USA > Massachusetts > Commonwealth history of Massachusetts, colony, province and state, volume 3 > Part 52
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
566
SEPARATION OF MAINE
FINAL MOVEMENT FOR STATEHOOD (1816)
The refusal of Massachusetts to allow the people of Maine as a body to pronounce an opinion on the question of separa- tion aroused its advocates to greater activity. When the Legislature met in the following winter, petitions poured in from Maine in favor of statehood. The action of the pre- vious year was reversed and a bill was passed allowing the people of Maine, on May 20, 1816, to express by a vote their wishes in the matter of separation. The change probably was due to the fact that the petitions showed a strong sentiment in Maine in favor of separation. Massachusetts as a whole had no desire to retain the District against the wishes of a decided majority of the inhabitants. The twentieth of May rather than one of the election days was chosen as the time of voting, because it was thought best to separate the question of the division of the State from party politics. A near day of voting was fixed so as to put an end as soon as possible to the suspense and agitation of the citizens of Maine.
The contest was thus transferred to the people of the Dis- trict. It was fiercely waged; but when the ballots were counted, it was found that less than half of the voters had gone to the polls. The vote stood in favor of separation, 10,584; opposed, 6,941.
STATUTE FOR SUBMISSION, NOT. SEPARATION (1816)
It had not been intended by the Massachusetts Legislature that the popular vote should be absolutely decisive. The legislature met shortly after the vote in Maine, and promptly referred the subject of separation to a joint committee of which Senator Harrison Gray Otis was chairman. The com- mittee reported to the senate that the vote in May did not give a clear impression of the wishes of the people of Maine; that the committee hoped that separation would not take place, and that it believed that some further means should be taken to learn the opinion of Maine on the matter. It accordingly presented a bill providing for the election by the people of Maine of a convention to meet at Brunswick on August 26. If a majority of the delegates then favored separation, the fact should be taken as a proof that the people of Maine desired it and the convention should proceed to frame a con-
567
GRIEVANCES OF MAINE
stitution. Various provisions were made in regard to the public property and lands, the public debt, etc. These pro- visions were required to be accepted without change by the convention and were to become ipso facto a part of the consti- tution of the new State.
In the senate, several amendments were passed. One of them, though moved by a leader of the separationists, Senator Holmes, of York County proved fatal to their plans. It provided for another popular vote on the question of separa- tion, to be taken September 2, 1816, and for the election at the same time of a convention which should assemble on September 30, organize, and count the votes. It was further provided "that if a majority of five to four at least of the votes returned are in favor of said District's becoming an inde- pendent State aforesaid, then and not otherwise, said conven- tion shall proceed to form a constitution, as is provided in this act." It seems strange that such a limitation should be proposed by a friend of separation, but probably Mr. Holmes thought that it would win votes in the Legislature, yet would not prevent the separationists from carrying Maine in September.
GRIEVANCES OF MAINE (1816 - 1820)
In the House an earnest effort was made to postpone the subject of separation until the next session, but without suc- cess. Then, says Mr. Stanwood, "the storm burst forth in Maine. .. The election upon which everything depended was to take place in eleven weeks, and although the people were already greatly excited, they were stirred to even greater activity. The newspapers discussed the question with enlarged headlines, and their pages became spotty with capital letters and italics."
A correspondent of the Argus expressed the hope that the people of Maine would not be gulled by a bill which had been introduced into the legislature to improve the public lands. "Whenever they have been hard pressed to let us off," he said, "they have delayed and amused us with similar systems."
