USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > Boston > The memorial history of Boston : including Suffolk County, Massachusetts, 1630-1880, Vol. III > Part 32
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 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88
The conclusion of the war, and the revival of business in all directions closed the differences which had divided the country since the foundation of the government, and turned men's minds from the political issues of the past. It was the dawn of the so-called era of good feeling, the transition period in which old parties disappeared and new ones were developed. The Federal- ists of Massachusetts retained their power for many years, dexterously avoid- ing the rocks of religious controversy on which their party brethren of Connecticut were wrecked. They held the government by reason of past services solely, for the great political questions which had brought them forth and given them strength no longer existed. Gradually, however, they faded away; the old leaders in Boston and elsewhere retired from public life or were removed by death; and the century had hardly completed its second decade when the great party of Washington, really extinct for some years, vanished even in name from our history finally and irrevocably.
Almost coincident with the disappearance of the Federalist party was the change of municipal government in Boston from the town form to that of a city. The change had been agitated at various times from a very early period down to 1821, and in the next year the old town government came
son, Charles Francis Adams, between 1874 and 1877. The Life of Hamilton so far as it reacted upon the Federalism of Boston is not without im- portance ; and the reader who has not the cour- age to compass the somewhat assuming and vo- luminous Life by John C. Hamilton may find
progress easier in the Life of Hamilton as writ- ten by John T. Morse, Jr. in 1876 Of the part played by the press in the political movements in this period, see D. A. Goddard's Newspapers and Newspaper Writers in New England, 1787- 1815, a pamphlet published in 188o. - ED.]
216
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
to an end. It had been the government of Winthrop and Cotton, of Adams and Franklin. It had defied George III. and Lord North, and its name had rung through two continents in the days when it faced the English Parlia- ment alone and unterrified. It was the most famous municipal organization in America, and it passed away into history honored and regretted. The next chapter traces in detail the transformation which followed.
Henry Cabot Lodge.
CHAPTER II.
BOSTON UNDER THE MAYORS, 1822-1880.
BY JAMES M. BUGBEE.
THE purpose of this chapter is to give some account of the local govern- ment of Boston since its organization under a city charter in the year 1822. The extent of the change in the administration of local affairs in- volved in the establishment of a municipal council in place of the town- meeting can hardly be appreciated without going back for a moment to con- sider the origin and development of what is known as the New England town-system. Most New Englanders cling to the belief that the system of local self-government which their Pilgrim and Puritan ancestors set up here was wholly original; that a new principle of government was introduced which had its natural culmination in the Declaration of Independence and the formation of the Federal Union: but the investigations of modern his- torians have made it clear that the early settlers of this country were gov- erned largely by the traditions which had come down to them from their Teutonic ancestors. The form of government which they established had not its exact counterpart among any other people, but it was based on the ancient Anglo-Saxon township; and the new features which were introduced were only such as were necessitated or suggested by the peculiar circum- stances in which the colonists were placed. They were wiser than many of their eulogists would make them. Had they struck out for themselves in an entirely new path, their subsequent development would have been wanting in those elements of conservatism and steadiness which have shown New England to be the lineal descendant of Old England.1
The charter of the Massachusetts Bay Company contained no express authority for the erection of town governments or the establishment of minor political divisions; and Sir Edmund Andros could say with truth, that in a legal point of view there was no such thing as a town in all New Eng-
1 [See Vol. I. pp. 217, 427, 445, 454. This interesting subject of the origin of our town sys- lem, upon which so much new light has been thrown since the publication of Sir Henry Maine's Village Communities, is now undergoing more VOL. 111 .- 28.
exact study at the hands of Dr. Herbert B. Adams, of Johns Hopkins University. See II. C. Lodge's English Colonies in America, p. 414, and Harvard University Bulletin, June 1, 1881, or vol. ii. 214 .- ED.]
