O .‘o‘ '4. 9--a A POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE MACKINAC BRIDGE Thesis for the Degree 0? M; A MICHIGAN-STATE UNIVERSITY _ BENJAMIN. I. BURNS 1968 M‘ ~~nofim“‘~~m' ILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIZILIIIIIZIIIIIZIIII I/ 'a".*‘.*‘**" *“v'wfi-r ‘1 .IS .- a.- '1‘“ M". .. - ”V I t IMAR (‘2 21” I ‘ d' 10r"'= ‘ :99 I II ‘ " ‘ g I: m- :r ’ ‘3‘: 1“? ABSTRACT A POLITICAL HISTORY or TILE mat-mac BRIDGE The Mackinac Straits Bridge, which links Lichigan's two peninsulas is an imposing structure. Five miles long, it curves gracefully across the waters of the Great Lakes. Traffic moves swiftly and smoothly across its great length twelve months of the year. With a price tag of $100 million it is the product of man's imagination and a monument to man's persis- tance. The first proposals to bridge the Straits are found in Indian legends. Ever since the task of con- quering the travel barrier has colored man's thoughts. The concept of conneCting the two peninsulas traces thread-like down.through the pasn eighty years of Michigan's history. This is the story of the political loops and turns, knots and tangles in that thread. It is the story of the role and effect of the bridge in the politicalcampaigns of the twentieth century, which is pinpointed through analysis of election statistics. It is the story of Horatio Earle, Prentiss harsh Brown, Lmrray Van Wagoner, w.s. woodfill, and G, Lbnnen Williams, Although the bridge did not change the direction of Michigan political hiStory, it probably swayed its course simply because it was seized upon as an issue by candidates of every ilk and stripe. ihny sensible, practical politicians thought the bridge would or did affect the outcome of their campaigns and thus the structure influenced their emotions and ideas. Perhaps more than anything else the bridge has served as a political football. It has been trade bait for legislators, who wheeled and dealed With the bridge proposals and who were still making political mileage out of toll removal proposals in the late 1960's. However, the real fights in the state capitol occurredr in the 1950's during the successful push for bridge approval by a coalition of Republicans and Democrats. Pbre recent battles seem dim by comparison to those hectic days, which indicates that in the game of politi- cal football the first hundred years are the hardest. A POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE MAC K11"? AC BR 1D GE By BENJAIVEEN J." BURNS A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the_requirements for the degree of LESTER OF ARTS Department of History 1968 Copyright by BEIIJAI'IIN JOSEPH BU N 1968 CHAPTER II III IV TABLE OF CONTEI‘ITS PA GE TEEEARIJBDAYS.......... 1 TIE DEPRESSION DECADE . . . . . . . 15 THE: FORT H s O O 0 O O O O O O O O 0 1+5 TIE 1950 'S: ENGAGEI/IENT AID I'IARRIAGE . . . 0 g o o o o o 0 7O LEAR-IE IT FEE o o o o o o o o o o. o o 119 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1 LEGISLATIVE NEGATIVE VOTES ON FIRST BRIDGE AUTHORITY . . . . 19 2 UPPER PENINSULA ELECTION GAINS BY WILLIANE IN 19MB . . . . 61 3 FINAL VOTE ON 1950 BRIDGE BILL O O O O O O O O O O O O O I 81 N WILLIANE' 1950 ELECTION STRENGTH COMPARED TO 19MB CAIVIPAIGIII o o o o o o o o o o o o 90 5 GOVERNOR, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, AND 12TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 1950 ELECTION RESULTS IN UPPER PENINSULA . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 6 COMPARISON OF ALGER AI-ID FELLY'S 1952 ELECTION STBEI‘IGTH IN UPPER PENII'ISULA . . . . . . . . . 105 iv CHAPTER I THE EARLE DAYS In the beginning the dream of a Mackinac Bridge belonged to the Indians who peopled the shores of Michigan's upper and lower peninsulas. It was only with the coming of the white man that the bridge became a political issue which stirred the fires of oratory in men throughout the state. One of the early legends, repeated during bridge dedication ceremonies in 1958, utilized the famous literary figure of Hiawatha to achieve its point. Hiawatha, as the story goes, confided to his feminine companion Minehaha a plan.to bridge the Straits with canoes tied side by side. With typical female logic she rejected the scheme and explained to the crestfallen warrior that a whole tribe could paddle across in the canoes while a single brave stumbled from shore to shore in the makeshift bridge. Hiawatha wisely dropped the scheme.1 A second legend told how the demi-God’ Na-na-bo-Jo built a bridge out of rocks he found along the shore. The structure was later upset by a high wind creating lite Sign 21:21.12 Maskiaas mate. pamphlet. The Straits Publishing 00., 1957. 1 the islands in the Straits.2 A third tale called for a Chippewa brave to cut down a giant pine tree which would tridge the Straits. Failing to find a tree five miles high, the Indians never accomplished the feat.3 Perhaps if the Inidans could have conceived how long it would take their white brothers to stop arguing and get around to building the bridge, the tribal council would have ordered the immediate intensive cultivation of a promising pine sapling. For the long campaign for a Mackinac Bridge was fraught with trouble. misstatement and SUperstition and colored by a succession of indivi- duals, who in their own way rivaled the Indians of legend. The completion of the Brooklyn Bridge in 1883 insrnred the northern Michigan residents to hash over the possibility of a permanent crossing at the Straits. A ‘ St. Ignace merchant by the name of Paulson, booming his department store wares, ran pictures of the Brooklyn Bridge in advertisements in local newspapers captioned "The proposed hhckinac Bridge." Admitedly, the bottom of the bridge engraving was filled with buildings, which 2John C. wright, The Crooked Tree Indian Legends and a Short History of the Little Traverse Bay Region, harbor Springs, Mich., 1917, p. 36. 31319. Lansing 5.13.239. 29.22221. June ’5 ~ 1960. DJ of course could not have exiSted in northern Michigan, but that did not particularly matter to Paulson, who apparently felt the eye stopping impact of the advertising campaign for his department store was most important.LP On a cold winter day in 188%, Traverse City editor and publisher Thomas T. Bates sat down and penned an editorial which was to summarize the bridge situation for the next sixty years. Bates deemed a Straits cross- ing practical, but raised the question of its economic feasibility. Couched in the personal JournaliStic style of the times, Bates' editorial is generally considered the first real consideration of the problem. The latest from the Straits of Mackinac is that the steamer Algomah has been aban- doned for the winter, the crew discharged and all transferring across the Straits will be done by teams, until spring. And thus ends the experiment of a winter ferry across the Straits. What will be done remains to be seen. If there is to be a great through route from east to west through Michigan, there must be a sure and permanent crossing at the Straits. A steam ferry was never dreamed practical by many. The Algomah has already made a hard fight for existence and is finally abandoned. Now whall it be a bridge or a tunnel? Either will mean enor- mous expense but both are practicable. It is the only solution of the queStion as the Herald claimed when the Algomah was put on. The important question is will the business to be done warrant the expenditure of the HThe Story of the Mackinac Bridge, pamphlet, The Straits-Pubiishing Co., St. Ignace, 1957. 1. large amount of money required in the build- ing of such a bridge or the construction of a tunnel under the Straits?5 However, Bates' visionary dream.of a permanent crossing failed to stir the imagination.of the Michigan populace, although several newspapers around the state reprinted it. It was more than two decade later that othe first of a long series of politicians turned the idea over in his mind and decided it was a good one. Horatio S. Earle, Michigan's first highway commis- sioner, was the first of the colorful politicians who became involved with the Mackinac Bridge proposal. A cross-eyed, inventive little egotist from.Hallowell, Vermont, Earle gained fame by stumping the state for good roads. Filled with homespun humor and witty little, tidbits he termed "Earlisms," he yearned for political fame. ‘ ‘ He won election as a Republican to the state senate in 1901 and was appointed to the newly created post of State Highway Commissioner in 1903. When the State Attorney General found the bill creating the position unconstitutional, he served for two years without pay. He was then appointed constitutional State Highway Commissioner in 1905 and served until 1909.6 5113?. 932.933. WEE @192 January 31, 188%, p. 5. 6Detroit News, Dec. 26, 1935. Earle's term as highway commissioner was a period of road promotion, for convincing the public good roads were important was as big a Job as building them. Although the diminutive politician won the title "Good Roads," he never managed to promote himself into the positions he desired as governor and mayor of Detroit. An eternal optomist, his diaries indicated he was sure he had the Republican nomination for governor sewed up several times, only to be badly beaten at the polls.7 Earle first got the idea for a bridge-tunnel across the Straits in 1907. A brief entry in his diary of that year indicated the thought of a permanent crossing appealed to his creative senses.8 Earle went on to form mental sketches of his bridge-tunnel. His scheme called for a reinforced con- crete tunnel which, buoyed up by reinforcing cables and the water, would hang forty feet beneath the surface of the Straits. He explained the plan to a friend and was pleased when the friend liked the idea.9 After that tentative start the bridge idea dropped out of sight until 1920. There was no mention of the 7Horatio s. Earle diaries, Michigan Historical Collections, The University of Michigan, entries during 1908, 1912, 1916, 1920. 8Earle diary, Nov. 30, 1907. 9Earle diaries, Dec. 2 and Dec. l’+, 1907. scheme in Earle's diaries throughout the period, although he later claimed to have developed several ideas during this time. Similarly, there was no empha- sis or interest expressed in the bridge during political campaigns. In 1920, Earle again spoke out publicly on the sub- Ject. By then automobile traffic had grown considera- bly. The railroad lines responded to public demand and provided limited facilities for carrying cars across, but in winter it was sometimes a difficult or impossible tr ip.10 Earle's article in Amggiggg Highways in 1920 is credited as "creating more than passing interest" by at least one politician.familiar with the history of the effort. In essence the article projected the earlier floating tunnel scheme and Earle invited his colleagues to comment on it.11 That invitation brought a New YOrk engineer, Charles Evan Fowler, into the Mackinac Bridge story. Fowler offered a counter-proposal. He suggested a series of causeways and bridges starting north of Cheboygan and island hopping across the Straits. Earle 10Frank B. Wbodford, “Introduction," in Lawrence A. RUbln, MighEy rig-2’ DetI‘OIlt, 1958’ p. 90 “ llPrentiss M. Brown, The Mackinag Bridge Story, Deficit, 1956’ p. 1+. liked the idea and invited Fowler to Michigan at his expense.12 The pair of men and their schemes for a bridge crossing dropped out of the public's sight for several years, although a 1922 entry inthe Earle diaries indi- cated he was still writing articles favoring the perma- nent crossing first visualized by Fowler. It was a brief entry in the Earle style: "Have written articles on bridge across the Straits of Mackinaw (sic) and on the gasoline tax, in favor of the iirst and against the last."13 There is no record of either being published although, presumably, they were. Although there were hardly any public outcries in favor of the crossing outside of the north country, pol- iticians began to sense the trend of the times. One of the first to become aware of the need for better trans- portation across the water barrier was Governor Alex J. Groesbeck. Groesbeck, who had always found strong poli- tical support in the Upper Peninsula, proposed a passen- ger ferry service replace the railroad ferries at his second inauguration on January H, 1923. Advocating a pub- lic car ferry service represented a chance for Groesbeck to show that he was aware of the Upper Peninsula's needs. 1212.23.29.22 revs. Sept. 16. 1928. l3Earle diary, Aug. 1%, 1922. with the start of a ferry system the roads would no longer end at the water, according to Groesbeck. 11+ The beginning of passenger ferry service at the Straits did not halt the hopes for a bridge link. It was only a step toward the final entity. While Earle had apparently toyed with the idea of a privately financed structure at the Straits which would eventually provide profits through tolls, he had dropped the thought by early 1927. The Detroit News, noting an increased interest in a bridge crossing and aware of Earle 's work, asked for a copy of his final plan. ._ Earle confessed in his diary, "I threw away the drawing that Mr‘. C. E. Fowler made for me back in 1921, Just a few weeks ago, but I have found by hunting until midnight a little about it. "15 The same year the Republican attorney general of the state, William W. Potter, contemplated drafting a resolution for the legislature to have the Department of Conservation make a survey on the bridge and report to 16 the 1927 regular session. 11+Frank B. Woodford, Alex J. Groesbeck: Portrait of a Man, Detroit, 1962, pps. “210-211. 15Earle diary, March 18, 1927. 16Detroit News, March 27, 1927. NOthing came of Potter's proposal. Early in 1928 he resigned his post to accept a iflchigan Supreme Court a ppo intment. 17 However, in 1928 Governor Fred W. Green, also a Republican, took up the bridge cause. Green was a sportsman, eSpecially a hunter. He apparently sympa- thized with other hunters who experiencdldifficulty crossing the Straits on the ferries during peak traffic days. Green's support led the highway department to make a study of the private toll facility proposal dur- ing 1928 and find the Fowler plan feasible.18 The Highway Department at this time was headed by Frank F. Rogers of Port Huron. Notably there was a close bond between Earle and Rogers. Earle had named Rogers the first engineer of the Michigan Highway Department shortly after his first appointment as head of the agency. Earle's feelings for Rogers were evidenced in his diary and later in a letter quoted in his autobiography: Lh'Dear Sir, By the authority vested in me, by the unanimous vote of the members of the State Highway Commission, I do hereby appoint you as State Road Engineer, without salary or even your expenses, but with an untold amount 17bflchigan Manual, 1963-196M, Lansing, Mich,. 196%, p. 137. _ 18Brown, p. 1+. 