History of New London county, Connecticut : with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men, Part 49

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton)
Publication date: 1882
Publisher: Philadelphia : J.W. Lewis & Co.
Number of Pages: 1317

USA > Connecticut > New London County > History of New London county, Connecticut : with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men > Part 49

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).

Episcopacy, but of Englishmen, to whom the Church of England was their natural mother, whom they had loved and honored from their childhood, and gladly welcomed when she presented herself among them. Of this church of the fatherland, missionaries from the East and West alike contributed to establish, en- courage, and strengthen ; but they cannot be said to have introduced it in New London.

The first decided movement toward the very desira- ble object of giving the incipient congregation a local habitation and a name was made in the summer of 1725. The earliest paper extant is one which bears date June 6, 1725, and runs as follows :

" COLONY OF CONNECTICUT, NEW LONDON, June 6, 1725.

" Wee, The Subscribers, doe oblidge ourselves To pay the Rev. Mr. James Mc Sparran, or to his Substitute, he being Treasurer, The Partic- ular Sums affixed to our names, for the Building and Erecting a Church for the Service of Almighty God according to the Liturgie of the Church of England as by Law Established. And doe further oblidge ourselves to pay the sd Sums as the Treasurer shall have occasion for the same: John Merritt, £50; Peter Buor, £50; John Braddick, £25; Jolin Gid- ley, £10; James Stirling, £25; Walter Butler, £10; John Bennett, £3; James Tilley, £10; George Smith, £3: Nathaniel Hay, £20; James Packer, £5; Giles Goddard, £5."

This engagement was not acted on directly. The reason of the failure or postponement, whichever it may have been, is now undiscoverable. But that the purpose was not abandoned, but apparently only de- ferred to be put into a more practical and effective form, appears from a second paper drawn up a few months later, which, as it was followed by the accom- plishment of the object it contemplated, has been considered the true beginning of the parish. Accord- ingly, Sept. 27, 1725, is considered the parish birth- day, the day it began to have that visible being in the world which has now continued without breach or interruption through all the vicissitudes and trials of a century and a half. This second document is as follows :

" NEW LONDON, September the 27th, 1725.

" Whereas Sundry Pious and Well Disposed Gentlemen in and around New London, in the Colony of Connecticut, being Earnestly Desirous of Erecting a Church for their more convenient and Decent Worshipping of God, according to the Usage and Liturgie of the Church of England as by Law Established, Did Subscribe to the payment of Sundry Sums Towards Erecting and Furnishing a Church in said Town of New Lon- don, as by a paper Bearing date June Sixth, 1725, may Appear, Refer- ence thereto being had ;

"In order, Therefore, to begin and Carry on ye Building of said Church, The Following Gentlemen, viz., John Shackmaple, Peter Buor, Esq., Maj. John Merritt, Capt. James Sterling, Mr. Thoms Mumford, and Mr. William Norton, have formed, and doe by these Presents Incorpo- rate and form Themselves into a Standing Committee to Agree for, Buy, Sett up and finish said Building, as well as to Purchase a convenient Place to Erect said Fabric upon, and Themselves Do Oblige Every Sev- eral Sum and Sums Contributed by well Disposed Christians for that good Work faithfully to lay out and Expend According to the Consent, Voice, and Directions of the Major part of Said Committee at their Sev- eral Meetings; In Witness whereof, the Gentlemen to these presents have Voluntarily and Unanimously Affixed their names ye Day and Year above written.

" JOHN SHACKMAPLE,

" PETER BUOR,

" JOHN MERRITT,

" WALTER BUTLER,

" JAMES STERLING,

" THOS. MUMFORD,

" WILLIAM NORTON."

198

HISTORY OF NEW LONDON COUNTY, CONNECTICUT.

Along with this document is another of the same date, as follows :

" NEW LONDON, September 27th, 1725.