218
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
land. Boston was never formally incorporated as a town. The order of the Court of Assistants (Sept. 7, O. S. 1630), changing the name from Tri-mountain to Boston,1 has been construed by the courts to be sufficient to entitle it from that time forward to all the privileges of a town; but no corporation was specifically established until 1822. Springing up in this way, outside of the formal scheme of government devised by the king, the line between the town governments and the colonial government could never . be very clearly defined ; and it may well be imagined that the former were continually encroaching upon the just and necessary powers of the latter.2 Fortunately for the maintenance of local government, the colonial authority as represented by the General Court was composed of delegates from the towns; and therefore almost any exercise of authority on the part of the towns, which did not interfere directly with the operations of the general government, was permitted and indeed encouraged. The extent and variety of the powers exercised by the town of Boston in its early days go far be- yond those exercised by the city of to-day. The conditions upon which strangers should be allowed to reside in the town,3 the admission of new comers to the rights of citizenship,4 the conditions upon which allotments of land should be made,5 the prices of commodities, the rates of wages for labor, the conditions upon which suits at law should be prosecuted,6 and even great questions of peace or war, were discussed in meetings of all the free- men; 7 and the action of the town was determined by the number of voices that shouted for the affirmative or the negative.
.
In the beginning all public affairs were passed upon by the whole body of freemen; but as the population increased, the frequent attendance upon town-meetings was found to be burdensome. Then certain persons were chosen to act for a limited time, -at first for six months, and afterward for a year,-to "order the affairs of the town." That was the origin of the Board of Selectmen, the name by which the chief executive body in town government is now widely known.8 Subsequently other town officers were elected to look after special departments of the public service, -constables, surveyors of highways, clerks of the market, sealers of leather, packers of fish and meat, and hog-reeves.9 A commissioner was also chosen at the
1 Vol. I. p. 116.
2 [See Mr. C. C. Smith's chapter, “ Boston and the Colony," in Vol. I. p. 217; of this His- tory. - ED.]
$ Boston Town Records as printed in Second Report of Record Commissioners, 1877, pp. 10, 90, 109, 152.
+ Ibid. p. 46.
6 Ibid. p. 6, et seq.
6 Ibid. p. 5.
7 See Richard Frothingham's Oration, July 4, 1874 ; City Documents, 68, 1874.
8 They are referred to in the first volume of Boston records as "the ten men," "the nine men," and "the town's men," until 1647, when
they are called " the selectmen." See Vol. I. pp. 388, 505 of this History.
9 Reeve is from the Anglo-Saxon Gerefa, concerning the etymological connection of which with the German Graf there has been a good deal of controversy. It is curious to see how a once honored title has become degraded. The first civic temporal magistrates in England were the Reves. William the Conqueror, in the first charter granted to London, "greets William the Bishop, and Godfrey the Portreve." Later the Anglo-Saxon Portreve was superseded by the French Mayor. Shire-reve has been contracted to Sheriff; and the Reve survives only as the keeper of hogs.
219
BOSTON UNDER THE MAYORS.
annual meeting to receive the proxics for magistrates and county treasurer and carry them to the shire-meeting.
