Ohio History Journal

270                                                         OHIO HISTORY

 

No. 7820; Henry Howe, Historical Collections of Ohio (Cincinnati, 1907), I, 406. Howe

notes that his son's death almost broke the father's heart.

30. Letters Patent No. 6775, October 9, 1849. See also "Personal Recollections of

Early Springfield," Told by Squire J. J. Synder, Yester Year in Clark County (Spring-

field, 1948), II, 22-23.

31. Howe, Historical Collections, I, 406. See illustration, p. 206.

32. "Personal Recollections of Early Springfield," 23.

33. Letters Patent No. 34,150, January 14, 1862. A very brief analysis of the wheel

may be found in James E. Frankart, "The Industrial Rise of Springfield, Ohio," Seminar

paper in Ohio history, Miami University, 1961. Leffel received a re-issue of the original

patent in 1864; it involved minor improvements, Letters Patent, Reissue No. 1,791,

October 11, 1864.

34. Howe, Historical Collections, I, 406.

35. "Personal Recollections of Early Springfield," 23; see also comments of H. P.

Bradbury in Yester Year in Clark County (Springfield, 1949), III, 23.

36. Springfield News, May 3, 1862. For a brief comment on Kindleberger, see Abram

Ludlow's recollections in Yester Year in Springfield (Springfield, 1948), II, 5, 6.

37. Springfield News, May 3, 1862. For specific details on the performance of the

wheel, see James Leffel's Hydraulic Note Book, Leffel Papers.

38. Ralph H. Gabriel, The Epic of Industry (New Haven, 1926), 121.

39. James Leffel, Hydraulic Note Book.

40. Letters Patent No. 34,150, January 14, 1862.

41. Statement of J. Robert Groff, President and General Manager, The James Leffel

& Company, July 14, 1966.

42. Ibid.

43. Springfield News, July 14, 1862.

44. Ibid.

45. Ibid., December 27, 1862.

46. Ibid., March 3, 1863.

47. Ibid.

48. Ibid., December 24, 1863.

49. Ibid., February 27, 1864.

50. Ibid., March 8, 1864.

51. F. M. Bookwalter to A. F. Sparks, January 20, 1922. Leffel Manuscripts Collec-

tion, The James Leffel and Company, Springfield, Ohio.

52. Beers, History of Clark County, 472, 543; William M. Rockel, 20th Century

History of Springfield, and Clark County, Ohio (Chicago, 1908), 518.

53. Bookwalter to Sparks, January 20, 1922.

54. Order Book, Leffel Collection, Springfield.

55. For comments on durability of the wheel, see Illustrated and Descriptive Pam-

phlet, 72.

56. Ninth Census of the United States, Schedule 4, Production of Industry, Clark

County; in State Library of Ohio.

 

THE CHILLICOTHE GERMANS

1. A source of information often relied on for the early history of the Germans in

the United States is a German-language periodical, Der Deutsche Pionier, published in

Cincinnati from 1869 to 1887. A series of articles which it ran in 1875 under the title

"Die Deutschen Pioniere des Scioto-Thales" has proved, however, to be at times

untrustworthy. In reference to the War of 1812-14 passage used by Albert B. Faust in

The German Element in the United States (Boston, 1909), I, 423-424, the information

given appears likely to be incorrect.

2. The statements concerning German families in Chillicothe are based on data

derived from the manuscript census returns, available on microfilm made from the

original returns in the National Archives. The census of 1850, which was the first to list

place of birth, shows 1,298 families in Chillicothe, of which by actual count, 403, or 31

percent were those whose head was born in German-speaking countries. (The figure

403 does not include French and Swiss families, the great majority of which bore

German names.) Of these 403 families, 290 contained one or more children not born

abroad, virtually all of them having been born in Ohio and, presumably, the greater

proportion in Chillicothe.

In 1910, out of a total population of 14,508, Chillicothe had 424 German-born and

1,255 native-born whose parents were both born in Germany. Thirteenth Census of the

United States, 1910: Population, III, 420.

The following is a graphic picture of the population breakdown. Information pertain-

• 1
 

NOTES                                                                      271

 

ing to the city of Chillicothe, however, is often incomplete, since computation usually

took in the whole county. After 1880 it was noted that there was considerable inter-

marriage. This was the pattern even in the 1880 reports. As a result, it would be

inaccurate to characterize a given family in which only one parent was German, as in

fact German. By "German" is meant the Austro-German territory as defined on today's

maps, not as the loose empire that existed prior to 1871. A large percentage of the

emigrants reported their native country as Bavaria, Saxony, or Baden/Wurtemberg.

