USA > Connecticut > Connecticut in transition: 1775-1818 > Part 20
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
86 Courant, Jan. 6, Feb. 3, Apr. 6, May 4, 1808. Republicans charged that thou- sands of pamphlets attacking the measures were being distributed. Mercury, Apr. 7, 1808. Webster in May wrote to Oliver Wolcott: "Is there no way to unite the northern or commercial interest of the United States against a non-commercial administration?" Ford, Webster, II, 36-37, 50. In August he was drafting a memorial to Jefferson. See Forrest Morgan, Connecticut as a Colony and as a State, III, 50 ff.
87 Mercury, Feb. 25, 1808, and following issues. The editor (July 28) rejoiced that Connecticut was a state of farmers, not of marines and dippers who cannot live out of water.
88 Courant, Apr. 20, May 18; Mercury, May 19, 1800. Some 1,744 votes were cast out for an unknown reason.
89 Courant, July 13, 29, 1808.
178
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
torrent, ... Connecticut alone has maintained her station-unmoved alike by the numbers and sophisms of her enemies, she has walked on in the path opened by Washington and never for a moment turned aside to the right nor to the left.90
Republicans called for the support of the national government. Their appeal against a village majority was without avail. Everything went Federalist. The minority in the Assembly sank to fifty members. Gen- eral Hart withdrew from the gubernatorial candidacy; "resigned," as the opposition had it. New Haven and Meriden addressed the President on the Embargo, and the Legislature, by 145 to 49 votes, passed a resolu- tion against it. The simple truth is that this vote makes clear how Jeffer- son's policy was curing the state of its Republicanism. Of the forty-nine, only thirty representatives were bold enough to subscribe to the minor- ity report.91
Governor Trumbull called an extra session of the Legislature in February, 1809, to consider the Embargo, which he did not hesitate to declare unconstitutional. In this the Federalist majority agreed, for they empowered him to communicate with the governor of Massachu- setts, stating their willingness to join for certain constitutional amend- ments. It was resolved: "That to preserve the Union, and support the Constitution of the United States, it becomes the duty of the Legisla- tures of the States, in such a crisis of affairs, vigilantly to watch over and vigorously to maintain the powers not delegated to the United States, but reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people; and that a due regard to this duty will not permit this Assembly to assist or concur in giving effect to the aforesaid unconstitutional act, passed to enforce the Embargo." Addressing the people, the Legislature declared: "We forbear to express the imminent danger, to which we fear, not only our constitutional rights, but those of all the people of the United States are exposed from within and without. May Heaven avert the danger and preserve to us our privileges, civil and religious." 92 A Re- publican protest, signed by thirty-seven representatives and headed by Dr. Jabez Fitch, had no effect save in bringing ridicule upon themselves.
Connecticut was entering the darkest period of her history-one which deserves a thorough study as affording an early nullification precedent. Federalist writers were asking what steps should be taken
90 Ibid., Sept. 14.
91 Mercury, Sept. 8, 22, 29, Nov. 10; Courant, Sept. 28, Oct. 13, 1808.
92 Yale Pamphlets, Vol. 1626; Courant, Mar. 1, 1809.
179
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
when the national government oversteps the constitution, and were urg- ing state allegiance before national. They wondered if it was less crim- inal for Republicans, who were shocked at the action of the Legislature, to rise up in open opposition and declare that the state, to which they had sworn allegiance, was without a constitution. They charged that the return from the Embargo to Non-Intercourse was a change from folly to cowardice, due to the administration's fear of Connecticut and Massachusetts.93
A Democratic meeting declared Trumbull's action "an enormous stride toward treason and civil war." To Republicans it was an invasion of law by "self-stiled friends of Washington, order government, and religion." Republicans in mass meetings, in dissenting churches, and in town meetings when in a majority, hurried to pass resolutions pledging Madison their support.94 William Bristol, a prominent Republican, wrote an essay severely condemning the attempt of the special session to distress the administration. He complained: "While foreign nations are aiming their destructive weapons at the vitals of our country, in- stead of rallying around the Constitution and constituted authorities, party animosity has usurped the place of national feeling; the citizens are inflamed from one degree of animosity to another; and too many seem determined to push every measure which can distress their op- ponents, though it may at the same time pierce the vitals of their own country .... The Government of the United States contains, within it- self, a salutary and peaceable remedy against the abuse of power. An Independent Judiciary, under the Constitution of the United States, may declare laws unconstitutional and void. But the chief resort, contrived by human wisdom to guard the people against their rulers, consists in freely and peaceably recurring to the Elective franchise. To the judici- ary let those resort who feel the operation of the law in question, and think it unconstitutional; but let not the citizens be seduced by syren songs into forcible opposition." Thus he sustained his thesis that the United States, not Connecticut, was the paramount power.95
Federalist success in April was regarded as unequivocal approval of the session. Trumbull was re-elected by an unusually large majority, 14,650 votes to 8,159, carrying Spalding's own town, a Democratic stronghold. Hartford, a delicate measure of Republicanism, returned
