USA > Connecticut > Connecticut in transition: 1775-1818 > Part 19
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 four justices were happily vindicated by their constituencies, all being elected to the next Legislature. Federalists unable to defend their course laughed at the distinction between a government and a
60 Church Ms .; National Intelligencer, articles in Mercury, Nov. 15, Dec. 27. The Courant, Nov. 14, found it necessary to take the National Intelligencer to task for its interfering interest. Cases of justices guilty of heinous offenses, but yet in office, were cited. Mercury, Nov. 15, 1804. See also Mercury, May 23, 1805.
169
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
constitution, and cast doubts on the authorship of the Judd defense. They required no justification, for they were a governing majority.
The constitutional agitation was not allowed to die down. "Numa," in a series of about fifteen articles printed in the American Mercury through the fall of 1804 and the following spring, thoroughly treated the whole question.61 The compact of 1639 had been pressed into service as the necessity of grounding the ancient government in the people was recognized. The limitation of this pact with its exclusion of New Haven, Numa demonstrated, even making use of Trumbull's History. He then sketched the history of New Haven, the blue laws (which Republicans liked to recall), and the granting of the Charter by Charles II.
In answer to his own query as to where one would find the constitu- tion, the pamphleteer noted that there were many differences between the governing institutions and those provided for in the Charter. If the Charter had been modified, the constitution must be a combination of Charter, usages and law. What is a constitution and how does it differ from a law? In this country it has a well-known signification. It is not a government, for countries like Turkey, Algiers and Russia have gov- ernment enough, but no constitution. The mere fact that men, in order to become citizens, took an oath to support the constitution, he con- sidered no proof of their acquiescence or belief in the "constitution." Let the people see the constitution in print or make clear the mystical means by which the constitutional laws, customs and usages may be known. Citizens sustaining such a reputation for intelligence must soon learn that there is no constitution like those of other states or that of the national government. A constitution, he wrote:
Is an instrument framed and adopted by the supreme power of the State (which in all popular States is the people themselves), defining the great principles on which society is formed, and in conformity to which it is to be governed, establishing the various departments of government and circum- scribing by well defined and distinct limits the powers and functions of those departments respectively.62
A despotism, he stated, would evolve unless rulers were limited by a written constitution, which would enable a vigilant and intelligent people to know when their liberties were being infringed upon. Other- wise they could not guard against encroachments any more than a
61 Series commences in Mercury, Oct. 18, 1804.
62 Mercury, Feb. 21, 1805.
170
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
farmer without landmarks. The erection of courts and defining of suf- frage qualifications he described as a legislative usurpation. Yet without a constitution there could be no legal check save revolution as a last resort.
The chief obstacle in the way of a constitutional convention, he wrote, came from the propagation of falsehoods, by ministers, magis- trates, and lawyers.63 They argued that, if it is admitted that no con- stitution exists, then the government will be a usurpation and all deeds, contracts, writs and marriages since the Revolution would be illegal. Such was not the case in the other states which were all temporarily without constitutions. Only the ignorant could be so imposed upon. If true, no better arguments for expediting the creation of a legal gov- ernment could be adduced. The root of the whole difficulty he diag- nosed as the popular, slavish awe for clergy and magistrates, founded not on their moral or mental superiority, but on the steady habits of bigotry and credulity. Their objection to the framing of a constitution in the midst of violent political factiousness he swept aside, with the logical answer that the disturbance was chiefly over this very issue and could thus be quieted.
The Democratic appeal to voters was skillfully framed. After dem- onstrating the weakness of the present system of government, it was charged that those who cry out against innovation were the first slyly to change the institutions of the fathers. They had limited the freedom of suffrage and imperiled the purity of elections. Freemen were warned to remember that "The Legislator and the Minister of Justice may be as fatal to liberty, as have been the Conquerors of the world; and the doors to the temple of freedom, as strongly barricaded by commissions of peace officers, as by the bayonets of Soldiers." 64
A Democratic investigator found an essay by "Hambden" in the Middlesex Gazette, September, 1792, which argued that Connecticut was without a constitution.65 This was reprinted in the American Mer- cury as proof that one was not always regarded as a heresiarch, who believed with Judd that there was no constitution. Connecticut Repub- licans were on the whole moderate, and less impassioned than one would expect. Few would attempt to develop the thesis that, while in structure