The number of those emigrating from Austria was small.

 

Table

POPULATION OF CHILLICOTHE

German

Year                           Total Pop.                Foreign-born       All Families Family Heads Percent

1850                         7,100                          unavailable                                           1,298                             403                            31

1860                          7,626                          unavailable                                           1,511                             521                            34.5

1870                          8,920                                    1,809                                             1,808                             603                            36.7

1880                          10,938                                 1,643                                             Intermarriage makes the statistics

1890                          11,288                                 1,342                                             meaningless after 1870

1900                          12,976                                 910

1910                          14,508*                               623 (424 German)

1920                          15,831                                 379 (222 German)

* (1,255 native-born of foreign German parentage)

3. The building used had been occupied formerly by the Episcopalians and was later

remodeled into an apartment house. It was recently purchased by the Walnut Street

Methodist Church to be transformed into a parking lot.

4. Alexander J. Schem, Deutsch-Amerikanisches Conversations-Lexicon (New York,

1871), III, 202, states that the German parochial school's enrollment was about 250 pupils.

5. Der Ohio Correspondent (Chillicothe, Ohio), April 12, 1851.

6. Monsignor Ernst Windthorst, Historical Sketch of the Catholic Church in Chilli-

cothe, Ohio (Geschichtliche Nachrichten der katholischen Kirche in Chillicothe, Ohio,

1846-1896) (Columbus, 1896).

7. Unsere Zeit, Chillicothe, Ohio, June 9, 1905.

8. Theodore Schlundt and Edward M. Griesheimer, The History of St. John's Evan-

gelical and Reformed Church 1833-1958. This mimeographed pamphlet will be placed in

the Ross County Historical Museum.

9. Walnut Street Methodist Church, 1800-1950 (Chillicothe, 1950), 11.

10. Schlundt and Griesheimer, The History.

11. Ibid.

12. Lyle S. Evans, A Standard History of Ross County, Ohio (Chicago, 1917), I, 188.

13. Der Ohio Correspondent, April 12, 1851.

14. Evans, Ross County, I, 208.

15. The Eighth Saengerfest, Central Ohio Saengerbund (Chillicothe, 1896), 35. A

copy is in Ross County Historical Museum.

16. Festgesaenge fur das zweite deutsche Gesangfest des Central Sangerbundes von

Nord-Amerika abgehalten in Chillicothe im Jahre 1863 (Cincinnati, 1863).

17. Goldenes Jubilaum der Eintracht (Chillicothe, July 1902), 1.

18. Unsere Zeit, June 13 and June 20, 1902.

19. The letter with its wax seal is in the Ross County Historical Museum.

20. Unsere Zeit, April 8, 1882.

21. Karl J. R. Arndt and May E. Olson, German-American Newspapers and Period-

icals 1732-1955 (Heidelberg, 1961), 433. See also Williams Brothers, Publishers, History

of Ross and Highland Counties (Cleveland, 1880), 91, which erroneously reports that

the paper began in 1851. Also, the editor's name appears correctly as "William Raine,

jun.", not as "Wilhelm", the spelling used by Arndt-Olson.

22. Dieter Cunz, The Maryland Germans: A History (Princeton, 1948), 254-255.

Although a footnote on page 255 mentions that F. T. Zanders took part in editing the

paper, his name is nowhere listed. In fact, an 1855 city directory of businessmen lists

him as a doctor, and an advertisement in Der Ohio Correspondent, which was placed

weekly after September 1850, denies a rumor stating that Dr. Zanders was about to

give up his profession and invites the public to patronize his general practice.

23. Local advertisers were German merchants, selling foreign and domestic goods, as

well as native business concerns.

24. Der Ohio Correspondent, April 5, 1851.

25. Ibid., June 28, 1851.

26. Ibid., April 12, 1851.

27. Williams Bros., History of Ross and Highland Counties, 91. Williams Brothers

erroneously report that Unsere Ziet began in 1870. The correct date is 1868.

• 2
 

272                                                       OHIO HISTORY

 

28. The English-language Chillicothe Gazette welcomed the new German paper with

the following: "The Advertiser is in error in saying that the Germans intend to start

a 'radical' paper here. If they establish a paper it is to be independent in politics, not

to lean either to one side or the other." February 19, 1867. "We learn that Mr. Arnold

who has been publishing a German paper in Marietta will in a few days remove it

to this city. We think it will receive a good support. It is to be neutral in politics and

religion. We wish it success." March 5,1867. Even though Arnold did not start a paper,

these remarks illustrate the English-language attitude toward the German press,

generally.