93 Courant, January and March, 1809. Larned, Windham County, II, 404.
94 Mercury, March, April, and May.
95 Address (1809), pp. 3, 17.
180
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
Federalist representatives by the largest majority in years. The Repub- lican representatives fell to forty-five. Rev. Samuel Nott in the election sermon prayed that religion would prevail and party spirit die down, while he predicted that the governor and General Assembly united would be able to protect the state from its enemies. Small wonder that Robbins wrote: "Democracy in this State appears hopeless"; or that Pierrepont Edwards had once exclaimed: "As well attempt to revolu- tionize the kingdom of heaven as the State of Connecticut." 96
The September election brought more joy to Federalists. The high- est Republican on the assistants' list had only 5,593 votes, a little over half the Federalist vote, but not a great deal more than half the Repub- lican vote of three years earlier. It seemed that at last Jacobinism had spent its force. Lieutenant Governor Treadwell felt that he was address- ing his own when he said, in the Assembly: "The Public maintenance of religion has ever been deemed by the most enlightened nations as in- timately connected with the interests of the civil state." He was an- nouncing the result of the long struggle against the state-church-ap- parently Republican failure and the triumph of the sound principles of Federalism.97
The year 1810 witnessed a further decline of Republicanism. In vain did its orators make national, patriotic appeals and call their "ten thousand" to follow the lead of Massachusetts and New Hampshire.98 National arguments failed where men could look upon America as "our confederacy of republics." 99 Connecticut men were too provincial, too parochial-minded.
In the April election Governor Treadwell, who succeeded on Trum- bull's death, received 10,265 votes; Spalding, 7, 185; and Griswold, 3, 110. As no candidate had a majority the choice of a governor devolved upon the Legislature, which named Treadwell.100 Griswold and his following
96 Diary, I, 415; Beecher, Autobiography, I, 343; Courant, May 17.
97 Mercury, Oct. 26; Courant, Sept. 27, Oct. 18, 1809.
98 Mercury, April issues, 1810. Robbins wrote: "It appears the people in Massa- chusetts are again to have the trial of a Democratic governor [Gerry]. The anger of Heaven is very heavy towards us in the infatuation of the people." Diary, I, 433.
99 Courant, July 18, 25, 1810. Tudor, in his Letters, continually harps on Con- necticut's provincialism. He believed that: "Among all their public men, there is hardly one, with the exception of those who have been transplanted, who has shown a mind capable of extensive range, or that was not bigoted to, or fettered by local considerations." Pp. 47, 128.
100 Courant, May 10, 16, 1810. In the Assembly Treadwell received 121 votes; Spalding, 42; and Giswold, 29.
181
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
had bolted. It was a foreboding of what the following year was to bring forth. In the Assembly only forty-two Republicans could be relied upon in a crisis. The September results were more discouraging to Repub- licans. Their representatives increased to a doubtful sixty-four, but their high man on the assistants' list sank to 4,242 votes, only slightly above the 1801 level.101 The opposition could not eternally keep up hope. Utterly discouraged, they named no official list for the Council until 1815.
