. The Court is informed by a sense of world duty which is inexorable.”

A. Phillip Randolph. Photo courtesy of Library of Congress.

Another name that appears more than once in the list of prominent figures featured at Monster Meetings is that of A. Philip Randolph. In 1925, Randolph organized the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, the first labor union comprised principally of African American workers. A major civil rights activist, he played a large part in pressuring President Franklin Roosevelt to issue an Executive Order that banned discrimination in World War II defense industries. He also pressured President Harry Truman to issue an Executive Order that ended segregation in the armed forces. (The 1945 Freeman Field uprising in Seymour, Indiana, where Tuskegee Airmen protested illegally-segregated officers’ clubs by forcibly entering the white officers’ club, also played a large part in Truman’s Executive Order). Randolph was not satisfied with those successes, though. In 1955, he stood in the Senate Avenue YMCA and declared:

“Negroes are yet second class citizens. Civil revolution was never completed, free public schools were never established, Negroes cannot buy property where they wish, nor can they enter certain businesses. They cannot join all the various unions. The Negroes cannot vote in some parts of this county; therefore they are not yet free.”

Later, in 1963, Randolph organized the March on Washington, where Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have A Dream” speech, which highlighted the injustice of many of the same racist, segregationist policies Randolph underscored in his Monster Meeting lecture.

Image courtesy of the Indianapolis Recorder.

In 1958, Martin Luther King Jr. himself, made an appearance on the YMCA Monster Meeting roster with a speech entitled “Remaining Awake through a Revolution.” Due to intense interest in King’s lecture, organizers moved the event to Cadle Tabernacle, which could accommodate a larger audience. In one of his first public appearances since he suffered a brutal attack at a book signing that year, the Baptist minister maintained his message of nonviolence, urging the use of love in the face of violence. He proclaimed:

“A new age of justice is challenging us to love our oppressors . . . We must not assume this new freedom with attitudes of bitterness and recrimination, for, if we do, the new age will be nothing but a duplicate of the old one . . . A new world is being born, and the old world will die. We must be prepared for the new world to come. Segregation is nothing but slavery covered up with certain niceties and complexities. If our democracy is to live, segregation must die . . . Use love. Love is a sure winner. Remember that as Christians we are working with god. If we do it the way God wants us to do it, we will be able to sing with pride, ‘My Country ‘tis of thee’ for Freedom must ring from every mountainside.”

The Senate Avenue YMCA Monster Meetings played a central role in not only educating members about topics of local, national, and international importance, but also in galvanizing the community into action. According to Dr. Warren, “As the popularity and importance of these mass education meetings grew, both the public and YMCA members exhibited a higher level of community activism.” For those who regularly attended Monster Meetings, the YMCA became a foundation for the changes that they worked towards in the coming decades. The meetings were a place where, in the words of Dr. Mordecai Johnson, “The redcap and the lawyer, the laborer and the doctor, seek together to find answers to social and political questions.”

*Interested in the Civil Rights Movement in Indiana? Check out this post about the 1972 National Political Black Convention, which drew over 10,000 black Americans to Gary. Influential leaders, such as Black Panther co-founder Bobby Seale, Revered Jesse Jackson, and Coretta Scott King, lent their support in creating a cohesive political strategy for black Americans.

THH Episode 12: The Revolutions of George Rogers Clark

­­­­Transcript of The Revolutions of George Rogers Clark

Jump to Show Notes

Written by Lindsey Beckley from research by Peter DeCarlo

Produced by Lindsey Beckley and Jill Weiss Simins

Recording of man speaking: “An American general named George Rogers Clark has taken Kaskaskia and Cahokia, and I would expect by now that he also controls Vincennes…”

Recording of Second man: “George Rogers Clark? Who is he? How large is this fort?”

First man Speaking: A Virginian, I believe…

[Transition music]

Lindsey Beckley: So, sometimes these episodes come really naturally to me. We decide what the topic is going to be, I read as much as I can on it, and I write and record the episode. Of course, there are revisions and discussions along the way, but generally, I just kind of write. That’s not how this one has been. I knew for a while that a George Rogers Clark episode was on my horizon, and, I’m not going to lie, I was kind of dreading it. Not because I particularly disliked the topic, I didn’t really have any strong feelings about it at all. No, I dreaded it because I knew I was going to be out of my element. Eighteenth century military history is far out of my area of expertise.  My area of expertise is, obviously, Indiana history. And here I was, tasked with doing an episode about George Rogers Clark, a Revolutionary War hero whose life, from his first commission in 1774 to his military funeral 44 years later, consisted of a string of military campaigns. And while Indiana is the only state to celebrate George Rogers Clark day every year, most of his story takes place outside of the Hoosier state. To say I was out of my element is an understatement.