10 of work to do. And I believe it will be just as well done, as though there were a salary attached, and in after years you will get great satisfaction from the fact that you were the first engineer, and that you had something to do with the great highways that will checker our state.19 Roger's department estimated the cost of the facil- ity at $30,000,000, which included accomodations for a railroad crossing underneath the passenger car bridge. The Fowler-Earle proposal eventually came to a stand- still because of an inability to finance it on a private basis.20 Earle's statements during the latter half of 1928 and his published word in 1929 have a tendency to con- fuse the situation unless considered in light of two factors: Earle was in his seventies and might not be expected to recall all details accurately, and Earle was forever promoting himself into a place in history. Earle, in a letter to the Detroit News political writer John.Fitzgibbon, provided this account in Septem- ber 1928: Directly after retiring as highway commissioner in 1909 I went into the sub- ject and at my own expense engaged Charles Fowler, a noted bridge engineer to make a survey. First we considered a tunnel and decided it was impractical because of the 19Horatio s. Earle, The Autobio aphy 9.2 up}; gum." Eagle, Lansing, Michigan,-l929, p. 96.. . -,. .- 8 20Detroit News, March 27, 1928. 11 great length, hence prohibitive cost. Then I proposed a floating tunnel sunk forty feet below the surface of the water and people laughed at me. No such tunnel had ever been built, but of its practi- cality I was convinced. Evans also deci- ded that a bridge from hackinaw City to St. Ignace was also impractical for the reason that the piers would have to be the top of the suspension and the ice flows would probably destroy them. Next he submitted what he and glagreed was the only feasible plan. . . . It was the island hopping route. However, the account raises the unanswered question, if all this transpired shortly after Earle left office, why the 1920 article? Two solutions present themselves. Either Earle got mixed up in his dates or the 1920 article was a promotional gambit designed to give the effort publicity. The former choice seems more logi- cal considering Earle's diary entries during the 1920's. Reported in the same column from Lansing was anot- her statement by Earle; "Now that Governor Fred EL Green is taking up the project for a bridge I am in hearty accord with him." Earle pointed out that he had publicly declared the two peninsulas must be connected above water fully twenty years earlier and proposed to devote his best efforts to the project.22 It is impossible to make a satisfactory case that Green's support of the bridge proposal had a positive 2¥Detrgi£ News, Sept. 16, 1928. 22.22%-, l2 effect on the electorate, although it may have been designed to win over supporters of Groesbeck. However, it is interesting to note that Green was running a cam- pagn for re-election when he brought the issue before the public. Green had stepped past Democratic hopeful William Comstock by a 126,326 vote margin, 1+83.99o to 357,661+ in. 1926. In 1928 with the aid of the presidential election Green moved past Comstock by 556,633 votes.23 There is no evidence to indicate Green gained by his support of a bridge proposal since there were not a considerable number of votes to be gained in the Upper Peninsula. On the other hand, it apparently did not hurt him. In 1929, according to House Journal reports at least one Republican bill favoring the establishment of a Mackinac Bridge was introduced. However, there is no record of its being discussed or of it carrying much weight with the legislature. In 1929, that diminutive, but undiminishable Earle, now past seventy-three, published his autobiography. In the chapter "Public Life and Pelitics," Earle cites eight political campaigns of his life from fire commis- sioner in Chicopee Falls, Massachusetts to governor of Michigan. In his final bid for a place in the minds of 23Michigan genual, l963-6H, p. 431. 13 posterity, Earle cites as his eighth political work the Mackinac Bridge. waghth political work I am going to will to citizens of Michigan and to younger men than I am. Being of sound and disposing mind, I do hereby bequeath to young men, my hopes for bridge and right of way to connect the Upper and lower Peninsulas of this great commonwealth. But knowing, from past experience, that some politician will claim to be the originator of the best and only prac- tical way to obtain this, I will record my idea in this book to be printed in 1928. Earle proceeds to carefully detail the island hopping route fervantly backed in later years by Fowler. In the year 1920, I made a preliminary investigation and found, it was easy and feasible to make this connection with only three and one-half miles of bridge; starting at a point northeast of Cheboygan to Bois Blanc Island, to Round Island, to Lhckinac Island, to St. Ignace. If these three islands were owned by an individual or corporation, the increase in their values would be nearly, or quite as much, as the cost of the bridge and fills. Only one high bridge is needed; and my plan ovided that the fills and bridges should so built, the state chould lease a right of way to railroads. The real kicker came in Earle's last line on the topic: ”The direct line across, from thckinaw City (sic) to St. Ignace, is impossible for either a bridge or tun- nel, account of the depth .of thechannel. '2“ 2t"Earle, gumm, pps. 170-182. l’+ Earle was not the first nor the last man to enunci- ate that sentiment. He probably has more claim than any other single twentieth century politician to the title: "Father of the Mackinac Bridge." It is sad that he did not solidify his claim to the title by backing the direct route which was already gaining adherents. 25 However, modern engineers, including David B. Steinman, ultimate designer of the five mile long span, have indi- cated Earle was probably right considering l928 engineer- ing standards for the direct route could have resulted in a structure which would have collapsed, like Na-na- bo-Jo's rock effort of legend. 26 25 Detroit News, Sept. 16, 1928. 26Interview with Lackinac Bridge Authority official who asked not to be identified, Feb. 23, 1966. CHAPTER II THE DEPRESSION DECADE The depression, which blew its ill wind across the economy of the nation, actually breathed new life into the bridge proposal. It was with the idea that the gigantic undertaking could provide Jobs for northern Michigan's unemployed that the first state effort was made. ' During the depression.decade the first bridge com- mission was named. More feasibility studies were made and plans actually drafted for the island hopping route. It was also during the decade, that politicians seized on the proposal as an issue which would further their efforts toward election. ‘However, backing the bridge was a stand that many took easily without really know- ing or caring at times whether the bridge was possible. The first federal rejection of participation in paying for the bridge was also recorded during the 1930's. In 1930 the GOP candidate for governor was the youthful Wilber Brucker, who had been attorney general under Fred Green. Brucker held the Republican line and turned back William Comstock's third bid for the state's highest elective office by léé,326 votes. The total ' 15 16 2 votes cast for both candidates were less than 850,000. 7 By 1932 the state and nation were in economic chaos. The tide had turned and Comstock, nominated for the fourth straight time, went into office on the strength of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's presidential popularity. When the votes were canvassed, Comstock had a plurality of 190,737 votes. His total was 887,672, more than the combined total for both gubernatorial candidates two years earlier. Brucker, who held important appointive posts in later life, was finished as a successful elec- tive politician.28 Brucker, a co-chairman of the Michigan apportion- ment commission in 1966, recalled the Mackinac Bridge proposal was not a concrete issue in either of his cam- paigns. ". . . Let me say that I did not take any stand with reference to the building of the thkinac Bridge in either of my campaigns in 1930 or 1932. I do not recall whether my opponent, William Comstock, made any mention of the Mackinac Bridge during the 1932 cam- paign," Brucker said.29 A 27Rflchigan.bhnua1, 19éi-6H, p. #31. 28 this. 29Letter to author from Wilber M. Brucker, Feb. 25, 1966. 17 Prentiss Brown, however, remembered that Comstock had brought up the bridge topic in a speech at Newberry in 1932. "I don't distinctly recall any earlier mention," Brown said.30 ‘ But the main.issues in 1932 were economic, with Brucker pleading for a fair chance to govern. Newspaper reports of speeches by both candidates during the cam- paign in the Upper Peninsula fail to confirm Brown's statement on.Comstock's Newberry speech.31 I Comstock may have been favorably disposed toward the bridge proposal, like many others, because he was a north country native. Born in Alpena in 1877, he served as alderman and mayor of that community before entering statewide politics.32 During the second special session of the state legislature in 193%, Comstock proposed a bridge author- ity be named to investigate the feasibility of a bridge, issue and sell bonds, build a bridge, and fix and col- lect tolls. Comstock was supporting the Fowler island hopping scheme and the cost was estimated then at $335,000,000.33 0 Interview with Prentiss NL Brown, St. Ignace, bhch., Aug. 15, 196%. 31§§ul§ Ste. Marie Evening flaws, June to Nov. 1932. 32John.P1 White, "The Governor of Iflchigan as Party Leader: The Case of William A. Comstock," Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and letters paper, Ann Arbor, Vol,.XLII, 1957. 33State Journal, march 1 and 2. 1934. 18 The enabling act was sponsored by another north country politician. Democratic Representative Edward Fenlon, a law partner to Prentiss bi Erown, introduced the successful measure. Fenlon later became circuit court judge for Mackinac and Emmett counties, the sites of the tridgeheads. The Comstock backed proposal also asked the federal government for a loan of seventy per cent of the cost of the bridge.35 The Fenlon proposal passed the House by a 76-16 margin. Twelve of the sixteen no votes came from Republicans. The Comstock backed bill was approved in the Senate by a 17-9 margin with Republicans providing six of the negative votes. Figure 1 (page 19) shows only two of the negative votes wace cast by lawmakers residing north of Bay County. These two were from Antrin and Grand Traverse Republican state representatives. All other no votes came from southern.Michigan with Kent and Oakland counties providing three no votes each, and Wayne, Jackson and Ienawee countiesshowing two no votes each. The rest of the negative ballots were concentra- ted in Allegan, Barry, Eaton, Inng and Kalamazoo, and in the thumb counties of Huron, Tuscola, and Lapeer.36 35State Journal; March and April 193h' 36MichiganHouse Journal, Extra Sessions iglg-ah, 9- 95s and aimless Serielaaaaal. latte. §e§§iaas 123.1%, po 23):. u _ m II..|I a. v» a a 1i . rm Pl-sl._|- w _.. .I. Lia. .H..-_ .a. ‘I|l- a a. o z .w 5 .I. E 4. 7 ._\ vi. ’ _n.gflmy//,. ///. 7 / . a _. 7/; .. __ ... 3: ...-.Ii._ is: . _ u .. * lay/A. a I” _I.Q.~I.ii _ lizfl. ..... ’3/ i._ a a. C m. u. -- L. ..... -._,, ,m. l..- :i, e-..i..-,__.--_ . _. é. ..._ «we; " 1%.». lg..- 0.? _.. FL-.. _ _ . a _. __ _. L._i -...h.-‘..-.._ ‘0... Nemm Votes—1934 and“ Authority Bill 7/4 I} V .l’l‘!‘ 55' .l'lulil [1' III 20 The hackinac Bridge Authority named by Comstock in April 193%- included Patrick Kane of Port Huron, Otto W. Lang of Mackinac Island and Stephen T. Stackpole, of Detroit, who represented the railroad interests. Brown, who already was a U.S. Representative, was named legal adviser and Horatio Earle's New Ybrk import, Charles E. Fowler, was named temporary chief engineer.37 Fowler's appointment as chief engineer was probably made because he had more background in the bridge pro- ject than any other individual. It was probably rea- soned that his choice as engineer would expedite federal acceptance. In the fall of 1933, Fowler had attempted to inte- rest the State Highway Department in the project. He apparently failed, but continued active promotion.of the project. In December 1933, Fowler made efforts to set up a federal Civil works Administration project. On January 9, 193%, presumably with the approval of Comstock, Fowler filed a preliminary application.with the Public works Administration. The federal agency approved a project known as "local control survey and Mackinac Bridge survey" in February 193%. Fowler opened an office in Lansing and . employed assistants and men for survey parties. They were paid by federal checks. In March Fowler was 37m0m! pa 5. 21 ordered to discontinue his surveys, but apparently the office in Lansing was continued throughout April with the government agency paying the bills.38 At the first meeting on April 28, the Bridge Authority appointed Fouler to his official post. He continued to direct field work until the latter part of July 193%. No reports were ever made by Fowler to the Authority and the information and data he assembled while working under both federal and state governments was never received.39 Immediately after the Bridge Authority was named, Brown introduced a bill for the federal government to pick up $33,000,000 of the cost of the bridge linking the two peninsulas. Optimistic in mid-May, Brown expected the bill would be reported out of committee. In early June an Associated Press dispatch noted: "the Straits of Mackinac Bridge was another step nearer realization today." The Senate had passed Republican Senator Arthur Vandenberg's bridge bill. Two days later the House committee reported out the Brown bill.1+0 38J.H. Cissel, "Consulting Engineer's Report," Dec. 31, 1936, in the files of the State of Michigan library. 39mm. ”Omar «33.29.. tame merging here. May 21. June 7. and June 9, 1934. 22 However, the first legislative drive for federal aid failed on the final day of the session as GOP Repre- sentative George A. Dondero of Royal Oak officially put it to death by objecting to consideration of a bridge bill. Dondero said the bill should be rejected because it would destroy the scenic beauty of the Straits.”1 August 28, 193% the Bridge Authaity put forth its first effort for federal aid as a slightly revised Fowler plan, which was submitted to the Public works Administration with a request for seventy per cent of the estimated $35,000,000 cost.1+2 Meanwhile, objections were raised to the island hopping route. These were brought before the Authority chiefly by interest groups from Mackinac Island, which felt the distinctive character of the island would be ruined by Fowler's project. Others, in the western part of the state, particularly the Grand Rapids area, com- plained a terminus near Cheboygan would not be to their best interests. Many others also indicated a preference for a direct crossing, according to Cissel.’+3 Comstock, who had not been a particularly popular %% governor, did practically no campaigning for renomina- LilSault Ste. Harie Evening Mews, June 19, 193%. 231.0%! po 50 43 %1+ White, "Governor." Cissel, 1936 report, p.%. 