USA > Connecticut > Tercentenary pamphlet series, v. 3 The Beginnings of Roman Catholicism in Connecticut > Part 34
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 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47
6
such a confined day the students occasionally indulged in pillow fights in their chambers at night.
Although a student's spare time would seem to have been reduced to a pitiful, not to say dangerous, minimum, a vast legal machinery operated for making him conform to a stern code of conduct and morals. First, there were the Freshman laws, which, having grown out of the established customs of several decades, were finally issued, apparently with the approval of the Corporation, in broadside form. They were administered largely by the seniors. An extant copy of these laws (undated, but known to have existed in 1764) reveals that the seniors tried to control the most minute details of a freshman's life. Some of the provisions were incredibly petty. The first-year men were not allowed to wear gowns or carry canes. They were obliged to show respect for their elders in ways little less than fantastic. They were, for example, "forbidden to wear their Hats (unless in stormy weather) in the front door-yard of the President's or Professor's House, or within Ten Rods of the Person of the President, Eight Rods of the Professor, and Five Rods of a Tutor." Before entering a gate or door at college, the freshman was required to look around to see whether any of his superiors were within three rods of him, in which case he was not to enter "without a signal to proceed." The laws do not explicitly state whether freshmen were provided with tape measures or not. One of the most offensive pro- visions of the code was that known as "sending fresh- men." Seniors were at liberty at any time to send fresh- men on "all reasonable errands." It is easy to guess that a senior's interpretation of a "reasonable" errand was much broader than a freshman's. Certain it is that fag- ging and other forms of hazing elicited a great deal of fruitless protest. John Treadwell of the class of 1767,
7
later governor of Connecticut, openly resisted fagging on the grounds that the power of the seniors was "illegally exercised." But Treadwell was unsuccessful in his move for independence, and he "afterwards suffered much persecution." By exasperating the freshmen and by trespassing on their study periods, the freshman laws exercised a deleterious effect on the morale and the scholarship of the college. Even so, they formed only a part of the veritable phalanx of laws with which the undergraduate was hedged about.
If the seniors were the overlords of the freshmen, they were themselves subject to a higher authority, which governed the student body. It was the function of the faculty to administer the college Laws. These were so elaborately devised and provided such severe punish- ments that under them the students lived in a condition later described by Theodore Dwight Woolsey as no less than "servitude." There was of course provision whereby a student could petition for redress of grievances, but this seldom operated to his advantage. To the modern observer the most astonishing feature of the Laws is the enormous number of offenses which were punishable by fines, ranging from a halfpenny, for being late at chapel, to ten shillings for more serious delinquencies. There was a fine of four pence for singing or unnecessary noise dur- ing study time; two shillings six pence (first offense), for playing at dice or cards or making a wager on permitted games; six pence for taking food or dishes out of com- mons; three shillings for acting "a Comedy or a Tragedy," with a shilling as the penalty for witnessing the same. Besides the many offenses which were expiable by speci- fied sums, there were others devised by the unpredictable ingenuity of youth which were punished by fines deter- mined after the nature of the crime was known.
8
Generally fines did not exceed ten shillings. For cases in which ten shillings (a large sum in the monetary sys- tem of those days) could not atone for outraged morality, the administration provided more drastic punishments, including public admonition, rustication, and expulsion. Public admonition might follow upon misdemeanors such as fighting, lying, wearing woman's apparel, and injuring a townsman. For still graver infractions of morality such as striking a tutor, denying Holy Scripture, blaspheming (swearing), fornication, theft, forgery, and dueling, the punishment was expulsion. But most of the wrongdoing of students was punishable by fines. Indeed the college Laws so bristled with references to fines that outside criticism reached the president's ears in 1763. The suspicion (probably unjustified) that some of the money collected as fines by the tutors stuck to the tutors' fingers did not add to public confidence. President Clap responded by asserting that "thro' the Laxity of the Administration . . . fines have never been inflicted in more than half the instances, wherein they have been justly deserved." Criticism was not stilled, however.