The first break in the ministerial party came in 1811.102 It was a fortunate schism, for an everlastingly solid Federalism must have proven a menace to the state. The rupture was partly occasioned by the anti- national, factious opposition of Treadwell. Then the long-suffering Episcopalians gave up hope of gaining a position of equality with the Congregationalists. A victorious, national Republicanism had become estimable, hence the Episcopalians could no longer be constrained from entering the Republican party because of its lack of respectability. Their vote, estimated at four thousand, deserved the attention of good poli- ticians and won Republican pledges.103
Asa Spalding having declined the nomination, the Republican party declared in favor of naming no man, but of allowing public opinion to formulate on a candidate. Governor Treadwell and Roger Griswold were the Federalist candidates. After some little delay the Republican organization determined to name Griswold, and the wealthy Episco- palian, Elijah Boardman, for lieutenant governor.104 Griswold was the son of Governor Matthew Griswold and a grandson of Governor Roger Wolcott. He was a classical scholar, a lawyer and a life-long Federalist office-holder, as judge and Congressman. However, he was not a pro- fessor of religion, a fact which accounted for his popularity with the anticlerical element. On this ground alone did he stand less high with the Congregationalists than Treadwell. Treadwell on the other hand was
101 Courant, Sept. 28; Mercury, Oct. 18, 1810.
102 It must have been expected, for on Trumbull's demise the Assembly vote for governor stood: Treadwell, 107; Spalding, 45; and Griswold, 34. Seven coun- cilors voted for Treadwell and five for Griswold. Mercury, Oct. 26, 1809.
103 Mercury, May 9, 1811.
104 Dexter, Biographical Sketches, IV, 146-149; F. C. Norton, The Governors of Connecticut, p. 137; Dwight, Travels, IV, 143-145; death notice, Courant, Oct. 27, Nov. 3, 1812; Orville Platt in New Haven Hist. Soc., Papers, VI, 299 ff. Board- man (1760-1823), private in Revolution; heavy speculator in Connecticut Land Co. and Western Reserve; director of Bridgeport bank; several terms in Assembly. Kil- bourne, Sketches, pp. 237 ff .; Orcutt, Stratford, pp. 605-608.
182
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
aggressively religious.105 Boardman's nomination pleased and won over the Episcopalians. Republicans featured Griswold as no friend to the clergy and as hostile to a combination of church and state, while Tread- well was described as the father of the 1801 election law, a Puritan of theocratic stamp, and a traitor to the national government.
At the polls the ungodly element was successful. As Beecher phrased it: "They slung us like a stone from a sling." 106 Griswold, easily elected, was the twenty-second governor, and the first who was not even a man of religion, let alone being a pillar of church and state.107 At first Tread- well's friends had hoped that Griswold would not accept the election at such hands. For lieutenant governor, none of the candidates had a majority, though of the two minority candidates Boardman had three times as many votes as John Cotton Smith. Yet the General Assembly selected Smith, overriding the will of voters.108 In the Assembly Re- publican strength remained stationary.
Griswold's address to the Legislature was anxiously awaited. It proved, however, to be of studied conservatism and impartiality. He an- nounced his belief that, while the states through the amending power are in a way conservators of the constitution and have a right occasion- ally to examine acts of the central government, this should be done cau- tiously and with a view to national interests; and that in general state legislatures should confine themselves to local matters. While the speech was too conservative to win unrestrained Democratic applause, it in no way augured his stand of the following year.
105 Bentley (Diary, IV, 20) described it as "rank rebellion against the minis- terial candidate," but Treadwell, a "stiff man" and enforcer of the Sabbath laws, was disliked. Beecher wrote that, under the leadership of Daggett who controlled the Fairfield bar, the lawyers revolted, saying: "We have served the clergy long enough; we must take another man, and let them take care of themselves." Auto- biography, I, 260-261.
106 "But throwing Treadwell over in 1811 broke the chain and divided the party; persons of third-rate ability, on our side, who wanted to be somebody, de- serted; all the infidels in the state had long been leading on that side; the minor sects had swollen, and complained of having to get a certificate to pay their tax where they liked; our efforts to enforce reformation of morals by law made us un- popular; they attacked the clergy unceasingly and myself in particular, in season and out of season, with all sorts of misrepresentation, ridicule and abuse; and, finally the Episcopalians who had always been staunch Federalists were disap- pointed of an appropriation for the Bishop's fund, which they asked for, and went over to the Democrats. That overset us. They slung us like a stone from a sling." Autobiography, II, 343.
107 Olmstead, Treadwell, p. 26.
108 Based on Courant and Mercury, May-June, 1811, passim.
183
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
There was something sad about this break with the past. Men felt that the old order was giving way; that Puritanism was loosening its hold; and that a new era had dawned. There was little rejoicing. Re- publicans might have been jubilant if they had been more confident of their man, but they recognized that it was Griswold's personal victory. Griswold himself displayed no elation over his success, nor over the break in the customs of his fathers.
