USA > Massachusetts > Berkshire County > Great Barrington > History of Great Barrington, (Berkshire County,) Massachusetts > Part 17
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
Voted "That the Rev'd Samuel Hopkins is so acceptable to the Inhabitants of this town in the work of the ministry that they are willing to receive him in that capacity still and afford him a reasonable and competent maintenance."
Voted "That Eighty Pounds Lawful money shall be an an- nual salary for the Reverend Samuel Hopkins during his contin- uance in the work of the ministry here, when the following ne- cessaries of life are bought and sold at the following rates or · prices-viz: Wheat at five shillings, Indian Corn at three shil- lings, Rye at four shillings and Oats at two shillings by the bushel, and Labor in the summer at three shillings and in the winter at two shillings by the day, and as those necessaries of life shall annually either rise or fall his salary shall rise or fall ac- cordingly, or in proportion ; this to be paid to him exclusive of his firewood heretofore agreed and voted to be by us brought to him, he the said Samuel releasing to the Town all past arrear- ages to the heretofore non-payment of his full salary."
By the terms of this grant, a stated salary, then equal to $266.67, was established and Mr. Hopkins re- linquished his claims upon the town, and parish, for all past arrearages, which amounted to a not incon- siderable sum. But no provisions were made for raising money for the payment of the salary, as it was then customary to act upon this business in the autumn of the year. Accordingly, at a town meeting-on the 29th of November-under an article of the warrant "to
190
HISTORY OF GREAT BARRINGTON.
agree upon the ways and means by which the Rev'd Mr. Samuel Hopkins shall be paid his salary for the present year and his firewood provided" the records inform us that "the question was put but not voted."
This action indicates a disposition on the part of the inhabitants not to provide for the support of the minister; but a month later-December 31st-at a special meeting, called on the petition of eleven leading citizens, the people, in better mood-voted that the salary should be raised by a tax upon the polls and es- tates of the inhabitants. The next year the same un- willingness was manifested towards raising money for the minister's salary and at a town meeting held Oc- tober 4th, 1763, "after some debate the question was put, whether the Reverend Mr. Samuel Hopkins his salary for the present year should be raised upon the polls and estates of the inhabitants of s'd town, which passed in the negative." Another meeting, called on the petition of the friends of Mr. Hopkins, was held on the 9th of December and "it was put to vote whether the town would give the Rev. Samuel Hopkins the sum of eighty pounds agreeable to the grant made to him on the 4th day of June 1762, for his service in preach- ing, &c., the current year, and the moderator declared that it was not a vote for said sum; whereupon a large number- of the voters arose and insisted that it was clearly a vote, and after polling, the moderator and said party disagreed, and the meeting finally broke up in a great tumult and noise and nothing further was done." Such is the brief report of this stormy town meeting, as furnished by the records. The moderator was himself inimical to Mr. Hopkins; the town was di- vided into two parties, and much ill feeling prevailed on both sides. But another meeting was called, and, on the 3d of January, 1764, the town voted to raise money for the salary of £80 for the year 1763, and also £10 for firewood, by a tax upon the polls and estates of the inhabitants; and at the same time re-affirmed the vote of 1762, by which the terms of salary had been made permanent. Whilst these dissensions were in progress the Episcopal church was organized and many of the opposers of Mr. Hopkins connected themselves
191
OPPOSITION TO THE MINISTER.
with it. It is said that the Episcopalians, then con- tributing to the support of a missionary who visited them occasionally, were for a time taxed in common with others, for the support of the Congregational minister. This-though strictly in accordance with the law-they regarded as unreasonable and unjust ; and in this is found one of the causes of discord which arose whenever the business of raising money for the support of preaching was acted upon. But as an act of justice to the Episcopalians, and to remedy this cause of complaint, they were, in 1764 and after- wards, by special votes, permitted to draw from the treasury the sums which they were assessed for preach- ing, for the purpose of maintaining the ordinances of their own church.
