USA > Massachusetts > Commonwealth history of Massachusetts, colony, province and state, volume 3 > Part 41
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 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53
JOHN HANCOCK AS GOVERNOR (1787 - 1793)
The adoption of the new Federal Constitution which went into effect in 1789 made no immediate difference to the State governments. At the time, John Hancock had already been twice elected governor and he continued to receive the annual suffrage of a majority until his death in office in 1793.
As will be deduced from what has already been said, Han- cock was an opportunist in politics. The administrations of such men are not likely to produce critical results, unless affairs over which they exercise but little control intervene to disturb them. Hancock had lived through stirring times and there is much in his experience and services for the historian's attention; but so far as the public affairs of the State of Massachusetts were concerned, there is little of importance
446 MASSACHUSETTS STATE GOVERNMENT
to record during the last four years of his life. In his private life, the Governor was afflicted through all these years with a painful illness which eventually resulted in his death.
Among the events which evidently affected Massachusetts at this time was the establishment of the Federal Constitution. The connection of Massachusetts with that great event is elsewhere described in detail. An immediate effect was the stability in the securities of the national government which helped to reestablish commercial prosperity. Two new coun- ties in the Maine District were set up; one named for the Governor and the other for President Washington.
Taxes were high in Massachusetts in spite of the assumption of the State debts by the Federal government; for large accu- mulations of former years were still unpaid. The sale of Maine lands affording no relief, recourse was had by the legislature to a lottery for the raising of £10,000. Although this device for obtaining money was much used in those days and for over a half century later even by churches and colleges, Hancock disapproved of it; and it seems to have been through his influence that the legislature did not continue this method of raising funds.
The old law against theatrical entertainments had long been a dead letter. In December, 1791, a play was stopped by the sheriff and the principal actor arrested. At the examination the next day in Faneuil Hall was presented a special order for the arrest, signed by the governor. The attorney for the defense-no other than Harrison Gray Otis-objected that it had been issued without complaint being made upon oath. With this view the justices agreed, and they discharged the prisoner. Quite a popular controversy followed, but majority opinion seems to have been against the governor, for the legislature repealed the law a year later.
A new law of the Sabbath was enacted in an attempt to curb laxity which had followed the war. Although not as severe as the old colonial statutes, it did prohibit traveling and recreation on the Sabbath Day. This law, however, seems to have been about as effective as have the attempts of later times to enforce other moral codes.
EFFECT OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION 447
EFFECT OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION (1789 - 1794)
The French Revolution, which broke out in 1789, was at first received with tremendous enthusiasm in America, Massa- chusetts being in no degree behindhand. Their own struggle for liberty was not far removed; Americans could but throb with sympathy for the efforts of others towards the same glorious end. January 24, 1793, was declared a holiday in Boston in celebration of the news from France that a Republic was established.
The day opened with a cannon salute. A parade led by a band with the citizens marching eight abreast was escort to a huge roasted ox. In spite of the season of the year tables were set out of doors in State Street for a banquet at which even the little children received cakes with these words upon them, "Liberty and Equality". At two o'clock there was another parade, followed by a banquet at Faneuil Hall for the more aristocratic, at which Lieutenant Governor Adams presided. In the evening the State House was illuminated and there were fire works and bonfires. Enthusiasm went to fantastic lengths when everyone, including the Lieutenant Governor, was addressed as "Citizen" and a purse was raised to release those imprisoned for debt in the town jail that they might "again breathe the air of liberty". Even the Phi Beta Kappa at Harvard fell under condemnation as being contrary to the principle of democracy.
Before long all this was changed, at least so far as the Federalists were concerned. Both John Adams and John Quincy Adams opposed the French revolution in pamphlets issued under the titles "Discourses on Davila" and "Essays of Publicola". The early ardor of the more conservative part of the population was cooled by the Genet incident of 1793, Washington's insistence on neutrality, the rejection of religion by the French, the execution of Louis XVI who had aided America in her own Revolution,-above all by the excesses of the Terror.