Local questions and political activities were forgotten in 1812-1813. All interest centered in the War. Republicans called upon the people to lay aside party differences and present a united front to the enemy. The appeal remained unanswered, for sympathy with England carried the Federalists to treasonable extremes.109 They celebrated allied victories over Napoleon, although England was at war with their own country, and gloried in the difficulties of the administration.110 They officially re- fused the service of the state militia, as did their brethren in Massachu- setts, for "Mr. Madison's War." The central administration was com- pared to Nero, fiddling away while surveying the destruction it had brought upon the country. The War was said to be an electioneering move to perpetuate the Virginia dynasty, supported by the Pennsyl- vania United Irish because of hatred for England, by the West for Indian lands and army supplies, and by the South because of designs on Florida and Mexico. They saw New England under a western yoke- that is, the substitution of a "Clay and a Grundy for a Grenville and a North." 111
Not content with refusing the President's "unconstitutional" call on the militia, everything possible was done to prevent enlistments in the national army. The clergy not only did nothing to inculcate patriotism, but expressed an anti-nationalism, which further embittered Repub- licans against their class. Connecticut Federalism was fast sinking to its Hartford Convention depths. It had truly become a party of "settled disaffection." 112
109 "Count the Cost" article, Courant, Sept. 15; "Steps tending to the dissolu- tion of the Union," ibid., Sept. 23; "War received with disgust north of Delaware," ibid., June 23, July 7, 28, 1812. Robbins, Diary, I, 518.
110 Courant, June 14, 1814; Robbins, Diary, I, 578.
111 Morgan, Connecticut, III, 69 ff .; Niles' Register, III, 4, 24; Mercury and Courant, Aug .- Sept., passim.
112 Capt. Elijah Boardman was imprisoned, while under marching orders, be- cause of the fife and drum noise. He was convicted and fined months after the war. Mercury, Nov. 8, 1814; Dec. 17, 31, 1816. Hartford, by a small majority, pro- hibited federal recruiting. Ibid., Feb. 7, 1815. Under Capt. Nathaniel Terry the
184
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
The Republicans, on finding Governor Griswold opposed to the War, attempted to remedy their mistake by turning to Captain Elijah Boardman for their gubernatorial candidate. Boardman, though an Episcopalian, was an ardent supporter of the War. His selection offered practical evidence of the religious toleration of the minority party. Griswold, who stood as a Federalist, received 11,725 votes to Board- man's 1,487, hardly one of which came from Middlesex or Litchfield counties. Only thirty-six Republicans were elected as representatives. Republicans were wholly disheartened, and not without cause.
Republican disappointment in Griswold was keen, for it had never been suspected that his nationalism was as colorless as that of Trumbull. They had no way of supporting the administration, save in town mass meetings at which war petitions were circulated.113 The September elec- tion proved even more discouraging. Griswold being ill, both sessions were addressed by John Cotton Smith, the lieutenant governor; but there were only thirty-six Republican members to be annoyed by his survey of the War.
The Federalist party felt the disuniting effects of this lawyers' bolt from the reactionary, clerical wing, in support of their man, Griswold. In order to heal the wounds, a meeting of the leading lawyers such as Daggett and Roger M. Sherman, and leading representatives of the clergy, like Beecher, was convened at the New Haven law chambers of Judge Baldwin to discuss the situation. Beecher stanchly supported the claims of John Cotton Smith, a rigid old Puritan, for governor, as this succession was one of the steady habits.114 The fact that he had been elevated by the Legislature, not by the freemen's votes, does not appear
First Company of Governor's Foot-Guards was decidedly hostile to the War, al- most to the point of open conflict with a recruiting company. L. E. Hunt, Proceed- ings at Centennial of ... Company, pp. 12, 37; Tudor, Letters, pp. 42-43.
113 For lists of loyal towns and meetings, Mercury, Aug. 26 et seq.
114 Beecher wrote to Rev. Asabel Hooker (November 24, 1812): "I am per- suaded the time has come when it becomes every friend of this State to wake up and exert his whole influence to save it from innovation and democracy healed of its deadly wound. ... If we stand idle we lose our habits and institutions piecemeal, as fast as innovation and ambition shall dare to urge on the work. If we meet with strenuous opposition [anti-Smith element] in this thing we can but perish, and we may-I trust if we look up to God we shall-save the state." He advised counseling with Theodore Dwight, complaining: "Why should this little state be sacrificed? Why should she at such a day as this, standing alone amid surrounding ruins, be torn herself by internal discord? What a wanton effort of ambition." Autobiog- raphy, I, 257, 259.