The failure of Massachusetts to defend the District during the late war had caused much bitterness in Maine. There was a widespread feeling that the union with Massachusetts
568
SEPARATION OF MAINE
had been a hindrance rather than a help. It was alleged that if Maine had been a separate State she would not have tamely submitted to the occupation of Castine, but would have won honor by her courage as did Kentucky. Massachu- setts was accused of partiality in educational matters. It was said that $13,000 in ten years had been given to Massa- chusetts colleges ($10,000 to Harvard and $3,000 to Wil- liams), and only $3,000 to Maine's college, Bowdoin; that according to the proportion of direct tax paid by Maine she had paid the whole of the Bowdoin grant and made a small contribution to the Massachusetts colleges. One critic blamed Massachusetts for refusing to give the usual aid of a grant of land to a proposed academy at Bangor. He also complained that a lottery for the benefit of a Maine work had been refused on the ground that lotteries were injurious to morals, but that Harvard College and the Middlesex Canal had been permitted to raise money in this reprehensible way.
Wild lands in unincorporated districts were assessed at only one third of their value, and the legislature was accused of taxing the speculator two per cent. when it taxed the farmer six.
REPLIES OF UNIONISTS
The opponents of separation declared that it would be contrary to the fundamental laws of the State and the Nation. They asserted that neither the government, nor even the people of Massachusetts, could deprive law-abiding citizens of the protection of the State, that such persons residing in Maine were entitled, if they so desired, to continue a part of the people of Massachusetts and to remain with their property under her jurisdiction. It was assumed as a matter of course that an independent Maine, with no authority over thousands of her inhabitants and their estates, was a practical impossibility. The assertion that Massachusetts could not divest herself of the duty of protecting the property of her citizens was made to meet the objection that separation need not deprive any one of his citizenship in Massachusetts. He could go and live there, or he could remain in Maine as a citizen of Massachusetts, though obliged, like any alien, to obey her laws while in her borders.
569
TERRITORIAL ARGUMENTS
The antiseparationists vigorously defended Massachusetts against the charge of selfishness and partiality in her educa- tional policy. They said that grants to colleges should be in proportion not to the taxes paid by the districts in which they were located, but to the number of students attending them. They urged that Harvard was the college of the whole State and of the United States, that it was easier for persons residing on the seacoast of Maine to go to Cambridge than to go to Portland. Travel was mainly by water, and there were many more vessels trading to Boston than to Portland. Indeed, it was as easy for them to go to Harvard as for residents of the county of Middlesex, unless the latter lived so near to Cambridge that they could board at home.
RELIGIOUS AND TERRITORIAL ARGUMENTS
The opponents of separation also asserted that Maine could not furnish suitable officers for a State, particularly suitable judges for a supreme court, that the taxes would be heavier should separation take place, and that the conditions were unjust. They likewise appealed to denominational preju- dice. Church members were told that the authorities of the new State would be unfriendly to the interests of religion. A special attempt was made to alarm the Congregationalists. Certain privileges had been given to the first church in a town, and this was usually a Congregational one. Hence the Baptists and other "dissenting" churches often found them- selves at a disadvantage. They were stronger in Maine than in old Massachusetts, and some Maine Congregationalists feared that their position would be endangered should Maine become a separate State. Attempts were made to win the Quakers by assertions that the new constitution would compel them to bear arms.
The separationists answered that the claim that Maine stood in need of the property, talents and integrity of Boston, was of the same nature as the old Tory argument that the colonies needed the talents and the protection of Great Britain. One writer vigorously denied that Maine lacked men of talent, but said that, were it true, statehood would stimulate talent and attract men of systematic knowledge, and the public land would no longer be given to colleges in Massachusetts.
570
SEPARATION OF MAINE
Massachusetts was to have half the public lands in Maine, and they were to remain untaxed while she held them. It was said that she might refuse to improve or sell, but grant long leases, and that the title being in her name,; she could obtain a revenue and still escape taxation. Cyrus King, brother of Senator Rufus King, replied that experience showed that unimproved lands were not profitable if the lands near by were settled; in other words, the honest pioneers would steal the timber. It was also urged that should Massa- chusetts lease, though Maine could not tax the land owned by her, she could tax the tenants on the value of the leases.