The provisions for punishment in the chapter on "Crimes and Misdemeanors" in the college Laws as printed in 1755 would seem to have been comprehensive enough to cover all cases of student misbehavior. Yet so deeply was President Clap interested in disciplinary measures that in 1764 he drew up a manuscript entitled "Some Observations Relating to the Goverment [sic] of the College 1764." This paper contained a statement of the moral aims of the college, a painstaking analysis of the causes of misconduct, and a comprehensive classi- fication of the types of violation of the Laws, with explanatory remarks. Not content with citing the offenses already penalized, he prepared a supplementary
9
list (doubtless suggested by actual occurrences) including "Crimes ... of a heinious Nature ... such as Sacriliege malicious setting the College on Fire Burglary Defiling the Chappel taking away the great Bible out of the Desk destroying the Monitors Bills &c," for all which he recommended condign punishment.
Now President Clap, although something of a marti- net, was not perverse. It is clear that he regarded him- self as a conscientious Christian and a zealous worker for the welfare of Yale. His administration must be seen in perspective to be judged fairly. The Yale. Laws, although first drawn up by President Clap, were modeled rather closely upon comparable statutes in force at Harvard and at Oxford. The same misguided spirit which so emphasized the use of the rod in elementary education of the time was responsible for the general application of only slightly preferable methods of punish- ment for college students. Fear, in those days, was the feeble base of much educational theory. Yet when all is said, President Clap's zeal in the prosecution of culprits can hardly be considered typical of the times. Indeed his cardinal defect as an administrator, in the opinion of Ezra Stiles, who became president of Yale in 1778, was that "he was prone to consider boys as being men." Of course, as will appear, his harsh methods provoked reprisal, and he was to learn that the retaliatory meas- ures of his "boys" could be as formidable as those of men. He put his faith in law, but a college cannot be admin- istered by law alone. Then, too, the latter part of his administration was rendered peculiarly difficult by colonial excitement over the Stamp Act. Student unrest was undoubtedly augmented by the bold example of the Sons of Liberty in political affairs.
IO
IV
THE curriculum at Yale exhibited limitations common to American colleges of the time. In the mid-eighteenth century education in New England was very definitely affected by frontier conditions and by the predominance of Puritans in the population; consequently there was little opportunity for the development of broader views and more liberal methods in the cultural life. Conceived primarily as an adjunct of religion, nourished upon psalmbook, sermon, and primer, education resisted innovation. For many years, says James Truslow Adams, it suffered from "an intensified preoccupation with the problems of Calvinism." The chief aim of the American college even in 1760 was to provide preliminary training for young men who planned to enter the ministry. Such courses as did not contribute directly toward that end were valued mainly as aids to discipline. For disciplining the mind, not expanding or broadening it, was the ideal of contemporary education. Hence the emphasis upon text, axiom, law, formula, system-in short upon those things already established by authority. Liberal studies were not yet countenanced in either America or England.
The Yale curriculum, therefore, had long been shaped by a conservative policy. As Professor Henry A. Beers remarked, it was based upon "the ancient scholastic curriculum of the English universities, the back-bone of which was theology and logic." It aimed to impart "solid learning." A glance at the program of studies in the Laws of 1755 reveals the formidable character of the intellectual fare. In the freshman year, the principal studies were "the Tongues and Logic." The tongues were, of course, Greek and Latin. Modern languages were not recognized. In the second year, the language study con- tinued, probably with the inclusion of Hebrew; and to it
II
were added rhetoric, geometry, and geography. For the third year, the program consisted of natural philosophy (that is, science), astronomy, "and the other Branches of the Mathematics." The special studies for the fourth year were metaphysics and ethics. In addition to these, as the detailed program shows, there was an enormous quantity of religious study for all students throughout the four years.