The system of government which grew up in this irregular way was full of make-shifts, -it would have vexed the soul of the political doctrinaire ; but it was admirably adapted to the wants of a small, homogeneous community. It was covered with patches, but the patches protected just the places which hard wear threatened to expose. That it performed its functions to the gen- cral satisfaction of the people for a period of nearly two hundred years is shown by the fact that during that time they steadily resisted all attempts to change its original form. There were not wanting individuals who favored a change, and who had their patent devices for making the government better than the people; but so well satisfied were the majority of the voters with what they had, that they clung to the old system long after the growth of the town appeared to make a change necessary for the maintenance of good government.1 Upon the suggestion of the selectmen a committee was ap- pointed in 1708 to " draft a charter of incorporation " for " the better govern- ment of the town; " but at the annual March meeting in the following year the " town's men " refused to accept the draft which was submitted to them, and refused to refer the subject to any future meeting. The next attempt to make a radical change in the constitution of the government was in 1784, when, on the petition of a number of influential citizens, a committee of thirteen was appointed " to consider the expediency of applying to the Gen- eral Court for an act to form the town of Boston into an incorporated city, and report a plan of alterations in the present government of the police, if such be deemed eligible." The committee reported two plans,-one making the town a body politic, by the name of " the Mayor, Aldermen, and Com- mon Council of the City of Boston; " the other making it a body politic by the name of " the President and Selectmen of the City of Boston." At a meeting of the inhabitants it was voted, " by a great majority," " inexpedient to make any alterations in the present form of town government." 2
In 1791 " the want of an efficient police " led to another petition for a change ; and a plan was reported which provided for a division of the town into nine wards, and the election in each ward of two men who, with the selectmen, were to constitute the Town Council, with power to make by-laws and to appoint all executive officers except selectmen, town clerk, overseers of the poor, assessors, town treasurer, school-committee men, auditors of ac- counts, firewards, collectors of taxes, and constables, who were to continue to be elected by the legal voters. A good deal of time was given to the discussion of this scheme, and it was printed and distributed in hand-bills to all the inhabitants ; but when the vote came to be taken upon its adoption, it met the fate of former schemes. Another report in favor of changing the
1 [See Vol. I. p. 219; N. E. Ilist, and Geneal. Forming the Town of Boston into an Incorporated Reg. July, 1857; Quincy's Municipal History of City, Published by Order of the Town for the Pe- Boston, ch. i. - ED.] rusal and Consideration of the Inhabitants. The
2 [There is in Harvard College Library a day named for the further consideration of them little tract of eight pages called Two Plans for is June 17 .- ED.]
220
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
town government was negatived by a decisive vote in 1804. The next move- ment for a change was not made until 1815, when a committee submitted the draft of a bill which provided for the incorporation of the town under the name of " the Intendant and Municipality of the Town and City of Boston." The municipal council was to consist of the selectmen, chosen by the citizens in town-meeting, and two delegates from cach ward chosen by the inhabi- tants of the ward. . The Intendant was to be chosen annually by the selectmen and delegates; and was given powers which made him rather a mild chief executive. The title appears to have been imported either directly from France or from the Gallicized municipalities in the Canadas. This scheme came pretty near adoption, - nine hundred and twenty votes being in the affirmative and nine hundred and fifty-one in the negative.
What turned the scale against it, perhaps, and what would have been urged equally against any scheme by which the town government was to be changed to a city government, was the fact that there was no provision in the State Constitution which appeared to authorize the erection by the Gen- eral Court of city governments. The subject was brought before the Con- stitutional Convention of 1820, by one of the Boston delegates, Mr. Lynde Walter, who procured the passage of a resolution instructing a committee to inquire into the expediency of so altering the Constitution, that the Legisla- ture should have power to grant to towns charters of incorporation with the usual forms of city government. Daniel Webster, chairman of the commit- tee to which the matter was referred, reported that it was expedient so to amend the Constitution as to provide that the General Court should have full power and authority to erect and constitute municipal or city govern- ments in any corporate towns in the Commonwealth, provided such towns contained not less than a certain number of inhabitants. The proposed amendment was strongly opposed by some of the country members, who feared that the city governments would make laws by which " the inhabi- tants of the towns, going into the cities, would be liable to be ensnared and entrapped." The reasons for the proposed change were set forth very clearly by Lemuel Shaw, afterward the Chief-Justice of the Commonwealth. He said that it was not the intention to grant any special powers or privileges to the citizens of Boston, but simply to give them an organization adapted to the condition of a numerous people. All the towns in the Commonwealth possessed the powers and privileges of municipal corporations in England. They had power to choose their own officers, to send members to the Gen- eral Court, to make by-laws, to assess and collect taxes, to maintain schools and highways, relieve the poor, and to superintend licensed houses and other matters of local police. The Constitution as it stood required all the inhabitants of a town to assemble in one body, be they few or many. The sole purpose of the proposed change was to provide an organization by which the voters in municipalities containing a large number of inhabitants would be enabled to meet in sections for the purposes of election, and to choose representatives who should be empowered to make the by-laws and
221
BOSTON UNDER THE MAYORS.
vote the supplies instead of the whole body. The amendment was adopted by the Convention and subsequently (April 29, 1821) ratified by the people of the State.
