LOW, represented by Governor Claiborne. For a year after formal transfer the Spanish military forces and officials remained at New Orleans, causing much trouble. Later (March 9, 1804) upper Louisiana was also formally transferred to the French who transferred it to American authorities, March 10. Status and Government. Although the treaty of cession provided that the inhabitants as soon as possible should be admitted into the Union and to the "enjoyment of all the rights, SETH References: H. Adams, Hist. of the U. S. (1889), II, chs. ii-v; E. P. Carpenter, Am. Advance (1903), chs. iii-iv; E. Channing, Jeffersonian System (1906), chs. v, vi; J. K. Hosmer, Louisiana Purchase (1902), chs. iiix; W. C. Ford, Ed., Thomas Jefferson's Works (1897), VIII; S. M. Hamilton, Ed., Monroe's Writings (1901) IV; J. B. Moore, Arbitrations (1898), V, 4432-4446; A. B. Hart, Foundations of Am. Foreign Policy (1901), §§ 47, 62-68; Alexander Johnston, Am. Pol. Madison, Writings (1867), II, 177-204; J. B. advantages and immunities of citizens of the | Hist. 1763-1876 (1905), I, ch. xiii; James United States," there was no clause providing for the future admission of states from the territory. Under act of October 31, 1803, Jefferson ordered General Claiborne to take possession and to govern with the almost unrestricted power of previous Spanish officials. The country was divided into two parts separated by the parallel of 33°. The government of the upper was to be administered by the governor and judges of Indiana territory; that of the southern, the Territory of Orleans (see), was vested in a governor, a secretary and a council of thirteen-all appointed by the President. See ANNEXATIONS TO THE UNITED STATES; BOUNDARIES OF THE UNITED STATES, INTERIOR; DEPENDENCIES; FRANCE, DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH; LOUISIANA; TERRITORY, ACQUIRED, STATUS OF; WEST FLORIDA. LOW, SETH. Seth Low (1850-) was born at Brooklyn, N. Y., January 18, 1850. From 1875 to 1888 he was in active business. In 1878 he organized, and was the first president of, the Brooklyn bureau of charities. His political career began in 1880, when he was LOWELL, JAMES RUSSELL-LOYALISTS made president of the Young Republican club | Still others went with the popular American in the Garfield campaign. The next year he movement until some discouraging phase of the was elected mayor of Brooklyn on an indepen- war, or perhaps distaste for the French aldent ticket, and held the office until 1886. liance, caused them to lose heart or sympathy His administration attracted national atten- with the Revolution, and then they went over tion. Under the charter, the heads of munici- to the British side. At the beginning of the pal departments were appointed by and were struggle those colonists who were most closeresponsible to him; he introduced competitive ly related with the royal governors, those examinations for the selection of many officials; whose interests or theory of government made and he improved the system of taxation. In them favor the established order, the Episcopal 1897 he was an independent candidate for clergy dependent on the aid of the British mayor of Greater New York, but was defeated. missionary societies, crown officers and persons In 1890 he became president of Columbia Uni- dependent on them, tended to become Loyalists. versity. In 1899 he was a delegate to the In general the more prosperous and contented peace conference at The Hague. He resigned element in American society contributed a the presidency of Columbia in 1901 to become majority of their number to the Loyalists. mayor of New York. The chief successes of Feeling against them on the part of the selfhis administration were the reduction of styled Patriots was bitter. They were called taxes, the improvement of the schools, and the enemies of their country, and mobs attacked reform of the police department. He lacked their persons and property. Whig committees efficient party support, however, and in 1903 published their names, "sending them down to was defeated for reëlection. In 1907 he was posterity with the infamy they deserve." Fear elected president of the National Civic Feder- of this violence seems to have kept many of ation, which office he still holds (1913). See them inactive in the early stages of the RevoMAYOR AND EXECUTIVE POWER IN AMERICAN lution, and that inaction made them lose their CITIES. W. MACD. only opportunity of effective, united opposition to the Whig movement. After the second end was prompt in most of the states, and, thereafter, the Whig legislatures passed test acts requiring certain oaths of allegiance which no honest Loyalist could take. Many Loyalists fled to England, to the West Indies and to various parts of Canada, Nova Scotia and the region near Niagara being the chief centers. Others fled to New York City and there joined the British army. The statistics of the loyal volunteers seem to show that at one time as many Loyalists were serving in the British army as there were Patriots in the Continental army. LOWELL, JAMES RUSSELL. James Rus- Continental Congress had suggested that the sell Lowell (1819-1891) was born at Cam-states should disarm them, the action to that bridge, Mass., February 22, 1819. He first won national reputation by the publication, in 1848, of the first series of Biglow Papers, humorous and satirical poems which touched the politics