23 tion as his party's standard bearer in 193%. He insisted the Democrats either wanted him to run for a second term or they did not. Perhaps the four p-evious nominations made him vulnerable or perhaps it was simply that Comstock was not popular. In any event, the voters answered Comstock negatively and Arthur lacy was named Democratic gubernatorial nominee in the September pri- mary. Lacy had a margin of 9,000 votes,“5 Apparently candidates in the more hotly contested Republican gubernatorial primany thought they had mre to gain by espousing a bridge. In August former Governor Alexander J. Groesbeck, ontthe come-back trail, advo- cated elimination of all ferry tolls at the Straits.1+6 A few days later former Detroit Mayor John W. Smith, also seeking the GOP gubernatorial nomination, summed up an attitude that was to become common in regard to bridge advocacy. “Both Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Groesbeck declare they are in favor of a bridge across the Straits. I'm in favor of that too," said Smith.“7 Fitzgerald won the nomination and went on to win the governorship by 82,699 votes.“8 Since the federal government, through the PWA, had “5%; Journal, Sept. 12 and Sept. 13, 1931+. “68.22;: as. an: Emmet an. Aux. 23. 193*. ”7mm an. inn Austria me. Aug. 27. 193*. I“Michigan W, 1963-6’h P. 181. 2% not acted by November, Comstock appeared before the Bridge Authority to ask it to pass a resolution urging an early and favorable decision on the application, The resolution began: "in view of the imperative need for immediate employment in northern Michigan. . . ," thus indicating the reasons behind the original push for ‘ a bridge}!r9 In the background a controversy was brewing between the direct route supporters and Fowler, who had become passionately involved with his island hopping route, to the exclusion of any consideration of the other. Brown said he was never in favor of Fowler's route and had to ignore constant urgings fr-m Fowler while he was in Congress. The Authority attempted to secure necessary data in order to make a decision on the matter of location, but it was unable to secure from Fowler satisfactory infor- mation as to the merits and probable cost of construc- tion on.routes other than.the one originally proposed by him. After a number of urgings, Fowler finally stated: "It is absolutely certain beyond peradventure of a doubt that no highway bridge can be built for a direct crossing at less than $50,000,000 upwards, and one to 49Minutes of the Mackinac Bridge Authority, Nev. 9, 193%, in.Authority files at St. Ignace, Mich. SOBrown, pps. 5-6. 25 carry railways would cost so much it is useless to waste .51 time in an estimate.‘ The battle between Cissel, who supported the direct route, and Fowler, who had become the sole exponent of island hopping, came to a head in January 1935. Cissel wrote to Stackpole, Authority chairman: "I regret that Dr. Fowler and I have been unable to agree on these several matters and that so much controversy has developed over the matter of the 'direct' crossing. His attitude on this matter has, from the beginning, been such as to lead me to the conclusion that it is his pur- pose to force adoption of the route ori- ginally proposed by him. This situation, I believe, has been unfortunate in sev- eral particulars. In the first place, I believe that the 'direct' crossing, if feasible and economic, is favored by the highway department. With.kr. Fowler representing the Authority and avidly fighting consideration of anything except his own favored plan, it has been impossi- ble to secure full cooperation of the highway department in development of the project as might have otherwise been possible." On February 12 and 13, 1935, the Authority took steps to remedy the situation by informing Fow1er his activities as temporary chief engineer were suspended "and that he was not to further represent the Authority in discussions pertaining to the project." 'N 51Report by Charles E. Fowler to bhckinac Bridge Authority, Nov. 27, 193”. 52Letter from J. H. Cissel to S. T. Stackpole, Jan. 22, 1935, in Mackinac Bridge Authority files. 53Cissel,.l936 report. However, Fowler continued to represent the Authority. JHeappeared with Stackpole and Cissel at a PWA Board of Review hearing on June 17. thmbers of the Lake Carriers Assaiation presented strenuous objections to blocking the South Straits channel with a bridge with low clearance and a draw span.51+ A month later the PWA notified the Authority that its application had been disapproved, but added the rejection.would not prejudice an amended application far a new route. Fowler's services were again discontinued. However, the Authority was still not rid of Fowler, as Cissel duly noted in September the final disposition at which the Authority confirmed they no longer required the New Ybrk City engineer's services as of July 27.55 A few days later a renewed application for a PWA loan and grant were filed in washington. During the summer of 1935 the public began to evince an increased interest in the possibility of a bridge. This was particularly true in the Upper Peninsula where former Governor Chase S. Osborn was sponsoring the push. 56 Osborn, one of the most venerable and eloquent 51+H.H. Cissel, "A Report on the Mackinac Straits Bridge Pro ect," Jan. 27, 1937. in theiiles of the State of A chigan library. 55Cissel, 1937 report. SéCissel, 1937 report. 27 Republican elder statesmen of the time, had at one point opposed the bridge as impractical. However, he was persuaded the project was feasible largley due to the influence of Dean.Mortimer E. Cooley, of the University of Michigan College of Engineering.57 In September 1935 a letter from Osborn to GOP Governor Frank Fitzgerald cited twenty-three reasons why a bridge should be built. This letter supposedly helped convince the Grand Ledge native to come out for the project. Fitzgerald, after a study of the propo- sals, said he was for it one hundred per cent. He claimed the federal government was responsible for financing the bridge because Michigan‘s two peninsulas were linked into one state by the federal government during the Andrew Jackson administration.58 In November 1935, Brown, who had dreamed of the link between the peninsulas since childhood,59 indi- cated a desire to present the project to President Franklin D. Roosevelt for his consideration and possible backing. 57woodrord, introduction to gigggz Mag, p. 11. SBStellanova Osborn, Les Cheneaux Breezes, Cedarville, Mich., Vol. t,.Nov. 1,1936. SgBefore the Bridig, the History anQDDirectory g; ‘SE. Ignace and Heargy calities, St. Ignace, 1957, 28 -Brown had been active in politics since he was elected prosecuting attorney in 191% at age twenty-five. He was chairman of the Michigan State Democratic Convention six times between 1924 and 19%. He was first elected to Congress in 1932 and served two terms in the House before moving up to the Senate in 1936. He was beaten in l9#2, thus ending his elective political life.60 The plan put forth by the Bridge Authority was to have Brown and Comstock make an appeal for Roosevelt's 61 backing for the bridge. This, however, never materi- alized. Instead it was Brown and Osborn, who eventually went to Roosevelt in.December. Osborn apparently met twice with Roosevelt, once in Georgia and later in washington, D.C. Osborn's diary entry for December 6 recorded this 'remark on.his meeting with Roosevelt at Warm Springs, Georgia: “He proceeded to favor a bridge across the Straits of Mackinac."62 Brown adds insight into Roosevelt's ability to charm with his recollections of the washington meeting. 60"Sketch of Career, Prentiss M. Brown, Chairman of the Board," paper by the Detroit Edison.Company, March 22, 195%, copy in State of Michigan Library files. 61Letter from Brown to S. T. Stackpole, Bridge Authority Chairman, Nov. H, 1935, in Mackinac Bridge Authority files. 62Chase S. Osborn, diary, Dec. 6, 1935, p. 3H0, Michigan Historical Collections, The University of Muchigan Library. fiaiwiiqgw . x 29 After several hours closeted with the President, Brown said, "we left believing we had won his whole hearted support, but it was not until several hours later that I realized he had actually promised us nOthing."63 On December 17, Roosevelt did order the Army Corps of Engineers to report on the location, cost, feasi- bility and necessity of the bridge.6H The report, when made, was favorable.65 In January the Upper Peninsula Development Association at its annual meeting in Hancock endorsed the bridge. This culminated in the formation of a ihckinao Bridge Association, which held meetings throughout the state in the Spring of 1936. The push was made through the Chambers of Commerce and civic // associations.00 Another voice added to the chorus was that of George Osborn, Sault Ste. Marie Evening News publisher, who like his father, was a Republican. Osborn used the device of having friends in the Michigan Press Association ask questions about the bridge in order to keep the issue before the public.6/ 63 61+ , 3 . Cissel, l9J7 report. as? .orovni, p. 7. Brown interview. 66Cissell, 1937 report. 67Interview with George Osborn. Aug. 16, 1964, Sault Ste, Lhrie, Mich. 30 But there were still substantial elements of dis- agreement on the project as was indicated by Republican U.S. Senator James Couzens, when he was asked to support the measure by a Nfichigan constituent. So far as I have been able to deter- mine there is not substantial agreement among the voters of Michigan on the desir- ability or the need of the construction of the bridge at the Straits of thkinac. However, if there is any likelihood of the matter being seriously considered by the federal government I will be glad to go into the matter. . . . The difficulty however seems to be that the government here does not believe that the project will be self liquidating. Couzens went on to point out that Brown, who would be elected to the U.S. Senate that fall, was already working on the matter in washington as a Congressman.68 Statements by six Michigan Governors from Osborn to Fitzgerald early in 1936 failed to indicate the bridge project was a major problem facing the state.69 However, Osborn's campaign was drawing some national attention to the proposal as was indicated by a half page article in the Chicago Tribune, which noted, "Chase S. Osborn, former Governor of bhchigan, is behind a movement to have the state of Michigan build 68Letter from James Couzens to Seth Turner of the Heart of Nature Club” Pontiac, Nflch., Feb. 3, 1936, reprinted in the Mackinac Bridge Authority files. 69 Grand Rapids Erggg. Jan. 1. 1936. the bridge alone from state funds in celebration of the hundredth anniversary of Ihchigan's achievement of statehood next year." The article also contained a report on the status of the proposal before Eresident Roosevelt.7O Governor Osborn's role in the bridge struggle was apolitical. He was most interested in development of the Upper Peninsula and approached the project on this basis./1 In a letter to the Larquette Mining Journal, Osborn had summed up his position: Suppose on a trunk line--and The Straits road is that-—there was a mud hole, or chasm, or abyss, or sink-hole eight miles wide that every car had to he pulled over or through. St methiiug would be done about That at once. . . . Lichigan is unifying itself and a mag- nificent new route through Lichigan to Lake Superior and the northwest Lilited States is developing via the Straits of Lackinac. it cannot continue to grow as it ought with clumsy and inad- equate_fcrries for any portion of the year./4 Osborn's interest "gave the proposal the first dignity accorded the idea by the federal government,” a laudatory editorial writer was to later proclaim./J 1,2,0 ‘ . 0 w w - ‘N Chicago irierng, march 16, 9g6. 7] ‘0 s born in t erv :e w. l—rh [C'L‘YTTTQI' from Chase Osiforn to IIaI-C'uette Zfinin.’ A .I . ."‘—.‘L ~ —. “a Journal, Dec. 21, 1955, reprinted in introoUCLion to ‘ ' V 13KB. p.11s ’i. I. l“"‘._:_““ L raj) _ - -. «o w -”"~ ’ ("11891.1 plican ‘il'l sung, CIL3.I'.L01- i e , 1ilCfl, , Cot. 2k) , 173‘ “2. 32 Others were to label him "an outstanding proponent." He was still actively fighting for the preject in his late seventies. Osborn.also used his political influence to get members of the Republican party to take a more favor- able stand on the structure. In April 1936 Osborn wrote to Representative Carle E. Mapes, one of the more outspoken GOP opponents. The former Governor chided the Grand Rapids lawmaker for opposing bridge construction. Mapes' replytypified many Republican conservative thoughts on the bridge at that time. He said it had not been studied enough.75 Politics entered the picture, according to the elder Osborn's son, George, only after the bridge had been successfully promoted for several years. 'Conserva- tive Republicans were very opposed on the grounds of feasibility and economics," George Osborn.added.76 Brown had introduced a bridge bill again in the 1936 session of Congress designed to ask for federal approval to bridge the navigable waters of the Straits. The 1936 bill still had the alternative of a series of 7H 19%0, pps.—E06 and 315,“ copy in State “of Nflchigan library. 75Letter from Chase Osborn to Carle E. Mapes, undated, copy in Mackinac Bridge Authority files. 76Interview with George Osborn, Aug. 16, 1964, Sault Ste. Marie. Mich. 33 causeways in it, but it never got to the floor. Jesse D. welcott of Ibrt Enron asked that the measure be passed without prejudice when it was reported from the Committee On Interstate and Foreign.Commerce, but it was objected to by Representative Vito Phrcantonio.77 A variety of politicians from former Governor Fred Green to Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Frank.kMrphy and incumbent Frank Fitderald spoke favorably of the bridge project during the campaign.months of 1936. Fitderald's approach to the bridge proposal and its possible impact on.votes was more direct. In a Nagaunee campaign speech he declared "that getting auto- mobiles across the Straits is Just as much a state responsibility as clearing away the snowdrifts." This was a fairly apparent echo of Osborn's earlier senti- ments.78 ” During heavy traffic periods five boats including the car ferry Ste. Marie and the Chief wawatam.were put into service in the summer of 1936 on a free schedule.79 It still could not be said the bridge was a signi- ficant issue in the determination of the campaign's eutcome for the real issues in 1936 were obviously eco- nomic. 77Congressional Record, 7ch Congress, Second session, pps. 8278 and 9H72. 78§§ul§ §§§. Marie Evening News, July 10, 1936. 79cissé1;'1'936"sépoge,' p; '12,. ' 31+ Murphy did keep his promise to look into the bridge pro- posal.80 Bridge backers, who were gradually gaining voice across the state, got a bad blow in September when Michigan's applieation for a loan and grant of funds frcn the MFA {es denied. 81 ' MDrphy's race in Michigan in 1936 could easily be claimed to be the race of President Roosevelt since it' was at the President's urging that Murphy entered the campaign. And it was not without misgivings. In March Murphy wrote to Roosevelt: “. . . concerning the situa- tion in Michigan, reports that reach me suggest party success, in the state this fall, if not hopeless, is at least very doubtful. There appears to be a general belief outside of strict party circles. . . that the state at large will go Republican."82 It was July before Murphy decided to make the race against the incumbent Fitderald. Murphy's campaign was a promise to bring the New Deal into Nflchigan. And it was from this standpoint that the one time Detroit Mayor was probably interested in the Mackinac Bridge project. .In his first important speech of the campaign Murphy Survey of Detroit News and Sault Ste. Marie —8 .. ¥Detroit News, Sept. 18,1936. 