USA > Connecticut > Connecticut in transition: 1775-1818 > Part 17
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32
The new party waged a vigorous spring campaign in 1800. The Federalists were taken by surprise, so that their vote was somewhat scat- tered; while the Democrats massed their vote with unusual success. In this way General William Hart with 1,587 votes attained fourteenth and Gideon Granger with 1,052 votes the eighteenth place on the con- gressional nomination.14 While the electoral mechanism made success impossible, winning places on the list was encouraging in that it aroused high hopes. Federalist vigilance prevented a like happening for a long time, for a surprise could succeed but once.
The Presidential campaign commenced early.15 Jefferson's character and religious views were castigated by Federalists, lay and clerical. To counteract these injurious calumnies the Republicans printed a free pamphlet, giving extracts from Jefferson's "Notes on Virginia" to prove him a God-fearing man. Federalist leaders and papers urged the freemen to look to New York and Pennsylvania for the results wrought by a revolutionary party. Republicans were accused of counterfeiting assistants' nominations in order to scatter the votes of unsuspecting free- men; of meeting in private cabals; of sending missionaries to harangue people in clubs and taverns; and of actually nominating themselves. The touring of the eastern counties by the Republican candidate for Con- gress was used as proof of the brazen effrontery of demagogues. It was indeed a revolutionary manoeuver, for nominations had always been clothed with a popular character and open electioneering was un-
14 Mercury, May 22, 1800.
15 Chauncey Goodrich wrote from Hartford, Aug. 26, 1800: "The Democrats have taken courage to come into the open day, and are very busy. A few active re- cruits have joined them. ... As yet, it is not known that any character of worth has gone over to their side." Gibbs, op. cit., II, 411. Welling, Connecticut Federal- ism, pp. 296 ff .; H. S. Randall, Life of Jefferson, II, 642 ff .; Adams, History of U. S., I, 312 ff .; Courant, July 7, Sept. 1, 29, 1800.
151
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
known.16 Every effort was made to prevent Republican success by beseeching electors to attend the fall meeting and vote for known Federalists. A newspaper reign of terror appears to have been inaug- urated to intimidate Republican editors.17 The result of the freemen's meetings was anxiously awaited. In the assistants' nomination Hart won the eighteenth place. For Congress the seven elected were Federalists, but Hart received the eighth and Granger the ninth place. The As- sembly again had "democratic" members, though not as many as in the spring. Governor Trumbull made his first political speech, calling upon Providence to preserve the state from the dangerous innovations of the time.18
Federalists congratulated themselves on their success. With the Re- publican poll well over 3,000 they were thankful that an unusual Fed- eralist vote was cast. Otherwise, the party of disorder would have saddled itself in power, displacing the tried men of the old order.
Republicans, it was said, were so organized and drilled blindly to vote for designated characters that their chances of success were vastly increased. In Connecticut, as elsewhere, the Jeffersonian party was educating the people to use the ballot and not to leave the business of governing to a professional class. To counteract Republican appeals, Federalist leaders were forced to bring out their whole voting strength. The ballot was to become an instrument of value, as more than a nom- inal rule of the people was about to be developed through party life. The poll became larger; and more stress was laid upon the privilege of
16 Courant, Aug. 4, Sept. 1; Mercury, Sept. 11, 1800.
17 Robbins, Diary, I, 124, reported from Danbury: "The Democratic editor in this town has blown out and moved to Norwalk. The boys attended him out of town with bells, quills, etc." Charles Holt of the New London Bee was fined $200 and sentenced to three months imprisonment by the circuit court. There was a movement to establish the Republican Optic at Litchfield. Mercury, Sept. 25, 1800; Courant, Apr. 21, Dec. 1, 1800.
18 Hart received 3,892 votes to 9,625 for William Hillhouse. For Congress Hart polled 3,250 votes to Samuel Dana's 6,273. Courant, Oct. 13, 20, 27; Mercury, Oct. 23; Robbins, Diary, I, 123. Webster to Wolcott, Sept. 17, 1800: "We have had the warmest election in Connecticut that I ever saw. We have defeated the Jacobins in this town [New Haven]; in others the victory is upon their side. Their astonish- ing exertions, secrecy, and discipline have effected much-their lies and misrepre- sentations exceed all credibility. They will not, I believe, carry any important point this time-but the principles of corruption are speaking fast in Connecticut-and the last stronghold of republicanism is so violently assaulted that its fate is uncer- tain. I have long believed that no government in which the right of suffrage is founded on population can be durable-and the cheapness of that right will greatly accelerate the destruction of ours." Ford, Webster, II, 506.