It is not without significance that during its embryonic period, the sponsors of Yale College listened attentively to the counsels of Increase and Cotton Mather. Having recently lost a battle against enlightenment at Harvard, the Mathers were anxious to see established in New England a college which should hold fast to seventeenth- century ideals of religious orthodoxy and ministerial sovereignty. Conservatism naturally prevailed in the new college, and even after the middle of the eighteenth century Yale still presented a strong theological front. Religion and theology occupied a large share of an under- graduate's time. Throughout the four years he was required to recite texts, catechisms, and creeds, and con- fessions of faith; to read copiously in theology; to attend prayers twice a day; and to hear grace twice at each meal. He had to make constant companions of Wollebius's The Abridgement of Christian Divinitie . .. To Which is Adjoined ... The Anatomy of the Whole Body of Divinity [sic], Delineated in IX Short Tables, etc. (London, 1650) and Amesius's Medulla SS. Theologiae .. . (Amsterdam, 1627). The Greek Testament was seldom far from his elbow, if not always close to his thoughts. Religious meditation was constantly enjoined upon all students. Saturdays were almost entirely devoted to religious studies and exercises. On Sunday there were two chapel services with sermon. One half of the sermons delivered
I2
on Sundays by the professor of divinity were expected to be theological discourses based on scriptural texts and so arranged that by the end of four years they should constitute a system of divinity. The other half were miscellaneous exhortations "suited to the religious and moral ... improvement of the college." Besides the Sun- day sermons there were protracted services on days of public thanksgiving and fasting. Students were required to attend promptly upon all religious exercises on the pain of fines for tardiness or unexcused absence. Special injunctions warned the students to observe a Sabbath decorum of so lofty an order that other students and strangers were not to be admitted to one's chamber. Resident graduates were of course even more completely immersed in the atmosphere of religious study, for in most cases their reason for staying on was to prepare for the ministry. They attended all religious exercises or were punished by being deprived of the use of the library or by being expelled.
Thus the religious activities of the college not only made heavy drafts on the student's time and patience, but they were enveloped in the same atmosphere of com- pulsion and authority that characterized other aspects of education at the time. Little attempt was made to conduct the religious life of the college on the basis of free discussion; no inquiry was needed in matters that had been wisely settled generations ago. Difference of opinion was ruthlessly dealt with, if necessary, as in the cases of two tutors who dallied with Sandemanian heresies in 1765, by dismissal from the college com- munity. Religion was acquired not through growth but by assent; it was measured by tests and administered by authority.
Science, though accorded a lesser place than religion,
I3
was probably better taught. President Clap revered theology, but he excelled in science. A competent authority said of him that in mathematics and science Clap was not "equalled by any man in America, except by the only man by whom he was surpassed, the most learned Professor Winthrop."" The Yale library still houses original manuscripts of Clap which testify to his profound interest and considerable researches in astron- omy. He personally gave special instruction to students who showed a talent for his subject. Inasmuch as he was ably seconded for a number of years by tutors who also leaned toward science, it is probable that the scien- tific instruction was very creditable for the times. Indeed President Clap was responsible for emphasizing those branches of learning for which the college was dis- tinguished for many years to come. Said Professor Beers in 1876: "There has always been in the training given at Yale a certain severity. Discipline, rather than cul- ture; power, rather than grace; 'light,' rather than 'sweetness' have been, if not the aim, at least the result of her teachings. Her scholars have been noted for solid and exact learning.' "
Definitely cultural subjects found too little place in the curriculum under President Clap's régime. To the modern eye the most noticeable aspect of the old Yale curriculum was its relative neglect of modern history, belles-lettres, and composition. Of course certain portions of ancient history were studied in conjunction with religion; and one of the first professorships to be established was that of ecclesiastical history (1777). But history taught as a separate entity received very slow recognition, and it was not accorded a professorship until 1868.
I John Winthrop (1714-1779), professor of mathematics and natural phi- losophy at Harvard.