The Argus accused its opponents of disloyalty in the war just closed. The Gazette replied by anticipating and even excelling Darwin, for it discovered the missing link. It said that its opponents could not argue but could only shout "Hart- ford Conventionists," and that these creatures felt sensible in the presence of men of character and soul that nature had formed them but a link in the chain of animal creation between mankind and the brute.
THE CONVENTION OF 1816
Election day came, the separationists carried the conven- tion, and from the early returns it appeared that they had the necessary five to four majority of the popular vote on the question of separation. But when the ballots were counted it was found that they had polled 11,969 votes and their oppo- nents 10,347, or a trifle more than four to five. It would seem that the question was decided, separation defeated, and that the convention, which duly assembled on the 30th of Septem- ber, had nothing to do but to verify and proclaim the result, and adjourn sine die. But among the separationist leaders were some of the cleverest politicians in Maine, and they had no intention of giving up the fight.
POPULAR VOTE
Under the leadership of John Holmes, later one of the first senators of the State of Maine, they induced the convention to adopt a construction of the enabling resolution which made the necessary five to four majority not that of the individual voter but that of the majority of yeas in the towns voting yea
571
STATEHOOD IN SIGHT
to that of the majority of nays in the towns voting nay. It is probable that some of the delegates voting for this interpreta- tion did not believe in it themselves, but simply held that the right of a majority to decide was sacred, and that others thought that as the required majority had been so nearly obtained Massachusetts would acquiesce in a separation. Votes were passed providing for an appeal to Congress should Massachusetts deny that Maine had fulfilled the required con- ditions, but these resolutions were immediately modified. Some extremists in Massachusetts and in Maine talked civil war but official relations remained perfectly courteous. A committee of the legislature reported two resolutions: "That the contingency upon which the consent of Massachusetts was to be given for the separation of Maine has not yet happened, and that the powers of the Brunswick convention to take any measures tending to that event have ceased"; and "that it is not expedient for the present General Court to adopt any fur- ther measures in regard to the separation of the District of Maine." The report was accepted by the senate, the resolu- tions were adopted on the next day, December 4, without debate, and the house concurred unanimously.
December 5, a gentleman in Boston wrote to a friend : "Yesterday the remains of the Brunswick convention were quietly deposited in the vault." He also stated that Holmes declared that he never believed in his construction but that he was pushed up to it, that King said that he was opposed to it, but he was talked over and that "Mr. D. [Davis?] who claimed the honor of the invention sometime since, now disavows it."
STATEHOOD IN SIGHT
In 1818 the friends of separation again began to stir, and the question was repeatedly asked, how long was the subject to be allowed to sleep, and why was not something done? Certain Kennebec gentlemen proposed that such friends of separation as might attend the Bowdoin Commencement in September should meet and discuss the best time and means of bringing up the matter. Apparently no action was taken at Brunswick, but the Republican campaign committee of the county of Kennebec met during the session of the supreme court at Hallowell the last week in September, organized their
572
SEPARATION OF MAINE
friends for the next election, and inquired what the sentiments of the various towns were in regard to separation. The replies were most encouraging. It appeared that the ranks of the friends of statehood were unbroken, and that great numbers of former opponents were giving up their objections. But there were differences of opinion concerning the proper time of making application to the legislature. Some desired to apply at once, some wished to wait until the next political year, while others thought that application should be delayed until after the next United States census, which would be taken in 1820.