of the day and showed him as a strong opponent of slavery. From 1856 to 1886 he was professor of French and Spanish literature and belles-lettres at Harvard. He became a Republican in 1856. From 1857 to 1861 he was editor of the Atlantic Monthly, and from 1863 to 1872 joint editor with Charles Eliot Norton of the North American Review. A second series of Biglow Papers appeared in 1867. In 1876 he was a Republican presidential elector for Massachusetts, and the next year was appointed minister to Spain. In 1880 he was made minister to Great Britain, where for the next five years he served with great acceptance and won to an unprecedented degree the regard of the English people. He died at Cambridge, August 12, 1891. See SLAVERY CONTROVERSY. References: J. R. Lowell, Works (1890-92); H. E. Scudder, James Russell Lowell: a Biography (1901). W. MACD. LOYALISTS. The Loyalists in the American Revolution were the colonists who adhered to the royal cause. Some clung to that cause from the first; others were, in the days before the war, opponents of the British schemes for taxing the colonies and did not believe in the political theories upon which taxation was based, but when opposition to the ministerial measures went so far as armed resistance, they left the American and joined the British cause. Those who remained at home and tried to avoid trouble with their Whig opponents became subject to fines and extra taxation, and, whenever the British army approached, they were imprisoned or marched away to distant places where they could do no harm. As the struggle continued, the Patriots began to deport and banish the Loyalists, and to confiscate their estates. During the negotiations for peace, the British Government made every effort to have the Loyalists compensated for these losses, but the effort failed and the British ministry was itself obliged to make the compensation, amounting to nearly thirty millions of dollars. See REVOLUTION, AMERICAN, Causes of. References: G. E. Ellis, in J. Winsor, Hist. of America (1888), VII., 1851; A. C. Flick, Loyalism in New York (1901); C. H. Van Tyne, The Loyalists in the Am. Revolution (1902), Am. Revolution (1905); A. E. Ryerson, Loyalists and their Times (1880). C. H. VAN TYNE. LOYALTY TO PARTY. LOYALTY TO PARTY-LYNCHING ciary; with the result that the action of Borden in exercising authority under the existing state government was lawful. ac This case has been consistently adhered to in determining analogous controversies and has recently been followed in deciding that а state statute enacted in cordance with constitutional provisions for the initiative and referendum would not be held invalid in the courts on the contention that the government thus provided for was not a republican government, the enforcement of the guaranties as to republican government resting solely with the political department of the Federal Government [see Pacific States Telephone & Telegraph Co. vs. Oregon (1912), 223 U. S. 118]. See DORR REBELLION; POLITICAL QUESTIONS AND JUDICIAL AUTHORITY; REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. By becoming a member of a political party a man does not surrender his right of private judgment. Though bound to act for those principles for which the party stands and to seek party success for the sake of those principles, he is not under obligations to follow party leaders in a course of action which, while calculated to strengthen temporarily the organization, is at the same time likely to prove inimical to those wider interests of the state which a party exists only to conserve and promote. To every good citizen the welfare of his country and the interests of the whole people stand foremost and true loyalty to his party can never conflict with enlightened patriotism. To keep his party faithful to the object of its existence one must sometimes act against its apparent welfare. No great political organization can maintain its highest level of efficiency and usefulness without the consciousness of a body of adherents of high ideals, independent in opinion and fearless in action, who may be relied upon to administer trenchant criticism and wholesome discipline even to LYNCHING. Origin of the Term.-The killthe extent of defeat at the polls should the ing of an obnoxious individual by a mob as a higher good of the state demand it. penalty for real or supposed crime is an See INDEPENDENT MOVEMENTS IN POLITICS; incident of all civilizations; and many formal PARTY, PLACE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF; THIRD organizations of people have undertaken to PARTIES; VOTING, INDEPENDENT. References: supplement or replace legal procedure by dealJ. Macy, Party Organization and Machinery ing with criminals outside the law. Such were (1904), ch. xxi; J. A. Woodburn, Po- the Vehmgericht of Germany; the Spanish litical Parties and Party Problems (1903),| Hermandad; the California Vigilance Commitch. xxi. tees (see); and some phases of the Ku Klux Klan (see). This practice as a recognized system has now ceased in almost every part of the civilized world, except some portions of the United States. J. M. LUTHER vs. BORDEN. As the result of an effort to supersede the state government of Rhode Island as it existed under its colonial charter, no constitution having been adopted when the state became a member of the Union, a voluntary convention adopted a constitution