USA > Massachusetts > Hampden County > Springfield > Springfield, 1636-1886 : history of town and city, including an account of the quarter-millennial celebration at Springfield, Mass., May 25 and 26, 1886 > Part 20
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 | Part 54 | Part 55
Webb, Cornelius and wife,
White, Mrs. (widow ) and danghter,
Williston, Joseph and wife,
Williston, Joseph, Jr.,
Worthington, John and wife,
Wright, Mrs. Henry.
Mrs. Henry, JJr.
Waiving the names of the dead, and of those who had withdrawn from the church, less than sixty were church-members. Thus, much less than half the land-owners on the east side were in full communion, and they, too, not including the most important names in the com- munity. Men held office here who were not church-members in full communion, and these long lists we will be justified in transcribing, if it illustrates more fully the change that had come over the spirit of Springfield's dreams. The Pynchons and the Glovers were not rep-
224
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
resented on the male side, and even the wife of the minister, Eunice Breck, daughter of the previous minister, as well as her mother, were not members. Some of the best people in the community neglected to take the covenant.
But how had the status of the freeman changed during these years ? In the beginning, as has been said, no one in Massachusetts could be made a freeman but church-members. It was ordered (1634) that the General Court, only, should have power to admit freemen. This was followed up the next year by a vote prohibiting any but freemen voting in any town on questions of " aucthority or necessity," such as receiving inhabitants, and laying out lots, etc. There would seem to be an implied right or privilege of voting on lesser matters. Thus a member of a training-band could vote for the officers, although not a freeman, provided he had taken the resident's oath, and balloted for freemen only. The churches were warned to deal with those who were not inclined to become freemen, and this not producing the desired effect, the General Court came to the conclusion (1647) that it was best to allow inhabitants who had taken the oath of fidelity to be eligible to town offices, even though not freemen, provided the freemen on the board, as selectmen or townsmen, should still consti- tute a majority. The object of this was to put a stop to the prac- tice among church-members of escaping duty as jurymen, constables, surveyors of highways, and the like, by refusing to become freemen. And to give point to the above order these men were visited with fines if they refused to serve when elected. In 1658 it was ordered that regular inhabitants above twenty-four years of age, with an estate of £20, who had taken the oath of fidelity (not freeman's oath), were eligible as jurymen and constables, and could vote for select- men, a majority of the latter to be freemen. Church-membership, as to the qualification of freemen, was reaffirmed two years later. Now, the question is, could an inhabitant, not freeman, refrain from being a full communicant, and still vote in the prudential affairs of the town, under the above law? He undoubtedly could. All inhabi-
225
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886. 1
tants were compelled, after remaining two months, to take the short oath of fidelity to the Massachusetts government, and there was no church-membership requirement in this oath.
But the King of England's attention to his obdurate New England dependency forced the march of events as to religious qualification. Charles II. wrote a letter to the General Court in June, 1662, direct- ing that "all the freeholders of competent estates, not vicious in conversacon, & orthodoxe in religion (though of different persua- sions concerning church government) may have their votes in the election of all officers both civil and military." This forced the General Court to repeal the law prohibiting all persons but church- members from becoming freemen ; but the court at once decreed that " all Englishmen " presenting a certificate from a minister that they were orthodox in religion, and could show that they were freeholders, paid a country rate of ten shillings, "or that they are in full com- munion with some church amongst us," and are twenty-four years of age, might be admitted freemen by the General Court upon a majority vote. This was evidently a case where repeal did not necessarily repeal. The majority-vote clause was considered a reflection upon the king and the Church of England.