It would naturally be supposed that after this there would be no serious opposition to the proposed organization of a city government in Boston ; but there was a conservative element in the old town which could not be con- vinced that any change was either necessary or desirable, even though the venerable John Adams supported the amendment in the Convention. The national census of 1820 gave the town a population of forty-three thousand two hundred and ninety-eight. The number of qualified voters exceeded seven thousand.
"When a town-meeting was held on any exciting subject in Faneuil Hall, those only who obtained places near the moderator could even hear the discussion. A few busy or interested individuals easily obtained the management of the most important affairs in an assembly in which the greater number could have neither voice nor hear- ing. When the subject was not generally exciting, town-meetings were usually com- posed of the selectmen, the town officers, and thirty or forty inhabitants. Those who thus came were for the most part drawn to it from some official duty or private interest, which, when performed or attained, they generally troubled themselves but little, or not at all, about the other business of the meeting. In assemblies thus composed, by-laws were passed, taxes to the amount of one hundred or one hundred and fifty thousand dollars voted on statements often general in their nature, and on reports, as it respects the majority of voters present, taken upon trust, and which no one had carefully con- sidered except perhaps the chairman."
Among the number who resisted the proposed change, " by speech and pen, as long as there was any chance of defeating it," was Mr. Josiah Quincy, who afterward, in his Municipal History of Boston, made the statement above quoted. "He believed," says his son, "the pure democracy of a town- meeting more suited to the character of the people of New England, and less liable to abuse and corruption, than a more compact government."
In January, 1822, the subject was brought before a special meeting of the inhabitants in Faneuil Hall, on the report of a committee recommending that there should be a chief executive, called the " Intendant," elected by the selectmen; that there should be an executive board of seven persons called the " Selectmen," elected by the inhabitants on a general ticket; and that there should be a body with mixed legislative and executive powers called a " Board of Assistants," consisting of four persons chosen from each of the twelve wards. For three days the subject was debated with much earnestness and some heat. The report was amended by giving to the chief executive the title of "Mayor ; " by putting " Aldermen " in place of the Selectmen ; and by changing the name of the Board of Assistants to " the Common Council." The amended report was then put into the form of five propositions and submitted to the inhabitants to be voted upon by ballot, yea or nay. The vote on what may be considered the test proposition, -
222
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
namely, " that the name of 'Town of Boston' should be changed to 'City of Boston,'"-was two thousand seven hundred and twenty-seven in the affirmative, and two thousand and eighty-seven in the negative. The other propositions were all adopted by a greater or less majority.
Application 1 was immediately made to the Legislature for an act of incorporation ; and on Feb. 23, 1822, the Governor approved " an act estab- lishing the city of Boston," which is known as the first city charter. As the earliest departure, under Massachusetts laws, from the ancient system of town government, the act was regarded as one of grave importance. The city form of organization, copied in most cases from the form which had been established in London as early as the thirteenth century, had long been in use in other parts of the country. New York received a city charter in the English form in 1665, and several charters were granted in the name of the king to large towns outside the New England colonies, previous to the Declaration of Independence. The lord proprietor of Maine had exercised the right given him by his patent to make the little town of Agamenticus (now York), with two hundred and fifty inhabitants, a city under the name of Gorgeana, with a mayor, aldermen, common council and recorder; but when the province came under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, the town system was substituted. In Connecticut, city charters were granted immediately after the Revolution; and so freely were they granted, that at last " a little clump of Indians took it into their heads to apply for city pow- ers and privileges," which "convinced the Legislature of the impolicy of granting charters with so much liberality." 2
The new charter of Boston, drafted by Mr. Lemuel Shaw, provided that the title of the corporation should be " the City of Boston; " that the ad- ministration of all the fiscal, prudential, and municipal concerns of the city, with the conduct and government thereof, should be vested in one principal officer, to be styled " the Mayor ; " one select council of eight persons, to be denominated " the Board of Aldermen," and one more numerous council of forty-eight persons, to be denominated " the Common Council; " that the city should be divided into twelve wards ; that the mayor, aldermen, and com- mon councilmen should be elected on the second Monday of April annually, and enter upon their duties on the first day of May; 3 that the mayor and aldermen should compose one board, the mayor presiding and having a right to vote on all questions, but not the veto power; that the administra- tion of police, together with the general executive powers of the corporation, and the powers formerly vested by law or usage in the selectmen of the town, should be vested in the mayor and aldermen; that all the other pow- ers then vested in the town or in the inhabitants thereof as a municipal cor-
1 [See the paper in chapter iii. of this sec- the annual election was changed to the second tion. - ED.]