under which an attempt was made to organize a state government. Resistance of this pseudo government to the power of the existing state government led to the Dorr (see) Rebellion (1841). As a result of this conflict, Borden, acting under authority of the existing government, broke and entered the house of Luther for the purpose of arresting him, and Luther instituted an action in a Federal court against Borden to recover damages for trespass, and on appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, the question considered was whether the judicial department had authority to determine the validity of the existing state government [7 How. 7 (1848)]. It was held that under the provision of the Federal Constitution that "The United States shall guaranty to every state in this union a republican form of government" (Art. IV, Sec. iv), the question as to the existence and validity of a state government was in its nature political and not judicial, and therefore committed to the legislative department of the Federal Government and not to its judi References: T. M. Cooley, Constitutional Limitations (7th ed., 1903), 58–62. EMLIN MCCLAIN. During the Revolution Charles Lynch of Virginia (from whence the term) was the head of an unofficial band which seized and severely whipped loyalists; and for a time the term lynching meant a flogging. The practice continued, partly as an instrument of the frontier where regular justice was hard to obtain, partly to deal with offenses which were thought to be too heinous for ordinary treatment. Such were the murder of white men, particularly masters by negroes, and the rape of white women by negroes. The usual penalty exacted by mobs or assemblages was hanging; occasionally criminals were burned to death. The term lynching thus came to mean the taking of the life of the supposed offender, outside of judicial process. Progress of Lynching. The practice appeared chiefly in the southern and southwestern states. In a notable case in 1837 commented upon by Abraham Lincoln at the time, a negro was burned at the stake near St. Louis for the murder of a peace officer. After the Civil War when the restraint imposed by slavery had ceased, lynching was freely applied to negro criminals and supposed criminals. According to the following table LYNCHING compiled from the findings of the Chicago | proved and in some cases where it does not Tribune there were 3,539 lynchings from 1885, when the collection of lynching statistics began, to 1912: Causes of Lynching.-An analysis of the causes for lynchings shows that only about a third were for violence to women, sometimes by white men, but much more often by negroes. This crime dates very far back. The number of authentic cases of rape of white women by negroes appears to be now about thirty to fifty a year. Approximately another third of the lynchings is for murder, of whites by whites, or whites by negroes, but almost never for the killing of a negro by a negro. The other third is for various lesser crimes or no crimes at all, down to giving testimony or for refusing to give testimony before a court. Iniquities of Lynching. The process is not simply extra-legal but anti-legal. It assumes guilt in many cases where guilt cannot be exist; it sometimes includes manifestly innocent persons, as the negro woman who was burned at the stake by a mob because she had fled with her husband who had committed a crime. In the greater number of cases the person lynched has been taken by violence out of the custody of officers of the law. Sheriffs and prison wardens and even militia show little disposition to protect their prisoners against a mob. There are cases of lynching where men have been tried and convicted and would in a few days have been executed in an orderly manner. In very few cases in the South are prosecutions instituted against lynchers, though there have been instances of trial and conviction and even of imprisonment for that offense. Criticism of Lynching.-The two main arguments for lynching are that the courts cannot be relied upon to do justice, and that the crime of rape should be followed by a more fearful and exemplary punishment than the law allows. Criminals are of course, often set free through technicalities but these are not likely to be invoked in the case of an atrocious crime. The governor's, pardoning power releases many bad criminals particularly in the southern states; but would hardly be used against criminals who could by any form of reasoning be thought subject to lynching. So far as lynching is directed against negro criminals the whole machinery of the state governments both North and South is provided and carried out by white people, who ought to know how to protect their race by legal methods. As for the defense that lynching is a needed warning to the worst of criminals, the practice is freely applied not only to cases of rape but to all sorts of crimes and misbehavior. So far from being a warning the accounts of one lynching are likely to incite another. Lynching by irresponsible mobs of men of low character cannot be stamped out though they might be punished; but lynching as carried out by respectable men with the approval of the communities in which it happens is a confession of failure of self-government, hence the practice has much diminished of late years. The total number of reported cases in 1906 was 68, in 1911 