OBJ Datastream

O C T O B E R
1966
Published by
THE FLORIDA
HISTORICAL SOCIETY
THE FLORIDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF FLORIDA, 1856
THE FLORIDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY, successor, 1902
THE FLORIDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY, incoporated, 1905
by GEORGE R. FAIRBANKS, FRANCIS P. FLEMING, GEORGE
W. WILSON, CHARLES M. COOPER, JAMES P. TALIAFERRO,
V. W. SHIELDS, WILLIAM A. BLOUNT, GEORGE P. RANEY.
OFFICERS
W ILLIAM M. G OZA , president
H ERBERT J. D OHERTY , J R ., 1st vice president
J AMES C. C RAIG , 2nd vice president
MRS . R ALPH F. D AVID , recording secretary
MARGARET L. CHAPMAN , executive secretary
DIRECTORS
C HARLES O. A NDREWS , J R . M ILTON D. J ONES
E ARLE B OWDEN F RANK J. L AUMER
J AMES D. B RUTON , J R . W ILLIAM W ARREN R OGERS
M RS . H ENRY J. B URKHARDT C HARLTON W. T EBEAU
F RANK H. E LMORE LEONARD A. U SINA
W ALTER S. H ARDIN J ULIAN I. W E I N K L E
JOHN E. J OHNS
JAMES R. KNOTT , ex-officio
S AMUEL P ROCTOR , ex-officio
(and the officers)
( A l l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e r e l a t i n g t o S o c i e t y b u s i n e s s , memberships, a n d
Quarterly subscriptions should be addressed to Miss Margaret C h apman,
University of South Florida Library, Tampa, Florida 33620. Articles for
publication, books for review, and editorial correspondence should be ad-
dressed to the Quarterly, Box 14045, University Station, Gainesville,
Florida, 32601.)
* * * To explore the field of Florida history, to seek and gather up the

ancient chronicles in which its annals are contained, to retain the legendary
lore which may yet throw light upon the past, to trace its monuments
and remains, to elucidate what has been written to disprove the false
and support the true, to do justice to the men who have figured in the
olden time, to keep and preserve all that is known in trust for those who
are to come after us, to increase and extend the knowledge of our history,
and to teach our children that first essential knowledge, the history of our
State, are objects well worthy of our best efforts. To accomplish these ends,
we have organized the Historical Society of Florida.
G EORGE R. F AIRBANKS
Saint Augustine, April, 1857.
THE FLORIDA
HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
VOLUME XLV OCTOBER 1966 NUMBER 2
C O N T E N T S
B ISHOP M ICHAEL J. C URLEY AND A NTI -C ATHOLIC
N A T I V I S M IN F LORIDA ........................... David P. Page .... 101
H ENRY B RADLEY P LANT AND F LORIDA

Dudley S. Johnson ....... 118
E ARLY H ISTORY OF THE C ROSS -F LORIDA

BARGE CANAL .............................. Charles E. Bennett ...... 132
P OLITICAL R ECONSTRUCTION IN F LORIDA

Jerrell H. Shofner .... 145
BOOK REVIEWS ............................................................................. 171
HISTORICAL NEWS ............................................................................ 194
THE ANNUAL MEETING , MAY 5-7, 1966 ................................ 199
CONTRIBUTORS .............................................................................. 217
COPYRIGHT 1966
by the Florida Historical Society, Tampa, Florida. Second class postage paid at
Tampa, Florida, and at additional mailing offices. Printed by
Convention Press, Inc., Jacksonville, Florida.
i
BOOK REVIEWS
Tebeau and Carson, Florida: From Indian Trail to Space Age,
by J. E. Dovell .......................................................................... 171
Will, Okeechobee Boats and Skippers; and Okeechobee Catfishing,

by Charlton W. Tebeau .............................................................. 172
Richardson, The Negro in the Reconstruction of Florida, 1865-1877,

by Joel Williamson .................................................................... 174
Cushman, A Goodly Heritage: The Episcopal Church in Florida,

by Hamilton West ...................................................................... 175
Gipson, The Triumphant Empire: The Rumbling of the Coming

Storm, 1766-1770; and The Triumphant Empire: Britain
Sails into the Storm, by Don Higginbotham .............................. 176
Cobourn, The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the

Intellectual Origins of the American Revolution,
by Michael G. Kammen ................................................................. 178
Abernethy, The Formative Period in Alabama, 1815-1828,

by William Warren Rogers ............................................................ 180
Ford, John James Audubon, by E. Ashby Hammond ..................... 180
Beals, War Within a War: The Confederacy Against Itself,

by William E. Baringer ................................................................ 182
Wilson, The Black Codes of the South,

by Irwin Unger .............................................................................. 183
Mann, Atticus Greene Haygood, by Richard E. Blanchard ......... 185
Newby, Jim Crow’s Defense: Anti-Negro Thought in America,

by Charles C. Alexander ........................................................ 186
Golden, A Little Girl is Dead, by Harry Simonhoff ......................... 189
Highsaw (ed.), The Deep South in Transformation,

by E. Merton Coulter .................................................................. 190
Colberg, Human Capital in Southern Development,

by Edgar S. Dunn, Jr. .................................................................. 192
ii
B ISHOP M ICHAEL J. C URLEY
1879-1947
BISHOP MICHAEL J. CURLEY AND
ANTI-CATHOLIC NATIVISM IN FLORIDA
by D AVID P. P AGE
HE FOUR - HUNDRED YEAR history of the Catholic Church in

Florida, beginning with the Spanish settlements of the six-
teenth century, and continuing through successive English, Span-
ish, and United States occupations of the peninsula, has not been
an entirely peaceful passage. It has been marked by periodic con-
flicts between Indians and missionaries, missionaries and Spanish
officials, missionaries and English raiders, parish priests and gov-
ernors, parishioners and United States officials, and, finally, dur-
ing the first half of the nineteenth century, between parish trus-
tees and pastors. In the years between the Civil War and World
War I, the church in Florida enjoyed a consoling peace both with-
in her household and without. A particularly amicable relation-
ship was formed between the bishops of this period and the offi-
cials of the State of Florida.
In the World War I years, however, a new conflict arose in
the church’s life which threatened at one point to be as ruinous
to Florida Catholicity as any of the earlier conflicts had threaten-
ed to be. An outbreak of anti-Catholic nativism in Florida during
the years 1910-1917 seriously ruptured church-state relations,
and ended in a confrontation between a remarkable young bishop,
Michael J. Curley, and a mercurial and colorful anti-Catholic
politician, Governor Sidney J. Catts. The hysteria that resulted
from this wave of religious nativism became so intense that three
Sisters of St. Joseph in the city of St. Augustine were imprisoned
in their convent in 1916 on the charge of teaching Negroes in
violation of state law. The same movement was a contributing,
if not indeed the major, factor in that year’s election of Sidney
J. Catts as governor of Florida (1917-1921).
Numerous studies have been published on anti-Catholic nativ-
ism in the northern United States, but comparatively little has
appeared on anti-Catholicism in the South. 1 The truth is that
1. For the best studies of nativism on the national level see Ray Billing-
ton, The Protestant Crusade, 1800-1860 (New York, 1938); John
Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns in American Nativism,
[ 101 ]
102 F LORIDA H ISTORICAL Q UARTERLY
the South, Florida included, was relatively unaffected by the

waves of anti-Catholicism that swept intermittently during the
nineteenth century over much of the eastern and midwestern
regions of the nation. Unquestionably, the Catholic Church was
generally viewed in an unfavorable light in the South, where
distrust and suspicion of Rome were always present, but these
sentiments did not give rise to any significant anti-Catholic move-
ment in that area until the twentieth century. Thus, during the
Know-Nothing movement of the 1850s, the bitter anti-Catholic
campaign in the North had no counterpart in the South. Again,
during the 1893-1894 period, when the American Protective
Association was growing throughout the North and Midwest,
Southerners were generally apathetic to the anti-Catholic bait
and disdained the APA as a Republican tool. 2
The absence of a militant anti-Catholicism in the South
throughout the nineteenth century was undoubtedly due to the
small number of Catholics in that area. Yet, with no significant
change in the content of southern population, the twentieth cen-
tury scarcely reached its second decade before the South witnessed
an anti-Catholic crusade, so widespread and so intense that its
reverberations are still painfully audible in these recent, more
ecumenical times.
The sudden appearance of this anti-Catholic ferment is dif-
ficult to explain. John Higham thinks that it was an outlet for
the expectations that the progressivism of the early twentieth cen-
tury had raised and then failed to fulfill. The progressive move-
ment, moreover, gave further impetus to the American feeling
that the pope was a “reactionary despot, hostile to liberty and
progress alike.” 3 It may also be remarked that Protestantism and
Orthodoxy, particularly in the South, felt threatened by the com-
bined forces of the large city and the labor union, both of which
smacked of foreign and Catholic influence. 4 Each of these influ-
ences had a greater or lesser part to play in forming the back-
ground for the 1910-1917 anti-Catholic campaign, but we have
to look elsewhere for its immediate cause.
1 8 6 0 - 1 9 2 5 (New Brunswick, 1955). For a more recent study that
touches on this issue in the South see Kenneth K. Bailey, Southern
White Protestantism in the Twentieth Century (New York, 1964).
2. Higham, Strangers in the Land, 81.
3. Ibid., 178-79.
4. Thomas D. Clark, The Emerging South (New York, 1961), 252.
B ISHOP C URLEY AND F LORIDA 103
A frustrated radical politician, the noisy Populist leader of

the 1890s Tom Watson of Georgia, was the main instigator of
the movement that set Florida and the South aflame against Rome.
In the August 1910 issue of his Watson’s Jeffersonian Magazine,
the Georgia firebrand published the first chapter of an inflamma-
tory series entitled, “The Roman Catholic Hierarchy: The Dead-
liest Menace to Our Liberties and Our Civilization.” When this
series ended Watson started another, an even more virulent one,
“The History of the Papacy and the Popes.” Each series, upon its
completion in the magazine, was published in book or pamphlet
form and distributed by the thousands. Thus began a deliberately
planned campaign that was to last for seven years. 5
In 1911, Wilbur Phelps founded the most devastating of all
the anti-Catholic periodicals of the period, The Menace. Within
a year, circulation rose to 120,000; in two years to 500,000; in
three years to a million; and at its peak in 1915, to a million and
a half copies each week. 6 A crop of other nativist sheets sprang
up all over the rural South. The burden of their message was
the danger of placing in office Catholics who invariably put loyalty
to Rome ahead of loyalty to America. It was firmly and constantly
alleged that Rome was scheming to undermine American institu-
tions and to place Catholics in key political positions so that the
Vatican’s take-over of the White House would be quick and de-
cisive. The pope’s secretly organized band of traitors, the Knights
of Columbus, were well armed with rifles and were training
nightly in church basements. Had not the Knights pledged their
fourth degree members to a war of extermination against all Prot-
estants? 7
Watson and his fellow anti-Catholic propagandists, relying
heavily on Maria Monk’s Awful Disclosures, concocted fantastic
and bewildering accounts of the goings-on in the popish Church:
adult enslavement and infant murder in convents; moral iniquities
behind the confessional screen; and nocturnal adventures of lech-
erous priests who were variously and imaginatively described as
“foot kissers” and “bull-necked convent keepers.” 8
5. C. Vann Woodward, Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel (New York,
1938), 419.
6. Higham, Strangers in the Land, 180-84.
7 . W a s h i n g t o n G l a d d e n , “ T h e A n t i - P a p a l P a n i c , ” H a r p e r ’s W e e k l y ,
LIX (July 18, 1914), 55; Higham, Strangers in the Land, 178-80.
8. Gustavus Myers, History of Bigotry in the United States (New York,
1960), 194; Woodward, Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel, 421.
Secret societies, aimed ostensibly at defending American in-

stitutions against political candidates who owed superior allegiance
to a foreign power, mushroomed throughout the rural South.
Chief among these societies was the “Guardians of Liberty,”
founded in upstate New York in 1911. By 1912, the Guardians
had spread to the South and soon wielded strong political power,
9
particularly in Florida. The compass of religious nativism point-
ed now to the rural South, just as in the previous century it had
pointed to the large cities of the North and the eastern seaboard.
John Higham has written: “What had issued from Boston, New
York, and Philadelphia in the 1840’s radiated from the smaller
cities of the Middle West in the 1840’s and finally found its most
valiant champions among the hicks and hillbillies.” 10
Not surprisingly, the history of anti-Catholicism in Florida
is similar to that in other parts of the South. Prior to 1910, reli-
gion had been a negligible issue in Florida politics 11 The Florida
legislature of 1897 had elected a Catholic, Stephen R. Mallory,
II, to the United States Senate. 12 Again in 1902, in the first
state-wide primaries ever held in Florida, Mallory was renomi-
nated without opposition. As far back as 1878, at the request of
Bishop John Moore, second Bishop of St. Augustine (1877-
1901), the free schools operated by the Sisters of St. Joseph in
St. Augustine were recognized as public schools and supported
from public funds. In 1892, St. Joseph’s Day School in Man-
darin, south of Jacksonville, was recognized and supported as a
public school of Duval County. 13
9. William T. Cash, History of The Democratic Party in Florida (Talla-
hassee, 1936), 124.
10. Higham, Strangers in the Land, 181.
11. Cash, Democratic Party in Florida, 123.
12. Sections three and four of article one of the United States Constitu-
tion provided that two senators from each state should be elected by
the state legislature. The attempt to free the United States senatorial
elections from the dictation of city bosses and the corrupt activities
of the railroads and other lobbyists was initiated by the progressives
in the late nineteenth century. By 1912, twenty-nine states had
adopted laws providing for the direct popular nomination of senators
with the practical result that nomination was, as a general rule, in the
South equivalent to election. The direct popular election of senators
was enacted into federal law by ratification of the seventeenth amend-
ment on May 31, 1913.
13. Sister Mary Alberta, S.S.J., “A Study of the Schools Conducted by
the Sisters of St. Joseph of the Diocese of St. Augustine, Florida,
1 8 6 6 - 1 9 4 0 ” ( u n p u b l i s h e d M a s t e r ’s t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f F l o r i d a ,
1940), 40-41.
It would be a mistake, however, to conclude that anti-Catholic

prejudice was non-existent in Florida prior to 1910. On the con-
trary, an account by Father Patrick J. Bresnahan, a diocesan
priest, of his 1904-1910 missions to the non-Catholics of rural
Florida provides ample witness to their host of latent suspicions,
animosities, and misconceptions concerning the Church of
Rome. 14 The attitude of the backwoods people may be gathered
from an incident during a 1905 mission conducted by Father
Bresnahan at Brady’s Farm near Madison. The priest recounts
with amusement how a little girl, on returning home after the
first night of the mission, told her mother that she had seen the
priest and that “he looked just like a man.” 15 The missionary
found during the early years of this century that this prejudice
was seldom belligerent. The bigots were always in the minority
in every community, and only when they happened to have fi-
nancial or political prestige did they succeed in gathering a num-
ber of residents to their standards and thus deny the priest a place
in which to preach. 16
More often than not, the Protestant community welcomed the
Catholic missionary. Frequently, the use of the local Baptist or
Methodist church was volunteered to him. The ministers them-
selves would occasionally attend and show a “great deal of inter-
est.” 17 On reading Father Bresnahan’s account of his gracious
reception during 1908 in such places as Osteen, where only one
Catholic was known to reside, it is difficult to understand how
Florida, only eight years later, could select its governor largely on
the basis of his anti-Catholicism. The good people of Osteen of-
fered the missionary the use of their Methodist church, and as
Father Bresnahan recalled: “They were delighted, too, when I
requested their choir to assist me. Night after night I called out
the number of hymns . . . and we all joined in singing as best we
could such hymns as . . . ‘Onward Christian Soldiers’. I do not
think that any one in town missed the mission; and oh! didn’t
they ask some interesting questions! The attendance and atten-
tion were simply wonderful. On the farewell day I was earnestly
begged to come back again very soon.” 18
14. Patrick J. Bresnahan, Seeing Florida With a Priest (Zephyrhills,
1937), passim.
15. Ibid., 20.
16. Ibid., 22.
17. Ibid., 28.
18. Ibid., 50-51.
After 1910, however, the rural population’s attitude toward

the Catholic Church was being changed by such publications as
The Menace and Watson’s Jeffersonian Magazine. To the simple
country people of Florida, most of whom had never laid eyes
on a priest or a nun, Roman Catholicism, as it was portrayed by
the masters of vilification, seemed a weird and sinister thing.
Little wonder they were “agin it.” During the 1915 session of
the Florida legislature, a body that was predominantly rural, a
so-called “garb bill” was proposed, the alleged purpose of which
was to regulate the “garb or dress to be worn by teachers in the
public schools, while performing their duties as such teachers.” 19
The real purpose of the proposed legislation, however, was not
lost on the Sisters of St. Joseph; they quietly arranged that their
three schools at St. Augustine and nearby Elkton and Loretto no
longer be considered or supported as public schools. 20
At the very time that the anti-Catholic forces in Florida were
becoming strong and coordinated, the Church herself, in 1914,
gained a strong leader in the person of Michael J. Curley. Seven
years later, on his promotion to the Archdiocese of Baltimore,
Curley would leave behind him a diocese and a state that bore
the distinctive impress of his courage and leadership. Born in
Athlone, Ireland, on October 12, 1879, Michael J. Curley began
his studies for the priesthood at Mungret College, Limerick, and
completed them at the Collegio Propaganda, Rome, in which city
he was ordained for the Diocese of St. Augustine on March 19,
1904. Upon his arrival in Florida later that year, Father Curley
was assigned to be pastor of the large missionary parish of St.
Peter’s, DeLand. From there, on April 3, 1914, at the age of
thirty-four, he was appointed bishop of his own Diocese of St.
2 1
Augustine. Seven years later, on August 10, 1921, he was
promoted to succeed the late James Cardinal Gibbons as Arch-
bishop of Baltimore. On June 22, 1939, he also became arch-
bishop of the newly created see of Washington, and thereafter
19. House Bill No. 325 (introduced by W. J. Gray of Gadsden County)
Florida House Journal (1915), 316, 389.
20. Sr. M. Alberta, “A Study of the Schools Conducted by the Sisters of
St. Joseph,” 41-42. Contrary to the above writer’s assertion, this bill
was not enacted into state law.
21. Before the creation of the Diocese of Miami, August 13, 1958, all
of Florida, except the area west of the Apalachicola River, was em-
braced by the Diocese of St. Augustine, which had been established
on March 11, 1870.
until his death on May 16, 1947, Curley had the rare distinc-
tion of ruling concurrently over two archdioceses.
If there was any one feature that distinguished the character
of Michael J. Curley one might say it was his courage. As the
Catholic Review of Baltimore wrote after his death: “By temper-
ament he was a leader of battle, and love of truth gave rise to a
zest for battle, whenever he saw that the cause of truth was at
stake.”22 The prelate, who on several occasions did not hesitate
to condemn the policy of the federal government towards the
revolutionary forces in Mexico, who in the 1930s castigated the
radical and ultra-liberal advocates of the anti-France forces in
Spain, had earlier battled courageously and successfully the forces
of religious bigotry in Florida.
From the beginning of his episcopal career, Bishop Curley
expressed alarm at the growing menace of anti-Catholic literature.
In a letter written to all pastors of his Florida diocese on January
28, 1915, he stated: “We Catholics of the United States are vic-
tims of organized vilification and the government itself [through
the mails] takes a hand by the distribution of lewd and lascivious
anti-Catholic filth. It is high time for the sixteen million Catholics
of the United States to assert their rights and claim that protec-
tion which their citizenship and demonstrated loyalty should
guarantee them.” He went on to ask all pastors to call a special
meeting of their people in each parish for the purpose of sending
to their respective senators and congressmen a formal resolution
of protest against the use of the mails for such purposes. 23
On the occasion of a public reception tendered him in Jack-
sonville in the spring of 1915, the newly consecrated bishop took
the opportunity to defend the patriotism of Catholics. “Patriotism
of the highest order,” he assured his mixed Catholic-Protestant
audience, “flows from the very essence of Catholicism.” No man
who had ever read American history, he added, unless he were
blinded by prejudice, could ever “stultify himself before public
opinion . . . by stating that America ever had in the Catholic
Church other than a friend. . . .” Yet the people were being
told that because a Catholic policeman was on the force or in the
city council, the country was on the verge of ruin. “Today that
22. Catholic Review, May 30, 1947.
23. Archives of the Diocese of St. Augustine, box 4 (x)-A-4. Cited
hereafter as ADSA.
spirit is abroad, a wave of anti-Catholic hysteria is passing over

the land. Men are organized to set citizen at citizen’s throat.”
Curley went on to warn his audience: “If ever you make a man’s
religion a bar to public office, that moment you prove traitor to
the greatest and most fundamental principle of our country’s
glorious constitution.” 24
Well known as a powerful orator, Curley always drew large
crowds wherever he spoke. In July 1915, he again visited Jack-
sonville, the center of much anti-Catholic agitation, especially
against the Knights of Columbus. Here he urged an overflow
Catholic audience to band itself together in such societies as the
Knights of Columbus to protect itself against “the hydra-headed
monster of bigotry and prejudice which ever and anon rises up
in this land of liberty.” 25 In March of that same year, ex-Con-
gressman Charles D. Haines of New York lectured in Tampa on
the topic, “Whether . . . civic and religious liberty . . . is to con-
tinue in this nation, or is it to become only a chapter of past his-
tory, through the machinations of the Roman hierarchy?” Haines
charged that Rome had its eyes on Florida and that the recent
trip of Bishop Curley throughout the state had actually been
planned at Rome and ordered from there. Every Knight of
Columbus, he asserted, was a soldier of the pope, “an insidious in-
fluence for the destruction of your liberties,” and like every good
Catholic, “he votes for a Roman Catholic, regardless.” 26 Curley
lost little time in answering Haines. Addressing a specially called
meeting after confirmation ceremonies in San Antonio, Florida,
he assured Haines that he was in Tampa purely to discharge his
episcopal duties and to administer the sacrament of confirmation.
He went on to declare that he had nothing but contempt for the
Catholic who would “vote for a Catholic candidate simply because
he is a Catholic.” 27
The intensity of anti-Catholic feeling in Florida at this time
may be gathered from an incident that occurred during the sum-
mer of 1915 in Fort Lauderdale. A young Catholic girl had been
appointed by the Broward County school board to teach in the
Fort Lauderdale public grade school. On the discovery that she
24. ADSA, 4-D-5; Jacksonville Florida Times-Union, February 9, 1915.

25. Jacksonville Florida Times-Union, July 29, 1915.
26. Tampa Morning Tribune, March 21, 1915.
27. Ibid., March 28, 1915.
was a Catholic, the local school trustees refused to accept her

appointment, and petitioned the school superintendent for her
removal : “We are opposed to hiring and placing in charge of any
of our school work any but Protestants.” 28 Reaction to this move
quickly came from Catholic and liberal forces in Miami, and
Fort Lauderdale School Superintendent Robert E. Hall, in concert
with local school trustees, shifted responsibility of the question to
a mass convention of the people of the community. A Miami
Catholic described the convention to Bishop Curley as “a quasi-
lynching mob.” 29 At this meeting, a Bap tist minister and a Cath-
olic layman both spoke up against the patent discrimination prac-
ticed against the teacher. The sentiment of the meeting, how-
ever, was indicated by the storm of applause that broke when a
woman back in the crowd asked: “What I want to know is why
we should have Catholic teachers when there are so many Prot-
estants?” By a vote of 181 to seven, the citizens of Fort Lauder-
dale decided to back their local school trustees in rejecting the
Catholic teacher. 30
The Miami Daily Metropolis, leaving little doubt where its
sympathies lay, editorialized: “. . . When 181 out of 188 citizens
express their wishes not to have a teacher of the Roman Catholic
faith in their school, it may be assumed that neither the teacher
herself-or none of her fellow churchmen-would desire to have
the situation.” 31 The Fort Lauderdale Sentinel defended the ac-
tion of its citizens: “Individually we have no prejudice against
the Catholic, but we fear the power and influence of hierarchy.
We know . . . that a Catholic’s allegiance is first to his church
and next to his state.” The editorial went on to assure its readers
that, “if any protestant church had a great organization behind
it such as the Catholic Church has, we would feel toward it, just
as we do the hierarchy.” 32 The Miami Herald on the other hand
was vehement in its denunciation of Fort Lauderdale’s action.
Believing that no appeal to fairness or loyalty would reach those
who “displayed such narrowmindedness,” the newspaper reflected
28. Copy of letter from taxpayers committee to public school official
R. E. Hall, July 17, 1915, ADSA, 4-G-22.
29. James J. McLaughlin to Bishop Curley, August 25, 1915, ADSA,
4-H-12.
30. Miami Daily Metropolis, August 25, 1915.
31. Ibid., August 27, 1915.
32. Fort Lauderdale Sentinel, quoted in the Miami Herald, August 29,
1915.
on the economic effects that such bigotry would have on Broward

County, and, by association, on Dade County, both of which at
that time were eagerly seeking new settlers: “No such blow to
the welfare of the southeast coast of Florida has ever been dealt
than that which those assembled at the mass meeting gave on
Tuesday night.” 33
Of all the incidents involving Bishop Curley and the forces
of bigotry, none attracted such widespread attention as the arrest
on Easter Monday, 1916, of three Sisters of St. Joseph in St.
Augustine. Three years previously, on June 7, 1913, the Florida
legislature had passed a law making it unlawful for “white teach-
ers to teach negroes in negro schools, and for negro teachers to
teach in white schools.” 34 William J. Kenny, Bishop of St. Au-
gustine at the time, was advised by his attorney that the law was
unconstitutional. 35 Deciding to await a “test case,” Bishop Kenny
had asked the Sisters of St. Joseph to continue teaching in their
four colored schools at St. Augustine, Fernandina, Jacksonville,
and Ybor City. 36 The test case came on the morning of April
24, 1916, when, on the orders of Florida Governor Park Tram-
mell, the principal of St. Benedict’s School for Negroes in St.
Augustine, Sister Mary Thomasine, and two companion-teaching
sisters were arrested and charged with the violation of the 1913
law. Two of the sisters were released under their own recogni-
zance, but Sister Thomasine would not accept her liberty under
this ruling, and refused to pay a bond of twenty-five dollars. As
a result, she was imprisoned in her convent. Father John O’Brien,
rector of the Cathedral, assumed the responsibility of her custody
and appearance in court when her case should come up. 37
On May 20, upon a writ of habeas corpus, Judge Cooper Gibbs,
circuit court judge for St. Johns County, ordered Sister Thom-
asine set free on the grounds that section I, chapter 6490, Laws
of Florida, 1913, did not apply to private schools. In his accom-
panying opinion, Judge Gibbs reasoned that just as a white doctor
has the right to sell his services to Negro patients, so a white
33. Miami Herald, August 26, 29, 1915.

34. Laws of Florida (1913), 311.
35. Alston Cockrell to William J. Kenny, September 3, 1913, ADSA,
3-W-22.
36. Sr. M. Alberta, “A Study of the Schools Conducted by the Sisters of
St. Joseph,” 44.
37. St. Augustine Evening Record, April 24, 1916.
teacher has the right to teach Negro pupils. While the judge’s
decision was undoubtedly hailed as an enlightened one for that
time, the closing statement of his opinion would grate discordant-
ly on the ears of more recent jurists: “To say that such teaching
[of Negro pupils by white teachers] would tend to promote social
equality among races and thus be opposed to the good morals of
the State is to insult the superior race and ignore the relative
status of teacher and pupil.” 38
Curley viewed the sisters’ arrest as an attack against the
Church and especially against Catholic education. The dedication
of a new Cathedral School in St. Augustine, at a time when the
sisters’ trial was pending, was the occasion of a spirited defense
of the parochial school system by the youthful leader of the
diocese : “Today a propaganda of deception is being carried on,
and it is focusing all its engines of attack against the Catholic
School. The parochial school, they assert, stands as a monument
to Catholic enmity and antagonism towards the public school.
The parochial school is un-American, they cry. If religion and
morality are un-American, and destructive of free institutions,
then indeed the parochial school is un-American. But George
Washington thought differently.” Having explained at length
the Catholic philosophy of education, Bishop Curley went on to
defend the role of the parochial schools as well as the patriotism
of their students. The fervor of his discourse as well as the en-
thusiam of his audience may be judged from the newspaper refer-
ences to the frequent outbursts of applause that greeted the
bishop’s words. 39
Such frank and vigorous defense of the Church not only won
for Bishop Curley the undying loyalty and glowing admiration
of his own flock, but it attracted notice in higher places. From
the Apostolic Delegate in Washington, Archbishop Giovanni
Bonzano, came these encouraging words: “I have followed with
great interest the accounts in the newspapers of your fight against
the enemies of our holy religion and am gratified by the results
you have obtained. I offer you my hearty congratulations and
38. Docket No. 3, 97. Law No. 778, Circuit Court House o f St. Augus-
tine, Florida. Filed May 22, 1916. Recorded in Circuit Court
Minute Book, 267.
39. St. Augustine Evening Record, May 1, 19 16.
shall be pleased to see you on the occasion of your trip to the

north next October.” 40
Nowhere were the forces of bigotry so active or so produc-
tive of results as in the field of politics. Feelings ran high in
Jacksonville in 1914 when United States Senator Nathan P.
Bryan, a Methodist, recommended Peter Dignan, a Catholic, for
the office of postmaster of that city. Billy Parker, a firebrand
from Pennsylvania, was imported to Jacksonville to spearhead an
anti-Catholic campaign. The Guardians of Liberty and other
secret societies gained so many members and such influence they
were able successfully to use the religious issue against Senator
Bryan in his 1916 bid for re-election. 41
It was obvious that much of the anti-Catholic prejudice was
being aroused and exploited for monetary purposes. The Menace
and a host of other hate periodicals were doing a booming busi-
ness. Bishop Curley informed a St. Augustine audience that anti-
Catholic sentiment was becoming so intensive and widespread that
despite the pitifully small number of Catholics in Florida, “a
stranger in the State today might be justified in concluding that
Catholics form seventy-five per cent of the total population if he
were to judge the strength of the Church from the organized bitter
opposition and vilification that are carried on against it from one
end of the state to the other.” 42
With this background in mind, the reader can now be intro-
duced to Sidney J. Catts, the central figure in what the New York
Times called at the time “the stormiest political fight in the his-
tory of Florida.” 43 Early in 1916, Catts stood as a rather lonely
and forlorn figure on the outer rim of Florida politics. Utterly
inexperienced in statecraft, he had never held a public office. As
pastor of an obscure Baptist church in DeFuniak Springs, and a
comparative new comer to Florida, he was all but unknown to
the electorate of the state. During most of the primary campaign
for governor, his candidacy was almost completely ignored. In
fact, he himself was often jeered at, or treated as a joke. With
practically all the newspapers and the powerful Democratic state
40. Giovanni Bonzano to Curley, August 25, 1916, ADSA, 4-K-19.
41. John R. Deal, Jr., “Sidney Johnston Catts, Stormy Petrel of Florida
Politics” (unpublished Masters thesis, University of Florida, 1949),
33-34.
42. St. Augustine Evening Record, May 1, 1916.
43. New York Times, September 17, 1916.
machine and its local bosses arrayed against him, Catts, against
hopeless odds, conducted a one-man campaign throughout the
backwoods of Florida. That he overcame these seemingly insur-
mountable obstacles and became the only man in Florida history
since Reconstruction to defeat the Democratic party’s guberna-
torial candidate stands as a monument both to his innate shrewd-
ness and to the bigotry of his time. 44
Catts was widely regarded as an oddity and as an ignoramus,
but he was far from being either. He was rather a shrewd ob-
server of the swelling tide of anti-Catholic prejudice. He quietly
decided to make political profit out of this widespread sentiment.
With consummate timing he made his entrance into Florida
politics. Long before the gubernatorial primary elections, Catts
began visiting the backwoods regions of Florida, where he played
upon the fears and prejudices of the people. Apart from his de-
nunciation of what he called the dictatorial method being used
to enforce a 1913 Florida fish and oyster conservation act, Catts
devoted his time and energy almost exclusively to the Catholic
issue. 45 Combining invective with humor, Catts tiraded against
the “papist church,” which he denounced as a growing “menace”
to the nation, to public education, and to good morals. 46 His pro-
gram was put forward briefly as follows: “Nothing in Florida
above the Nation’s flag; the red school house against the Parochial
school; all closed institutions in Florida to be opened by process
of law and America for Americans first, last and forever.” 47
Early in 1916, the Florida Democratic Executive Committee,
alarmed over the growing influence of the Guardians of Liberty
and other similar secret societies, unwittingly played into the
hands of Sidney Catts by passing the so-called Sturkie Resolutions,
proposed by R. B. Sturkie of Pasco County where a large pro-
portion of the population was Catholic. These denied voting
qualifications in the primaries to those who would refuse to swear
that they were not influenced by nor affiliated with such secret
societies. It was now relatively easy for Catts to convince voters,
many of whom had little interest in the religious issue, that their
44. Deal, “Sidney Johnston Catts,” 1-2.

