second year, by the people of the Territory. And there was to be one representative for every five hundred free white male inhabitants. The members of the Council, on the other hand, were not elected by the people, but were nominated and appointed as follows: As soon as elected, the representatives were convened by the Governor, to rominate eighteen persons for the Council. The names of these persons were returned to the President of the United States, who then appointed and commissioned, as members of the Council, nine out of the eighteen candidates. The Governor, who, of course, was still appointed by the President, had the power of an absolute and final veto over all legislation. But the Judges were now shut out entirely from this department of the government.

It is moreover important to note the qualifications of members of the Assembly and of electors; for along this line there is considerable development in the twenty years next following. As fixed by the act of 1812. the qualifications of representatives were, twenty-one years of age, one year's residence within the Territory and the possession of a freehold within the county in which he is elected. Those of members of the Council were, one year's residence in the Territory, and the possession of two hundred acres of land in his own right. Electors of representatives consisted of "all the free white male citizens of the United States, above the age of twenty-one, who have resided in the said territory twelve months next preceding an election, and who shall have paid a territorial or county tax."

It is also observed that for the first time. provision is made for a Delegate to Congress. This was an important innovation. For up to this time, although the Territorial government centered in Washington, the people had no official representative in the national councils.

Another significant passage in the organic law is the one enumerating the rights secured to the people. It is true that the treaty of 1803 guaranteed to the inhabitants the free enjoyment of their liberty, prop erty, and religion, and that in the acts of 1804 and 1805, freedom of religion and uial by jury are expressly mentioned. But further than this there was no enumeration. In

fact, Congress, while extending to the territory west of the Mississippi, the principles of the Ordinance of 1787 as to governmental organization, did not fully guarantee to the inhabitants those several fundamental rights enumerated in the articles of the famous compact. In 1812, these rights are first fully recognized and incorporated in the organic law of the Territory. But there still remained one exception-freedom of labor. It remained for the Compromise of 1820 to accomplish the extension of this clause of the Ordinance.

In the meantime the laws and regulations of the preceding governments, so far as they were not inconsistent with the act of Congress, were continued in full force. But at every point the Common Law was inevitably taking the place of the Roman Code. By an act of the Territory passed in 1816, the Common Law of England was adopted as the rule of decision, so far as not in conflict with the laws of the Territory. It had already been made the basis of the organic laws. However, it would be extremely difficult to determine to what extent the Civil Law did actually constitute a part of the Territorial code at this time. In 1819 a portion of the Missouri Territory was erected into the Territory of Arkansas; and in 1821 another and the most thickly settled portion was admitted into the Union as the State of Missouri.

A PECULIAR POLITICAL STATUS.

But further than the prohibition of slavery, no provision was made at this time for the remaining territory lying to the north and west of Missouri. This country, which included the future Territory of Iowa, was in fact left without any subordinate jurisdiction whatsoever. It was a country without laws. A sort of no-government's land, with no local constitutional status. And in this condition the country remained until 1834.

Yet there seems to have been a vague notion that this country was still in some way connected with Missouri (an impossible condition to be sure); and maps published during those years generally designate the country north and west of Missouri as "Missouri Territory." "Missouri Territory." And the erroneous statement that the Iowa country was for a

people, now numbering some 10,000, were to a large extent still without the pale of constitutional government.

Unsatisfactory as the union with Michigan may have been, the territorial government was not responsible for the situation. Since distance from the seat of that government rendered the administration of the laws partially, if not wholly impracticable. In deed, the condition seems to have been the logical result of the rapid expansion of the population into new territory. The solution of the problem, so far as it admitted of solution, lay in the establishment of a separate territorial government for western Michigan.

A division of Michigan was seriously discussed as early as 1828 under a proposition to establish the "Territory of Huron." This proposition did not meet with favor in Congress; but agitation for division was nevertheless kept up from this time on by the introduction of bills and by petitions and memorials from the people of the territory concerned. Moreover, in 1834 interest in the establishment of a new territory was intensified by the addition of the country west of the Mississippi and by the agitation for a state government which had begun two years before. In December the Legislative Council of Michigan again called the attention of Congress to the "Unnatural union so prejudicial to the best interests of the inhabitants of western Michigan and destructive to their rights as American citizens."

In 1835 all government in Michigan was more or less extra-constitutional, since, in the first place, a state government had gone into operation under a constitution which had not been approved by Congress; and in the second place, the "contingent remainder" of the territory of western Michigan, not to be behindhand, proposed to perpetuate the territorial government by electing a delegate to Congress and members to a Legislative

Council.

But the Council chosen by the "contingent remainder," which met at Green Bay in January, 1836, and to which the counties of Dubuque and Demoine had elected each two representatives, could, for want of an acting governor, do little more than ask Congress for a "new and efficient political existence," and point to the conditions west of the Mis

THE TERRITORY OF WISCONSIN.

In the meantime George W. Jones, the delegate to Congress, was devoting his energies to securing the establishment of a territorial government for his constituents. That he was eminently successful is shown by the fact that the Territory of Wisconsin was established even before Michigan was finally admitted into the Union.

