Introduction
Individuals in the Upper Peninsula (UP) of Michigan are farther from having liberty and justice than they have been through the entire history of American federalism. Their story is one filled with repeated, failed attempts at asking nicely for human rights, from powers in Lansing and DC. While modern, centralized power structures make freedom and liberty difficult for individuals, there is hope for those who reject their domination through passive resistance. Humans everywhere need a way to live freely despite tyranny’s grip.
From the decades before Michigan became a state, and to this day, residents and representatives of the UP have made repeated attempts at establishing autonomy. Often, UP representatives led statehood movements particularly suited to their personal ambitions, and those of their business partners. These reps did not work towards liberty and justice for individuals, but rather attempted to ride the UP to their own fame and fortunes. With failure after failure, to get crony statists to recognize their inalienable, natural rights to self-determination and autonomy, residents of the UP have been repeatedly denied their freedom. The book Superior: A State for the North Country by James L. Carter (2011), reveals the timeline of those attempts.
“Although entirely overlooked in matters of legislation, appropriation, and education, we are fully recognized in that of taxation.” -Abner Sherman, Upper Peninsula Advocate, March 23, 1858.
UP Secessionist Timeline
- 1781 – Northwest Territories created to include the UP
- 1805 – Michigan Territory created, including the eastern UP.
- 1809 – the UP divided into three sections: East (Michigan Territory), Central (Indiana Territory), and Western (Illinois Territory).
- 1818 – Entire UP folded into Michigan Territory upon Illinois becoming a state, along with all of what later became Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.
- 1820s – Movements began to separate the UP from Michigan and combine it with parts of modern-day MN, WI, and IL- around Lake Superior’s southern and western borders.
- Petitions circulated among residents and presented to Territorial and Federal officials.
- A rivalry between lead-mining interests and fur traders stole the spotlight.
- 1823 – James Duane Doty, a Michigan Territorial Judge appointed in 1823, was a major supporter of the movement for UP statehood.
- His area included Michilimackinac County with its seat on Mackinac Island.
- He sent a bill for statehood, for the superior region, to Senator Thomas Hart Benton of Missouri.
- No action was taken on his bill.
- 1827 – Austin E. Wing of Monroe, Michigan’s Territorial Delegate to Congress, wrote a bill similar to Doty’s.
- Jan. 1829 – Wing’s bill was passed by the House of Representatives, having the backing of Senator Benton and Michigan Territorial Governor Lewis Cass (who wanted to govern the new territory and make the capital Cassville, 30 miles south of Prairie du Chein).
- His 3rd term as delegate expired and the Senate took no action on his bill.
- 1830 – Another bill for statehood was introduced but did not include the eastern half of the UP (the cedar swamps and Mackinac Island) to win support from lower Michiganders. It failed.
- 1835 – Michigan first attempted to declare statehood using its original territorial boundaries (with only the eastern UP) but met roadblocks.
- 1836 – The Toledo War was settled by Congress in the passing of the Northern Ohio Boundary Bill which gave Ohio the Toledo strip and gave Michigan the western part of the UP- comprised of 9,000 square miles of the era’s most profitable mineral and timber land in America.
- Many of the residents of the UP did not want to be part of Michigan either.
- Congress had received a number of petitions from persons in this region asking that the area south of Lake Superior be organized as the territory of Huron.
- Jan. 26, 1837 – Michigan entered the union as a state.
- 1837 – The Panic of 1837
- It was a time of banks holding failed assets, a housing bubble, and a federal government demanding payments in gold or silver, leading to massive losses for venture capitalists and banks. It caused a 6-year depression, after which many American investors were keen on reinvesting in American markets that were attached to navigable waterways.
- Of 175,000 Michigan residents, an estimated 3,000 lived in the UP. Of these, about 1,000 were white men (1/3rd; French, Scottish, and English). 2/3rds were indigenous, mostly Ojibwa.
- Settlements in the Superior Region included Mackinac Island with its Fort, Saint Ignace, Sault Ste. Marie, L’Anse, LaPoint on Lake Superior, and Green Bay. Seasonal settlements existed on Whitefish Bay, Bay de Noc, at Grand Marais, and where Marquette is now. Fur Company posts were at L’Anse, Grand Island, the Sault, and Mackinac.
- Only practical transportation was the great lakes. Several indigenous trails through the interior. In winter a virtually isolated region.
- 1840 – Houghton’s mineral report; given to Michigan state congress in 1841.
- America’s first mineral rush began for copper, in the UP.