A correspondent of William King's, E. T. Warren, stated with great frankness the policy which he and his friends believed most likely to be successful. They thought that it would be unwise to apply at once, because only a few Maine towns had sent representatives to the General Court and these had not been chosen with regard to their views on separation. To wait until after the census, would endanger separation and lessen its advantages should it be carried. It would doubtless be found that the eastern part of the District had greatly increased in population, and the people of York and Cumber- land Counties would fear that the capital would be located contrary to their wishes. Moreover, a new valuation would have been taken, the wealth of the District would be seen to have increased, and Maine would be obliged to assume a larger part of the public debt. It was true that she would also have a right to a larger share in the public property, but Mr. Warren thought that this would by no means balance the increase of indebtedness, since he believed that the claim of Massachusetts against the United States for expenses incurred in the War of 1812 would never be paid; that Massachusetts, thinking that separation was sure to come, was wasting the public lands in lavish grants, and that the other State property was constantly decreasing in value. It was therefore the opinion of Mr. Warren and his friends that application to the legislature should be made at the end of the session of the ensuing May, and that the Republican State and county com- mittees should meanwhile urge the towns to send their full number of representatives to the legislature. This would probably make the Federalists of Massachusetts afraid to refuse separation. Should, however, the result of the election
573
ELECTION OF 1819
not be equal to expectation at least public sentiment would have been tested, and efforts for separation could be suspended until a more favorable moment.
ELECTION OF 1819
On April 19, 1819, "a committee of the Maine members of the Legislature issued an address to the people of the Dis- trict, urging them, in the selection of representatives, to choose none but supporters of separation. They also urged that the towns petition for separation in their corporate capacity. At the annual election party differences were extinguished and the sole issue was separation. Every Senator elected from the District was in favor of separation, and of 127 repre- sentatives chosen by eighty-nine towns, 114 were in favor of separation and only 13 opposed. Both these numbers' were subsequently increased by later returns. A great number of towns voted to petition the General Court in their corporate capacity. The opposition was successful in only a few cases."
So overwhelming a majority rendered it practically impos- sible for Massachusetts to refuse separation. The legislature referred the subject to a joint committee on which Maine was well represented, and the committee reported a bill providing that there should be a vote of the District on separation, and that the returns should be made to the Governor and Council. Should there be a majority of 1500 in favor of separation, the people of Maine were to be regarded as assenting to it. The Governor was to proclaim the result, and a convention was then to be chosen which should meet in Portland, select a name for the new State, and form a constitution.
The constitution was to be submitted to the people for ratifi- cation. If they refused to adopt it, the constitution of Massachusetts, except such parts as were locally inapplicable, was to be the constitution of the new State until legally changed. But whatever the result of the vote on the constitu- tion, the District was to become a State on March 15, 1820, provided that the consent of Congress were first obtained. Provision was made for the continuance of the existing laws, courts and public officers, in Maine, until its legislature should act. The president of the convention was to perform the duties of governor until a governor was legally chosen.
574
SEPARATION OF MAINE
Certain conditions of separation, relating to the public lands, debts, buildings, and so forth, were to be a part of the new constitution. Various changes were made in the requirements of 1816, but they were not of great importance. An amend- ment requiring the assent of the people of the whole State was defeated. The bill passed in the senate by a vote of 16 to 14; in the house by one of 193 to 59. The bill was signed two days later by Governor Brooks, and Maine was offered the privilege and the burden of home rule. Her first duty was to draw up a form of government.
CONVENTION OF 1819
October 11, 1819, a constitutional convention met at Port- land, in which the ablest Federalists and Democrats had seats; for in the selection of delegates, party lines had been disre- garded. William King was chosen president of the conven- tion. Other officers were elected and committees were appointed, to recommend a style and title for the new State, to draft a constitution and to make application to Congress for admission to the Union.
Next day the first committee reported the title, "Common- wealth of Maine." Massachusetts called herself a Common- wealth, and many of the delegates wished to retain the term. They argued that the Maine people were not a new, people as were the inhabitants of the late territories. A delegate objected that "In common parlance, Maine would always be called a State? Why then should we style it Common- wealth? What was the use of giving the name Jonathan, when it would always be called, after all, plain John?" The word "Commonwealth" was struck out by a vote of 119 to 103.
Some delegates were anxious that the State take the name of "Columbus," which they considered more rotund and more significant than "Maine." It was effectively answered that "Maine" had a definite significance in the commercial world, while "Columbus" might be associated with the Columbia River, or with South America.