In 1664 men who were freemen were allowed to take the freeman's oath before the County Courts. King Charles was very explicit in his demands that no British subject using the Book of Common Prayer should be debarred thereby from full political privileges under the charter of his royal father. This was the beginning of a terrible struggle. The king, in his wrath, sent a war vessel, which reached Boston harbor in 1664, the first ever seen in those waters, and the royal commissioners were instructed to see to it, that " such who desire to use the Booke of Comon Prayer, may be permitted to do soe without incurring any poenalty, reproach, or disadvantage in his inter- est, it being very scandalous that any persons should be debarred the exercise of his religion according to the lawes & custome of England, by those who, by the indulgence, have liberty left to be what profes-
226
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
sion in religion they please. In a word, that persons of good and honest conversations, who have lived long there, may enjoy all the privileges, ecclesiastical & civil, which are due to them, & which are enjoyed by others, as to choose & be chosen in places of government, & the like, & that differences in opinion doe not lesson their charity to each other, since charity is a fundamentall in religion." It was a dark day for Massachusetts. The court lost no time in responding that " The all-knowing God, he knows our greatest ambition is to live a poor and a quiet life in a corner of the world, without offence to God or man. We came not to this wilderness to seek great things to ourself. . . We keep ourselves within our line, and meddle not with matters abroad." But what odds? The royal commissioners had brought a Church of England chaplain, and in the summer of 1664 the Episcopal service was first read in Boston. The battle against a religious qualification had been won, and we find this order made October, 1673 : " That henceforth the names of such as desire to be admitted to the freedome of this comon-wealth, not being mem- bers of churches in full communion, shall be entered wth the secre- tory, from time to time, at the Court of Election, and read over before the whole court some time that session, and shall not be put to vote in the Court till the Court of Election next followg." This provision was subsequently repealed, but by the time of the burning of Springfield the whole structure of a political corporation founded upon Puritan, Non-conformist, Calvinistic interpretations of the Bible had been shaken. There was still no chance for a Baptist or Quaker to become freemen ; but the Church of England was on the roll of qualifications implied in true orthodoxy which admitted in- habitants to freemen, even though not in full communion with any New England church. Therefore, between the natural reaction from the New England discipline among the "living saints " and their progeny, and the cruder infelicities of mind in the common walks of life, where elaborate schemes of religion breed scepticism and open revolt, the churches in the early part of the eighteenth century were
227
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
great sufferers. The period is the low ebb of Congregationalism, and while our church records before the Breck ministry are meagre, the traces of the moral transitions and distractions are not wanting.
Rev. Stephen Williams, a very remarkable man, was already preaching in Longmeadow, where a part of the Springfield congrega- tion had gathered ; and Mr. Williams had a peculiar way of recording his thoughts, - a kind of a sentimental journal of a minister, one might call his literary remains. He gives definite evidence and form to the traditions of those times. The low condition of morals led to many conferences among the brethren, and at a meeting of the local churches at Chicopee, Williams was uncompromising ; the moral landscape that he saw was dismally and unpicturesquely dark. Here are his notes of what he said upon that occasion : -
Facts : Vices abound - visible and manifest evills among us -decay of ye power of godliness - divine institutions neglected by many - some unbaptised - great multitudes never join themselves to the churches of Christ - low esteem of ordinances - strifes and contentions - extravagant dress beyond our estates and degree - family govt and instruction neglected - how many children ignorant of the first rudiments of religion and without civility - yea and without instruc- tion in reading and writing - intemperance, much drunkennesse, tavern haunting and cheating one another ; breaches of the 7th commandt and not to insist on the abounding of adultery, how amazing does ye sin of fornication abound, sinful company keeping, and wanton managements which possibly may be meant by the apostle when he speaks in Romans, 13; 13, of chambering and wantoness.
Mr. Williams drew up a " covenant of reformation " for his Long- meadow people, but there is nothing to indicate at this time (1728) that Mr. Brewer did the same for the first parish.
There is no need to soil this page by transcripts from the court records of these days in support of the charges made by the ministers as to the general demoralization, but we will hasten to narrate the outcome. Rev. Daniel Brewer died in 1733, and the event threw wide the door to the uneasy elements that were already moving on
228
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
the waters. A " pall or scarff creditable to couver coffins," which was procured the same year at an expense of £9 15s., was probably used at Mr. Brewer's funeral.
The spring of 1735 opened unpropitiously for Springfield. The town was closing its first century, and eighty-five years had elapsed since the burning of William Pynchon's theological book in the Boston market- place. Theology had again become a burning issue. If the Pyn- chon affair had ended with almost the breaking up of the plantation, the controversies in 1734-36 nearly cleft the first precinct in two. William Pynchon's doctrine of the meritorious price of man's redemp- tion was an attempt .of a philosopher to perfect an intellectual scheme. The theory of redemption that contributed to the controver- sies of 1734-36 was occasioned by a charitable sentiment as a possible elaboration of prevailing interpretations of the Bible. Both the con- troversies, we have reason to believe, were a material part of the relig- ious chronicles of the two eras, they being the pegs, as it were, upon which were hung those garments of substantial religious faith which no people cast away.