The contest over the support of the minister, gradually increasing in proportions, and reaching its height in 1766, pervaded all the business affairs of the town, and its effects are visible even in the Revolution. In addition, the differences between the Colonies and Great Britain had already begun to agitate the coun- try. In the town a strong tory element existed. The tories opposed Mr. Hopkins strenuously, for he was a whig in principle and did not hesitate to express his sentiments. The annual meeting for the election of town officers, in March, 1766, was adjudged to be il- legal, was set aside, and another election was ordered by the General Court. This meeting, at which Hon. Joseph Hawley of Northampton presided, was held on the 14th of July. In a private letter, dated July, 1766, Mr. Hopkins writes:
" Last week we had a town meeting which lasted three days. "The spirits of each party were raised to a very high degree. In the issue, the Tories carried the day, and have got all town af- fairs in their hands, just as they had before ; with this aggrava- tion, that now they have a vastly higher degree of resentment against me and the party that adheres to me than before. They say they will with-hold a great part of my salary if not all; and it appears that they intend to get me out of town. Query : Since my salary seems to be the great bone of contention, the strife at bottom being about money-who shall have the money voted for preaching ? or in one word, whether the Dutch, &c., .shall pay any part of my salary ?- had I not better give my salary
192
HISTORY OF GREAT BARRINGTON.
up, and, if those who adhere to me will not maintain me by sub- scription, either leave them or preach gratis."
This letter sheds a ray of light upon the case, from the point from which Mr. Hopkins viewed it. That , the threats of his opposers, "to with-hold a great part of his salary," were not without foundation, is to be inferred from the fact that at a town meeting, on the 27th of October following, the inhabitants raised only £45 for his support, making a reduction of thirty-five pounds from his previously stipulated salary. In ad- dition to this his salary for several previous years had not been fully paid.
No money was raised by the town for the support. of preaching in 1767; but in that, or the early part of the next year, a complaint was made against the in- habitants, by William Ingersoll and others, for not having duly encouraged, maintained and supported the Rev. Samuel Hopkins in the work of the ministry ac- cording to contract and agreement ; and particularly for not having paid his salary for the years 1761-62-64- 65-66. Ensign William King was appointed an agent, in behalf of the town, to defend against this complaint, and £5. was appropriated for that purpose. At the same time-February 2d, 1768-a committee was ap" pointed to settle with Mr. Hopkins relative to arrear- ages of salary, but the records furnish no evidence that they attended to the business. But at a town meeting, October 10th, 1768, William Brunson, David Ingersoll, Jr., Esq., and Ensign William King were ap- pointed to treat with Mr. Hopkins relative to the ar- rearages of his salary, to make a fair state of the same, and lay the same before the town. (1) This committee-
(1) The following copy of a letter of the Rev. Samuel Hop- kins, is kindly furnished by Henry W. Taft, Esq., of Pittsfield. The original was evidently the reply of the minister, to an invi- tation to a conference with the committee appointed "to treat" with him.
".G. BARRINGTON 12. Oct' 1768.
Sir :- I am obliged to be from home to-day till the evening. Then I can wait upon the gentlemen, the Committee, if they please. Yours, S. HOPKINS,"
To David Ingersoll Esq.
193
MR. HOPKINS DISMISSED.
reported at an adjourned meeting-November 27th :
"He demands of said town as arrearages,
for the years 1761, 62, 67 the sum of £67, 15,7,1.
and for the year 1766 £71, 5, 0, 0. And it appears that John Williams (Town Treasurer) has paid towards his salary for the year 1766, £26. 18. 11. 1."
No measures were adopted for discharging this in- debtedness, but on the 10th of January, 1769 (after an ecclesiastical council had been called for dismissing Mr. Hopkins) the town voted to pay him £71 as a salary for the year 1768, but refused to raise money either for arrearages of salary or firewood. Mr. Hopkins was dismissed, by a council January 18th, 1769; and brought a suit against the town to recover the amount due him. David Ingersoll, Jr., Esq., and William King, Jr., were appointed a committee to defend this suit ; but Mr. Hopkins, ultimately, recovered judgment against the town, and the inhabitants, in May, 1771, voted to raise £146 for the payment of his execution ; at the same time the town appointed William King, Jr., Israel Dewey and Ensign John Burghardt a committee to wait upon Mr. Hopkins to see if he would "abate anything" from his execution. With what reception this proposition met from the reverend gentleman does not appear from the records; but it is hardly to be supposed that, with all of his characteristic patience and forbearance, he could have regarded it as other than an act of effrontry on the part of the town.