46. Deal, “Sidney Johnston Catts,” 52.
47. Pat Murphy, Legislative Blue Book 1917 (Tallahassee, 1917), 62.
Murphy was at that time one of Florida’s best known lobbyists.
free political institutions were indeed being menaced by the

Church of Rome. 48
It should be emphasized, however, that most newspaper edi-
tors and responsible people, even in areas where Catholics were
practically unknown, came out strongly against Catts’ rabble-
rousing anti-Catholic antics. The Ocala Banner lamented: “We
confess that we were humiliated and mortified when this candi-
date to the highest office. . . , making the most vicious reference
to the Catholic Church, should have received the wild applause,
not of the rabble, but of supposedly good, cultured Christian
women. Mr. Catts, in our judgment, is endeavoring to ride into
the gubernatorial office of Florida by appealing to the religious
passions of the ignorant and fanatical. It seems to us that he is a
49
dangerous man.” The Bradford County Telegraph, denouncing
the voices of bigotry, explained that numerically the “Catholic
Church in Florida is a very weak affair,” and that it was making
“no effort whatever to exercise control over our state affairs.” 50
Catts’ warm personality, together with his unique method of
campaigning, were perhaps as important as the religious issue
itself in accounting for his upset victory in the Democratic pri-
maries of June 1916. His campaign tactics were unusual, not
only because he concentrated on areas that the other candidates
considered out of the way and insignificant, but also because he
was among the first to introduce the use of a portable loudspeaker
mounted on top of his Model-T Ford. 51 He boasted to an audi-
ence in Tallahassee that he had been in places where the voters
were ignorant of the names of his opponents; that he slept in
the beds “used by crackers and bedbugs;” that he had stopped to
plough with the country folk, and noticing that they wore no
shoes also went barefoot; and that he had kissed their clean babies
and patted the others. He became all things to all men to such an
extent that whenever he addressed an intelligent urban audience
he omitted his usual tirades against the Catholic Church. 52
Catts’ narrow primary victory was disputed in court by his
nearest rival, William V. Knott of Tallahassee. After re-counts

49. Ocala Banner, May 12, 1916.
50. Bradford County Telegraph, May 26, 1916.
51. Deal, “Sidney Johnston Catts,” 40.
52. Bresnahan, Seeing Florida With a Priest, 73-74.
had been made in several counties, Knott was declared the winner
and the Democratic nominee for governor. The undaunted Catts
would not give up without a fight. Gaining a place on the general
election ballot as the nominee of the rather insignificant Prohibi-
tion Party, he faced formidable odds, but he had the psychological
advantage of being “the people’s choice” over Knott who was
commonly referred to as the “court’s nominee.” By the time of
the November election, the people were by and large convinced
that the Democratic nomination had been stolen from Catts.
Up to election day itself Catts carried his crusade with un-
relenting vigor against the Roman Church, which he termed the
greatest menace that the country had ever known. He continually
charged that his opponent, like himself a Baptist, was receiving
campaign funds from Roman Catholics through Cardinal Gib-
bons. 53 Unlike the result of the primaries, the November elec-
tions left no doubt as to who had won. Sidney J. Catts, the Bap-
tist preacher, had successfully exploited religious prejudice to be-
come governor of Florida. Yet it should not be readily assumed
that he was a rabid anti-Catholic bigot. Probably his true inner
motive was revealed in a chance encounter with Father P. J.
Bresnahan the morning after his primary victory. In reply to the
priest’s charge of spreading falsehoods about Catholics, Catts
replied: “But, brother, it was all politics. Didn’t [Napoleon B.]
Broward tell the people during his Campaign [of 1904] that he
would drain the Everglades and give them land for nothing if they
elected him; and he was elected on that issue.” 54
Those who had expected Governor Catts to harass the Cath-
olic Church after his election were for the most part disappointed;
his bark was worse than his bite. Yet there were occasions when
he lived up to his reputation and fulfilled at least some of his
campaign promises with regard to the Church. The most notable
demonstration of anti-Catholic feeling that occurred during his
term of office was the enactment in 1917 of what came to be
known popularly as the “convent inspection law.” As might have
been expected, Bishop Curley reacted strongly when this bill was
proposed, calling it “this implied and outrageous insult to women
who rank with the best, purest and noblest on God’s earth.” In
53. Cash, Democratic Party in Florida, 129; Bradford County Telegraph,
September 1, 1916.
54. Bresnahan, Seeing Florida With a Priest, 74.
a letter to Speaker of the House Cary A. Hardee, he described the

legislation as a “veritable crime.” The bishop tried to disarm
the proponents of the bill: “I state here and now that there is no
such thing in this State as a Catholic institution that is closed to
Florida laws, or to anyone representing lawful authority. Nay,
more-every Convent in this state is open to every man, woman,
and child residing in any town or city where such an institution
is located, and I hereby invite any representative or body of repre-
sentatives to go through any Catholic school or convent-when-
ever they desire to honor us with such a visit.” 55
Notwithstanding this forceful note of protest, the bill was
passed. It provided for the appointment by the governor of a
commission of six members in each county. It was the duty of
this body to visit at least once a year “All Hospitals . . . Public and
Private Schools and Institutions, Nunneries and Houses of the
Good Shepherd” for the purpose of “ascertaining the treatment
of the inmates of said institutions and the general conditions.” 56
These inspecting bodies were to be appointed in each county
upon the recommendation of the board of county commissioners,
but the law was never enforced. 57 It was finally repealed in
1935. 58
Soon after Governor Catts' inauguration, the Guardians of
Liberty began agitating for the removal of the Benedictine Sisters
as public school teachers in San Antonio, Florida. Although the
school building belonged to the Church, the sisters were paid
as public school teachers and many non-Catholics attended. 59
The matter came to a head in September 1918, when the sisters
were denied their salaries from public funds. Bishop Curley im-
mediately directed that the building be used as a parochial school,
and wrote a forceful letter to the people of San Antonio, with
the result that not one Catholic pupil transferred from the school
even though it was no longer supported by public funds. 60
55. Quoted in Vincent de Paul Fitzpatrick, Life of Archibishop Curley

(Baltimore, 1929), 32-33. This was a popular work written to
commemorate Archbishop Curley’s silver sacerdotal jubilee.
56. Laws of Florida (1917), 239-40.
57. Francis Sadlier, O.S.B., “The Catholic Church in Florida,” Ellwood
C. Nance, (ed.), The East Coast of Florida: A History, 1500-1961,
3 vols. (Delray Beach, 1962), II, 443.
58. Laws of Florida (1935), 647.
59. Mother Rose Marie, O.S.B. to Curley, August 9, 1917, ADSA, 4-M-26.
60. Father Albert, O.S.B to Curley, September 12, 1918, ADSA, 4-N-19.
By this time, however, the fervor of religious bigotry was

waning in the South and throughout the nation. The ravages of
World War I and its accompanying economic upswing diverted the
people’s interest elsewhere. Anti-Germanism replaced anti-Cathol-
icism. On the completion of his four-year term as governor in
1920, Sidney Catts ran for the United States Senate. Carrying
only three counties, he experienced one of the most devastating
eclipses in political popularity ever suffered by a former Florida
governor. For the scattered Catholics of Florida who had lived
through this anti-Catholic nativism, it was reassuring to discover
that the ugly tree of bigotry in the South had but shallow roots.
Planted and nourished on ignorance rather than on malice, those
roots in large part had their origin no earlier than the present
century, and they seem now to have been extirpated.
HENRY BRADLEY PLANT AND FLORIDA
by D UDLEY S. J OHNSON
LORIDA WAS A FERTILE FIELD for developers during the

last quarter of the nineteenth century. Lumbermen were at
work in the northern part of the state; the citrus industry was in
its infancy; phosphate mining was just beginning; and northern
vacationers and some invalids were discovering the restorative
powers of Florida’s climate. Railroads were needed to serve and
to further develop these diverse interests. Many men dreamed of
building a network of rails in the state, and some began the proj-
ect. Most failed, although a few succeeded. Henry Bradley Plant
was one of the more successful. He constructed railroads, hotels,
and steamship lines, and in the process served the various business
enterprises in the state while earning a respectable profit for him-
self.
Plant was born in Branford, Connecticut, in 1819. At an
early age he entered the employ of a steamship company, and
within a short time he was put in charge of all the company’s
express business. He took a short leave of absence in the summer
of 1853, and carried his wife to Florida for her health. The next
year the Adams Express Company, which had undergone several
mergers, established a southern division and made Plant superin-
tendent with headquarters in Augusta, Georgia. 1 Plant establish-
ed residence in Georgia, and for the rest of his life he was inti-
mately connected with southern investment and development.
Officials of the Adams Express Company, wary of the impend-
ing conflict between the North and the South and hoping to retain
1. G. Hutchinson Smyth, The Life of Henry Bradley Plant (New
York, 1898), 42-53; Lafayette McLaws, “Henry Bradley Plant,”
Federal Writers Project, unpublished mss., 1. (typed copy in P. K.
Yonge Library of Florida History, Gainesville, Florida); Franklin Q.
Brown to A. J. Hanna, January 24, 1938, mss. collection, box 6,
P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History; New York Times, June 24,
1899; Alexander L. Stimson, History of the Express Business: Includ-
ing the Origin of the Railway System in America, And the Relations
of Both to the Increase of New Settlements, and the Prosperity of
the Cities in the United States (New York, 1881), 57; Alvin F.
Harlow, Old Waybills: The Romance of the Express Companies
(New York, 1934), 66-67.
[ 118 ]
H ENRY B RADLEY P LANT AND F LORIDA 119
company assets in case of a civil war, authorized Plant in 1861

to organize the Southern Express Company to be composed of all
stockholders living south of the Potomac and Ohio rivers. Plant
was very successful during the Civil War, and, although loyal to
the North, he was entrusted with the transportation of all Con-
federate funds. After the war he re-established the disrupted
routes of his company, and extended them into Texas where he
formed the Texas Express Company. He began adding railroads
to his interests, and, in 1879, he purchased a Georgia line, the At-
lantic and Gulf, at a foreclosure sale. This road, extending
through the fertile cotton and timber lands lying between Savan-
nah and Bainbridge, connected with Florida lines by an exten-
sion from Lawton, Georgia, to Live Oak, Florida. 2 Plant im-
mediately reorganized this road into the Savannah, Florida and
Western Railway Company. He bought a second bankrupt line,
the Savannah and Charleston Railroad, on June 7, 1880, for
$300,200 and reorganized it as the Charleston and Savannah
Railway Company. Associated with Plant in these ventures were
William Cutting, B. F. Newcomer, W. H. Brawley, C. G. Mem-
minger, and A. F. Ravenal. Brawley, Memminger, and Ravenal
were Charleston men and the others were from the North. 3
Plant and his friends acquired stock in other railroad and
steamship lines, and in 1882 they formed the Plant Investment
Company under the laws of Connecticut, in order to manage
these new properties separately from the Southern Express Com-
pany and the Savannah, Florida and Western Railway Company. 4
The Plant company eventually controlled railroads, hotels, real
estate, and steamship and telegraph lines. In addition to the above
named men, three wealthy individuals participated in the ventures
of the investment company. They were Henry M. Flagler, a part-
ner of John D. Rockefeller in Standard Oil; Morris Ketchum
Jesup, banker and owner of a railroad supply house; and William
2. Brown to Hanna, January 24, 1938, mss. collection, box 6, P. K.

Yonge Library of Florida History; Smyth, The Life of Henry Bradley
Plant, 54-58; Commercial and Financial Chronicle and Hunt’s Mer-
chant's Magazine, November 8, 1879, 488; December 6, 1879, 608;
Stimson, History of the Express Business, 160.
3. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, June 12, 1880, 625.
Yonge Library of Florida History.
Thompson Walters, a commission merchant and heavy investor

in southern railroads. 5
In an interview published in 1884, Colonel Henry S. Haines,
general superintendent for the Plant System, explained the com-
pany’s method of operation: “We speak of the Plant Investment
Company-do you know what the Plant Investment Company is?
It is Mr. Plant and his friends who have money, cash, to invest.
When it is decided to do a certain thing, build a piece of road
for instance, they figure out what each is to pay and send in their
checks for the amount. They have no bonds, no indebtedness, no
interest to pay; they build railroads to operate them and not for
bond and stock speculations.” 6
Plant’s first railroad entered Florida at only one point, but he
and his associates made every effort to shorten the time it took
to travel to the North. This was essential since many Florida
vegetables and fruits arrived at their destination unfit for use. To
help remedy this situation, the Plant group incorporated the Way-
cross and Florida Railroad Company in 1880 to construct a line
from Waycross, Georgia, to the Florida line in the direction of
Jacksonville. The East Florida Railroad Company was incor-
porated in Florida to build a road. from Jacksonville to a junction
with the Georgia concern and was granted land by the 1881
7
state legislature for this purpose. The two roads were completed
on April 25, 1881, and the route, called the Waycross Short Line
by newspapers and railroad men, considerably shortened train
time between Jacksonville and Savannah. The Savannah, Florida,
and Western operated the Waycross Short Line from the time of
completion to 1884 and then absorbed it. 8
The Plant System’s third entrance into Florida occurred in
the Apalachicola River valley in early April 1883, when a thirty-
one mile branch line was completed from Climax, Georgia, just
east of Bainbridge, to Chattahoochee, Florida. 9 This gave the
Savannah, Florida, and Western greater access to freight shipped
5. For biographical information on Flagler, Jesup, and Walters, see
Allen Johnson and Dumas Malone, eds., Dictionary of American
Biography, 22 vols. (New York, 1928-1936), VI, 451-52; X, 6l-62;
XIX, 400-01.
6. Jacksonville Florida Dispatch, January 21, 1884.
7. Laws of Florida (1881), 131-32.
8. Tallahassee Floridian, April 26, 1881; Ralph G. Hill and James
H. Pledger, comps., The Railroads of Florida (Tallahassee, 1939),
A-5.
9. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, April 14, 1883, 427.
down the Chattahoochee and Flint rivers, and placed it in

direct competition with the Florida Railway and Navigation Com-
pany which owned the line extending through northern Florida
from Chattahoochee to Jacksonville. Plant’s road seems to have
been the most aggressive and successful. Much of the traffic
originating in West Florida was shipped over the Georgia line.
This is amply illustrated by the route followed by William Henry
Davison, a civil engineer and Pensacola resident, in February
1886. He was hired to do certain work in the region of the upper
St. Johns River in conjunction with two friends, one of whom
lived in Tallahassee. Davison’s trip to Jacksonville proceeded as
follows: Pensacola to Chattahoochee on the Pensacola and At-
lantic Railroad; Chattahoochee to Waycross on Plant’s Savannah,
Florida, and Western; and Waycross to Jacksonville on Plant’s
Waycross Short Line. 10 If Davison had followed the route
through Tallahassee he could have met his friend in that city and
he would have shortened his trip by at least thirty miles.
The Plant System’s three entrances into the state gave it an
advantage that other lines did not have. The eastern route of-
fered fast passenger and freight service; the central connection at
Live Oak dealt mostly in timber and farm products, although some
perishables were shipped over this route; the western entrance
at Chattahoochee secured a large amount of the traffic that came
down the river as well as that from the area west of the river.
Plant was interested in buying old roads and building new
ones. He and his friends chartered the Live Oak and Rowlands
Bluff Railroad Company in 1881 to construct a line from the town
of Live Oak to Rowlands Bluff on the Suwannee River. The
company, capitalized at $100,000, completed the road in 1882. 11
The Live Oak, Tampa, and Charlotte Harbor Railroad Company
was incorporated in 1881 and capitalized at $5,000,000. This
company proposed to construct a line from Rowlands Bluff to
Charlotte Harbor by way of Tampa Bay. 12 It built a five-foot
gauge road to Newnansville, northwest of Gainesville. Work was
10. Diary of William Henry Davison, February 17, 1886, 1, mss. collec-
tion, box 25, P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History.
11. Laws of Florida (1881), 145-48; Hill and Pledger, Railroads of
Florida, A-15.
12. Hill and Pledger, Railroads of Florida, A-15; Cedar Key Journal,
quoted in Fernandina Florida Mirror, September 10, 1881; Florida
Senate Journal (1883), “ R e p o r t o f t h e S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e , 1 8 8 1 -
1882,” 222.
halted here because any further construction would compete with

the Florida Southern, formerly the Gainesville, Ocala and Char-
lotte Harbor Railroad, a company that proposed to build a narrow
gauge railroad from Lake City to Charlotte Harbor with a branch
to Palatka. 13
The South Florida Railroad Company was incorporated in
1879 by Dr. C. C. Haskell, B. R. Swoope, James E. Ingraham,
E. W. Henck, and others. They planned a line from Sanford via
Orlando to the Gulf coast at Charlotte Harbor. Surveys began
on November 10, 1879. Groundbreaking ceremonies were held
on January 10, 1880 with former President Ulysses S. Grant
turning the first spade of dirt. Dr. Haskell was able to interest
the owners of the Boston Herald, which included his brother,
E. B. Haskell, a Mr. Halsted, and R. M. Pulsifer, in the com-
pany. These men provided most of the capital needed for con-
struction and the route was opened from Sanford to Orlando on
December 1, 1880. 14 Construction continued and the road was
completed to Kissimmee in March 1882. It was at this time that
Plant first indicated an interest in the line.
James E. Ingraham, president of the South Florida, was asso-
ciated with Henry Sanford in the production of oranges near
Sanford, Florida. General Sanford was also associated with Plant
as a director of the Savannah, Florida and Western and as a stock-
holder in the Adams Express Company. Just prior to the opening
of the road between Orlando and Kissimmee in early 1882,
Ingraham and Sanford were strolling along Bay Street in Jackson-
ville when they happened to meet Plant. Sanford introduced the
two men, and Plant was invited to join the official party making
the first trip over the new line. Plant, who had recently pur-
chased the steamer Henry B. Plant to operate on the St. Johns
River between Jacksonville and Sanford, was interested in making
a connection with the railroad at the upper port. He accepted
the invitation and asked if his wife and several associates could
also make the trip. As the train moved through the Florida pine-
woods, Plant and Ingraham discussed the possibility of extend-
13. Laws of Florida (1879), 119-80; George W. Pettengill, Jr., The
Story of Florida Railroads 1834-1903, Railway and Locomotive His-
torical Society Bulletin No. 86 (Boston, 1952), 120; Florida Senate
Journal (1883), “Report of the Secretary of State, 1881-1882,” 224.
14. The South Florida Railroad Company (New York, 1887?), 16,
pamphlet in P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History.
ing the road to Tampa and connecting it with a steamship line

that would reach Key West and Havana. Eventually the Plant
Investment Company purchased three-fifths of the stock of the
South Florida Railroad Company. 15
The Jacksonville, Tampa and Key West Railroad was incor-
porated in 1878 to construct a line from Jacksonville to Tampa. 16
The company was unable to raise the funds to complete the Kis-
simmee to Tampa branch and its land grant was due to expire in
January 1884. Alfred H. Parslow, a company official, negotiated
a sale of rights and land grants to this section to Plant’s South
Florida Railroad for $30,000. 17 Deeds were transferred in June
1883, just seven months before the grant was due to expire. No
one but Plant and his friends expected the South Florida Rail-
road to be able to complete the road to Tampa in time to save
the land grant.
Construction was commenced at both ends of the route. Rails
and supplies were sent up the St. Johns River to Sanford and from
there were carried to end of track. Other supplies and equipment,
even a locomotive, were dispatched by water to Tampa and work
began at that point. Feverish activity ensued with all available
contractors and laborers used to speed the work. End of track
became Plant City, the second largest town in Hillsborough Coun-
ty. Construction proceeded rapidly, and on January 22, 1884,
three days before the grant expired, the rails of the South Florida
met thirty-eight miles east of Tampa, near the present city of
Lakeland. Appropriate ceremonies were held a short time later
with Governor William Bloxham and his entire cabinet present. 18
The inhabitants of the Tampa Bay area had desperately want-
ed the railroad. They had anticipated spectacular growth with the
completion of the track, and they were not disappointed. Prior
to construction, Tampa had a population of 700; seven years after
the road was completed the population had increased to approxi-
mately 7,000. 19
15. F. H. Glover, “Henry B. Plant - Genius of the West Coast,” Suni-
land, I (February 1925), 36-37.
16. Hill and Pledger, Railroads of Florida, A-12.
17. Ernest L. Robinson, History of Hillsborough County, Florida (St.
Augustine, 1928), 56-57; Tampa Tribune, October 22, 1961.
18. Robinson, History of Hillsborough County, 57-58; Tampa Tribune,
October 22, 1961; Glover, “Henry B. Plant,” 38; Jacksonville Florida
Times-Union, January 24, 30, 1884; Tallahassee Weekly Floridian,
February 5, 1885.
19. Glover, “Henry B. Plant,” 38; Tampa Tribune, October 22, 1961.
The Plant Investment Company continued to play a major

role in the development of the region. The railroad was built
on to Port Tampa where a wharf, large enough to berth twenty-
six ships at once, was built. Ample loading facilities were pro-
vided, and within a few years Port Tampa was the busiest
phosphate port in the world and more tobacco was imported
through this harbor than any other place in the country. Plant
established a steamship line to Key West and Havana, and he
secured the mail contract from Tampa to those points which
insured bi-weekly sailings. A branch of the railroad was extended
to Pemberton’s Ferry and another to Bartow. Connections were
made at these points with the Florida Southern which had con-
structed its line to Pemberton’s Ferry. This company then sus-
pended construction between the above point and Bartow so as
not to compete with the South Florida. However, the Florida
Southern immediately commenced construction at the latter city
on a route to Charlotte Harbor. These various routes gave Plant
a monopoly on the railroads on the West coast of Florida. After
converting the South Florida to standard-gauge in 1886, his sys-
tem had an even greater advantage: it was now possible to send
a Pullman all the way from New York to Tampa, eliminating the
necessity for changing trains. 20
Tourism increased in Central Florida after completion of the
South Florida Railroad. Orlando became known as a health resort
for persons suffering from rheumatism, asthma, and lung ail-
ments. When tourists complained of the poor accommodations in
Tampa, Plant decided to construct a hotel. Jerry T. Anderson
owned a two-story hotel on Water Street called the H. B. Plant,
but this was not the elaborate structure needed to attract wealthy
visitors from the North. Plant had plans drawn for a lavish 300-
room hotel building. The cornerstone was laid on July 26, 1888,
and construction commenced immediately. It took three years
to complete. Plant and his second wife went abroad to select the
furnishings and decorations. Estimates of the cost of the hotel
vary from $1,500,000 to $4,000,000. 21 The cost may have
20. The South Florida Railroad Company, 16; Glover, “Henry B. Plant,”
39.
Yonge Library of Florida History; Glover, ‘‘Henry B. Plant,” 38-39;
Robinson, History of Hillsborough County, 58; Tampa Tribune,
October 22, 1961; The South Florida Railroad Company, 16; Karl H.
seemed excessive, but Florida gained an enormous amount of free

publicity, and many northern investors were attracted to the state.
The Tampa Bay Hotel opened February 5, 1891, with elaborate
ceremonies similar to those conducted by Henry Morrison Flagler
when the Ponce de Leon Hotel opened in St. Augustine. Special
trains carried the guests, which included Flagler and other noted
persons, into Tampa. For many years tourists visited Florida’s
West coast just to stay in this “Palace in the Wilderness.” 22
Plant’s officials, through their activities and business interests,
were aware of the growing tensions in Cuba during the 1890s.
Franklin Q. Brown, one of Plant’s associates, visited the island
in 1897, and upon his return was invited to the White House
to discuss his views with President McKinley. Brown played a
major role in the decision to make Tampa the port of embarkation
during the Spanish-American War. 23 The war brought added
prosperity to the Tampa Bay area and to Plant’s interests through-
out Florida and the South. The Tampa Bay Hotel was used as a
headquarters by the army, and Theodore Roosevelt supposedly
drilled his Rough Riders on the hotel’s grounds. War correspond-
ents and artists filed dispatches from the city. 24
Other Plant hotels included an elaborate structure on the
waterfront at Belleair north of St. Petersburg, which was com-
pleted in 1897. It reputedly served more railroad and corporation
presidents in its day than any other hotel in America. 25 Plant
bought the Ocala House in Ocala in 1896, Hotel Kissimmee
in Kissimmee, Seminole Hotel in Winter Park, the Inn in Port
Tampa, and hotels in Fort Myers and Punta Gorda. 26
Although Plant constructed hotels and established steamship
lines, he and his associates continued to invest in those railroads
which they considered an asset to their company. The Gaines-
ville, Ocala and Charlotte Harbor Railroad was chartered in
1879 to build a line from Lake City to Charlotte Harbor with
Grismer, A History of the City of Tampa and the Tampa Bay Region
of Florida (St. Petersburg, 1950), 179.
2 2 . Glover, ‘‘Henry B. Plant,” 39; Tampa Tribune, October 22, 1961.
2 4 . Ibid.; Tampa Tribune, October 22, 1961.
25. St. Petersburg Times, January 29, 1964.
26. S m y t h , T h e L i f e o f H e n r y B r a d l e y P l a n t , 8 8 ; J o h n C . B l o c k e r ,
“Henry Bradley Plant,” Papers: The Jacksonville Historical Society,
II (1949), 69-70.
a branch to Palatka. The company began construction in 1881,

and the name of the corporation was changed to the Florida
Southern Railroad Company. By the end of the year the branch
line between Palatka and Gainesville was completed, and some
work had been done on the main line south in the direction of
Ocala. The road to Lake City was not constructed until the
citizens of the town secured a court order forcing the company
to carry out the provisions of its charter. The Plant System then
constructed a line from a point near Fort White to Lake City. 27
It is impossible to determine the exact nature of the interest the
Plant group had in the Florida Southern at that time. Plant
bought an interest in the road bed in 1883, but he does not
appear to have had the strongest voice in the management of the
company. 28 But Plant’s railroads and the Florida Southern never
competed with each other.
The Florida Southern continued to build its road down the
peninsula at a rapid rate. By the middle of August 1885, the
line had connected with the South Florida Railroad at Pember-
ton’s Ferry. The officials intended to terminate the road there;
but, when the citizens of Brooksville raised $20,000 for the
railroad, company officials reconsidered and constructed a line
to that community. The Florida Southern, in accordance with
the agreement with Plant not to compete with the South Florida,
then moved its operations to Bartow. Construction on the branch
to Charlotte Harbor began, and it was finished in record time. 29
The business decline in the late 1880s caused the failure of
Florida Southern. The Jacksonville, Tampa and Key West Rail-
road Company, having purchased over nine-tenths of Florida
Southern’s bonds, announced in November 1888, plans to take
over operation on January 1, 1889. The Florida Southern could
retain its own identity and select its own president, but company
policy would be determined by Jacksonville, Tampa and Key
West officials. Conditions became worse and a receiver was ap-
pointed for the Florida Southern on March 18, 1890. Final
27. Laws of Florida (1879), 119-20; Tampa Sunland Tribune, quoted

in Fernandina Florida Mirror, September 10, 1881; Gainesville
Weekly Bee, December 8, 1883; Pettengill, Story of Florida Rail-
roads, 67.
28. Gainesville Weekly Bee, December 8, 1883.
29. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, August 22, 1885, 215; Petten-
gill, Story of Florida Railroads, 73.
decrees of foreclosure were issued in 1891, and a public sale was