The people of Springfield awoke on the 8th of April, 1735, with feelings of the most intense excitement. The Hampshire association of ministers had been called to assemble at Springfield that day to consider the theological views of Rev. Robert Breck, whom the First Church desired to place in the pulpit of Brewer, Glover, and Moxon. The Hampshire divines were a remarkable set of men. The patriarch was the venerable William Williams, of Hatfield ; while their young- est preacher was Jonathan Edwards, of Northampton, but thirty-two years of age, and yet even then making his giant arm felt amid the broken columns of the Puritan polity. There was also the famous Stephen Williams, of Longmeadow, who had the spirit of a Paul in danger, and whose boyhood was made the sport of Indian warfare. There were also Isaac Chauncey, of Hadley ; Samuel Hopkins, of West Springfield ; Peter Reynolds, of Enfield ; Ebenezer Devotion, of Suf- field ; William Rand, of Sunderland ; and others.
229
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
The Springfield church was so divided over Mr. Breck that even families were in danger of rupture. Mr. Breck was on the ground at the meeting of the association ready to defend himself, and there was evidence in abundance prepared by way of attack.
In order to understand the situation at the April session it will be necessary to go back a year and more. Mr. Breck was the son of Rev. Robert Breck, of Marlborough. Breck took the first honors of his class at Harvard, in 1730, at the age of seventeen. He had been taken out for a time by his father, probably because he had fallen into evil company. Physically we have the tradition of the Breck family that Robert was of sturdy proportion, and mentally we know from his liter- ary remains that he was a deep thinker and a fearless controversialist who did not hesitate to read any book, orthodox or otherwise, that would clear up a subject. He was as good an example of genuine intuitions as could be found in this valley before the Revolution. The two rising young men of this valley - Breck and Edwards - set at work at about the same time to examine the portals of the ortho- dox faith, -one with doubt and the other with a herculean faith. One held up the shield of the love of God, and the other brandished the sword of the glory of God ; one had the heart and the other the intellect of theology, and both felt the demoralization of Christian society in New England. They and their respective partisans -for that is the word to use - met in open combat, and the results were as dramatic as the immediate conflict was terrible. Breck brought the religion of Springfield into the revolutionary period, and opened the way to modern ideas ; while poor Mr. Edwards, after establishing his metaphysical scheme, was forced to retire to the Stockbridge Indians under a cloud. Scholars have since bowed to the genins of Edwards, but the people live the principles of Breck.
The parish first extended a unanimous call to Rev. Daniel Hubbard, of New London. Two ineffectual attempts were made to secure Mr. Hubbard, William Pynchon and John Burt going down first, and then Lieut. John Worthington and Thomas Stebbins. Meantime Deacons
230
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
Munn and Burt conducted religious services from time to time. The precinct then tried to secure Rev. Samuel Whittelsy, or Writtelsy, of Wallingford, Conn., and, again failing, sent Luke Hitchcock, Jr., to Boston in 1734.
