USA > Maine > Cumberland County > Portland > The history of Portland, from its first settlement: with notices of the neighbouring towns, and of the changes of government in Maine, Part II 1700-1833 > Part 27
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
A large and splendid building was erected by this society in 1828, which contains a very convenient chapel for public worship and suit- able rooms for seamen's schools, and the use of the marine society. There are also connected with it some spacious stores, offices and a market-house. The building cost $33,000, and was erected partly by contribution and partly by means raised on a pledge of the property to be refunded from the future income by rents, &c.
The object of the society meets with universal approbation, and is one in which all persons engaged, however remotely, in commercial
' Bishop Fenwick is a native of Maryland. Mr. French is a native of Ire- land, and is a son of a bishop of the Church of England. He received his re- ligious education at Lisbon in Portugal, and is a friar of the order of St. Don- inic. Mr. McNama is a secular clergyman.
249
Mariners' Church.
C. 12.]
pursuits are interested. To furnish religious instruction to a class of people, to whom so much property is confided, and who from their irregular mode of life are subjected to unusual temptations, is cotiled to unqualified support.
The building has a stone front on Fore-street of three elevated stories, surmounted by a handsome pediment, and occupies the whole front between the avenues on to Long and Commercial wharves, being a distance of 61 feet, and extending down those avenues about the same number of feet. On the rear and sides, which are of brick, it is 4 stories high. The building is a fine specimen of architecture and an ornament to the city. 1
1 In 1828, a society ofcoloured people was formed and incorporated by the name of the Abyssinian Religious Society. They commenced the same year, by subscription, a house of worship on Munjoy's hill, which is not yet com- pleted. They have occasionally had preaching in the house, but no regular minister, and the spirit which prompted the undertaking has altogether sub- sided ; it can now hardly be numbered among the religious societies of the city.
1
1
250
Separation of the State.
[P. II.
CHAPTER 13.
Separation of Maine from Massachusetts.
As Portland bore a conspicuous part in the history of the separa- tion of this State from Massachusetts, and as we have in the first part of this work given an account of our earliest connection with that Commonwealth, we may be pardoned for introducing a chapter de- voted to a summary view of the dissolution of that ancient union.
After the close of the war, the separation of Maine, which then con- sisted of what were called the " three eastern counties, " viz. York, Cumberland and Lincoln, from Massachusetts, early occupied the attention of people in the District. The first public suggestion made on the subject was in the following acrostic, published in the Fal- mouth Gazette Feb. 5, 1785.
F rom th' ashes of the old, a Town appears, A nd Phoenix like, her plumy head she rears. L ong may she flourish ; be from war secure ; M ade rich by commerce and agriculture ; O 'er all her foes triumphant ; be content Under our happy form of government ; Till (what no doubt will be her prosp'rous fate) Herself's the mistress of a rising State.
On this hint a writer over the signature"of " A Farmer," entered at once on the discussion of the subject, and in his communication puts the following queries : "Have we not good harbours and well situated for fishery, and a foreign trade, and materials for ship build- ing and the lumber business ? Have we not a great tract of unculti- vated land with only a few roads into the wilderness ? If so how are these natural advantages to be made useful to us, or to the pub- lic, but by giving the greatest encouragement possible to people, to cultivate the wild land and bring the lumber to the markets ? How is it possible to accomplish these valuable ends in any other way so well as by restoring to the province of Maine its ancient privileges ?"""
The discussion thus opened was pursued with great spirit and considerable ability, in which the advantages contemplated from a local government in the District were fully set forth. The princi-
1 This writer in another communication remarks, that the separation " was contemplated before the war."
-
251
Separation of the State.