set for March 7, 1892. The Jacksonville, Tampa and Key West
purchased the 307-mile network at the sale, and two years later
resold it to the Plant System. 30
The Jacksonville, Tampa and Key West Company, after selling
Plant the rights and land grants between Kissimmee and Tampa
in 1883, constructed a line from Jacksonville to Palatka the next
year. 31 The section between Palatka and Sanford was opened in
1886. The company then purchased a line of steamers operating
on the Halifax River, and, in order to connect them to the main-
line, leased the Atlantic Coast, St. Johns and Indian River Rail-
road, extending from Enterprise to Titusville. In addition, the
Jacksonville, Tampa and Key West constructed a six-mile branch
from Deland to Deland Landing and a twenty-nine mile railroad,
the Sanford and Lake Eustis, between Sanford and Tavares.
Connections were made with several log roads along the route
which served as feeders to the larger system. The company, after
leasing the Atlantic Coast, St. Johns and Indian River for four
years, purchased it in 1890. 32 It sold the Sanford and Lake
Eustis under foreclosure during the same year to the Plant
System.
The Jacksonville, Tampa and Key West should have been a
success. Its route followed the St. Johns River, and, although the
company was in direct competition with river traffic, it could
offer faster service than the steamboats. It also had connections
in Jacksonville with all the rail and steamship lines to the North.
For several years the company appeared to be prosperous. Then
it became involved in legal action and a receiver was appointed
in 1893. The depression of the 1890s, plus severe freezes, led
to a worsening financial condition. The courts ordered the line
sold in January 1894, but because of the unstable money market
no buyers appeared. The road was offered for sale a number of
times. Finally, in 1899, the Plant System purchased the main
line and merged it into a new company, the Jacksonville and
St. Johns River Railway Company, which then became part of the
30. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, November 3, 1888, 531; De-
cember 19, 1891, 922; October 27, 1894, 738.
31. Pleasant Daniel Gold, History of Duval County, Florida (St. Augus-
tine, 1928), 180.
32. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, May 28, 1887, 681; Hill a n d
Pledger, Railroads of Florida, A-2, A-19.
Savannah, Florida and Western. The Sanford and Lake Eustis

section of the Jacksonville, Tampa and Key West was operated by
the Plant System under lease until 1900, when it was absorbed
by the parent system. 33
The Plant group obtained other railroads during the depres-
sion of the 1890s. The fifteen-mile Winston and Bone Valley
passed under the dominance of the South Florida Railroad in
1894, and it was completely absorbed two years later. The Plant
System later lengthened this line to thirty miles. The Florida
Midland Railway, extending from Longwood to Kissimmee, was
made part of the Plant System in 1896, the same year that Plant
bought the St. Johns and Lake Eustis Railway. 34 These were
short lines, serving as feeders to the main system. A longer line,
the Sanford and St. Petersburg Railway, was leased by Plant in
1895, and was later absorbed. This road connected St. Petersburg
to the rest of Florida, but Plant was not interested in developing
that city as a competitor to Tampa and made no effort to improve
the bad service rendered by the railroad. 35
The Savannah, Florida and Western announced in January
1893, that it would guarantee the bonds of the Silver Springs,
Ocala and Gulf Railroad, which began to operate as part of the
Plant System, although the official merger did not occur until
1901. 36 The St. Cloud and Sugar Belt Railway, extending from
Dunnymeade to Kissimmee, was merged into Plant’s South Florida
Railroad in 1893. 37 Plant was also interested in the Tampa and
33. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, March 10, 1888, 320; May 5,
1888, 573; August 24, 1889, 235; July 16, 1892, 101; July 23,
1892, 146; July 30, 1892, 177; April 15, 1893, 621; September 8,
1894, 470; January 26, 1895, 177; April 17, 1897, 754; September
3, 1898, 479; July 15, 1899, 132; Poor’s Manual of the Railroads
of the United States, 1889, 582; 1899, 416, 1417; Hill and
Pledger, Railroads of Florida, A20-A21.
34. Hill and Pledger, Railroads of Florida, A-8, A-28; Annual Report
of the Comptroller of the State of Florida, 1894 (Tallahassee, 1894),
59; (1896), 41; (1901), 65; Commercial and Financial Chronicle,
November 3, 1888, 531; September 14, 1895, 470; March 21, 1896,
548; August 29, 1896, 357; Poor’s Manual of the Railroads of the
United States, 1900, 383.
35. Miami Herald, September 28, 1952; Karl H. Grismer, History of
St. Petersburg (St. Petersburg, 1924), 45-50; Report of the Secretary
of State of the State of Florida, 1893-1894 (Tallahassee, 1893), 64;
Poor’s Manual of the Railroads of the United States, 1895, 200, 739;
1896, 883-84.
36. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, January 7, 1893, 43; Hill and
Pledger, Railroads of Florida, A-21.
37. Hill and Pledger, Railroads of Florida, A-22.
Thonotossasa Railroad, a short line extending a distance of fifteen

miles northeast of Tampa. It was incorporated and constructed
in 1893. It was operated by the Plant System from the date of
completion, and was officially merged into the larger network in
1902. The company appeared to be more of a liability than an
asset, however. The Plant System presented evidence to the Flor-
ida Railroad Commission in 1899, showing that earnings averaged
twenty-two cents per passenger mile while expenses averaged
ninety-three cents per mile. 38
The Plant System was the most profitable transportation
network in Florida during the 1880s and 1890s. One reason
was its interest in freight development. Agents urged farmers to
plant earlier in order to get the best prices on the northern
market. Management officials sought the best methods for han-
dling vegetables and other perishables so the products would arrive
in peak condition. 39 Modern equipment was used wherever
possible to speed shipment. Steel rails gradually replaced the iron
rails. Comfortable equipment was used on passenger cars, and
the dining cars, designed by George M. Pullman, provided excel-
lent meals. The system was operated as a benefit to shippers and
passengers and the owners received a good profit. 40
The Savannah, Florida and Western Railway was hurt
financially by the freezes of 1894-1895 and by the depression
of the 1890s, but its sound financial condition enabled the com-
pany to survive and to grow when lesser lines failed. The com-
pany paid a two percent dividend in 1887, four percent in 1889,
two percent in 1891, three and one-half percent in 1893, six
percent in 1894, four percent in 1895, and two percent in
1896. 41 These were the worst depression years and only sound
management made such payments possible. Not every road in
the Plant System flourished, but they also seemed to enjoy earn-
ings better than average.
Plant died in 1899, and was succeeded to the presidency of
the Plant Investment Company, the Savannah, Florida and
Western Railway, and several smaller companies by Robert G.
38. Ibid., A-26; Second Annual Report of the Railroad Commission of
the State of Florida, 1899 (Tallahassee, 1899), 21.
39. Jacksonville Florida Dispatch, January 21, 1884.
40. Ibid.
41. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, Investors’ Supplement, April
1899, 129.
Erwin, his long-time associate. His only son, Morton F. Plant,

was elected vice-president of the Plant Investment Company and
president of some of the smaller companies. Other associates
retained their positions in the system. 42
42. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, July 8, 1899, 82.

It was Plant’s desire to keep his property in trust until his

grandson, four years old in 1899, reached the age of twenty-
one. His will directed Robert Erwin, Morton F. Plant, Margaret
Plant, 43 George H. Tilley, and Lynde Harrison to administer the
estate until that time. Margaret Plant did not like this arrange-
ment and brought suit to dissolve the trust created by the will.
After three years of litigation she was successful, and in 1902,
the Plant System’s railroads were sold to the Atlantic Coast Line
Railroad Company. The Plant Investment Company retained
control of hotels, real estate, and other property until it was
liquidated in the twentieth century. 44
The Plant System included more mileage, had a greater
valuation, and paid more taxes than any railroad network in
Florida in 1901, the last year of its existence. It included 1,196
miles of main track, was valued at $7,475,883, and paid a
total state, county, and school district tax of $132,770. The
next largest system, the Florida Central and Peninsular, already
a part of the Seaboard Air Line Railroad, had 689 miles of main
track. It was valued at $4,491,844 and paid a total tax of
$76,516. The Florida East Coast Railway consisted of 466
miles of main track, was valued at $2,719,144, and paid a tax
of $52,423. 45
Plant was Florida’s greatest nineteenth century railroad
developer. Other individuals spent more money and developed
more extensive areas of the state, but in the railroad field no one
surpassed Henry Bradley Plant.
43. Plant’s second wife. His first died in February 1861.

44. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, J u l y 8 , 1899, 8 2 ; Brown t o
Hanna, January 24, 1938, mss. collection, box 6, P. K. Yonge Library
of Florida History; New York Times, November 15, 1899; December
17, 1903.
45. Report of the Comptroller of the State of Florida, 1901 (Tallahassee,
1901), 65, 67-68.
EARLY HISTORY OF THE
CROSS-FLORIDA BARGE CANAL
by C HARLES E. B ENNETT
T H E DREAM OF constructing an all-water route across the

peninsula of Florida to carry freight and passengers has
often been discussed and debated in the past history of this state.
Many plans were projected and discarded, surveys were made,
and work even began on a canal during the 1930s. However,
only now is the Cross-Florida Barge Canal actually underway
with completion scheduled for sometime after 1970.
The story of the canal and the men who have dreamed of
its great potential is one of the most exciting and rich dramas of
Florida history. Four hundred years ago the ruling powers of
Europe were locked in a power struggle for domination of the
New World. France, Spain, and England vied for rule of the sea
and a piece of what now is the United States. The first decisive
conflict between Europeans on our shores was the battle over
Fort Caroline on the banks of the St. Johns River in 1565.
Almost as soon as the first Europeans began the exploration
of Florida they realized the importance of a water route big
enough for a small vessel to travel across Florida.
Fort Caroline, established by the French on the banks of the
St. Johns River in 1564, was regarded by Spain as a threat to her
security. It also brought about the first recorded mention of a
waterway across Florida. Pedro Menendez de Aviles, Spain’s
great commander, attacked Laudonniere’s withering forces and
defeated the French, leading to the establishment of St. Augustine.
One of the men at Fort Caroline was Roberto Meleneche, a
seaman and a soldier, who was captured by the Spanish prior to
their attack in 1565. As a prisoner Meleneche gave a deposition
which greatly influenced Menendez' thinking. In the first place,
he felt that a land attack on Fort Caroline would likely be more
successful than one from the river. Apparently taking this advice,
Menendez followed this strategy in his operations against the fort.
Meleneche also claimed that the St. Johns River had “two
mouths,” one on the Atlantic and the other to the southwest on
[ 132 ]
T HE C ROSS -F LORIDA B ARGE C ANAL 133
the Gulf of Mexico. 1 Because the mapmaker at the Fort Caroline

settlement did not show a natural channel across Florida, not all
the French supported Meleneche’s contention.
After capturing Fort Caroline, Menendez explored the St.
Johns and the west coast of Florida, seeking to substantiate
Meleneche’s claims. He planned to erect a fort at or near the
southwestern “mouth” of the river to protect the water route from
the Gulf to San Mateo and St. Augustine. In January 1567,
Menendez set about acquiring specific information about the
water course, but he failed to verify its existence. He was also
afraid of arousing the hostility of the Indians if he pursued his
quest with too much enthusiasm. 2
Several mapmakers supported this theory of a Florida water-
way. One map dated around 1595, in the Spanish Archives of the
Indies in Seville, shows rather imperfectly the water course
across northern Florida, the places visited by Menendez, and the
forts established by him, including St. Augustine, San Mateo, and
Ays. 3 “A New and Accurate Map of East and West Florida
Drawn from the Best Authorities,” published in the London
Magazine, March 1765, outlines a waterway from the St. Johns
to a point just above Tampa Bay; a map made by Juan de la
Puente in 1768 plainly shows a channel across the peninsula. 4
A map dated 1775 found aboard a Spanish ship in the eighteenth
century, shows many water routes across Florida, including several
which link the Gulf of Mexico with the Atlantic Ocean. 5 The
earliest detailed map of the canal area in the U. S. Army Corps
of Engineers files is a sketch of the country between Pensacola
and St. Augustine which was drawn in 1778. 6
From the very beginning, the Cross-Florida Barge Canal has
been debated and discussed in the highest echelons. Yet the
1. Charles E. Bennett, Laudonniere & Fort Caroline (Gainesville,
1964), 87-93.
2. Woodbury Lowery, The Spanish Settlements, Within the Present
Limits of the United States, 2 vols., (New York, 1905), II, 226, 278.
3. Ibid., 286.
4. The London Magazine, CXXXIV (March 1765), 120; mss., Dep de
la Guerra, 9a-2a-a, 14, 1768, Madrid, Spain.
5. Thomas Jeffreys, “Pais Cedes, containing the Peninsula and Gulf
of Florida with the Bahama Islands” (map), Old Print Shop, New
York, Florida, 1775.
6. Corps of Engineers, “Sketch of country between Pensacola and St.
Augustine, July to August,” 1 7 7 8 , R e c o r d G r o u p N u m b e r 7 7 , H Q
map file (L-S), National Archives.
period between the time of Menendez and the first governmental

action taken in the 1800s to actually construct the canal is
barely recorded except by mapmakers, many of whom believed
there was already such a waterway in existence. John G. Ruge
of Apalachicola and chairman of the Florida State Canal Com-
mission during the 1920s wrote: “The Florida Cross-State Canal
project, covering a distance of about two hundred and fifteen
miles from Fernandina to Saint Georges Sound, has been discussed
since the days of Washington. The project was proposed initially
in 1763, when the British took over Florida, and again in 1821,
when the United States got possession.” 7 Exploratory missions
were conducted by the British who also believed that the water-
way existed. 8
Government officials, beginning with Jefferson’s administra-
tion, favored construction of a canal. Jefferson was concerned
with Florida’s proximity to Cuba and Cuban influence on naviga-
tion in the Gulf of Mexico. A canal across Florida would destroy
Cuba’s power over trade around the tip of the peninsula. 9
Jefferson’s Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin, was in-
terested in waterway development, as was George Washington
earlier. Their interest is said to have inaugurated the waterway
policy of the United States. 10 On April 4, 1808, Gallatin pre-
sented a report on roads and canals to the Senate and outlined a
program for development of waterways throughout the eastern
seaboard. While he did not propose a waterway across Florida, he
called for a system which would link the “Atlantic and western
11
waters.” Florida at the time was a Spanish territory, and ob-
viously the secretary would not have proposed construction of a
canal through the area.
In 1830 the Southern Review reported: “Mr. Gallatin sug-
gested the inquiry into the feasibility of uniting the St. Mary’s
and the Mississippi, and on the temporary occupation of Florida,
7. Quoted in Harry G. Cutler, History of Florida, 3 vols. (Chicago,
1923), I, 75.
8. Don Manuel de Montiano to Don Manuel Joseph de Justis, February
2 3 , 1 7 4 0 , Collections of the Georgia Historical Society; 10 vols.
(Savannah, 1840-1916), VII, part I, 44.
9. Joseph M. White to Charles F. Mercer, House Documents, 23rd
Cong., 1st Sess., No. 61, p. 68.
10. “Preliminary Report of the Inland Waterways Commission,” Senate
Documents, 60th Cong., 1st Sess., No. 325, p. 535.
11. Ibid.
by the American troops, in 1818, Mr. Calhoun, the Secretary of

War, seized the occasion of directing some partial examinations
near the head waters of the St. Mary’s and the Suwannee, with
the view to inland communication between the Atlantic and the
Gulf.” 12 It is believed that Andrew Jackson was an early pro-
ponent of a Florida canal. He had led an American force twice
into Florida, once during the War of 1812, and again in 1818, at
the time of the First Seminole War. He must have realized then
the military value of a communication route between East and West
Florida. John C. Calhoun, while Secretary of War in the Monroe
administration, concerned himself with construction of roads and
canals for defense purposes, but in 1820 he seemed cool to the
idea of spending the money on a canal in an area which was
largely unexplored and which the United States was still in the
process of acquiring. In a letter to Jackson, he noted that “it will
require much economy and good management to meet the ordinary
expenditure of the year. You will accordingly take no measure
in the present state of the business which will increase the ex-
pense of your division.” 13 While Jackson may have evidenced
interest in the canal idea when he served as territorial governor
of Florida, as president he opposed Federal support for such
projects. His pocket veto of 1832 is evidence of this. 14
In his 1821 study of Florida, William Darby included a
letter written by a proponent of the canal to a resident of
Charleston, South Carolina: “Canals connecting this river [St.
Johns] with the Mexican basin, by the bay of Tampa, or with
more expense, but with more importance, by the bay of Ap-
palachy, could be effected. The herculean prospect that such an
undertaking might, at the first view, carry with it, will be greatly
softened down on only comparing with it the commercial ad-
vantages of an inland navigation between the Atlantic shores of
the United States and the Mississippi; totally avoiding the
circuitous and perilous route around the Cape and Keys of
Florida, where more disasters annually occur, than on any other
equal extent of the coasts of North and South America . . . . I
12. Southern Review (November 1830), 414.
13. Letter of March 15, 1820, Andrew Jackson Papers, LVI, Library of
Congress, Washington.
14. James D. Richardson, ed., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers
of the Presidents, 11 vols. (New York, 1891-1897), II, 601-03,
638-39.
have laboured considerably in the theory of this project, and

expect, at some early period, to lay it before a community, suf-
ficiently large and enterprising to appreciate its many and obvious
advantages.” 15
On December 28, 1824, the Florida legislative council pre-
sented a memorial to Congress requesting assistance in several
areas. It called for the “opening of a canal across the Peninsula of
East Florida from the river Suwannee to St. Johns or between
such other points as on examination may prove to be more
eligible . . . . Such a canal, by opening a passage from the Gulf
of Mexico to the Atlantic would in an eminent degree, develope
the agricultural resources of Florida, enhance the value of public
lands, promote the intercourse and enlarge the commerce of the
Atlantic and western states and in time of war would give
celerity and energy to the operations of the general government;
and it is believed that in no part of the United States could an
object of so much public utility be promoted with less difficulty
or expenditure, the Peninsula being intersected at various parts by
water courses, the connexion of which would render the expense
of this work an object of comparative insignificance.” 16
In 1824 a group of citizens of Camden County, Georgia,
presented a memorial to Congress calling for “a canal within the
boundary lines of this state and county from the waters of the
St. Mary’s River, along the southern extremity of the Okefenokee
Swamp, to the waters of the Suwannee River.” The estimated
length of this waterway would be about 300 miles, with only
twenty-five miles actually to be dug. According to the petition,
this canal would both protect commerce and “open a safe inland
communication . . . of the highest importance to our country.” 17
The route for the proposed canal was based on a map of the
territory by Charles Vignioles. 18
Richard Keith Call, Florida’s territorial delegate to Congress,
submitted plans to cut a waterway across Florida to the House
Committee on Roads and Canals in February 1825. His letter,
15. William Darby, Memoir on the Geography and Natural and Civil
History of Florida (Philadelphia, 1821), 74-75.
16. Clarence E. Carter, ed., The Territorial Papers of the United States,
26 vols. (Washington, 1834-1962), XXIII, 136.
17. House Executive Documents, 18th Cong., 1st Sess., II, No. 4, p. 54.
18. Acts of the General Assembly, Senate, State of Georgia, November
8, 1823.
outlining the proposal to connect the Mississippi with the Atlantic

by an internal communication extending along the northern
margin of the Gulf of Mexico, was included in the report of the
committee of February 26, 1825. “It is believed to be practicable,
and by no means at an unreasonable expense, compared with the
high importance of the subject,” the report said, “to make an
inland water communication from Boston to St. Mary’s, and to
connect the waters of the Atlantic with those of the Gulf of
Mexico.” The committee referred to the 1808 report by Secretary
Gallatin, which indicated that a canal could be opened from the
Mississippi to the Atlantic Ocean through the state of Georgia.
“But, since the acquisition of Florida,” the report noted, “a new
route presents itself, to commence on the Mississippi, at the mouth
of the river Iberville, and terminate at the mouth of the St. John’s
River, of the coast of Florida. . . . The whole distance is 700
miles, but the distance to be canalled would not exceed 120
miles, and would save a distance of navigation of 1,500 miles.
The cost of this undertaking, from the information received,
would be about six millions of dollars.”
On December 8, 1825, the Florida legislative council named
a three-man committee - James Gadsden, Edward Gibson, and
William R. Simmons - to examine “the expediency of opening a
canal from the Gulf of Mexico to the Atlantic, by the most
admissable route, through the peninsula of Florida.” 19 On
December 8, 1825, a canal memorial was approved by Governor
DuVal and sent to Congress. The memorial stressed the potential
national aspects, rather than the local interests of the canal: ‘‘While
the American commerce, but particularly the coast trade between
the East and West, will be relieved from a heavy tribute annually
exacted in the form of shipwrecks and insurance; while the
dangerous shoals of the Florida Keys will be avoided, and the
distance from the Atlantic ports to the mouth of the Mississippi
greatly reduced; the increased facilities to certain and rapid
communications along an exposed frontier, adding to the national
security by augmenting the means of national defense, will be a
result the no less imposing.” The memorial asked for a study of
the canal “whether as a national work to be constructed ex-
clusively with the public funds for general benefit, or as a work
19. Niles Weekly Register, April 9, 1825, 89.
to be undertaken by private enterprise, under a charter of in-

corporation. . . .” 20
On December 19, 1825, Daniel Webster of Massachusetts
submitted a House resolution calling “for the examination and
survey of the Peninsula of Florida, for the purpose of ascertaining
whether it be practicable to unite the Atlantic Ocean and the
Gulf of Mexico, by a ship canal, to run from the neighborhood
of St. Augustine, or from the mouth of the St. John’s River, on
the Atlantic coast, to the neighborhood of the mouth of the
Suwannee River, in the Gulf of Mexico.” 21 In the Senate a bill
was introduced on January 10, 1826, calling for an appropriation
of $20,000 for the canal survey. 22
While the Congress was taking this action, interest in the
Florida canal was developing elsewhere in the country. Cad-
wallader D. Colden of New York, at the request of the Com-
mittee of the Florida Company in the City of New York, wrote
a letter to the National Intelligencer in December 1825, sup-
porting the canal: “As it will be entirely within a Territorial
government, no state rights are in the way. It will be more con-
nected with commerce, and may be more connected with military
operations than any work of the same nature in the United States
can be. In these points of view it seems fit that it should be made
at the expense of the nation, and not only be a ship canal, but be
capable of passing vessels of war. 23 Colden stressed the dangers
of the coast around Florida and outlined the advantages of the
shorter route.
While the advantages of a Florida canal were obvious, there
were questions of its cost. The New York National Advocate,
however, contended that the canal was, “a project, though of
trifling cost, of more real value and importance to our commerce
24
than any yet conceived or executed.” The National Intelligencer
claimed the canal was of “great importance” and that lives and
property would be saved by the safe navigation across the penin-
sula rather than around the tip of Florida. 25
20. Senate Documents, 19th Cong., 1st Sess., No. 15, p. 3.
21. Carter, Territorial Papers, XXIII, 382 fn.
22. Pensacola Gazette, February 4, 1826.
23. Washington National Intelligencer, December 1825, reprinted in
ibid., February, 1826.
24. New York National Advocate, December 13, 1825.
25. Washington Daily National Intelligencer, February 17, 1826.
The first government survey was approved by Congress on

March 3, 1826, with an appropriation of $20,000. 26 Major
General Alex Macomb, head of the U.S. Army Engineers, in-
structed Brigadier General Simon Bernard, once Napoleon’s
principal military engineer, to send a brigade to make the survey
for the canal route. 27
Joseph M. White, who succeeded Richard Keith Call as Flor-
ida territorial delegate, in December 1826, wrote a highly opti-
mistic letter to Congressman Charles F. Mercer, chairman of the
House Committee on Roads and Canals, giving the historical back-
ground of the canal and emphasizing the need for its construc-
tion : “These are some of the advantages of a work I have ven-
tured to pronounce, in national importance, paramount to all
others. To suppose that it will not, at a period not far distant,
be accomplished, would be to suppose the nation hoodwinked, or
destitute of that energy and enterprise that has produced its pres-
ent glory, and the prospects of its perpetuity.” 28
The survey authorization contemplated two routes to be
studied for both a ship channel and small boat canal. One was
from the St. Johns River to Vassasousa Bay, the other from the
St. Marys River to the Appalachicola River, and both would
connect the Atlantic Ocean with the Gulf of Mexico. General
Bernard ordered Major Paul H. Perrault, a U. S. topographical
engineer based in New York, to conduct the surveys in two parties,
one on the eastern side of the peninsula and one on the Gulf
coast. 29 The Perrault survey team reached Florida in July 1826
and started work. General Bernard visited Florida in June 1827,
and upon his return to Washington reported to President John
Quincy Adams that a ship canal across Florida was impracticable,
and that the most that could be effected was a canal six feet deep
for steamboats. Perrault also returned to Washington to work on
his report and maps. 30
In the Florida election campaign of 1827, Joseph M. White
defended himself against the claim that his opponent, James Gads-
den, could get the canal project through Congress at a quicker
26. Carter, Territorial Papers, XXIII, 382 fn.
27. Alex Macomb to Simon Bernard, March 15, 1826, ibid., 471.
28. House Documents, 23rd Cong., 1st Sess., No. 61, 67.
29. Bernard to Paul H. Perrault, March 18, 1826, Carter, The Terri-
torial Papers, XXIII, 476.
30. Ibid., fn. 855.
pace. White wrote the secretary of war in March 1827 that one
of the engineers working on the canal survey “declared in a tavern
in St. Augustine, that he had been out electioneering for my op-
ponent Col. Gadsden, & that the canal would never be completed,
if he were not elected.” White also complained that the work was
not going fast enough on the survey completion, and that more
competent engineers should be sent to the territory to finish the
job. 31 White was re-elected delegate and continued his efforts
for the canal. In addition to his work in Congress, he wrote articles
for newspapers in Florida and New York showing the need for
the waterway.
General Bernard reported in February 1829 to President
Adams on the partially completed survey. On February 26, 1829,
the President, in transmitting the engineer’s report to the Con-
gress, described the canal as a “great and most desirable national
work.” 32 The report, signed by Bernard and Captain William
Tell Poussin, included a general map of the area and traced
several possible routes for the canal. One, known as the St.
Marys route, ascended that river from its mouth to Alligator
Creek, and then across the Okefenokee Swamp in a more or less
straight course to the Gulf coast at the mouth of the Aucilla
River. The St. Johns route ascended that river from its mouth
to Black Creek, then across Trail Ridge and down the Santa Fe
River to the Suwannee River, following this stream to its mouth.
The board of engineers recommended the St. Johns route, but
because of a lack of funds, it was unable to prepare the necessary
cost estimates. Up to this time both ship and barge canal projects
had been considered, but this survey called for a lock-barge canal,
five feet deep with locks thirty three feet wide. The survey argued
that a ship channel across Florida was “not practicable.”
Congress, on May 31, 1830, approved legislation providing
for the completion of the survey and appropriated $10,400 to
carry out the work. Major Poussin was in charge of this survey
until the summer of 1831 when he left on a visit to France; on
July 31, 1832, he resigned. 33 The lock-barge report of March
31. Joseph M. White to the secretary of war, March 4, 1827, ibid.,

785-86. See also fn. 786.
32. House Documents, 20th Cong., 2 n d Sess., N o . 147, February 26,
1829.
33. Carter, Territorial Papers, XXIV, 4 4 6 fn.
6, 1832, described in detail the area surveyed, but it did not an-
swer the question of the canal’s practicability, give an estimate of
its cost, or point out its economic advantages. The survey was for-
warded without comment to the House Committee on Roads and
Canals by President Jackson on December 9, 1833. 34
Three more canal surveys were authorized by Congress dur-
ing the late 1800s. An act of August 30, 1852, provided for the
completion of the old line of survey, or a new line, for a canal
across the Florida peninsula. Two routes were surveyed by Lt.
L. M. Smith of the U. S. Topographical Engineers, both having
Tampa Bay as their Gulf terminus and the St. Johns River as
their Atlantic terminus. One route entered the upper St. Johns
through the Wekiva River, four miles below Lake Monroe. The
other entered the St. Johns through the Oklawaha River a few
miles south of Palatka. The estimated cost for this canal was
$3,697,000, and it was to have a depth of six feet, a top width of
sixty feet, and locks 110 feet long and sixteen feet wide. The
route via the Oklawaha River was the favored of the two, but
Secretary of War Jefferson Davis in his December 3, 1855 report
called for additional surveys and an appropriation of $12,000
to finance the study. 35
On December 16, 1872, a Senate Select Committee on Trans-
portation Routes to the Seaboard was established, and it made a
two-year study of the rail and water transportation system in the
United States. This committee, known as the Windom Select
Committee, recommended surveys made to determine the Practic-
ability and probable cost of a canal across Florida, so as “to enable
sea-going vessels to avoid the dangerous passage around the Flor-
ida keys.” 36 Senator Simon Barclay Conover of Florida was a
member of this committee.
Florida Congressman Josiah T. Walls, a Negro born in Vir-
ginia and living in Gainesville, strongly endorsed the canal proj-
ect in testimony before the Windom Committee in 1874: “In
peace, it will give to the United States government a prestige and
power that will place the nation in an advanced position; and in
34. House Documents, 23rd Cong., 1st Sess., No. 61, December 9,
1833.
35. Senate Executive Documents 33rd Cong., 1st Sess., No. 83, p. 1.
36. Senate Documents, 43rd Cong., 1st Sess., No. 307, Part I, 235.
war, a land-locked channel and secure passage for our Army and
Navy.” 37
The two surveys in 1875 and 1878 were concerned with a
possible route from the mouth of the St. Marys River through
the Okefenokee Swamp to the Gulf of Mexico. Both a barge-
type and ship-type canal were considered, and efforts were made
to determine if the Okefenokee Swamp would be adequate for the
water supply needed for the canal. The barge canal, measuring
nine feet deep by eighty feet wide, would cost $8,250,000; the
lock ship-canal, measuring twenty-five feet deep and eighty feet
at the bottom, would cost $50,000,000. Lieutenant Colonel Q. A.
Gilmore of the U.S. Corps of Engineers was a principal participant
in these surveys and the results drawn from these two studies were
known as the “Gilmore Report.” No specific recommendations were
made at this time. 38
Many persons over the years had proposed that Florida or a
group of private investors rather than the Federal government
might be able to build the canal. In April 1878, a group of
Floridians formed The Atlantic and Gulf Transit Canal Company,
with capital of $20,000,000, for the purpose of “constructing,
maintaining and operating a canal across the peninsula of Flor-
ida.” 39 Nothing came of this venture.
There were several private surveys for a canal route, including
one by Robert Gamble of Tallahassee which reported on the
advantages of a barge canal connecting the Mississippi River with
the Atlantic Ocean. This report had been referred to the Windom
Committee. 40
Five Congress-authorized canal surveys over a period of fifty
years had been made, but without any recommendations by the
engineers. The distance of the suggested canal routes varied from
100 to more than 200 miles, and the costs were just as indefinite.
President Theodore Roosevelt, in March 1907, endorsed in-
creased Federal support for the country’s waterways network and
37. Speech by Congressman Josiah T. Walls before Senate Transportation