63 Ibid., Mar. 21, 1805. 64 Ibid., Mar. 21, 1805. 65 Ibid., Apr. 4, 1805.
I71
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
Connecticut was the most republican of states, in practice it was as little republican as Turkey. Yet such was the view of a neighboring journal.66
A pamphlet, Steady Habits Vindicated, supposedly by Daggett, ap- peared just prior to the April election. Attention was called to the ex- cellence of the present government. It was ancient, and as free a system as "can exist among fallen men," for the elective principle made the Assembly responsible. It was as plainly understood as if the forms were committed to writing. He feared that "If a long constitution, on paper, were adopted, many years and even an age or two might pass away before the common people would understand all its niceties, as well as they understand the plain old form under which they and their fathers lived." It was an economical system; official salaries were hardly enough for decent support. Daggett commented:
It is an alarming circumstance that the men who are foremost in attempts to overthrow this government are holding offices from the executive of the United States, and are receiving from thence, each of them, a yearly emolu- ment more than twice as great as you allow your governor. Is there a secret understanding between them and their employers at the City of Washing- ton? Has the destruction of your state government, by private agreement, been made a part of their offices? Why are the officers and servants of an- other government engaged, with a furious zeal, to subvert the institutions of this state? Why have your civil officers and your government been reviled and denounced in the official newspaper at the seat of the national govern- ment? Why has it been threatened that Connecticut shall have a constitution imposed on her by the power of the union? There is no wish to excite groundless suspicions; but when the dearest interests of the public are at stake, a degree of jealousy is a virtue and should be awake, especially when there is an appearance of foreign interference and influence. . . . The class of men like Bishop and Alexander Wolcott, who strive to destroy the state, are unworthy of any trust or respect. They question the legality of our govern- ment comparing the people under it to the slaves of the South.
Beware of men [he warned] whose desperate circumstances, whose profligacy of character, whose hatred of the christian religion and whose inordinate ambition, render them turbulent, under the disguise of a flaming zeal for the public interest. Have all men until Bishop been too ignorant not to realize that there was no constitution? . . . You have not indeed a fine spun constitution, spread over abundance of paper, and consisting of divers chap- ters and sections and of numerous articles and nice definitions. But you have a plain simple constitution, consisting of a few most important articles or principles, and these are known to the great community as well as a farmer
66 Mercury, Oct. 18, 1804.
172
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
knows his land marks. ... It was originally framed and adopted by the people ... more than almost any other government upon earth, it is the legitimate child of the people, who have hitherto constantly nursed it and cleaved to it with affectionate attachment; and whenever the people (far off be the day) shall cease to give it their voluntary assent and support, it must instantly fall. ... How foolish is it then to expect that your government, which by long use and by reason of the remarkable simplicity of its nature is now plain to common understanding, would become plainer by a new con- stitution, spun out into scores of nice articles, which even learned and honest men might understand differently, and which cunning knaves would inter- pret as might best suit their own ambitious purposes.
Connecticut, he counseled, not the central government, protected you during the Revolution. A new government would seem strange; would be more expensive, with higher salaries and more offices; would be less responsible to the people; and would inevitably mean a change in the habits, manners and customs of the people. Daggett was begging the question. If this was his honest opinion, it was in conflict with his later views. For as Chief Justice he admitted that the old constitution "gave very extensive powers to the legislature, and left too much (for it left everything almost) to their will." 67
The April election of 1805 was again fought over the question of a constitution. The Republicans made telling use of the figures 162 to 14, laughing at the alliance of little Delaware and Connecticut, and ad- vising freemen to stand with the majority of the nation. The Federalists appealed to all friends of the state government. Trumbull received 12,700 to Hart's 7,810 votes. Of the representatives, in whom was seen the true political barometer, one hundred and twenty-four were Fed- eralists and sixty-eight Republicans.68 The eastern counties were fairly evenly divided; Fairfield was overwhelmingly Republican; and the Connecticut Valley counties and Litchfield were preponderatingly conservative. Towns of wealth were Federalist, while the liberal towns were those in which dissent was a force.