- 1842 – Fort Howard at Green Bay became a center of activity and provided “law and order” for a vast wilderness region
- 1844 – Iron discovered in Marquette area, bringing new activity to the area
- Within a few years, dozens of mining companies laid claim to the minerals, many based in the East financial and industrial centers – Boston, NY, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland. Many did not succeed. Still, new towns developed around the mines:
- Iron Towns: Marquette, Ishpeming, and Negaunee.
- Copper Towns: Ontonagon, Rockland, Eagle River, Eagle Harbor, Copper Harbor, and Portage Lake.
- Mining activity increased arguments about the need for representation.
- Within a few years, dozens of mining companies laid claim to the minerals, many based in the East financial and industrial centers – Boston, NY, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland. Many did not succeed. Still, new towns developed around the mines:
- 1844 – Out of feigned concern for order (rather than mineral exploitation), the US Secretary of War sent William Wilkins to establish Fort Wilkins in Copper Harbor and used soldiers to protect white miners from the Ojibwa.
- No conflict occurred between white miners and the Ojibwa, and two years later the soldiers at Ft. Wilkins were sent to assist in the Mexican-American War.
- Between 1867 and 1870 Ft. Wilkins was used to station men finishing their terms following the Civil War and was then abandoned.
- 1850 – The census reported the UP had 5,659 inhabitants recorded in its 7 counties.
- Legislators voiced the need for roads, port improvements, schools, and other state services.
- House of Representatives heard Committee of Mines and Minerals on the need for infrastructure for the sake of the mines.
- Michigan did not want to throw money at the useless wilderness it had been given, though it was sure to enforce taxation on the region’s people.
- Sept 24, 1851– the Lake Superior Journal featured an article entitled North Michigan – A New State, which claimed the state government’s policies towards the UP were “niggardly” (a non-racist term derived from the Scandinavian language, meaning stingy or miserly). It quoted Editor Jermain of the Michigan Expositor as saying UP legislators had to be in the state capital three months before opening of the legislative session, or otherwise they had to travel to Lansing on snowshoes. Jermain noted the UP residents had “not one thing in common with us below. They have within themselves everything requisite for an important state.”
- 1853 – Senate Mines and Minerals Committee recommended “obnoxious and illiberal” taxation provisions in Mining Company charters be revised and noted the difficulty for the Lansing-based legislature to properly govern the region of vast wealth.
- Reform was called for to make tax money more available to local governments.
- It was doubtful that “a legislative body composed almost entirely of members chosen from the Lower Peninsula, having limited means of knowing the wants and interests of a region so remote…can…bestow that legislative action so much needed.” Statehood would be the best means of serving the interests of the peninsula. Residents didn’t really want separation, “unless unequal laws and an oppressive policy shall drive them to it.”
- 1853 – Gov. Robert McClelland said to a joint session of Michigan House and Senate “There is no part of the State which deserves more your fostering care than the mineral region of Lake Superior.” He advocated for the completion of the Soo Canal so Michigan could better appreciate the UP’s mineral wealth. His words came after constant complaints that state taxes on local mining companies were depriving local areas of that tax money. Non-mining companies paid little taxes, so Lansing didn’t want to lose its cash cow, but wouldn’t develop the local areas the mines operated in, instead using the money for Lansing. This led to renewed calls for statehood.
- 1854 – Most of the land in the UP was put under control and management of the federal government in the second Treaty of LaPointe.
- 1855 – Ontonagon was one of most prosperous towns.
- The four-story Bigelow House, along the Ontonagon River, was the site of early meetings on statehood for the Superior region. Newspapers from Sault to Ontonagon were advocating for statehood at that time, with Ontonagon taking the lead. The Bigelow House featured many private and public meetings on statehood. It no longer stands today.
- Mid-1850s – UP had population of about 10,000, and it was a time of propaganda for and against UP statehood.
- Downstate and out-of-state newspapers all railed against the idea of statehood for the UP, though the UP and, allegedly, nearly all of its residents advocated for it. The NY Daily Tribune (an abolitionist paper) advocated for UP statehood.
- Rumors flew that the original Northwest Ordinance did not allow for the creation of a new state from that region. Also, many papers nationwide printed misinformation, that Wisconsin and Michigan legislators had already approved conceding territories to the new state. A state of confusion arose.
- The new state would be “a great commercial emporium.”
- The capitals of Michigan and Wisconsin were too far from the remote settlers who “should be allowed the privilege of adapting their political institution to their circumstances.”
- 1853– The legislature had just begun pushing a railroad through, though the railroad didn’t connect the national railway to the UP until 1872.
