USA > Massachusetts > History of Massachusetts, for two hundred years: from the year 1620 to 1820 > Part 38
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
The character of Governor Strong, both as a man and a politician, may be justly perceived, so far as his opinions would portray it, (and his life and practice were entirely in unison with his professions) by the following declarations in his first public speech to the legislature ; for, in sincerity, probity and moral purity, he resembled General Washington, whose high and excellent qualities he so fully appreciated. " As virtue and submission to the laws are essential in a republic, and form the only sure basis of its prosperity; these qualities must in a peculiar manner be requisite in those appointed to office in a free government. A man who is not under the influence
* His death was in December, 1799.
363
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
of moral principles cau have no just claims to the public con- fidence. * There is no opinion more prevalent in civilized nations than that religious principles are essential to morality, and the principal support of lawful government ; and that the obligation of piety is imposed on man by his nature. If opposite opinions are patronised, and revealed religion, in particular, is represented as unfriendly to individual or social happiness, it becomes those who believe the truth of christian- ity, to endeavor to prevent the progress of infidelity, by every mild and prudent method ; by promoting institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge, by excluding vicious and profligate persons from the employment of instructing youth, by supporting teachers of piety, religion and morality ; and by manifesting, in their own conduct, the genuine effects of the religion, which they regard as the purest source of human felicity."
In 1801, Governor Strong was re-elected for the place of chief magistrate, by a larger vote than he received the year before ; and Mr. Gerry was again the candidate of the anti- federal or democratic party. The political parties had not materially changed in Massachusetts, though in the whole United States, the anti-federalists had become the majority ; and Mr. Jefferson was elected president, in opposition to Mr. Adams, then the incumbent and the federal candidate. Mr. Jefferson had been vice-president with Mr. Adams; and was secretary of state under Pesident Washington. He had been long considered the head of the anti-federal or democratic party through the country. When the constitution was formed, he objected to it, as monarchy. in disguise ; and he was believed to be opposed to the policy pursued, during the ad- ministration, of his predecessors. His professions were in favor of reform and of economy, as to public expenditures, and of making the will of the people a more general guide. He was disposed to apologize for the injustice and depreda- tions of the French, and inclined to exaggerate the misconduct of the British. His views respecting commerce were such, as to render him more unpopular in Massachusetts, than even his abstract political sentiments, or his supposed partiality for France. Many of the most intelligent citizens were ready to predict great evils from his administration. But Governor Strong, in his public speech to the general court, spoke of Mr. Jefferson in a very candid and conciliating manner. It was not his disposition to criminate those who differed from him; nor to excite party feeling among the people by ad- dressing their prejudices and passions. " Although, (he said)
1
364
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
in the choice of a president of the United States, the result has not corresponded with the wishes of many citizens of the commonwealth, yet they will reflect, that, in republics, the opinion of the majority must prevail, and that obedience to the laws and respect for constitutional authority are essential to the character of good citizens. We are encouraged to expect that the chief magistrate of the nation will not depart from the essential principles of the constitution ; and so long as his administration shall be guided by those principles, he will be entitled to the confidence of the people ; and their interests require that he should possess it. But if it shall appear hereafter, that their anticipations are not realized, a sense of decorum and a regard to justice and the public wel- fare should exclude asperity and false coloring, from all dis- cussions of public measures. For the morals and liberties of
the people will be in danger, if the press should be prostituted to faction and falsehood." This is the language of a virtuous and enlightened statesman ; and such a spirit in rulers and men of influence, in times of party excitement, would certainly prevent much evil and mischief in a republican government.
In 1802, the general court voted to build a state prison ; which was afterward erected in Charlestown ; confinement to hard labor had before been provided, on Castle Island, instead of public whipping, and sitting in the pillory. The design of a state prison was both for punishment and reform. The plan was to confine convicts to hard labor, and at the same time provide moral discipline and religious instruction ; in the hope, that while society was rendered safe from the depredations of evil men, some, not sadly depraved and hardened, might reform, and be sent back into the community with good principles and habits of industry. The criminal law was altered as to some cases ; burglary, which had been punishable with death, was made a capital offence only, when the person charged, was armed with a deadly weapon, or gave evidence of an intention to commit murder, as well as to rob and plunder. The results of the establishment were not immediately so favorable as had been expected ; the expense of the building and the support of officers, for several years, was also very great ; and the public was not fully satisfied with the plan. But the friends of the penitentiary system were unwilling to abandon it; for they contended that the experiment at first was necessarily expensive ; and they also insisted that the trial had not been fairly made, as to the pro- bable and expected benefits to the criminals ; since the building was not sufficiently large to keep the convicts separate by
365
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
night, which was an essential part of the penitentiary system. The number of convicts was so great that often six and eight were lodged in one room for the night; which was a great defect, and must forever prevent the good effects of confine- ments, so far as the reformation of the prisoners was concerned. At a subsequent period, a remedy was provided for this evil, by providing an additional number of rooms, so as to have only one person in a cell during the night ; and when at labor through the day they were attended by a guard to prevent all conversation among the prisoners.