In the meantime Massachusetts had particular reasons for developing an anti-French feeling. When a French frigate sailed into Boston harbor with a "blacklist" attached to its mainmast of eleven names of prominent Boston citizens
448 MASSACHUSETTS STATE GOVERNMENT
accused of not being too well disposed to the Revolution, it was felt to be an unwarrantable interference in the domestic affairs of the town. This same frigate afterwards attempted to prevent the execution of decrees of the United States Circuit Court enforcing the neutrality laws against some French privateers which had come into the harbor. President Washington felt obliged to vacate the exequatur of the French Vice Consul at Boston. The foreigner's successor had the temerity to write a letter of protest to Governor Samuel Adams.
Among the Democrats, enthusiasm for the French cause remained unabated. "Jacobin Clubs" were formed, including one in Boston which took the name "Constitutional Club." The Federalist paper, the Centinel, continually denounced this club, and charges and counter charges of falsehood were exchanged between it and its Democratic rival sheet, the Chronicle.
New England Puritanism manifested its influence by driving the clergy into the Federalist camp when the French Revolutionists developed atheism. Sermons on the subject led the Democrats to resent the participation of the pulpit in politics, but the Federalists could find an effective retort in charging their opponents with atheism.
THE JAY TREATY (1794 - 1796)
Party animosity was at its height when the Jay Treaty added fuel to the flames. Everywhere the Massachusetts Democrats claimed that they were "sold out" to England. In Boston on the night of September 4, 1794, a mob paraded in opposition to the treaty. As it passed his house Governor Adams is said to have bowed and smiled his approval. Jay's effigy was burned, the house of a Federalist editor attacked, and a bonfire kindled. One person was wounded; and finally the sheriff ordered the mob to disperse. Upon its refusal to do so, the sheriff applied to the governor for assistance; but Adams would not give it, declaring the mob was "only a watermelon frolic."
All of this was very alarming to the propertied class, some of whom left the city. Fisher Ames complained of the "blindness and gullibility of the rich men who so readily lend
449
SAMUEL ADAMS AS GOVERNOR
their strength to the party which is thirsting for the contents of their iron chests." Two years later, however, the growing strength of Federalism is indicated by the memorials sent by the Massachusetts town meetings to the national House of Representatives, favoring the treaty in the face of the move- ment in that body to refuse to make the appropriations necessary to carry it into effect. In that struggle at the seat of the national government, Fisher Ames was the most unyielding and convincing member of the House of Repre- sentatives in favor of a treaty and peace with England.
SAMUEL ADAMS AS GOVERNOR (1793 - 1797)
Upon the death of Hancock, Samuel Adams as lieutenant governor succeeded. In accordance with the custom of the times, his full designation was "Lieutenant-Governor and Commander-in-chief of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts." At this time Adams was 71 years old. In the election the next April, he was elected governor over William Cushing, the candidate of the Federalists. Cushing had been chief justice in the old royalist regime under Governor Hutchinson, but was the only one of the administrative office holders to take the patriot side at the opening of the Revolution.
The advanced age of Adams was used against him, while his former Tory connections, even although prewar, were brought up against Judge Cushing. Cushing also was charged with having at one time rendered a decision in favor of the right of an individual to sue a State in the Federal courts. The victory of Adams was overwhelming.
The next year (1795) Adams was again elected by a large majority. Scurrilous writings against him were circulated, which many years later distressed Wells, his grandson and biographer. Considering the character of the language used in political campaigns at the time, "scurrility" does not seem significant. In this campaign the Reverend David Osgood of Medford, an ardent Federalist, preached sermons against the governor. The pulpit of the times by no means confined itself to religion and morals ; but perhaps was no more effective than the violent campaign literature of the times. Then, as now, an especially strong article aroused the enthusiasm of a man's
450 MASSACHUSETTS STATE GOVERNMENT
enemies, and also had a boomerang effect in calling his friends to his defence.