So, I read several summaries of his life. Then a few articles. Then a book. And then a thesis. And against all odds, I genuinely enjoyed all of it. But I just couldn’t figure out a good way to tell the story. I tried again and again to start the writing process. I even wrote a whole script and then scrapped it the same day. I thought about George Rogers Clark constantly, and I talked about him nearly as much. My poor husband and friends kindly listened as I rambled about the exploits of a man 200 years dead. My coworkers listened to pitch after pitch of the episode. And through all this, I realized that I kept coming back to the same question: why is this important? And the answer to that question always came in the form of another question: what if? What if things had gone differently? So, on this episode of Talking Hoosier History, we’ll be asking just that.

[Talking Hoosier History theme music]

Beckley: Hello, and welcome to Talking Hoosier History, brought to you by the Indiana Historical Bureau. For over a century, we’ve been marking Hoosier history. Now, it’s time to start Talking Hoosier History. I’m Lindsey Beckley and I’ll be your host.

[Sound effects]

Beckley: Before we get to my main man, George Rogers Clark, let’s talk about something called Historical Contingency.

[Sound effects]

Voice of a man on the television: The American ideals of Freedom and equality became beacons of hope.

[Sound effects]

This is a concept often used by historians to explore historic happenings. Basically, the world we live in today was not inevitable. It’s the result of a series of events, each of which could have had multiple outcomes.

[Music]

Beckley: For example, some people would argue that during the Civil War, the succession of the Southern states was on the election of Abraham Lincoln. What if someone else had become president? Maybe the Civil War wouldn’t even have happened. And was World War II contingent on Hitler’s rise to power? I mean, what if he had been accepted to art school? Maybe there wouldn’t have been a World War II. Of course, both of those things could have happened regardless. The thing to keep in mind here is that history isn’t linear – it’s a web with one small event leading to another one and that event leading to two more. I’ll be talking about a few historical contingencies. And you may not agree with my conclusions. And that’s alright. That’s what makes historical theorizing fun – there is no one right answer (although there are some wrong ones.)

Voice of a man on the television: Hamilton is sitting in Vincennes dreaming about spring time, thinking that nobody can cross these flooded plains to get to him. I say we treat those British to an early spring.

Voice of second man on television: On a rainy day in February 27….(fades out slowly)

Beckley fading in: … 1779, George Rogers Clark was 27 years old the leader of 175 men on a mission. He led his troops through the neck deep waters flooding the Wabash River valley in present day southern Indiana. They had left the town of Kaskaskia over 2 weeks before with only the most necessary supplies – the clothes on their backs, food, guns, and ammunition. Their sole mission was to retake Fort Sackville in Vincennes from the British.

This wasn’t the men’s first time trekking to Vincennes to take the fort from the British – they had taken the fort just 6 months ago but were unable to hold it after spreading their forces too thin. No, it wasn’t their first time taking the fort. But it would be their last.

[Menacing music]

Beckley: When Clark heard that the British had come down from Detroit and walked back into the fort with little fight, he had a choice to make – wait until the spring campaigning season to march on the fort, which would the British gathering reinforcements in the meantime, or march immediately and risk the unpredictable Midwestern weather in the middle of February.  He decided on the latter option and before setting off, wrote to his superior:

Voice actor reading from Clark: I know the case is desperate, but, sire, we must either quit the country or attack Mr. Hamilton. No time is to be lost… Who knows what fortune will do for us? Great things have been effected by a few men well conducted.

Beckley: Those few men might have been wet and tired. And they definitely hadn’t eaten a decent meal in days. But they had one thing on their side – the element of surprise – and they would indeed affect great things.

Eighteen days and 180 miles later, they arrived in Vincennes on February 23 and laid siege to the fort that night. Clark ordered every banner and flag they had to be unfurled in an attempt to make their numbers look larger than they were. They fired so relentlessly on the fort that the British forces inside hardly dared poke their heads over the battlements. Just 2 days later, on February 25, 1777, the British forces surrendered. The fort was in American hands once again and would stay that way through the end of the war.

And here, we come to our first “what if?” What if George Rogers Clark hadn’t made this march? What if he hadn’t taken fort Sackville?

[Inquisitive music]

Beckley: First and foremost, if he had not made this march and taken the fort, we probably wouldn’t be talking about him today. While he did have other military accomplishments, the Vincennes campaign was by far his most famous achievement. When his story is taught in Indiana History classrooms, this is the story that is told. The George Rogers Clark National Historical Park, one of Indiana’s 3 National Parks, is located in Vincennes near the site of the old fort and it was established solely to commemorate this action.

But it’s more than that. If George Rogers Clark had not made his march – if the fort had stayed in British hands – the boundary lines agreed upon after the Revolutionary War may have looked much different. The British wanted to use the Ohio River to serve as the northern American boundary. But because fort Vincennes had been held by the Americans for nearly 5 years, the United States had a legitimate claim to the land. Partially because of this, the boundary line was moved to the next natural boundary to the north – the Great Lakes. So, if he hadn’t marched, or if the march had failed, if he hadn’t inspired those tired, hungry men to march on the fort, Indiana and the rest of the Northwest Territories may have become part of Canada, not the United States. I never really realized this importance until it was phrased as a “what if” so I decided to look at another chapter of George Rogers Clark’s life in the same way.

[Transitional music]

Beckley: For this story, we jump from 1778 and the end of the American Revolution to 1794, and to a totally different revolution.

