Quotes from the Conventions, et al

Mr. Lamb of Ohio County, August 16, 1861, 2nd Wheeling Convention-

   "...It is a fact, Mr. President, which no one on the opposite side has denied, as asserted by the gentleman from Mason (Mr. Polsley), who address this Convention, that you cannot now, within the boundaries of the State proposed by the substitute of the gentleman from Harrison (Mr. Carlile) have a full and fair expression of one-half of the people. It is a fact that within the boundaries proposed by the report of the majority of the Committee, you cannot now have a fair and full expression of one-fourth of the people upon any subject. Is this not, Mr. President, some reason why we should not hurry inconsiderately, hastily, recklessly, into this subject? Is there not a obvious propriety-if it be possible to secure our object-in waiting, at least until the matter can be thoroughly submitted and fairly acted upon, by the people whom we profess to bind by our actions here? And, gentlemen, we are not only to include them within the boundaries of our new State, but we are to go to work and fix up a consitution for them. We are to fix up a constitution for the people of Jefferson and Morgan and Berkeley and Hampshire and Hardy, and for the people of Boone and Logan and Nicholas, and I know not how many other counties. Will my friend from Upshur, who has proposed this substitute for our adoption, undertake to carry that Constitution into those counties, before the first Thursday of November next, or the fourth Thursday of October next, and explain its provisions to them, and explain why we took this action or that action-why we adopted this provision or that provision?"

Mr. Polsley of Mason County, August 16, 1861, 2nd Wheeling Convention-

    "They had been told that the people are clamorous for immediate action. He had endeavored to find out if this was an imaginary or a real clamor. When people are oppressed, or desire a grand object through their representatives, it has been customary to present their petitions for that purpose. Had a solitary petition been offered here?

    A Member said some three or four had been offered here, signed by some seven hundred names.

    Several members volunteered to give the gentlemen information as to the willingness of their constituents to sign such petitions.

    Mr. Polsley resumed: 'Well, then, here were seven hundred out of some 640,000, who had petitioned them upon this subject.'"    Mr. Polsely refers to the total number of citizens of Virginia, the total for West Virginia was about 360,000.

Mr. Sinsel at the Constitutional Convention, Jan. 13, 1862

"Anyone can see that what I have stated here is a fact. Who denies that McDowell, Wyoming, Raleigh, Calhoun, Gilmer, Braxton, Clay, Tucker, Randolph, Webster, Nicholas, Boone, Logan, Pocahontas, Roane, Wirt, Monroe and Greenbrier-add to that Barbour and many others-are all dominated by the spirit of rebellion..."

Jan. 7, 1862, Constitutional Convention, petition from Calhoun County, read by Mr. Van Winkle

    "To the Honourable, the Convention of delegates of the people of western Virginia, assembled in the city of Wheeling under and in pursuance of the ordinance passed August 20, 1861, to provide for the formation of out of a portion of the territory of this state.

    The humble memorial of the undersigned qualified voters in and for the county of Calhoun respectfully represent that they were unable to hold an election for a delegate to your Convention on the fourth Tuesday in October, 1861, as they desired to do and would have done but for the following reasons: there is neither sheriff, clerk or justice in said county, and no court has been held in said county since June last, all the county officers are or have been engaged in the rebellion, so that there was no one to hold an election.

    Your memorialists desiring to have their said county of Calhoun represented in your convention respectfully appoint and recommend to a seat in that body our fellow citizen, Jon Robinson, Esq., who has been faithful and loyal to the Constitution and government of the United States, is honest, intelligent and competent to represent our county in said Convention.

    The undersigned comprise nearly the whole loyal voters in the said county, for, in fact at the election upon the Ordinance of Secession there were but fifty (50) votes cast in said county against it."

Mr. Hagar of Boone County, Constitutional Convention, Dec. 7, 1861

"I am informed by the delegate from Wayne, notwithstanding Ziegler had a regiment then [there], that all the elections had to be guarded by his regiment. Suppose he had not been there with his regiment - perhaps Wayne would not have been represented. I do not know how many elections were held in Cabell county. Perhaps my friend (Mr. Parker) who lives just across from Guyandotte knows. However, they held one somewhere and the county is represented. Boone, which has eight places of holding elections, by a detachment being sent from Kanawha and a home-guard on Mud River held an election at two precincts, one at Peytona and the other at Mud. They gave 223 votes in favor of the new State. The returns are not here; the man I sent may have been captured. Logan could not be represented. That is my opinion. If it required a military force in the county where Zeigler's regiment were stationed to hold an election; if Cabell county which borders the Ohio river, had to have a military force to hold an election there; if Boone which lies adjoining Kanawha had to have a military force to hold an election at two points - if a detachment went up and held an election there, and by risking their lives and losing one killed and two or three captured got into a corner in Raleigh and held an election there - with what difficulty are those counties here represented! No wonder Wyoming and Fayette had to be represented by petition."

Mr. Battelle of Ohio County, Dec. 9, 1861, Constitutional Convention

"What is easier than, if a poll be opened, for a few dozen to go to one poll and vote; and in the absence of any other voters they decide the whole question. A few dozen may go to another poll, in the same way; and so on throughout the whole district. And that, it seems very likely to me, might be the case, sir. I cannot say of course that it is likely one hundred men might decide it; but still it is possible. What is the state of the fact? The secessionists within these bounds - and, by the way, notwithstanding all the declarations to the contrary by the gentleman from Kanawha, yet in this secession business they have been to a man against us - except away down there on the railroad: I believe all the delegates from the valley and, sir, all these counties voted for secession, and their people since then have been and today are for secession.

But as I was going on to say, you may tender to these secessionists an opportunity to vote, but what will be their answer? They will not recognize your government, as my colleague says, for they call it a "bogus government." They will not recognize it by voting. Suppose the State of Ohio should give the people of Ohio and Marshall counties an opportunity of voting whether they would go into Ohio or not - I should not go to the polls at all. I would not recognize the validity of the act even by going to the polls to vote against it. Well, now, the whole history of this case shows that these secessionists feel just that way in reference to your new state movement. They will not vote at all. What is the result? Why a few Union men - patriots though they may be and may have been - suffering Union men though they may be - and you may say every other good thing of them you please and I will endorse it - the trouble is there cannot be enough of them - but it is possible, I repeat that one hundred in this whole district may decide this whole question."

Letter from James Evans to Gov. Pierpont, Sept. 27, 1861