Committee, January 28, 1874, Library of Congress.
38. Senate Executive Documents, 46th Cong., 2nd Sess., No. 154, April
21, 1880.
39. Charter of the Atlantic and Gulf Transit Canal Company, secretary
of state of Florida, April 1, 1878.
40. Major Robert A. Gamble, “Exposition of Advantages of a Canal
Through Florida,” Senate Documents, 53rd Cong., 2nd Sess., No. 118.
named an Inland Waterways Commission to consider improve-

ment and control of the rivers system. Railroads, the President
claimed, could no longer handle the movement of crops and
manufactured items rapidly and efficiently enough to meet de-
mand, and “the cost of improving the waterways system would
be . . . small in comparison with the $17 billion of capital now
invested in steam railways in the United States.” 41 A report by
the commission was made in 1908, and Roosevelt said: “The in-
ner passage along the Gulf coast should be extended and connect-
ed with the Atlantic waters.” 42 No plans or recommendations
were submitted for the Florida canal, but a year later Congress
authorized its sixth survey of a “continuous inland waterway
across the State of Florida,” a barge canal with a maximum depth
of twelve feet. The recommendation that came from this survey
was unfavorable to the construction of such a waterway. Canal
backers were disappointed again in 1924 when the report was
reviewed and a similar conclusion was reached. 43
In Florida, enthusiasm for the canal continued, and in Con-
gress, Representative Frank Clark of Gainesville kept up the fight
for the canal. In 1921, the State legislature created the Florida
State Canal Commission to promote construction of the waterway.
In 1921, President Warren G. Harding declared himself in favor
of the broadest development of the nation’s inland waterways, and
his successor, Calvin Coolidge, on January 21, 1927, signed into
law the rivers and harbors act, authorizing the secretary of war
to make a preliminary examination and survey of the “Waterway
from Cumberland Sound, Georgia and Florida, to the Mississippi
River.” 44
It was this legislation that began the serious reconsideration
of a ship canal across Florida and led to the first concrete efforts
to complete the 400-year-old dream. It has been called the “divid-
ing” date between the earlier and later history of the project. 45
The bitter struggle in the Senate for the canal in the 1930s
the winning of the authorization for construction in 1942, and
41. Inland Waterways Commission Report, March 14, 1907, Senate
Documents, 60th Cong., 1st Sess., No. 325, p. 16.
42. Ibid., February 26, 1908, p. vii.
43. House Documents, 75th Cong., 1st Sess., No. 194, p. 44.
44. Ibid., 40.
45. Henry Holland Buckman, “Documentary History of the Florida Canal,
1927-1936,” Senate Documents, 74th Cong., 2nd Sess., No. 275,
p. 1.
the first Congressional appropriation which came in 1963, are

later stories of the building of this important waterway. Menendez'
dream is becoming a reality in the same place in Florida where
be thought it existed 400 years ago.
POLITICAL RECONSTRUCTION IN FLORIDA
by J ERRELL H. S HOFNER
U NTIL WELL INTO the 1930s historians accepted as standard

the interpretations of Reconstruction offered by the “Dunning
school.” Professor William A. Dunning and his students at Colum-
bia University had undertaken extensive research in preparing
scholarly monographs on the Reconstruction period in each south-
ern state. But they wrote at a time when most Americans consid-
ered Negroes as inferior beings and their studies usually began
with this basic assumption. It usually followed that the Con-
gressional Radicals had been wrong in all they attempted. Helpless
white populations had been subjugated by selfish outsiders who
plundered the states, using ignorant Negro voters to maintain
control. Since it was fundamentally wrong to assume the Negroes
should vote, it had been regrettably necessary that the native
whites employ severe measures including violence to “redeem”
their states from “Radical rule.”
This interpretation has since been revised and many historians
now agree that Republican administrations, faced with overwhelm-
ing obstacles, contributed much that was beneficial to the south-
ern states. The argument is that Radical Republicans brought
improved constitutions, tax-supported education, and recognition
of government responsibility for certain limited welfare services
to the South, but all at an exorbitant cost. It further implies that
Republicans formulated policy without interference from the
native white population whose only alternative was total, violent
resistance. This generalization still imposes a universally applicable
interpretation on an era during which conditions seem to have
varied considerably from state to state. Whatever conditions may
have been in other states, the Reconstruction of Florida does not
fit very accurately into these interpretations. While events in one
small, frontier state may have limited significance for the Recon-
struction era in general, they seem worth considering if only in
contrast to the accepted generalization.
Reconstruction in Florida was radical from the point of view
that great changes were attempted in the state’s political, economic,
[ 145 ]
and social arrangements. Yet Republican policy was not form-

ulated between 1868 and 1876 by men who were sympathetic
with such Congressional Radicals as Thaddeus Stevens and Charles
Sumner. That group lost out to their moderate colleagues in the
1868 constitutional struggle. Those who formulated party policy
in Florida were business-oriented men who recognized that the
state needed to be developed if the problems created by the Civil
War were to be permanently solved. These men were interested in
Negro rights because the vast majority of their voting supporters
were Negroes and because solving the problems created by eman-
cipation was a necessary preliminary to stable political and social
conditions. Without this stability, development of the state’s
economic resources could not succeed. This kind of Republican
wished to establish the Negro in Florida society without alienating
powerful native leaders whose support was considered essential.
Reconciliation of these conflicting aims almost shattered the
Florida Republican party in its infancy.
Because of major concessions to them by the moderate
Republicans during the 1868 constitutional maneuvers and the
subsequent Republican factionalism, native Democrats influenced
governmental policy during the Reconstruction era far more than
they would admit after they had regained control of the state in
1876. One of their major campaign weapons became the charge
of Republican extravagance and corruption, although the Demo-
cratic minority contributed to the situation which made these
charges possible. Democratic citizens benefited along with Repub-
licans from the generous grants of state aid to internal improve-
ment corporations. 1 For years after the Republicans ceased to
command majorities, the threat of a return to ‘‘Radical Reconstruc-
tion” was sufficient to overcome major differences of interest be-
tween white groups in Florida. The willingness of white Floridi-
ans to accept almost any alternative to this threat was incongruous
because their own leaders had exercised a voice during Recon-
struction. There was amazingly little immediate policy change
between the Republican administration of Marcellus L. Stearns
and the “redeemer” administration of George F. Drew.
The first and probably most important struggle for control
1. Native Floridians who opposed the Republicans called themselves
variously Conservatives, Conservative-Democrats. They are referred
to in this paper as Democrats.
P OLITICAL R ECONSTRUCTION IN F LORIDA 147
between Radical Republican and Republican moderates came dur-

ing the 1868 constitutional convention and subsequent election.
When it became clear that President Johnson’s Reconstruction
policy would be replaced by the Radical program, several indivi-
duals began organizing potential voters in Florida. Thomas W.
Osborn, a Freedmen’s Bureau official, established the Lincoln
Brotherhood with a large Negro membership, but his position was
soon usurped by a group ostensibly sent into the state by the
Republican National Committee. Daniel Richards, a white Radical
from Illinois, William U. Saunders, a Negro barber from Mary-
land, and Liberty Billings, a New Hampshire minister who had
been a chaplain in a colored Union regiment, had organized the
Union League by late 1867, which commanded broad Negro
support. Another organization was the Jacksonville Republican
Club largely composed of local businessmen. Some, like future
Governor Ossian B. Hart, were Southern Unionists; others, in-
cluding future Governor Harrison B. Reed, were recently arrived
federal officials. The Jacksonville Republican Club considered a
startling resolution by J. C. Greeley but failed to take any action.
The club member’s plan was to draft a platform upon which
certain Democrats would be willing to unite with them in carry-
ing out Congressional Reconstruction. 2
During the registration of voters and election of convention
delegates in 1867, these groups contended for Republican leader-
ship. Failure to reconcile Southern Unionists and Radicals led to a
realignment and Osborn lost most of his Negro support. With his
remaining followers, he soon joined the moderate Jacksonville
Republican Club. One Massachusetts-born Floridian, with eleven
years residence in the state, complained that Radical insistence on
a no-compromise policy regarding Negro suffrage and civil rights
had split the Republican party and encouraged the opposition to
enter the race for convention seats. 3 This mattered little in the
2. George R. Bentley, “The Political Activity of the Freedmen’s Bureau

in Florida,” Florida Historical Quarterly, XXVIII (July 1949), 29;
New York Tribune, February 5, 1868; Daniel Richards to Elihu B.
Washburne, November 11, 1867, Elihu B. Washburne Papers,
Library of Congress; “Proceedings of the Union Republican Club of
Jacksonville,” May 16, 1867, mss. in P. K. Yonge Library of Florida
History, Gainesville, Florida; David H. Overy, Jr., Wisconsin Carpet-
baggers in Dixie (Madison, 1961), 30.
3. C. D. Lincoln to William Pitt Fessenden, September 20, 1867, Wil-
liam P. Fessenden Papers, Library of Congress.
election. With 15,441 Negroes and 11,151 whites voting, forty-

three Republicans and three Democrats were elected to the con-
vention. About eighteen of these were Negroes.
The Radicals dominated the convention organization which
assembled in Tallahassee on January 20, 1868. The forces of
Richards, Billings, and Saunders were strengthened by Jonathan
C. Gibbs, a well-educated and able Northern Negro; “Bishop”
Charles H. Pearce, a Negro minister just arrived from Canada;
Eldridge L. Ware, a white Key West citizen; and J. H. Goss, a
white Ocala lawyer. They made a determined effort to write a
constitution guaranteeing full citizenship to the Negroes. To pre-
vent Billings and Richards from controlling the new state govern-
ment, Osborn, whose convention spokesman was Freedmen’s
Bureau official William J. Purman, allied with the Jacksonville
Republicans against the Radicals. Purman and a few delegates used
dilatory tactics to delay the Radical leaders until they could build
up voting strength. Outside the convention, Harrison Reed and
William H. Gleason, both from Wisconsin, were lobbying for
support for the “moderate” Republican faction. Richards and his
allies complained that these “minions of the devil and A. Johnson”
had received money from outside the state while their own funds
had been cut off. 4
A crucial vote on January 31 showed that Billings and Rich-
ards still controlled a small majority in the convention. 5 During
the following weekend, nineteen Osborn delegates left the con-
vention and convened their own rump session in nearby Mon-
ticello. They were joined there by two Democratic delegates, John
L. Campbell of the second district and W. Rogers of the fifteenth,
who had not yet claimed their convention seats. With advice from
such prominent Florida Democrats as Charles E. Dyke, editor
of the Tallahassee Floridian, and McQueen McIntosh, former
federal judge and ex-Confederate, the “seceders” drafted a con-
stitution which they hoped would be acceptable to the Democratic

state leadership. 6
With their opponents absent, Billings and Richards ruled
that their twenty-two delegates comprised a quorum and promptly
adopted a constitution embodying the Radical program. A copy
was dispatched to General George G. Meade at Third Military
District headquarters in Atlanta, and the convention adjourned
to await his instructions. At a public meeting, Billings and Saun-
ders were nominated for governor and lieutenant governor. Then,
on February 10, around midnight, the Osborn group quietly
returned from Monticello, moved into the convention hall, and
despite the late hour, reorganized the convention. With the two
Democrats and two Negro delegates, whose support was secured
when C. M. Hamilton, acting as a Freedmen’s Bureau agent,
ordered them to the convention, the moderates now commanded
a narrow majority. 7
Billings and Richards were blocked from entering the hall, and
they were prevented from taking it by force by the federal troops
stationed there at the request of Democratic Governor David S.
Walker over Richard’s vehement protests. 8 Colonel John T. Sprague,
military commander in Florida, had been closely acquainted
with prominent Floridians since his participation in the Seminole
Wars, and he willingly complied with the governor’s request.
The resulting confusion mystified General Meade and he
informed Colonel Flint at Tallahassee: “Richards telegraphs he
has been dispossessed of the hall . . . by a mob, and that the
military is protecting the mob. I presume there is some error . . . .
You will see that order is preserved.” 9 Restoring order, Colonel
Sprague presided temporarily over still another reorganization of
the convention. The moderates were in control and they approved
their own version of the constitution, dispatching a copy to Meade.
Jacksonville Florida Union, March 7, 1868, quoting Pensacola Ob-

server; Edward C. Williamson (ed.), “Florida’s First Reconstruc-
tion Legislature: A Letter of William H. Gleason,” Florida Historical
Quarterly, XXXII (July 1953), 41-43.
St. Augustine Examiner, February 22, 1868; U. S. House Miscellane-
ous Documents, 40th Cong., 2nd Sess., No. 109, p. 2-3.
New York Tribune, February 17, 1868; Pensacola West Florida Com-
mercial, February 18, 1868.
George G. Meade to F. F. Flint, February 16, 1868, Letters Received
(1868), Department of the South, Record Group 98, U. S. Army
Command, National Archives.
The General submitted both drafts to the Congressional Com-

mittee on Reconstruction, but recommended approval of the
moderate document since it had majority approval of the conven-
tion. In the interim, the moderates nominated Harrison B. Reed
for governor and William H. Gleason for lieutenant governor.
The congressional committee accepted Meade’s recommendation
and authorized an election for ratification and selection of officers
for the new government.
The two draft constitutions differed in only three important
matters; in each, the Monticello version reflected the moderate
Republican effort to appease Democratic leaders. 10 The Billings-
Richards draft made most state and county offices elective; the
Monticello document provided more offices and made them ap-
pointive by the governor. The latter provision would enable the
governor to control the number of Negro officials in the black
belt counties. The Radical draft required a lengthy loyalty oath
which excluded from office everyone who had supported the
Confederacy; the Monticello version omitted any reference to the
rebellion and required a simple oath of loyalty for officeholders.
The most significant difference between the two drafts pertained
to apportionment of legislative representation. The Radical draft
provided representation in proportion to population which would
have benefited the large, predominantly Negro counties in the
north-central part of the state. Leon County would have had
seven representatives, while Orange, Volusia, Brevard, and Dade
would have shared one. The Monticello document modified equal
representation and guaranteed each county one representative and
no county more than four. By this method, approximately one-
third of the voters would elect a majority of the representatives.
The favored counties were predominantly white, virtually assuring
white control of the assembly. 11
The campaign for ratification revealed great differences of
opinion in both parties regarding the proposed constitution. Both
had members who were willing to accept the constitution and
other unalterably opposed to it. Eventually there emerged three
10. John Wallace, Carpetbag Rule in Florida (Jacksonville, 1888), 350-
94, See also the facsimile edition with introduction by Allan Nevins
(Gainesville, 1964).
11. Washington Weekly Chronicle, March 28, 1868; Richard E. Bain,
“Legislative Representation in Florida: Historic and Contemporary”
(unpublished Master’s thesis, Florida State University, 1960), 93-94.
slates of candidates for state offices. New York Tribune reporter

Solon Robinson protested that the Negro voters had been sold
out by the convention. Proof of this, he said, was nomination of a
“conservative” like Harrison Reed for governor. 12 The Radicals
kept their state ticket in the field and urged voters to repudiate
the constitution. Evidently Richards hoped to force appointment
of a governor with federal military support.
Numerous Democratic newspapers favored ratification and
election of Reed, and others expressed satisfaction with the
moderate Republican effort to attract Democratic support for the
new government. 13 William Kirk, patronage-hungry editor of the
Pensacola Observer, declared that the constitution had been
adopted with support from Governor Walker and other state
leaders and that “Radicalism has been sent howling from our
midst.” 14 Democratic leaders were divided. Some refused to con-
done any compromise with Republicans regardless of proffered
concessions, and a few thought opposition was hopeless and did
nothing. Still other influential persons believed they had achieved
a favorable constitution. Edward M. L’Engle declared, “The
proposed constitution will if adopted not absolutely ruin us.” 15
With Republicans feuding and running two slates of candi-
dates, some Democrats decided to run a state ticket of their own.
Charles Dyke of Tallahassee protested that this was a short sighted
policy. He reminded them that he had worked long and hard to
bring about the Republican split, “abusing the one side and patting
the other on the back.” Now those Democrats who desired the
whole loaf or none might force Florida Republicans to coalesce
once more. His own plan was to eschew the gubernatorial and
ratification issue and exploit the generous apportionment pro-
vision by concentrating on election of Democratic legislators. 16
12. New York Tribune, February 12, 1868.
13. Pensacola West Florida Commercial, March 10, 1868; Jacksonville
Florida Union, March 7, 1868, quoting Jacksonville Mercury, and
Jacksonville Florida Union, March 21, 1868, quoting Pensacola West
Florida Commerical and Quincy Commonwealth; St. Augustine Ex-
aminer, March 21, 1868.
14. Jacksonville Florida Union, March 7, 1868, quoting Pensacola Ob-
server; William Kirk to Edward McPherson, February 5, March 28,
1868, Edward McPherson Papers, Library of Congress.
15. Letter of Edward M. L’Engle, March 5, 1868, E. M. L’Engle Papers,
Southern Historical Collection, University of North Carolina. Micro-
film copies in P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History.
16. C. E. Dyke to Edward M. L’Engle, March 23, 1868, ibid.
Dyke reluctantly supported the Democratic ticket which was en-

tered against his advice.
After a bitter campaign and an election in which irregularity
abounded, the constitution was ratified by a vote of 14,520 to
9,491. Moderate candidate Harrison Reed was elected governor
with 14,170 votes to 7,852 for the Democratic candidate and
2,262 for the Radical. By a combination of extra-legal maneuvers
and generous concessions, the moderate Republicans had gained
control of the new government. In doing so they gave Florida a
constitution which satisfied Congressional Radicals but at the same
time gave the ex-Confederates an active place in state affairs. These
moderates preferred to collaborate with native state leaders who
were their economic allies rather than with their own Radical
political associates. Once the Radicals were defeated, the Negroes
would be left without leadership and could be won over later.
Even such Radicals as William U. Saunders and Jonathan C.
Gibbs deserted Billings and Richards to support Reed and the
constitution in the election campaign.
If no permanent coalition of moderate Republicans and Demo-
crats resulted, at least some members of both parties had worked
together and continued to do so afterwards whenever it was
mutually beneficial. The support of two Democratic delegates in
the closely divided constitutional convention had been crucial.
Governor Walker’s efforts in keeping the Radicals from recaptur-
ing the convention hall had helped give a legal appearance to the
moderates inside that bastion. General Meade, primarily con-
cerned with peace and order, was impressed by the good relations
between Osborn’s group and some of the local leaders. A huge
asset was Democratic willingness to limit campaign activities to
vocal and editorial criticism. They preferred this constitution to
another which might be drafted if the constitutional convention
was forced to reconvene.
The most important Democratic gain was the apportionment
provision. With the party still disorganized and many white voters
not yet participating in politics, the first legislature had eight
Democrats to sixteen Republicans in the senate and fifteen
Democrats to thirty-seven Republicans in the assembly. Two years
later, in 1870, the Democrats narrowly missed controlling both
houses. With the Republicans usually divided, the large Demo-
cratic minority was a power with which to reckon. Governor Reed
tried to keep the support of Democrats by appointing several of

them to state and county offices. Robert H. Gamble was Reed’s
comptroller and James D. Westcott, Jr., was attorney-general first
and then state supreme court justice. Thomas T. Long, William
A. Cocke, and Pleasant W. White-all Democrats-became
circuit judges. Perhaps some Democratic officials accepted their
office, as one Madison County judge said, to keep it from a
“miserable scalliwag [sic] carpetbag Radical,” but most realized
that these offices gave them a far more effective voice than mere
defiance. 17
The Reed administration was responsible for implementing
the new constitution in a state whose free population had been
nearly doubled by addition of the emancipated Negroes, a social
change bitterly resented by many native citizens. The treasury
was empty and the state had poor credit. Florida’s repudiation of
more than two million dollars in state bonds in the 1840s had
never been settled. Because the Walker administration left a half
million dollar debt, the economy was not strong enough to com-
mand respect for new bond issues. It was necessary to borrow
money for operating expenses before a new tax system could be
implemented. Bankruptcy, poor state credit, and increased govern-
ment commitments under the new constitution, along with inex-
perienced administrators, were the major reasons for an increasing
state debt during Reed’s administration. 18 One Republican journal
explained that its party spent money on education and replaced
the “whipping post and pillory” with courts of law and a peniten-
tiary thus rendering meaningless any comparison of expenditures
with prior administrations. 19
The problems facing Governor Reed would have been difficult
enough even with the support and cooperation of the major
interest groups. But Reed not only had political enemies who tried
to block his legislative program, but he was forced to spend much
of his time fighting off efforts to remove him from office. The
extra-legal power play by which his faction had vanquished the
17. E. J. Vann to D. H. Hamilton, January 19, 1869, Ruffin-Roulhac-
Hamilton Papers, Southern Historical Collection, University of North
Carolina.
18. Florida Assembly Journal (1868), 76; Edward Haslewood to W. H.
Gleason, November 17, 1870, William Henry Gleason Papers, P. K.
Yonge Library of Florida History; William A. Scott, Repudiation of
State Debts (New York, 1893), 54.
19. Tallahassee Sentinel, January 8, 1876.
opposition set an example which plagued the Republican party

and Florida for years. At the same time, Reed’s attempts to achieve
broad support by making concessions to the Democrats alienated
many fellow Republicans. Radical leaders like Richards and Bill-
ings were reduced to impotence, but their followers sought new
alignments. Opposition to Reed soon centered around Thomas W.
Osborn who was elected to the United States Senate by the first
Republican-dominated legislature. The Radical versus moderate
division became less important as the party divided between
Osborn and those depending on federal patronage on the one side
and Governor Reed on the other. The governor’s position was
complicated because many Osborn supporters headed county
organizations and held state senate seats.
Nor did all the Democrats support Reed. Former Governor
Walker opposed him personally and did whatever he could to
marshal Democratic opposition. Charles Dyke of the Floridian
was bitterly critical and his columns were always open to dissident
Republicans wishing to attack the administration. But the Demo-
crats were not unanimously opposed to Reed; they were opposed to
the Republican party. Some supported Reed as the lesser of the
evils. 20 During hisadministration the Democratic party did not
always act as a “loyal opposition” willing to criticize administra-
tive policy within the existing frame of government. The constitu-
tion guaranteed full citizenship to all persons, but most Florida
Democrats wished to oust Republicans from power, exclude
Negroes from political participation, and restore a white governor-
ing elite. Many were willing to rely on parliamentary and editorial
tactics to discredit the Republicans, but others applied violence,
including murder, to drive the “party of the Negro” from the
state. 21
One of the least defensible acts of those Democrats who later
20. George P. Raney to Edward M. L’Engle, February 8, 1872, L’Engle
Papers.
21. U. S. House Report, No. 22, Part 13, 42nd Cong., 2nd Sess.; William
Watson Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida (New
York, 1913) 566, passim, see also the facsimile edition with intro-
duction by Fletcher M. Green (Gainesville, 1964); J. Randall Stan-
ley, History of Jackson County (Marianna, 1950), 201-02; E. M.
Cheney to Ulysses S. Grant, with affidavit, November 18, 1871,
Papers of Attorney General, Records of Department of Justice, Record
Group 60, National Archives (henceforth cited as Justice Dept. Rec-
ords); Daniel Gillis letter, December 10, 1871, Robert Bigelow
Burton Papers, P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History.
claimed to have “redeemed” the state from a corrupt, Negro-

dominated Republican party was the methods used to win control
in counties such as Columbia and Jackson where the population
was large and almost evenly divided between the races. About
150 persons were killed in Jackson County, most of whom were
Negroes and white Republicans. John Q. Dickinson, the last white
Republican in the county, was gunned down on the main street
of Marianna in April 1871, without a single witness to the
shooting. 22 Violence in the county subsided in late 1871, but only
after President Grant threatened to use military force. By that
time Governor Reed had agreed to appoint local officials recom-
mended by native white leaders. 23
Reed exhausted skill, energy, and time fighting the attempts
to impeach him. In 1868 he angered many Republican legislators
by vetoing an unauthorized mileage appropriation they had voted
themselves. A mild public accommodations bill, which he declared
unnecessary, was also vetoed. 24 Hastily drafted and poorly sup-
ported impeachment charges were brought against him, setting a
precedent which would be followed three more times. The gover-
nor managed to outwit the impeachers and served out his full term.
His support in these incidents changed from time to time. Negro
legislators and Democrats voted both for and against him on
occasion.
Evidence behind the impeachment charges was usually absent
or inconclusive, but on the third attempt in 1870, a damaging
letter was produced indicating that Reed had accepted a bribe from
George W. Swepson, a North Carolina railroad developer. 25 But
even on this occasion, Reed's defenders maintained that Senator
Osborn had blackmailed Swepson into writing the letter. The
last impeachment attempt in 1872 came nearest to success. Reed
was removed from office and Lieutenant Governor Samuel T. Day
replaced him, but the Senate voted ten to seven against convic-
22. Tallahassee Weekly Floridian, May 2, 1871; Ralph L. Peek, “Law-

lessness in Florida, 1868-1871,” Florida Historical Quarterly, XXXX
(October 1961), 182.
23. Florida Assembly Journal (1872), 21-22; Tallahassee Weekly Flor-
idian, June 6, 27, 1871.
24. Florida Senate Journal (Extra Session, 1868), 23.
25. George W. Swepson to Harrison Reed, May 31, 1869, quoted in
Wallace, Carpetbag Rule in Florida, 119; State v. Milton S. Little-
field, cases 30 and 31, fall term, 1870, Circuit Court Records, Leon
County, Florida.
tion, and Reed was restored. Because Democrat William D.