185
RISE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY
to have entered into Beecher's calculations. The success of this caucus was seen in the united support given John Cotton Smith. It was this forced harmony which enabled Federalism to maintain its hold some years longer, though it prevented a progressive movement within the party.
John Cotton Smith was elected in 1813, with practically the full Federalist vote (11,893). The Republicans were proud of Boardman's 7,201 votes, for it presaged a rebirth. The Federalist vote for lieutenant governor was divided between Chauncey Goodrich and Calvin God- dard, so the Republican, Isaac Spencer, received a plurality. The de- cision lay with the Legislature, which without hesitation named Good- rich, who resigned his seat in the Senate. In the Assembly the "Peace men," as the Federalists liked to label themselves, had a majority of 133 votes. The September vote was small, though the Republicans gained a few seats.115
The year 1814 was of similar political tone. Opposition to the war was becoming more violent. Appeals to patriotism fell short, in view of the depressed condition of agriculture and the English blockade of the Sound. Federalist views so alarmed the freeman that he seems to have shunned the war party, the "Embargaroons." The April vote was very light, Boardman dropping to 2,619 against John Cotton Smith's 9,415 votes. For the congressional list, the highest vote was only 6,289 and the leading Democrat had but 104 votes. Still, the Federalists were wor- ried; for with the freemen remaining away from the polls, a sudden turn might bring Republican majorities. "The thirteenth year of the reign of democracy" was indeed discouraging.116
The autumn campaign offered no consolation to nationalists, the one issue being that of hostility to the War. "Chatham" in The Crisis de- picted the dangers from invasion and the failure of the central govern- ment. He advised the united action of New England, and the appoint- ment of commissioners to arrange for some plan of defense. Let these states raise an army and win peace by saying to England: We will not invade your territory and you shall not invade ours. He suggested that Connecticut set an example to the traitors who had brought on the War, and urged the freemen to choose honest legislators unless they desired
115 Courant, Apr. 27, May 18, Sept. 28, Oct. 19, 1813; Mercury, May 19; Niles' Register, V, 121.
116 Courant, February-May, 1814, passim.
186
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
to become slaves. Democratic appeals on behalf of the Union were boot- less, only about thirty-six of their men being chosen to the Lower House. Disunion was the order of the day.
Governor Smith referred to the General Assembly a letter from the governor of Massachusetts, inviting Connecticut to join in sending dele- gates to consider measures of safety "not repugnant to our obligations as members of the Union." The request was referred to a joint com- mittee. On advice of the committee, it was voted (153 to 36) to send delegates to the Hartford Convention.117 Chauncey Goodrich, James Hillhouse, John Treadwell, Zephaniah Swift, Nathaniel Smith, Calvin Goddard, and Roger M. Sherman were selected. Theodore Dwight acted as the Convention's secretary and later as its historian. Connecticut was deeply committed. Her representatives were among the state lead- ers, Federalists of deep hue, men of undoubted integrity, but aristocrats and rulers.
The Convention's session of three weeks was clouded in secrecy. New England's attitude of hostility to the central administration, her early doubts as to the permanence of the Union, hatred of the West, and the Federalist whisperings of disunion, gave this New England Convention a more traitorous aspect than it deserved. Republican papers minced no words in proclaiming its treason, made doubly obnoxious by the presence of a foreign foe on American soil. Federalist writers did not hide their true sentiments in answering their opponents.118 The Connecticut Courant, aroused by the taunts of Matthew Carey, a nat- uralized Irishman, declared:
We have no idea of any contest; we shall not invite it, we deprecate any collision with our sister states, but we are too well acquainted with our re- sources, our spirit and our rights to be deterred from asserting, and main- taining them, because some people chose to ridicule the one and make light of and assail the other.
If we only defend our rights and do not encroach, the editor asked, how can there be civil war?
The printed resolves of the Convention and its brief journal dis- played a deadly hostility to the administration. It was admitted that
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.