29. In Cincinnati Balthasar Fromm edited the Ordens Warte, with the subtitle

Organ des Unabhangigen deutschen Ordens der Harugari, of which I have found only

the first number issued October 1, 1867, and which I shall deposit in the Ross County

Historical Museum. Fromm states the paper's purpose, "To make the members of

the order aware of their duties, namely, to do justice to the German arts, sciences and

language, and to show our children that they need never be ashamed of their German

origins. We want to keep the mother tongue alive in our homes and to expand its use

elsewhere. We want to prove ourselves equal to our English-speaking fellow citizens

and that we as Germans know how to value freedom and to live in a Republic. We want

to preserve and propagate all our traditions which are not against the constitution."

30. Evans, Ross County, II, 553-554.

31. It is erroneously reported in Arndt-Olson, German-American Newspapers that

Charles Johann lived and edited the paper until 1899 (p. 443).

32. Charles Albert Fromm, Jr., of Chillicothe, present owner of the Fromm Printing

Company, loaned me the existing issues. After losing the bound copies in the 1913 flood,

Mr. Fromm was left with papers folded four ways and stored in boxes. An advertisement

in the paper recently turned up only a few from local attics. Nevertheless, the collection

represents nearly the fifty-year history of publication, though sparse in some periods.

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the Fromms, not only for the papers,

but for pointing out local items and for guiding me to much additional source material.

Mr. Fromm states that he will deposit the papers in the Ross County Historical Museum.

33. See "Die deutsche Presse in den Vereinigten Staaten" Deutscher Pionier, VIII,

No. 7 (October, 1876), 302.

34. Arndt-Olson, German-American Newspapers, 433.

35. Williams Bros., Ross and Highland Counties, 91, states "This paper has ever

since issued as an independent newspaper, devoted to the interests of Chillicothe and the

surrounding country. It is ably edited, handsomely printed, and in a very prosperous

condition." The circulation of over a thousand leads us to believe that the number of

families or households which bought the paper actively composed the German-speaking

element within Chillicothe. When we consider that families were larger in those days,

the total German population looms relatively high in proportion to the native English-

speaking segment. For example, in the random year 1880 when Chillicothe had 2,294

families, of which only 639 listed themselves in the census as German, we can suspect

from the newspaper circulation of nearly 1100 that there were more German-speaking

families than were actually listed as such officially.

36. Balthasar Fromm, ed., Der Deutsche Pionier, I, No. 1 (Chillicothe, 1882), 5.

37. Ibid., 7.

38. Ibid. 8.

39. Der Ohio Correspondent, April 12, 1851.

40. Reprinted in Fromm, Der Deutsche Pionier, 9.

41. Unsere Zeit, March 25, 1882.

42. Columbus Westbote, quoted in Unsere Zeit, March 25, 1882.

43. Unsere Zeit, March 25, 1882.

44. Seventh Census of the United States, 1850 (Washington, 1853).

45. Now a vine-covered structure, the Mountain House represents gothic and

romanesque styles. Stone vaults beneath the house were for processing and storing wine.

The house is now in the estate of the late Dard Hunter, who before his death had been

an authority on the history of paper making, and hand-tooler of books.

46. Floyd Brown of Chillicothe has collected an extensive scrapbook on the ARBENZ

automobile.

47. Fromm, ed., Der Deutsche Pionier, 18.

48. Der Deutsche Pionier, XVI, No. 7 (October, 1884), 272. The 1882 census shows

that of 589,632 Ohio pupils in school, 53,978 were in German public schools, with an

additional 29,426 in German schools affiliated with churches. Thus, 83,400 pupils, or

14.5 percent attended schools in which German was the vehicle of instruction.

49. Fromm, ed., Der Deutsche Pionier, 19.

50. Unsere Zeit, February 22, 1901.

51. Carl Wittke, German-Americans and the World War (Columbus, 1936).

52. In October, 1917 Congress enacted the first law in its history for specific control

of the foreign-language press. It required that translations of all war articles be sub-

• 3
 

NOTES                                                                     273

 

mitted to the local postmaster until such time as the government, convinced of loyalty,

would issue a permit exempting it. Dual language coverage was expensive and cumber-

some and the law had as its specific purpose not so much censorship as the death of

certain papers. This fact becomes clear when it is realized that some papers had their

permits within weeks, and returned to German-language war coverage only, whereas

others never received them at all, often because they lacked the necessary "connections."

See Carl Wittke, The German-Language Press in America (Lexington, 1957), 262-291.

