Yes, yes, of course. But why those particular smallish cities for state capitals?

[Find_Friends]

Lots of good answers here. I feel safe in adding the brief blurb on the part of “The Good Doctor” to my casual mental list of things he was at least partly wrong about.

FWIW, I never said that “Boston, Denver and Honolulu” were the only exceptions.

[Kimballkid]

The location of South Dakota’s state capital was decided after three elections

[yabob]

@snowthx

While that is true about L.A. back then, there is more to it than being near the goldfields. The original Capitol for CA was in San Jose, then Vallejo, then Benicia, and finally Sacramento. It seems the reasons for the moves were lack of space and “accommodations” in each of these cities. Why it ended-up in Sacramento had to do with a generous offer from the city of land and other spaces for nearly no cost, and Sacramento already had hotels, a port, and other infrastructure in place (probably due to being near the gold fields).

Linky

Why San Francisco was not considered, I am not sure - it was definitely a city in the early 1850s, when all these moves took place. There was pretty much nothing but ranches and wilderness in the rest of the state, except around the Missions and the gold mining areas.

The legislature in San Jose was known as “The Legislature of 1000 Drinks”, and became “The Legislature on Wheels” during its quest for a place to call home:

http://www.sanjose.com/underbelly/unbelly/Sanjose/plaza/plaza5.html

[RealityChuck]

@friedo

In the case of Albany, it was actually the oldest colonial settlement in New York, even predating permanent settlements in Manhattan, having been established by Dutch furriers in 1614. It was made the capital after the independence and remained thus mostly because it was

1. Not New York City, which by the late 18th century had developed as an economic and population center,
2. Somewhat centrally located in the state, and
3. Accessible via the Hudson River and Erie Canal.

Well, not exactly.

Kingston was the first capital of the state, starting in 1777. The capital moved to Albany because Albany promised to build a capitol building after the British burned down Kingston during the revolution.

[jtur88]

Alternatively, the title to the thread could have been : “Why didn’t state capitals grow to be larger cities?” Since most state capitals were established at a time when the there was a rather sparse population and few cities had yet taken hold as a major metropolis. State capitals clearly had a potential growth advantage not enjoyed by other cities in the state, yet often failed to grow.

Somewhat more surprising is the rarity of county seats that are much smaller than the leading city in the county.

[Rick_Kitchen]

New Bern, North Carolina was the largest city in North Carolina while it was the state capital, but it dwindled when the capital moved to Raleigh.

[watchwolf49]

From Wikipedia:

After Ohio achieved statehood in 1803, political infighting among prominent Ohio leaders resulted in the state capital moving from Chillicothe to Zanesville and back again. State legislature finally decided that a new capital city, located in the center of the state, was a necessary compromise. They chose Columbus because of its central location within the state, and proximity to major transportation routes (primarily rivers). The legislature chose it as the capital over a number of other competitors, including Franklinton, Dublin, Worthington, and Delaware. Prior to the state legislature’s decision in 1812, Columbus did not exist. The city was designed from the first as the capital. Named in honor of Christopher Columbus, the capital city was founded on February 14, 1812, on the “High Banks opposite Franklinton at the Forks of the Scioto most known as Wolf’s Ridge.” At the time, this area was a dense forestland, used only as a hunting ground.

So in Ohio it appears the Columbus site was selected because it’s in the middle of the state.

[dasmoocher]

Annapolis, MD is fairly small, but was important in MD during the latter half of the 18th century. It was eclipsed by Baltimore as a port afterwards (Baltimore probably has 10x the population, now). Annapolis also briefly served as the US capitol.

[Kent_Clark]

Jefferson City, Missouri was nothing more than a trading post when it was made the state capital. It happened to be midway between the state’s eastern and western borders on the Missouri River. It made sense.

But that doesn’t begin to unravel the number of political deals that came later. Jefferson City got the state penitentiary, so Columbia got the state university, Fulton got the state hospital, etc.

[even_sven]

@snowthx

While that is true about L.A. back then, there is more to it than being near the goldfields. The original Capitol for CA was in San Jose, then Vallejo, then Benicia, and finally Sacramento. It seems the reasons for the moves were lack of space and “accommodations” in each of these cities. Why it ended-up in Sacramento had to do with a generous offer from the city of land and other spaces for nearly no cost, and Sacramento already had hotels, a port, and other infrastructure in place (probably due to being near the gold fields).

Linky.

I’ve heard the Sacramento city representatives also helped the process by booking all the hotel rooms in candidate cities before the scouting committees arrived. Hefty bribes were also likely involved.

[Nefario]

Frankfort, Kentucky, was chosen because it was an important port on the Kentucky River which was the interstate of its day, before major railroads or highways.

The original boundaries were a horrible location to build a town. It was a low area near the river, mostly surrounded by cliffs, that flooded with some regularity. Eventually the current capitol building was built in a slightly higher area. Today most businesses and homes are on the surrounding highlands.

[JRDelirious]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

That seems to be an urban legend. There are lots of references to the “rule” in high school study guides but I can’t find any reference to it ever having been law.

I have heard it in reference to a traditional rule for the “ridings” (legislative districts) in the UK Parliament but again as just that, with no further reference.