In 1796 Increase Sumner was the Federalist candidate against Adams. In Boston, Adams led by 1614 to 848; and in the State at large he won again by a good vote, although some of the western counties were for Sumner. Among the argu- ments used against Adams was his old hostility to Hancock, although these two old friends had made up long before the latter's death. Whether the out and out sympathy of Adams for France hurt him or helped him we cannot know. His refusal to call out the militia at the time of the riot, referred to above, which he termed "a mere watermelon frolic," could not have increased his popularity, at least with the propertied class.
That there was no particular bitterness between the two candidates is indicated by an extract from a letter of Sumner's two years before in connection with the election of that year. "Entre nous," he says, "some gentlemen have proposed to me to stand for the first magistracy of our State; but many weighty reasons prompted me to decline that too high and arduous task. There is our good Lieutenant Governor, who stands in the direct line of promotion, and who has waded through a sea of political troubles and grown old in labors for the good of his country. Why not he!"
For the election of 1797 Adams declined to run, giving as his reason in an address to the legislature "the infirmities of age." It seems probable, however, that someone was aware that it was no longer possible to hold off the long overdue Federalist victory in the State government.
Little of importance occurred in State affairs during Adams's administration. His first message to the legislature was taken up almost entirely with an exposition of the relation of the Federal government and the States, in which he advocated that neither encroach upon the powers of the other. All of his other messages while he remained in the governorship had this for their burden; although at no time did Adams make any concrete applications of his theory. He was living in the past.
Much of Governor Samuel Adams's messages as governor were taken up with the European War situation. In this he was hardly consistent, since foreign relations were according
451
PARTY ALIGNMENTS
to the new Constitution clearly allocated to the national gov- ernment. In those days, however, the governors of all the States habitually discussed the topics of prevailing political interest to the people whether or not strictly relating to the State. The entire realm of government had been, too long matter for the consideration of the States for them to become accustomed so soon to giving up any portion of it.
MASSACHUSETTS DURING THE QUASI-WAR WITH FRANCE (1798-1800)
For the next two years after Samuel Adams retired in 1797, Increase Sumner was governor. Compared with his two immediate predecessors, Sumner was a young man, being in his fifties. The story is told that at the time he passed into the State House upon his inauguration, an old apple- woman who kept her stand there was heard to exclaim, "Thank God, we have got a Governor that can walk, at last." Sumner brought back to the office that ceremonial which gouty Hancock had loved but which Adams cared nothing about.
Especially was Governor Sumner interested in the military. As his administrations coincided with the quasi-war with France which threatened to lead to a formal declaration of war, it was just as well to have in the governor's chair a man who would stress preparedness. He was fond of donning military uniform, which he considered appropriate in his capacity as the constitutional commander-in-chief, and of reviewing troops. Of more practical importance were his efforts, for the most part successful, to increase the military supplies and the number of arsenals throughout the State.
PARTY ALIGNMENTS OVER THE VIRGINIA AND KENTUCKY RESOLUTIONS (1798- 1799)
The nation-wide controversy over the Alien and Sedition Laws, and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions which fol- lowed them, provoked as much interest in Massachusetts as anywhere. While each of the contending sides followed the positions taken by their party members in the national Con- gress, nevertheless certain principles were developed as to the relation between the States and the Union, and as to the rights of the people under the national government.
452 MASSACHUSETTS STATE GOVERNMENT
It will be remembered that the Federalist majority in Con- gress had passed the so-called Alien and Sedition Acts, at- tempting to meet the pro-French and anti-Federalist agitation throughout the country. These laws increased the period of residence necessary for naturalization from five to fourteen years; gave the President permission to deport any alien; and provided for the arrest and punishment of those making libel- lous statements against officers of the government.
Against these statutes the Republican legislatures of Vir- ginia and Kentucky passed resolutions denying their constitu- tionality and claiming a right of nullification. As Virginia put it: "In cases of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of ... powers, not granted by the ... compact [the Constitution], the states, who are parties thereto, have the right and are in duty bound, to interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respec- tive limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them." These resolutions were sent to the legislatures of all the States and reached Massachusetts in January, 1799.