82Harold I“ Ickes, The Secret.Diagzo of Harold It Ickes, Vol. II: The Inside Struggle, New York, l§#¢, p.198.“ 35 cited a primary objective: to "assist as best I can in the reelection of the Roosevelt‘administration with its program of caring for the social and economic needs of the people. "83 The national character of the campaign was indi- cated by a Detroit News article which indicated Republican politicians generally feared Roosevelt more than any other Democrat. "He, they believe, is the Democratic candidate most likely to carry Michigan,“ said the analyst. ‘ When the tumult of the election campaign was over, Roosevelt had carried Michigan by more than 250,000 votes. Murphy, trailing far behind, managed to squeak through to victory by #8,919 votes.8 Election statistics give no indication that the bridge proposal provided impetus to the Murphy victory. Fitzgerald carried all four counties in the area of the bridgeheads. Chippewa, Mackinac, Emmett and Cheboygan counties all went for the incumbent governor during‘the 1936 campaign. Fitderald's margin of victory in each was not significantly different from the edge he had over Lacey in 1931+.86 I 83Detroit News, July 22, 1936. 813222223 liege. Aug. 29, 1936. r’ . , _ 8)Kalamazoo Qagggtg, May 30, 199+. 86Miphigan Manual, rag-:19 pps. 320-322 and Michigan Manual, 1232318, pps. 321405. 36 At year 's end the support for the bridge proposal was still mounting despite the federal disappointment of September. Chase Osborn indicated his support was undiminished by the September setback in a letter to Seth Turner of the antiac Heart of Nature Club: "Undoubtedly you know that Governor Murphy came out during the campaign in favor of the bridge at the Straits of Mackinac," Osborn wrote. "He did this at w rewest after dis- cussing the question fully with me. That bridge shall be built yet, one of these days. 1'37 The 9.23.9.3 gage 3.9.5! in {December survey seconded this opinion with'the report that one hundred twenty Michigan organizations had officially endorsed the undertaking. 88 Meanwhile state officials still had not given up hope of federal financing for theproject. State WA officials met with Bridge Authority leaders in mid- December to tell them the previous rejection did not preclude the reconsideration of the application if the Authority presented new and additional data which might justify reconsiddration. 89 87Letter from Chase Osborn to Seth Turner, Dec. 2, 1936, copy in Mackinac Bridge Authority files. 889.93.23.15. 13.2.9. 3.21%: Dec. 7! 1936. 89Cissel, 1937' teen, p. 11. v-c-—— .— — --—- 37 In January 1937 the Bridge Authority submitted a re-application on the grounds of increased traffic flow at the Straits and a hike in the total revenues for the state.90 In 1937 the Michigan highway Department, under the leadership of Murray D. Van wagoner, began to take a more active interest in the bridge project. A new one hundred and fifty passenger ferry was built during the year, but Van wagoner pointed out that it was only a short term solution to the overall Straits' transportation problem. Cissel had found that traffic volume across the narrow neck of water had doubled from 1932 to 1937 and nego- tiations were launched to get a bridge building firm to supply preliminary plans for the structure.91 Cissel continued to attempt to win over the senti- ments of lawmakers in the Michigan House of Representa- tives and the Michigan Senate throughout the year. Various organizations were continuing to add their voices to those already on record as supporting the bridge building project. For instance, the Taft Memorial Highway Association with members from five states and the Canadian province of Ontario resolved the bridge should be constructed during an annual meeting on 90Mackinac Bridge Authority meeting minutes, Jan. 30, 1937, Mackinac Bridge Authority files. 91Cissel, 1937 report, pps. “-9. 38 Mackinac Island. Copies of the resolution went to major politicians from all the states.and Roosevelt. 92 However, Detroit F_r_e_e_ 3.29.! editors decided federal aid for the project'was 'pr'etty'much out of the question by April. "It now looks as if Michigan must await another depression to build a bridge over the Straits of Mackinac," the editors wrote. "Opposition to the pro- ject, from the Michigan standpoint has faded in recent months, but now that all other obstacles to the bridge have been resolved word comes from washington that large outlays will no longer be approved by WA." The editors went on to explain that Roosevelt had explained the slow downas a tapering off of PWA activities due to increases in std. and durable goods prices. 93 Van Wagoner, who with his chief deputy G. Donald Kennedy, was in the process of building one of the state's most powerful political machines, also began to speak’out on the bI'idge.9"" Utilizing a "build and dedi- cate," action-Speaks-louder-than-words formula, Van Wagone' pointed out the difficulty of federal and state governments getting together on the project. Van Wagoner 92Copy of resolution in Mackinac Bridge Authority files, 1935-37. sec. 16. 93Dem-«>11: Egg m, A1311 25, 1937. 91*Interviewwithiawrence Rubin, Executive Secretary of the Mackinac Bridge Authority, Aug. 1'5, 199+, St. Ignace, Mich. 38 cited the construction of the Pbrt Huron Blue water bridge, which linked bflchigan with Ontario, as an example which should challenge the state and federal governments to move forward.95 Final PWA rejection came in the summer of 1937 and later the Reconstruction Finance Corporation also decided against supplying money on the grounds that this was only for defense mobilization.96 However, Van.wagoner was still convinced that the bridge would be built. In late August the road builder said at Mackinac Island: "Eventually there will be one of the world's greatest bridges built to handle this multiplying annual traffic." He predicted then it might take five more years to have the project authorized and seven or eight years to build it.97 If world war II had not altered the time schedule, Van Wagoner's predictions might well have proven true. There was relative silence throughout the winter months of 1937-38, but with the summer of the election year came the first of the pronouncements in favor of bridge construction. Governor Murphy announced that a new survey would be started in a few days of the proposed route and he 959.111.}. Arbor News, Aug. 18, 1937. 96Maekihae Bridge Authority publicity file, 1937-38. 97Mackinac Isiah; News, Aug. 28, 1937. 39 added that President Roosevelt was greatly interested in the Mackinac Bridge and might visit the site during the campaign.98 Murphy continued to sing the same or similar tunes about the bridge throughout the campaign. He is quoted in June as saying: "The new authority will be instructed to start an immediate survey on the hopes of making a $530,000,000 Straits bridge eligible under the new fed- eral PWA program. " Murphy said that Washington author- ities were keenly‘interested in the project. 99 The highway department backed up Murphy by stating its position, "backed by tourist and civic organizations in the northern part of the state," was that full devel- opment of Michigan's tourist industry would not be pos- sible until the ferry fleet was replaced with a bridge.100 Fitzgerald, on the other hand, phrased his bridge position in terms of the immediate possibility of making the ferry service a free one.101 It is likely that he hoped to gain more votes through the prompt promise than ' the long range approach. In August, with the political campaign pace getting ‘ warmer, Murphy chose Mackinac Island to make an important 98%: Emmett 0.9.2211 granule, June 23. 1938. 992221.212 1193;, June 21, 1938. 100Detroit News, July 6, 1938. 1012mm liars: July 28, 1938- #0 speech on the bridge topic. Nhrphy said he would rally state citizens to support of the project through a committee of one hundred representing every county in the state and consolidate backers of it. He appointed Republican Chase Osborn to head the committee. Van wagoner's right hand man, G. Donald Kennedy, Deputy Highway Commissioner, was named as chairman of a reor- ganized Mackinac Straits fridge Authority. NMrphy again hammered the public with the claim Roosevelt was for the bridge. "Great impetus will be given the Mackinac Bridge movement when President Roosevelt comes to Michigan to dedicate the Blue water International Bridge at Port Huron," Murphy said. "The President has talked over the question of a Straits‘ bridge with me and is much interested in the iiea. When he comes to Michigan he will gain useful information on how the bridge could be financed and what it would mean to the northern part of the state. I doubt if he will be able to visit the Straits region, but he is familiar with every detail of the project," Murphy claimed.102 In October Fitzgerald,in a speech at Sault Ste. Marie revived the tunnel proposal, saying engineers had told him it was feasible. However, by this time most engineers were convinced the underground route was l+1 impractical. Fitderald reiterated his position that he was in favor of free ferry service until construction of a bridge or tunnel could get underway. He said he would propose a ban on ferry tolls to the next legisla- ture. Fitzgerald slapped at the New Deal in the state and nation and said promises were being made in.hfichigan for bridges "for the New Deal fears one of its favored sons is on the way to the chopping block." The Grand Iedge Republican continued, "No one hopes more fervently than I that the time may come when a bridge or a tunnel shall connect the two peninsulas of Michigan. I favor such a project. . . . in cold concrete terms, which will provide for the fabrication of steel and the pouring of concrete-~not it terms of political visions." Fitzgerald repeated the sentiment that the project should not be based on a gaudy appeal for votes throughout.his swing through the Upper peninsula.103 In early November Murphy's federal aid approach to bridge financing received a blow in the form of an Associated Press dispatch from Washington, D.C. The story said: "The Public WOrks Administration considers a Michigan application for money to construct a bridge across the Straits of Mackinac as dead despite the pro- 103Detroit News, Oct. 12, 1938. 1+2 ject's White House standing. The original application has been in the PWAszfiles since 193% without action. An authorized PWA spokesman said it had not received recent consideration." However, the article also reported that Roosevelt at a recent press conference termed the bridge a definite need of Michigan and added it would benefit the state and nation by uniting Michigan's two peninsulas. The President said he would ask.for a bill to provide for building and aiding in.financing. The dispatch specu- lated that such a bill would have difficult passage since the Brown bill which failed had no appropriation attached to it.101+ Nmrphy carried eleven counties in the election, half of those he carried in 1936. Eight Upper Peninsula counties, wayne, Muskegon and Presque Isle counties went for the incumbent. The rest went to Fitzgerald. There was no significant change in the bridgehead county totals, both were carried again by Fitzgerald. The analysts came up with various causes for Murphy's defeat. Some felt the Lansing labor holiday and sit-down strikes were the Governor's undoing.lo§ The Democratic county chairmen reported the farmers were up in arms against the state and national adminis- 0% Detroit News, Nov. 1, 1938. losNew York Times, April 16, 1939. 1+3 trations.106 The religious issue, the communists, party organization and the national trend were other reasons listed.107 Murphy claimed the recession had 08 swung the pendulum of public opinion against him.1 And Fitderald was convinced it was a defeat of the New 109 Deal. At any rate, the bridge was not mentioned as a factor and certainly if it played any role either in the victory or defeat it had to be a miniscule one. In his first message to the 1939 legislature, Fitzgerald kept his campaign promise and brought the subject of a free ferry service at the Straits before 110 the lawmakers. However, Fitzgerald did not live to see any action taken on his proposal. He died suddenly on.Narch 16, 1939 and his successor, Luren.D. Dickinson, a conservative Republican, apparently dropped the idea,111 Thus the Deptression Decade ended with a consider- able lobby among clubs and organizations, particularly in northern Michigan, in favor of the Mackinac Bridge project, but with little accomplished in favor of the 106Richard D. Lunt, The High Ministry of Government: The Political Career of Frank—Murphy,TunpubIIsfiedfthesis, Uf‘of‘N. WIMe'iiC'SI‘I962, p. 193. I 107Ickes, p. #98. 108mg 9.: Leasing. Dec. 9. 1938. 109Capitol'Commentator, Feb. 1%: 1939- 1939 110Fitderald message to state legislature, Jan, 5, 111M1chigan Manual, lfléizéia 9- 85. scheme. The half century old proposal had been an active item in at least two political campaigns, but had little effect on their outcomes and as an issue was virtually tabled after a politician won office. As the ten year period ended it was Democratic Highway Commissioner Murrary D. Van wagoner, who was at the head of efforts for a bridge. An engineering firm, Modjeski and Masters, was in the process of again deter- mining the feasibility and route and its first report would be filed in 1940.112 Several times the fiederal government had spurned the proposal under both Democratic and Republican state administrations. Quarreling among supporters over route and method had probably served as factors in diminishing the chances of federal aid. 112Brown interview. CHAPTER III THE FORTIES The dominant feature of the 19%0'5, World war II, also held sway over the fortunes of the Mackinac Bridge project. The 19H0's were a period of highs and lows for the proposal which had colored man's imagination since the 1880's. ' The first definite effort for the giant undertaking got underway with the construction, by the State Highway .Department, of a causeway south from St. Ignace. How- ever, the United States' entry into the war forced cur- tailment of the plan due to the difficulty of getting construction materials. And the 19H0 collapse of Washington's Tacoma Narrows Bridge gave fuel to the claims of‘individuals who believed the bridge an imprac- tical dream. At any rate, the dream was shelved for the war's duration, and the causeway was not utilized until the bridge was finally built in the 1950's. Two new antagonistic personalities became part of the bridge's historical picture during the decade. They were Republican Highway Commissioner Charles Ziegler and youthful Governor G. hennen‘Williams. Two other Republicans also made their presences felt during the ten year span. D. Hale Brake, state treasurer from l9H3 45 46 to 195%, played a role as did an unusual apolitical Republican from Mackinac Island, W. Stewart Woodfill. During the period the bridge proposal received its first official votecf approval from the federal government and the original Lackinac Bridge Authority was abolished because of inactivity. Late in the decade the stage was finally set by Williams for the successful push for a second Bridge commission and ultimately for the bridge itself in the 1950's. In 1940 Congressional passage of a bill to allow Michigan to construct a bridge across the federally con- trolled Straits of Mackinac seemed pretty dim. Republican Congressman George Dondero pledged to continue his deter- mined opposition to the structure as financially unfeas- ible and he was joined by fellow Nflchigan GOP member, Representative Fred L. Crawford. Both contended the expenditure was not justified and added the new plaint that if approved at this late date would be in conflict with the defense program.113 And yet just a few months later the eight year fight for passage of the contested measure, first sponsored by Prentiss Brown, ended after a Michigan delegation caucus approved the proposal. Actually all the bill did was give Michigan the federal go-ahead to build a bridge. As Democratic pro- ”3 ganglia more, June 5. 