In 1767-two years previous to the dismissal of Mr. Hopkins-says Professor Park-" he requested the church to refer the question of his continuance among them to a council. But they refused, for they were determined to retain him. They adopted various ex- pedients to raise his salary, but after an effort of two years, they despaired, and then united with their des- pondent pastor in the summoning of a council."
Nearly thirty years afterwards, in the autobiographic- al sketches of his life, Mr. Hopkins-referring to the time of his ministry at Great Barrington-writes: "I continued there in the work of the ministry till Jan'y 18, 1769, twenty-five years and about twenty days, when I was dismissed, by the unanimous voice of a council
13
194
HISTORY OF GREAT BARRINGTON.
called on that occasion, and the consent of the church. During this time I had no great apparent success in the ministry. A small number were hopefully convert- ed and a number of Christians moved into the place in this time, which increased the number in the church. But the congregation in general did not attend public worship, except sometimes; and were not willing to support the gospel. And a number turned churchmen, apparently, and some of them professedly, to get rid of paying anything for the support of the gospel. And so great a number of others refused to do anything this way, that after the church, and others who wished to have me stay among them, had made a number of at- tempts, they declared there was, in their view, no pros- pect or hope of my having a support, if I continued with them; and therefore they could not object to my leaving them, especially, if an ecclesiastical council should advise. They therefore joined with me in call- ing a council, and laying the circumstances of the case before them ; who advised to my dismission, as men- tioned above." During the twenty-five years of Mr. Hopkins' ministry here, he received into the church one hundred and sixteen persons; forty-five by recom- mendation and seventy-one by profession.
The church records of these early days, abound in cases of discipline for profanity, libel, intemperance, or other misdemeanors, the punishment for which, if not suspension, was frequently a public censure administered in presence of the Church and congregation, or a less severe admonition before the brethren only. The case of Israel Dewey, though unimportant in its immediate result, is a somewhat curious one. Mr. Dewey, who did not fully concur with the minister in his doctrinal views, took occasion, on a Sabbath, to manifest his dis- sent from the discourse to which he was a listener, in so marked a manner as to attract attention. In what the offence consisted the record does not inform, and we can only conjecture that, sitting uneasily on his bench, he shrugged his shoulders or in some other way manifested his disapprobation of the sermon : but at a meeting of the Church, March 23d, 1758-it was "voted that Israel Dewey ought to be dealt with for
195
ISRAEL DEWEY'S BELIEF.
his disorderly behaviour in the time of preaching, in the meeting-house lately," and Jonathan Willard, Jonathan Nash, and William Ingersoll were desired to confer with him. Mr. Dewey, having been summoned by these gentlemen "appeared to confer with the brethren on the 13th of April" about his conduct that had been offensive, and, as he was competent to do, defended himself and his doctrinal belief. But the dis- cussion only added to the previous cause of grievance, and the hearing was consequently adjourned for a week.
April 20th, the record continues, "Israel Dewey also appeared, and upon his making his submission to the Church, and confession of his conviction that he was out of the way in his conduct, at which excep- tion was taken, and promising to reform, it was voted that the Church would pass it by without a public cen- sure; but whereas he has declared before the brethren of the Church, that it was an article in his belief that it was not upon the whole best that sin should take place in the world, and had in unjustifiable ways op posed the Doctrines of God's decrees, the Church voted to defer this to further Consideration." A little later, " upon further Conference with said Dewey," it was determined " to let him pass without a public cen- sure, but only to admonish him before all the brethren, to be more modest and earnestly seek further light, as we look upon him ignorant and much out of the way." Mr. Dewey-who had been previously engaged in a written discussion of doctrines with the minister-ac- cepted the admonition, but with views unchanged as to the benificent usefulness of sin.
CHAPTER XVI.
THE ORGANIZATION OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH- THE ERECTION OF THE CHURCH-REV. GIDEON BOSTWICK.
1760-1793.
In the discordant state of religious affairs of the parish and town, depicted in the preceding chapter, the Episcopal church of Great Barrington had its origin. Unfortunately, no record of the organization of this church is preserved here. The printed and commonly accepted account of its formation is that it was instituted by the Rev. Solomon Palmer, then a missionary of New Milford and Litchfield, about the year 1760. This statement, so far as we can learn, appears to be based upon tradition rather than upon records. It is not improbable that the Rev. Mr. Pal- mer visited Great Barrington in 1760 and 1761, per- formed the ceremony of baptism and held religious services here in those years. But the date of the for- mation of the church as well as the statement that it was organized by Mr. Palmer seems to us to need con- firmation. It is said that the Dutch-Lutherans-and a few Episcopalians together with some not originally of either of these denominations united in forming this church.