Political agitation continued during the summer.69 The Norwich True Republican saw an engine of Federalism in the banks and turn- pike companies. The Hartford Courant hotly took issue with assertions that "the power had never been with the people," or that there was a union of church and state. Federalist praise of the unwritten British
67 Stair vs. Pease, 8th Conn. Rept., p. 548; Trumbull, Historical Notes, p. 30. 68 Mercury, Dec. 11, 1804; May 16, 1805; Courant, Apr. 17, May 15, 1805.
69 Courant, June 19, July 17; Mercury, June 20, 1805.
I73
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
constitution aroused the minority almost as much as the recent defeat, by 126 to 66, of the Stonington representative's resolution calling for a constitutional convention. Fourth-of-July celebrations afforded splendid opportunities for partisan orators. A Republican, expatiating upon the need of a constitution, defined organic and statutory law: "The one is made by the people, and for the government and control of the legislature, and the other is the off-spring of the legislature itself." 70
George Stanley, in a well-thought-out address, contributed some new ideas: "The constitution of this state, and her citizens have grown together. Each seems fitted for the other. Speculative men may in their closets form constitutions nicely balanced and proportioned; but the experience of others affords reason to fear, that like many curious in- ventions of modern times, they will not go." 71 Another writer at- tempted to demonstrate that Connecticut was more democratic than other states, because of the frequency of elections, short terms of office, "the mediocrity in wealth," and a suffrage as liberal as that of Virginia.72
The September election duplicated the spring figures. Elizur Good- rich stood at the head of the list with 11, 162 votes, while the Republican Elisha Hyde polled 7,852 votes. About sixty-one Republicans were elected to the Assembly.73 The fight for and against the constitution was continued, but less was written, and that merely a repetition of old arguments. Federalists accused the Republicans of trying through the national administration to silence inquiry by throttling the press.
A political scandal was created by a letter from Alexander Wolcott
70 Yale Collection of Fourth of July Orations, III, 3. Typical toasts: "State of Connecticut-May she, like her sister States, form constitutional barriers against the exercise of inordinate power." Mercury, June 6. "The Charter of Connecticut-The gift of a king, supported by the same cloth." Ibid., Aug. 29. "Constitution-None in Connecticut, may her honest citizens ere long, be strangers to a legislature that acts without control." Ibid., Sept. 5. "Constitution of Connecticut-Anything or noth- ing"; "The mere creature of the Legislature,-May it soon be exchanged for some- thing which will secure the rights of the people." Ibid., Mar. 7. "The State of Con- necticut-May she soon acquire a Constitution of too much health and vigor to be shaken by the fevers of ambition, or the agues of ignorance." Ibid., Sept. 15. "The State of Connecticut-By the united exertions of the sons of freedom, she will soon emerge from the darkness of Federalism, leaving the old Charter of King Charles 2nd, and shine forth in the light of Republicanism, with a written constitution of civil government, formed by the people." Ibid., July 25. "Floating to and fro on the tempestuous sea of passion, without Rudder or Compass-May we soon hear of her safe arrival at Port Constitution." Ibid., July 11.
71 Address, Aug. 8, 1805, pp. 16-17.
72 Courant, July 31, 1805.
73 Ibid., Oct. 23; Mercury, Oct. 31, 1805.
174
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
to his appointee in Middlesex County.74 It was observed: "The Federal- ists have priests and deacons, judges and justices, sheriffs and surveyors, with a host of corporations and privileged orders, to aid their elections. Let it be shown that plain men, without titles or hope of offices, can do better than the mercenary troops of Federalism." The object was to centralize the party. Under the state manager there were to be county leaders directly responsible to and removable by the state manager. Likewise there were to be town, city, and district managers subject to the county leader. A canvass was to be made of the various towns, so that the exact number of freemen, of taxpayers, of Federalists, of Re- publicans, and of neutrals would be known. Reports were to be sub- mitted to the central leader of all hindrances and undue influence at the polls, of political sermons, false returns and other questionable Fed- eralist tricks. "A majority," the letter continued, "can relax its exertions occasionally without hazard: a minority must exercise its full strength constantly." Local leaders were to aid Republicans through the intri- cate process of becoming freemen to scrutinize all objections, urge their men to the polls, note the absent and those not voting. A modern reader is only surprised at the perfection of the plan, but Federalists were shocked.