Bloxham was then successfully challenging Day in the courts for
the office which had been fraudulently awarded to him, it has
sometimes been concluded that the Republicans closed ranks and
supported Reed to prevent a Democrat from becoming governor. 26
There was no such party unanimity. Six Democrats joined four
Republicans for acquittal, while three Democrats and four Re-
publicans opposed. 27
In time Reed was criticized for complicity in the “Swepson-
Littlefield bond fraud.” The Republicans were condemned for
giving away millions of acres of the public domain, while later
Democratic Governor Bloxham was hailed as a state hero when he
sold 4,000,000 acres of public land for twenty-five cents per
acre. Reed and Bloxham were both acting according to the gen-
erally accepted economic policies of their day. To prosper, the
state had to grow, and it could grow only if it became a desirable
place to live. The state should use its abundant public lands to
encourage railroad and canal development and open up unsettled
areas, thus attracting capital investment and new citizens.
Both parties voted for state-supported internal improvement
projects, and members of both parties participated in this kind
of economic activity. Many Democrats were connected with rail-
road schemes as directors, managers, legal counsellors, bond-
holders, and receivers. They competed and collaborated with
Republicans in the legislature and courts, as well as the bond
markets and business offices. 23
The largest state-supported enterprise was the Jacksonville,
Pensacola and Mobile Railroad Company, incorporated in 1869-
1870 by George W. Swepson of North Carolina, General Milton
S. Littlefield of Maine, and John P. Sanderson, a Florida railroad
man who had supported the Confederacy. Swepson and Littlefield,
it turned out, were unscrupulous manipulators who had already
26. Hilary A. Herbert, et al, Why the Solid South? (Baltimore, 1890),
159.
27. Florida Senate Journal (1872), 68.
28. Prominent among them were John P. Sanderson, Mariano D. Papy,
F. B. Papy, A. J. Peeler, J. M. Peeler, Edward M. L’Engle, D. P.
Holland, Edward Houstoun, Franklin Dibble, Wilkinson Call, Silas
L. Niblack, A. B. Hawkins, David Levy Yulee, John G. McGehee,
and T. W. Brevard.
swindled a North Carolina railroad. 29 They were guilty of un-

ethical practices, and their railroad failed because of wasteful
financing and poor management. Their methods were patterned
after generally accepted railroad financing in post-Civil War
America. They failed and their activities became known as the
“notorious Swepson-Littlefield fraud,” but if they had succeeded
they would have been hailed as great developers of the state. In
1876 a bitter Republican editor, exasperated at Democratic
charges against his party, claimed that both Governor Reed and
General Littlefield were poor men, while the big houses and for-
tunes of the Democrats spoke for themselves. 30
The legislation authorizing state-support for the Jacksonville,
Pensacola and Mobile Railroad resulted in the issue of $4,000,000
in state bonds. The disposition of these securities raised the most
volatile political issue of the Reconstruction era in Florida, but
at the time all interests favored the venture. Edward Houstoun,
a Florida railroad builder, publicly endorsed Swepson, and John
Sanderson became a company vice-president. The Tallahassee
Floridian approved the essential east-west road and the company’s
incorporators, and congratulated Littlefield for his efforts in pro-
moting the state. 31
Unfortunately, this unanimity did not last. After Reed’s
abortive impeachment in 1870, when he was charged with ac-
cepting a bribe, and many legislators were similarly charged, op-
position to the bond issue rapidly developed. Former United States
Senator David L. Yulee, a Democratic railroad man, called the
bonds unconstitutional, and the Democratic New York World
claimed that Floridians would not support taxes for redeeming
these bonds. 32 When their sale in the United States was made im-
possible, they were heavily discounted to foreign investors. Most
of the proceeds were used to pay lobbyists, lawyers, and brokers,
although about twenty miles of track was built. In 1876 the
29. Florida Acts and Resolutions (1869), 29; C. K. Brown, “Florida In-
vestments of George W. Swepson,” North Carolina Historical Review,
V (July 1928), 279-80; Paul E. Fenlon, “Notorious Swepson-Little-
field Fraud: Railroad Financing in Florida, 1868-1871,” Florida
Historical Quarterly, XXXII (April 1954), 245-46.
Fernandina Observer, January 1, 1876.
Tallahassee Weekly Floridian, February 1, 1870; Fenlon, “Swepson-
Littlefield Fraud,” 248.
32. David L. Yulee to C. E. Dyke, July 15, 1870, David Levy Yulee
Papers, P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History.
Florida Supreme Court, with a Republican majority, declared the

bond issue unconstitutional, and the state took over the road until
it could be sold on behalf of the innocent investors. 33
A perplexing problem resulted from a court injunction pro-
hibiting the sale of public land by the trustees of the Florida
Internal Improvement Fund. Francis Vose, a northern iron
manufacturer, had furnished rails for the Florida Central Railroad
built by Senator Yulee in the 1850s, and held a large amount of
the road’s bonds as payment for the iron. After the war, the In-
ternal Improvement Fund trustees took over the road and sold it,
using the proceeds to redeem the bonds at a fraction of face value.
Vose refused to accept less than the full amount. These bonds
were backed by state lands which in the late 1860s were being
sold or granted to internal improvement enterprises at a rapid rate.
Vose sued to prevent further sale of this security until his claim was
satisfied, and the circuit court issued an injunction against further
disposition of land except by cash sale, the proceeds from which
had to be applied against Vose’s lien.
Everyone agreed that a large cash sale was needed to free
state lands of any encumbrance. Williams, Swann, and Corley,
a Fernandina land company with bipartisan membership, was
commissioned to sell enough land to pay the judgment. A buyer
was found who offered thirty cents per acre for 1,000,000 acres
if Vose would accept this as full payment. Vose refused, and no
large sale was made until 1881, when Governor Bloxham sold
4,000,000 acres to Hamilton Disston of Philadelphia for twenty-
five cents an acre. 34 While this encumbrance probably retarded
development during the 1870s, it was not a problem created by
Republican government. It resulted from railroad ventures which
failed because of the Civil War. Members of both parties were
economically affected by Vose case, and efforts to resolve it
were bipartisan.
Despite the economic obstacles and political struggles which
continued within and between the parties, Florida’s economic
situation improved during its second Republican administration.
33. 15 Florida Reports 533 (1876); George P. Raney to Edward M.
L’Engle, January 21, 23, 1876, L’Engle Papers; Tallahassee Weekly
Floridan, December 21, 1875.
34. W. H. Gleason to Trustees of the Florida Internal Improvement Fund,
n.d., Gleason Papers, box 4, P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History;
Jacksonville New South, March 6, June 2, 1875.
In the midst of a major national depression, Florida’s population

was increasing as people took up lands offered by the government,
as well as private land companies. Members of both parties ad-
vertised the wonders of Florida and insisted that peace and order
prevailed. Immigration gained momentum during the 1870s under
both Republicans and Democrats. 35
Tax rates were high in comparison with earlier administrations,
and factional strife convinced many Floridians that their taxes
were being squandered by selfish politicians in their struggle for
position. Despite opinions to the contrary, state finances im-
proved after 1873, although it would be some time before this
became noticeable. Careless record keeping, complex bond trans-
actions, and inefficient tax collection created confusion. A special
legislative session in 1873 enacted a funding bill providing for
issue of $1,000,000 worth of thirty-year gold bonds at six percent.
A four-mill property tax was levied for their interest and ultimate
retirement. Most of this issue was sold or exchanged for old
bonds which brought some order to state finances. 36
Reed’s administration had inherited a debt of more than
$500,000, and by 1873, state liabilities were estimated at
$1,900,000. When the second Republican administration ended
in 1877, the debt was about $1,580,000. The $4,000,000 in
railroad bonds was not included because it never obligated the
tax system and was invalidated by the state supreme court in
1876. Yet, according to the Tallahassee Floridian, by 1870, Reed
had increased the debt from $523,856.95 to $14,999,544.41. 37
For years after Reconstruction, Democrats campaigned against
Florida’s Republican administrations of the 1870s. One charge
was the Republicans had almost destroyed the state’s credit before
Democrats assumed office. Yet, state bonds were negotiated during
the period for eighty percent of face value, and state scrip,
35. New York Florida New Yorker, December 1875; Samuel A. Swann
to J. M. Wing and Co., March 5, 1875, Samuel Ashe Swann Papers,
Letterbook 6, 309, P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History; George J.
Alden, Florida: Information For Those Who Desire To Know of the
State, Its Climate, Resources, etc. (Jacksonville, 1875), 7; L. D. Hus-
ton to Menifee Huston, March 17, 1874, L. D. Huston Letters, Box 7,
P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History; Palatka Eastern Herald, April
13, 1874; Jacksonville New South, January 27, 1875; Fernandina
Observer, January 5, 1876.
36. Florida Senate Journal (1877), Appendix, Report of the Comptroller,
January 1, 1877, 5.
37. Tallahassee Weekly Floridian, September 20, 1870.
which was acceptable for tax payments, was selling for eighty
cents in many cases and ninety-five on occasion. Even United
States currency was not circulating at par during this period.
County scrip, in demand for county tax payments, sold for as
much as eighty cents, although some purchases were made for
less. 38
There were major changes in political methods after 1873.
Democrats utilized violence much less as a political weapon than
in the past. Partly, this was because of better enforcement of
federal election laws. Democrats were also finding that they could
achieve their purposes through more acceptable legislative and
campaign tactics. But if violence did not cease altogether in 1873,
it was not abandoned entirely in 1876 either. Democratic violence
did not abate because of any willingness to accept the social
changes brought about by the Civil War and Reconstruction, but
because party members and conservative Republicans had largely
mitigated the effect of these changes. Continued division in the
Republican party enabled Democrats to effectively influence
legislative policy.
The 1872 election showed that the degree of Republican
cohesion was the key to control of Florida politics. Apparently
the Democrats believed they had eliminated enough Negro voters
to assure victory without any concessions to dissatisfied Republi-
cans. When the Democrats met in their Jacksonville convention,
a loosely organized Liberal Republican convention met on the
same day, apparently hoping for an alliance. The Democrats
completely ignored them and nominated a ticket which, according
to Senator Osborn, was “straight out radical rebel.” 39 Bloxham,
who had run successfully for lieutenant governor in 1870, headed
this ticket. The Liberal Republican movement collapsed, and most
of its participants returned to the regular party, which nominated
Ossian B. Hart, a native of Jacksonville, for governor. Marcellus
L. Stearns, Republican boss of Gadsden County and a former
Pennsylvanian, was selected for lieutenant governor. These men
38. Edwin W. L’Engle to Edward M. L’Engle, November 23, 1875, and
H e n r y S . E l l i o t t t o E d w a r d M . L ’E n g l e , N o v e m b e r 2 5 , 1 8 7 5 ,
L’Engle Papers; Samuel A. Swann to J. C. Greeley, June 2, 1875,
VII, 7, and Swann to David L. Yulee, January 30, 1877, Letterbook
13, 114, Swann Papers.
39. T. W. Osborn to W. E. Chandler, August 22, 1872, William Eaton
Chandler Papers, Library of Congress. Microfilm copies in P. K.
represented the strongest party factions, and it was hoped that

Hart, an ex-slaveholder and native Floridian, would appeal to
Southern Unionists who were strongly attracted to Bloxham. The
convention tried to appease Governor Reed by resolving to elect
him to the Senate in 1873, but apparently he was not sufficiently
impressed. When he did not come out strongly for the ticket,
several partisans asked the national committee to make conces-
sions to him. 40 In response, National Secretary William E.
Chandler contacted Reed who promptly demanded that his long-
time enemies, United States District Attorney Horatio Bisbee, and
United States Marshal Sherman Conant be removed and replaced
with his own followers. Chandler complied and immediately was
overwhelmed with protests from the persons who had encouraged
him to appease Reed in the first place. 41 Bisbee and Conant had
reputations for successfully enforcing federal laws against Demo-
cratic intimidators of Negro voters. Republican leaders declared
that they must be retained if Negro Republicans were to have the
chance to vote in the 1872 election. The two were quickly re-
stored, and most Republicans continued to complain that Reed
was indifferent, and some accused him of supporting the
Democrats.
The Democratic ticket headed by Bloxham was soundly de-
feated. Negro voters had come to the polls in larger numbers than
the Democrats expected, and the Republican factional division
had caused less damage than was anticipated. The Democratic
ticket and campaign had left dissatisfied Republicans little choice
but to support their party. Furthermore, many native white Florid-
ians did not even register or vote. 42 Unable to muster a major-
ity at the polls, Democratic leaders resolved to improve their ef-
forts at exploiting the Republican factional situation.
40. W. J. Purman to Chandler, August 22, 1872, and A. A. Knight to

Chandler, September 15, 1872, ibid.
41. J. O. Townsend to George H. Williams, October 7, 1872, Chandler
to Ulysses S. Grant, September 24, 1872, Justice Dept. Records,
Record Group 60; A. A. Knight to Chandler, October 6, 1872,
Osborn to Chandler, October 18, 1872, Josiah T. Walls to Chandler,
October 16, 1872, Chandler Papers; Horatio Bisbee to Henry S. San-
ford, October 9, 1872, Sanford Papers, Sanford Memorial Library,
Sanford, Florida.
42. Bronson Weekly Artery, October 24, 1874, quoting the Tallahassee
Floridian; Tallahassee Weekly Floridian, May 9, 1876; Jacksonville
Tri-Weekly Sun, April 25, 1876; Savannah Morning News, July 8,
1876; Quitman [Ga.] Independent, January 23, 1876.
Because the organization was almost fragmented at times, it is

difficult to generalize, but it is still possible to identify broad divi-
sions in the Republican party. Governor Hart died in 1874, and
was succeeded by Lieutenant Governor Stearns, an able politi-
cian who had built up strong support. His most dependable allies
were county leaders and most federal officials. The officials had
been appointed by Osborn but owed no allegience to his replace-
ment, Simon B. Conover, former state treasurer and state senator.
Conover was supported by some of the Negro leaders and the few
Radicals who remained in Florida. He also managed to keep good
relations with the Democrats who were associated with Charles
Dyke of the Tallahassee Floridian.
Old-line Republicans recently arrived in East Florida made
up a segment of the party that became increasingly important.
They were interested primarily in orderly, economical state gov-
ernment under which they could settle land and establish their
business enterprises. They were also influenced by independent
Florida Republicans like J. S. Adams, former Commissioner of
Immigration and editor of the Jacksonville New South, and Solon
Robinson, one-time agricultural editor of the New York Tribune
and now associated with the Jacksonville Weekly Republican and
the Florida Agriculturist. Both men published materials for farm-
ers and citrus growers and at the same time recommended inde-
pendent political action. Robinson advised his readers to vote the
national Republican ticket and the Democratic state ticket because
of the corruption in the Florida Republican party.
The growth of Democratic strength was demonstrated by the
senatorial elections of 1873 and 1875. The 1873 legislature was
composed of thirteen Republican and eleven Democratic senators,
with twenty-nine Republicans and twenty-three Democrats in the
house. Its first important duty was to elect a successor to Thomas
W. Osborn. There were several hopefuls in both parties, and the
election required twenty-two ballots. During early balloting,
Republicans scattered their support while the Democrats muster-
ed all their strength behind leading Democrats, especially Wil-
liam Bloxham. But when it became clear that they could not elect
their choice, the Democrats settled on Republican Simon B. Con-
over as an acceptable alternative. The last ballots were between
Conover and Democratic Supreme Court Justice James D. West-
cott, whose most consistent support came from a group of Repub-
licans. Conover was elected with forty-three votes to twenty-one

for his opponent. More Democrats voted for Conover than West-
cott, but Democrats explained that this was because they wished
to keep the judge on the state court where he had been beneficial
to the party. 43
The Democratic Floridian praised the legislature for electing
Conover. Independent Republicans, opposed to Osborn, added
their approval because Conover was sympathetic with “those who
labored to redeem the State from the iron hand of an irresponsible
and tyrannical ring.” 44 Unable to elect one of their own, the
Democrats had thrown their strength behind the Republican who
seemed least objectionable.
By 1874 economic depression had replaced Reconstruction as
a major national issue, and it was becoming more difficult to find
common ground on which Negroes and their friends might stand
with Republicans who were more interested in the material bene-
fits of party hegemony. After unruly nominating conventions,
highlighted by a furniture-destroying brawl in Tallahassee, Flor-
ida Republicans waged a campaign which gave them both con-
gressional seats but little party harmony. In the state legislature
the senate was tied with twelve members of each party, while the
Democrats had a twenty-eight to twenty-five majority in the house.
With a small majority on joint ballot it appeared that the
Democrats could easily elect their choice to the senate seat to be
filled in 1875. Four Democrats who considered themselves inde-
pendents thwarted party plans. Led by William Watkins Hicks
of Dade County, the independents cast their early votes for Sam-
uel B. McLin, a Republican official and editor of the Tallahassee
Sentinel. After a long deadlock during which the regular Demo-
crats consistently voted for one prominent Democrat after an-
other, Hicks nominated Charles W. Jones, a relatively obscure
Democratic state senator from Escambia County, who was elected
on the twenty-fourth ballot. Both Democrats and independent
Republicans applauded the choice. The Jacksonville New South
cautioned Governor Stearns against trying to fix the blame for
43. Florida Senate Journal (1873), 97; Tallahassee Weekly Floridian,

February 4, 18, 1873.
44. Jacksonville Florida Rebulican, February 5, 1873; John R. R. Polk
to Thomas F. Bayard, April 2, 1873, Thomas F. Bayard Papers,
Library of Congress.
Republican defeat, since “the real cause was the years of disgrace-
ful squabbling within the party.” 45
Democratic legislative influence was also apparent during this
period. In 1873 a civil rights bill provided equal treatment in
public accommodations but specifically authorized continued
school segregation. An 1874 law granted a five-year tax exemp-
tion on property of persons or corporations engaged in manufac-
turing. Constitutional amendments were submitted to the people
in 1875, providing for abolition of county courts and substituting
expensive annual legislative sessions with bienniel meetings. The
legislature in 1875 awarded the state printing contract, one of the
most lucrative of all patronage jobs, to staunch Democrat C. E.
Dyke. 46
Certification by a county returning board did not always mean
that an official had actually won the election. Every legislative
election was challenged. Probably the most famous case involved
E. T. Sturtevant, Republican incumbent senator from the twenty-
first district, and Israel M. Stewart. Although the senate was tied
in 1875, the Democrats controlled its organization, and they ap-
pointed a committee to investigate the contested election. It re-
ported that Sturtevant, acting as an election official, had thrown
out Democratic votes in Dade County, and the returning board
had refused to count the Brevard County return, which was
Democratic, on the grounds that it arrived too late. A struggle
followed the committee’s recommendation to oust Sturtevant.
When Republicans sought to delay action by refusing to enter the
senate chamber, the sergeant-at-arms forced them in, but only
after a gun battle with two senators. Every member supported his
party and a deadlock resulted. Despite tremendous excitement
over the matter, Sturtevant was still in the senate when the 1875
legislature adjourned. 47
Francis M. Weeks contested the seat filled by Elisha G. John-
son from the fourteenth district on grounds that Johnson had
45.
46.
committed fraud at a Columbia County precinct. No action was

taken against Johnson, a controversial Republican leader who had
received numerous threats on his life. Then, on July 21, 1875,
he was killed near his home by a shotgun fired by an unidentified
person. Democratic newspapers deplored the murder but noted
that Johnson was in office as the result of his own fraud. His
removal gave the Democrats a majority in the senate. Privately,
Henry A. L’Engle exulted, “In his death is our gain, . . . That
gives us a clear majority without putting out Sturtevant. . . . In
losing Johnson we gain a county. . . . If I was on a jury of
inquest I should say shot by persons unknown and served him
right. . . .” 48
The reason for his assassination was never established, but
Republicans used the incident to label the Democrats as the party
of murder and violence. Harney Richards of Alachua County was
arrested on scanty evidence for the midnight murder. After a long
controversy and widespread publicity, the grand jury released
Richards who had “proved an alibi by some of the very best citi-
zens of the state.” 49 He was released after the 1876 election
campaign had gotten underway, and the case became another of
the election issues.
In 1876 the citadel of Republicanism was the governorship,
and bitter intra-party battles threatened their hold on that office.
Governor Stearns, Senator Conover, and other Republicans hurled
charges at each other which furnished the Democrats with cam-
paign material. Congressman William J. Purman and Leon
County Senator John Wallace, an influential Negro, accused
Stearns of dishonesty, while others denounced Conover for em-
bezzlement and Democratic collusion. Although arrested, Conover
was exonerated of embezzlement charges. At a convention in Madi-
son, Stearns was renominated for governor. Many delegates refused
to accept the result and held their own convention to nominate
Conover. Despondent Republicans pleaded with Conover to with-
draw from the race. “Florida Republicans must ‘Unite or Die!’ ”
the Tallahassee Sentinel prophesied. A disgusted Jacksonville
48. Henry A. L’Engle to Edward M. L’Engle, July 23, 1875, L’Engle
Papers; Tallahassee Weekly Floridian, August 3, 1875, quoting Tal-
lahassee Sentinel; ibid., August 10, 1875, quoting Fernandina Ob-
server; ibid., September 7, 1875, quoting Key West Dispatch.
49. Thomasville [Ga.] Times, November 6, 1875; Palatka Eastern Herald,
September 25, 1875.
Republican announced that he and his friends would vote the

Florida Democratic ticket while supporting the Republican presi-
dential nominee. The Jacksonville Florida Agriculturist also en-
dorsed this policy. General Henry Sanford, a conservative Republi-
can and large Central Florida grove man and land developer,
financed a Florida campaign for Republican candidate Rutherford
B. Hayes, but did not support the state ticket. Conover withdrew
in September but did not actively support Stearns. 50
The Democrats launched a “reform” campaign, calling on all
parties to support good government and get rid of the corrupt
Republicans. Bloxham and other native Democrats were passed
over, and George F. Drew was nominated for governor. The
Democrats intended to give dissatisfied Republicans every incen-
tive to split their ticket in 1876. Drew later became known as
the man who “redeemed” Florida from the Republicans, yet he
was one of those New South leaders who was far more concerned
with economic development than reactionary politics and pres-
ervation of a social system. Originally from New Hampshire, he
had lived many years in Georgia and Florida. He had been a
Unionist during the Civil War, but Southerners could overlook
this since he had sold essential supplies to the Confederacy. He
had voted for Grant in 1868 and Greeley four years later. In
1876 he was a successful lumberman with a large mill at Ellaville
in Madison County. The Sentinel, incensed at his nomination,
said, “He must have been nominated to give the ‘Lost Cause’ a
Union flavor. . . . His nomination is a wicked fraud to catch
Union men and Northern Republicans coming into the state. We
would rather have the most bitter Bourbon. . . .” Democrat Edwin
W. L’Engle thought Drew’s chances of election were good but
that he would not be much better than a “Radical.” Columbia
County Democrats endorsed Drew even though he was “recently
of the Radical party.” The Republican Jacksonville Sun was will-
ing to support Drew if he were free of the “Bourbons.” 51
50. Tallahassee Sentinel, July 15, 1876; John F. Rollins to Chandler,
A u g u s t 9 , 1 8 7 6 , C h a n d l e r P a p e r s ; Tallahassee Weekly Floridian,
October 10, 1876; Sanford to John Friend, December 31, 1877,
Sanford Papers.
51. Quitman, [Ga.] Reporter, June 8, 1876; Tallahassee Sentinel, June
10, 24, 1876; Edwin W. L’Engle to Edward M. L’Engle, May 19,
1876, L'Engle Papers; Savannah Morning News, May 28, 1876;
Tallahassee Weekly Floridian, August 22, 1876, quoting Jacksonville
Sun.
In an exciting campaign Democrats called on voters to bring

about much needed reforms at the national and state levels, while
Republicans declared that victory was essential to prevent the
undoing of all that had been accomplished since the war. Both
tried to reach every potential voter and see that he was registered
and willing to go to the polls. Tempers flared but there was rela-
tively little violence. There was fraud and intimidation, but it was
kept to a minimum by constant patrolling at key points by both
parties. Because Florida was one of the three southern states upon
whose electoral votes the presidential election depended, every
scrap of evidence hinting at irregularity was gathered and aired
in the national press.
Early returns in the November election indicated that the out-
come would depend on a few votes. National political dignitaries
rushed to Florida to obtain a favorable decision from the official
canvassing board. The state board, responsible for compiling the
county returns and certifying the victorious candidates, was com-
posed of two Republicans and one Democrat. Subjected to pres-
sure from both sides, these men ultimately decided the outcome
strictly according to party affiliations. The Republican majority
threw out enough Democratic votes to elect the Republican presi-
dential electors and the Republican state ticket as well. With less
than 100 votes separating the presidential tickets, there were
enough questionable returns so that the board could probably have
declared for the Republicans without anyone challenging its deci-
sion. Rut the Republican state ticket was running several hundred
votes behind and the Republicans on the canvassing board
desperately wanted a state victory. In throwing out enough votes
to accomplish this, their flagrant action opened the way for court
intervention.
Drew obtained a court order directing the board to count
returns exactly as received from the counties, a procedure which
would result in a Democratic victory. The board ignored the court
order and declared Stearns the victor. A long count battle followed,
during which the Republican canvassing board members were
threatened with contempt citations. The Florida Supreme Court,
with one Democrat and two Republican members, unanimously
issued a writ of mandamus requiring the board to count all county
returns as received. This gave Drew the governorship although
the recount did not pertain to presidential electors. After a lengthy
dispute before the electoral commission in February, Florida’s four

electoral votes were counted for Hayes and helped make him
president. Long before that, on January 2, 1877, Drew had been
peacefully inaugurated as Florida’s governor. 52
Stearns and the Florida Republicans who lost offices as a result
of the recount were disappointed but refused to pursue the matter
further in court because of the damage it might do to the national
ticket. 53 Many Negroes regarded Stearns’ defeat as a repudiation
of the Radical program, although much of that Radical program
had failed as early as the 1868 constitutional convention. At the
same time, many members of both parties were satisfied with
Drew’s election. Wilkinson Call complained that some Florida
Democrats felt a Republican president was acceptable as long as
they had a Democratic governor. Consequently the Democrats
had not demanded an electoral vote recount under the court order
which had benefited Drew. Northerners were amazed at the
speed with which Florida Democrats dropped Tilden in exchange
for the governorship. 54
Frank Sherwin, Stearns’ secretary and an associate of Repub-
lican officials of the Southern Inland Navigation and Improve-
ment Company, predicted Drew’s administration would be satis-
factory: “My friends and business associates control Drew to a
great extent. . . . I have a very positive influence and I believe
it possible to have this incoming State administration thoroughly
in accord with the Hayes government. . . . Three of the cabinet
just confirmed and are excellent selections. . . . The Bourbon ele-
ment is nowhere.” 55 The Jacksonville Florida Union, which often
represented the views of East Florida business interests, approved
52. Rome, [Ga.] Courier, December 13, 1876; C. Gibson to Samuel J.

Tilden, December 9, 1876, Samuel J. Tilden Papers, Box 13, New
York Public Library; 16 Florida Reports 19-29, 52-63 (1876); New
York Times, December 24, 1876; R. B. Hilton to Manton Marble,
December 23, 1876, Manton Marble Papers, Library of Congress;
A. A. Sargent to O. P. Morton, December 22, 1876, M. L. Stearns
to Chandler, December 22, 1876, S. B. McLin to Chandler, Decem-
ber 24, 1876, Chandler Papers.
53. D. Montgomery to Chandler, March 25, 1877, Stearns to Osborn,
February 21, 1877, Chandler Papers.
54. Wilkinson Call to Marble, January 5, 7, 1877, R. B. Hilton to
Marble, December 27, 31, 1876, January 4, 7, 1877, Tilden Papers,
Box 13; Thomas Donaldson to Rutherford B. Hayes, December 18,
1876, Rutherford B. Hayes Papers, Hayes Memorial Library, Fre-
mont, Ohio. Microfilm copies of Hayes Papers in Library of Congress.
55. F. B. Sherwin to Chandler, January 3, 1877, Chandler Papers.
Drew’s cabinet appointments and praised the new governor for

exhibiting a “liberal Republican disposition.” “If we have got to
have a Democratic State government we rejoice that there is so
little of the old Democracy in it,” the Union remarked. 56
Whatever new departures may have resulted at the national
level from the disputed election and compromise of 1877, in Flor-
ida the election was just one more step toward Democratic suprem-
acy. It is indicative of the political struggle during this period
that Florida’s “redeeming” Democratic governor was from New
Hampshire, while the state’s first native born governor, Ossian B.
Hart, was a Republican. By 1880 the Democrats would have
enough strength to win with Bloxham, but in 1876 they wanted
a man who would attract the Northerners who felt that they
could not support an ex-Confederate.
There seems to be little justification for the old assertion that
white Floridians were helpless under a corrupt government staff-
ed with outsiders and supported by ignorant Negro voters until
a determined native movement threw the intruders out in the
1876 election. It seems that Democrats bargained with more or
less success for concessions at every possible point during the period
and arrived at the 1876 election in a position of strength nearly
equal to their Republican foes. Although the Florida Democrats
sometimes used methods which are not acceptable for a loyal op-
position in a two-party arrangement, Florida came nearer to hav-
ing an operating two-party system in 1876 than it has had since.
The Reconstruction era was a period in which economic,
political, and social institutions, devastated by the war and its
consequences, had to be repaired or replaced. The Radicals em-
phasized replacement while native Democrats wished to apply
minor repairs. Moderate Republicans steered a middle path and
gained control of the new government. Because of internal dif-
ferences and the magnitude of their undertaking, this group was
unable to execute an effective program. They must bear the re-
sponsibility for the chaos and inefficiency which has marred this
period of Florida history, but with the state in a phase of great
change and rebuilding, any government would have had difficulty.
The Democrats must share the responsibility. Whether they were
destroying Republican control in the northern counties by terror
56. Jacksonville Florida Union, January 5, 1877.

and murder, resisting unfavorable legislation by dilatory tactics,

or helping to formulate a positive program in alliance with moder-
ate Republicans, they were a limiting factor on Republican policy
makers.
Shouting “the bottom rail is on top,” Florida Negroes hailed
the Radicals who first controlled the constitutional convention,
but these men did not survive their first major struggle. They
influenced Florida Reconstruction only to the extent that they
could muster opposition to moderate Republican policy and there-
fore increase disorder. While they may have obstructed a cohesive
program, these men did not have a major voice in the government.
No propertyless class legislated against a helpless, propertied class
in Florida. The Negroes were always a minority in government
offices. Some served in the state senate and house, and others
were county officials, but only Jonathan C. Gibbs as secretary of
state and superintendent of public instruction, and Josiah T.
Walls, as congressman, attained high office. Both Gibbs and
Walls were qualified for their offices. While the “bottom rail”
may have been temporarily lifted a notch or two during Recon-
struction, no Negro-controlled party dominated Florida. The
Democrats of the 1890s who called for white solidarity to prevent
a return to the terrible days of Reconstruction were distorting the
history of Reconstruction in Florida.
BOOK REVIEWS
Florida: From Indian Trail To Space Age. By Charlton W.
Tebeau and Ruby Leach Carson. 3 vols. (Delray Beach:
Southern Publishing Company, 1965. xxxiv, 1,618 pp. Intro-
duction, preface, illustrations, maps, bibliography, index.
$82.50.)
Volume I of the narrative history compiled by Dr. Tebeau

and Mrs. Carson, covering the years of Florida’s history from dis-
covery to 1896, includes all facets of the story, in addition to the
usual relation of political activities. Special sections at the end of
this volume by R. S. Chauvin and Ripley and Adelaide Bullen
describe the natural features of Florida, its prehistory, and Indians
of the past and present. Volume II covers the period from the
Spanish American War through 1965. There are also a number
of chapters in this volume dealing with a diversity of topics rang-
ing from religion to constitutional revision and legislative appor-
tionment. These special topic chapters are excellent additions.
Volume III, containing personal and family history sketches
and some accompanying portraits, may well become the MOST
valuable item of the three. Information on hundreds of individ-
uals who have contributed to Florida history can often be located
only in the biographical volumes of these subscription histories,
hence their great value. Historians condescendingly refer to
these as “mug histories,” but let the student of Florida history re-
member the sparsity of enough good historical data.
The authors in their preface state that their history is “an
attempt to synthesize all of the work that others have done and
to bring the studies up to date.” That the authors have succeeded
in their self-appointed chore is very evident. For example, in
chapter fifteen, describing the activities of the armed forces in
the Civil War, many of the references cited have become avail-
able only since 1951. What is true of this chapter dealing with
a nineteenth century subject is even more evident with twentieth
century subjects.
While the selection of references is generally good, the omis-
sion of footnotes or chapter notes is unfortunate. A formal bibli-
[ 171 ]
ography would also have been useful. The three volumes are
separately indexed and the illustrations offer a good selection and
usually accompany the narrative as related to the text. Special
mention should be made of the fine pen and ink drawings of
Norval E. Packwood, Jr. Credit should also go to the publisher
who has maintained the high quality of his earlier books: D. B.
McKay’s Pioneer Florida and E. C. Nance’s East Coast of Florida
Viewed as a whole, this narrative history is well-related, al-
though there is an unevenness which is always present when
multiple authors contribute their efforts in publishing a general
history. A few mistakes inevitably find their way into any publica-
tion. No doubt Allan Nevins will be amazed to find that he col-
laborated with former Governor Fuller Warren on How to Win in
Politics in 1949.
J. E. D OVELL
University of Florida
Okeechobee Boats and Skippers. By Lawrence E. Will. (St.