it was 71, in 1912 it was 64. See ENFORCEMENT; EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW; LAW, CRIMINAL; LIFE, PROTECTION OF; MOBS AND MOB RULE; PENALTIES FOR CRIME; RIOTS, SUPPRESSION of. References: E. G. Cutler, Lynch Law (1905); A. B. Hart, Southern South (1910), chs. xiv, xv; F. L. Hoffman "Fewer Lynchings" in N. Y. Times, Mar. 4, 1913; Am. Year Book, 1911, 345, ibid, 1912, 440; bibliography in Channing, Hart and Turner, Guide to Am. Hist. (1912), § 261. ALBERT BUSHNELL HART. MCCULLOCH, HUGH-MCDUFFIE, GEORGE M a consideration of the nature of the Union. "The government of the Union," he declared, . . is, emphatically, and truly, a government of the people. In form, and in substance, it emanates from them. The Government of the United States, then, though MCCULLOCH, HUGH. Hugh McCulloch | Congress power to incorporate a bank?” In (1808–1895), one of the abler of American fi- discussing this question Marshall entered upon nanciers, was a native of Maine but a resident, after his twenty-fourth year, of Indiana. Although an opponent of the National Banking Act of 1862, he was chosen by Secretary Chase to occupy the post of comptroller of the currency, and so to put into operation the system provided for by that measure. His perform-limited in its powers, is supreme; and its laws, ance of the task was eminently successful and when made in pursuance of the Constitution, in 1865 he was elevated by President Lincoln form the supreme law of the land." The powto the secretaryship of the Treasury. In this ers of sovereignty were declared to be “dividoffice his principal interest was the retirement ed between the government of the Union, and of the legal tenders or "greenbacks," and in those of the states. They are each sovereign 1866 he procured the passage of a law pro- with respect to the objects committed to it, viding for the inauguration of this policy. The and neither sovereign with respect to the ob law was repealed, however, in 1868 before its jects committed to the other." The doctrine operation had proceeded far, and the resump- of implied powers (see) was also distinctly tion of specie payments was further postponed. stated: "Let the end be legitimate, let it be During 1870-76 McCullough resided in Eng- within the scope of the Constitution, and all land as a member of the banking firm of Jay means which are appropriate, which are plainCooke. During one brief period subsequently-ly adapted to that end, which are not prohibOctober, 1884, to March, 1885-he held, for a ited, but consist with the letter and spirit of second time, the Treasury portfolio. See LEGAL the Constitution, are constitutional.” TENDER CONTROVERSY. References: H. McCul-power of Congress to establish a bank was, in loch, Men and Measures of Half a Century consequence, upheld. (1888); J. Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years (1895), I, ch. xvii; J. G. Blaine, Twenty Years of Cong. (1886), II, ch. xiii; Secretary of the Treasury, Report, 1867. F. A. O. This case The The court denied the right of the state to tax the bank. The power to tax was held to involve the power to destroy, and, if the states could tax one instrument of government, they might tax every other and thus defeat all the ends of government. A. C. McL. MCCULLOCH vs. MARYLAND. was decided by the Supreme Court of the Unit- References: K. C. Babcock, Rise of American ed States in 1819 (4 Wheat. 316). The opin- | Nationality (1906), 294–296; J. P. Cotton, The ion, written by Chief Justice Marshall, is gen- | Constitutional Decisions of John Marshall erally considered one of the ablest and great- (1905), I, 302-345. est of all his opinions. It is one of a number of important decisions rendered in the decade after the War of 1812 in which the court outlined fully the principles of the federal system, discussed in an illuminating way the nature of the Union, and laid down broad principles of constitutional construction (see COHENS vs. VIRGINIA; DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE). The controversy arose concerning the power of Congress to establish a national bank and concerning the right of Maryland to tax one of the branches of the bank. The bank had been chartered in 1816, but a number of the states, dissatisfied with the arrangement, passed hostile laws. Maryland sought to require the issue of notes on stamped paper; McCulloch, the cashier of the bank in Baltimore, disregarded the law and was sued. The case was carried to the Supreme Court. "The first question made in the cause," said the court, "is, has MCDUFFIE, GEORGE. George McDuffie (1790-1851) was born in Columbia county, Ga., August 10, 1790. In 1814 he was admitted to the bar, and in 1818 was a member of the legislature. In 1821 he was elected to Congress, retaining his seat in the House until 1834, when he resigned. Like Calhoun, he was at first a nationalist and broad constructionist, but changed with the changing sentiment of his state. In Congress he supported the bank, but opposed internal improvements and vigorously denounced protection. He parted company with Jackson on the question of state rights, upheld nullification as a constitutional remedy, and wrote the Address to the People of the United States, issued by the South Carolina nullification convention in 1832. On his resignation in 1834, he was elected governor of South Carolina, holding the office until 1836. |