19%. H7 proponent Louis Rabaut explained on the House floor: "The bill requires no money and asks for no money. 'It merely asks permission to allow the state of tflchigan to build a bridge across the Straits of Mackinac. This bill was originally introduced by Senator Brown when he first came to Congress and it has been pushed around and objected to ever since."11n Dondero's response was: "For eight years I have stood on therfloor of this House opposing the pending proposal. . . . and I have opposed it mainly on the grounds there is no economic justification for the pas- sage of the bill; secondly, that no necessity exists as yet." The Royal Oak Republican warned the proposed Straits bridge would be a financial flop like Detroit's Ambassador Bridge. He cited the great natural beauty of the Straits area and said: "Man thinks he can improve on its beauty with concrete and steel." He termed the ferry trip "one of the most delightful links in the journey of the traveler.“ Crawford added that construc- tion at the Straits might hinder the defense program and said there is no guaranteed way to pay for the structure. Rebaut retorted that control over the eventual building would probably belong to a Republican legislature.115 llLFCongressional Record, 76th.Congress, Third Session, p. 1303?:- . 11SCongressional Recoord, 26th Congress, Third Session, pps.1§060-1506. 1+8 In the final 984+ vote, Michigan Representatives Fred Bradley, Republican, and Louis C. Babaut, Democrat, favored the proposal while Dondero and Crawford held fast to their opposition. Only tw0 other Congressmen shared the Dondero-Crawford negative position. 116 According to Michigan sources negotiations between G. Donald Kennedy, Chairman of the Ridge Authority, and the War Department were to begin immediately. The War Department had expressed interest in the bridge because of its potential military value, Kennedy had said. 117 For Kennedy and his boss, Highway Commissioner Murray D. Van Wagoner, the Mackinac Ridge project was part of an overall, active approach to state highway construction. Van Wagoner, who had spent three years working for the Highway Department in Alpena after his college graduation, was convinced that the ferries were inadequate and that a bridge was necessary at the Straits.118 At the same time Van Wagoner and Kennedy were building a political machine that would parlay Van Wagoner into the Governor's chair in 1911.1 and would allow Kennedy to step up to Highway Commissioner.119 116Detroit Nag, August 6, 1910. 117Detroit 1133;, August 6, l9’+0. 118mm interview. 119mbin interview. 49 Van.Wagoner had said in a 1930's radio address from Battle Creek that the "best politics was doing a good 3 job" and it was such a campaign of "building and dedi- cating" roads which won him popularity and political strength. Analysts from both sides of the political fence conclude it is hard to separate Van Wagoner's political motives from his genuine conviction that the bridge was necessary. Rubin concluded: "What emerges is a clear cut feeling that Van Wagoner felt the structure was 120 While George Osborn opined, "It was parti- needed." ally both. Originally the basis was a campaign issue, but he was convinced it was a practical solution to a problem."121 Although the growing cloud of war in Europe was making it increasingly difficult to get steel for con- struction, Van wagoner's department, upon receipt of an engineering report recommending a dual purpose causeway be built H,200 feet south from St. Ignace as a first step toward bridge construction, let the contracts and the project was completed in 19%1, during his term as Governor. The causeway was supposed to serve as a ferry dock temporarily and eventually as part of the bridge foundations.122 120Rubin interview. 121Osborn interview. 122Brown intervieW. Even University of Nfichigan engineer James H. Cissel, who had been.stumping the state talking up the bridge for nearly a decade, advised shelving projected bridge construction. The professor urged further plans be put aside for the duration "of the national defense emergency," and added the twin problems of obtaining steel and a federal loan made the project "out of the question."123 3 Another factor in the decision to hold off was the collapse of the Tacoma Narrows bridge in washington, which had been cited as proof of the engineering feasibility of the Lhckinac project. The west coast bridge fell during a sixty mile-per-hour wind and since the Straits experienced eighty mile-per-hour gales, shelving the project seemed wise.12h In the 1940 election, Van wagoner had ousted Republican Iuren.Dickinson by 131,281 votes. However, Van Wagoner was beaten by Republican Harry Kelly, who stopped his bid for reelection with a 72,021 plurality. In the l9h6 gubernatorial contest, Van Wagoner made a comeback bid against GOP’nominee Kim Sigler. The former highway commissioner reportedly spoke out on the need for a Straits bridge in.his Upper Peninsula appearances; how- ever, Sigler won by 359,338 votes.125 Although Van 123Detroit News, Jan. 25, 19Hl. 121+Letter to author from A. J. Levin, former Detroit News reporter, Oct. 2, 196%. ”stagnant ianuala 1363-6”: p- 432' .J )1 Wagoner, in retrospect, said he believed his Stand on the bridge gained him.votes in all three of his gtber- natorial campaigns, the margins of his victory and two losses indicate any votes gained could have had no sig- nificant effect on the outcome of the races.126 Further activity in regard to the bridge was pretty much limited to newspapers and magazines until 1947. The feasibility question continued to crop up after the war and in January 19%? the Sault Ste. Marie Evening News reprinted a magazine article from the Michigan TradeSman, which questioned the project's practicality.l In keeping with their long standing position in.favor of the struc- ture, the editors noted that they felt there was a good chance for federal aid and suggested agitation begin anew for the span.127 The Sault newspapermen continued to peek away almost weekly at the bridge proposal throughout the. winter and in February optimistically theorized that Highway Commissioner Charles Ziegler was "nearing a point where he will become sold on the bridge."128 Ziegler had, in 19%3, withdrawn the highway department's support for plans to construct a bridge. He had termed 126Van wagoner interview. 127§au1t Ste. ygggg Evening News, Jan. 30, 1947. 126Sault Ste, Lhrie Evening News, Jan., Feb., and March , 19147. . ‘ 52 Van wagoner's causeway an "unused monument to bad plan- ning." Ziegler had indicated he had no intention of spending more money on the causeway.129 Ziegler, who died in 1959, was State Highway Commissioner from 1943 to 1957, a period encompassing the scarcity and enforced thrift of the war years and the post-war highway building boom. He emerges as an irascible, stubborn man and a politician of the old school. There was little love lost between Ziegler and the Democrats.130 The Democrats were not so charitable as the Sault editors in assessing Ziegler's role and the white-haired commissioner's contention that the feasibility of the bridge had not been proven. For example, Van wagoner is convinced Ziegler's opposition was a personal thing. In discussing Republi- can opposition to the structure, Van wagoner said: "It was only this one man--only Charlie Ziegler. It wasn't the Republicans. They helped. They helped in many ways. we were for the bridge and he (Ziegler) was against it. He told the bond people that the founda- tions wouldn't stand up, that it would collapse, he was opposed so much. I don't know why he would be opposed mama: tats. Sept. 3. 19%3. 130"Special soapy File, Correspondence of the Highway Commissioner and the Chief Executive," 62-33-A, ly49-57, State of Michigan Archives. . 53 to the bridge unless he wanted to have a fleet. See, he was in charge of the state ferries. But he was the only one opposed," Van Wagona‘ said. 131 Brown, usually a gentle man, had a similar opinion of Ziegler. ”I wouldn't blame the Republican Party for Ziegler 's attitude," Brown said. "The man's mind was not big enough to comprehend that it could'be done. The opposition was Ziegler backed up by Administrative Board friends. “13?- Willians was more gentle in his summing up of the long war with Ziegler. williams termed Ziegler's opposition "interesting“ in light of the fact the Highway Commissioner was later "proud to accept an invitation to have his name appear on the bridge plaque when it was built. . .“133 ‘ Despite the bitter opposition attributed to the Highway Commissioner, Ziegler testified in favor of retaining the Mackinac Bridge Authority in 19%. Bay City Republican Arthur C. MacKinnon had introduced a bill to abolish the Authority in April and Ziegler was called on for his view.13" Ziegler said: "Under existing 131V“: Hagoner interview. 1323mm interview. 133Letter from c. Lennon Williams to author, Feb. 21. 1966. 13"House Bill 1&8, April 2’+, 1914-7, Michigan House Bills gag. Joint Resolution; of £212, conditions activity of the Authority is practically nil." However, he recommended continuation of the Authority to deal with reviving interest. He also pro- posed abolishing the $l,000 annual salaries of the Commissioners since they were largely inactive.135 The Republican.oriented Sault newspaper saw logic in the Ziegler proposal and stated editorially: "In this day of economy-mindedness we cannot blame the state legislature too much for its peeve against the Mackinac Bridge Authority. A tidy sum of money has been charged against the group including $1,000 annual salaries for each member." The writer pointed out that the salaries had continued throughout the war when little could be done to promote the bridge project. However, the editors made it clear that they favored the Ziegler approach, which had been incorporated in a senate bill, rather than the idea of abolishing the entire Authority. "If the legislature finds that the present Commission has been derelict in its duty of promoting the bridge let another Commission be appointed with zeal and courage enough to build for us a bridge," the editorial writer concluded.136 ‘ However, the lawmakers were not in a mood to listen and in June 19%7 the house abolishment bill was passed 13SHouse Journal, Vol. I, 19%7, p. 8H9. Eésauit Ste- Hattie Brahms late, May 28, 19W. 55 and signed into law,ending the first chapter in the his- tory of the Mackinac Bridge Authority.137 The only no vote case in either legislative body against the abol- ishment was that of Senator George Girrbach, Republican from Sault Ste. Lhrie. The vote in the Senate was 20-1 and in the House it was 7H-0, although eighteen northern Michigan legislators in that body abstained from voting. 138 Despite the demise of the Authority, interest in the proposal to bridge the Straits was on the upswing. Some contended a tunnel was the answer while others claimed a bridge was the only practical method. The Junior Chambers of Commerce of Sault Ste. Marie and St. Ignace prepared 10,000 folders in support of petitions addressed to Governor Sigler and the legislature appeal- ing for construction of a bridge or a tunnel.139 And the feasibility question continued to haunt the issue. Shortly before the 19H8 political campaign two University of Michigan geologists examined the rock strata at the Straits and declared it too unstable to support the weight of the bridge.11+O Arnold J. Levin, A Detroit News reporter in Lansing, 137Pub_l__i_c_ Acts of 1%, p. #72. 138 Journal of the Senate l9h7 June 3 . 1356- 57 and House JournaI‘“l§EZ, pps. m6=IIU7. ’ p 139Detroit News, Nov. 22, 19%7. 11+OLevin—letter. 56 was assigned to get the Highway Department's viewpoint. The officials concluded questions raised by the University of Michigan geologists could'be overcome by engineering technology and a bridge could be built.11*1 Levin's subsequent story reviewed the history of the bridge and proposals for better communication between the We peninsulas by bridge or tunnel. And it set the stage for the entry of youthful, guvernatorial candidate G. mnnen Williams into the Mackinac Bridge picture. After receiving the Democratic nomination inl9'+8, Williams went to the Upper Paninsula on his first out- state Jaunt. Levin was assigned to cover Williams dur- ing the campaign and accompanied the future governor on the trip. As the Williams' party crossed the Straits on a ferry, Williams discussed the bridge situation briefly with Levin and viewed the unused Van Wagoner causeway, which had been built mior to the war. That night in Sault Ste. Marie, Williams sought out Levin at his hotel room and asked if he could discuss Upper Rninsula problems and the reporter's recollections of the l9lr6 Van Wagoner campaign. Levin recited the background of bridging the Straits on the basis of his previous stories. ”As I remember, I told him (Williams) that the people in the north of Michigan were very lullevin 1e tter. 57 interested in a bridge but that it probably had little or no interest in the south. (I am not a deer hunter, so had no experience with the long line-ups for ferry ser- vice during the season.)" Levin told Williams it would be a tremendously expensive undertaking and mentioned that the geologists' reports and the Tacoma Narrows bridge collapse had thrown a lot of cold water on the idea, but that someday certainly "someone would do some- thing about it." Williams finally asked if Levin thought the bridge a good idea for him to promote and Levin suggested in view of the circumstances and questions which had been raised, that Williams might propose the establishment of a special citizens' committee to determine the feasi- bility of bridging'the Straits. Williams made a note of the suggestion and followed it up in a speech at Sault Ste. Harie. He proposed a citizens' committee, which would determine, on the basis of available evidence, the answer to the question of establishing better and faster communication between the two peninsulas.1H2 It was in these terms that Williams discussed the 1,. bridge throughout the 191+8 gubernatorial campaign:L 3 lL+2Levin letter. 