C. 13.]
pal objections urged were, that it was too early to agitate the ques- tion, the people needed time to recover from the agitation and losses of war, and that the expenses of supporting a separate government would be greatly enhanced. A writer, who adopted the signature Impartialis, and who wrote with much candor, estimated the differ- ence of expense between an independent government and a continu- ation with Massachusetts at £2500. He put the proportion then paid by this District to the treasury of Massachusetts at £1000, being one tenth of the whole amount, and the expense of supporting a separate government at £3500 ; he was followed by another writer of more sanguine temperament, who, admitting the correctness of much of the calculation of Impartialis, yet by cutting off some items of expenditures and reducing others, he made the excess for the maintenance of a local government to be but £1530.1 This it will be perceived was more than double the actual expense the District was then paying for the benefits of a free representative system. This difference in expense was to be more than compensated, by the superior inducements held out for immigration, improvement of roads, and the better application of laws to the peculiar situation and wants of the territory.
Some laws had been enacted in Massachusetts, which were con- sidered at the time by many people here injurious to our trade and oppressive in their operation, among these were the stamp, the lum- ber, the navigation and excise acts ; but the lumber and navigation acts which were considerably complained of at the time, have been sanctioned by experience, and confessedly laid deep and strong the foundations of our prosperity. Before that time British vessels were allowed to come to our ports and take lumber, upon the dimensions of which there were no restrictions. This act excluded British vessels, because ours were excluded from the colonies of Britain and provided that no lumber should be shipped unless the different spe- cies corresponded with the standard fixed by law. These were at first felt to be grievances, and thought to be unwarrantable restraints
1 Both writers put down the governor's salary at £200, the secretary at £150, four judges for the supreme court at £630, that is three at £150 each, and the chief justice at £180. The above estimate was exclusive of the pay of the representatives in each case, because as they were paid by their re- spective towns the item was supposed to be balanced. Another writer re- duced the excess by a closer calculation to £622, which he balanced by the advantage " of expending the money among ourselves."
3
252
Separation. [P. II.
upon trade, as is every regulation when first adopted, which inter- feres with our natural rights ; but they were measures of protection, and experience confirmed their wisdom.
Under these feelings of discontent, the discussion of the separation question was pushed on, and all the advocates for the measure were anxiously looking forward for some section of the District to take the lead in the measure. One writer on the 27th of Aug. 1785, observes, " I am convinced that the minds of the people are now ripe for the important question-and that a beginning is only necessary to ensure a speedy and happy completion of the measure now in contemplation: this beginning must and will be made somewhere. Orientalis men- tioned York ; but they hitherto have declined. I wish as I ever have done, that Falmouth might have the honour of taking the first step. If they likewise decline, I would by no means have that operate as a hindrance to those other towns, that are now waiting and wishing to follow them."
Other propositions were made for the purpose of ascertaining the sense of the people upon the project, which at last resulted in the following notice, which appeared in the Falmouth Gazette of Sept. 17, 1785, without date or signature : "Agreeable to a request, made and signed by a large and respectable number of persons, to the printers of this Gazette, the inhabitants of the three counties of York, Cumberland and Lincoln, are hereby notified, that so many of them as incline, or can conveniently attend, are requested to meet at the meeting-house of the Rev. Messrs. Smith and Deane, in Fal- mouth, on Wednesday the fifth day of October next, to join in a CONFERENCE, then and there to be held, on the proposal of having the said counties erected into a separate government ; and if it should be thought best, to form some plan for collecting the sentiments of the people on the subject, and pursue some regular and orderly meth- od of carrying the same into effect."
The request to the printer to make this notice was signed by the most respectable men on the Neck.
On the day appointed a number of persons from different parts of the District assembled at the meeting-house of the first parish in this town.1 They chose Peleg Wadsworth chairman, and discussed the subject of separation in a dispassionate manner ; after which a com-
1 About 30 persons were convened. (Perley.)
-
253
Separation.
C. 13.]
mittee of seven was chosen to prepare a circular letter to be sent to every town and plantation in the three counties, inviting them to send delegates to a convention, to be held at the same place, on the first Wednesday of January 1786, "to consider the expediency of said counties being formed into a separate State."