45
CHAPTER XXXII.
Governor Strong continued in office several years-Mr. Jefferson President -His.Policy and Measures-Political Opinions and Parties-Finances of the state-Public Debt-Electors of President and Vice President-Gov- ernor Sullivan-His Character and Opinions-Political Parties-Policy of General Government-Non-intercourse and Embargo-Letter of Mr. Pickering-Complaints of the Embargo-Additional Act, affecting the Coasting Trade.
GOVERNOR STRONG Was re-elected in 1802, and continued to receive the suffrages of the majority of his fellow-citizens till 1807. The spirit of party rather increased than abated, during this period. The policy of the federal administration, under President Jefferson, was not deemed favorable to commerce, and was therefore warmly opposed in the New England States. In the southern and western parts of the union, liis measures were more acceptable. War was continued between the two great maritime powers of Europe, France and England ; and in their efforts to annoy and distress each other, they both, at times, disregarded neutral rights, and inflicted great injuries on the commerce of the United States. President Adams had been charged by the democratic party with unfriendly feelings towards the French rulers, and with too much partiality for Great Britain. And Mr. Jefferson and his cabinet were charged by the federalists, with unjust antipathies against the government of England, and with undue regard for France. This was the more unaccountable, as the French rulers had become very arbitrary ; and republicanism in that nation was merely nominal. The charges, in both cases, might have been only proof of prejudice and party spirit in those who preferred thiem. But they were believed by the respective parties to be well founded in a degree ; and therefore were the causes of the party feel- ings which prevailed. The people took a deep interest in the measures of the general government, at this period, and ex-
367
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
pressed their opinions, not only with frankness, but often with unbecoming asperity ; and, probably, their opinions werc, in some degree, dictated by their individual interests. The mer- chants suffered more immediately than the land holders, and therefore complained the more loudly. And though all foreign concerns were in the hands of the general government, the members of state legislatures considered that they had the right to discuss the policy of the federal administration. In Massachusetts, the general court repeatedly passed resolutions disapproving the measures of congress, and the policy of Pres- ident Jefferson ; and complaining, that more decisive and ener- getic measures were not adopted to resist the maritime aggres- sions of France. Governor Strong, while he faithfully discharge ed his duty to the state, abstained from all severity of remark on the general government, and appeared studiously to avoid all appeals to the passions of the people, which might tend to undue party excitement. This was a commendable trait in his character. He was resolved to discharge his own high duties, and to leave to the rulers of the federal government the responsibility which justly belonged to them. He had a set- tled opinion, also, that all foreign affairs belonged exclusively to congress. The political party in favor of President Jeffer- son's measures, however, increased in Massachusetts, during 1801, '05, and '06; and in 1807, James Sullivan, the attorney general, and who had before been a candidate, in opposition to Mr. Strong, was elected governor. In 1806, indeed Governor Strong was chosen by a small majority ; nor was his election admitted and declared (the general court being anti-federal) till ten or eleven days after the court had convened. Various difficulties were made, by his opponents, to his election, found- ed in the omission of a letter in his name, in some of the returns, and of the informality of others, compared to the strict letter of the law.
While Governor Strong was in the chair, the internal con- cerns of the commonwealth were faithfully attended to; the finances of the state were prudently and ably managed ; and a large part of the public debt was paid. In 1801, this amount- ed to a large sum ; for congress did not assume the whole debt incurred by the several states during the war of the revolution ; and for this reason Massachusetts was indebted in a large amount for moneys borrowed in and soon after the war, to meet the current expenses necessary to support its credit, and to discharge demands against it. The state tax, in 1803, was $143,000, which was appropriated for the ordinary expenses of govern- ment, and the payment of interest on the remaining debt of the
368
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
commonwealth. The pay of the representatives, for that year, was only $20,000.
For the first time, in Massachusetts, the electors of president and vice president of the United States, were chosen in 1804, by a general ticket. In 1800, they were appointed by the legislature ; which was considered improper by a large portion of the people. On three previous occasions they had been elected by the people, in districts, though not in exact con- formity to the districts for choosing members of congress. All these various modes of appointing or choosing the electors had been adopted in different states ; and had not been opposed as unconstitutional, though it was contended, that the fairest and most republican mode was for the people themselves to vote, and that in separate districts, as numerous as the number of electors. The constitution had prescribed no particular man- ner of choosing them, farther than by saying, that they should be appointed in each state, as the legislature thereof should provide. Either mode, therefore, was constitutional ; whether by the people, in districts ; by a general ticket, when every citizen might vote for the whole ; or by the legislature.