The organization of the Territory of Wisconsin, July 4th, 1836, was a great stride in the direction of constitutional government for Iowa. Col. Henry Dodge, a man who had spent the best years of his life on the frontier and who was, therefore, familiar with the needs of a pioneer people, was appointed Governor. Under his direction a census was taken of the new Territory and on the second Monday in October members were elected to the first Legislative Assembly.

The first session of the Assembly was held at a place called Belmont, in Iowa County. The next session met west of the

Mississippi at the town of Burlington in the winter of 1837-38. This Assembly during deal for the settlers of Iowa by establishing the two years of its existence did a great judicial districts, by sub-dividing the counties of Dubuque and Demoine and by establishing and organizing a number of smaller counties. Its great work consisted of preparing the field for the government of Iowa that was to follow. By 1838 its statutes had i a measure superceded the extra-constitutional laws and regulations of the various claim associations and claim clubs of the settlers.

But the Territory of Wisconsin as established by the act of April 20th, 1839, did not possess a geographic unity. It was too extensive, and was divided by a great river. Then, too, the Territory was not settled at, nor did it grow from, any one point. There was no concentration of population. settlements west of the Mississippi were far removed from those on the east side. These conditions naturally rendered the administration of civil government difficult and inefficient.

The

THE TERRITORY OF IOWA ESTABLISHED.

On the 6th of November, 1837, delegates from the respective counties west of the Mississippi convened at Burlington and prepared a memorial to Congress praying to be organized into a separate territory. In this memorial it was represented that the Territory of Wisconsin was too large and extensive; that the settlers west of the river were too remote and isolated to derive any considerable benefit from the "fostering care of the parent government;" that they had been neglected and ill protected in their individual and political rights; that they had existed as a part

of an organized territory for sixteen months events their numbers entitled them to a sepwith but one term of court; and that at all arate government.

In Congress the Committee on the Territories to whom this memorial, together with one to the same purpose from the Legislative Assembly of Wisconsin, was referred, reported a bill "to divide the Territory of Wisconsin, and to establish the territorial government of Iowa;" which bill passed both houses, and was approved June 12th, 1838. On the 4th day of July Iowa became a separate and independent territory.

The early history of Iowa has been characterized as a history of governments. And it has been shown that, in the course of this history, Iowa has at different times been under the sovereign jurisdiction of France, Spain, and the United States; and that, while under the dominion of the latter, it passed successively under the subordinate jurisdiction of the Territory of Indiana, the District of Louisiana, the Territory of Louisiana and the Territory of Missouri. But in 1821 Missouri was erected into a state, leaving Iowa wholly without a subordinate jurisdiction. This political separation from the south was complete, and had an important consequence, namely, that Iowa subsequently received its political institutions from Wisconsin and Michigan by way of the Northwest Territory.

But statute book complications are not the whole of government, and statutory enactments are not the only foundation of Iowa political institutions. Here as elsewhere the prevailing system of law and politics is determined by the character and the subjective environment of the people rather than by any code of legislation. In other words, to fully understand the significance of the evolution of Iowa some account must be taken of early settlements and settlers.

SPANISH LAND GRANTS.

The earliest settlements were made while the country was still under the dominion of Spain, that is to say, during the last quarter

of the eighteenth century; and their evidences are to be found in the records of Spanish land grants. This source affords information of at least four actual settlements within the limits of Iowa. These were made on concessions to Julien Dubuque, Bazil Giard, Louis Honore Tesson, and Francois Cayolle.

Julien Dubuque, whose claim included the site of the present city of Dubuque, was a Frenchman from Prairie du Chien. From the records it appears that originally he purchased or leased his claim from the Fox Indians. This was in September, 1788; and the settlement, which at first included ten laboring men, began with the date of the conveyance. Houses were erected and an extensive farm cleared, cultivated, and improved. But the chief attraction of the claim was the lead mine which it embraced. In 1796 Dubuque petitioned the Baron de Carondelet, Spanish Governor of Louisiana, for the "peaceable possession" of all these lands and mines which, he says, "form about seven leagues on the west bank of the Mississippi by three leagues in depth." The governor granted the petition as asked. In October, 1804, one-half of the original claim was transferred to August Chouteau for the sum of $10.848. Two years later the claims of Dubuque and Chouteau to 148.176 arpents* of land were confirmed by the United States Board of Commissioners, the original grant

An arpent contained 40,000 square feet of land; an English acre contains 43,560 square feet.

to Dubuque being ascertained to be a complete Spanish title. Dubuque continued to reside on these lands until his death in 1810. He died insolvent, and his estate was sold for the benefit of his creditors. It is further represented that some of the assignees of Dubuque continued to reside on the land, so far as their relations with the Indians would permit, until about 1832, when they were dispossessed by the military authority of the United States. But the heirs persistently pressed their claims until 1853, when the question of the legitimacy of Dubuque's

to 1808. The Commissioners confirmed the giant for "a league square," if the Indian right was extinguished.

The claim of Louis Honore Tesson was obtained as a permit from the LieutenantGovernor, L. Trudeau, in 1799. This tract of land was located on the Mississippi river about eighteen miles above the Des Moines, and was inhabited and cultivated from 1798 to 1808. It embraced cabins and an orchard of one hundred trees. Subsequently Thomas F. Reddick, as assignee of Joseph Robideu, assignee of Louis Honore Tesson, claimed