[Transitional music]

Beckley: George Rogers Clark was just days away from enacting an elaborate plan that was over a year in the making. This plan involved a representative of the French government stationed in Philadelphia, Frenchmen living in Spanish Louisiana, and Americans from Kentucky and the Northwest Territory, including what would become Indiana.

Simply put, the plan was for Clark and around 1,500 Americans, to gather around the Falls of the Ohio river, near present day Louisville. Once gathered, the men would expatriate themselves, renouncing their allegiance to the U.S. They would then declare French citizenship and head south, from the Ohio River to the Mississippi, attacking and capturing any Spanish settlement they encountered on their way. After taking a settlement, they would commandeer any weapons and ammunition they found, recruit as many new men as they could, and set off towards the next settlement.

In this way, both their manpower and their firepower would grow as they moved towards their main goal, Spanish held Louisiana. Clark expected no less than 5,000 men to be at his back when he reached the capital, New Orleans. Once he reached the city, the French residents living there would join forces with him and overthrow the Spanish in a revolution. At this point, they would proceed all the way east to Sarasota and overthrow the Spanish there. If things were still looking good, they would then march back west to Santa Fe, conquering as they went. Their end goal was the formation of a new republic, separate from both the United States and France, but allied with both.

[Transitional music]

Beckley: Of course, if all of this had actually happened, we probably would hear more about it. So, obviously, it failed. Or rather, it never really got going in the first place. At the same time that George Rogers Clark was laying his plans and gathering his forces, the French government was overthrown and the minister in Philadelphia replaced. This change of administration meant that the money Clark needed for this so-called expedition would never make it to his camp on the Ohio.

Now, If you’re anything like me, you’ve never heard that part of George Rogers Clark’s story. And if you’re anything like me, you might be thinking, “Wow, George Rogers Clark was a traitor?” And by modern terms, he may have been. I mean, he allied with a foreign nation and renounced his US citizenship in order to lead an army comprised mostly of Americans against a nation which the US Government was not at war with. However, Clark and his western brethren wouldn’t have seen it in the same light.

Most people in the early republic believed that every man had the right to expatriate themselves at any time. And most westerners believed that, as the only other republic in the world, they were obligated to help the budding republic of France in any way they could. While this was definitely something Clark was thinking about when concocting his plan, there were three other main motives behind his decision to pursue such an extreme course of action.

First, he and many other westerners were outraged that the Spanish did not allow US citizen’s to freely navigate the Mississippi. Most Americans were flat out not allowed to ship goods down the Mississippi river. Those that were allowed to faced hefty fees. And those that chose to do it without Spanish consent faced the possible confiscation of their goods and punishment by Spanish government. This was a huge deal because the farmers of the west needed a way to get their products to the east, and in a time before cars and trains, river navigation was the name of the game and if you couldn’t ship your goods, you couldn’t make a living.

The second thing spurring Clark on to action was the American government. After the American Revolution, Clark felt that the government was falling far short of his revolutionary ideals. He thought the Federalists, who held most of the power in government at the time, were leading the country back to monarchy or creating an oligarchy, which is rule by a powerful few. He also felt wronged by the government. He had financed much of his American Revolutionary activities himself and was in massive amounts of debt because of that. After years of petitioning for repayment, it was clear that he was not going to get the money. His disagreements with the American government were so strong that he no longer felt an allegiance to them. Just before he started on the plans for the Revolution on the Mississippi, he had written:

Voice actor reading from Clark: My Country has proved notoriously ungrateful, for my services, and so forgetful of those successful and almost unexampled enterprises which gave it the whole of its territory on this side of the great mountains, as in this my prime of life, to have neglected me.

Beckley: To him, the government had turned its back on him as much as he had on it. His third and final motivation for action, and probably the purest one, was a desire to help the French living under Spanish rule in Louisiana. After all, he himself had lived under unwanted British rule before the American Revolution. He looked to the South and saw basically the same situation. Here were a people, calling out for freedom from the oppressive yoke of foreign rule. All they needed was a hero, willing to risk it all to save them. And who better to do so than the Washington of the West, George Rogers Clark?

All of this brings us to our second “What if?” What if George Rogers Clark had gotten the funding for his expedition? What if he had set out on the Ohio with 1,500 men at his back and revolution in his heart?

Well, all evidence says that if he was well funded, he probably would have succeeded. I mean, he certainly thought so. Clark wrote to the French representative in Philadelphia saying:

Voice actor reading from Clark: There is no knowing where our career will stop.  This kind of warfare is my element.  I have served a long apprenticeship to it.  I engage in it from the purest motives and have no doubt of success …you will ere long hear of a flame kindled on the Mississippi that will not be easily extinguished.

Beckley: But let’s not just take his word for it, though. Let’s look at the facts of the matter.