53. Unsere Zeit, October 19, 1917.

BAKER ON THE FIFTH BALLOT?

THE DEMOCRATIC ALTERNATIVE: 1932

The author is indebted to the Rutgers University Research Council and to the Penrose

Fund of the American Philosophical Society for grants which, in part, financed the

research for this article.

1. John W. Davis to Newton D. Baker, July 5, 1932. Box 84, Baker Papers, Library

of Congress. Jouett Shouse to Baker, July 7, 1932. Ibid., Box 85. Joseph Proskauer to

Baker, July [?], 1932. Ibid., Box 192. On April 30, 1932, Edward M. House wrote Walter

Lippmann that "... I am sure that many of those close to the Governor [Roosevelt] feel

about Newton Baker as I do, that if the nomination does not go to our man [Roosevelt]

it should go to him [Baker]." Copy in Baker Papers, Box 116. See also, House to Ralph

Hayes, May 4, 1932. Ibid. Louis Brownlow was similarly convinced that Baker was the

most acceptable alternative to Roosevelt; see Robert Woolley to House, March 23, 1931.

House Papers, Yale University Library. Thomas J. Walsh of Montana, a Roosevelt

supporter, also regarded Baker as the logical alternative; Walsh to James R. Bennett, Jr.,

April 8, 1931. Box 382, Walsh Papers, Library of Congress.

2. William E. Dodd to Josephus Daniels, December 22, 1931; Daniels to Hon. W. A.

Ayres, November 28, 1931; and Cordell Hull to Daniels, February 29, 1932. Boxes 660

and 661, Daniels Papers, Library of Congress. Cordell Hull to William G. McAdoo,

January 21, 1932. Box 364, McAdoo Papers, Library of Congress. McAdoo to House,

January 10, 1931; Robert W. Woolley to House, October 6, 1931, House Papers. Raymond

Moley to Mrs. Malcolm L. McBride, May 11, 1932, Moley Papers, in Mr. Moley's

possession.

Hull, e.g., wrote Josephus Daniels on February 29, 1932, "I think the leadership of

the combined opposition to Roosevelt is and will continue to be in the Smith-Raskob-

Du Pont group, which according to my belief favors a virtual merger of the two old

parties except as to prohibition. Should they succeed in destroying the candidate far

out in front and who stands in their way [Roosevelt], they would then dominate all

further proceedings and nominate whomsoever they want." The result, Hull feared, might

well be the dissolution of the Democratic party after 1932. Hull, it will be recalled, was

then Senator from Tennessee and had been chairman of the Democratic National Com-

mittee for some time in the 1920's. Daniels was editor of the Raleigh, N. C., News and

Observer and had served as Wilson's Secretary of the Navy.

3. Moley interview, September 1963, tape recorded; Tom L. Johnson, My Story, Eliza-

beth J. Houser, ed. (New York, 1913), 126,139, 172-73, 251-56, and 259-61. The best

general works available on Baker's career are: Frederick Palmer, Newton D. Baker:

America at War, 2 vols. (New York, 1931); Daniel R. Beaver, Newton D. Baker and

the American War Effort, 1917-1919 (Lincoln, 1966); and C. H. Cramer, Newton D.

Baker (Cleveland, 1961).

4. "The Candidacy of Franklin D. Roosevelt," New York Herald Tribune, January

9, 1932.

5. Hayes to Baker, November 12, 1931. Box 115, Baker Papers. "Yesterday I had

luncheon with Lippmann," Hayes wrote, "who is brooding over how his space in the

paper can be most effectively useful to you."

6. George F. Milton to J. F. T. O'Connor, July [?], 1932. Box 370, McAdoo Papers.

Milton to McAdoo, February 26, 1932. Ibid., Box 366. William E. Dodd to Baker,

March 24, 1932. Box 87, Baker Papers. D. F. Houston to Josephus Daniels, March 8,

1932. Box 665, Daniels Papers.

David F. Houston, who in 1932 was president of the Mutual Life Insurance Company

of New York, wrote, "I do not care for Roosevelt as a nominee. I think he has very

limited ability and that he is enormously ambitious. In many directions he shows bad

judgment and lack of courage. He sadly failed to take a position of firm leadership in

the mess in this city [New York] due to the Tammany bosses. He seems to wish to

run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. If I had to select a candidate right now, I

think I should prefer Newton Baker."

7. Interview with Raymond Moley, September, 1963.

8. Franklin D. Roosevelt to Daniels, May 14, 1932. Box 15, Daniels Papers.

9. Daniels to William E. Dodd, April 16, 1932. Ibid., Box 664.

• 4