Some writers endeavored to resist the current which seemed to be - setting in favor of separation, believing that the time had not arrived for an event which they admitted would one day take place. " A friend to Justice" observed, " The United States are but just emerg- ing from a cruel and expensive war ; in which, perhaps, but few parts of America have been greater sufferers than the inhabitants of this castern tract. Our treasures are exhausted ; commerce embar- rassed, money extremely scarce, and taxes enormously high ;" he further observed that although ingenious estimates had been made, he did not believe that taxes would be lightened. He proposed instead of calling a convention to consider of a separation, that the people should unite in a petition to the legislature for a removal of all unnecessary restrictions and burdensome inequalities from this part of the Commonwealth. Among the grievances complained of as existing, were the following : that the records of the supreme court were kept at Boston, to which it was necessary to go to get all pa- pers necessary for evidence ; that the expense of returning execu- tions so great a distance caused a burdensome expense which fell generally on the poor ;1 that but one supreme court was held a year in York and Cumberland, and none in Lincoln; that the distance from the seat of government and the infrequency of conveyance pre- , vented their receiving the enactments of the government in due season. Public opinion was in a most unsettled state on the question, and many towns declined sending delegates to the convention.2 This town, at a meeting called for the purpose, elected Peleg Wadsworth, Stephen Hall, John Waite, Enoch Ilsley and Samuel Freeman as delegates, and a committee was appointed to draw instructions to be given them; the instructions reported by the committee were unfavour- able to separation ; when the report was announced, the article under
1 It was said that the service of a writ of £4 returnable in the old Common- wealth, was 40s. and the return of an execution from the eastern extremity of the country £3.
2 About half the towns and plantations only where represented. Fal. Gaz. Jan. 7, 1780.
32
254
Separation. [P. II.
which the choice was made was again called up and dismissed ; the persons chosen however, took seats in the convention. This body · met at the time appointed, Jan. 4, 17SG, and was organized by the choice of William Gorham of Gorham, president and Stephen Long- fellow jr. of the same town, clerk. A committee of nine was theu chosen to state the grievances under which the eastern counties la- boured in their connection with Massachusetts, and to form an esti- mate of the expense of a separate government. The committee reported the several subjects of grievance which followed from their connection with Massachusetts, but avoided making any estimate of the expense of an independent government, on the ground that it was uncertain what form the people would adopt. The convention added to the report a vote recommending a full representation of all the towns to the general court, and another earnestly inviting them to send delegates to an adjourned meeting of the convention to be held in September following. They adjourned without testing the opinions of the members upon the question of separation ; it having been thought advisable from the small number present, not to bring the subject immediately before them.1
The governor of Massachusetts, at the opening of the session in 1786, noticed the attempts at separation in his speech to the general court, and a committee was raised to report a bill declaratory of the allegiance which the inhabitants owed to the government, and of the ill consequences of a dismemberment of the Commonwealth. During the interval of adjournment, the merits of the question were discussed with more feeling and more ability than at any previous period, and all the arguments adduced on both sides which the case seemed to admit. Judge Thatcher of Biddeford, took an active part in the dis- cussion. This town-the separation from Falmouth having then taken place-appointed new delegates, viz. Peleg Wadsworth, Samuel Freeman, Stephen Hall, Daniel Davis, and Stephen Codman, who,
1 The number of delegates chosen was 10 from York, 12 from Cumberland and 11 from Lincoln, about 20 attended ; the largest towns in the District, as York, Wells, Falmouth, Scarborough and North- Yarmouth, were in the oppo- sition. Only three towns in York were represented, viz. Fryburg, Brown- field and Wells ; the county of Lincoln had the largest representation. North . Yarmouth transmitted to the convention a letter, assigning their reasons for declining to send a delegate, and for their opposition to the measure. They supposed that the charges of government would be at least four times as much as then paid ; another reason was, "the want of a sufficient number of gen- tlemen of ability in important matters of government, which "must render their councils weak if not contemptible." Fal. Gaz. March 9, 1786.
255
Separation.