Clark expected to have at least 5,000 men at his back when he reached Spanish Louisiana, and the reports that were coming in from various places in the west seemed to back that up. On the other hand, the Spanish Regiment of Louisiana consisted of approximately 1,500 troops, and that was spread throughout the region. New Orleans, the capital, only had about 300 troops for its defense. So, even conservatively, Clark would have had a 10 to 1 advantage in any attack on Spanish held settlements. The only thing the Spanish had to their advantage was a fleet of boats that was dominant enough to control the Mississippi, but Clark had begun building a fleet of his own before funding fell through, so that threat as well very well may have been nullified. Add to all of this the rising discontent of the Frenchmen who were under Spanish rule and it seems fairly clear that Clark had a good shot at leading a successful revolution. Which brings me to my last “What if?”

What if he had succeeded? Simply enough, if George Rogers Clark had succeeded…there would have been, there might still be, an independent nation stretching from Florida in the east, to New Mexico in the west, and stretching all the way down into Mexico. And if that nation had been established but no longer existed, we would have yet another war to learn about in our history classes, a war which pitted republic against republic. George Rogers Clark vs. George Washington. It’s impossible to know all the various ways this revolution on the Mississippi could have changed the course of history, just as it was impossible for George Rogers Clark to know all the various ways the American Revolution would change the course of history as he led the march on Vincennes and became the Father of the Old Northwest.

[Talking Hoosier History theme music]

Beckley: Once again, I’m Lindsey Beckley and this has been Talking Hoosier History. A special thank you to Peter DeCarlo, a Historian with the Minnesota Historical Society. I used his thesis extensively in preparing for this episode. As always, thanks to Jill Weiss Simins, my sound engineer extraordinaire, for bringing her incredible skills to the podcast. And for voiceing George Rogers Clark, we want to thank Justin Clark, no relation. Keep up with us on Facebook at Talking Hoosier History or on Twitter at @TalkHoosierHist. And please, subscribe, rate, and review us wherever you get your podcasts…it helps more than you can know. Thanks for listening!

Show Notes for The Revolutions of George Rogers Clark

Episode Eleven Show Notes

Books

Boomhower, Ray. Robert F. Kennedy and the 1968 Indiana Primary, Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press, 2008.

Schlessinger, Arthur. Robert Kennedy and His Times, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1978.

Other

                The Indiana Historical Bureau. “Robert F. Kennedy on Death of Martin L. King” Historical marker file.

Newspapers

                “City Pays Tribute To Dr. Martin Luther King.” The Indianapolis News, April 5, 1968.

“City To Hold Memorials For Dr. King.” The Indianapolis News, April 6, 1968.

“King Moves to Confrontation.” The Leaf-Chronicle, April 4, 1968.

“Leaders Of Races Urge Calm After Tragedy.” The Indianapolis News, April 5, 1968.

“Negroes Excused For King Funeral.” The Indianapolis News, April 8, 1968.

Special Thanks

                Dr. Frank Thomas, director of the PhD in African American Preaching and Sacred Rhetoric program at the Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis, joined us on this episode for a discussion of his book “Preaching a Dangerous Sermon.”

Jill is the sound engineer for Talking Hoosier History. She does everything from set up the recording equipment to selecting the music featured in each episode as well as actually mixing.

Justin Clark, project assistant with the Hoosier State Chronicles newspaper digitization project, voiced all newspaper clips in this episode.

Music Credits

Theme Song

The Talking Hoosier History Theme Song is “Rock and Gravel” by Indianapolis band Syd Valentine’s Patent Leather Kids. The trio recorded this song in Richmond, Indiana, in 1929. Used courtesy PublicDomain4U, accessed publicdomain4u.com.

Featured Sample

Several samples were taken from the 1970 documentary “A Few Men Well Conducted,” created by the Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Harpers Ferry Center. The film is housed in the National Archives at College Park, and was accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgMpUFY9EoA.

Other Audio

Bensound, “Epic,” Audio Library, No Copyright Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae8FyeVc7qk

Josh Kirsch, “It’s Coming,” Audio Library, No Copyright Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi0cGs4wXLY

Ross Bugden, “Parallel,” Audio Library, No Copyright Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ1oZ9tmoEo

Kevin MacLeod, “Sneaky Snitch,” Audio Library, No Copyright Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-rXQALDv-4

Uniq, “Art of Silence,” No Copyright, Royalty Free, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V-pYCGx0C4.

2018 Marker Madness

WHAT: Marker Madness Social Media Campaign       WHEN: March 1, 2018 – March 31, 2018                           DOWNLOAD PRINTABLE BRACKETS HERE

During the month of March, the Indiana Historical Bureau will be pitting potential historical marker topics against each other in a single elimination tournament. The 32 topics will go head-to-head and YOU get to decide who will move forward.

Each day, there will be a featured match up from one of the four divisions: Politics & Military, Economy & Technology, Culture & Arts, and Community & Society. Voting for the featured match will start at 5:00 am and close at 5:00 the next morning. You can vote on Facebook and Twitter so follow us on both to participate! Check back here to see the results and the updated bracket. Below are the results of the first round matchups that have come in so far- print your own bracket and pick your winners here!