By the regulations of Mr. Hopkins' church the rite of baptism was accorded only to the children of converted parents. It is related by Prof. Park that "many unconverted parents, particularly among the Dutch, insisted on having their children baptised; and when the number of unchristened children amounted to sixty or thereabouts, an Episcopal Clergyman was
197
FORMATION OF THE CHURCH.
invited to administer the rite." The date of this oc- currence is not given, but it is supposed to have been about the year 1760, and this was, perhaps, the occa- sion of the first official visit of the missionary of the Church of England to this town. Neither are we in- formed as to the name of the clergyman by whom the baptismal ceremony was performed; but that the Rev. Solomon Palmer officiated is highly probable, as he was then located in Litchfield county, Connecticut, and was the nearest resident Episcopal clergyman. From the best information which we have been able to obtain, and in the absence of any proof to the contrary, we are of the opinion that both the date of the formation of this church-"about 1760"-and the statement that it was organized by Mr. Palmer are erroneous. To the Rev. Thomas Davies, who, succeeding Mr. Palmer, was in September, 1761, appointed missionary to the church- es of New Milford, Roxbury, Sharon, New Preston and New Fairfield, in Connecticut, we believe belongs the honor of having organized the Episcopal Church in Great Barrington. In support of this belief we have the following certificate from the pen of Mr. Davies as well as his letters, quoted beyond, which distinctly state that he "united the people as a church."
"This may certify all whom it concerns, that on the 21st Sept. 1762 Robert Noble, Jonathan Reed, David Ingersoll, Sam'l Breck, Stephen King, John Westover, Jacob Burgott, Warham Williams, John Williams, John Williams Ju'r, Ebenezer Hamlin, David Clark, Jos'h Robie, Jon'a Hill, Daniel Bayley, Josiah Loomis and Josiah Loomis Jur., Put themselves under my care as a minister of the Church of England, and accord- ingly by mutual consent were formed into an assembly or body of People, to be denominated hereafter members of the Church of England, and moreover according to the Rules and Canons of s'd Church of England, and by authority divested in me I chose John Westover Clerk, and we mutually chose Robert Noble and Jonathan Reed Church Wardens. And therefore the above mentioned Persons, with all such Person or Persons as shall hereafter join with them are reputed to be and by the Can- ons of said Church of England, are esteemed members of said Church of England, and are exempted from Pay any Rates or taxes to Dissenters on any eclesiastical account whatsoever.
New Milford in Connecticut Feb. 15, 1763.
THOMAS DAVIES,
Missionary for propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts."
198
HISTORY OF GREAT BARRINGTON.
This certificate was apparently issued by Mr. Davies for the purpose of exonerating the persons named therein, with such as might "join with them," from the payment of taxes for the support of a dissenting minis- ter, and, in the absence of other records, is of histori- cal interest, inasmuch as it establishes the date of the formation of the church-September 21, 1762-the fact that Mr. Davies officiated on that occasion, and also hands down to us the names of the seventeen original members-united into a church-which are, perhaps, not elsewhere preserved.
The original of this certificate still exists in the files of the county court-formerly at Great Barrington, now at Pittsfield-where it found lodgement at a time when religious intolerance was more in favor than now, and when attendance upon Sunday worship was, by the law of the land, compulsory --- for in those days some were imprisoned, even in the Great Barrington jail, for non-performance of their Sabbath-day duties. The copy of the certificate quoted is kindly furnished by Henry W. Taft, Esq., clerk of the county courts.