152
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
suffrage. The national election of 1800 encouraged Republicans to "revolutionize" Connecticut.
The campaign of 1801 was inaugurated by a state gathering of a thousand Republicans, at Wallingford on March 11, to celebrate the Jefferson-Burr victory.19 This was the first of a series of party jubilees which aroused popular interest, much as did the Methodist camp meet- ing, from which they probably originated. To the sober Federalist it was a contemptible pandering to the multitude. Gideon Granger read the Declaration of Independence; Rev. Stanley Griswold preached the sermon; and after Pierrepont Edwards had read Jefferson's inaugural address, Abraham Bishop delivered an oration, taking as his motto, "Our Statesmen to the Constitution and our Clergy to the Bible." Anti- clerical as it was in bias, its tone was more destructive, with its insist- ence that the state was without a constitution. The rally ended with a banquet at which toasts were given to the Republican leaders in nation and state, to true religion, and to the destruction of a political ministry and a state church.
The anticlerical plank was made emphatic. The union of church and state was becoming the crucial issue, as the clergy were condemned as "political parsons." 20 Fisher Ames, who was desirous of making the Boston Palladium a London Gazette, wrote to Theodore Dwight, ask- ing that the clergy and good men assist its circulation, as they were doing in Massachusetts. He continued: "An active spirit must be aroused in every town to check the incessant proselytizing acts of the Jacobins, who will soon or late subvert Connecticut, as surely as other States un- less resisted with a spirit as ardent as their own." 21 Federalists did not deny the deep-rooted influence of the clergy, but defended it as some- thing desirable.22 They defined the issue as one between "Religion and
19 Mercury, Mar. 19, 26, Apr. 1, June 11; Courant, Mar. 9, 23, 1801.
20 "Those states which are most under the hierarchical yoke, will be last. ... The favorite theme of uniting church and state, has been more cherished in New England than in any other part of the United States, and more in Connecticut than any other state. The numerous advocates of this system will not yield, 'till the in- fluence of truth, and the voice of the people become too powerful for further re- sistance." Mercury, May 11, 1801.
21 He said this paper "should whip Jacobins as a gentleman would a chimney- sweeper, at arm's length, and keeping aloof from his soot." Fisher Ames, I, 292- 295, 315.
22 Courant, Jan. 12, Feb. 2, 1801; Dwight, Travels, IV, 404 ff .; Robbins, Diary, I, 135. Theodore Dwight's frequently quoted Oration of 1801, after describing the lowering tone of religion and morals, broken family ties, asked: "The outlaws of
153
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
Infidelity, Morality and Debauchery, legal Government and total Dis- organization." Resenting what they termed an infidelic attack on the church and its ministry, they questioned the Christian motives of the Baptists and Methodists who were in accord. Their stand was honest, for they had convinced themselves that only under the ancient system could the commonwealth's welfare be assured. Theirs was the con- servatism of an entrenched interest.
In the spring election of 1801 Republican candidates first appeared for governor and lieutenant governor, Judge Richard Law and Colonel Ephraim Kirby.23 Against neither of them could a reasonable objection be raised. Law was an excellent justice, but a political apostate. That was enough! Than Kirby, no contemporary did more to raise the Con- necticut bar and legal education to a higher level. Upon counting the vote it was found that Governor Trumbull and Lieutenant Governor Treadwell had received 11,156 and 9,066 against 1,056 and 2,038 votes for their opponents. Calvin Goddard for Congress received 7,397 votes as against 3,256 for Granger. The Republicans had at least forced out the Federalist vote, for such a poll for governor had never been re- corded. In the Assembly the new party won thirty-three seats, or about a sixth. Certain towns were becoming Republican strongholds, whereas other doubtful towns were inclining toward Republicanism. A study of the situation will show Republican strength throughout the state.
Jefferson's election materially benefited the local organization, in furnishing "deserving democrats" with paying federal offices. They were thus enabled to carry on their political propaganda and build a Republican machine. It was excusable, for the minority party received no state or local appointments, and without patronage the opposition could not have maintained itself so many years. This explained the per- sistence which astounded the Federalists, who expected that each of their overpowering victories would cause opposition to die of sheer desperation.