Petersburg: Great Outdoors Publishing Company, 1965.
166 pp. Maps, illustrations, index. $1.95.)
Okeechobee Catfishing. By Lawrence E. Will. (St. Petersburg:

Great Outdoors Publishing Company, 1965. 159 pp. Illus-
trations, index. $1.50.)
Lawrence E. Will is perhaps Florida’s most unique “amateur”

historian. He “growed up” in the Lake Okeechobee-Everglades
country. The story of that region since white men began to settle
there early in this century is also his own story. He was history-
conscious from the first. A keen observer, he kept notes and
photographs. Because he became known as the local historian he
was the recipient of other stories and pictures, all of which he
uses to good effect. He writes in an excellent narrative style or
resorts to the dialect appropriate to the character he is describ-
ing. He began by writing stories for the local paper and making
talks mostly at gatherings in the lake region. In 1959, his arti-
cle, “‘Digging the Cape Sable Canal,” appeared in Tequesta. It
was based upon material and pictures he made while working
on that project in 1921-22. He started another article which grew
BOOK REVIEWS 173
into a book, Okeechobee Hurricane and the Hoover Dike. A

second, A Cracker History of Lake Okeechobee, followed. The
two small volumes reviewed here might easily have been chapters
in the larger book for they are integral parts of the Lake Okeecho-
bee story and one must read all four books for a complete account.
Boats and Skippers is largely about steamboats and their gas-
oline-powered successors which operated on the big lake and its
navigable arms, natural and artificial, until highways and rail-
roads reached the lake in the nineteen-twenties. The stories of
the boats and their almost legendary owner-captains are reminis-
cent of Mark Twain tales of steamboating on the Mississippi a
half-century earlier. They make a colorful picture of the coming
and the passing of an era in Florida history.
Though Lake Okeechobee is a big lake, second only to Lake
Michigan of lakes lying wholly in the United States, it stretches
the imagination to realize that the lowly catfish, likely to be con-
sidered a nuisance by fishermen interested in sport and unaware
of its delightful flavor, was the basis of an industry on the lake
that ranked in importance with carrying passengers and freight,
and indeed, outlived the other two waterborne activities. At its
height, it yielded as much as a million dollars a year. It began
conveniently for recording in the year 1900, when Captain Ben-
jamin Franklin Hall brought a refrigerator box and some trot lines
from Kissimmee and set some alligator hunters on the lake to fish-
ing. The catch proved so good that Captain Hall brought down
a seine to increase the haul. The fish were carried to the nearest
market served by a railroad, at first to Kissimmee which always
remained the capital of the business, but later also to Fort Myers.
When the New River Canal opened to Fort Lauderdale it became
an outlet. Finally, when the railroad reached Tantie (Okeecho-
bee) in 1915, it became the most convenient shipping point.
Others joined Hall in the business. Tom Bass became the biggest
operator with forty-five boats and eight refrigerated railroad cars.
In 1945, the Florida legislature put an end to the business, and
now catfish may be taken only with wire traps. But there is more
to the story than catfishing. There are stories of people and places
from Miami to Kissimmee and Palm Beach to Fort Myers, all by
way of Lake Okeechobee and associated with catching, dressing,
and marketing the catfish.
C HARLTON W. T EBEAU
University of Miami
The Negro in the Reconstruction of Florida, 1865-1877. By Joe

M. Richardson. (Tallahassee: Florida State University,
1965. xi, 255 pp. Preface, bibliography, index. $7.00.)
In this excellent monograph, Professor Richardson fully de-

scribes the role of the Negro in the Reconstruction of this south-
ern-most state. Writing in an open, lucid style, he depicts Ne-
groes as they emerge from slavery into freedom, and traces their
progress in the areas of economics, religion, and education, and
in civil and political affairs. Progress is indeed a proper word for
Professor Richardson’s findings. Negroes came to relish their
freedom early, he asserts, and they used that liberty to become
money-saving laborers and landowners, to establish independent
churches as forces of moral uplift, to provide the state with a
program for public education, and to become full and useful citi-
zens in the courtrooms, at the polls, and in public offices. “By
the end of Reconstruction,” Richardson concludes, Negroes “were
probably as good citizens as any race of similar economic stand-
ing.” To say that Negroes were in any sense as good as whites
does injury enough to the ideals of the white fathers and grand-
fathers of the South, but Professor Richardson soon moves for-
ward to add insult by questioning the divinity of redemption.
“As far as the future of the Negro was concerned,” he declares,
“and perhaps the state at large, it was unfortunate that Repub-
licans lost office in 1876.” Strong words these, and words which
place the author in the very vanguard of a revisionist interpreta-
tion that maintains, to the screaming horror of its elders, that Re-
construction was a positive good rather than an unmitigated evil.
The reader might surmise that behind such boldness there lies
a polemical purpose, that upon this tastefully executed volume
there stands an orator of the new abolitionist school. Such is the
case, I think, but unlike many of his more prolific colleagues, Pro-
fessor Richardson rests his case upon a prodigious amount of basic
research-particularly in the manuscripts and newspapers. The
presumption is that his conclusions represent something more
than wishful thinking. If one is inclined to disagree with him,
his evidence will have to be met, not dismissed. Challenge is fur-
ther daunted by the ring of truth about the study. The Negro
observed in the rapid flow of the Second Reconstruction makes
the author’s image of the Negro in the First fully credible. But,
BOOK REVIEWS 175
more centrally, one senses that Richardson has touched the pulse
of the South as he recounts the vital determination of white Flori-
dians to keep theirs a white man’s country. As we read the book
we seem to hear an off-stage chorus chanting in slow and steady
measure the constant reminder that “white is right.” And it is
difficult to decide from where this music comes: from the sub-
stance of the volume we hold, or from the distilled words and
deeds of racist fundamentalism still rampant in our own day, from
the horrendous violence of Birmingham, of Oxford, and of Phila-
delphia, Mississippi, which hangs about our necks as a symbol of
our sin and our suffering.
Professor Richardson has produced an argumentative history,
but it is good history, and it is a rock which will not, I think, be
broken in our time.
J OEL W ILLIAMSON
University of North Carolina
A Goodly Heritage: The Episcopal Church in Florida. By Joseph

D. Cushman, Jr. (Gainesville: University of Florida Press,
1965. xiii, 219 pp. Illustrations, foreword, preface, bibli-
ography, index. $6.50.)
The author of this fascinating volume has written a definitive

and factual history of the beginnings of the Episcopal Church
in Florida. Expertly he traces the development of the church from
the first Anglicans, the first clergy, and the first buildings, through
the formation of the Diocese of Florida in 1838, its vicissitudes
during the Civil War, its rapid growth in the post-war years, to
the happy necessity in 1892, of having to divide itself into two
dioceses. A Goody Heritage not only takes its place in Americana,
making a vital contribution to the national scene, but also becomes
one of those indispensable additions to the growing interest in
producing the history of Florida and its people. Professor Cushman
has told his story of the Episcopal Church in Florida mainly
around the episcopates of its first three bishops, each dynamic in
leadership in his own right.
The author’s style is easy flowing and makes for interesting
reading. For the casual reader he enlivens his history with the
various ways men in the early days overcame the difficulties of

travel and communication. For the historian he lines the bottom
of every page with explanatory footnotes as well as keeping his
narrative strictly consistent with the facts and evidence. He has
taken the broad, diocesan, state-wide point of view, and has not
lost himself in the details of any individual parish or mission. He
had at his disposal the annual Journals of the Episcopal Diocese
of Florida, newspapers of the period, and the works of former
writers of elements of Florida Episcopal Church history. He
also had the advantage of living in Florida and being able to visit
many of the places of which he wrote. Dr. Cushman has kept
a good balance in the amount of attention given to each of the
critical periods in the life of the church.
H AMILTON W E S T
Bishop of Florida
Jacksonville, Florida
The British Empire before the American Revolution. Volume XI.

The Triumphant Empire: The Rumbling of the Coming
Storm, 1766-1770. By Lawrence Henry Gipson. (New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965. lxix, 579, xxxv pp. Preface,
illustrations, maps, index. $10.00.)
The British Empire before the American Revolution. Volume XII.

The Triumphant Empire: Britain Sails into the Storm, 1770-
1776. By Lawrence Henry Gipson. (New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, 1965. lvii, 372, xxx pp. Preface, illustrations, maps,
index. $10.00.)
With the appearance of Volumes XI and XII of his monumen-

tal The British Empire before the American Revolution, Lawrence
H. Gipson has finally traveled the last miles of the long road
from 1748 to 1776. Now we have for the first time a full schol-
arly examination of the origins of the Revolution from the point
of view of the imperial school of historiography. The two volumes
under consideration (along with volume ten that appeared in
1961) cover the momentous developments that divided the thir-
teen mainland colonies from the mother country following the
Great War for the Empire. Many of the conclusions presented
B OOK R EVIEWS 177
are largely elaborations of Mr. Gipson’s opinions expressed in his

Coming of the American Revolution, 1763-1775. For, as the au-
thor acknowledges, “I have long been convinced, along with John
Adams, that the Revolution was completed before the outbreak
of what should properly be called the War for American Inde-
pendence.” Here in vivid, panoramic form is the story of the
gradual separation of the English speaking peoples. According
to Mr. Gipson, the clash was not so much over different theories
or principles but over conflicting interests. Britain, confronted
with enormous territorial acquisitions after 1763, and saddled
with a staggering debt, endeavored to create more efficient admin-
istrative machinery, just as she attempted to get the provincials
to contribute to the upkeep of the expanded empire. But the
mature colonies, no longer threatened by French forces in Cana-
da, were eager to pursue their own ends without interference from
Parliament and the king’s ministers.
As is customary of Gipson’s work, these studies are rich in
detail, well documented, well organized, and written in a smooth,
readable style. In The Rumbling of the Coming Storm, 1766-
1770, the author begins by tracing the efforts on both sides of
the Atlantic aimed at reconciliation following the repeal of the
Stamp Act. He then launches into the new controversies that soon
erupted, emphasizing New York’s opposition to the Quartering
Act, the origins of the Townshend program, the Revenue Act of
1767, and the American response led by the radicals of Massa-
chusetts Bay. The colonists could generally agree on their opposi-
tion to British taxes and other aspects of imperial reorganization,
including western lands; but they could simultaneously disagree
about a great many things, as the chapters on boundary disputes
and East-West friction make abundantly clear.
Some readers may feel that the companion volume, Britain
Sails into the Storm, 1770-1776, lacks balance. For these impor-
tant six years are treated in only 372 pages, whereas the four
years embraced in the previous tome are accorded 579 pages. It
may be, however, that the author considers the concluding aspect
of his story more familiar than the period of the Chatham and
Grafton administrations. Even so, Mr. Gipson has revised his
original plan of ending the narrative in 1775 by extending his
account down to the Declaration of Independence.
A final volume in this remarkable series, The Empire beyond
the Storm, will deal with the British dependencies that did not
revolt, in addition to offering sections on the historiography and
bibliography of the “Old Empire.” Historians will disagree among
themselves on many of Mr. Gipson’s findings, but they will never
be able to ignore them. And few if any would deny that The
British Empire before the American Revolution is one of the
finest historical achievements of the twentieth century.
D ON H IGGINBOTHAM
Louisiana State University
The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the Intellectual

Origins of the American Revolution. By H. Trevor Colbourn.
(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press for the
Institute of Early American History and Culture at Williams-
burg, 1965. viii, 247 pp. Preface, appendices, index. $7.50.)
As in recent major studies by Caroline Robbins and Bernard

Bailyn, Trevor Colbourn’s book explores the American colonial
understanding of the rights of Englishmen. His special forte lies
in investigating the sources of that understanding and the histori-
cal perspective those sources provided. He therefore devotes con-
siderable attention to the reading habits of the revolutionary
intellectuals (and in a long appendix lists historical volumes in
eighteenth-century American libraries-a significant contribution).
The author finds that the colonists were selective in their use of
history. They took seventeenth-century arguments against the
Stuart kings and directed them against the eighteenth-century
Parliament. The colonial achievement thus involved the adaptation
of English historical writing to the exigencies of Anglo-American
politics: “They used whig history, they used whig arguments, but
their borrowing fed ideas and led to decisions appropriate only to
the colonial circumstances.”
Colbourn has structured his material into two parts. The first
treats “the English heritage and the colonial historical view.” The
second, and longer section, discusses “the revolutionary use of
history.” There are chapters on New England and the South; but
the most satisfying chapters treat the historical minds of John
Adams, James Wilson, Dickinson, Franklin, and Jefferson. In
B OOK R EVIEWS 179
sum, the book adds to our recent rediscovery of the English

libertarian tradition; and even more, it augments the current
reformulation of the American Revolution as an intellectual
movement.
It is perhaps ungracious to suggest that Colbourn’s good book
might have been better; but two points warrant some attention.
The first involves the colonization issue. When the Great Debate
raged between 1765 and 1775, one of the major questions in the
dispute over the proper relationship of the colonies to the mother
country hinged upon opposing conceptions of the nature of
English colonization. Colbourn touches upon this obliquely in
discussing John Adams and George Mason; but a more systematic
treatment would have illuminated the interpretive use of historical
knowledge in the colonies.
A second problem emerges from the need for clearer usage of
the term “whig history,” especially as it is the pivotal concept for
this study. It is defined sketchily on page six, again on page 128,
and then more adequately at the end of the book (pp. 183-189).
Colbourn casts a broad net in describing reading habits and pat-
terns of influence, and at times his catch would seem to include
elements extraneous to True Whiggery. Can Hume and Mrs.
Macaulay (who wrote a multi-volume history to refute Hume)
both be part of a whig tradition in historical thought? Perhaps;
but it requires some explanation. What about Jefferson’s concern
for Hume’s “Jacobite outlook”? And in what tradition does Boling-
broke stand? He has customarily been labelled a defender of
Tory thought. Yet his historical perspective unquestionably in-
fluenced John Adams, Josiah Quincy, Jr., and James Wilson.
Possibly Bolingbroke has been cavalierly categorized in the past;
but does that justify lumping him with the libertarian “True
Whigs,” whose reading of seventeenth-century history was quite
different? Finally, if whig ideas were devoted to the preservation
of parliamentary integrity at the expense of the Crown, what is
to be said of the colonial position commonly held by 1774-that
the only imperial bond was the Crown and not Parliament? These
and other minor ambiguities might have been clarified at the outset
by a more precise definition of “whig history” and the determina-
tive patterns of thought embraced by it.
M ICHAEL G. K AMMEN
Cornell University
The Formative Period in Alabama, 1815-1828. By Thomas P.

Abernethy. (University: University of Alabama Press, 1965.
220 pp. Prefaces, maps, charts, notes, bibliography, index.
$6.95.)
Students of southern history, particularly those interested in

Alabama and states like Florida which adjoin Alabama, will wel-
come the reprinting of Professor Abernethy’s pioneering work.
Brought out as one of the University of Alabama Press’ new series
of Southern Historical Publications, the book is slightly different
from the original edition, and new maps and charts add to its
value. The object, according to the author, was “to amend, rather
than to change, the presentation of the subject.”
Although relatively brief, the study neglects few facets in the
state’s history, effectively exploring everything from Indians to
bank notes, from public lands to journalism. In short, the book
introduces a land, raw but full of challenging potential, and
traces its complicated initial development. Events in these early
years established patterns and shaped the future. Any one of the
chapters either has been or should be the subject of a separate
monograph-slavery, agriculture, politics, immigrants, to name
but a few.
The book’s organization is logical and the style uncomplicated
and concise. Much new material not available to Professor Aber-
nethy has since been found and exploited by historians. Yet his
work remains important, useful, and, fortunately, once more
easily available in an improved, well-packaged edition.
W I L L I A M W ARREN R O G E R S
Florida State University
John James Audubon. By Alice Ford. (Norman: University of

Oklahoma Press, 1964. xiv, 488 pp. Acknowledgments,
illustrations, chronology, art miscellany, Audubon classics,
bibliography, index. $7.95.)
Few modern scientists have stirred more popular interest than

has John James Audubon and few have been more complex.
These facts have combined to evoke since his death in January
B OOK R EVIEWS 181
1851 a vast assortment of biographical literature, some merely

romantic and some laudably sound and scholarly. To the latter
category belongs this splendid biography by Alice Ford.
Miss Ford’s book may not be presumed to supersede Francis
Hobart Herrick’s notable work, published in 1917 and somewhat
out of date, but it is a significant addition to the Audubon litera-
ture. Most noteworthy is the author’s success in searching out the
details of Audubon’s ancestry, parentage, and childhood, hitherto
generally enshrouded in uncertainty. While Miss Ford is supplying
the substance of fact for some aspects of Audubon’s life, she
rejects as without basis certain legends which have become a part
of the Audubon story.
Relying heavily on letters and journals, both published and
unpublished, the author has followed Audubon’s almost continual
peregrinations. It is not in the nature of a naturalist to remain
settled for very long. This can be the despair of those who would
trace his steps. It may multiply the responsibilities of the con-
scientious researcher. If Miss Ford’s book has a weakness, it is that
she has in the course of a relatively brief treatment attempted to
leave no expedition unmentioned, no vicissitude unrecorded, no
incident unnoticed. It tends to become a recital of facts. One
might almost wish that with her vast resources and her undeniable
skill, she had attempted to provide more insight into the per-
sonality of her subject. He was an amazing man, and who knows
him better than Miss Ford?
Since these remarks are addressed most particularly to stu-
dents of Florida history, the reviewer may be pardoned for con-
cluding on a parochial note. Without doubt Audubon’s collections
of birds and animals were tremendously enriched by his Florida
specimens. Florida readers will perhaps be pleased to find six
pages of this biography devoted to the expedition of the winter of
1831-32 into the St. Augustine and St. Johns River area. (As
readers familiar with the Audubon letters will recall, he found
the rigors of the Florida terrain exhausting and troublesome.)
On the contrary, however, it may be disappointing to discover only
half a page dealing with the expedition to the Florida Keys in
May 1832. This latter trip, so productive of specimens that five
carts were required to transport them through the streets of
Charleston, and so provocative as to have prompted at least four
of Audubon’s absorbing essays delineating American scenery and
character, would seem to have merited more attention. An occa-

sional local historian may carp when he notes that Major James
M. Glasell, army commandant, first at Fort King and later at Key
West, and so esteemed by Audubon as to be entrusted with a
sample folio volume of his “Birds,” is identified only as “a Major
Glassel.”
But Miss Ford is writing for a much wider audience. She has
produced a very valuable book. The University of Oklahoma Press
is to be commended for adding this to its already lengthy list of
distinctive offerings and the Ford Foundation for subsidizing
its publication.
E. A SHBY H AMMOND
War Within a War: The Confederacy Against Itself. By Carlton

Beals. (Philadelphia: Chilton Books, 1965. xi, 177 pp.
Foreword, maps, selected bibliography, index. $3.95.)
Carleton Beals, one of the nation’s most prolific book-writers,

had his interest aroused in the common folk of the South by his
grandfather, an Ohio volunteer, who told a small boy how, in
northern Alabama, they warmly greeted invading Union troops.
This did not fit the myth of “The Lost Cause;” and for years as
journalist, traveler, and researcher, he tracked down the true
story.
This book is the result, and in it Beals tells “of those who
refused to conform to the patriotic slogans of the Confederacy
and suffered their own Golgotha, [those] who resisted a vigilante
terrorism rarely paralleled in history.” The account of these people,
Beals tells us, has largely been lost. The veil was drawn over them
by contemporary Civil War mythology, and suppression is only
now being lifted somewhat.
All historians are aware of resistance inside the Confederacy,
usually at the upper political levels involving the likes of men
like Governor Brown of Georgia and Governor Vance of North
Carolina. A similar struggle among the common people is less
easy to see, but this book shows that many unknown citizens
were greater heroes than the famous rebels against rebellion.
B OOK R EVIEWS 183
Despite the grimness of the subject, the book is delightful reading.

The author tells his story well and supplies much source material
for fiction writers, television melo-dramatists, and movie scenarists.
The book includes the sagas of William G. Brownlow, the
Knoxville editor, Reverend John H. Aughey of Mississippi, and
Parson Brownlow. John Aughey’s obscure feats are particularly
worthy. A Presbyterian minister in Mississippi, he asked for a
Union ballot on election day in 1860. Since nobody had seen one,
he wrote his own. When a vigilante band summoned him to
answer to the charge of treason, he defended himself eloquently.
Later, vigilantes attacked his home, but the preacher was there,
shotgun cocked. The attackers, blundering in the dark, became
entangled in a clothesline, fell into the well, fired on one another,
and ignominiously fled. This was the Battle of Wyandotte, in
which, wrote Aughey, “probably the first blood of the war was
shed.” Aughey lost his pulpit, and southern “patriots” went gun-
ning for him, but killed another man by mistake. He was later
arrested with other Unionist refugees, jailed, and was condemned
to death, but he kept arguing that he was loyal to Mississippi
and that secession was unconstitutional. He finally managed to
escape to Union lines after adventures worthy of Anthony Adverse,
Don Quixote, Gil Bias, or Tom Jones.
W ILLIAM E. B ARINGER
The Black Codes of the South. By Theodore B. Wilson. (Univer-

sity: University of Alabama Press, 1966. 192 pp. Preface,
notes, bibliography, index. $5.95.)
This is an uneven book about an important subject. Appearing

at a time when analogies with recent southern segregation laws
will inevitably be drawn, it deals with a controversial phase of
“Black Reconstruction” with control and discretion. It’s balance
and objectivity do credit to the author and to Professor Rembert
W. Patrick who encouraged the writing of this study.
The so-called Black Codes were loose collections of laws and
regulations passed by southern provisional legislatures in the
months after Appomattox to regularize and regulate the new
circumstances of the Negro freedmen. Quite clearly something

had to be done. The freedmen, after all, had to be protected and
their new status had to be defined. Marriages had to be legalized,
rights of property had to be established, citizenship privileges and
responsibilities had to be dilineated, and, finally-or so most
people thought-economic relations had to be regulated. No, the
issue that aroused public controversy then, and arouses historical
controversy now, was not whether some rules were needed, but
whether the codes were discriminatory, and-the stronger charge
-whether they were designed to restore de facto slavery.
Mr. Wilson’s answer to the first question is yes. In a section
distorted by an unnecessary amount of do-it-yourself sociology, he
developes the notion of the “gray institution”-his name for the
complex of attitudes and behavior worked out long before the
Civil War to govern relations between whites and blacks in the
South. This “gray institution” made it impossible for whites after
1865 to see that the Negro was a social being, the product, like
other men, of his social milieu, and entitled, like other men, to
fair and impartial treatment. Under the circumstances, the codes
were neither “just” nor “discreet”; but they were, he says, “pre-
dictable.” To the question of whether the codes were designed to
re-enslave the Negro or reduce him to peonage, Wilson’s answer
is no. Only in Florida, perhaps, where the legislative committee
appointed to frame a code presented “a voluminous report ridicu-
lous for its pompous bigotry,” did anything approaching an attempt
to revive the “good old days” occur. In general, he insists, South-
erners were glad to be rid of the incubus of slavery, and had no
intention of reimposing it, even in covert form.
In the end we are left with a monograph which metes out
praise and blame with equal, objective hand. Northern Radicals
are criticized for exaggerating the iniquities and the evil intent of
the Black Codes. As Wilson notes, the Freedmen’s Bureau-the
darling of the Radicals-imposed its own “vagrancy laws” on its
charges to encourage them to work for economic independence.
Southerners are called to account for the bigotry and brutality
which the newly emancipated slaves frequently encountered in
the months after the war. Law-abiding citizens of the South, he
notes disapprovingly, were willing to tolerate the abuse and murder
of Negroes by the lawless elements in the war-ravaged section.
On the score of judgment, then, the book is a model. Un-
BOOK REVIEWS 185
fortunately its execution is not equal to its balance. The book is

marred by digressions into the history of slavery and the genesis
of Northern Radical opinion which are far longer than necessary
to establish the background for some of Wilson’s major themes.
The writing is indifferent in quality. Wilson is given, for one
thing, to piling up long, indented quotations. His excursion into
amateur sociology and his use of some of its jargon strikes a sour
note. Still, when all this is said, The Black Codes of the South is
a worthy addition to our knowledge of a significant chapter of
Southern history.
I RWIN U NGER
University of California, Davis.
Atticus Greene Haygood: Methodist Bishop, Editor, and Educator,

By Harold W. Mann. (Athens: University of Georgia Press,
1965. viii, 254 pp. Preface, illustrations, notes, selected
bibliography, index. $6.00.)
The period of Reconstruction in the South following the Civil

War was a time of drastic change and frustration for her institu-
tions. In the throes of these difficulties, none was more deeply
affected than the church, particularly the Methodist Episcopal
Church, South, which was caught up in this furor of reappraisal
and readjustment.
This biography of Atticus Greene Haygood, preacher, de-
nominational editor, college president, and Methodist bishop,
presents an on-balance concept of the structure and struggles of
the church and its surrounding culture in the southland of the
second half of the nineteenth century.
One of the most thoroughly researched religious biographies
that this reviewer has examined, this book introduces a well-trained
and articulate historian to the reading public. This volume should
find a conspicuous place on the shelves of those ministers, educa-
tors, and interested laymen who desire a proper frame of reference
for ante-bellum Methodism.
Good fortune attended Haygood throughout his life, inasmuch
as he was blessed with being in the right place at the right time.
His rise in the ministry was meteoric. That he was pastor to the
powerful Bishop George Foster Pierce in Sparta, Georgia, at the

age of twenty-one was a measure of his ability as orator and
preacher. It was equally indicative of the sponsorship accorded
him by the highly-regarded Lovick Pierce, the bishop’s father.
At twenty-seven, Atticus was a district superintendent, three years
later he was appointed secretary of Sunday School for his denomi-
nation, an office that gained him southwide attention. At the age
of thirty-six, he became president of Emory College. No one
was surprised when the Methodist Church elected him a bishop
in 1890.
Atticus Haygood’s major contributions to his age centered
around the thrust he gave to public and Negro education. He was
an “evangelical echo” of his contemporary, Henry W. Grady.
Although beset with personal finanical problems in his latter years,
his earlier acumen in this field saved Emory College from a pos-
sible disastrous collapse and pointed the institution toward its
present prominence. As writer, preacher, and church administra-
tor, his impact upon the life of Georgia Methodism is still
felt today.
Throughout this volume, one is impressed with the extra-
ordinary range of fact garnered about this man. Wistfully, one
wishes that the personality of Atticus Greene Haygood were more
clearly revealed. Perhaps the lack lies not so much with the author
as it does with the enigmatic character of the bishop himself.
Nevertheless, such observation in no way nullifies the value,
vitality, and scope of this biography.
R ICHARD E. B LANCHARD
Tampa, Florida
Jim Crow’s Defense: Anti-Negro Thought in America, 1900-

1930. By I. A. Newby. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State Uni-
versity Press, 1965. xv, 230 pp. Preface, bibliography, index.
$6.50.)
“From the late 1890’s to the late 1920’s,” writes Newby, “the
South, with Northern acquiescence, found and established the
Negro’s ‘place’.” Chronologically bounded by what C. Vann Wood-
ward has called the “capitulation to racism” and by stirrings of
B OOK R EVIEWS 187
discontent with the American caste system among educated

Negroes and a growing number of white allies, the first three
decades of this century saw national acceptance and general ap-
proval of the Southerner’s answer to the “Negro problem.” The
years that encompassed the democratic reformism of the progres-
sive movement, the idealistic internationalism of the First World
War, and the advent of unprecedented material well-being for
most Americans, also saw the flowering of intellectual racism in
the United States. Paralleling, perhaps outstripping, the develop-
ment of racial and religious nativism, which culminated in the
1920s in the imposition of stringent national origins quotas on
European immigration, was the growth of an intellectual system
designed to rationalize and thus consolidate the segregation and
disfranchisement of southern Negroes accomplished in the 1890s.
Contrary to what Rayford W. Logan has written, perhaps the
early twentieth century, not the immediate post-Reconstruction
decades, marked the “nadir” of the Negro in American life and
thought.
Newby divides his study into sections on “development” and
“application” of anti-Negro ideas and attitudes. In the former he
discusses the racist ideology elaborately constructed after 1900
by ethnologists, anthropologists, geneticists, eugenicists, psycholo-
gists, social scientists, historians, and religious leaders. Largely the
product of intellectuals living in the northern states, this ideology
supposedly gave the authority of science, statistics, and theology
to the traditional emotional reactions of Southerners. Although
much of this body of thought consisted of resurrected ante-bellum
pro-slavery theories, the outstanding characteristic of racism after
1900 was the development of a new “racial science” that furnished
a systematic basis for both white supremacy and immigration
restrictionism. Partially applying scientifically established concepts
of Negro inferiority to southern social and political affairs, but
mainly expanding on longstanding popular prejudices, was a
host of journalists, educators, clergymen, and politicians. These
people, mostly Southerners, can be divided into “extremists,”
“moderates,” and “reformers,” says Newby, but they were united
in a belief that the Negro was an irremediably inferior being and
that only his social isolation and political suppression would insure
the maintenance of white civilization.
Newby is at his best in summarizing and analyzing the con-
tributions of the many scholars in various academic disciplines

to the intellectualized racism of the early twentieth century.
While the theories of such figures as John W. Burgess, Nathaniel
S. Shaler, William MacDougall, and Madison Grant are often
mentioned in treatments of American race-thinking, it may sur-
prise some that the mulatto, William Hannibal Thomas, was one
of the most vigorous exponents of anti-Negro doctrines and that
early in his career Howard W. Odum stoked the fires of racism
with his Social and Mental Traits of the Negro. Newby’s discus-
sion of the role that the so-called “Dunning school” of anti-Negro
historians of Reconstruction played in abetting the southern drive
for white supremacy and northern abandonment of the Negro is
the best yet written. As Newby rather masterfully shows, although
there was a close interrelationship between anthropological,
psychological, and sociological findings on race, “Academic histor-
ians were unimpressed by the theories of intellectual racism. . . .”
Newby, however, offers little explanation of why scholars in the
biological and social sciences failed to have more influence on
professional historians during this, the golden age of “scientific”
history.
In the portion of his book dealing with the application of
anti-Negro thought, Newby occasionally allows rhetoric and mis-
placed originality to substitute for strict accuracy. The result is
a few questionable assertions. He accuses political leaders like
Benjamin Tillman, James K. Vardaman, Hoke Smith, or Cole
Blease of being “interested only in their personal fortune. . . .”
He carelessly equates lynchings of Negroes with anti-racial hysteria
in 1919, and these two developments with the Ku Klux Klan,
which, contrary to what Newby says, did not begin to “spread
throughout the nation” until the fall of 1920. His thesis that
Southerners’ growing concern for federal special-interest legislation
after 1900 weakened their argument for non-interference in
southern race relations ignores the pre-1900 efforts of southern
congressmen to secure sectional benefits in the form of railroad
subsidies, railroad regulation, and currency inflation. Finally, my
own research on the Ku Klux Klan has revealed no evidence that
white supremacy was an important issue in the South during the
presidential campaign of 1928, as Newby contends, and his cita-
tions on this point are three rather obscure southern newspapers.
But these are minor matters. Newby has written a fine book
B OOK R EVIEWS 189
on a highly complex phase of recent American intellectual his-

tory. He has searched through an enormous quantity of published
material. His treatment is well-written and deftly organized, and
he has commendably avoided arguing with the intellectual racists,
whose errors and inconsistencies are self-evident. In an epilogue,
Newby sketches the factors moderating anti-Negroism since the
1920s, as well as the limited resurgence of racial science since
1954. He raises questions that furnish a good starting point for
a sequel to this admirable study.
C HARLES C. A LEXANDER
University of Georgia
A Little Girl is Dead. By Harry Golden. (New York: World