1H3Detroit Hews, Sept., Oct., and Fov. 1943. so However, by 19h8 bridge talk in political circles was nothing new. Columnist William Muller summed up in somewhat lyrical fashion the status of the bridge pro- posal in the minds of many bflchigan politicians during that election year: Now comes the season of the vote harvest moon-_distinguished in the land of Hiawatha by the appearance of down- state politicians. From one end of the Upper Peninsula to the other, they shove their way to platforms to discuss in sympathetic tones the stern and immediate necessity of facing up squarely to the issues and doing something about the crossing at the Straits of Mackinac. Much of the debate between now and the November 2 election can be expected to center around whether the people would be happier crossing the Straits over a bridge or through a tunnel. Time was when a vote hunter in the Upper Peninsula had to come out squarely for either building a bridge right away or building it sometime in the future. The late Governor Frank D. Fitderald changed all that. He suggested a tunnel-- just at the time former State Highway Commissioner Hurray D. Van wagoner (later Governor) was making gestures like he might do something about planning a bridge. The result, as the politically wise Fitzgerald hoped, was confusion and much1+ subject matter for future discussions.l imller was not alone in his rather acidic opinion of the bridge proposal as a political issue. The genominee EEEQ;Q.E§§QEE editorialized: G. Hennen Detroit Hews, Aug. 21, 19h8. 59 Williams' promise "may be good political pap for the east end of the Upper Peninsula, but it is an old record in the west." The writer pointed out that incum- bent Governor Kim Sigler had said he would improve the situation at the Straits.lh5 Williams promised a Democratic state administra- tion would‘see that Upper Peninsula residents got better service. The Democratic candidate also drew attention to the 19%? Sigler veto of legislation for a new ice-breaker type ferry},+6 Sigler's retaliation was to ridicule Williams' promise to do something about a Straits crossing. He labeled the promised citizens' committee “a political promise“ and cautioned Williams not to make promises he could not keep.147 In Hovember the voters cast 1,128,66H ballots for Williams, the new face. Incumbent Governor Sigler polled 96h,810 votes, which was less than he pulled in the off-year l9h6 gubernatorial race, in stopping Van Wagoner's bid. It is obvious that Williams' stand on the Mackinac Bridge citizens' committee did not play a significant role in attaining his 163.85% p1urality.lh° IHShEnominee Eerald Leader, Sept. 29, 1948. 146"Nancy's Scrapbook," p. 25. 147mm. ' p. L+7. 11+8liiiglligafl Phnual, 191910. pps. 235-233. 60 Mast of the vote shift came in Wayne County where Republican Sigler had beaten Van Wagoner in 19% by more than ‘+0,000 votes (31,1...5'73 to 300,091). In 19’+8, although GOP presidential nominee Thomas Dewey won Michigan over President Harry s. Truman, Sigler's Wayne vote dropped to 303,078 while Democrat Williams was accumulating $0,105 ballots in Wayne. However, as Figure 2 (page 61) shows, Williams did carry the Upper Peninsula counties compared to Van Wagoner's four in l9’+6. These included Baraga, Iron, Kewcenaw, Marquette, Menominee and Ontonagon counties. Van Wagoner and Williams both carried Alger, Delta, Dickinson and Gogebic counties. Williams also cut into Sigler's victory margin in the bridgehead counties of Emmet and Lhckinac, but the GOP incumbent still carried them by wide margins. 11*9 Within weeks of his inauguration, Williams wrote to Ziegler asking for information updating him on the situ- ation at the Straits. I am vitally interested in highway transportation and communication between the lower and upper peninsulas of Michigan. Surveys have been made as to the feasibility of construction of a bridge or tunnel. I will greatly appreciate it if you will furnish me with all the material available so that I can make a study of this problem. Some work also has been done on a causeway. I would like to know what plans 1M9Michigan“ mnual, 191048, pps. 251+-256. U p E R I 0 R I v u- /’I/ \ ' I /"~ - , —....:..-1 I /-v-- C I | a...» \ . / / \‘—" I _I__ ~' “7.1/ I """" |___ _. K‘ '\ / r“? ' a- . "’ “ o 4'1 ‘LI 9 ’/ as . t) t mung. ( .8 I 4 / MI..__I _____ l 1 q I _____ | 0-00 Iml Aba- / h- 0 I I I 6 uh: / S-KIIZ' (nu-H I 0.... u H I I -__!___-_ o T Jim I“... ’m‘”'I‘—o.-— I h- o i I I I 2 ~. JI—ui.‘ Ono-ch I an" i—cuT-TI—G l I r: - :r ._.i__ _____I_ _'_r—I." U Ono- i Hump I... I I.“ I | V # - i I ! . w. ~ “ — ’ i I a; s...- I I _.i 2 L— "" I I jug-'5'! ' ' ", — ---- °""" “-5.6: o---' ":‘T'd-Z‘I I m I ' I .L I I | _ w “I :4 u..— | M l-u- Ind- I W. ' l “ I I v. A Varn- Ml — _ m I w” Wm ' I ' ' _L _ I. I“... m WILLIAMS 1948 ELECTION S GAINS - U.P. Van Wagoner won in 46 and Williams in 48 E Williams won in 48 W Will hair: askec trat: age 1 Road Inter 11m fresh SeVerI V111 1 63 have been made for the use of this facility.150 There is no record of a Zielger reply to the Williams' request, although in all probability the white- haired Highway Commissioner provided the information asked for, as he did frequently throughout his adminis- tration. As to the use of the causeway, Ziegler had earlier stated his opinion when. he said that building a dock on the end of Van Wagoner '3 project would be throw- ing good money after bad. ‘ Williams was not above getting full political mile- age from his proposal. In March he told the Michigan Road Builders Association of his plans to appoint the Inter-Peninsula Citizens Committee to consider plans for linking the peninsulas. “Approaching this issue with fresh minds, armed with the accumulated information of several former investigating agencies, I believe we will be able to come up with some proposal for a perma- nent solution,“ Williams prophesied. Newspapers also publicized the‘fact that Williams had asked Ziegler for bridge information, an indicator that Williams probably released a copy of his letter to the press, a strategem that gained Ziegler 's wrath and enmity on several occa- sions. The Governor also added: "Republicans have called the project a Democratic dream. "151 15°Letter from Williams to Ziegler, Jan. 17, 19I+9, copy in Mackinac Bridge Authority archives. 15103393 News, Jan. 18, 19l+9 and March 31, 19b9, 64 In June the press carried reports of Williams' exploratory mission to washington to see if federal aid could be made available for the undertaking, but nothing came of the trip.152 True to his election promise, Williams invited indi- viduals to become members of the Inter-Peninsula Communications Committee to study the question of a link at the Straits. John H. tharthy, Chairman of the Michigan Public Service Commission, was named to head the group. Other members included James Kehoe, Mayor of Menominee, Maurice Hunt, Mayor of Sault Ste. Ihrie, and officials of the Michigan.Aeronautics, Economic Develop- ment, and Highway Departments and the Michigan Tourist Council. 153 In a letter inviting Harry C. Coones, Deputy Highway Commissioner and the department's chief engineer, Williams said: The complete social, economic and political marriage of our two peninsu- las of Michigan seems to one to be something all citizens of Pflchigan should work.for in order to promote the best interests of our people. Today our citizens can't even read the same news and their visit- ing together or sending goods or mer- chandise to each other is endlessly l52Detroit Times, June 3, 19H9. 153Mackinac Straits Inter-Peninsula Communication Committee file, 1950, State of Michigan Archives. 65 delayed because of lack of adequate transportation facilities. It seems to me that the time is ripe to bring out all the facts why and all the facts on how we can unite our peninsulas most efficiently and with the geatest prospects of final ssuccess.1 The Inter-Peninsula Communication Committee held its first meeting on Mackinac Island and its second in Lansing. Williams cited "political and cultural unity of the state" and improved commerce and transportation as reasons for the groups' being. 155 Shortly after the organisation of Williams' spon- sored group, W. Steward Woodfill, the President’of the Grand Hotel on Mackinac Island, organised a figurehead group of prominent Michigan businessmentinto a Mackinac Bridge Citizens Committee, to lobby for the re-estab- lishment of the Mackinac Bridge Authority. The entire group never actually held meetings, according to Woodfill, although it maintained offices in Detroit. One of its main efforts was to publish and distribute a pamphlet boosting re-establishment and urging readers to write to Williams or Ziegler. 156 The Mackinac Bridge Citizens Committee naturally had the backing of the Sault Ste. 151+Letter from Governor Williams to Harry G. Coones, 19l+99 Inter-Peninsula Communications Committee file, Sh te of Michigan Archives. 155 Minutes of Inter-Peninsula Communications Committee, July 9, 196. 5 156mter-Peninsula Comunications Committee file, 19 0. 66 Marie Evening News and publisher Osborn was a member of the coup. For example, the newspaper editorialized in October that it was time to revitalize the dead Straits of Mackinac Bridge Authority and staff it with men “recognized as being competent, regardless of political faith. . . ."157 Again and again the apolitical theme was sounded by individuals involved in pushing the Straits project. For instance, Commission Chairman McCarthy said: "I believe there isn't anybody on the Commission that has any political'axes to grind. Myself, I am here as a member” of the hter-Peninsula Communications Comission, period. Whether or not there is an attempt in the papers to make it political that is beside the point, but this Comission is certainly bi-partisan, non-political or anything you want to call it. We look at it the way we feel is best for the State of Michigan, upper and lower." McCarthy added: "This can neither be done as a Democrat nor Republican bridge."158 This sentiment was echoed in various newspapers and the Detroit Eggs said: ”No midge should be built on political suppositions' and called for a feasibility 157Sau1t §E§~ Marie Evening News, Oct. 18, 1949. 158Minutes 'of Inter-Peninsula Communications Comission, Dec. 16, l9'+9. 67 study first.159 The I_\_I.e_w_§_ also pointed out in early December that Democrats had been making political capital out of the bridge proposal.l€’O Williams told two hundred officials and delegates at the Upper Peninsula Development Bureau's thirty-ninth annual convention: “It seems clear to me that there are no insurmountable natural obstacles to a Straits bridge. The main obstacles to a bridge are economic and political."161 Williams also claimed that his appointment of a special - commission to investigate improving transportation and communication between the peninsulas was one of the most popular things he had done as governor.162 The feeling was building up in favor of a bridge and in December Republican woodfill, in a confidential memo, indicated Ziegler had stated in error to newspa- permen.that Congress would not permit federal grants. Wbodfill added optimistically: "I confidently believe that our pamphlet campaign which will begin this week will bring on such publicity and pressure on the Governor and the legislature that this will be included in the Governor's call for the special session and the legisla- 159uNancy's Scrapbook," p. 137. 160Detroit News, Dec. 7, 1949- 161Iron Mountaifl News, Oct. 1%, 1949. 162Detroit News, 0013. 11+, 191+“)- 68 ture will create a new authority such as we have been pressing for.“163 The pamphlet Woodfill's group published also took pains to claim the bridge proposal was not political. It stated: This is not a political matter and must not be permitted to enter into par- tisan controversy. The project as out- lined has the endorsement of political leaders of both parties. me membership and motives of this Committee are strictly non-partisan. When the Mackinac Bridge Authority is created by the legislature, it should specify a bi-partisan commission. With appointments by the Governor of the very ablest men available and with the confir- mation of the appointments reserved to the Senate, there will be every assurance of a truly non-political effort of a high order being made to solve this pro- blem. . . ." The news pundits were not completely convinced as the decade drew to a close. In mid-December Commissioner Ziegler pushed the Demcratic State Administration Board members into a corner on the transportation issue. Carl Rudow of the Detroit Eggs reported it thus: “Frustrated Democrats scurried for shelter today after blowing up a political nor-waster that threatened to swamp their campaign for a bridge across the Straits of Lickinac as a vote getting issue. 163Williams' Papers, Box 18, Mackinac Island Park Comission file, Dec. 19, l9l+9. 16%Copy of pamphlet in Inter-Peninsula Communication files, 1950, State of Michigan Archives. and Au1 YO 69 Caught in a legalistic maneuver that had served them well in the past, Governor Williams and Attorney General 3 Stephen J. Both were in a position where- they had to side with Republican Highway Commissioner Charles M. Ziegler or be responsible for delay in construction of an icebreaking ferry that would improve service at the Straits. Delay would be decidedly unpopu- lar, not only inthe Upper Peninsula but among the thousands of southern Michigan residents-u-particularly geer hunters-dwho cross the Straits. 6 Thus the 1914-0 's decade paved the way for the 1950's and the re-establishment of the lacunae Bridge ‘ Authority. Williams and Woodfill were added as strong voices in favor of construction and Ziegler emerged as one of the most powerful opponents. In the background was Republican State Treasurer D. Hale Brake, who handled state finances from 198 onward, but would play a larger role during the 1950's. The decade, although overshadowed by World War II, began with the building of the Van Wagoner causeway and ended with the Woodfill push for a new bridge authority. The lobbies in favor of construction were gaining voice and all in all the proposal was a tentative step closer to reality. 165Detroi§ News, Dec. 7. 1W9. CHAPTER IV THE 1950's: ENGAGEkENT AND MARRIAGE The decade ofthe 1950's spelled step-by-step appro- val for the bridge through a series of bills in the state legislature and finally construction of the long awaited span from 195% to 1957. When the ten year period began there were already two coordinated movements pushing toward renewal of a Mackinac Bridge Authority as the first official step toward construction. Among those leading the publicity and political efforts were Governor G. Hennen‘Williams, * a Democrat, and W. Stewart woodfill, the unusual Repub- lican from hackinac Island. There were, however, still occasional notes of dis- harmony as official Michigan edged toward accomplishment of the long extant dream. Nbst of these objections were voiced by Republican conservatives, principly concerned with financing and payment for the bridge. This lent some weight, but little substance, to Democratic claims that the bridge was their pet project. In.reality, when it came down to counting the votes in favor of bridge bills the margin of victory was provided by GOP members, who were dominant in the state legislature. 