"A biographical sketch of the Rev'd Thomas Dav- ies," published at New Haven in 1843, affords further light upon the early history of the Episcopal Church, and confirms the statement that the church was organ- ized by Mr. Davies. From a letter of Mr. Davies', dated December 28, 1762, and quoted in the sketch of his life, it appears that he preached sometime in Septem- ber, 1762, "to a large concourse of people at Barring- ton. sixty miles from his place of residence [New Mil- ford] where there were no less than forty sober and rep- utable families of the Church of England, and upon that occasion he baptised some children and chose a Clerk, a very regular and pious man, to read prayers to the people." In another letter, of a later date, addressed to the Society for the propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts, Mr. Davies writes-"If the honorable society desire, I would transmit an exact detail of the proceedings in that town [Great Barrington] since I united the people as a church,' &c. Here we have the explicit statement of Mr. Davies-confirmatory of the certificate quoted-that he "united the people as a
199
MISSION OF REV. THOMAS DAVIES.
church," and there can be no reason to doubt its truth- fulness. Our conclusion is that Mr. Davies did organ- ize the church, and at the time stated, September 21st, 1762; though we are of the belief that the Rev. Solo- mon Palmer had at an earlier date held religious service and performed the baptismal ceremony in this place.
Mr. Davies visited Great Barrington on the 21st of October, 1764, when he administered the sacrament to eighteen communicants, and on the next day baptized two adults and three children ; and again on the 25th of December of the same year, on which occasion he opened the church edifice-then recently erected- with appropriate services, administered the sacrament to fourteen communicants and baptized four children.
In his letters to the parent society, Mr. Davies com- plains of the ill-treatment which the professors of the Church of England received at the hands of the dissen- ters in Great Barrington. The following extracts from these letters will serve to illustrate the state of feeling which existed here at that time, and are in other re- spects of interest in connection with the history of the church. In one of these letters Mr. Davies says, "just before I wrote in June, 1763, they did imprison for fif- teen days, two persons of as good character as any in the town; the one educated in the church, the other a Lutheran, for no other reason but because they did not go to meeting. As to their rates or ministerial tax which amounts to about £20 sterling per annum, that they are obliged to pay without any hesitation, to support the dissenting teacher, although he, in almost all his sermons, casts the bitterest invectives against the Church of England as a church." In December, 1764, he writes, "I have visited Great Barrington and the parts adjacent, in October last, and shall, if God permit, set out directly for that place, in order to open a very elegant and large church, which those people have erected at great expense, and whilst laboring under the severest ill treatment from their brethren, the dissenters. If the honorable society desire, I would transmit an exact detail of proceedings in that town since I united the people as a Church, together with a copy of my sermon which I shall preach at the
200
HISTORY OF GREAT BARRINGTON.
opening of their church." Again in June, 1765, he writes, "On Christmas day I opened the new Church at Great Barrington, with a numerous audience, ad- ministered the sacrament of the Lord's supper to four teen, and baptism to four children. Mr. Bostwick, a graduate of Yale College, and a candidate for Holy Orders, continues to read prayers, and the Rev. Dr. Warner's collection of sermons to the people. The dis- senting teacher there, seems exceedingly embittered against the Church people and me, and says he shall write to the society about something that has offended him in one of my letters. If the society consider them as under my charge I would take the liberty (at their earnest solicitation) to request a Bible and Common Prayer book for the use of that Church." (1) Mr. Davies, apparently, was not, formally, in charge of this church under the auspices of the society, and we are not aware that he held services here at any time after the opening of the new church ; indeed we have no evi- dence that he visited this church except upon the oc- casions which have been mentioned, to wit : September, 1762, October and December, 1764 ..
The Rev. Roger Viets, missionary of Simsbury, Connecticut-whose records are preserved-sometimes officiated here. He visited this church several times in the latter part of the year 1763 and the early part of 1764, and once as late as January, 1766. On the occasions of these visits his records show that he bap- tized two children October 23. 1763, one December 13, 1763, married Nathaniel Lee and Sarah Hubbell at the house of John Burghardt, December 20, 1763, bap- tized five children January 29, 1764, one April 22d, 1764, and another January 19, 1766.
(1) Thomas Davies was born in Herefordshire, England, December 21st, 1736; Removed to this country, with his father, in 1745; Graduated at Yale college about 1758; Visited Eng- land, and took Holy Orders in August, 1761 ; Returned to Amer- ica, and on the 18th of September, 1761, was appointed, by the Society for the propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts. mis- sionary to the churches of New Milford, Roxbury, Sharon, New Preston and New Fairfield in Connecticut. Litchfield was prob- ably added to this list. He died at his place of residence-New Milford-May 12, 1766.
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.