Publishers, 1965. xv, 363 pp. Acknowledgments, introduc-
tion, illustrations, appendices, bibliography. $5.00.)
A Little Girl is Dead is perhaps the best book Harry Golden

has ever written. Presenting a vivid and exciting report of the
Leo M. Frank case, this book surprisingly has hardly caused a
ripple North or South. Perhaps to a public preoccupied with the
civil rights struggle, the miscarriage of justice in Georgia during
1913 seems somewhat inconsequential.
When fourteen-year old Mary Phagan was found murdered
in the basement of the National Pencil Company in Atlanta one
Sunday morning in 1913, the crime presented an opportunity to
the yellow press, especially the Georgian recently acquired by
William Randolph Hearst. The Hearst paper put out an extra
with the screaming headline: THE STRANGLER HAS BEEN
CAUGHT, when Leo Frank, manager of the pencil company,
was taken to the police station for routine questioning. Public
excitement was whipped up to such a frenzy that it terrorized
even the jury which brought in a verdict of guilty. Mr. Golden
shows how Judge Leonard S. Roan was also affected by the
hysteria.
There are phases of the case that still appear strange, even
after a lapse of fifty years. Frank, a college graduate, was highly
respected, married, and holding a responsible position. This was
the first, perhaps the only instance of a white man convicted in
the South on the uncorroborated testimony of an illiterate, low-
grade Negro sweeper with a criminal record who admitted lying

on the witness stand.
While the jury might be excused for being stampeded by a
howling mob, greater blame attaches to the courts, state and fed-
eral, for refusing Frank a new trial. The testimony against him was
highly circumstantial, and even the appellate judges expressed
doubt, and yet they allowed the conviction to stand. Supreme
Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Charles Evans Hughes
held that due process of law had been denied when the jury had
been terrorized by a raging Atlanta mob.
The denouement was horrible and reflects little credit on
Georgia. When Governor John M. Slaton, who believed in
Frank’s innocence, commuted his sentence to life imprisonment,
it almost brought on Slaton’s lynching. The atmosphere had been
charged by Tom Watson, the talented demagogue whose pen was
dipped in vitriol. Week after week he spewed forth in his Jeffer-
sonian a barrage of the most vicious, inflammable propaganda.
This pernicious brew consisted of poisonous slander, race preju-
dice, lies and half truths, southern chivalry, class resentment, and
state pride. The catalyst of this witch’s brew was anti-Semitism.
Shortly after Frank was transferred to the prison at Milledge-
ville, twenty-five mobsters seized him, drove him to Marietta,
Georgia, and there, near the dead girl’s home hanged him to a tree.
These vigilantes, founders of the resurrected Ku Klux Klan, were
not lawless hoodlums; even a preacher was present. They were
never sought by the authorities, although their identity was known,
and no one was ever indicted or tried for the Frank lynching.
H ARRY S IMONHOFF
Miami, Florida
The Deep South in Transformation: A Symposium. Edited by

Robert B. Highsaw. (University: University of Alabama
Press, 1964. 175 pp. Foreword, $5.95.)
As was remarked by someone recently, a Southerner might

“fret that he is oppressed, maligned and misunderstood,” but he
could never “complain that he is ignored,” for the “urge among
historians and journalists to interpret the South and its people is
B OOK R EVIEWS 191
irresistible.” The occasion for this, another book about the South,
was the dedication of a new social sciences building, Marten ten
Hoor Hall, on the campus of the University of Alabama. The
exercises consisted of a symposium, participated in by eighteen
people: college presidents (present and former), a newspaper
editor, historians, political scientists, sociologists, professors of
English, a former state governor, directors of research, and the
retired dean for whom the hall was named.
The central theme, as suggested in the title of the book, was
the transformation of the South now going on, and how the South
might meet it. In addition to a prologue, the subjects taken up
and around which discussion took place were these: “Training
for Responsible Leadership,” “Challenge to Research,” “Its Devel-
opment, Past and Present,” and “Its Changing Literature.”
Dean Marten ten Hoor set the pace in the prologue in a
learned and, at times, a whimsical discussion of the part the
social sciences should play in higher education, with no fixed sug-
gestions as to just how the professor in the classroom should pre-
sent them, but with the belief that in “such a society as ours there
is strength in variety quite as much as there is in unity, for, as the
old saying has it, our goal is unity in variety.” Luther Hodges,
former governor of North Carolina and at the time of the sym-
posium United States Secretary of Commerce, gave a run-down
on the economic situation.
Oliver C. Carmichael, in relating the social sciences to citizen-
ship, declared that the “overwhelming preoccupation with science
and technology, to the neglect of other subjects, is a characteristic
fault of our times,” and that in the humanistic-social studies field
the counterpart to the atom was the idea.
The South in transformation as an outstanding challenge in
the field of research was discussed from the sociological point
of view by Everett C. Hughes; from the political science
point of view by Donald S. Strong; and from the view of
needs and potentialities by E. William Noland. Rembert W.
Patrick gave a historical resume of southern history from ante-
bellum times down to the present, quite factual, but with emo-
tional overtones in discussing the evils of slavery, and giving a
dreary picture of southern statesmanship before, during, and after
the Civil War, but in the best tradition of most modern writings
about the South.
One of the most interesting parts of the program was the

principal discussion of the South’s changing literature made by
Louis D. Rubin, with comments by Hudson Strode and others.
The book as a whole brings together an excellent summary of
the best thoughts of the experts in the fields discussed.
E. M ERTON C OULTER
University of Georgia
Human Capital in Southern Development. By Marshall R. Col-

berg. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press,
1965. xv, 136 pp. Preface, appendix, index. $5.00.)
Dr. Colberg has carried out a careful piece of statistical ex-

ploration to provide a useful report on the nature of and changes
in human capital in the South. The work is in the tradition of
recent research on the economics of education and human capital
by other economists such as Friedman, Kuznets, Schultz, Becker,
Miller, and Weisbrod. The focus in this volume is specifically
upon human resources in the South.
One distinctive characteristic of this book is the distinction
that the author makes between labor and human capital. As a
practical means of carrying this distinction into his empirical
work, Colberg considers only post-elementary schooling to build
human capital. This is not defended on philosophic grounds but
is justified as a surrogate for more sophisticated but unattainable
measures.
The author attempts to test in a loose way the following set of
hypotheses: (1) human capital is much more mobile than labor
and much more likely to be well allocated with reference to its
combination with other resources; (2) labor, being in surplus
in the South, should be moving from the South and material capi-
tal should be moving to the South to take advantage of the labor
surpluses; (3) human capital in white persons is more comple-
mentary to material capital than that embodied in the Negro,
leading to increases in the stocks of white human capital and de-
creases in the stocks of non-white.
He examines the relationship between income and education
by age, race, and sex for both the South and non-South, as well
B OOK R EVIEWS 193
as estimates of human capital and such related topics as profes-

sional workers in southern manufacturing, college graduates, and
the teaching profession. The data are, in general, consistent with
his hypotheses. The data yield a number of interesting observa-
tions such as the fact that segregated schooling in the South has
been a favorable factor in the employment of educated Negro
women. The author suggests that this will pose special problems
during the coming period of adjustment.
In the view of the reviewer the effect of an interesting and
informative little book is somewhat tainted when the author
gratuitously brings into his summary the observation that the
problem of labor unemployment in the South would be made
easier without federally sponsored minimum wage legislation,
farm price supports, fair trading, and all such interferences with
the price system. These conclusions do not grow in any way out
of the research materials in his study and are expressed with con-
viction without reference to a very large body of literature on the
subject, much of which takes an opposing view. Whatever the
relative merits of the author’s position, it is a topic that belongs
to some other volume from the one that he offers.
EDGAR S. D UNN , J R.
Washington, D. C.
HISTORICAL NEWS
Florida Historical Markers Program
To facilitate the proper marking of important historical sites

and places in Florida, N. E. Bill Miller, director of the Florida
Board of Parks and Historical Memorials, has appointed a three-
man committee to receive and transmit recommendations for
markers submitted by local communities and local and county
historical societies and commissions. The committee includes
William M. Goza of Clearwater, president of the Florida Historical
Society; Judge James R. Knott of West Palm Beach, immediate
past president of the Florida Historical Society; and Dr. Samuel
Proctor of Gainesville, editor of the Florida Historical Quarterly.
The state will pay one-half the cost of markers approved by the
director of the park board and will supervise their installation.
Any group interested in having markers placed in its locality,
should communicate directly with the office of the Florida Board
of Parks and Historical Memorials, 101 West Games Street, Tal-
lahassee, or with any member of the Historical Markers Commit-
tee.
San Marcos de Apalache Museum
The Florida Board of Parks and Historic Memorials dedicated

the new museum at San Marcos de Apalache, the old Spanish fort
site at St. Marks, on Wednesday, July 27, 1966. Director N. E.
Bill Miller of the park board was in charge of the afternoon recep-
tion and program.
Historical Symposium
The Library of the Mission of Nombre de Dios of St. Au-

gustine and the St. Augustine Foundation are sponsoring an his-
torical and religious symposium on October 29, 1966, in the
Gold Ballroom of the Ponce de Leon Hotel in St. Augustine.
The theme of the symposium will be “Explorations and Settle-
ments in the Spanish Borderlands: Their Religious Motivations.”
[ 194 ]
H ISTORICAL N EWS 195
Archbishop Joseph P. Hurley is presiding and the Rev. Dr.

Robert Trisco, editor of The Catholic Review, is chairman of the
first session. Dr. Lewis Hanke, professor of history at Columbia
University will speak on “Religious Principles Behind the Explo-
ration and Settlement of Spanish America.” Dr. John K. Mahon,
head of the Department of History at the University of Florida,
will chair the second session. Father Michael V. Gannon, director
of the Mission of Nombre de Dios, will speak on “The Conquista-
dors of Florida;” “The Florida Missions” is the subject of a talk
to be given by Father Matthew J. Connolly, pastor of St. Joseph’s
Church, Winter Haven. Dr. John A. Harrison, Dean of the
Graduate School, University of Miami, will serve as chairman of
the third and final session. The Rev. Dr. John Francis Bannon,
S.J., St. Louis University, will speak on “The Spaniards in the
Southwest: With An Appreciation of Herbert E. Bolton.” The
Rev. Dr. Maynard Geiger, archivist of the Old Mission, Santa
Barbara, California, will discuss “The Spaniards in California.”
The sessions are open to the public and the proceedings of the
symposium will be published.
The Great Cross “The Beacon of Faith,” that has been erected
on the grounds of the Mission of Nombre de Dios in St. Augustine
to commemorate the establishment on September 8, 1565, of
Christianity in North America, will be formally dedicated on Sun-
day afternoon, October 30, 1966, at 2 p.m.
Henry S. Sanford Grant
The Henry Shelton Sanford Memorial Library and Museum

Association, 520 East First St., Sanford, Florida, is offering an
annual research grant of $100 to a graduate student of any ac-
credited Florida college or university who uses the life of General
H. S. Sanford or the early history of Sanford, Florida as the sub-
ject of his thesis. The Association has catalogued and placed on
microfilm the Sanford Papers covering the period from 1823 to
1891. The original papers are available at the Florida State Bank
and the Sanford Memorial Library in Sanford. Communications
concerning the grant or the use of the papers or the microfilm
should be directed to the office of the Association.
St. David’s Mission
When the Episcopal mission St. David’s is built in the near

future, it will be located adjacent to Fort Caroline and St. Johns
Bluff on the St. Johns River. It was here in 1563 that the first
Protestant worship service in what is now the United States was
held. In July 1565, in ships anchored off Fort Caroline, the
Anglican Book of Common Prayer was used for the first time
in North America. In clearing for the mission site, traces of old
roads and a footpath down to the spring at the head of Shipyard
Creek were uncovered. This spring is known to have been used
by the Indians and the early settlers in the area.
Local and Area Societies and Commissions

Alachua County Historical Commission: The History of Gaines-
ville, the new book by Jess Davis, chairman of the Alachua Coun-
ty Historical Commission, has been published and is available for
sale. The Commission is continuing its efforts to collect docu-
ments, pictures, and letters relating to the history of the area.
These, together with taped interviews, are being deposited at the
Gainesville Public Library.
Pinellas County Historical Commission: The Half-Century Club

for persons who have lived in Pinellas County for fifty years or
more was set up recently under the auspices of the Historical
Commission. At the June meeting a membership card for the
club was approved. At the July 20, 1966 meeting, a resolution
memorializing George Ward McMullen was adopted. Mrs. R. R.
Meador reported on the Commission’s continuing efforts to secure
the James McMullen log cabin on the Coachman property so that
it can be properly preserved. It was also noted that the 1830
census book being prepared by Harvey Wells is nearing comple-
tion.
Safety Harbor Area Historical Society: In cooperation with The

Searchers, Inc., members of the recently organized Safety Harbor
Area Historical Society helped to excavate the Bayview Indian
burial mound at Clearwater. Artifacts were displayed at the Safety
Harbor Festival in the spring and afterwards at the Pinellas Coun-
H ISTORICAL N EWS 197
ty Historical Museum. There was also a display of these artifacts,

arranged by George Donatello of The Searchers, at the annual
meeting of the Florida Historical Society in Clearwater in May
1966. At a joint meeting of the Safety Harbor Area Historical
Society and the United Daughters of the Confederacy, Mrs. R. R.
Meador, a member of the Pinellas County Historical Commission,
gave the history of Bayview and the Bayview Mound.
St. Augustine Historical Society: The Society held its regular

quarterly membership meeting in the Art Association Building
on Marine Street on the evening of July 12. After a short busi-
ness session, Frederick E. Williams who owns the Pedro Fornells
House in St. Augustine spoke on the history of gunmaking in
Spain from 1530 until the middle of the eighteenth century.
Displaying guns from his collection, Mr. Williams described the
kind of firearms employed by the Spaniards in early Florida
history.
To fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Albert
Manucy, Dr. Luis Arana, chairman of the committee on research,
was elected to the board of directors. It was announced that the
annual meeting of the St. Augustine Historical Society would be
held October 11, 1966.
The Society is continuing its active publications program. It
aided in the publication of Frederick decoste’s True Tales of Old
St. Augustine, and has contracted for the publication of E. P.
Panagopoulos’ The Story of New Smyrna.
St. Petersburg Historical Society: To mark the forty-sixth anni-

versary of the founding of the St. Petersburg Historical Society,
the Historical Museum, 335 Second Avenue N.E., held an open
house on July 20, 1966. An exhibit of maps, water colors, post
cards, and pictures showing the history of St. Petersburg and
Pinellas County was displayed in the Mary E. Apple Room of the
museum. At the evening program, Walter P. Fuller, president of
the St. Petersburg Historical Society and former member of the
board of directors of the Florida Historical Society, described the
eighteenth-century map of the Tampa Bay area that he recently
acquired. Frank J. Laumer of Dade City, member of the board
of directors of the Florida Historical Society, was the other speak-
er, and he used the history of Fort Dade as the subject for his talk.
According to the July 1966 issue of “The Sea Breeze,” the

St. Petersburg Historical Society’s publication, the Haas Museum,
under the supervision of Mr. and Mrs. Joseph F. Miller, and the
Grace S. Turner House have received 2,000 teachers and students
as visitors this past year. Short articles by Dr. Lyman O. Warren,
second vice president of the Society, Milton D. Jones, member
of the board of directors of the Florida Historical Society, Walter
P. Fuller, and William M. Goza, president of the Florida His-
torical Society, are published in this number of the “Sea Breeze.”
Mr. Goza’s article deals with the history of the Florida Historical
Society since its organization in 1856.
Officers of the St. Petersburg Historical Society are Walter P.
Fuller, president; Paul Mowrer, first vice president; Lyman O.
Warren, second vice president; Mrs. Charles Locklin, recording
secretary; Mrs. Robert Massey, corresponding secretary; Ruth
Leatherman, treasurer; and Page S. Jackson, historical research
secretary. Directors are Harold Anderson, T. David Anderson,
A. Franklin Green, Arthur D. Miller, Jr., Lorin B. Smith, Mrs.
J. B. Starkey, Harold Steele, and Larry Welke. Mrs. Oma M.
Cross, Mrs. Alma S. Jones, and Joseph F. Miller are curators..
Past copies of the Florida Historical Quarterly are

available for sale. For information and prices write
Miss Margaret Chapman, Executive Secretary, Univer-
sity of South Florida Library, Tampa, Florida, 33620.
THE ANNUAL MEETING, MAY 5-7, 1966
MINUTES OF THE DIRECTORS MEETING

President James R. Knott presided over the meeting of the
officers and directors of the Florida Historical Society, Tuesday
evening, May 5, 1966, at the Lagoon Motel in Clearwater. Board
members present were William M. Goza, Margaret Chapman, Ann
Davis, Mrs. Ralph F. Davis, Samuel Proctor, Mary T. Rule, Frank
J. Laumer, Allen C. Crowley, William W. Rogers, James C. Craig,
Jay I. Kislak, Herbert J. Doherty, Jr., Morris E. White, Walter P.
Fuller, and Frank B. Sessa. Gilbert L. Lycan was present as a guest.
Dr. Proctor informed the board that the Arthur W. Thompson
Fund is a gift to the Society from Mr. and Mrs. Jacob Siegel of
New York City and their daughter, Mrs. Arthur W. Thompson of
Gainesville. The fund will be invested and the interest will be
used to make an annual award to the author of the best article
on Florida history published each year in the Florida Historical
Quarterly. The winner will be selected by a panel of judges ap-
pointed by the editor of the Quarterly, and the annual presentation
will be made at the banquet. Dr. Thompson, a distinguished mem-
ber of the history faculty of the University of Florida was the
author of a number of historical articles, monographs, and books
on Florida and the South. His Ph.D. dissertation was a study of
Senator David Levy Yulee. Mr. Goza called for adoption of the
resolution establishing the Arthur W. Thompson Memorial Prize.
His motion carried by unanimous vote.
Dr. Proctor informed the board that Father Michael V.
Gannon, director of the Mission of Nombre de Dios in St. Augus-
tine and a former student of Dr. Thompson, was the first recipient
of the Arthur W. Thompson Prize in Florida History. His article,
“Altar and Hearth, the Coming of Christianity, 1521-1565,” was
published in the special Quadricentennial number (1965) of the
Florida Historical Quarterly. Dr. Proctor was asked to make the
presentation of the award to Father Gannon at the annual banquet.
This year’s judges were Miss Chapman, Dr. Rembert W. Patrick,
and Dr. Charlton W. Tebeau.
Miss Chapman distributed copies of the treasurer’s report. She
[ 199 ]
explained that the Society has adopted a policy of charging a

$50.00 royalty for permission to make reprints of articles from the
Quarterly by any person or agency other than the author. The
latter can order reprints at cost of printing. The royalty fee will be
divided equally between the author and the Julien Yonge Publica-
tion Fund. Dr. Proctor was designated co-signator of the Yonge
Fund with Miss Chapman, replacing Dr. Patrick.
Dr. Lycan informed the board. that the lots (a gift from John
B. Stetson) owned by the Society at De Leon Springs have a
natural scenic beauty and could have a resale value. Dr. Lycan
was asked to investigate the status of the property in the event
the Society wants to sell the lots.
Judge Knott appointed Mr. Kislak and Mr. Usina as chairmen
of the Society’s finance committee. Other members will be ap-
pointed later. He also appointed Dr. Doherty as chairman of the
resolutions committee.
Judge Knott reported the Florida State Board of Parks and
Historic Memorials requests the Society’s cooperation in screening
historic markers. Director N. E. Bill Miller, director of the park
board, has appointed Mr. Goza, Judge Knott, and Dr. Proctor as
a state committee to work with him in approving markers. Possible
marker sites suggested are Jacksonville, Fort Lauderdale, Naples,
Vero Beach, Dade City, Tallahassee, and Tampa.
Mr. Craig, chairman of the publicity committee, reported
that the news releases had been mailed to papers throughout the
State describing the articles in the July number of the Quarterly
and the date, place, and program of the annual meeting. Mr.
Craig was commended for his excellent copy and the good results
that he is getting. It was suggested that the Newsletter be sent
to a number of editors to acquaint them with the Society’s work
and program. Dr. Rogers was commended for his work as the new
editor of the Newsletter.
President Knott, Mr. Fuller, and Mr. Goza reported that the
Florida legislature had authorized establishment of an antiquities
commission, and that it had formulated rules for recovery and
salvage, with particular emphasis on sunken treasure and historical
artifacts recovered on submerged lands. Historians are represented
on the commission, and it is believed that certain areas will be
reserved for historical purposes and future state excavation.
Dr. Rogers announced the following winners of the essay
T HE A NNUAL M E E T I N G 201
contest: first place, Ann Touchton of Pasco High School, Dade

City, for her paper “Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings”; second place,
Lorrine Thomas of T. R. Robinson High School in Tampa, for
the study of “Hamilton Disston’s Effect on Florida’s Economic
History and Development”; and, third place, Christina Fult for
“The Early Development of St. Lucia County, Fort Pierce.”
Several recommendations were made by board members to create
additional interest throughout the school system in the essay
contest. An announcement will henceforth appear in the Quarterly
when Miss Chapman sends out contest announcements, and district
vice-presidents will contact local school principals and heads of
history departments in an effort to promote the contest. Mr. Goza
plans to discuss the contest with State Superintendent of Public
Instruction Floyd T. Christian.
A motion was passed setting the 1967 annual meeting at Key
West on May 5-6. Mr. Goza recommended that the board also
consider with favor but take no immediate action on the invitation
of the New Smyrna Historical Society to hold the 1968 meeting
in that area.
Mr. Fuller announced the availability of early Florida maps
that he has recently secured from London. Judge Knott asked Dr.
Lycan to draw up a resolution requesting the State to provide
proper archival facilities and to secure the services of an archivist.
The board of directors then adjourned.
MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL MEETING
The membership of the Florida Historical Society met for its

annual business session in the Convention Room of the Lagoon
Motel, Clearwater, at 9:30 A.M., May 7, 1966. President James
R. Knott presided.
After introducing his officers and directors, Judge Knott call-
ed upon Mr. William Goza to present an honored guest. Mr.
Goza recognized Father Jerome: “We have with us today a
man of such unusual stature and ability, a man who has
contributed so much to Florida History and so much to my
personal enjoyment of it. The person of whom I speak is
a scholar; he is a man who is gentle without weakness;
be is scholarly without ostentation. I speak, of course, of
the Dean of Florida History, Father Jerome of St. Leo’s Abbey.”
Judge Knott commended Dr. William W. Rogers, editor of

the Society’s Newsletter, and Mr. James C. Craig, publicity chair-
man, for their excellent contributions for the past year.
Dr. Herbert J. Doherty, Jr., chairman of the resolutions com-
mittee, presented the following resolutions on behalf of his com-
mittee, Dr. Gilbert L. Lycan and Dr. Frank B. Sessa:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Arthur W. Thompson, who died on July 12,

1965, was a valued member of the Florida Historical Society, and
made many contributions to the fields of education and historical
writing, and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Jacob Siegel of New
York City, and Mrs. Arthur W. Thompson of Gainesville, Flor-
ida, desiring to perpetuate the memory of the said Arthur W.
Thompson, have made a contribution to the Florida Historical
Society of the sum of $2,600.00 to be held and disbursed by it as
hereinafter set forth, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of
the gift aforesaid, the Florida Historical Society does hereby
establish
T HE A RTHUR W. T HOMPSON M EMORIAL P RIZE
for the following uses and purposes, and under the following con-
ditions:
1) $2,500.00 of said sum shall be invested or deposited in a
separate interest or dividend bearing account in a commercial
bank or savings and loan association, which shall provide in-
surance against loss in at least such amount by an instrumen-
tality of the Federal Government, subject to check or draft of
the Editor of the Florida Historical Quarterly and the Execu-
tive Secretary of the Society; or, shall be invested in securities
issued by the United States Government.
2) Three individuals shall be appointed annually by the Editor
of the Florida Historical Quarterly, and they shall constitute
the Arthur W. Thompson Memorial Prize judges; such judges
shall select, before the date of the annual meeting of the
Society, the most scholarly article on Florida history which
shall have been published in the Florida Historical Quarterly
during the year preceding the annual meeting at which such

award is made.
3) The Arthur W. Thompson Memorial Prize judges shall then
designate the payment to the individual whose article was
selected of any portion of the income accrued and payable
upon the prize fund, not to exceed $100.00. In the discre-
tion of the Judges, more than one award may be made, pro-
vided the total value of the prizes awarded shall not exceed
the income accrued and payable on the prize fund. If in the
opinion of the prize committee, the income of the fund or the
quality of the articles appearing in the Quarterly shall not
justify the payment of an award, the award may be withheld
for any such year. In the event a designation of award is
made, announcement of the name of the winner of the award
shall be made during the annual meeting of the Society held
nearest to the date of the publication of the last number of a
complete volume of the Quarterly within which volume the
winning article shall have been selected, and payment of the
prize shall be made at such convention.
4) In no event shall the principal of the fund be disbursed, and
in the event the fund cannot, at any future time, be admin-
istered in accordance with the terms herein outlined by the
Florida Historical Society or its successors, Irene S. Thompson
(Mrs. Arthur W.) or a majority of her heirs at law if she be
deceased, shall have the absolute right and power to designate
a non-profit educational or charitable institution, other than the
Florida Historical Society, as recipient of said fund, and the
said Florida Historical Society or its successors are hereby ir-
revocably bound to comply with such request and designation.
5) The sum of $100.00 (being the difference between the
$2,600.00 gift and the $2,500.00 fund hereby established)
shall be paid to the writer of the most scholarly article ap-
pearing in the Florida Historical Quarterly during the year
preceding May 1, 1966, as selected by three judges designated
by the present Editor of the Florida Historical Quarterly, and
the name of the recipient of the first annual Arthur W.
Thompson Memorial Prize shall be announced during the
annual convention of the Florida Historical Society in Clear-
water, Florida, May 5-7, 1966.
6) The terms of this resolution may be amended by a unanimous

vote of the directors at a duly constituted meeting of the Board
of Directors of the Florida Historical Society, with the excep-
tion that the name and general purpose of the award shall not
be altered; authorization shall not be given for the deposit; or
investment of the funds in any manner not herein authorized,
or in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida pertain-
ing to the investment of trust funds; and de provisions of
paragraph “4” hereof may not in any circumstance be amend-
ed, modified, or rescinded.
RESOLUTION
On October 1, 1965, Dr. Dorothy Dodd retired as State

Librarian of Florida. Trained in both journalism and history with
degrees from Columbia University and the University of Chicago,
she is known and admired by a generation of historians.
WHEREAS, Dr. Dorothy Dodd served the State of Florida

twenty-five years in its State Library, being the State Librarian
since 1952; and WHEREAS, Dr. Dodd was active in this Society
as a member, officer, and one of the Board of Editors of the Flor-
ida Historical Quarterly, and, by action of the Board of Directors,
as a Life Member since 1963; and WHEREAS, in her writings
Dr. Dodd has made signal contributions to the history of the state,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Florida Historical
Society publicly express its appreciation to Dr. Dorothy Dodd for
her historical contributions and for her faithful efforts to preserve
the sources of Florida history despite budgetary handicaps and an
almost complete lack of facilities afforded by the state government
for its library.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the members of this

Society through their secretary send all good wishes to Dr. Dodd
for the enjoyment of her retirement and a reminder of the per-
petual welcome she will receive at all functions of the Society.
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Dr. Rembert W. Patrick has devoted more than

a quarter of a century to the study and writing of Florida history,
during which time he was chairman of the University of Florida

history department, editor of the Florida Historical Quarterly,
president of the Southern Historical Association, and occupant of
many offices in this society; and
WHEREAS, Rembert W. Patrick was a quiet but steady bul-

wark of this Society in difficult times lending his talents without
praise or publicity; and WHEREAS, Rembert W. Patrick founded
a publications fund to honor the memory of the late Julien
Chandler Yonge and worked unceasingly in its promotion; and
WHEREAS, Professor Patrick after twenty-five years of devoted
service to the University of Florida has accepted an invitation to
move to the University of Georgia,
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Florida Historical Society in con-

vention at Clearwater, Florida, on May 7, 1966, that the heart-
felt gratitude of the members of the Society be expressed to Dr.
Patrick and his good wife for their impressive contributions to the
history of our state; and
BE IT RESOLVED, that at all future functions of this Society

Dr. and Mrs. Patrick shall be received with all the respect, honor,
and hospitality which we may extend to distinguished citizens.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this resolution

be forwarded to Dr. and Mrs. Patrick by the secretary.
RESOLVED, that the Florida Historical Society strongly rec-

ommends that there be erected a Florida State Archives Building
in which to store and preserve the papers, records, and documents
of value to Florida government and history and to provide a
proper place for the study and examination of such documents.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there be appointed a State
Archivist with an adequate staff, budget, and equipment to sys-
tematically collect, preserve, classify, and make readily available
to public offices and other researchers said documents and records,
with authority and resources to publish guides, bibliographies,
and documents of significance. AND BE IT FURTHER RE-
SOLVED that copies of this Resolution be forwarded by the secre-
tary to the governor, the secretary of state, the chairman of the
Interim Committee on Governmental Reorganization, the chair-

man of the Florida Library and Historical Commission, and the
Florida Antiquities Commission, requesting each of these persons
or agencies to lend support to the implementation of this reso-
lution.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Florida Historical Society con-

gratulates the National Park Service of the Department of the
Interior of the United States upon its fiftieth anniversary, and
confirms the special interest of the Society in the Parks, Monu-
ments, and memorials of Florida which are part of the National
Park System. AND WHEREAS the year of 1972 is another an-
niversary of special historical significance for two units in the Na-
tional Park System, being the centennial of the birth of the
National Park idea at Yellowstone, and the tricentennial of Cas-
tillo de San Marcos, the noted Spanish fort at St. Augustine;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Florida Historical