" The Major part of said Committee being present at the House of John Shackmaple, Esq., Proceeded to choose a Treasurer to receive and l'ay oul such sum or sums as are to be drawn out of the Treasurer's hands by an Order or Orders under The hands of a major part of so many of the Gentlemen as shall be present at such meeting whence such order or Orders shall Issue; and further, it is agreed that such Treasurer as shall be chosen by said Committee shall have full Power and Authority to constitute one or more to Act for or under him in said affairs, that said Committee may, upon any failure of said Treasurer, proceed to a new choice of a New Treasurer, as well as upon yo Demise, Removal, or Re- fusai of any member to act, proceed to a new choice of a new member in the room and place of any Dead, Removed, or Refusing member.

" At The aforesaid Committee meeting, the members then present chose the Rev. Mr. McSparran, of Narragansett, Treasurer, to Receive the Subscriptions for Building said Church.

" JOHN SHACKMAPLE,

" JOHN MERRITT, " WALTER BUTLER,

" THos. MUMFORD, " WILLM. NORTON,

" JAMES STERLING."

The committee began negotiations with Trinity Church, Newport, for their church edifice, which it was proposed to remove to New London and rebuild. This project, however, failed, and the committee then determined to proceed without further delay to the erection of a church. For this purpose a lot of land was purchased, and a contract entered into with Mr. John Hough to place a suitable building upon it. This lot was situated on the north side of the lower part of State Street, that broad space which is still called the Parade, so called, it is supposed, because it had formed the parade-ground of a fortification which lay to the east of it, on the bank of the river. It contained about twenty square rods, and was of a wedge-like form, the east side coinciding with the west line of Bradley Street, tapering to a point in the west, and leaving a passage of considerable width be- tween the church and the north side of State Street. It stood out apparently uninclosed and surrounded on all sides by the public street. The area of the church itself was used for the purposes of burial, the graves being made beneath the floor, after the custom prevailing in England.

The edifice which John Hough contracted to build was to be in its interior length fifty feet, by thirty- two in width, to have two double doors at the west side, and there was also a door on the south side, "the roof half flat, and the other arched on each side,"-a description not very clear. It was to have five windows, one in the rear and two each side. As it was constructed, according to the custom of the time, of stout oak timber from the model farm of Maj. Buor, and well-seasoned stuff, it might have re- mained for centuries had not the ruthless hand of war swept it prematurely away. It stood facing west, and though a very simple structure, it was a respect- able and not uncomely edifice according to the ideas of the day.

It had a bell, and, of course, a belfry to contain it. Tradition ascribes to it a steeple, but whether this was

an original appendage or was subsequently added does not appear, there being no mention of it in Mr. Hough's contract. All we know of the bell is that in 1740 a subscription was solicited " to procure a new and larger bell; by accident the bell belonging to the church having become useless, and being too small for our purpose." Such, so far as we can ascertain, was the first Episcopal church erected in New London. The beautiful photographic art was not then at hand to preserve and hand down to us its " counterfeit present- ment," and without this our notions of it are but vague and indistinct. But doubtless the little flock that first "went into its gates with thanksgiving, and into its courts with praise," were as proud and exultant as those who, more than a hundred years after, hailed the completion of its present noble and costly successor. That happy consummation was not reached, however, till 1732, the intervening period, long for so simple a work, being filled up doubtless by unknown and un- recorded struggles and anxieties. The first mission- ary writes to "the Society" at home in 1742 that on June 20, 1726, a carpenter was agreed with for a wood frame ; that on the 9th of August following the timber was brought to the ground ; on the 1st of October the frame was raised and completed, and on the 28th of November, 1727, the house was inclosed, glazed, the under floor laid, a neat desk and pulpit finished. In this condition he found the building when he arrived at New London, Dec. 9, 1730, "in the service of the honorable Society." Miss Caulkins speaks of the building as completed and opened for worship in the autumn of 1732. Mr. Seabury came in 1730. Till that time, and in the years preceding his arrival, ser- vices were held, it would seem, more or less frequently by Dr. MeSparran, and probably also by Dr. Johnson, in the house of Mrs. Shackmaple.