The spirit of the constitution is that each state should have a voice in the election of president, according to its number of representatives and senators. But this principle is controlled or qualified by another provision ; that, in case no one is cho- sen president by the vote of the electors, each state shall have a single vote in congress, to be made according to the majority of its representatives. Ultimately, therefore, the object of the constitution seems to be, that every state should have a vote, or the declaration of its will, in the election of president. And this is done most simply and effectually, certainly most agreeably to republican principles, by a general ticket, or by the legislature ; for in that case the vote would be for one and the same person ; and it would be an expression of the will of the majority of the state. But if a state is divided into several districts, the vote of the state may be divided also. The measure of a general ticket, as it had not before been adopted in Massachusetts, was considered to be dictated for party purposes. It was peculiarly a measure of the federal party; which was then the dominant party in the general court ; and their opponents complained loudly against it, and made every effort to defeat its success. The democratic party triumphed, much to the disappointment and mortification of the federalists, who had proposed and urged it. Such is frequently the result of party projects. The moderate men of all parties will give their influence and vote in favor of what appears just and proper, rather than to support
369
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
the plans of those with whom they have usually acted, when they find them adopting particular measures, merely to secure their object. Honest and independent men never sanction the maxim, that the end justifies the means; or that all is fair in politics, which is attended with success.
Governor Sullivan had been long in public life. In the be- ginning of the revolution, he was decided and active in sup- port of the liberties of the country. He was a useful member of the provincial congress of Massachusetts, in 1775; and in 1776, was appointed a justice of the highest judicial tribunal in the state. After a short period, he resigned that office, and was made attorney general. The federal party opposed Mr. Sullivan, because they preferred Governor Strong, who had their entire confidence, and because he approved gener- ally of the policy of Mr. Jefferson. The writings in the public papers, relating to the candidates for governor, were uncommonly bitter and virulent. Moderate and candid men of both the great political parties regretted the temper which was manifested. Governor Strong was represented as an enemy to liberty ; and Mr. Sullivan as opposed to order and virtue, and destitute of moral principle. No circumstances could justify such asperity and vituperation. Much was ex- aggerated, and much was charged, wholly unfounded. Mr. Sullivan administered the government with ability and impar- tiality. Some of the party who brought him into the chair, urged him to acts of intolerance and proscription. But he declared, " he would act as the governor of the state, and not as the head of a party." And by his impartiality and candor, he gave offence to some of his political friends, who expected office from him, as the reward of their services, on his eleva- tion to the chair.
Governor Sullivan was equally the friend of education and of religious institutions, as his virtuous predecessors. They had all given their decided support to the means of religion in the state, and had recommended common schools for the instruction of children of every grade and condition, as essen- tial to the peace of society and the preservation of a free gov- ernment. Governors Hancock, Bowdoin, Adams, Sumner, and Strong, were exemplary professors of religion, and zealous advocates for providing means of education for all the rising generation. Mr. Sullivan was no less the consistent and uni- form friend to these institutions. But it was his lot to fill the chair of the commonwealth, when party feelings were greatly ' exasperated, by long political disputes, and when the adminis- tration of the general government had adopted a policy very
370
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
obnoxious to a great portion of the citizens. No man of the democratic party, perhaps, would have been less exception 1- ble than Governor Sullivan was. Perhaps, no federal go .- ernor would have been exposed to less censure in 1807 a id 1808. On most occasions, he conducted with prudence a id moderation ; and on none, did he attempt to influence the passions of political parties.
For the first time after the federal government was estab- lished, all branches of the government in Massachusetts, in 1807, were democratic or anti-federal. In 1806, the majorities in the two houses were democratic, but the governor was not. This was probably considered by President Jefferson as a proof that his measures were approved by the greater portion of the citizens of Massachusetts : and it served to confirm him in the policy which he had adopted, with regard to foreign nations. The system of non-intercourse with England and France was continued, against the interests and the wishes of the merchants. Mr. Jefferson had adopted this policy, under the difficulties which took place between the United States and France and England. The conduct of the French rulers, particularly, was so hostile and injurious, that many believed that firm and decisive measures were necessary towards that government. But Mr. Jefferson was of opinion, that the policy was to retire from the ocean, and to have no commercial intercourse with either of those countries. By his recommendation, congress passed a law prohibiting the importation of British goods, and other commercial dealings both with England and France. The suspension of trade with England was alike injurious to that country and to the United States ; but the trade with France was comparatively small, and restrictions, as to that nation were not so injurious.