It was "a conspiracy, active, daring and wicked, in the midst of the State for the destruction of our Government"; it was a "Papal Bull." Wolcott, Bishop and General Wilcox were arrogating to themselves a despotic power over the freemen and their electoral rights. They were national office-holders, organizing like Jacobins to destroy their native commonwealth.75 The Republican manifestoes to town managers ad- vised open electioneering, for secrecy would only mean the temporary success of a stolen march.76 Their organization was defended as neces- sary to contend against an organized aristocracy by which the party of nine-tenths of the union has long been slandered.
The April election (1806) saw the heaviest vote ever cast and one not to be duplicated for some time. Trumbull received 13,413 votes and General Hart 9,460-by far the greatest Republican poll. The Republi- cans were fortunate to have in Hart for the head of their ticket a mili- tary hero hallowed, like Kirby, by the Revolutionary legend. Wolcott's
74 Courant, Mar. 12, 1806.
75 Middlesex Gazette in Courant, Mar. 19; Courant, Mar. 26, Apr. 2, May 26, 1806.
76 Mercury, Mar. 20, 1806.
175
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
organization had worked efficiently. His estimate of the relative strength of the parties as eight to eleven had almost exactly anticipated the actual figures. No better demonstration of his ability as a "boss" could be de- manded. The Federalists, on the other hand, greatly overestimated their strength of 20,000. Seventy-two Republicans were elected as representa- tives, six short of their high level of 1804. Even the city of Hartford elected Republican officials.77
Republicans grieved at their failure to reach the farmer. They ac- counted for the apathy of this class by the observation that the farmers had little time for reading papers and saw few persons save Federalist clerics and justices, who imposed on their religious credulity. Recog- nizing their lamentable weakness in Litchfield County, they planned to carry their principles into this citadel of conservatism by holding in the town of Litchfield what came to be known as the Sixth-of-August Festival.78
Litchfield had a riotous day. The great concourse of Republicans listened to a short prayer and a spirited address by Jonathan Law. In procession they visited the jail where editor Selleck Osborne of the Litchfield Witness was incarcerated. On conviction of libel, he refused to pay a fine, preferring to assume the rôle of a martyr to free speech and the Jeffreys-like justice of a Federalist judge and packed jury.79 To Federalists this was a "most signal exhibition of the rage of democracy." An incident which resulted in a newspaper controversy unfortunately marred the celebration and hurt Democratic prospects. The aged Con- gregational minister, being of a prying disposition, sought entrance into the hall and apparently was roughly jostled. Robbins described the whole affair as in the interests of revolution.80
Federalist bitterness at this invasion turned to exultation when, at
77 Election statistics in Courant, Apr. 2, 16; Mercury, Apr. 3, 1806. In May of this year Noah Webster received a letter from his wife in New Haven: "Democ- racy has increased sadly in this state. I fear Dr. Dwight was right in despairing as he did the other evening he passed with you." Ford, Webster, II, 3-4. Rev. William Lyman in the election sermon preached: "Against the wisest measures and most salutary laws, the enemies of order and government may ... unite and clamor. Such combinations of infuriated men must have their seasons and their cause. Though success attend their exertions they will not long enjoy the triumph."
78 Mercury, Aug. 14, 21, Sept. 11, 18, 1806. A bitterly distorted account was printed anonymously as "The Sixth of August." Yale Pamphlets, Vol. 1554, No. 10. 79 Judge Church saw in this conviction and that of Phelps at Hartford and Lawyer Ball of Danbury, the English method of crushing out a revolt.