Miss Caulkins preserves a tradition of this old church which may not be without interest, and should properly have a place in this history :

" The steeple or belfry terminated in a staff which was crowned with a gilt ball. In this ball an Indian arrow was infixed, which hung diagonally from the side, and remained till the destruction of the build- ing. A delegation of Indians passing through the town stopped to look at the church, to them, no doubt, a splendid specimen of architecture. The leader of the party drew an arrow from his quiver, and taking aim at the ball, drove it into the wood, so that it remained firmly fixed, and was left permanently adhering there."

In 1775 the regular parish-meeting was holden on Easter Monday, and Thomas Allen and John Deshon chosen church-wardens. There was no choice of offi- cers again till 1779. During the most, if not all, of the intervening time the services seem to have been intermitted.

The history of this period is obscure and imperfect. Mr. Graves remained in New London, and continued to occupy the parsonage, and doubtless to discharge

199

NEW LONDON.

such official functions as were needed, but held no public services. The public odium, the increasing bitterness of political sentiment, and the division of opinion in his own congregation, joined to his own unbending sense of duty, which would not let him yield to solicitations of interest or appeals of affec- tion, led him to the conclusion that retirement and silence were for him the path of prudence and of use- fulness. An outspoken and impulsive man, restraint must have been hard for him, but we hear of nothing done or said by him to exacerbate displeasure or in- flame hatred. There is no evidence that the church was closed by any formal action of the parish. It was probably acquiesced in as the dictate of ordinary prudence and a sort of moral necessity. In the heated atmosphere of the times religion of any form sunk to a low ebb, and in turmoil and contention about worldly interests, there was little room in men's minds for concern about things unseen. The period of the Revolution was a period of great religious deadness. The parish-meeting of Aug. 17, 1775, was adjourned to August 25th, but the adjourned meet- ing was never held, at least there is no record of it. A meeting was held Nov. 14, 1778. What led to it is not known. We may conjecture that the fact that several of the Episcopal clergy had by this time found a way to reconcile their consciences with the omission of the prayer for the king had awakened a hope that Mr. Graves might be induced to follow their examples and put an end to the unhappy stoppage.

At that meeting this resolution was introduced : "Voted, that no persons be permitted to enter the church, and as a pastor to it, unless he openly prays for Congress and the free and independent States of America, and their prosperity by sea and land ; if so, he may be admitted to-morrow, being Sunday, 15th November." On putting the resolution to vote, it appeared that there were fourteen in the affirmative and eleven in the negative, and then, as there were four votes challenged and rejected on the one side and one on the other, it left the vote a tie ; still, the affirmative sense of the congregation had been pretty distinctly given. But the meeting went on to " vote that the church-wardens wait on the Rev. Mr. Graves and let him know of the foregoing vote, and if it be agreeable to him, he may re-enter the church of St. James and officiate as pastor thereof, he praying and conforming to said vote."

The church-wardens fulfilled their duty and made this report : " Agreeably to the above, we, the church- wardens, waited on the Rev. Mr. Graves, and ac- quainted him of the resolution of the parishioners, to which he replied that he could not comply there- with." The church-wardens who signed this report were Thomas Allen and John Deshon, both stanch Whigs. The Sunday came, however, and Mr. Graves, perhaps encouraged or urged by injudicious friends, determined to brave the consequences, and read the service with the obnoxious prayers. The result was

a painful and disgraceful scene, which put a speedy end to his ministry in New London, and perhaps ex- pedited his death.