Society encourages the National Park Service to undertake suitable
commemoration of these anniversaries in 1972, and offers cooper-
ation in furthering such observances in the State of Florida.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the officers and members of the

Florida Historical Society express their gratitude to Miss Dena
Snodgrass for the outstanding service which she has rendered to
the Society as co-chairman of the Newsletter. BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED, that the officers and members of the Florida
Historical Society express their gratitude to Mrs. W. S. Manning
for the outstanding service which she has rendered to the Society
as co-chairman of the Newsletter.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Florida Historical Society ex-

tends its grateful thanks to the Pinellas County Historical Com-
mission, the Clearwater local arrangements committee, Mr. and
Mrs. William M. Goza, Mr. and Mrs. Milton Jones, Mrs. Thomas
of the Clearwater Chamber of Commerce, and to those who have
made this May 1966 annual meeting a memorable one.
I N M EMORIAM
WHEREAS, Mr. Lucius Ruder was a faithful officer and

member of the Florida Historical Society, serving last as a vice-
president, and quietly but efficiently lending aid and support to
historical projects of many kinds; and WHEREAS, Lucius Ruder
was known and loved by countless members of this Society for his
warm personal qualities,
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the members of this

Society in Convention assembled at Clearwater, Florida, on May
7, 1966, do express their grief and sense of loss at his death and
extend their sincerest sympathies to the family of this gallant
gentleman. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this
Resolution be forwarded by the secretary to the Ruder family.
RESOLVED that the Florida Historical Society express its

regrets upon the death of the following esteemed members:
Mrs. Winchester Bennett, Delray Beach, Florida
Mr. C. Edgar Blocker, Ocala, Florida
Mr. Sam Brammar, St. Cloud, Florida
Judge F. C. Dame, Fort Pierce, Florida
Mr. E. N. Davis, Frostproof, Florida
Mr. E. Story Hallock, Vero Beach, Florida
Mrs. B. B. Lane, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Mrs. F. J. Meigs, Bronxsville, New York
Mrs. A. M. Porter, Pompano Beach, Florida
Mr. John W. Rabb, Ocala, Florida
Mr. R. V. Rickord, Orlando, Florida
Colonel William M. Robinson, Jr., Quincy, Florida
Mr. Lucius S. Ruder, Clearwater, Florida
Judge Bayard B. Shields, Jacksonville, Florida
Dr. Arthur W. Thompson, Gainesville, Florida
Mr. William T. Weeks, Lynn Haven, Florida
The resolutions were duly approved.
Judge Knott announced that beginning this year the annual
essay contest awards would be presented in the local schools of
the winners in order to recognize them in their own communities.
In the absence of Mr. Adam G. Adams, chairman of the
nominating committee, Dr. Frank B. Sessa submitted the com-

mittee’s report. Dr. Sessa passed on to the membership an ob-
servation of Mr. Adams to be acted upon by the membership.
Mr. Adams suggested that because of a difficulty created by con-
gressional reapportionment in Florida, that the directors whose
terms have not expired be retained and that they be assigned to
the districts in which they now reside. The nominating commit-
tee’s report is as follows:
Officers - 1966-1967
President ................................................. William M. Goza, Clearwater
First vice-president ................... Dr. Herbert J. Doherty, Jr., Gainesville
Second vice-president ......................... James C. Craig, Jacksonville
Executive secretary and treasurer .............. Margaret Chapman, Tampa
Recording secretary ................................. Mrs. Ralph F. Davis, Sarasota
Board of Directors
District 1 ............................................................ Earle Bowden, Pensacola
District 3 ................................. Judge Frank H. Elmore, Jacksonville
District 6 .................................... Judge James D. Bruton, Jr., Tampa
District 7 ................................................... Walter S. Hardin, Bradenton
District 8 ...................................................... Milton D. Jones, Clearwater
District 9 .................. Mrs. Henry J. Burkhardt, West Palm Beach
District 10 ............................................................. Leonard A. Usina, Miami
District 11 .............................. Dr. Charlton W. Tebeau, Coral Gables
District 12 ............................................................ Julian I. Weinkle, Miami
At Large ..................................................... Dr. John E. Johns, DeLand
Nominations Committee, 1966-1967

Adam G. Adams, chairman, Coral Gables
Dr. Charles W. Thrift, Lakeland
Judge Frank H. Elmore, Jacksonville
Dr. Gilbert L. Lycan, DeLand
Dr. Frank B. Sessa, Miami
It was moved that nominations be closed, and the motion was
seconded and it carried. The president declared the slate pre-
sented by the nominating committee to be the elected officers and
directors for 1966-67. Judge Knott then turned the rostrum

over to Mr. Goza.
Mr. Albert C. Manucy, former president of the Society, called
for a standing vote of appreciation for Judge Knott. After a
standing ovation, Mr. Goza remarked, “This is one motion that
needs no second, by acceptance we certainly all agree. I know
I speak for all the officers and directors when I say that the last
two years have been very pleasant for us. We have seen the guid-
ing genius of Judge Knott manifest itself in many ways and cer-
tainly we are appreciative of the work he has done. I would like
to add my own appreciation for all the splendid cooperation and
assistance we have received from everyone.”
Mr. Goza announced that the convention site committee had
recommended that the next annual meeting be held in Key West,
Florida, on May 4, 5, 6, 1967. The board of directors had ac-
cepted this recommendation. He also informed the membership
that New Smyrna had extended an invitation to hold the 1968
annual meeting in the Daytona Beach-New Smyrna area as part
of the celebration of the bi-centennial of the founding of the
Andrew Turnbull Colony.
Mr. Goza announced that the membership of the Society is
more than 1,300, the largest in its history. He noted there had
been a number of suggestions for Society projects for the coming
year: establishment of a speakers bureau; increased solicitations
for membership in schools, junior colleges, and universities; a
fund for the acquisition of new books and the repair of old books
for the Society’s library; election of the president for a two-year
term of office and the designation of a president-elect; establish
a means whereby local societies can affiliate closer with the Florida
Historical Society; wider and more complete publicity; acknowl-
edgements in the Florida Historical Quarterly of gifts made to the
Society; a more democratically-appointed nominating committee;
inventory the assets of the Society, with a continuing inventory
program; up-date the index to the Florida Historical Quarterly;
condense local Society reports at the annual meeting; and opera-
tion of workshops for local historical societies.
Dr. Lycan called for the continuance of local society reports
at the annual business meeting.
Judge Knott thanked all the members and the officers and
directors for the work that they had done in making this annual
meeting and the past year’s activities so successful. He expressed

his gratitude to our hosts in Clearwater: the Pinellas County His-
torical Commission, the St. Petersburg Historical Society, the
Hillsborough County Historical Commission, Searchers, Inc., and
to William M. Goza and Milton D. Jones and the members, of
their committees on local arrangements. He extended an invitation
to all to attend the annual meeting in Key West next year.
The meeting was then adjourned.
In July 1966, President Goza announced the election of the
Board of Directors as regional vice-presidents:
Dr. William W. Rogers, Tallahassee-Northwest Florida
Judge Frank H. Elmore, Jacksonville-Northeast Florida
Mr. Frank J. Laumer, Dade City-Central Florida
Mr. Milton D. Jones, Clearwater-Southwest Florida
Dr. Charlton W. Tebeau, Coral Gables-Southeast Florida
Mr. Goza has appointed the regional vice-presidents as mem-
bership chairmen for their respective districts, and has asked them
to watch the news media for announcements of historic signifi-
cance, such as dedications of historic markers, etc., and to identify
themselves as representatives of the Florida Historical Society,
offering the cooperation of the Society.
FLORIDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY

TREASURER’S REPORT
APRIL 1, 1965 - MARCH 31, 1966
Balance, April 1, 1965 ............................................................................... $15,826.15
Location of Balance:
Florida National Bank at Gainesville ................... 1,469.94
First National Bank of Tampa .................................. 144.71
First Federal Savings and Loan Assn. .............. 7,200.59
University of South Florida Account #95003 96.53
Petty C a s h ........................................................ 4.52
Julien C. Yonge Fund:
Guaranty Federal Savings and Loan Assn. 6,477.36
United Gas Corp. 20 Shares (Par Value) 200.00
Middle South Utilities 3 Shares ........................ 126.75
Florida Growth Fund 15 Shares ................. 105.75
$15,826.15
Receipts:
Memberships:
Annual ............................................ 3,860.50
Fellow ............................................. 570.00
Contributing ........................ 175.00
Sponsor .................................. 50.00
Student . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38.00
Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.00
Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,416.37 6,209.87
Other Receipts:
Quarterlies Sales .................................. 627.15
Reprints ......................................... 357.22
Royalties ......................................... 200.00
First Fed. Savings Dividends 310.10
Real Property
St. Johns County ...................... 280.00
Volusia County ......................... 20.00
Individual Contributions ............. 700.00
United Gas Dividends ............... 42.50
Middle South Dividends .......... 3.81
Florida Growth Dividends 6.68
Royalties:
Aristrocrat in Uniform ........ 125.21
“Osceola” Issue of
Quarterly ..................... 67.73
“Quadricentennial” Issue
o f Quarterly ............ 100.00
Guaranty Federal Interest ....... 286.41
Petty Cash ................................ 6.09
Miscellaneous:
Refund from Post Office ......... 10.00 3,142.90 9,352.77
$25,178.92
Total Receipts .............................................................................................. $25,178.92
Disbursements:
Quarterlies:
Printing ........................................... 5,433.62
Copyrights ....................................... 12.00
Editing Expense .................................. 300.00
Telephone & Box Rent .................. 28.20
Stationery and Envelopes:
Convention Press ........................ 107.47
Pepper Printing ..................... 25.32 5,906.61
Petty C a s h ............................ 167.94

U. S. F. Account #95003 ............. 279.16
Bank Charges
(Non Par checks only) .............. 1.00
Newsletter .......................................... 164.18
Essay Contest Prizes ................... 62.50
Resolutions filed in Tallahassee 13.00
Income Tax Return
(C. P. Saclarides) ..................... 25.00
Property Tax:
St. Johns County .................. 3.33
Volusia County ....................... 1.85
Fire Insurance on Collection ........ 15.00
Miscellaneous:
Judge Knott (Xeroxing) . . . . 6.50
Deposit a t Post Office .......... 50.00
Flowers for Funerals ................... 31.42
Directory of Historical
Societies ........................... 2.00
Reimbursements:
F. A. O w e n .................... 1.12
Newton Perry ....................... 2.50
R. D. Carter ........................ 1.50
Rubber Stamp .......................... 1.24
Royalties for Authors:
Luis R. Arana ...................... 25.00
Kenneth H. Beeson .............. 25.00
Fr. Michael V. Gannon ......... 25.00
Mrs. Helen H. Tanner ....... 25.00
Royalties for Julien C. Yonge
F u n d ....................................... 100.00 1,029.24 6,935.85
$18,243.07
Locations of Balances:
Florida National Bank
at Gainesville ............................ 2,038.70
First National Bank of Tampa ........ 29.59
First Federal Savings
and Loan Assn. ....................... 7,510.69
St. Johns County Property ........... 280.00
Volusia County Property ................. 20.00
U. S. F. Account #95003 .............. 117.99 9,996.97
Guaranty Federal Savings
Assn. ............................ 7,809.70
United Gas Corp.
(20 Shares Par) ...................... 200.00
Middle South Utilities
(3 Shares) ............................... 126.00
Florida Growth Fund
(15 Shares) ............................. 110.40 8,246.10
$18,243.07
REPORT ON JULIEN C. YONGE MEMORIAL FUND

Balance Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,477.36
C o n t r i b u t i o n s r e c e i v e d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,045.00
Dividends on stock ............................................. ......................... 54.01
Bank Interest Guaranty Federal .............................................. .............. 368.35
Royalties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292.94
Balance o n H a n d ..................................................................................... $8,237.66
Contributions received since Judge James Knott’s letter ........................... $ 800.00
FLORIDA HISTORICAL SOCIETY

NEW MEMBERS
April 3, 1965 - March 31, 1966
George J. Albright, Orlando, Florida

James M. Allen, Miami, Florida
Roy H. Amidon, Lakeland, Florida
Richard J. Amundson, Clemson, South Carolina
Evelyn Anderson, Sanford, Florida
Charles W. Arnade, San Antonio, Florida
Mr. and Mrs. Rudolph E. Atmus, East Longmeadow, Massachusetts
Hubert A. Barge, Miami, Florida
James A. Baxter, Clearwater, Florida
Robert S. Beardsley, Madeira Beach, Florida
Kenned H. Beeson, St. Augustine, Florida
Mr. and Mrs. Carl A. Benson, Orlando, Florida
Clinton S. Berrien, Gainesville, Florida
Ralph W. Bickham, Gainesville, Florida
Mrs. William P. Bivins, Maitland, Florida
Mr. and Mrs. Robert Botkin, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Maury A. Bromsen, Boston, Massachusetts
Elizabeth S. Brown, Bartow, Florida
Mrs. Henry I. Burkhardt, West Palm Beach, Florida
Governor Haydon Burns, Tallahassee, Florida
J. Fred Campbell, Clearwater, Florida
E. E. Carter, Vero Beach, Florida
Alfred M. Carvajal, Coral Gables, Florida
Betty Chadwick, Sarasota, Florida
Helen Chase, Ozona, Florida
Floyd T. Christian, Tallahassee, Florida
Terry L. Christie, Tallahassee, Florida
Mrs. C. A. Clayton, New Port Richey, Florida
Mrs. L. W. Clements, Bartow, Florida
I. B. Cole, Wharton, New Jersey
Edythe E. Coler, Safety Harbor, Florida
Doyle Conner, Tallahassee, Florida
Mrs. LeLand R. Cooper, Ocala, Florida
Walter F. Cordes, Miami, Florida
Mrs. Ora Burney Cox, Fort Pierce, Florida
Rita G. Crabtree, Tallahassee, Florida
Terry Crawford, Ocala, Florida
Allen Crowley, Sarasota, Florida
E. D. Currence, Lake Worth, Florida
Marilyn B. Deariso, Tallahassee, Florida
Ann Denson, Ocala, Florida
Fred Donaldson, Jr., Waldo, Florida
Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth W. Dow, St. Augustine, Florida
Herbert J. Drew, Live Oak, Florida
L. D. DuBois, Clearwater, Florida
Dr. and Mrs. Kenned Dunham, Frostproof, Florida
Lucien Y. Dyrenforth, Jacksonville, Florida
W. R. Edson, Safety Harbor, Florida
Helen C. Ellerbe, Gainesville, Florida
Earl Faircloth, Tallahassee, Florida
Mrs. R. W. Ferguson, Tampa, Florida
Charles Fetherston, St. Petersburg, Florida
Mary Theodora Fleming, Jacksonville, Florida

Dorothy J. Flood, Fort Meade, Florida
Mrs. A. H. Gaede, DeLand, Florida
Michael V. Gannon, St. Augustine, Florida
Mac J. Goethe, Bradenton, Florida
W. J. Grant, Tampa, Florida
Donald L. Green, APO, New York
C. J. Haire, West Palm Beach, Florida
Lloyd Harman, Homosassa, Florida
Screven T. Hart, Jacksonville, Florida
Harold C. Haskins, Tallahassee, Florida
Scott P. Hertel, West Palm Beach, Florida
C. Howard Hill, Jacksonville, Florida
Nanci Hoard, Oxford, Florida
W. M. Ives, San Antonio, Texas
Robert M. Jernigan, Fort Pierce, Florida
Larry Johnson, Hawthorne, Florida
Nelson T. Jones, Tampa, Florida
Mary Keith, Ocala, Florida
H. Jeanne Kelton, Ocala, Florida
Timothy D. W. Kerns, Satellite Beach, Florida
Mrs. Max Kettner, St. Augustine, Florida
Mrs. C. Jack King, Tampa, Florida
John B. Kirby, Jr., Holden, Massachusetts
Mr. and Mrs. Otto R. H. Knopp, Nokomis, Florida
Thomas Knotts, Yankeetown, Florida
Effie Knowles, Miami, Florida
Janie Kuppers, Lakeland, Florida
Martin M. LaGodna, Gainesville, Florida
Ann M. Land, Coral Gables, Florida
Alice Lawton, St. Augustine, Florida
R. A. Liggett, Tampa, Florida
James S. Lindsley, St. Augustine, Florida
Leo A. Lorenzo, Tampa, Florida
Leonard W. Lorenzo, Sr., Tampa, Florida
Broward Lovell, Ocala, Florida
Kenneth Luther, Gainesville, Florida
Thomas C. MacDonald, Jr., Tampa, Florida
James C. McKay, New Port Richey, Florida
Arlene M. McKee, Jacksonville, Florida
Mary O. McRory, Tallahassee, Florida
D. R. (Billy) Matthews, Washington, D. C.
D. Richard Mead, Miami, Florida
Rob Roy Meador, Leesburg, Florida
James Stewart Milner, Pensacola, Florida
Albert Moseley, Daytona Beach, Florida
James K. Mueller, Fairfax, Virginia
Curtis R. Newsome, Gainesville, Florida
Lynn Newsome, Gainesville, Florida
John J. Nolan, Gainesville, Florida
J. Allen Norris, Jr., Winter Park, Florida
John P. O’Connor, Springfield, Ohio
Martha Oelsner, New Port Richey, Florida
Arthur H. Park, Orlando, Florida
Ronnie Parker, McIntosh, Florida
Mrs. Henry U. Parrish, Jr., Rockledge, Florida
Leonard W. Payne, Dunedin, Florida
Chester Harvey Peacock, Jacksonville, Florida
Newton A. Perry, Ocala, Florida
Richard Perry, Crystal Beach, Florida

Mrs. Thruston Pettus, Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida
Mrs. Donald R. Porter, Fort Pierce, Florida
Eugene J. Proulx, St. Petersburg, Florida
Ella Ralls, Arcadia, Florida
Kay Rankin, Tallahassee, Florida
Mrs. Ralph Reddy, Dunedin, Florida
Earl D. Regan, Daytona Beach, Florida
E. Dawson Roberts, Nassau, Bahamas
George D. Robinson, St. Petersburg, Florida
George C. Rogers, Jr., Columbia, South Carolina
Paul G. Rogers, Washington, D. C.
John H. Romfh, Miami, Florida
Mary Turner Rule, Pensacola, Florida
Dale Russell, Ocala, Florida
Maxwell B. Sackheim, Clearwater, Florida
Frederick H. P. Schuck, Clearwater, Florida
Manuel Serkin, Coral Gables, Florida
James J. Short, Palm Harbor, Florida
Elizabeth F. Smith, Crawfordville, Florida
Jo Hill Smith, Miami Springs, Florida
Norman Somberg, Miami, Florida
Charles R. Speh, Tallahassee, Florida
John R. Stackhouse, Winter Park, Florida
Thomas A. Stanford, Maitland, Florida
Corrine Stepp, Oklawaha, Florida
Annie Bell Stevenson, Ocala, Florida
John B. Stoddard, Jacksonville, Florida
William M. Straight, Miami, Florida
Roy L. Struble, Bal Harbour, Florida
Carolyn Thompson, Tallahassee, Florida
Ralph J. Tompkins, Tampa, Florida
Judge and Mrs. M. W. Treiman, Brooksville, Florida
Kenned Treister, Miami, Florida
H. M. Turnburke, Clearwater, Florida
Louise Turner, Ocala, Florida
Rachel Van Berkum, Riviera Beach, Florida
Elizabeth V. Vernon, Orlando, Florida
Robert L. Wagner, Orlando, Florida
Harold B. Wahl, Jacksonville, Florida
David S. Walker, St. Petersburg, Florida
John D. Ware, Tampa, Florida
Fannie Budge Waters, Winter Park, Florida
William L. Webb, Fernandina Beach, Florida
Barney White, St. Petersburg, Florida
Roger S. White, Clearwater, Florida
Edmund S. Whitson, Clearwater, Florida
Lura Williams, Archer, Florida
Charles L. Williamson, Seminole, Florida
Col. and Mrs. A. G. Wing, Bradenton, Florida
Douglas J. Witham, Stuart, Florida
University of Alabama Library (Huntsville Campus), Huntsville, Alabama
Attucks High School Library, Hollywood, Florida
Ball State University Library, Muncie, Indiana
Boca Raton Library Association, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida
Boynton Beach Junior High School Library, Boynton Beach, Florida
Texas Christian University Library, Fort Worth, Texas
University of California Library (San Diego Campus), LaJolla, California
Chamberlain High School Library, Tampa, Florida
Cocoa Beach High School Library, Cocoa Beach, Florida

W. J. Creel Elementary School Library, Eau Gallie, Florida
Deerfleld Park Elementary School Library, Deerfield Beach, Florida
DeLand Public Library, DeLand, Florida
Delaura Junior High School Library, Satellite Beach, Florida
Ponce de Leon Junior High School Library, Coral Gables, Florida
Dillard Elementary School Library, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Eastern New Mexico University Library, Portales, New Mexico
Eau Gallie High School Library, Eau Gallie, Florida
Eau Gallie Junior High School Library, Eau Gallie, Florida
Edgewood Junior High School Library, Merritt Island, Florida
Freedom 7 Elementary School Library, Cocoa Beach, Florida
Forest Hill High School Library, West Palm Beach, Florida
Frostproof Public Library, Frostproof, Florida
Groveland Public Library, Groveland, Florida
Gulf High School Library, New Port Richey, Florida
Harbordale Elementary School Library, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Hillsborough High School Library, Tampa, Florida
Holland Elementary School, Satellite Beach, Florida
Howey Academy Library, Howey-in-the-Hills, Florida
Indialantic Junior High School Library, Satellite Beach, Florida
Indian River City Junior High School Library, Titusville, Florida
Jupiter High School Library, Jupiter, Florida
Kathleen Senior High School Library, Lakeland, Florida
Lake Alfred Junior High School Library, Lake Alfred, Florida
Lake Worth Junior High School Library, Lake Worth, Florida
Lake Worth Senior High School Library, Lake Worth, Florida
Lakeland Senior High School Library, Lakeland, Florida
Lantana Junior High School Library, Lantana, Florida
Lehigh University Library, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Louisiana State University Library, New Orleans, Louisiana
Dan McCarty High School Library, Fort Pierce, Florida
Meadowlane Elementary School Library, Melbourne, Florida
Merritt Island High School Library, Merritt Island, Florida
Miami Coral Park Senior High School Library, Miami, Florida
Monroe Junior College Library, Key West, Florida
North Fort Myers Junior-Senior High School Library, Fort Myers, Florida
Notre Dame Academy Library, Miami, Florida
Ormond Beach Junior High School Library, Ormond Beach, Florida
Ohio University Library, Athens, Ohio
Palatka Senior High School Library, Palatka, Florida
Palm Beach Junior College Library, Lake Worth, Florida
Palmetto Center Library, Miami-Dade Junior College, Miami, Florida
Northern Illinois University Library, DeKalb, Illinois
Parkway Junior High School Library, Titusville, Florida
Pineda Elementary School Library, Cocoa, Florida
Embry Riddle Library, Aeronautical Institute, Daytona Beach, Florida
Rockledge Elementary School Library, Rockledge, Florida
Rockledge Junior High School Library, Cocoa, Florida
St. Anthony School Library, San Antonio, Florida
St. Bernard College Library, St. Bernard, Alabama
St. Johns River Junior College, Palatka, Florida
Samford University Library, Birmingham, Alabama
Santa Fe High School Library, Alachua, Florida
Seabreeze Junior High School Library, Daytona Beach, Florida
Seminole High School Library, Sanford, Florida
South Sumter High School Library, Bushnell, Florida
Southwest Junior High School Library, Melbourne, Florida
State University of New York Library at Stoney Brook, Long Island, N. Y.
CONTRIBUTORS 217
Temple Terrace Public Library, Temple Terrace, Florida

Titusville High School Library, Titusville, Florida
Vero Beach Senior High School Library, Vero Beach, Florida
University College of Wales Library, Abersytwyth, Wales, Great Britain
Winthrop College Library, Rock Hill, South Carolina
W. J. Woodham High School Library, Pensacola, Florida
Hernando deSoto Historical Society, Bradenton, Florida
Lake County Historical Society, Tavares, Florida
Safety Harbor Area Historical Society, Safety Harbor, Florida
Southwest Florida Historical Society, Fort Myers, Florida
F ATHER D AVID P. P AGE is executive editor of The Florida

Catholic and is vice-president of the St. Augustine Founda-
tion.
DUDLEY S. JOHNSON is professor of history at Southeastern Loui-

siana College.
CHARLES E. B ENNETT is Congressman from the Second Florida

Congressional District and is the author of Laudonniere &
Fort Caroline.
JERRELL H. S HOFNER is professor of history at Texas Woman’s

University.
THE FLORIDA HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
Published in July, October, January,
and April by the Florida Historical Society
S AMUEL P ROCTOR , Editor
EDITORIAL BOARD
D OROTHY D ODD T H E O D O R E P RATT
Tallahassee, Florida Historical Novelist
C HARLTON W. T E B E A U LUIS R AFAEL A RANA
University of Miami Castillo de San Marcos
D AISY P ARKER D E N A S NODGRASS
Florida State University State Chamber of Commerce
J OHN K. M AHON B AYNARD K E N D R I C K
University of Florida Historian and Novelist
A LBERT C. M ANUCY F RANK J. LAUMER
National Park Service Dade City, Florida
Publication of this Quarterly was begun in April 1908, but

after six numbers it was suspended in July 1909. In July 1924,
publication was resumed and has been continuous since that date.
The Florida Historical Society supplies the Quarterly to its
members. The annual membership fee is five dollars, but special
memberships of ten, twenty-five, fifty, and one hundred dollars
are available. Correspondence relating to membership and sub-
scriptions should be addressed to Margaret Chapman, Executive
Secretary, University of South Florida Library, Tampa, Florida,
33620.
Manuscripts, news, and books for review should be directed
to the Quarterly, P. O. Box 14045, Gainesville, Florida, 32601.
Manuscripts should be accompanied by a stamped self-addressed
return envelope. The Quarterly takes all reasonable precautions
for their safety but cannot guarantee their return if not accom-
panied by stamped return envelopes. Manuscripts must be type-
written, double-spaced, on standard sized white paper, with foot-
notes numbered consecutively in the text and assembled at the
end. Particular attention should be given to following the foot-
note style of this Quarterly; bibliographies will not be published.
The Florida Historical Society and editor of this Quarterly accept
no responsibility for statements made by contributors.

OBJ Datastream

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

OBJ Datastream

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

O C T O B E R

* * * To explore the field of Florida history, to seek and gather up the

H ENRY B RADLEY P LANT AND F LORIDA

E ARLY H ISTORY OF THE C ROSS -F LORIDA

P OLITICAL R ECONSTRUCTION IN F LORIDA

BOOK REVIEWS ............................................................................. 171

HISTORICAL NEWS ............................................................................ 194

THE ANNUAL MEETING , MAY 5-7, 1966 ................................ 199

CONTRIBUTORS .............................................................................. 217

Will, Okeechobee Boats and Skippers; and Okeechobee Catfishing,

Richardson, The Negro in the Reconstruction of Florida, 1865-1877,

Cushman, A Goodly Heritage: The Episcopal Church in Florida,

Gipson, The Triumphant Empire: The Rumbling of the Coming

Cobourn, The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the

Abernethy, The Formative Period in Alabama, 1815-1828,

Ford, John James Audubon, by E. Ashby Hammond ..................... 180

Beals, War Within a War: The Confederacy Against Itself,

Wilson, The Black Codes of the South,

Mann, Atticus Greene Haygood, by Richard E. Blanchard ......... 185

Newby, Jim Crow’s Defense: Anti-Negro Thought in America,

Golden, A Little Girl is Dead, by Harry Simonhoff ......................... 189

Highsaw (ed.), The Deep South in Transformation,

Colberg, Human Capital in Southern Development,

HE FOUR - HUNDRED YEAR history of the Catholic Church in

the South, Florida included, was relatively unaffected by the

A frustrated radical politician, the noisy Populist leader of

Secret societies, aimed ostensibly at defending American in-

It would be a mistake, however, to conclude that anti-Catholic

After 1910, however, the rural population’s attitude toward

spirit is abroad, a wave of anti-Catholic hysteria is passing over

24. ADSA, 4-D-5; Jacksonville Florida Times-Union, February 9, 1915.

was a Catholic, the local school trustees refused to accept her

on the economic effects that such bigotry would have on Broward

33. Miami Herald, August 26, 29, 1915.

shall be pleased to see you on the occasion of your trip to the

44. Deal, “Sidney Johnston Catts,” 1-2.

free political institutions were indeed being menaced by the

48. Cash, Democratic Party in Florida, 127.

a letter to Speaker of the House Cary A. Hardee, he described the

55. Quoted in Vincent de Paul Fitzpatrick, Life of Archibishop Curley

By this time, however, the fervor of religious bigotry was

LORIDA WAS A FERTILE FIELD for developers during the

company assets in case of a civil war, authorized Plant in 1861

2. Brown to Hanna, January 24, 1938, mss. collection, box 6, P. K.

Thompson Walters, a commission merchant and heavy investor

down the Chattahoochee and Flint rivers, and placed it in

halted here because any further construction would compete with

ing the road to Tampa and connecting it with a steamship line

The Plant Investment Company continued to play a major

seemed excessive, but Florida gained an enormous amount of free

a branch to Palatka. The company began construction in 1881,

27. Laws of Florida (1879), 119-20; Tampa Sunland Tribune, quoted

decrees of foreclosure were issued in 1891, and a public sale was

Savannah, Florida and Western. The Sanford and Lake Eustis

Thonotossasa Railroad, a short line extending a distance of fifteen

Erwin, his long-time associate. His only son, Morton F. Plant,

42. Commercial and Financial Chronicle, July 8, 1899, 82.

It was Plant’s desire to keep his property in trust until his

43. Plant’s second wife. His first died in February 1861.

T H E DREAM OF constructing an all-water route across the

the Gulf of Mexico. 1 Because the mapmaker at the Fort Caroline

period between the time of Menendez and the first governmental

by the American troops, in 1818, Mr. Calhoun, the Secretary of