Thomas Hendricks (1873-1877)
In the 1870s, Indiana was coming into its own. The educational system was developing, transportation facilities were increasing, its population had risen to 1.6 million in 1870 and would hit 1.9 million by 1880, and as a political swing state, it was becoming a force in national politics. It was during this period that Thomas Hendricks would finally win the governor’s job.
Thomas Hendricks was the nephew of Indiana’s second governor, William Hendricks, and was apparently very keen to become governor in his own right; running for governor three times — in 1860, 1868, and finally, successfully, in 1872. Hendricks practiced law for a period of time, but his family’s political background seems to have set him on that path. He was a state legislator, a delegate to the Indiana Constitutional Convention of 1851, a United States Congressman, a land office commissioner, a United States Senator (filling Jesse Bright’s spot, earning him a place on Bright’s lengthy enemies list), governor, an unsuccessful Vice-Presidential candidate in 1876, and a successful Vice-Presidential candidate in 1884.
Hendricks had opposed passage of the Fifteenth Amendment and was generally an opponent of the Republicans’ reconstruction efforts in Congress. He had opposed repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act until slavery was made unconstitutional. Of blacks and the right to vote, he said “I say we are not of the same race,” Hendricks declared; “we are so different that we ought not to compose one political community.”
Hendricks faced challenges during his term as governor. He was a Democratic governor in a state that had, for about twenty years, been dominated by Republicans. Additionally, when he started his term, Europe and North America were hit by the Panic of 1873. The post-civil war era had seen a boom in railroad construction fueled by government land grants and railroad subsidies. This led to a bubble and then a bust. German economic policy trickled into the U.S. and resulted in the U.S. not backing its currency in silver, moving to a de facto “gold standard,” and depressing the silver market. The Grant administration contracted the money supply at a time when there were some major disruptions in the banking industry. The fires in Chicago (1871) and Boston (1872) apparently didn’t help anything either.
Labor Disturbances
The period after the Civil War saw more Hoosiers leaving the farm and moving to the city to work in industry. Some saw a material improvement in their living conditions. But others found such labor brutal and barely conducive to survival. Hours were frequently on the order of 10 hours per day, 6 days per week; but 12 hours per day, 7 days per week was not unheard of. Nor was frequent unemployment. During the depression of the 1870s, many people struggled to survive. Leaders in Indiana subscribed to “a blend of individualism, laissez-faire economics, and social Darwinism” — none of which lent itself to improving the lot of workers in the face of the overwhelming bargaining position of the owners of capital (whose property rights were very much the subject of government favor.)
During Hendricks’ tenure, he called the militia out to break two strikes. One was a railroad strike in Logansport and the other was a mining strike in Clay County. The Logansport strike was part of a wave of labor problems the railroads faced in the wake of the Panic. They adapted to falling freight and profits by mass layoffs, reduced wages, and, in some cases, simply withholding wages entirely. The companies did not do themselves any favors in their manner of relating to the workers; for example, telling workers of sharp wage cuts the day before they were implemented. In Logansport, 200 railroad workers halted traffic on the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and St. Louis railroad. They uncoupled cars, pulled non-strikers from their cabs, and tampered with engines and boilers. They fixed one engine so it could only run backward. The Cass County Sheriff and the mayor of Logansport were unsuccessful in dealing with the strikers, and the company was helpless to run the railroad. Indianapolis engineers appealed to public sympathy during the strike, explaining that they were not willing to sell their labor at a rate that would render them unable to send their children to school; compelling them to live a life of drudgery. Hendricks sent out the militia and restored order, but it appears that the public was largely on the side of the laboring men and the militia members heart really wasn’t in the job. Even so, the two companies of militia put down the strike by means such as arresting strikers, swearing in special deputies, sending a detachment of Indianapolis police officers, and having Logansport issue a riot proclamation ordering citizens to their homes or places of business.
The mining disturbance took place in Knightsville and Brazil. Operators of the Brazil field reduced compensation to $1 per ton and, when the miners quit, the operators imported black labor. On April 15, 1873, drunk miners attacked the black men in Knightsville and the trouble spread to Brazil. Gov. Hendricks ordered out the militia (apparently a slap-dash affair due to the disorganization of the militia at that time) and some Indianapolis police, and order was restored in fairly short order.
Baxter Bill
In the 1850s, Indiana had briefly experimented with state-wide prohibition law from 1855-1858 when it was declared unconstitutional and repealed. (Temperance advocates received a boost from the nativist Know Nothings who perceived a connection between alcohol and foreigners). Temperance concerns were set aside during the Civil War but did not go away. In 1873, Gov. Hendricks signed into law a temperance law known as the Baxter Bill:
[The bill] made it unlawful to sell, or give away for the purpose of gain any intoxicating liquors to be drunk about the premises without first obtaining a permit from the county commissioners. The applicant for such a license had to file with the auditor, not less than twenty days before the meeting of the board, a petition in writing giving the exact location, also certifying that the said applicant was a voter in the county, and that he was a proper person to have such a permit. This application had to be signed by a majority of the legal voters resident in the ward, town or township. If the petition was according to law and in regular form then the applicant had to pay the expense of filing such petition and give a bond of three thousand dollars with freehold security to insure payment of all fines and costs and all damages which might result from the selling of liquors by him. These licenses were all for one year; and the man was required to keep a certificate in a conspicuous place showing when his permit expired. If this permit was violated in any manner the holder must forfeit it and no new license might be granted him for a period of five years. In addition to this he was not allowed to sell liquors to minors or intoxicated persons, or persons in the habit of becoming intoxicated. Moreover, no liquors might be sold on Christmas, Thanksgiving Day or any public holiday between the hours of nine p. m. and six a. m.
State senator William Baxter was a Quaker from Wayne County. Gov. Hendricks was apparently urged to veto the bill and did not particularly favor it himself, but he acquiesced to it as the public will. However, he seems to have misjudged the public will (though that misjudgment was good for his party). In 1874, the Democrats had a good election in no small part because of Republican support for temperance. According to the October 14, 1874, edition of the New York Times, “opposition to the “Baxter Law,” passed by the Legislature, last Winter, undoubtedly had a good deal to do with the Democratic success. … the Democrats repudiated it at their last State Convention while the Republican platform endorses it. The Germans have been particularly hostile to the law, and the rum interest has been thoroughly organized for the benefit of the Democrats, who, in consequence, have carried the State.”
Hendricks also urged the construction of a new Indiana Statehouse. Its cornerstone was laid in 1880 after he left office. (Probably not coincidentally, he enjoys a large statue on the southeast corner of the Indiana Statehouse lawn). In 1876, while he was governor, he ran as vice-presidential running mate to Samuel Tilden. Tilden probably won that election, but, due to the “corrupt bargain” of 1876, Republicans got the disputed electors for Rutherford B. Hayes and the South got an end to any serious reconstruction, and the ability to disenfranchise black people. In 1880, Hendricks was nominated again but declined for health reasons. In 1884, he successfully ran as the vice-presidential running mate to Grover Cleveland. The Democrats electoral strategy worked that year — they were able to win Cleveland’s home state of New York, Hendricks home state of Indiana, and the “solid south.” However, Hendricks was not vice-president for long. In November 1885, he died unexpectedly in Indianapolis at the age of 66.
The monument to Hendricks on the Statehouse grounds lists all his offices and achievements, but says nothing about his Senate vote against the 15th Amendment, etc. I think state government should replace that plaque with one that tells a fuller story; not to denigrate the man, not to remove the statue, but to tell a fuller story. We deserve history, not hagiography.