 

 

 

THH Episode 11: Lincoln the Boy, the man, and the Myth

­­­­Transcript of Lincoln the Boy, the Man, and the Myth

Jump to Show Notes

Written by Lindsey Beckley from research by Bill Bartelt

Produced by Lindsey Beckley and Jill Weiss

Lindsey Beckley: Hey, this is your host Lindsey here. It’s hard to believe that we’ve been doing the podcast for over a year. And we’ve learned a lot in that time but we’re wanting to learn more. The best way for us to do that is to get feedback from you, our listeners. The number one thing you can do to help us is to let us know what you like…and what you don’t like….about the show. Review us on iTunes, post on our facebook, email us at ihb@history.in.gov, or even tweet at us on twitter. However you do it, we’d love to hear from you. Now, let’s get to the show.

[Folk style music]

Beckley: Abraham Lincoln once said, “It is a great piece of folly to attempt to make anything out of my early life.” In subsequent years, many, many people have attempted to make something out of his early life. And on this episode of Talking Hoosier History, we will, once again, attempt to make something out of his early life as we explore the myth, the man, and the grey area in-between.

[Talking Hoosier History theme music]

Beckley: Hello, and welcome to Talking Hoosier History, brought to you by the Indiana Historical Bureau. For over a century, we’ve been marking Hoosier history. Now, it’s time to start Talking Hoosier History. I’m Lindsey Beckley and I’ll be your host.

It was December, 1816. Indiana was a brand new state and the Lincoln family was moving to the Little Pigeon Creek Community in what later became Spencer County, Indiana. The Lincolns – parents Thomas and Nancy and their children, 9 year old Sarah, and 7 year old Abraham– had lived in Kentucky until then, but Indiana offered an opportunity not available to Thomas before: the chance to hold clear title on a tract of land without dispute. As an added bonus, Indiana was a free state, something which aligned with the Lincoln’s Baptist views.

[Sound effects]

Beckley: Once they arrived at their new home, the family set to work building a modest shelter and clearing the land to make way for crops such as corn and wheat. And Abraham, while young, did his fair share of the work and could wield an axe quite well. He later recalled that:

Voice actor reading from Lincoln: He was large for his age, and had an ax put in his hands at once; he was almost constantly handling that most useful instrument.

Beckley: The work required to meet the basic needs of food and shelter took up much of the family’s focus, but they still made time for other pursuits.

[Transition music]

Both Abraham and Sarah learned to read and write while attending school in Kentucky and Abraham especially liked to practice his letters. One account said:

Voice actor reading from account: He scrawled them with charcoal, he scored them in the dust, in the sand, in the snow – anywhere and everywhere that lines could be drawn, there he improved his capacity for writing.

Beckley: Because of this fondness for writing, and because neither Thomas nor Nancy had ever quite mastered the skill, Abraham became the de facto letter writer of the family, penning letters to neighbors and family left behind in Kentucky.

Reading hearthside in the evenings, the children adventured with Robinson Crusoe, visited a faraway land with The Arabian Nights, and learned many valuable lessons through Aesop’s Fables and the Bible. Many people who knew Abraham in his youth recounted how much he loved to read and indeed, many images of Lincoln’s time in Indiana feature the young, lanky boy with a book in one hand and an ax in the other.

Literature may have opened a world of imagination to the Lincoln children, but there was much left to learn. Luckily, Andrew Crawford came to town around 1819 and took up the role of school master. Over the next 5 years, Abraham attended school under at least three different school masters, where he learned “readin, writin, and cipherin to the rule of 3.”

[Nature sound effect]

Beckley: Now a young man, it was time for Abraham to find employment. First, he labored on neighboring farms doing the same kind of work he did on his father’s farm – splitting rails for fencing, clearing land, helping with crops, and slaughtering hogs. While working for neighbor Josiah Crawford, Lincoln noticed that he owned a biography of George Washington which Lincoln had been longing to read. He borrow it, but while reading, he accidently left it on a windowsill, where it was soaked through by rain. Embarrassed by his carelessness, Honest Abe went to Mr. Crawford to tell him the truth – he had ruined the book and couldn’t pay for it. Instead, he worked the debt off with three days of hard labor.

For the most part, Abraham pursued jobs that gave him a chance to interact with new and interesting people. For example, he worked on a ferry taking people and cargo across the Anderson River. During this time, he also took the initiative to build a small row boat which he used to carry travelers from the banks of the river to catch passing boats. It was while doing this that he first made a whole dollar in one day – something he reminisced about later, saying

Voice actor reading from Lincoln: You may think it was a very little thing, but it was a most important incident in my life. I could scarcely believe that I, a poor boy, had earned a dollar in less than a day. The world seemed wider and fairer before me. I was a more hopeful and confident being from that time.

Beckley: Perhaps the most exciting and influential part of Lincoln’s time in Indiana was a two month span in 1828, when Abraham accompanied Allen Gentry on a flatboat trip to New Orleans. Lincoln seized the opportunity to get away from rural southern Indiana and see more of the world by travelling down the Mississippi River with a boatload of agricultural products such as corn, pork, and corn meal.