Nothing excited Connecticut as much as Jefferson's removal of Eli- zur Goodrich from the collectorship of New Haven, and the appoint-
Europe, the fugitives from the pillory, and the gallows, have undertaken to assist our own abandoned citizens, in the pleasing work of destroying Connecticut. ... Can imagination paint anything more dreadful on this side of hell?" Pp. 15-17, 28-31.
23 Courant, Apr. 6, May 18, 25, 1801. For biographical notices of Kirby, see: Kilbourne, Sketches, pp. 103-107; Orcutt, Torrington, p. 207; Pease and Niles, Gazetteer, p. 236; Mercury, Dec. 13, 1804; May 16, 1805.
154
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
ment of the aged mayor, Samuel Bishop.24 Goodrich, named by Adams and approved by the Senate, February 19, 1801, resigned his seat in Congress to accept the sinecure. The reason for the removal, besides that of place-making, was Goodrich's unbecoming activity in advancing the interests of Aaron Burr before Congress. The merchants of New Haven drew up a memorial to the President, criticizing the appointment of a man nearly eighty years of age who could only perform his duties through clerks and who was already overburdened with state and local offices. Their real complaint was that his "notorious" son would be the actual collector. Jefferson in reply defended the appointment because of the noble career of Bishop and the advantage of his judgment, if not his clerical labor, in the office. Criticism was not checked, nor was there a lessening of assaults on Abraham Bishop and patronage evils. Good- rich as a Federalist martyr was made professor of law at Yale, elevated to the Council, and on the elder Bishop's death elected mayor of New Haven.25 The case was doubly important, as the first breach in Con- necticut Federalism, as the first glimpse of democracy triumphant.
Abraham Bishop, the "first consul," succeeded his father as collector with fees of about $3,600.26 The "steady, firm and unshaken Republi- can," Gideon Granger, was made Postmaster-General with a $3,000 salary, but his duties at the capital did not prevent a tour of his native state about election time.27 Alexander Wolcott was given the Middle- town collectorship, worth close to $3,000 a year, in the place of "a vio- lent, irritable, priest-ridden, implacable, ferocious federalist," whose removal Pierrepont Edwards advised. Madison in 1811 nominated Wol- cott for the Supreme Court, but the Senate failed to confirm him.28 Granger remembered some of his friends with postmasterships, among them Bishop's brother-in-law, Jonathan Law of Hartford.29 Barlow was
24 Courant, Mar. 2, 30, June 15, July 30, 1801; Mercury, June 11, 18, July 23, 1801; Ford, Webster, I, 515-522; Greene, Religious Liberty, pp. 421-423; Charles Burr Todd, Life of Col. Aaron Burr, p. 93: C. R. Fish, Civil Service and the Patronage, pp. 33-38.
25 Courant, Sept. 21, 1803.
26 Bentley, Diary, III, 257; Courant, Sept. 7, Oct. 12, 1803; Mercury, Oct. 13, 1 803.
27 Courant, Nov. 16, 1801; June 28, 1802; Dexter, Biographical Sketches, IV, 546 ff.
28 Fish, Civil Service, pp. 33-34; Mercury, Aug. 20, 1801; Sept. 11, 18, 1806; Feb. 14, 1811; Courant, Feb. 13, 1811; Dexter, Biographical Sketches, IV, 80-82.
29 New Haven, Litchfield, Durham, for instance. Granger was an ardent spoils- man, being removed in 1814 for this reason. Courant, Feb. 22, Nov. 22, 1802; Jan.
I55
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
honored with a French mission. Ephraim Kirby, a revenue supervisor, was appointed a judge for Louisiana territory just prior to his death.30 Commissionerships of bankruptcy furnished positions for twelve men. Others were awarded government contracts.31 In all, a fairly extensive list could be compiled.
Federalists found in the patronage a vulnerable point, to be con- tinually assaulted. The high salaries of collectorships had a sinister look to a people whose governor and college president did not receive a third as much. Parallel columns of fees paid federal and local officials gave weight to charges of federal corruption and extravagance. Repub- lican leaders were described as "a set of office-holders and office-seekers, under the National Government ... using every possible exertion to destroy this State." 32 They were rich demagogues receiving fabulous salaries out of the public treasury, riding in carriages, stirring up class strife by wickedly deceiving the populace in an attempt to gain control of the state. As these attacks were not without effect, it would seem that patronage was morally injurious to Republican growth, even though it furnished the sinews of party patriotism.
