Wait What? Illinois was much smaller?
Hello, everyone, and welcome to the return of Canal Stories, a series brought to you by the Canal Corridor Association celebrating the Illinois and Michigan Canal and the communities that were shaped by its legacy. The Illinois and Michigan Canal also played a role in the development of the state. Brought to you by Wayne Duerkes, PhD.
We are all used to the present-day shape of the state of Illinois. A long state running north and south, Illinois looks like a knife stabbing into the South with a flat northern border running from Lake County in the east and Jo Daviess County in the west. But this is not what Illinois looked like originally. A great amount of the state’s borders was affixed by rivers. The entire western border is formed by the Mississippi River and due to the nature of rivers, it has change slightly over the years as the river banks meander along points not containing man-made structures. Additionally, the Ohio River and, to a lesser extent, the Wabash River establish the southernmost border. Then, on December 11, 1816, the newly admitted state of Indiana created the eastern border. These entities firmly establish the majority of the state’s borders then and now. This left the northern border to be defined. Originally, it was set at the southernmost tip of Lake Michigan and ran straight across to the Mississippi (accounting for the Earth’s curvature of course). That is correct, Illinois was not supposed to have any access to Lake Michigan!
The Territory of Illinois—1814
What a difference this border issue would have created for the state and the nation. The entire northern tier of counties would be in Wisconsin: Jo Daviess, Stephenson, Winnebago, Boone, McHenry, Lake, Carroll, Ogle, DuPage, Whiteside, Lee, DeKalb, Kane, and Cook and the tops of Rock Island, LaSalle, Kendall, and Will. This would include all of Chicago and half of the Illinois and Michigan Canal. But one man, Nathaniel Pope—our first canal hero—a man of vision and remarkable foresight, helped create Illinois as we see it today.
Nathaniel Pope
Pope, born in 1784 in what is now Louisville, Kentucky, had a distinguished career in the nascent territory of Illinois as it separated from Indiana on the latter’s statehood. In 1817, he was elected to become a delegate of the Illinois Territory and reported to the 14th Congress shortly thereafter. In such a position, he was the critical component in securing Illinois statehood. In doing so, Pope made sure that the commercial future of the state was secured by having the northern border moved to its present position allowing for the state to have significant access to Lake Michigan which it did not have originally. His rationale was both economic and nationally-focused. With the new border, both the easternmost and westernmost termini of the Illinois and Michigan Canal, that was being seriously talked about, would be under one state’s control. Interstate commerce was always a point of contention and by narrowing the canal’s ownership, the potential for conflict would be eliminated.
Additionally, according to historian William A. Meese in 1911, Pope’s rationale demonstrated great vision for the future. Meese’s interpretation is quite controversial. He claims that Pope desired for Illinois to “united the incipient commonwealth to the states of Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York in a bond of common interest.” In short, Meese is arguing that Pope was alluding to sectional friction as early as 1818. Though this portion of Pope’s supposed speech has not been located, in Governor Thomas Ford’s A History of Illinois, he mentions that there where “much more weighty reasons for this change of boundary [and] it was known that in all confederated republics there was danger of dissolution” [p. 22]. Later, he adds that it was of national interest to “…binding [Illinois] to the eastern and northern portions of the Union” [p. 23]. Though Ford’s work was published posthumously, if his words were unadulterated in 1854 upon release, this lends credence to Meese’s assessment.
Further corroboration of this mentality can be found elsewhere. In 1826, the Illinois General Assembly sent a memorial to Congress seeking federal assistance for the canal in the form of land grants. The request strategically began with a plea for national cohesiveness.
“By the completion of this great and valuable work, the connection between the north and the south, the east and the west, would be strengthened by the ties of commercial intercourse and social neighborhood, and the union of the states might bid defiance to internal commotion, sectional jealousy, and foreign invasion.”
Terminology such as “internal commotion” and “sectional jealousy” featured so prominently in an official memorial is indicative of an awareness of issues of that weight heavily on Congress. An effort to ameliorate these issues served as a major selling point to the federal government. The General Assembly, Nathaniel Pope, and Governor Ford were all cognizant of sectional controversies and all hoped that the Illinois and Michigan Canal would act as an agent of commercial exchange binding the nation. The move to extend the northern border of the state secured Illinois’ role as the critical state in westward expansion.
When Illinois became a state on Dec 3, 1818, Congress fixed the northern border at 42°, 30’. Despite early claims to have the land revert to Wisconsin, the border remains. Illinois became an economic juggernaut for the nation and remained loyal to the nation during the Civil War. Nathaiel Pope’s vision kept the canal in Illinois and helped save the nation.
That concludes today’s Canal Story. Thank you so much for joining us as we continue our journey through the history of the Illinois & Michigan Canal. If you have enjoyed this episode, pass it along to your family and friends, be sure to leave us a like or drop us a comment, and we will see you again very soon.