14
Literature also fared badly in a period when the scho- lastic training was so severe as to be "almost monastic." Even the classics were not weighted heavily. It has often been assumed that early collegiate education in this country was predominantly classical; but this assump- tion needs examination. It is true that the Latin language rang in the ears of students throughout the day. The Laws of Yale College were printed in Latin (often bad Latin) until 1774. The students bandied a good many Latin catch phrases (such as non paravi-unprepared!), and they were required to memorize many Latin and Greek texts. They conned the Greek Testament pretty steadily. Moreover, there were Latin orations and "disputes." Yet it is a mistake to infer from this frag- mentary evidence that the average undergraduate was widely read in classical literature. A few of the orations of Cicero, Virgil's Georgics, selected bits of Horace- this would seem to have been the sum of the average boy's required reading in classical literature. Apparently not even Homer was studied except by candidates for the Berkeley (graduate) scholarships until the early nineteenth century. The professorship of Hebrew, Greek, and Latin was not established until 1805-after pro- fessorships had already been established in chemistry and law. In 1766 a friendly critic of the college, Samuel Purviance, wrote that in his opinion Yale's curriculum suffered from one "fundamental Defect," which he char- acterized as "the Slight Method of teaching the classics." Linguistic drill became an end in itself. The inference from contemporary testimony is that a real appreciation of the glories of ancient literature was set aside in favor of a knowledge of the political machinations of Catiline and the vagaries of the ablative case.
Nor was there adequate provision for the study of
I5
modern literature. The French and German languages were not regarded as essential. Even English literature was sadly neglected. The difficulty did not lie in lack of books. Through the generosity of friends of the college, especially Jeremiah Dummer and Bishop Berkeley, Yale had acquired a good library. As early as 1750 James Birket, a visitor to the college, observed that "there is in this College a Very pretty Library And well kept, their Books are many of 'em of Much Later date and better Choose then those at Cambridge." In 1765 there were about four thousand volumes. Although most of these were classified as pertaining to theology, philology, and science, there was a liberal sprinkling of the English poets, including Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Butler, Dryden, Waller, Cowley, Denham, Gay, Garth, Prior, and Pope. Unfortunately since the program of studies did not call for an acquaintance with the English poets, these rich assets of the library remained quite unused except through private enterprise. Moreover some dis- couragement stood in the way of individual initiative because of the carefully graded system of charging for the use of books-six pence per month for a folio, four pence for a quarto, two pence for an octavo or smaller volume, and a farthing for a pamphlet. Not only litera- ture but also composition was largely left to take care of itself, for although the Laws early make mention of rhetoric as among the studies, this apparently meant little more than brief and ineffective study of the rules of grammar.
Thus for many years literature flourished at Yale only through the fitful enthusiasm of literary societies and through individual attempts at self-education, which were carried on not only without encouragement but even at a financial sacrifice. In 1766 Ezra Stiles was
16
speaking (unofficially) for the whole college when he disavowed any excellence in "language" at Yale. The professorship of rhetoric and English literature was not founded until 1813. In this matter Yale lagged behind Harvard College, which in 1766 made a creditable attempt to improve its curriculum by providing that each class should be instructed two days a week by "a distinct Tutor in Elocution, Composition in English, Rhetoric, and other parts of the Belles Lettres." Indeed, Yale so neglected literature that the more enlightened students called attention to its lack; and when in the late 'sixties and early 'seventies some amelioration of the curriculum was secured, the leaders in the movement included a number of the more ambitious students.
V
STUDENTS are only intermittently interested in their studies; but they are always concerned for their food. Hence a great deal of administrative trouble, for the quality of commons was an almost constant cause of dissatisfaction-some of which was justified. Managing commons was a concession assigned by the college to the steward, who though a graduate of the college was gen- erally a man of more business acumen than culinary imagination. Except for a time when lack of accommo- dations forced the Corporation to allow students to eat their breakfasts in private families, all the students who resided at college were obliged to eat their meals at commons. Only those on the sick list were exempt from this order. The price charged varied with the market prices of the raw materials involved and the value of currency. In 1760 it was about four shillings a week; in 1763, six shillings. Perhaps this modest charge did not warrant the steward's setting a good table. At all events,
I7
judging from impartial documentary evidence and, more cautiously, from student complaint, the food was generally unappetizing and frequently meager. Plenty of milk seems to have been available; but for the rest, the steward relied too heavily on bread and meat (often salt pork) to provide a satisfactorily balanced and tempt- ing diet. An occasional apple pie, specifications for which were laid down in the college Laws, could not compensate fully for the prosaic character of the average daily menu. Even allowing for the fact that student criticism must always be taken with a grain of salt, it is pretty clear that the food at commons was altogether uninspired.