Abraham encountered many new things on this journey; settlements ranging in size from a few families to thousands of people, Spanish moss hanging from the trees, sprawling sugar plantations, and architecture much different than the rustic wooden structures he was accustomed to. One experience in particular from this trip made a lasting impression on the future president.

Once they had reached New Orleans, the two young men had a few free days to tour the city before they caught a steam ship back to Indiana. One day, while exploring the city, the two came across something else Lincoln probably had never saw before – a slave market.

[Music]

Beckley: New Orleans was home to the largest slave market in America. In that district of the city, the streets were lined with African American men dressed in blue suits and women wearing in calico dresses. Behind the buildings, there were small, fenced in yards where fifty to one hundred men, women, and children waited to be torn from their families and sent to labor in strange and often cruel circumstances. The streets rang with the sounds of slave traders shouting about the attributes of the people being sold and the din of the crowd below, scrutinizing their appearance and making their offers.

Gentry later recalled visiting the market, saying

Voice actor reading from Gentry account: We stood and watched the slaves sold in New Orleans and Abraham was very angry…

Beckley: It’s hard to know how much this encounter by a 19 year old Abraham Lincoln informed the views of 52 year old President Lincoln, but such an experience surely made its mark on his later political beliefs.

[Transitional music]

Beckley: Lincoln first found his interest in law and politics while living in the Hoosier state. The Lincoln farm was situated relatively near 2 different county court houses. It was common at this time for people to attend court hearings for socializing and hearing the latest news. Living near multiple courthouses, Lincoln had ample opportunity to witness skilled lawyers practicing their craft. He also borrowed law books and newspapers, both of which greatly influenced his political development. Nineteenth century papers were highly partisan and when Lincoln first ran for political office in Illinois, his views reflected political arguments he likely leaned from newspaper pages.

While Lincoln’s first forays into politics wouldn’t be in Indiana, he did here for 14 years before the family moved to Illinois in 1830. Long after his departure from the state, Indiana governor Otis Bowen said

Voice actor reading from Bowen: Lincoln made Illinois but Indiana made Lincoln.

Beckley: And that certainly strikes a chord. He came to Indiana a 7 year old boy and left a 21 year old man. While in the state, he learned the value of hard work and honesty, had his first up close encounter with the horrors of slavery, and developed an interest in law: all of which came together to build the character of one of the greatest US presidents of all time.

[Record scratch]

Now, you might be thinking that story I just told, with little exception, sounds very charming…idyllic, even. But, as is often the case, there’s another side to the story. Let’s start back at the beginning.

[Folk music blended with modern music]

The Lincoln’s left Kentucky for Indiana due to land disputes. Lincoln later said:

Voice actor reading from Lincoln: This removal was partly on account of slavery; but chiefly on account of the difficulty in land titles in Kentucky.

Beckley: Given what Lincoln went on to do as president, many people play up the first clause of that statement and all but ignore the second. While the Lincolns were, in all probability, anti-slavery, the sentiment probably had less to do with moral outrage about the practice and more to do with economics. Nevertheless, the bigger issue for the family was land titles – 2 different times, Thomas Lincoln purchased property, only to have the titles challenged, and he lost money each time. He decided to move to Indiana over frustration with the lackadaisical way Kentucky land was parceled, rather than over any sort of moral problem with slavery.

[Folk music]

Beckley: Regardless of why they moved to Indiana, once they settled here, life was hard. Lincoln may have been “large for his age,” but the fact remains that he was a 7 year old who “had an ax put in his hands” to tackle the physically demanding task of clearing land for subsistence farming. What’s more, if he and his father failed to clear enough land, it could spell disaster for the family…the kind of disaster that ends in a slow, horrible death by starvation. The Lincoln’s were in a slightly better position than some, since Thomas was a skilled carpenter with an alternate source of income, but their Indiana existence was still one largely of subsistence farming and hunting.

[Music continues]

Beckley: And starvation wasn’t the only danger of frontier life. Lincoln remembered the area being populated with bears and panthers.

[Music continues]

Beckley: Even domesticated animals posed a risk; once Lincoln recalled that he was kicked in the head by a horse when he was 10 years old and was “apparently killed for a time,” which most likely means that he was rendered unconscious…in any case, he wasn’t seen by a doctor to assess the extent of the damage – most likely because there were no – or at least very few – doctors in the area.

[Transitional music]

Beckley: Yet another ever present danger was illness. In the Autumn of 1818, the Little Pigeon Creek Community was struck by an illness which went by many names – puking fever, bilious fever, swamp fever, the slows, but most commonly, it was called milk sickness. The cause is now known to be drinking milk from a cow that ate a plant called white snake root, which contains the poison tremetol. But in 1818, they only knew that it seemed to come from drinking milk. That fall, several families in the area were plagued by the sickness, and soon it struck the Lincoln household; Nancy started showing the first symptoms of the illness in late September – that’s weakness, dizziness, and loss of appetite – and on October 5, 1818, Nancy died. Afterwards, 11 year old Sarah took on the duties of her mother, at least until Thomas married Sarah Bush-Johnston, a widow from Kentucky with three children, and that must have made things a bit tight in the household, what with the 3 Lincolns, 4 Johnstons, and 2 orphaned cousins all living in a one-room cabin with a single shared loft for sleeping.