- 1855– St. Mary’s Falls Ship Canal in Sault Ste. Marie finished.
- These projects effectively nullified one of the arguments for UP statehood.
- Jan 13, 1857 – Abner Sherman showed Michigan’s legislature a petition signed by 77 persons, mainly from Ontonagon, Houghton, and Keweenaw counties urging a new state for the UP. They said, “it is almost the unanimous desire of our people to have this project consummated…We are actuated no feelings of disrespect or disloyalty to our State but [are] fully satisfied that nothing would so much tend to develop our resources, and that many incalculable advantages would arise under a separate government.”
- Feb 4, 1857– A petition submitted by Sherman was referred to a special committee of five which released a bill “to retrocede the Upper Peninsula to the United States, preparatory to the formation of a new territory,” which was submitted to the house. It cited distance from the capital, seasonal isolation, differences of economy, and a lack of responsiveness to UP needs saying, “we believe considerations of ultimate benefits to the country – of justice to the pioneers of that distant region – of the practical necessity of an ultimate separation, the proposed measure will be sustained by the patriotic citizens of the Lower Peninsula.” He noted the people of the UP, “are almost if not entirely unanimous in favor of an independent organization, conscious that their own prosperity and best interests would be eminently subserved thereby.”
- The bill was laid on the table without discussion and never brought back up.
- The Free Press wrote The State of Superior which read, “The idea is a very fallacious one that would lead anyone to suppose that the people of the State of Michigan would be willing to cede away so valuable a portion of their territory.”
- March 23, 1858 – Abner Sherman’s wrote an article in the Upper Peninsula Advocate, The Relations of the Upper and Lower Peninsulas, which said:
- “Nature never contemplated such a union…a divorce from our unnatural partner is the only true mode of redressing the many evils to which we are subjected.” “Not a dollar” had been appropriated for UP roads or harbors. He wrote, “Although entirely overlooked in matters of legislation, appropriation, and education, we are fully recognized in that of taxation.”
- At this time, the legislature’s discussions and Press in every quarter was in concert, the new state should be called “Superior.”
- 1860s – UP statehood was laid aside (yet again) since Michigan was in the Civil War and the UP supplied that war with iron and copper.
- Dec. 28,1868 – A territorial Convention was called at Miller’s Hall in Houghton
- Delegates were selected, who went to the state senate and house, listed grievances for the UP, and set forth reasons for its separation.
- “Resolved: That we…will use our best endeavors, and earnestly request our representatives and senators in the state legislature to use all honorable means to secure a cession of this portion of the state to the general government for the purpose herein set forth.”
- It was received with little enthusiasm from Lansing.
- March 1869 – a minority resolution assenting to the secession of the UP was submitted to the House of Reps by its Committee on Federal Relations. It was promptly tabled, and no action was taken
- Dissatisfaction among UP residents was evident. Tolls on the Sault ship lane were increased. Calls were made to refund taxes taken from mines to the counties they were in.
- 1869 – Railway built through port of Escanaba and Ishpeming
- 1872 – rails merged into C&NW system
- Feb 6, 1875 – It “has been decided to call a convention for the purpose of taking into consideration the question of petitioning the State Legislature and Congress for the cession for the Upper Peninsula to the general government, and the erection of the same into a territory.”
- March 11, 1875 – Convention called at Austin’s Hall in Ishpeming
- Resolution by Swineford was accepted “almost unanimously.”
- This too was ignored in the legislature and waylaid in the press outside the UP.
- 1890s – Sault and Republic carry the banner
- Population of UP then was 180,658, higher than Delaware (168k), Montana (132k), Idaho (84k), Wyoming (61k), and Nevada (46k).
- News Editor Chase S. Osborn began a campaign to put state and national candidates into office in Lansing, so the issue would not be ignored by the Legislature there.
- Roger Andrews wanted Clover-Land, saying the UP could only see its potential with autonomy.
- He said the UP is ahead of other actual states in valuation, tax revenues, school expenditures, employment, timber and mineral production, population, land area, miles of railroad, etc.
- The State of Superior was proposed again.
- This only led to increased attention paid to the value of the UP, and resulted in disregard for the proposal so that Michigan could keep its cash cow in the barn.
- He continued support for the UP Development Bureau, which built the UP Tourism Industry.
- He published the “Clover-Land Magazine” well into the 1930s.
- 1920s – Logging, fishing, and motoring Tourists the UP’s main economy
- 1930s – Great Depression
- WW2 left no energy, resources, or inclination for freedom for another two decades.