Defects in the official diet could be compensated for in part by resort to the buttery, a sort of precursor of the modern college store, which was located in Connecticut Hall. This too was a concession, for which the butler paid fifty shillings a year and provided candles for chapel exercises and other solemn occasions. The butler was generally a Yale graduate, and he worked under orders from the Corporation. He was allowed to sell to the students limited quantities of cider, strong beer, and metheglin. He also dispensed fresh fruits, which were sadly lacking in commons, sugar loafs, and pipes and tobacco, as well as a few necessities such as books and stationery. It was explicitly stated that he should sell no distilled liquors, nor could he sell "foreign fruits," which were sometimes packed in brandy to facilitate transportation. The buttery was a popular resort and the butler had a tidy monopoly. Yet perhaps because of the lack of competition, there was occasional criticism of his prices.
There was one other recourse for the student who craved delicacies: he could have them sent from home and stored in his "cellar." Cellars were evidently small
18
bins or closets comparable to modern lockers. Here the luckier students kept their cheeses, cakes, wines, and apples. So far from frowning upon this luxurious custom, the Corporation encouraged it to the extent of renting the cellars-at a rate which was sometimes higher than that for a study.
The buttery, however, was expensive; and packages from home could not be counted upon to arrive very often in an era when it was a day's journey by horse from Hartford to New Haven. Neither of these palliatives could make full amends for the commons fare. Nor were the students allowed to take meals at taverns, for there they might be "exposed to the temptations of Company." Consequently when commons were at their worst, the students took their revenge on their oppressors by resort- ing to the more elementary forms of protest such as breaking dishes, throwing food, and generally harassing the tutors.
It is probable too that dissatisfaction with commons was responsible for an event that threw the college into consternation in April, 1764. All but nine of the students who boarded at college were suddenly taken ill of a vio- lent digestive disorder characterized by severe pains, shortness of breath, a "tremendous vomiting and purg- ing," and in some instances, convulsions. The catastrophe at first seemed attributable to poison, and in fact a French cook was suspected. But President Clap, who conducted a painstaking inquiry into the matter, reached the conclusion that "some strong physic and not any mortal Poyson" had been introduced into the breakfast dough by disgruntled students who devised this way of bringing discredit upon commons. Most of the cases yielded to emetics and "Oleaginous and mucilaginous draughts." No one seems to have died; the president
19
was undoubtedly right in his diagnosis. Apparently he failed to heed the warning in regard to the quality of commons, however, for only a few months later one of the undergraduates, Roswell Grant, wrote plaintively to his father: "Should be glad of a Cheese if it co'd be conveniently sent me, as our commons are poor." More- over "bread-and-butter riots" continued to occur at intervals until commons was abolished in 1817.
VI
ALTHOUGH the so-called poison plot of 1764 was only one of a number of protests at commons, it was important as a presage of the downfall of the administration. Presi- dent Clap was a stern and uncompromising man. His methods, even when he had the right on his side, were likely to create antagonism. One of his major exploits was outpointing his adversaries in 1763 when certain critics of the college prayed the general assembly to institute a "Commission of Visitation" enabling some suitable persons to inquire into all the affairs of the college and particularly to learn if religious orthodoxy were being preserved. The pretext for this proposed visit- ation was that the general assembly, by virtue of grant- ing a charter and partially supporting the college through gifts, was the founder of the institution. Presi- dent Clap, however, in a masterly refutation clearly proved that not the general assembly but the trustees or fellows were the real founders and as such had the only rights of visitation. His argument prevailed. On this occasion, as frequently, he was logical and within his rights; but he was hardly wise. His enemies naturally resented his victory. Denied the right of visitation, they exaggerated the extent of abuses within the college. Among these petitioners were doubtless some persons
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.