A more serious question was: Should Maine establish a constitution which was a replica of that of Massachusetts written forty years before; or should it welcome the newest ideas? A medium course was taken. The example of Massa-
575
CONVENTION OF 1819
chusetts had a distinct influence upon the frame of govern- ment. Maine established a two-chamber legislature, and also the principle of town representation. The object was to produce a house of about one hundred and fifty members. In Massachusetts the senatorial districts were determined, under certain limitations, by the amount of taxes paid in them; in Maine by the number of their inhabitants. Massachusetts required certain property qualifications for both senators and representatives, which Maine abandoned. Massachusetts had also what may be termed a bicameral executive; for the governor was assisted (or hampered) by a council, including a lieutenant governor. The Maine convention did away with the lieutenant governor without a word of dissent. The drafting committee recommended a council of seven, elected by the legislature from seven districts. One of the minor political leaders, Dr. Rose, objected. He said: "I believe we can get a Governor as capable of doing the business of the Executive alone, as other States. If we give him a council, we not only incur a useless expense, but divide the responsi- bility. . he may have a council in whom he has no confidence."
Whitman, who had himself been a councilor, stated, that, contrary to general belief, the action of the council on appoint- ments was but a small part of its duty. "On the whole," said Mr. Whitman, "I believe there is no other body, of men whatsoever, who have, under the constitution of Massachu- setts, performed so much and so important service, at so small an expense." The convention refused to abolish the council, and it retained the number of seven.
The Massachusetts property qualifications for voters and for senators, representatives and governors, were dropped in Maine. Both States officially acknowledged God. Massachu- setts had a strong belief in the superiority of the legislature, and described the Almighty as the "Great Legislator of the Universe." The drafting committee of the Maine Convention followed the example, but "Mr. Holmes thought there was great propriety when forming rules for the government of the people, that we should acknowledge our subjection to the "Sovereign Ruler of the Universe" and the convention adopted his phraseology.
576
SEPARATION OF MAINE
The constitution, as remodelled by the convention, was sub- mitted to the people and ratified by an overwhelming majority. Application for admission as a State was duly made to Con- gress; but the South blocked action until Missouri should be admitted with slavery. The delay was serious, inasmuch as Massachusetts had made her consent to the separation condi- tional on the admission of Maine before March 4, 1820. On petition of the Maine members of the Massachusetts Legisla- ture, that State extended the period of grace to March 15, 1822. The favor, however, proved unnecessary. The bill ad- mitting Maine was hurried through Congress, and on the third of March it was signed by President Monroe. The necessary Massachusetts Act of Assent took effect on March 15.
STATE AFFAIRS
Maine was now a separate State, with a constitution of her own devising and adopting; but she had still to choose her officers. The Democrats had promised the Federalists to give them a share of the offices of the new State in pro- portion to their numbers, which was supposed to be one in three, and for some years the promise was kept. It was then set aside with mutual accusations of bad faith. In the first assignment, most of the Democratic chieftains were excellently provided for, as they had doubtless hoped when they labored so long and so hard for the separation of Maine.
As everyone expected, William King was chosen governor ; Chandler and Holmes became United States Senators; Preble was made an associate justice of the supreme court; Parris soon became the second elected governor of Maine. The edi- tor of the Argus, Ashur Ware, was made secretary of state. Mr. Ware was a native of Massachusetts. After graduating from Harvard, he then moved to Boston, studied law, became active in politics, and helped to edit a Democratic newspaper, the Boston Yankee. In 1817, he moved to Portland in order to be- come editor of the Argus, and advocate separation. His literary ability was of great use to the able but uncultured Governor King, for whom he is said to have written his Fast Day and Thanksgiving proclamations. In 1822, Ware succeeded Judge Parris in the District Court, where he made a great reputation
577
RELATIONS WITH MASSACHUSETTS
for thoroughness and reliability, and for constructive work in building up a system of admiralty law. Nathan Weston, one of Elbridge Gerry's circuit-court-of-common-pleas judges, was transferred to the State supreme court.
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.