The first meeting of churchmen after the war of the Revolution was held on Easter Monday, April 25, 1783 ; just as soon as the independence of the country was established and peace restored, their usual annual meeting was holden. William Stewart, son of that Matthew whose remains lay beneath the relics of their former church, and Jonathan Starr, Jr., the second of that name, were chosen wardens, and it was " Voted, that Capt. John Deshon, Nichol Fosdick, Roswell Sal- tonstall, Giles Mumford, Joseph Packwood, Thomas Allen, James Penniman, Ebenezer Goddard, Henry Truman, Dr. Samuel Brown, and Jesse Edgecomb be a committee to join the church-wardens to solicit do- nations for building a new church, to treat with the selectmen of the town, to see if the ground where the old church stood can be disposed of or ex- changed for other ground suitable to erect the build- ing on, and to get the plan of a church procured, and make report of their doings as soon as may be. It was also voted that the church-wardens rent the parsonage-house for the highest rent it will fetch, al- ways giving the preference to one of the parishioners, and that the house be repaired by the wardens in the most frugal manner, and that all back rent be imme- diately collected, and the residue be appropriated as the church shall direct." The following year an offer of the Rev. John Graves, of Providence, brother of their late minister, to supply them with a clergyman was declined, on the ground that they were destitute of a building in which to celebrate the worship of Almighty God. The effort to provide such a building seems, meanwhile, though not relinquished, to have gone on slowly. That the work dragged is not so much to be wondered at as that, under the circum- stances, it was projected. In 1784 a committee was appointed to ascertain on what terms a lot could be purchased from Mr. Edgecomb, or some other pro- prietor, on which to erect a church. This church was consecrated Sept. 20, 1787. It was enlarged from time to time, and at a parish-meeting held Sept. 7, 1846, it was voted to build a new church edifice, and Novem- ber 3d of the following year the corner-stone of the new building was laid. The church was consecrated June 11, 1850.

The rectors since Dr. McSparran have been as fol- lows: John Seabury, Matthew Graves, Samuel Sea- bury, Solomon Blakslee, Bethel Judd, Isaac W. Hal- lam, R. A. Hallam, and W. B. Buckingham, the present incumbent.

The following is a list of wardens from 1732, when the first choice was made, to the present time :

1732, Thomas Mumford, John Braddick ; 1733-35, John Braddick, John Shakmaple; 1736-37, John Shakmaple, Matthew Stewart;' 1738, Matthew Stewart, Samuel Edgecomb; 1739, Samuel Edgecomb, Giles Goddard; 1740, Giles Goddard, Guy Palmes; 1741, Guy Palmes, Na- thaniel Green ; 1742, Nathaniel Green, Edward Palmes; 1743-44, Edward Palmes, Merritt Smith : 1745, Merritt Smith, Thomas Mum-

200

HISTORY OF NEW LONDON COUNTY, CONNECTICUT.

ford; 1746-51, Thomas Mumford, Samuel Edgecomb; 1752-53, Thomas Manwaring, Nicholas Lechmere; 1754, Samuel Edgecomb, Guy Palmes ; 1755, Samuel Edgecomb, Edward Palmes; 1756, Sam- uel Edgecomb, Jonathan Starr ; 1757, Jonathan Starr, James Mum- ford; 1758-60, James Mumford, Thomas Mumford ; 1761-62, Samuel Edgecomb, Jonathan Starr; 1763-64, Jonathan Starr, Thomas Fos- dick ; 1765, Ebenezer Goddard, Jonathan Starr; 1766-67. Ebenezer Goddard, Samuel Bill; 1768, William Stewart, George Mumford; 1769, William Stewart, Jonathan Starr, Jr. ; 1770-71, Jonathan Starr, Jr., Thomas Allen ; 1772, Thomas Allen, John Deshon; 1773-74, Thomas Allen, David Mumford ; 1775, Thomas Allen, John Deshon ; 1776-78, no choice ; 1779-80, Thomas Allen, John Hertel; 1781-85, William Stewart, Jonathan Starr, Jr .; 1786-1802, Jonathan Starr, Jr., Roswell Sallonstall; 1803-10, Jonathan Starr, Jr., Samuel Wheal; 1811-16. Jonathan Starr (3d), Edward Hallam; 1817-18, Jonathan Starr (3d), Isaac Thompson ; 1819-29, Jared Starr, Isaac Thompson ; 1830-38, Edward Hallam, Jonathan Starr (3d) ; 1839-52, Jonathan Starr (3d), Francis Allyn; 1853-56, Francis Allyn, Enoch V. Stoddard ; 1857-58, Enoch V. Stoddard, Stanley G. Trott; 1859-63, Enoch V. Stoddard, Charles A. Lewis; 1864-67, Enoch V. Stoddard, Isaac C. Tate; 1868-73, Isaac C. Tate, Iliram Willey ; 1874-78, Isaac Tate, Benjamin Stark ; 1878-81, C. A. Williams, Mason Young ; 1881, Mason Young, J. Ivers Lewis.