2 From Remarks of John Adams, in the Con- stitutional Convention of 1820. Debates, Massa- chusetts Convention, p. 195.
3 By an act of the Legislature passed in 1825,
Monday in December; and the officers then cho- sen entered upon their duties on the first Monday in January following. In 1872 the election-day was changed to the Tuesday after the second Monday in December.
223
BOSTON UNDER THE MAYORS.
poration should be vested in the mayor, aldermen, and common council, to be exercised by concurrent vote, each board having a negative upon the other ; that the citizens in the several wards should choose, at the annual meeting. in April, a number of persons to be firewards ; and also one person in each ward to be overseer of the poor, and one person to be a member of the school committee.
JOHN P11ILLIPS.1
At " a legal meeting of the frecholders and other inhabitants of the town of Boston," held in Faneuil Hall on March 4, 1822, the question, " Will you accept the charter granted by the Legislature?" was decided in the affir- mative, by a vote of 2,797 to 1,881. Among the large number who voted in the negative there were many who opposed any radical change of the
1 [This cut follows an engraving of a portrait ber, 1825; and a brief sketch, with a portrait, is owned by Mr. Wendell Phillips, kindly furnished by him. Mr. John Phillips died May 29, 1823. A memoir of Phillips, with an engraved portrait, ap- peared in the Boston Monthly Magazine, Novem-
also given in the N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., October, 1866; and an account of his family in Bond's Watertown, p. S85. There is also a sketch in Loring's Orators, p. 249. - ED.]
224
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
old system, and others who were dissatisfied with the form of organization provided by the new charter.
Mr. Josiah Quincy, who had always taken an interest in town affairs, and who presided at the last town-meeting held in Faneuil Hall, was invited by many substantial citizens to be a candidate for the office of mayor. He ac- cepted the invitation, without knowing, it is said, that the Federal leaders proposed to make Mr. Harrison Gray Otis the first mayor, preparatory to his elevation to the governorship of the State. That any respectable Feder- alist should be presumptuous enough to stand for any office which Mr. Otis was willing at that time to take, was sufficient to stir up a great deal of feel- ing among the party managers: it was much the same as if, twenty years later, Mr. Choate had allowed his name to be used for an office which Mr. Webster wanted. Mr. Quincy's supporters were not willing to release him from his engagement, however, and it does not appear that he was at all anxious to be relieved. It was not in his nature to be influenced, by weight or numbers, to withdraw from a position which he had once deliberately accepted. The night before the election the Democrats nominated Mr. Thomas L. Winthrop for their candidate, and threw enough votes for him to prevent an election, - a majority of all the votes being necessary for a choice. Mr. Quincy would undoubtedly .have been elected had not the Democrats resorted to the trick of using Mr. Winthrop's name without his authority, and greatly to his displeasure.
Both Mr. Otis and Mr. Quincy then withdrew their names, and John Phillips 1 was elected without serious opposition. He was in many respects well qualified for the position; a man of rather pliable disposition, but of strict integrity and general good judgment, - a character well fitted for the somewhat delicate task of commending the new order of things to those who had been adverse to a change. One who knew him well, and knew the difficulties by which he was surrounded, has said : -
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.