- 1950s – Pat Hayes owned the hotel House of Ludington in Escanaba and flew the flag of the State of Superior.
- 1957 – Mackinac Bridge completed
- April 4, 1959 – Theodore G Albert, Ironwood attorney, filed “Bill of Complaint in Action for Divorce” in Dickinson County court, with the UP being the Plaintiff and the Lower Peninsula, the Defendant. It read: “The Lower Peninsula is too distant, too cold, too unwieldy, too hard to handle, and for that reason, deprives the Plaintiff of any warm or close association.” The Plaintiff further asks that her maiden name be restored.
- This caught on, with talk of part of Wisconsin joining and making Iron Mt. the capital.
- 1962 – John Steel of DeTour (land developer & real estate broker) and Robert Wylie launched a campaign to form a new state and become a legalized gambling mecca like Nevada.
- A series of meetings started at the Iron Inn, in Iron River.
- They formed the Upper Peninsula Independence Association.
- 20,000 signatures were collected for a ballot referendum- just 36,000 short.
- 1960s – Jim Trethewey, who coined the term “Yooper,” proposed the idea of “Superiorland.”
- 1975 – Rep. Jacobetti continued to be a driving force behind the statehood issue…succeeded in getting the Legislature to approve expenditure of $5,000 in 1975 “to study the feasibility of establishing a new state.”
- 1988 – The last attempt of the UP statehood movement
- Jacobetti introduced House Bill Number 6115, “to separate the Upper Peninsula from the State of Michigan; to adjust certain boundary lines between the Upper and Lower Peninsulas; and to provide for a referendum.”
- Jacobetti’s bill for UP statehood failed to be brought to a proper vote in the House and, like all other similar legislative efforts, it quietly expired.
Secession – Good or Bad?
In June this year, General Petraeus told CNN’s Sate of the Union that the dissolution of a nation such as Russia would be a bad idea. He claimed, “I don’t think we want a country that spans 11 time zones and includes republics in the Russian Federation of many different ethnic and sectarian groupings to come apart at the seams.” Being a proponent of federalism, the general’s claims appear to be heavily biased. This becomes clear in a reading of Ryan McMaken’s recent book Breaking Away: The case for secession, radical decentralization, and smaller polities.
“Rights may be universal, but their enforcement must be local.” -Murray Rothbard
McMaken lays out a strong case against the centralization of power, with evidence from history and recent events. He demonstrates that democracy only works if it is done locally. He shows historical record of times this has worked, including reference to the 18th century Holy Roman Empire, the 19th century Austrio-Hungarian empire, and the 17th century Dutch Republic, which all had many subdivisions of nearly-autonomous regions. He proposes secession as a tool for independence, points out how colonized nations seceded from European powers, and reminds us that America seceded from Britain. He notes that the number of independent nations has tripled since WW2 and proposes this trend should continue.
“Democracy seems like oppression to the minority.” -Ludwig von Mises
McMaken tells the hard truth: Democracy doesn’t work, except perhaps on a local level. When populations with differing world views must exist under a single regime, voting resolves nothing, and one side will ultimately impose its preferred policies on the other side. He gives a prime example of Iceland in 2018 which saw legislation introduced to ban circumcision, though this is a de facto ban on orthodox Judaism. Some are so blinded by their cultural biases, that they even conclude that no “civilized” person could possibly believe that circumcision is anything other than a barbaric practice. Those who continue to believe in such things, it is thought, must therefore be forced “into the 21st century” by the coercive power of the state. Their religious beliefs, as Hillary Clinton demanded in 2015, “have to be changed.”
Democracies can produce disgruntled minority groups locked out of power indefinitely by the majority- what McMaken calls permanent minorities. Ludwig von Mises concludes that even if the member of a nation’s minority group, ”according to the letter of the law, be a citizen with full rights…in truth he is politically without rights, a second-class citizen, a pariah.” Mises characterizes majority rule as a form of colonialism from the point of view of the minority. The solution is one of the decentralization of power.
“Under decentralization, jurisdictions must compete for residents and capital, which provides some incentive for greater degrees of freedom.”
-Lew Rockwell
Early America & Tribal Sovereignty
Early Americans believed in spreading power out as far and wide as possible. They feared a federal government could replace the crown in military might and coercive power, and knew standing armies were a loss of liberty. They kept power locally to offset the potential for abuse by a central authority. This follows English traditions which in the 1600s raised militias under civil law. These militias were organized locally and divorced from royal control. By constitutional convention these fears were rooted in the 2nd Amendment, with the intent that states would be free to raise and train their own militias as a defense against federal power. Today in the USA military training of the once-free and now federally-managed militias, is left up to the states.