BISHOP SAMUEL SEABURY was born in North Groton (now Ledyard) the 30th of November, 1729, the son of Samuel Seabury, the first minister of New London, born while his father was officiating at North Groton as a Congregational licentiate. He passed the days of his youth in New London, where his father was ministering. At an early age he en- tered Yale College, and graduated with credit in 1748. He went to Scotland and studied medicine in the University of Edinburgh, whether with a view of devoting his life to the medical profession or merely as an amateur is not known. But it is known that in his ministry he made large use of his medical knowledge as a means of doing good. He soon, at any rate, put aside medicine for the study of theology, and after acquiring the requisite proficiency, was or- dained deacon by Dr. John Thomas, Bishop of Lin- coln, acting for the Bishop of London, Dec. 21, 1753, and priest by Dr. Richard Osbaldeston, Bishop of Carlisle, acting for the same prelate, Dec. 23, 1753, Dr. Thomas Sherlock, Bishop of London, being then disabled by infirmity and near the close of life. On his return to America he served several parishes in succession in New Jersey and New York, and set- tled finally in Westchester, where he continued to of- ficiate till the breaking out of the Revolution. His loyalty, founded on the deepest convictions of duty, drove him from his parish, and during the remainder of the war he resided in New York, serving as chap- lain to the king's forces, and eking out his living by the practice of medicine. Soon after the establish- ment of independence the clergy of Connecticut moved to obtain the episcopate, and made choice of Dr. Seabury for their bishop. To obtain consecration he sailed for England in 1783. He had been honored with the degree of Doctor of Divinity by the Uni- versity of Oxford, 1777. Political difficulties pre- vented his success in England; the English bishops were unable to dispense with the oath of allegiance to the sovereign which their ordinal contained, and the British Parliament was backward to pass an en-

abling act, for fear of exciting the displeasure of the young republic, jealous of any encroachment on its newly-acquired nationality. Under these circum- stances, Dr. Seabury bethought himself of the Scotch bishops, identical in polity and authority with the English bishops, but disconnected with the State in consequence of the disestablishment of their church for its fidelity to the House of Stuart, and lying under the ban of political proscription. By them he was cordially welcomed, and by them, Nov. 14, 1784, consecrated at Aberdeen, in Bishop Skinner's oratory, the consecrators being Robert Kilgour, Bishop of Aberdeen and Primus; Arthur Petrie, Bishop of Moray and Ross; and John Skinner, co- adjutor Bishop of Aberdeen. With these prelates, representataves of the Episcopal remainder in Scot- land, he entered into a concordat to maintain in America, as far as in him lay, the peculiarities of the Scottish Church, and in particular the prayer of con- secration in the communion office. With his divine commission he returned to this country, and landed at Newport June 20, 1785, preaching on the following Sunday the first sermon of a bishop in this country, in old Trinity church, from Hebrews xii. 1, 2. He was soon established at New London as the rector of St. James' Church, which was then in process of erec- tion, where he continued to dwell, in the faithful dis- charge of his duties as bishop and priest, till his very sudden death, Feb. 25, 1796.