[Transitional music]

Lincoln spent some time in his autobiographical sketches outlining his education…or lack thereof. While in Indiana, he attended subscription schools, where families in a community built a school house and paid the teacher directly. And even when there was a school to attend, children wouldn’t have gone as regularly as they do today. They went, as Lincoln later said, “by littles.” A week here, a month there…whenever they had the time and availability. The teachers weren’t necessarily professionally trained educators, either. Lincoln said:

Voice actor reading Lincoln: There were some schools, so called; but no qualification was ever required of a teacher, beyond “readin, writin, and cipherin to the rule of three.

Beckley: All told, Lincoln estimated that all of his schooling, when added together, didn’t even amount to a full year, and when he filled out his biographical survey for the Dictionary of Congress, he summed up his education with one word: defective.

[Transitional music]

The fact that Abraham Lincoln could read put him in the vast minority in frontier Indiana. Even 16 years after the Lincolns left Indiana, only 1 in 7 Hoosiers were literate. And, to set him apart even further, Lincoln enjoyed reading. Many relatives and neighbors recalled this unique trait, some with respect, like Nathanial Grigsby, who was a schoolmate of Lincoln’s. He recalled that Lincoln…

Voice actor reading from account: …would carry his books with and would always read whilst resting…

Beckley: during the work day and would…

Voice actor reading from account: …set up late reading & rise early doing the same.

Beckley: Others in the community, however, saw his penchant for reading and intellectual nature as signs of laziness. For example, one neighbor, when recounting Lincoln’s work ethic, said

Voice actor reading from account: Abe was awful lazy; he worked for me, was always reading and thinking…

Beckley: As most of Lincoln’s other employers described him as a hard, honest worker, it’s unlikely that Lincoln actually slacked off in his work; more likely, the neighbor equated traits of intelligence with poor work ethic. Being one of the few introspective, thoughtful people in the area must have been a fairly lonely and frustrating existence for the young Lincoln.

With all of this in mind, it’s no surprise that Lincoln sought employment on the river since it got him away from the small community and introduced him to people from a variety of backgrounds. I mean, who could blame him? And after his sister Sarah died in childbirth in 1828, who could blame him for taking the chance to get as far away from his grief as he could by accepting the position on Gentry’s flatboat trip to New Orleans. As I said earlier, this trip may have been the most influential part of Lincoln’s time in Indiana…and it wasn’t even in Indiana. While in the state, he probably felt surrounded by undereducated, uninspired people, being forced to do menial labor, all of which motivated him to “Escape the frontier,” as historian Mark Neely would put it. It was in spite of his Indiana roots that Lincoln became who he was, not because of them.

[Record scratch]

Beckley: Ok, That’s quite a different story than the first one, isn’t it? And yet, everything I said in both is supported by evidence. Each version of the story represents a different interpretation of Lincoln in Indiana. The first is, somewhat amusingly, called the “Chin-fly Theory” and is derived from author Ida Tarbell’s statement:

Voice actor reading Tarbell: The horse, the dog, the ox, the chin fly, the plow, the hog, these companions of his youth became interpreters of his meaning, solvers of his problems in his great necessity, of making men understand and follow him. Beckley: The second is, just as amusingly, called the dung-hill theory. That name comes from historian Chauncey Black’s remark:

Voice actor reading Black: It is our duty to show the world the Majesty and beauty of his character, as it grew by itself and unassisted, out of this unpromising soil…We must point mankind to the diamonds glowing on the dunghill.

Beckley: These two theories differ so much that both cannot be the correct interpretation of the facts. In reality, the truth of the matter is probably somewhere in the middle.

[Transition music]

Beckley: It’s hard to quantify Indiana’s impact on Lincoln as there are so many variables that come together to form someone’s character. But, we can judge the effect his time in the state had on his politics, as he first ran for public office just two years after leaving the Hoosier state. In his first known political address, the 23 year old candidate for the Illinois General Assembly chose to focus on three issues: high interest rate loans, internal improvements, and education.

While Lincoln specifies that the root of that first issue was a personal incident from his time in Illinois, the other two platform issues can be directly linked to his time in Indiana. The most obvious way Lincoln’s experience in Indiana influenced his politics was in his support of public education. In his 1832 address, he said:

Voice actor reading from Lincoln: I view [education] as the most important subject which we as a people can be engaged in. That every man may receive at least, a moderate education, and thereby be enabled to read the histories of his own and other counties, by which he may duly appreciate the value of our free institutions, appears to be an object of vital importance.

Beckley: This focus on education came directly from his sore lack of public schooling in southern Indiana.

Now, his support of internal improvements isn’t quite as obviously connected to his boyhood, but when you consider the fact that his means of access to the broader world was primarily through the Ohio River – and the goods, information, and people it transported – and that at this point in history “internal improvements” mostly referred to development of canals to connect small communities to large waterways, it’s reasonable to assume that seeing firsthand how that kind of access to the larger world could change lives influenced his stance on the matter.