It was in May, 1734, that the first parish invited the youthful minister, Robert Breck, to preach with a view of settlement ; and his impetuous oratory and strong periods made a deep impression upon the sleepy, cold, worldly-minded congregation. Breck had previously preached for a short time at Scotland (Windham, Conn., ) and soon rumors were afloat that his Connecticut sermons were not in all things according to the New England creed. Breck had a young man's penchant for debate and speculation, and in his sermons he continually wandered out of the beaten path of exhortation and com- mentary. A letter was received in Springfield from Rev. Eleazor Williams, of Mansfield, Conn., dated August 12, stating that the Rev. Thomas Clap, of Windham, and Daniel Kirtland, of Norwich, could furnish full particulars of Mr. Breck's unsound opinions. The church gave Mr. Breck a call, however, on the 15th, and on the 26th, Mr. Breck, being informed that Mr. Clap was industriously circulating reports about him, wrote a very spirited letter from Cambridge, in which he felt justified in saying : -
Sr. I took you always to be a Gentleman, and not only so, but a Christian and therefore would if Possible Disbelieve any such story (arianism). But it has come so often and so well confirmed that I cant Help Giving my Assent to it. And now what Could provoke you to tell such a falsehood I cant Imagine. I am sure I never gave you nor any other occasion to say this for me as God (and I can't think but) your Conscience very well knows. God be my witness, that to the best of my knowledge I never Lisped one single word in favor of arianism during the whole of the time I was at Wendham. (Spring of 1734.) And now How Intolerable is this. Is this the part of a Christian Gentleman -is this the Part of a Gentleman and a Christian? If this is the part of a Friend I Pray to be Deliver'd. Sr, I Hope you will think of the Barbarious treatment you have givn to me and Unspeakable and Irreparable Injury you have done me, and that God will Grant yon Repentance and Reformation that so Gentlemen may meet with
231
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
Civil treatment who will hereafter come among you. Sr, Excuse anything of warmth and Passion in this Letter and Consider that a Persons Character is dearer to him than it is to anybody else.
Mr. Breck soon after this visited Springfield, and Mr. Hopkins, of West Springfield, detailed to him, at the request of the Hampshire ministers, the impression caused by Mr. Clap's charges, and added, that it was expected of him to bring a certificate of orthodox character from both Kirtland and Clap. This was September 7, and about three weeks later Mr. Breck made the journey to Windham and met his accuser. The meeting may be described as stormy, and the young man returned without an endorsement. This put a very serions as- pect on the affair, and a majority of the parish were much disap- pointed. The Hampshire ministers seeing that the church was bent upon settling Breck, secured from Messrs. Clap, Kirtland, and others written statements as to what Breck had said in his sermons and con- versations while in Connecticut. The main points of the charges are : First, his denial of the authenticity of sundry passages of Scripture, like 1 John v. 7, " the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost," and John viii., concerning the woman taken in adultery ; second, that he " denied the necessity of Christ's Satisfaction to Divine Justice for Sin ; " third, he preached " That the Heathen that liv'd up to the Light of Nature should be Saved ; " that Christ might be immediately revealed to them, or they might be saved some other way ; that the " contrary was a harsh Doctrine; " fourth, sundry misdemeanors, like " stealing Books while he was at College ; " and, finally, that he had never read the New England Confession of Faith. When con- fronted by the documents, Mr. Breck told the Hampshire ministers that he would accept the call if the people stood by him, and as for the refusal of the ministers to ordain him, he produced the greatest consternation by promptly remarking to Mr. Hopkins, who represented the association, "I don't care for that ; if one will not, another will." The ministers then circulated the documentary evidence against Breck
232
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
among the congregation, and the result was that the young man re- turned to the Bay, having concluded to withdraw from the contest. But there soon came a reaction, and on November, 1734, the first pre- cinct voted to appoint Jonathan Chapin, Luke Hitchcock, Jr., and Thomas Stebbins, a committee to find out as to " Mr. Breck's Removal from us, it being commonly Reported that some Persons of Note have indeavoured to obstruct his settlement here by Wrightings Lodged in the hands of some of the Neighbouring ministers." This com- mittee examined the Connecticut documents, and upon application to the association for advice, William Williams, Isaac Chauncey, Jonathan Edwards, Stephen Williams, Samuel Hopkins, and Peter Reynolds signed a paper recommending the people of Springfield to make no further application to Breck. The renewal of the fight brought Breck on the scene again. He did not mince matters when he wrote to William Pynchon that Mr. Clap had lied, and that the word of Huntington (selectman of Windham) could not be taken for a groat by his neighbors. The church was now thoroughly con- vinced that they ought to settle Breck, as the following record shows : -
At a meeting of the Freeholders and other Inhabitants assembled according to Law Continued by several adjournments from December 9th, 1734 To January 1st, 1734-5.
1 voted to ask Breck to preach with view of settlement.
2 voted to send John Burt and Benj. Morgan to Cambridge to consult as to a minister.