In the formation of our institutions and the estab- lishment of our Prayer Book he acted a conspicnous and influential part. True to his engagement with the Scottish Church, he resisted the tendency to inno- vation that in many quarters displayed itself, and steadfastly exerted himself to procure the insertion of the consecration prayer in the communion office, and with success, most men will now admit, conferring a decided benefit on the church. He set his face firmly against what was termed the Proposed Book, and fought for the retention of the Catholic creeds and the pres- ervation of their integrity. For a few years preju- dice and misunderstanding and diversity of views on some points of polity kept him and his diocese sep- arate from the body of the church. But the difference was at last happily settled, and it was his honor to die the first bishop of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America.

He married, early in life, Mary, the daughter of Edward Hicks, of New York, who died before his consecration. He did not marry again. His house in New London was under the charge of his daughter Maria. At last, after a tour of visiting in his parish, he remained to take tea at the house of Mr. Roswell Saltonstall, a warden of the parish, whose daughter Ann had married his son Charles. When he had just risen from the tea-table, he fell with an attack of apoplexy, and soon expired. His funeral was attended without pomp, the only record of it in the register- book of the parish being the simple words : " Febru-

201

NEW LONDON.

ary 28, 1796. Buried, by the Rev. Mr. Tyler, of Nor- wich, Right Rev. Samuel Seabury, D.D., Bishop of Connecticut and Rhode Island." Soon after his en- trance upon the discharge of his episcopal functions in Connecticut the churches in Rhode Island placed themselves under his jurisdiction, whence he derived the double designation of Bishop of Connecticut and Rhode Island, which is often applied to him. He was buried in the public burying-ground in New Lon- don, and a table of gray marble placed over his grave, with the following inscription, written by the Rev. Dr. Bowden, of Columbia College, N. Y. :

Here lietli the body of SAMUEL SEABURY, D. D., Bishop of Connecticut and Rhode Island, Who departed from this transitory scene, February 25, 1796, In the sixty-eighth year of his age. Ingenious without pride, learned without pedantry, Good without severity, he was duly qualified to discharge the duties of the Christian and the Bishop. In the pulpit, he enforced religion; in bis conduct,

he exemplified it.

The poor he assisted with his charity; the ignorant he blessed with his instruction.

The friend of man, he ever desired their good ; The enemy of vice, he ever opposed it. Christian ! dost thou aspire to happiness ? Seabury has shown the way that leads to it.

This table, since the removal of the bishop's re- mains, has been placed within the inclosure on the north side of the present church. Within the church a tablet, in the form of an obelisk, stood originally at the left side of the pulpit, afterwards directly over it, bearing the following inscription :

SACRED May this marble long remain (The just tribute of affection) to the memory Of the truly venerable and beloved Pastor of this Church, THE RIGHT REVEREND SAMUEL SEABURY, D.D., Bishop of Connecticut and Rhode Island, Who was translated from earth to heaven, February 25, 1796, In the sixty-eighth year of his age and twelfth of his consecration; But still lives in the hearts of a grateful diocese.

This tablet now stands in the basement chapel of the present church. The epitaph is not to be much admired, and one expression in it is justly open to criticism. When, in 1849, the bishop's remains were placed under the chancel of the church, then in pro- cess of erection, at the joint expense of the diocese and parish, a handsome monument of freestone in the form of an altar-tomb underneath a canopy sur- mounted by a mitre was placed over his final resting- place. On the slab above the tomb this simple record was engraven :

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.

History of New London county, Connecticut : with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men, Part 49

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton) Publication date: 1882 Publisher: Philadelphia : J.W. Lewis & Co. Number of Pages: 1317

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton)
Publication date: 1882
Publisher: Philadelphia : J.W. Lewis & Co.
Number of Pages: 1317