7O 71 The bridge efforts, in full-swing as the decade began, were the Inter-Peninsula Communications Committee, which.had been set up byidilliams to fufill a campaign promise; and the woodfill created Mackinac Bridge Citizens Committee, designed to lend weight to the hotel keeper's utterances in behalf of the subject.166 A Woodfillpamphlet booming the bridge as a non- political necessity went into its second printing in early January 1950. Frank woodford, newspaperman- historian, noted the bridge might "soon again become an important political issue."167 And Williams continued to include the bridge topic in Upper Peninsula speeches as he began to campaign for re-election. In a Newberry talk in late January, the young Governor promised an audience to asszor re-establishment of the Bridge Authority to determine "once and for all whether a bridge connecting the two peninsulas was feasible."168 weedfill in a sense became an.unpaid lobbyist for the bridge. Perhaps he was acting on the advice of Cornelius Vanderbilt, one of the original incorporators of the Grand Hotel, who suggested the need for a bridge before the turn.of the century, or perhaps it was just 166Sault Ste. Marie Evening News, Nbv. 2. 1957- 167Detroit Free Press, Jan. 9, 1950. 1639 troit News,Jan. 27, 1950. “e-—-_ --.-I— 72 the hotelman's tremendous dedication to a cause, At any rate, woodfill coordinated his efforts closely with the activities of the Inter-Peninsula Communications Committee and kept in constant touch with Governor Williams on the progress of the effort. The flamboyant WOodfill wrote, visited and telephoned all state law- makers with any connection to the bridge bills during that 1950 session. However, Woodfill ran into a large snag in the form of William C. Vandenberg, a Holland Republican and chair- man of the Senate State Affairs Committee, which had control of the primary bridge bill. woodfill communi- cated his dissatisfaction with Vandenberg's lack of cooperation in a letter to his comrades on the Inter- Peninsula Communications Committee. He wrote that Vandenberg had advised him after receipt of a March 2% letter from the bridge enthusiast that "when and if" the state affairs committee decided to hold hearing‘ woodfill would be informed. Showing characteristic tenacity, woodfill continued to nag Vandenberg's steps. later that month, during a telephone conversation, Vandenberg admitted to woodfill that the bill "was wholly unacceptable and that a new bill had just been introduced which was also unacceptable to him as it only changed the methods of appointments to the aUthority." Vandenberg's objection was that both bills put the full faith and credit of the state behind revenue bonds 73 for the bridge. -This was the objection of other conser- vative financial critics of the economic feasibility of the bridge. Vandenberg told woodfill the legislature was not going to authorize any funds from the State Highway Department or any other source to study and investigate building the structure. The greatest concession Wbodfill had won was an agreement that Vandenberg would favor a study commission financed by someone other than the state.169 Long time political observer Will Muller of the Detroit News summed up the impending legislative battle in aMarch article: The real shooting war of Michigan's campaign year will start wednesday when Democrat Governor Williams meets the Republican dominated legislature again. Battle lines in the legislature will follow the pattern in the hustings where both.major parties are early afield in the fight for control of the state administration.for the next two years. Objectives of the Democrats will be to achieve a legislative record on Which the administration seeks reelec- tion by saying: "See what we did for you," or "we tried to do something, but the Republicans blocked it." For the Republicans, the strategy will be to work out a way of saying: "See how we protected you.from new Democratic taxes" -~without incurring the odium for "obstruc- ting progress."17O - Wbodfill described Vandenberg's attitude in the 169Letter from W. 3. woodfill to Inter-Peninsula Communications Committee, April 3, 1950, State of Michigan Archives. 170Detr91t News, rarch 11, 1950. 7h legislative push "as almost one of belligerency" and added if the state affairs committee should kill the bridge bills he was "inclined to think personally that the press of bflchigan should be fully advised about it. "171 K The threat of taking the story to the newspapers was one which Woodfill used on several occasions during his push to win legislative backing for the bridge. WOodfill apparently felt that popular sentiment would go against lawmakers if it were revealed that they had rejected the bridge project. There is little real jus- tification for thiscminion, although WCodfill was apparently convinced the threat carried weight. Wbodfill called upon friends of the bridge propo- sal to bring all possible pressure to bear upon state Senator Vandenberg and the members of his committee to grant a hearing on the bills.172 That Wbodfill's push was having some success was evident when newspapers reported that Republican Senator William A. Ellsworth, from St. Ignace, had been asked by his party to outline the background of the original bridge commission in an attempt to overcome the GOP conviction that the push was a Williams' brain child.173 171W'oodfill letter. 172W'oodfill letter. . 1/:)’Sault Ste. Marie Evening NQWS. April 11’ 1950- £3 '57 <1 75 On April 12 Wbodfill met with the Republican Policy Committee to discuss the issue. A week later the Hiawatha Land Tourist and Resort Association, with more than one hundred members in the eastern Upper Peninsula, wired Governor Williams to get the project out of politics. The telegram hit legislative inac- tivity and said: "Too long have we sat sedately by allowing the bridge to become a political football."174 Inter-Peninsula Communications Committee chairman McCarthy responded: "This can neither be done as a Democrat or Republican bridge," while promising Woodfill to do everything consistant with the non-political sta- tus of the committee.175 Others also joined in the effonzto get Vandenberg to relent to the bridge authority bill. Conservative Republican Senator George Higgins of Ferndale, a meme ber of the State Affairs Committee attacked his chair- man for denyingthe public hearing on the matter.176 The attempt to circumvent or overcome Vandenberg's blockade of the bridge bills forced the smouldering feud into the open in late April as the maligned Senator Vandenberg objected to the tremendous pressures that 17H§§E1E gte, ghrie_EveningNews, April 13. 1950. l7SInter—Peninsula Communications Committee files, 1950. 176"Nancy's Scrapbook." D. 135- WGI'el I .1 "rv *0“ SE ny j ‘9 :1! hr] 76 were being exerted to bring about a public hearing.l77 "This legislature has no moral right to accept at full face value all of the statements, publicity, and propa- ganda of the bridge proponents without making some inquiries of our own," said Vandenberg, who was pre- paring his own bill.178 Vandenberg claimed hm committee was studying the bridge bills before it, but this was immediately disputed by Higgins, who said: "I have seen nothing of it yet."179 Q Across the hall of the state capitol, Speaker Victor Knox, a Republican.from Sault Ste. thrie, was preparing to have a bridge bill introduced there by Representative Edward Hutchinson, a Republican from Fennville, in order to avoid the Vandenberg wall. An Indian River Republican, Representative Hugo A. Nelson, also introduced a bill to create a bridge and tunnel authority with a six man bipartisan committee. Knox's forces worked quickly and the Hutchison bill got its' first official airing by the legislature at a House Roads and Bridges Committee hearing may 3.180 Vandenberg countered with a proposition for a feasibility study to be run by the University of Michigan and Woodfill reacted promptly with the dark 177Ironwood Daily Globe, April 279 1950- 1"8 , _ a . A a / Associated Press diSpatCh. April 27, 1950- 179Sault Ste. Large Evening News, April 27, 1950. Q " ' '7 1°O§§EEE §E§~ Eerie Evening Hews, April 28. 1950. hi] Mn la in T 4 7H... Ct Si V; .C. \3 \3 hint that the bridge "could become a political issue if the authority is not established."181 The Wbodfill quote was typical, like his grand scale hotel. The hotel keeper might well envision himself on a stage or before an audience with his descriptive dialogue and gestures. He retold those hectic days of 1950 for news- papers in 1957 when the bridge was finished. And in 196%, from the comfort of his Lhckinac Island home, WOodfill recalled again his memories of that 1950 ses- sion. Wbodfill recalls Vandenberg as'the one man in the legislature who did the most to obstruct the I‘dackinac Bridge.“ WOodfill.said he tried to meet the powerful Holland-Republican, but Vandenberg dodged him. "I would try to catch him before he would leave the Senate floor, but he would beat me and race to his car to get back to Holland of an-evedng, where he would not receive me," woodfill said. "I finally cornered him before he could get off the Senate floor one day and had a plea- sant talk with him. WCodfill's personal assessment of Vandenberg was that he was "a very fine gentleman and an excellent legislator, but he was economical and ultra-conservative-minded and sincerely thought the bridge a dream."182 18112922922 liege. I'viay 1+. 1950. 132WOodfill intervieW. 78 Voodfill hounded Vandenberg‘s heels in a gracious fashion throughout the legislative session. He likes to tell one particular anecdote, which he believes was the last straw that broke the back of the opposition. It was in late April or early May and the hotel keeper was at the end of his patience. Senator Ellsworth had had particularly gloom reports for the ardent bridge supporter. “The bill be had introduced was stymied," recalled woodfill. "No one seemed ableto pressure N Senator Vandenberg to have it heard. the project was about to die a natural death for lack of vehement support and measure.“ Ellsworth left woodrlll's rooms at the Hotel Olds (now the Jack Tar), directly‘across from the State Capitol shortly before midnight and returned to his own roon at the Porter Hotel. Woodfill said he could not sleep because of an agitated state of mind. "I had spent a lot of tile and effort on the matters-and had what l thought was a righteous cause. such as at least should have been heard, and was getting nowhere," he said. Ellsworth and Knox did not wish to unduly prod their party leader Vandenberg, Hoodfill said. After pondering the problem. Woodfill finally got up and wrote a sharp note to Ellswrth telling him that he would either be heard in the next few days or would blow the lid off the situation. Voodfill said his note was not directed aga he t1} " [_4 pie. '2. vi. 5‘ . . .II. 1. ..j .9 . . 1 . . 79 against his "good friends Knox and Ellsworth, but at the legislature." Wbodfill could not find a bellboy so he put on a coat over his pajamas, called a cab, and tucked the note under Ellsworth's door at the Porter. Ellsworth awakened the agitated Neodfill with an 8:30 A.M. telephone call and asked if woodfill were all right because he feared from the tone of the note that the bridge supporter might have suffered a seizure. Ellsworth informed woodfill that a joint session had been scheduled to hear Woodfill out. Later WCodfill concluded "my blasting note that night is what broke the dam of opposition and got the bridge its hearing. That appearance and that presenta- tion.turned the tide."183 Whether Wbodfill's interes- ting tale is entirely accurate is a matter for conjec- ture, and whether it turned the tide or not is a matter of opinion. But the opinions were fairly unanimous on both side of the political fence that woodfill, an honest and honorable man. had been the factor behind the successful 1950 push to re-establish the Bridge Authority. One thing is particularly certain. Neodfill had become a gadfly to Vandenberg, who asked waspishly in early khy: "Is woodfill to direct this legislature or ‘ n are we to come to our own conclusions?"10 183Woodfill interview. 105%le «its. Lens. Bargains Ears, May 10 9 1950- . V 4 W. I c r e v ' l . H 1 .‘x e A .- L - .', " f‘ . \1)! I.) ’ . 1 _ , 'I" , .' 3. R .L~ a ' 7' T fi-. A. J A , V , s ' I . - . ' l P t ' a. ' V t I . s i... . - a _ 0 a r \‘._ '(‘- . .. s e j l - . . 1 h. f .5 , ' L P . V .m h r . 0' 9 — ~ -\ 1r . . , -' - s. .. a l. w A , ‘ -1 «a . . .. . . . ‘, _,\ V) r .- _ " . I" g . . . 1‘ t I .‘ l v- s- V' I“ - ~ ‘ l 1.. I 1 :w o - t.- - , . ' . Y A I cg . ‘u ’\ L . .. .L 7: ~ I1 79 against his "good friends Knox and Ellsworth, but at the legislature." woodfill could not find a bellboy so he put on a coat over his pajamas. called a cab. and tucked the note under Ellsworth's door at the Porter. Ellsworth awakened the agitated woodfill with an 8:30 A.M. telephone call and asked if woodfill were all right because he feared from the tone of the note that the bridge supporter might have suffered a seizure. Ellsworth informed WOOdfill that a Joint session had been scheduled to hear Woodfill out. later woodfill concluded "my blasting note that night is what broke the dam of opposition and got the bridge its hearing. That appearance and that presenta- tion.turned the tide."183 Whether woodfill's interes- ting tale is entirely accurate is a matter for conjec- ture, and whether it turned the tide or not is a matter of opinion. But the opinions were fairly unanimous on both side of the political fence that woodfill. an honest and honorable man, had been the factor behind the successful 1950 push to re-establish the Bridge Authority. One thing is particularly certain. woodfill had become a gadfly to Vandenberg, who asked waspishly in early thy: “Is woodfill to direct this legislature or are we to come to our own conclusions?"181+ 18 .. 3Woodfill interview. when: in. exile. Elérilrla Eases May 10, 1950- by infi Der Cr« E1 3 9 DE 80 A week later the House adopted the Hutchison bill by a 73-2 margin with sixteen members present abstain- ing. Them nay votes were both cast by Detroit Democrats.185 In the Senate the vote for the final bill was unanimus, 21r-0 with even Vandenberg voting for it. 186 Credit for passage of the measure was given to Knox. Ellsworth and woodrill—ell Republicans. 187 (See Figure 3. page 81). Later Williams pointed out the bill. which gave the new bridge authority no power to build, was not the one he wanted. but on June 6 he signed the measure. 188 A day earlier the young Governor had gotten a letter from George E. Bishop. secretary-manager of the Upper Poninsula Development Bureau of Michigan, re-emphasizing the political football nature of the project. "It has been a political football,” Bishop wrote, "The bill whieh you are about to sign, coming from alegislature divided politically, would seem to indicate that the leadership of both parties are ready now to Join with 3 :85M1ohiang Ho__u_§__e Journal, Ex___t_r__a S_e__ss_:_l__on of $219,. P. 1 3 186M1chi an §_____enate Journal, Extra Sesdon of... 1.229.: p. 190 ‘ ' 187Sau1t Sig. Marie Evening News, May 21+, 1950. 