Near the close of 1807, the general government passed an embargo act, as a part of the system of non-intercourse, and the policy of Mr. Jefferson, in preference to war. This was more severely condemned than the former acts of a similar character; for it put an end to all commercial enterprise, and the mer- chants' vessels were wholly useless. There were also circum- stances connected with the embargo act, which tended to render it peculiarly obnoxious. It was unlimited, as to its duration ; and other embargo acts had always been for a definite period ; for two, three, or six months. It was a still greater objection to the measure, as there was reason to believe it was adopted through the secret influence of the French government. It was the policy of the French rulers to get up a war between England and the United States; and if that could not be effect- ed, to prevent all commercial intercourse between the two coun-
371
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
tries; and thus inflict a blow on the maritime power and pros- perity of Great Britain. The information received from the American envoy in France, so far as made known, served to confirm such an opinion. The people generally were indignant in the belief that the French rulers should have such influence over the federal administration ; and without full proof that such was the fact, condemned Mr. Jefferson for recommending the embargo. In the eastern states, especially in Massachu- setts, this measure deprived the administration of many sup- porters. A great majority of the representatives in congress, strenuously opposed the act. One of the senators of Massa- chusetts, Timothy Pickering, was very active in opposition to it ; but John Q. Adams, the other senator, voted in favor of it. Mr. Pickering considered it his duty to give formal notice of the measure to the legislature, for he knew it would produce a great sensation in Massachusetts. His letter was addressed to Governor Sullivan, to be by him communicated to the general court. The governor did not communicate it for some time, and was severely censured for retaining it. When it was made known to the legislature, and published, it was the occasion of much excitement; and served to strengthen the apprehensions of the people, that it was owing to an undue partiality for France, in Mr. Jefferson, that the measure of an embargo had been adopted. The prosperity of the United States was more affected by it, than that of England ; and it was also considered to be an insidious measure: for, if Great Britain was to be treated in a hostile manner, it would be more wise and honora- ble to demand redress; and if not obtained, to resort to open warfare, rather than use such equivocal means of annoyance, at the desire of France, the inveterate enemy of England.
During the year 1807, the legislature of Vermont passed a resolve, proposing an alteration of the constitution of the United States, so that the president might remove a justice of the federal courts, on an address of the majority of congress, with- out impeachment. The proposition was laid before the gen- eral court of Massachusetts, and it was approved in the house of representatives by a vote of ninety-two to forty-four. Suchi a vote would not have passed in 1808, and probably not in 1806. It was a measure of President Jefferson himself; for he was never in favor of the real independence of the judges. He contended that they should depend on the will of the peo- ple for continuance in office ; which would in effect be to render them dependent on the executive, who would claim to be con- sidered the organ of the popular will.
Governor Sullivan was re-elected in 1803; but the majority
372
HISTORY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
of the legislature was federal. The gentlemen chosen for his council were of that party ; and yet there was great harmony between them and the chief magistrate. Mr. Sullivan observed to a friend, that he had less controversy with his council in 1808, than with that of 1807, which was composed of the democratic party. They had urged him to make removals from office, on account of political opinions, and demanded it of him, as due to the party; but he did not yield to their solicitations.
The policy of the federal government, which led to an em- bargo in 1807, dictated other measures very injurious to the trade and navigation of the country, under the pretence, that the act laying the embargo was occasionally violated. The transportation of flour and grain from the southern states to the northern and eastern ports was interdicted. And when this was found to be very injurious, the president proposed to grant license to such individuals, to transport flour, for the necessary consumption of the people, as Governor Sullivan should select or designate. Great complaints were made against this ineasure, as partial and unjust. A petition was preferred to congress, at this time, for liberty to send fish to foreign markets as had formerly been done, and when there were large quantities on hand, exposed to decay in a short time; but the request was not granted, nor was any sympathy expressed for the petition- ers. The federal party complained loudly of this policy and these measures, and said they were extremely injurious to the citizens of the United States, but productive of little or no evil to England, which it was intended should suffer by them. The democratic party insisted, that such evils were less than the calamities of war would be; assuming, that war was the only alternative ; and that there might be "reasons of state " for the policy pursued, of which the people could not judge, and of which they could not justly be informed. On this occasion, the party and the individuals, who had urged to im- mediate resentment of aggressions from a foreign nation, in the time of Washington and Adams, and who had protested against all secrets in politics in a republican government, when Wash- ington gave instructions to Mr. Jay, which he chose not to publish, were explicit and forward in their apologies for the measures of Mr. Jefferson. They said, " forbearance was most wise and politic, and that he might have reasons sufficient for recommending an embargo, and other commercial restrictions, though he had communicated none to the people, and but par- tially to the members of congress, who were to approve and sanction his recommendation by law."
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.