These two votes represented the sentiments of the Breck and anti- Breck factions. In an account of these troubles, prepared a year or two later, the ministers said that " There were reports handed about Town that Mr. Kirtland was not to be minded ; that Mr. Clap lied in what he wrote ; that he was liable to a severe Prosecution for what he had done ; that he dare as well eat his fingers as to come to Spring- field to defend it : that Mr. Huntington was a Man of a very ill Char-
233
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
acter ; And a great many other such reports. . When one Story
of this Nature was worn out, another of the same Kind was set on Foot, as that Mr. Clap wrote Mr. Huntington's Evidence for him ; that he wrote what he pleased, and that Mr. Huntington knew not what was in it, and so on. And there is too much Reason to think that Mr. Breck was the Author of those ill Reports."
No more need be quoted to show the animus of all parties. If men like Mr. Edwards and Stephen Williams would put themselves on record as above, the feeling must have been deep indeed. The next step of the Hampshire ministers was to secure evidence as to Mr. Huntington's reliability and Mr. Clap's impartiality ; for Clap, who it will be remembered afterward became president of Yale College, was noted for his intense denunciations of theological error. To show how Clap fortified himself we give this long extract from the affidavit of Samuel Manning, dated Windham, March 12, 1735 : -
Sam" Manning testifieth and Saith that on ye Sabath day ensning after ye Revrd Mr Clap preached at Scotland it being ve Sabath before our people here gave your Mr. Breck a call, Joshua Eazel and Sam" Cook and I desired Mr. Clap to goe into Jacob Libbes litle room to ask his judgment about Mr. Brecks principles and accordingly we did ask him. And Mr. Clap sat silent some time & said nothing and upon our asking him to speak Mr. Clap said that Mr. Breck was a stranger to him and he could not readily make a judgment about him ; then he was asked whether he had talked with him aboute his denying some part of ye scripture. he said yes, then he was asked what Mr. Breck said: Mr. Clap answered that he did not think it convenient at present to declare espetially since they had not talked so much as to enable him to make a clear judgment. Some of us urged Mr. Clap several times but he said very little, and after some time one of ns said that he thought that Mr. Clap had had time long enough to talk with Mr. Breek and wondered he could not know what his principals were yet. Mr. Clap said it was not always so easie a thing to know what a mans principals are as some might imagine.
After a little pause some of us proposed to call ye committee of the associa- tion together to examine Mr. Breck about his principals before the meeting : Mr. Clap said it was an unusual thing to call the committee of the association to examine a man so upon a sudden, and we might depend upon it that the associa-
234
SPRINGFIELD, 1636-1886.
tion would know his principals before they ordained him. This was the substance of ye discourse aboute Mr. Brecks principals according to the best of my renem- brance, and i know i took it to ye same effect : and though Mr. Clap seemed very loth to say anything about Mr. Brecks Principal and did not give any certain judgment upon them, yet i was then fully of opinion that Mr. Clap did suspect that Mr. Breck was something erronious, and as I went home wt my neighbour Silsby to the best of my remembrance i told him i did believe Mr. Clap was sus- petious of him and i think he answered he did not know but he might. The next day i was at Joshua Lazel and he asked me what i thought of these storys. i told him i did not know. they might be true and they might not: i was more con- sarned about his principals than about those storys : he answered so was he more consarned aboute his principals, and for my own part i was so much consarned aboute his principals that i doubted whether i should be in my way to voate for him but on this consideration that he would be examined by the ministers : accordingly i did voate for him ; and whereas i have heard that the above sd Lazel and Cook have said that on the conferance aforesd Mr. Clap said he did not know but yt Mr. Brecks principals were as bright as any mans i do hereby declare yt i did not hear any such words or anything that tended that way. . I know when Mr. Breek preached here in Scotland severial of our people were consarned aboute his principals boath by his preaching and in his private converse.
Mr. Breck, in the face of all this hostility, wrote Clap a very con- siderate letter referring to his habit of free discussion, acknowledging that he was too " inconsiderate and incautious in speaking " and ask- ing "Christian forgiveness." This letter Clap used to increase the prejudice against Breck, since he showed it to Breck's enemies, and prepared more documentary evidence against his character as a min- ister.
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.