80 Diary, I, 296.
176
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
the September election, Litchfield, the greatly over-represented county, returned thirty-nine Federalists and not a solitary Democrat. In the re- mainder of the state sixty-one Republicans were chosen. Jabez Fitch polled a few over 10,000 votes for assistant, while Matthew Griswold, the leading Federalist, received 13,42 1 votes. A writer who styled him- self "Seventy-six" called on all men to rejoice at the success of the godly party of the fathers, be they Baptists, Episcopalians, Methodists, Re- publicans or Democrats.81
The year 1807 was quiet. The vote for governor fell off by about four thousand, the loss being equally divided between both parties. In the Legislature their relative strength remained the same.82 Fourth of July was celebrated with unusual cordiality because of the Chesapeake crisis. Strife was again aroused by the federal prosecution of Rev. Azel Backus for a libelous attack upon Jefferson. As Pierrepont Edwards was the federal district judge and Alexander Wolcott the prosecutor, charges of partiality did not lack color.83 Federalists exerted themselves in the fall lest the apathy of their voters might mean an opposition surprise. Connecticut's constancy was their glory, for she alone of the New England states had never fallen. It was recalled that Samson was lost when he slept. Nevertheless little enthusiasm was aroused, the assistants' list showing a decrease of five thousand votes and the Republicans electing seventy-five representatives.84
The Embargo was the real issue in 1808.85 In January the Courant only mildly questioned its efficacy, but by the April proxies its attitude
81 Courant, Sept. 24, Oct. 8, 29, 1806; Mercury, Oct. 30, 1806.
82 Courant, Apr. 8; Mercury, Apr. 2, 9, 1807.
83 Courant, Sept. 30, 1807. "A Letter to the President ... touching the Prosecu- tions under his patronage before the Circuit Court" by Chatham (1808), supposedly Webster, charged that the marshal, Gen. Joseph Wilcox, packed the jury. Bills had been returned against Judge Reeve and Thaddeus Osgood, and Thomas Col- lier, a Litchfield printer, in 1805, and against Hudson and Goodwin of the Courant in 1807. About this time Rev. David McClure confided to his diary: "Democracy in Connecticut is more of an immoral and disorganizing character than in other States." Dexter, Diary of Dr. David McClure, p. 178.
84 Chauncey Goodrich and Jabez Fitch headed the respective lists with 10,185 and 7,524 votes. The Republican candidate for the Senate received 75 votes in the Lower House. Courant, Oct. 21; Mercury, Oct. 25, Nov. 5, 1807.
85 Senator Hillhouse wrote to Webster, Mar. 22, 1808, that the Connecticut delegation, united in their opposition, did not care to address formally their state, nor did they believe it effective. Even his letter was not to be made public unless that course was approved by Dwight, Goodrich, Baldwin and Daggett, a suggestive list. Ford, Webster, II, 50. Letter of Timothy Pickering (Dec. 12, 1808) castigating Jefferson. Ibid., II, 56. Cf. Elizabeth Donnan, Papers of James A. Bayard, p. 174, in Amer. Hist. Assoc., Report (1913), II.
177
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
had become rabidly antagonistic. It was the work of Virginians, who would destroy old New England and build up, at the expense of farmer and shipper, a manufacturing aristocracy. It would redound to the bene- fit of Canada. Men were advised to bury party distinctions and deter- mine to live and die freemen, in order that their voice be heard at the "presidential palace." Federalists appealed to the freemen to vote for "the Friends of Free Trade and the Opposers of Fatal Embargoes." "The doctrine of passive obedience and non-resistence" was said to have happily passed. Laborers out of employment, mechanics walking the streets, seamen lounging on the wharves and farmers without markets were urged to support the "Free Trade or Federal Ticket." 86 No logic of Bishop and Wolcott should deceive them, when the failure of busi- ness and industry was apparent on all sides. The Republicans were in- deed hard put to defend the administration.87 They granted that it was a harsh measure, but necessary because of the failure of the Non-Inter- course act as the only means of injuring England. As such it should be borne with patriotic resignation.
The April, 1808, vote was rather better than the Republicans ex- pected. Trumbull received 12,146 votes to General Hart's 7,566, the highest vote Republicans were to register for some time. In the Assem- bly, their number fell to sixty-one.88 Federalists gloried in Connecticut's stability in the face of seven years of revolutionary effort. Connecticut was toasted as "the tight ship that lives out every storm;" as "Noah's ark in the deluge of Democracy." 89
In the fall the general Federalist committee urged freemen to stand true, as presidential electors were to be chosen and as all New England was returning to its first love. They cried out:
Connecticut has a character to maintain. ... While the waves of faction have roared around us, while the billows of democracy have beat upon us- while State after State has fallen, and all New England has yielded to the
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.