C. 13.]
after a protracted and animated debate in town meeting, were instruct- ed to oppose " to the utmost of their abilities," any dismemberment of the Commonwealth. The convention, by the election of new members, being considered a new body, was reorganized by the choice of judge Gorham for president, and Stephen Longfellow jr. for clerk.1 The convention prepared an address to be transmitted to the several towns and plantations, and the form of a petition to the Legislature, in which they say that the grievances under which the people in the District laboured, " cannot be remedied in their present connection with the other part of the Commonwealthi. Our local situation, the nature of our commerce, and' the jarring of our interests, render it necessary, in order to an effectual removal of them that we should be erected into an independent State." The inhab- itants of the towns were requested to act upon the subject one way or the other, and transmit their proceedings to the convention at their adjournment on the 31st day of January 1787.
These proceedings were brought before the town at a meeting held in December, and a vote was taken on the abstract question of sep- aration, which stood eleven for and fifty against the measure.2
The convention met agreeably to adjournment, and the petition to the general court for an independent government, was put into the hands of a committee to present it or not, at their discretion. The meeting was thinly attended, and was again adjourned to meet at the same place on the first Wednesday, 5th day of September following. It is not to be disguised that little success awaited upon the efforts of the friends of separation at this period ; a large majority of the people were opposed to the plan, regarding it with apprehension, in consequence of the embarrassed state of the Commonwealth in its political and financial affairs. The committee, in view of this state of things, did not present the petition at the session following the adjournment, but delayed it until the next session after.3 The con- vention at their adjournment in September, issued an address to the
" The number of members returned was 5 from York, 16 from Cumberland, and 10 from Lincoln ; the convention continued but two days in session.
2 The votes of 32 towns were returned to the convention. Those from 8 towns were opposed to and those from 24 were in favor of the measure ; the votes from these 32 towns were 618 in the affirmative, and 352 in the negative ; eight towns which made no returns sent delegates -- the opinion of the other towns was not ascertained ; there were then 93 towns in the District.
, 3 Samuel Thompson was chairman of the committee.
256
Separation. [P. II.
people, stating that the petition for separation was before the general court, and that their deliberations on the subject would be assisted by being possessed of authentic information on the state of public opinion in the District relative to the question, and recommended to the inhabitants of the several towns to express their sentiments freely by subscribing yea or nay to papers which would be issued for the purpose.1 In March 1788 the general court took up the petition and committed it to a select committee, but nothing further was done with it that session.
At the January session in 1789, the petition was recommitted after a short debate, in which Dr. Jarvis of Boston opposed the further action of the legislature on the subject, as it went, he said, to the dismemberment of the right arm of the Commonwealth. Mr. Bow- doin who was chairman of the committee observed, that the towns represented in the convention were but about one third of the towns in the eastern counties, and that there was only a small number of the people in favor of a separation. The prayer of the petitioners was not granted. The convention in the mean time had had several ad- journments, at which there was no attendance but that of the presi- dent, secretary and the Portland members ; and after the unfavora- ble result of their petition, it was thought unnecessary and inexpedi- ent to keep alive that body ; no meeting was therefore held at the time of the last adjournment.2 Thus expired the first efforts to pro- cure an independent government in Maine, which were made by a few men, who took a deep and active interest in the measure, but who were not sustained by the great mass of the people.
The next attempt emanated from a meeting of the senators and representatives of the District, held in Boston in Feb. 1791. They first endeavored to bring the subject before the general court by re- viving the old petition of 1786, but it was so strongly urged that the petition did not represent the opinions of the people, that it was aban- doned and a number of the representatives united in an " address to the numerous and respectable inhabitants of the great and extensive District of Maine," recommending all the towns " to require their
' The returns made under this appeal contained about 1000 names, of which about 900 were in favor of separation.
? Three members from Portland attended at the time and place appointed. One was appointed chairman, another secretary, and the third put a motion for adjournment.
257
Separation.