Ultimately, it’s unreasonable to say that Lincoln wasn’t influenced by his time in Indiana. He was here from ages 7 to 21. It would be hard to walk away from a place you spent 14 years without being changed by that place. However, it’s also difficult to measure how Indiana shaped Lincoln’s character. His views changed dramatically after leaving Indiana due to life experiences and navigating major political events in American History.

He returned only once, in 1844, to his boyhood home. His visit brought back memories of the losses he experienced here, as well as some of the more joyous times. Inspired, he wrote the poem, “My Childhood’s home I see again.” I’ll leave you with a few stanzas.

Voice actor reading from Lincoln:

My childhood-home I see again,

And Gladden with the view;

And still as mem’ries crowd my brain,

There’s sadness in it too.

The very spot where grew the bread

That formed my bones, I see.

How strange, old field, on thee to tread,

And feel I’m part of thee!

Beckley: Once again, I’m Lindsey Beckley and this had been Talking Hoosier History.

[Talking Hoosier History theme music]

Beckley: To learn more about Abraham Lincoln in Indiana, check out the book “There I Grew Up: Remembering Abraham Lincoln’s Indiana Youth” by William E. Bartelt. The featred song of this episode was “Living Things” by Bloomington songwriter Tom Roznowski. It’s from the album “Wilderness Plots.” Visit Tomroznowski.net to learn more. As always, a huge thanks to Jill Weiss, our sound engineer extraordinaire. And Tom Mackie, formerly director of the Abraham Lincoln Library and Museum at Lincoln Memorial University, who did an amazing job bringing life to the world of Lincoln in this episode. Also, thanks to Justin Clark for lending his voice to the show. Stay connected on social media…We can’t wait to hear from you. Thanks for listening!

Show Notes for Lincoln the Boy, the Man, the Myth

Books

Bartelt, William. “There I Grew Up.” Remembering Abraham Lincoln’s Indiana Youth. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press, 2008.

Campanella, William. Lincoln in New Orleans: The 1828-1831 Flatboat Voyages and Their Place in History. Lafayette: University of Louisiana Press, 2010.

Warren, Louis. Lincoln’s Youth: Indiana Years, 1816-1860. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press, 1959.

Articles

Greenwald, Erin. “The Price of Life.” The Historic New Orleans Collections Quarterly, Spring, 2015.

Lighty, Chandler. “Research Summary.” Research file, Indiana Historical Bureau. July, 2008.

Special Thanks

Jill Weiss Simins is the producer and sound engineer for Talking Hoosier History. She records the audio, chooses the music and samples, and engineers the mix.

Bill Mackie, formerly director of the Abraham Lincoln Library and Museum at Lincoln Memorial University, who voiced Abraham Lincoln in this episode.

Justin Clark, project assistant with the Hoosier State Chronicles newspaper digitization project, lent his voice to Lincoln’s neighbors and other “extra’s” in the episode.

Music Notes

Theme Song

The Talking Hoosier History Theme Song is “Rock and Gravel” by Indianapolis band Syd Valentine’s Patent Leather Kids. The trio recorded this song in Richmond, Indiana, in 1929. Used courtesy PublicDomain4U, accessed publicdomain4u.com.

Featured Song

The featured song of Episode 11 is “Living Things” by Bloomington songwriter Tom Roznowski. It’s off the album Wilderness Plots. Learn more about Tom and listen to more tracks at his website: http://www.tomroznowski.net/

Other Audio

Ed Lewis, “I Be So Glad When The Sun Goes Down,” recorded Parchman Farm, Camp B, Mississippi, 1959, Association for Cultural Equity, accessed http://research.culturalequity.org/get-audio-detailed-recording.do?recordingId=4051

Pat Ford, “Swedish Fiddle from Wisconsin Woods,” 1938, Library of Congress Archive of Folk Culture, American Folklife Center, accessed https://www.loc.gov/item/2017701969/

“Indiana Polka,” Edmud Jaeger, composer, Frederick Fennell, conductor, recorded September 1974, Library of Congress, accessed https://www.loc.gov/item/cwband.recs007/

Kevin MacLeod, “Sneaky Snitch,” Audio Library, No Copyright Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-rXQALDv-4

Bensound, “Funny Song,” Audio Library, No Copyright Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mHpr8lhjZE

Ross Bugden, “Solstice,” Copyright and Royalty Free, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yRIt5yS36s

AShamaluevMusic, “Free Romantic Background Music for Videos,” No Copyright Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h45gVQ_FjD4

Ikson, “Walk,” Audio Library, No Copyright Music, accessed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szEfp07r5Cg

Lobo Loco, “Visions of 2018,” Free Music Archive, ID 783, accessed http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lobo_Loco/Hoh_Hey/Visions_of_2018_ID_783

Lobo Loco, “All Night Long – Guitarversion,” Free Music Archive, ID 775, accessed http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lobo_Loco/Hoh_Hey/All_Night_Long_-_Guitarversion_ID_775