“The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defense. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.” -1780 Massachusetts declaration of rights.
Tribal sovereignty presumes the tribe is a sovereign entity having a direct negotiation with the federal government. In practice the tribes are semi-autonomous and subject to regulations and oversight by the federal government. Tribal land should not be considered US territory, but as of now the federal government can regulate so far as to dictate whether tribes can sell marijuana. Federal officials are known for running their own puppet candidates in tribal elections who can serve as a direct conduit between tribal governments and the federal government’s favored interest group. The federal government reserves the right to dissolve tribal governments alleged to be corrupt, such as when tribal officials use their privileges to enrich themselves. Logically, it should be the other way around.
Postmodern Solutions
In November 2021 Gov. DeSantis of Florida signed a law banning the use of vaccine mandates by private and public entities. He claimed the sovereign state supersedes the federal government, but also local governments. He said local governments “don’t have a right to do wrong.” Critics claimed this was a violation of the “home rule,” which in some states protects the autonomy of local governments. To only decentralize to the state level inevitably presents the same issue of a centralized power enriching itself while abusing its citizenry. So, McMaken concludes decentralization must happen at the state level as well. Unfortunately, this is strictly forbidden in the US Constitution, which says people who want freedom must beg for it, from their abusers, the way peasants beg lords and kings.
“No new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State…without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.” -US Constitution, Article 4, Section 3, Clause 1
McMaken points out the number of solutions to this problem practiced elsewhere in the world. In Sweden, a system of Double Majority Voting means that to achieve significant legislative changes a majority of voters overall in a region, as well as a majority of voters in a majority of regional governments, must all agree. He proposes a system of Local Vetoes and gives an example of how this would apply to Colorado. If Colorado became a singular unitary state Denver would dominate exclusively. Areas outside of Denver should have veto power over policies pushed by it. Another solution would be political representation based on population size, where each region of a state would get equal votes within a greater body of regional governments.
To sum up McMaken’s claims, he provides 3 major reasons for decentralization. First, smaller states allow for more choice and more opportunities for exit. Second, smaller states increase protection of minority rights when democracy fails. Third, smaller states are less likely to get away with abuses of power. He points out that larger states do not necessarily facilitate greater trade. He demonstrates that defense agreements can work where national defense once stood. He reveals the fact that small countries are nearly twice as wealthy as larger countries- according to the World Bank Development Indicators- are oft more responsive to their people, and don’t have the money to engage in crazy ideas. An independent judiciary, along with proper legal checks and balances, could in theory ensure liberty and justice for all.
In the absence of the above remedies, or others, permanent minorities will continue to exist. Very few solutions exist for such individuals. These include boycotts, passive resistance, and armed rebellions. This last solution can lead to civil war, which makes secession a very important tool for those desiring peace.
The Free State Solution
If a Free State of Superior were brought about, it could do what cannot be done in federalist America. It could deregulate nuclear technology and enable companies, such as the one that went bankrupt earlier this year, to sell mini reactors to cities in need of clean power. After all, why should Americans have access to clean energy restricted, while the US government continues to buy its only heavy water from Iran?
“The United States is buying Iran’s heavy water for its nuclear reactors through an intermediary despite sanctions.” –Anadolu Agency
If a Free State of Superior were enacted, Yoopers could finally have the freedom to grow and be prosperous, on their own terms, without despotic control from dictatorial actors such as Gov. Whitmer, AG Nessel, Biden, and Trump. It could become a vacation paradise where the money goes to the property owners and the original inhabitants. It could be a place where humans live in harmony with nature. It could once again stand as a cultural epicenter for native civilization, like a beacon of light to the world.
“Nature never contemplated such a union…a divorce from our unnatural partner is the only true mode of redressing the many evils to which we are subjected.” -Abner Sherman, Upper Peninsula Advocate, March 23, 1858.
Individuals are sovereign unitary entities, and governments are not. Still, a local government run in a democratic manner would be freer and more just than our current model allows. The people of the UP and greater Superior region have struggled for independence for too long. If power is taken through decentralization, the decolonization of individuals within permanent minority groups such as UP residents and the Ojibwa tribe, could finally occur. Secession should be explicitly allowed by law, but in the absence of due representation the people are given no choice but to resist their oppressors in Lansing and DC. Ultimately, national divorce is the best solution to the problem of a weaponized nation captured by foreign and special interest groups.
*This article was featured in the January 2024 Michigan Libertarian newsletter.