C. 13.]
selectmen to insert in their warrant for calling a town -meeting, in May, for the choice of a representative, an article for their town, at such meeting to take into consideration the propriety of petitioning the general court at their next session, for their consent to our separa- tion from Massachusetts, and of being forthwith erected into a dis- tinct, separate, free, sovereign and independent State ; and that the number who may respectively vote, at such meeting, for or against the question may be taken down and minuted upon the town books, in order that the sentiments of the voters may be fully known and truly ascertained."
This recommendation received general attention, and many of the towns, especially those favourable to separation had their vores on the question recorded. In Portland, an animated discussion took place and the subject was committed to the Rev. Mr. Deane, Ste- phen Hall, Daniel Davis, Daniel Ilsley and Samuel Freeman, to report on the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed measure. The report of this intelligent committee embodies the principal arguments on the subject, and was favorable to separation ; they es- timated the whole expense of supporting a separate government at £1972. When the report was made at an adjourned meeting, a further debate took place and on a division the vote stood 38 for and 38 opposed to separation, the moderator gave his casting vote in the affirmative.1 The county of Lincoln was most decidedly in favour of the new government ; they suffered more inconvenience from the great distance of the seat of government and the deposit of judicial records than either of the others.
The cause was publicly advocated by Wm. Symmes, of Port- land, in a series of essays over the signature of Alcibiades, and Daniel Davis, published a pamphlet of over 50 pages, in which he warmly espoused the affirmative side of the question.
Notwithstanding the subject had been so long before the public, its friends were exceedingly embarrassed by the uncertainty which hung over the true state of public opinion. They were continually met in the legislature and abroad with the objection that the majority of the people were opposed to the measure. While this state of
1 In this debate, the expense of a separate government was strongly urged against the measure; to obviate this in some degree, one of the other side very zealous in the cause, replied that he would serve as governor two years for nothing !
258
Separation. [P. II.
things existed, it was found impossible to make much progress. They were determined to bring the matter at once to the test, and with this view the senators and representatives from Maine, at the January session of the legislature in 1792, presented a memorial in which they prayed that an order might be passed for taking the sense of the people upon the question. After debating the subject several days, the prayer of the memorial was granted by a vote 84 to 27, and the first Monday of May 1792, was appointed for the people in their several towns in the District, to give their votes for and against separation, which were required to be returned to the Secretary of State's office.
The question was now directly presented to the people in a tangi- ble shape, they must act one way or the other ; the papers were filled with laboured communications on the subject, appealing to the passion, pride and prejudices of the people in a variety of aspects. The order did not pass the senate until March 6, so that little time was left for discussion ; but this was improved with great spirit.
The vote was taken at the appointed time, and stood in the dif- ferent counties as follows :
York 202 yeas,
991 nays
Cumberland
618
596 «
Lincoln .
1090
501 "
Hancock
163
345 «
Washington
1 yea,
91 4
2074 2525
showing a clear plurality against the measure of 450 votes in the District.1 This result so unexpected to the sanguine advocates of separation, suspended for a short time any further attempts on their part.
In October 1793, however, a number of persons from various parts of the District being at Portland attending court, proposed to revive the subject, and for that purpose a meeting was called at the court-house in Portland, at which Gen. Wadsworth presided, by which a large committee was chosen to correspond with the towns in the District and invite them to send delegates to a convention, to be held on the last Tuesday in Dec. of that year. The principal reason assigned for this new attempt is expressed in the first vote
1 In Portland the vote was 86 yeas, 50 nays.
r
C. 13.]
Separation. 259
adopted by the primary meeting, " voted as the opinion of this meeting, that the time of revising the constitution of the Common- wealth, will be a proper time for erecting the five eastern counties into an independent government." Portland elected Samuel Free- man, Daniel Tucker, John Thrasher, Samuel Waldo, John Fox and Jolin Mussey, delegates to this convention. A strong spirit of op- position existed in the town, and three meetings were called on the subject ; at the first meeting the article to choose delegates was dis- missed, at the second, three were chosen, and at the third meeting three more, a much larger number was proposed with the avowed intention of voting down the project in the convention, two of the persons chosen, at least, Waldo and Tucker, were hostile to the separation.1
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.