In the fall of 1801 a Republican list for assistants was issued. An ex- cuse was deemed necessary, so it was suggested that President Dwight's clique had secretly fathered a Federal-Republican list.33 The Republican list included certain Federalists of broad type, Williams, Samuel John- son, and Zephaniah Swift, an augury of the later Toleration party. While the Republican nomination was bitterly assailed, it was eminently respectable, some five being Revolutionary officers, another a physician, and others lawyers. At the polls their highest man, Granger, received a vote of 3,936 against 10,583 for Hillhouse. For Congress, Granger polled 4,187 votes to 7,02 1 for Congressman Benjamin Tallmadge. In
12, June 5, 1803; Adams, History of U. S., VII, 399; Andrews, John Cotton Smith, p. 61.
30 Mercury, July 16, 1801; Dec. 13, 1804.
31 Courant, July 19, 1802; June 11, 1806; Mar. 16, 1808. The Connecticut Gazette counted nineteen men who were rewarded for "useful labors." Then it must be remembered the extension of business meant additional Republican postmasters, revenue offices, etc.
32 Courant, Mar. 12, 1806. See Courant, June 4, 11, 1806; July 3, 1811; Apr. 6, 1813. In 1809 Webster wrote to Madison that he would do well by appointing re- ligious men in Connecticut. Ford, Webster, I, 529. II, 60 ff.
33 Mercury, Sept. 17, 1801. The Middlesex Gazette had already printed the Re- publican list. Courant, Sept. 14. For the votes see Courant, Sept. 28, 1801; Mercury, Oct. 22, 1801.
156
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
the Assembly forty Republican representatives answered the roll. Every office of importance was contested, so men were bound to regard Re- publicanism as a party, not a faction.
The year 1802 gave to the opposition a platform of local issues about which a determined fight could be waged. Pointing to the Federalist stand-up law, which was intended to strengthen the hold of the Stand- ing Order, Republicans were able to set forth as their first principles the purity and secrecy of elections and an extension of the suffrage. This made an appeal to the sectarian, the farmer, and mechanic, whose near ones were often "porpoises," as well as to the non-voters whose influ- ence might be of value. This tinkering with the electoral machinery vitalized interest in the question of whether or not the state had a con- stitution. To Bishop belongs the credit of making the lack of a written constitution a political issue. Federalists were thrown on the defensive, a political disadvantage of no mean importance.
Theodore Dwight in an oration before the Society of Cincinnati, a supposedly non-partisan, patriotic order, undertook a defense. He de- scribed the constitution as unwritten, but resting its claims on the permanence of a hundred and fifty years, during which it had withstood every assault of royal prerogative, revolution and faction. It was a gov- ernment based on the Charter of 1662, which was "little more than a re-establishment of the first constitution, with somewhat more explicit- ness," tested by long usage and experience. Dwight's oration was in- spired. Henceforth belief in the constitution was one of the "steady habits," a political dogma to which every friend of religion and morals must unquestioningly subscribe.
Elder John Leland in his sermons of 1801 and 1802 called for the abolition of the ecclesiastical constitutions and of compulsory religious support.34 He described the people of Connecticut as politically igno- rant, for "they have been trained too much in the habit of trusting the concerns of religion and policy to their rulers." He suggested a con- stitutional convention, which he computed would not cost more than five cents a head. Then a printed constitution could be presented to every freeman for a like sum. Hence for an expenditure of ten cents per man, the state could have a constitution and every freeman would be able to judge whether this or that law was constitutional. He ex- claimed: What a saving in lawyer's fees!
34 Sermon (1801), pp. 1-28; Dissenters' Strong Box, pp. 30-36.
157
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
If ever there should be a constitution, he hoped that, "despite the deep rooted modes and habits," religious liberty would be granted. Yet he was not sanguine, "considering the long accustomed habits of Con- necticut, the prejudices of the people, and the present connection that exists between religion and property-religion and honor-religion and education." With regard to the Federalist contention that a constitution then existed, he wrote:
The people of Connecticut have never been asked, by those in authority, what form of government they would choose; nor in fact, whether they would have any form at all. For want of a specific constitution, the rulers run without bridle or bit, or anything to draw them up to the ring-bolt. Should the legislature make a law, to perpetuate themselves in office for life; this law would immediately become part of their constitution; and who would call them to account therefor?
Leland thus brought the constitutional question before the Baptist vot- ers, who were led to see in a written constitution the only hope of dis- establishment. Hence Republican success became a religious hope with them and with the Methodists, who were soon to fall into line.