188Sault S33. Marie Evening News. May 29 to June 8, 1950. HOUSE VOTE 1950 BRIDGE BILL Yes —73 Warsaw.-. 3.-- it... -i _i i u 1: mi 0 at Q bowlirllf No — 2 —both Dems. Abstain—16 Democrats-13 GOP - 3 Counties with abstentions 7/1. Of no votes u-Hn—Ii- E.._;' this. - ."' l l.— c—uohoud-on-C-—'h..---—o S | the tag Bri wit: Bro1 no t Rani Coch elec #111 Con 82 sound thinking non-political groups and work toward the materialization of a bridge. . . ."189 Woodfill said his campaign during‘that legislative . session had been directed primarily at the Republican lawmakers because, as a GOP supporter, he could con- vince them it was a bipartisan issue. The Democratic lawmakers were following Williams' leadership. Woodfill later recalled that he had asked Democrats McCartlcor and Williams to soft pedal their bridge back- ing in order to play down the football possibilities of the issue. "They never took a single political advan- tage and kept as mum as I asked." Woodfill said. It was Woodfill who piclned the names of the new Mackinac Bridge Authority Comission members. Williams agreed with the selections which included Democratic naturals Brown and Van Wagoner. Only one Woodfill nominee was not named and that was Judge Raymond Starr of Grand Rapids, who refused. His spot went to William Cochran. Jr. 190 In June Williams was getting ready to run for re- election. Columnist Will Muller pinpointed it with: "Williams will find a way to grab the spotlight and will spend the last two weeks of July on Packinac 189G. Mennen Williams Papers, Michigan Historical Collections, University of Michigan, Box 37. 19°Woodfill interview. Bl m .r‘. 83 Island and Upper Peninsula residents will hear him tell how he 'tried in vain' to put the hackinac Straits Bridge Authority in an immdiate finance-and-build pos- ition."l91 bmller's prediction held true. Throughout the northern part of the state, candidate'Williams talked the bridge. At rallies in June, July and August he reiterated the need for a bridge and at the same time stressed the necessity for Democrats to get out the vote in an off year election.192 Through it all Williams cited the revival_of the Bridge Authority as an accomplishment of his first two year term.193 Williams continued in the same vein throughout the fall as newspapers were predicting the gubernatorial battle between.Harry Kelly and Williams would be one of the bitterest in years.191+ Not all the public was apparently convinced Williams was doing a good job in behalf of the proposed bridge. Williams' secretary sent the following reply to one irate Detroiter: Don't you think you are being very unfair to blame Gov. Williams personally for this condition? Since the Governor first took office he has continually fought for better communications between the two peninsulas. I am enclosing a folder whichtdll tell you just what the 191Detroit News, July 7, 1950. 192"Nancy's Scrapbook," Vol. V. 193Detroit News, Sept.‘23, 1950. 19%Qgtroit News, Sept. 1%, 1950. 8% Governor has done and how interested he is in a bridge across the Straits or some better means of transportation. Be assured that Gov. Williams is doing all possible to correct this very bad situation and has received much oppo- sition from the Republican legislature and other Republican leaders. 95 That pamphlet is probably the same one that turns up in the Mackinac fridge Authority files. The front page features a map of Michigan's two peninsulas with a voting box at the Straits.‘ "learks the spot," the caption reads. The promotion advised voters to vote Democratic and win "the battle of the bridge." The literature went on to cite the background of Democratic contributions to the structure, mentioning both Van Wagoner and Brown. 196 But the bridge certainly was not the major issue of the hectic 1950 campaign, which turned out to be as bitter as prognosticators had warned. The big question was Communism, with a capital "C". In an early October swing through the Upper Peninsula neither candidate mentioned the bridge. Kelly's issues were CIO domi- nation of the Democratic Party, insufficient roads, and alleged Communist infiltration of the Democratic Party. Williams confidently announced a few days later that he was convinced that the Upper Peninsula was his, 195' G. Lennen Williams papers, Box 37. 196Mackinac Bridge Authority fileS, Woodfill file, 1950. I‘II. .t. b but at least one former Democratic county chairman was beating the Upper Peninsula bushes for Kelly, predict- ing the Communist-socialist issue would cost the incum- bent votes.l97 Long-time political commentator W. K. Kelsey made this wry observation as Kelly and Williams stumped back and forth across the Upper Peninsula woodlands: Don't candidates ever look at the census returns? Gov. Williams and his Re publican opponent harry Kelly have used about a quarter of their cam- paigning time in the Upper Peninsula. which contains about one-twentieth of the population of the state. . .only in the legislature where it is 1&3 is the Upper Peninsula important. However, the longer the commen- tator lives the less he knows about politics. It may be that as the U.PL goes, so goes the state, and that major strategy dictates that candi- dates spend their time in swamps and sand plains and crossroad villages instead of in the great centers of population; that they sell themselves to porcupines and loons rather than to factory workers and housewivesQ3-9O Part of the Communist issue in the Upper Peninsula, which.Williams had difficulty disassociating himself from, was the fact that John Sabol, Democratic candi- date for Congress, had once signed a petition to put the Communist Party on the ballot. Williams tried to coun- ter the socialism charges of Kelly by labeling the 197Detroit Kews, Oct. 11 and 13. 1950. 198mm was. Oct. 15. 1950- 7; Sec 86 former two term governor "a big business Stooge." It is noticeable, but not particularly significant,‘that the Hackinac Bridge began popping up on south and cen- tral ifichigan speeches as a part of the Williams' pro- gressive program that ”sees and meets the needs of the people." Williams finally decided he could not avoid the Sabol issue and spoke directly on the topic of the petition signing a week before the election, calling it "a very foolish thing.ul99 \ It was a rainy Tuesday on election day in.Detroit portending a gloomy forecast for Democrats who had to rely on heavy wayne voting to overcome out-state GOP margins. The rain kept the Democratic supporters away from the polls and Kelly was declared unofficial winner on the strength of a 6,108 margin. The Detroit News calculated that two more votes in each of Detroit's~ %,355 precincts would have spelled the difference. Kelly was jubilant, Williams was silent. Other members of the GOP team tallied far greater unofficial margins. These ranged from Frank G. Millard, elected Attorney General by a 60,000 vote margin to Fred Alger, named Secretary of State by 191,000 ballots.200 Kelly had headed south for a Florida vacation ——.~.~~ —--— 200Detroit News, Nov. 8, 1950. 1‘6: 01“ W0 5"} (D Se g1 ”7 November 10 when errors showed up on the official tab- ulation of straight party ballots. Kelly's lead had slipped to a thin 298 vote margin by November 11 and the next day the rebounding Williams held a 558 vote lead on the strength of a theomb County tabulation error. The Williams' lead doubled quickly as an Oakland error shot him into a 1,406 vote margin. Kelly cancelled his Florida stay and headed back to Phchigan for a recount, but the Williams' margin continued to widen. 0n.Decem- ber 13 Kelly grudgingly conceded defeat with Williams leading by 4,250 votes. It was the first time a Democratic governor had succeeded himself since 1911+.201 During the interim When the governship was hang- ing in the balance, the irascible Republican Ziegler had re-stated his position in regard to the new Bridge Auth- ority just to clarify things for the commissioners. "I would advise that the hhchigan State Highway Depart-H ment is to be maintained as an entity in itself, separate from the Rackinac Bridge Authority," Ziegler ‘ wrote to Lawrence Rubin, executive secretary of the Bridge Authority.202 20liDetroit News, Nov. 10 through Dec. 13, 1950- 202Letter from Charles Ziegler to Lawrence Rubin, Lhckinac Straits Inter-Peninsula Communications Com- mission file, 1950. "Contacts between the Bridge Authority and the State Highway Department will be with me personally as a liason officer between the Authority and the De par tment. "This department does and will continue to cooperate fully in every way possible with the bridge Authority, but in all cases it must be through me personally," Ziegler said, outlining his future policy. "This letter is not in the nature of a crit- icism, but merely setting up definitely the relation- ship between this department, or the members thereof, and the hhckinac Bridge Authority," he felt constrained to add.203 ‘ Although unofficial counting showed Williams with more than a %,000 vote margin when the 1950 election was over, the official canvass, which would not include the partial recount, gave him only an advantage of 935,152 to 933,998 for a narrow 1,154 vote victory. Perry Hayden, the Prohibition Party candidate for governor had polled almost eight times that margin with 8,511 ballots, and Theos A. Grove of the Socialist Labor Party had gotten 1,077 ballots, while Howard Lerner of the Socialist Wbrkers Party got 636. Sur- face analysis would indicate that Hayden's candidacy 203Letter from Ziegler to Rubin, Mackinac Straits Inter-Peninsula Communications Commission file, 1950. la U1 tc 89 could easily have cost Republican Kelly the elec- tion. 201+ It is impossible to say that Williams' bridge stand saved the 1950 election for him. There simply are not figures to support the claim. However, there are distinct indications that Williams was more popular in the Upper Peninsula counties than his Democratic predecessor IMrray Van wagoner as shown in Figure 4 (page 90). There is also statistical support for the claim that Williams was more popu- lar than the Democratic ticket in pro-Republican Upper Peninsula counties, which might lend weight to the statement that the bridge backing could have been a factor in the election. In the 19%8 election.Dickinson County was rated as a landslide or sixty per cent supporter of the Democratic ticket. Nine other counties (Gogebic, Ontonagon, Keweenaw, Baraga, Iron, hhrquette, Alger, hbnominee and Delta) gave fifty to sixty per cent support for Democrats. Houghton. Schoolcraft, and Chippewa Counties favored the GOP ticket by fifty to sixty per cent margins and Luce and Hackinac Coun- ties showed more than sixty per cent support for Rep- 205 ublican candidates. In every Republican county 20hIflchigan.Ihnual, l9§_a p. #64. 2o5Josefih LaPalombara, Guide to Michigan Politics, The CitizenshiJ>Clearing House affilitated with the Law ‘Center of New York University, New Yerk, pps. 17-20. an... WILLIAMS —U.R Counties won in 1948-1950 Plural ity reduced 48 '50 Won in 48. lost in 50 < 91 Williams had reduced the margin by which his party lost the l9h6 gubernatorial race. This was in the face of Republican Thomas Dewey polling fifty per cent of the state's vote and two per cent going to a Progressive Party slate and only forty-eight per cent 'to Democratic standard bearer President Harry S. Truman. For example, Governor Kim Sigler carried Chippewa County by 1,907 votes in 19%. Sigler's margin was reduced to 1,115 votes in l9#8, the year Williams promised to appoint a bridge study committee.206 The Democratic party suffered in Michigan in 1950. The issues of union domination.and Communist sympathizers were probably factors in the party losses. Lbnominee shifted to the Republican column and Dickinson slipped out of the landslide category. The other eight Democratic counties in the Upper Peninsula held the line by giving more than fifty per cent of the vote to the ticket. However, the Williams trend toward cutting into his opposition's' lead in the Republican counties continued in four 206Michigan Manual, 1 1+5 1%6 _____ _- __ _. -_ __ pps. 25H-256 an Michigan ganual, l§¢2-l§¢g: pps. 235-238. 92 of the six in the Upper Peninsula. In Chippewa, where Sigler had won by 1,115 vote, harry Kelly managed to eke out only a 371 vote margin.207 Simi- larly in Heughton County the Sigler margin of 1,37% in 19%: dropped to 1,021 in 191+8 and the Harry Kelly mar- gin of 1950 slid to 578 votes. In.Iuce and Lackinac the trend was not as strong, but it was still there. Only in Nenominee, the switchover county, where Williams dropped about 800 votes was the trend really bucked. In Schoolcraft the figures went against Williams, but only by a narrow margin. He lost to Sigler by 168 votes in 19h8 and lost to Kelly by 192. Van Wagoner had lost to Sigler by 376 votes there in 19%6. Tallying all the Upper Peninsula counties in 1950, Williams won by 5,057 votes, which provided more than his statewide margin. He was down from his 19H8 margin over Sigler of 7,85% votes though. The Williams' 1950 margin.also represented a 2,1H5 vote pluralityover the Kim Sigler 19H6 total and a 2,971 margin over the Sigler 19%8 total. This is in contrast to Van wagoner losing the Upper Peninsula in 19h6 to Sigler by H.513 ballots}BCB Statistics which indicate that the bridge could not have been a major factor in the Upper Peninsula vote 207LaPalombara, p. 18. 2” 82.1.1511 asst. Lassa; . ygii‘lié . Hashim: tassel. Pill: 1:53, and Michigan manual lQ_2_—_5_Q_. . . . _ n\ In 93 include the outcome of the 1950 Lieutenant Governor election between William Vandenberg and John Connolly. Vandenberg, who had been noted as an anti-bridge man in the previous legislature, ran more than 2,000 votes ahead of Kelly and defeated his opponent in the Upper Peninsula by more than 3,000 votes. It is probably safe to say the Communist sympa- thizer issue hurt Williams in the Upper Peninsula where Sabol was running against John Bennett for Congress in the 12th District. Bennett polled H3,010 in the eight county district, more than 16,000 votes more than his Democratic opponent. But Figure 5 (page 9%), which shows how the various candidates fared in the Upper Peninsula in 1950, also shows that votes against Sabol did not cause Williams the loss of any counties. Additionally, the union control issue possibly reduced the Williams' total. Certainly when all factors are considered, it must be concluded that Williams' out- spoken support for the Mackinac Bridge proposal, his positive action in naming a committee, and the re- instatement of the Bridge Authority must have gained him votes in 1950. Precisely how many would be conjec- ture, but certainly every vote he got was important in his first re-election bid. George Osborn, editor of the §au1t gig. EQElE ,_——v,-,v '_.1—.._.v VT.~ 008.300 pHmmH mwammm Gauguin Uonm U Howgmou mommdpo mocmvaob Hue: “account baoo zwoWHfimo vBHocouem musosusmm 9525 no: mosoowoumne eomem Bbfimfimg .ewbmmw. Horbuubmo. 3m. row}? 25 u. 5:. .dwmmw mmzHZMCBF mvmnaHoz wwdeHm Homo 00403.03. atom—Hg 953.5». 025802.. 35 Hpacgsmse 004350“. 0040850“. mowpw szHHmam . new 3% H. . :.mo0 :.:om more a how an: o .30 m.u~m o.o~m e.mow o.omm w.mwm :.row are emu H.ooo ooe m.pwo H.mow m.mom m.mmm :.muu :.m0~ m.~He m.:mm ur.reo mo.m~o vuacaospsa oo<0wuon