A joint committee was set up of three from the State Senate and four from the House. As it was composed entirely of Federalists there was no danger of a minority report. Never- theless, the Republicans presented their side in the debates on the floors of the two houses and in the columns of the Repub- lican newspaper, the Chronicle.
Two questions were involved: the constitutionality of the Alien and Sedition Acts; and the right of a legislature to pass upon the constitutionality of an act of the national Congress. The report of the committee declared that "the decision of all cases, in law and equity, arising under the Constitution of the United States, and the construction of all laws made in pursuance thereof, are exclusively vested by the people in the Judicial Courts of the United States." Nevertheless, within a few years this doctrine opposing State nullification was flatly repudiated by the Federalists of Massachusetts, both in theory and in practice, when the controversies arose over the policies of the Republican administrations in connection with the embargo and the War of 1812. The Federalist Party was of course entirely inconsistent in its right-about-face on the State rights issue; but as in all such attempts to apply a general principle to specific cases, people consider the self-
453
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
interests of the moment and are concerned only with whether it is their ox which is being gored or the ox of somebody else.
In the debates in the legislature, the Federalist arguments were superficial, perhaps because their party had the votes and therefore did not need the arguments. One Federalist objector made the undeniable point that, if the State legislature was not the proper organ to pass upon the constitutionality of acts of Congress, then the logical thing to do was to ignore the whole matter. To this, John Lowell, the Federalist leader in the House, replied that the report could be considered as an expression of the individual opinions of the members; and that to ignore the matter altogether would appear to be con- senting to the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions.
On the Republican side, John Bacon of Berkshire, the sole member of that party in the Senate, argued the usual Repub- lican points against the constitutionality of the Alien and Sedition Laws. In the House, Dr. Aaron Hill of Cambridge pronounced the State rights doctrine: "While the individual States retain any portion of their sovereignty, they must have the right to judge of any infringement made on their Constitutions, for if the right is transferred exclusively to Congress, or to any department of the General Government, no vestige of sovereignty can remain to the individual States, but they become a consolidated instead of a Federal Govern- ment." If the leaders of the South from 1828 to 1861 had only gone to the New England Republicans of 1798, or the New England Federalists of 1807 to 1814, they would have found plenty of arguments in defence of their theories of the nature of the union.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH UNDER A FEDERALIST JUDGE (1799)
The action of the Massachusetts legislature, paralleled in other Federalist States, was an abstract statement of political doctrine. The specific trial of Abijah Adams was a concrete application of the doctrine. It was one of the striking instances of Federal tyranny occurring in different parts of the country at this time; and it goes a long way in explaining the defeat of the Federalists in the national elections the fol- lowing year.
454 MASSACHUSETTS STATE GOVERNMENT
Abijah Adams was the younger brother of the editor and proprietor of the Republican paper, the Chronicle, and was employed in the office. The Chronicle as a matter of party principle opposed the attitude of the legislature on the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions; whereupon the grand jury brought an indictment against the two Adamses on the ground of libel. The elder brother was not prosecuted, however, since he was too ill to stand trial. In calling the attention of the grand jury to the matter, Chief Justice Dana remarked that he had obtained a copy of the paper by accident, claiming that if he were a subscriber "his conscience would charge him with assisting a traitorous enmity to the Government of his coun- try." In spite of this expression of bias, under the judicial system then prevailing in Massachusetts he presided at the trial.
The indictment charged the defendant with libel upon the General Court of Massachusetts ; and the prosecution depended on the common law for its basis. The case was entirely a State affair, being in no way connected, at least in law, with the recent Sedition Act of the national government. The defense denied the possibility of a libel against a government and also stood for the freedom of the press. They denied Blackstone's doctrine that liberty of the press consists only of freedom from restraint prior to publication. This the defence declared to be unsuited to the spirit of American institutions, especially since the Revolution. In support of this construc- tion the defence offered to read from John Adams's Revolu- tionary pamphlets; which the judge would not allow. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the defendant was sentenced to thirty days in jail with payment of costs; and was bound over in five hundred dollars to keep the peace for a year. In modern American law this whole case would constitute a most flagrant violation of freedom of the press.
ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNOR SUMNER (1797 - 1799)
Federalism increased in strength from the middle of the last decade of the Eighteenth Century down into the next decade; but the political issues were national rather than local. Even while Boston was voting for Hancock and Samuel Adams for the governorship, it was sending Fisher Ames to Congress. The conservative influence of the clergy was great.
Original by Harding after Stuart
Courtesy of Massachusetts Historical Society
CALEB STRONG
1
GOVERNOR STRONG
455
Both Massachusetts Senators voted for the Jay Treaty in 1794. Governor Samuel Adams was criticized for his French partisanship. The electoral votes not only of Massachusetts but of all New England went to John Adams both in 1796 and 1800. In the gubernatorial election of 1796 several Republican counties gave their votes to Increase Sumner, the Federalist candidate, but the personal popularity of Samuel Adams pulled him through.
In 1797, however, Sumner won and he was elected there- after until his death in 1799. Indeed his last inaugural oath was taken on his death bed but a few days before he passed away. He was succeeded by Moses Gill, the lieutenant governor. As a result of his death on May 20, 1800, the State for the first and only time in its history was without either a governor or lieutenant governor. For ten days the Council functioned as the executive until the inauguration of Governor Strong.
ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNOR STRONG (1800 - 1807)
It is difficult to get at the character, of public men of the times because of the extremely laudatory style of the contem- porary biographies. Caleb Strong seems to have been a solid man, conservative but not too much so, quite representative of the better Federalism in the State, but not as extreme as the most radical of the Essex Junto.
The second most prominent Federalist during these years was Harrison Gray Otis, who at this time left the national Congress for the field of State politics, a not unusual transfer in the early history of the republic. For fifteen years from 1802 he was alternately in the House or Senate. In 1804- 1805 he was Speaker of the House, and in 1805-1806 and again in 1808-1811 president of the Senate. Yet he was not persona grata with the Essex Junto, because while in Congress he refused to take part in the secret conspiracy against Presi- dent Adams from inside the Federalist Party which was led by Timothy Pickering.
During Strong's terms as governor some reforms were enacted in criminal and judicial procedure. The penitentiary system was begun in 1802, and restrictions were made in the application of capital punishment. The judicial system was
456 MASSACHUSETTS STATE GOVERNMENT
clumsy and complicated; there were more judges than was necessary, yet the circuits were so poorly arranged that there was unequal division of labor, and justice was slow and expen- sive. The bar opposed reform because the lawyers were profiting from the conditions. The bench, however, favored a change and during 1803, 1804, and 1805 acts were put through the legislature rearranging jurisdiction and the circuits.
DECLINE OF FEDERALISM (1803 - 1807)
During all this time the radical Federalists were continuing their machinations. By 1804 their plans, under the leadership of Pickering, actually reached the point of discussing secession. These were secret proposals, however, and nothing came of them. Besides the Essex Junto the Connecticut Federalists were active; and over in New York the discontented Burr became the leader. He was eliminated, however, when Hamil- ton aided in defeating him for the governorship. No information on this plot came to light until 1828, when John Quincy Adams, hearing of it by accident, used it against Otis, his political enemy, and his friends. These denied any knowledge of it, and the probability of their innocence was strengthened by the fact that Otis and his friends were not liked by the Pickering wing of the party. Adams later admitted that Otis probably knew nothing of the plans of the Essex Junto. The whole episode was not laid bare until disclosed in the Plumer correspondence published in 1857.
In the meantime extreme Federalism was steadily losing ground through the increasing prosperity of New England. This in turn was due to the resumption of the European War after the failure of the Peace of Amiens in 1803, and the consequent dependence upon Yankee ships for overseas cargo and for commerce between European ports. It was but natural, therefore, that New England should slowly turn to the party predominant in the nation. In 1806 the Republicans (later Democrats) captured the legislature, which thereupon attempted to steal the governorship from Strong. It was the law at the time that the legislature should be the final election returning board. As such it always canvassed the votes as its first duty after convening, and from its decisions there was
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.