"Hancock" in an appeal to the Republican voters, April, 1802, put the question squarely:
You exhibit to the world the rare and perhaps unprecedented example, of a people peaceably and quietly consenting to be governed, without any compact which secures rights to yourselves, or delegates powers to your rulers. ... I am ready to admit that you have been influenced by a sacred re- gard for order and government, otherwise you would not, ever since the American Revolution, have consented to be governed by a charter given your ancestors by a British King, and which since your independence has separated you from Britain, has been imposed on you by an act of a legisla- ture not authorized to make the imposition.35
He argued: Your legislators have been honest in the past, but history teaches the story of aspiring men intoxicated with power. You have re- elected them from force of habit, not because of their proven worth, for there is no criterion of their worth. There will be imperceptible in- creases of power and gradual encroachments on the part of your rulers, who will brand inquiry as licentiousness, innovation, or infidelity. He continued:
Let me ask you if a legislative majority of judges and justices, has not by law provided that the poor man, who trudged on foot his weary pilgrimage
35 Mercury, Apr. 8, 1802.
158
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
through life, should do the same quantity of labour in the public roads as the rich man; while the Justice or Judge, the Clergyman and Physician who encumbered the highways with his Waggon's six cattle team and pleasure Carriage, should bear no part of the burden.
Why should not officials serve in the militia and defend the state, of whose wealth they are the chief holders? They have deprived you of an independent judiciary and a free vote. He closed warningly:
You cannot be insensible that the work of a Connecticut Legislator is an arduous, a weighty task. He has not only to guard the people against them- selves, but has also the more difficult-the herculean labour of guarding the people against himself. Having no Constitution to limit him, he finds it neces- sary to be constantly on his guard against the delusions of power and Ambi- tion. He has to contend against his most favorite wishes; his fondest hopes. When he finds it in his power to gratify these hopes-when he finds no check but in the elective voice of the people; and when he finds this elective voice almost confined by law, to those who have similar interests with himself- prudence deserts her helm-ambition seizes it-and the rights of the people are lost in the usurpation of the statesman.
The Republicans published their nomination list, which they de- scribed as differing from the Federalist list in that it included men of various classes, professions and creeds.36 It was not a Congregational lawyer's list nor restricted to the Connecticut valley towns. Farmers as lovers of economy were asked for support. Federalists, aroused, franti- cally called forth their non-active freemen. The campaign, like its suc- cessors, abounded in bitter recriminations, personal attacks, and in news- paper controversies between pugnaciously partisan editors.37
The April, 1802, vote was large. The city of Hartford was said to have cast its heaviest vote, amounting to 8.2 per cent of the population. Other towns did equally well. The total vote for governor amounted to 15,891, with a majority for Governor Trumbull of 6,875 over Ephraim
36 Mercury, Apr. 8. After this, printed lists were usual. Issued at first apologeti- cally by the newspapers, they were soon made out in party caucus and issued under the signature of the chairman, with an appeal to the voters.
37 An interesting controversy was that between Alexander Wolcott and Sena- tor Uriah Tracy, life-long friends made rabid enemies by politics. To Senator Hill- house, who joined in proclaiming Wolcott's profligacy, the latter wrote: "If I am a profligate man, to prove it will not be difficult, nor to you an unpleasant task." Mercury, Feb. 28, Mar. 25 and Aug. 19, 1802. The editor of the Mercury deprecated attacks on Kirby, a man long honored by editors like the one in Middletown, who excused libels on Republicans as "strokes of wit." See Courant, Aug. 16.
159
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
Kirby.38 About fifty-five Republican members were sent to the Legis- lature, in spite of the new election law and the failure of New Haven's Republican paper. Not a man were the Republicans able to name on the assistants' list, despite their concentration of votes. New London County, which had gone Republican by a small majority in October, 1801, was again Federalist. Small wonder that the General Election was a gala day, and that Federalist leaders and visiting clergy rejoiced in the failure of the "disorganizers."
The fall election resulted in another contest, even Hartford becom- ing so doubtful that the old order confessedly were obliged to recruit voters. It was estimated that between seventy and eighty Republican representatives were elected, but the number was exaggerated, for only fifty-three votes were cast for Kirby for Senator against one hundred and seventeen for James Hillhouse. The vote on the assistants' nomi- nation showed a marked Republican increase, but a much larger Feder- alist decrease.39 The Federalist problem was to hold their voters to the polls lest, caught unawares, they be defeated by a better-directed mi- nority.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.