In quite a few of the Western States from looking at the map one can guess they were drawn up based on the Land Survey grid, and the county seat was wherever in that particular demarcation happended to be sustainable as such, or was founded to take advantage of rail or river access.

There may also have been in some states/territories a requirement of X population before you could have a county, but the whole of the jurisdiction has to be in a county or another. So if there were the required howevermany settlers in Hardscrabbletown and a few smaller settlements at the edge of the ridge along the river, but to the north and west of it there were five thousand square miles of tumbleweed and Indians, you got yourself a large county with a small setted strip in the corner.

[Rick_Kitchen]

@Nefario

Frankfort, Kentucky, was chosen because it was an important port on the Kentucky River which was the interstate of its day, before major railroads or highways.

The original boundaries were a horrible location to build a town. It was a low area near the river, mostly surrounded by cliffs, that flooded with some regularity. Eventually the current capitol building was built in a slightly higher area. Today most businesses and homes are on the surrounding highlands.

Sacramento was also on a low area near the river which flooded with regularity. They eventually just filled in the streets and built in on top of them. You can actually tour Underground Sacramento.

[asterion]

@RealityChuck

Well, not exactly.

Kingston was the first capital of the state, starting in 1777. The capital moved to Albany because Albany promised to build a capitol building after the British burned down Kingston during the revolution.

I think Kingston might be the most depressing city in the Hudson Valley.

Anyway, as mentioned earlier, Santa Fe is the capital of New Mexico because it’s always been. Oldest state capital in the US, with 405 years as the capital of the area under Spanish, Mexican, and American control. Though you could quibble about the continuity at times.

[smiling_bandit]

@jtur88

Alternatively, the title to the thread could have been : “Why didn’t state capitals grow to be larger cities?” Since most state capitals were established at a time when the there was a rather sparse population and few cities had yet taken hold as a major metropolis. State capitals clearly had a potential growth advantage not enjoyed by other cities in the state, yet often failed to grow.

I don’t think there’s much mystery about it. Until the 19th century, cities were almost completely the result of natural transportation opportunities - spots with good harbors, or along rivers, or both. Being a capital isn’t going to attract any business that uses transportation heavily - which is virtually all of them, except (ironically) virtual business. There may be some opportunities for service businesses, but even then you’re looking at a seasonal clientele for legislators, plus bureaucrats. But by convenience, necessity, and politics, bureaucracies are often spread out over the state anyway.

Rail changed things, but it didn’t inherently change the commercial importance of capitals. Some of them turned into major cities because they were centrally located, so it made sense to put them right on major train lines that were going through the state anyway. Still, for the most part the rail lines ran where they went because that was where it made sense to put rail lines - they were built to serve people and industries, not to decorate capitals. So while they created new, and different transportation opportunities, they didn’t necessarily make capitals any better sited than before. And of course, no amount of rail can turn a poor harbor into a thriving port, although eventually technological changes did eventually make some obsolete and gave big opportunities to others. Many of the major ports before the 20th century are functional but not really ideal, due to not have the necessary deep waters to support supersized cargo ships. So while hosting the government can be nice for a city, it won’t ensure it becomes large or even particularly wealthy.

There’s other things we could go into about this, but it would veer a bit into GD territory. Just talking about the highways could spark some ferocious arguments.

[Loopus]

Houston was actually founded to be the capital of the Republic of Texas, with the blessing of President Sam Houston. While on the far east edge of the land the Republic claimed, Houston was actually pretty centrally located relative to the larger population centers of the time.

When Mirabeau B Lamar became president a few years later, he moved the capital from Houston to the frontier village of Waterloo, renaming it Austin. He did this both because he had delusions of Texas becoming a powerful nation and wanted a capital near the center of the land it claimed, and because he hated Sam Houston’s guts and didn’t want to live in a city named after him.

I’m with Freddy: Fifty states, fifty stories.

[Rick_Kitchen]

The capital of Georgia was moved to the town of Terminus because it was a central railway hub. Then they changed the name to Atlanta for the Western and Atlantic Railroad.

[Mr_Downtown]

There’s a recent scholarly book on this topic.

[TriPolar]

Here in Rhode Island Providence is our capital and largest city. There isn’t anyplace very far away to move it to though, and the next 4 largest cities adjoin it. Even Newport is close enough that according to legend Roger Williams once rowed a boat from Newport to Providence and back again in the same day.

Pennsylvania made Harrisburg it’s capital in 1812 because it was becoming a major industrial area at the time. It isn’t now though, close to half it’s population currently works for the state government.

[gigi]

@friedo

In the case of Albany, it was actually the oldest colonial settlement in New York, even predating permanent settlements in Manhattan, having been established by Dutch furriers in 1614. It was made the capital after the independence and remained thus mostly because it was

1. Not New York City, which by the late 18th century had developed as an economic and population center,
2. Somewhat centrally located in the state, and
3. Accessible via the Hudson River and Erie Canal.

The rust belt cities like Rochester and Buffalo developed much later as industrial manufacturing centers from the mid-19th century.

Don’t forget Kingston, the first capital in 1777-1797. Pretty much the same pros as Albany.