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 28
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
The convention which assembled at this call appointed Daniel Cony chairman, and S. Freeman clerk, but not being numerously attended, it was thought expedient to do nothing more than to re- commend another convention to be held in Portland on the third Wednesday of June following, to take into consideration the expe- diency of constituting the three counties, York, Cumberland and Lincoln, into a separate State, thus excluding the two lower counties, Hancock and Washington, which were decidedly hostile to separa- tion in any form. To this summons there was not a full response, but fourteen towns and three plantations were represented by 25 members. This town elected five delegates, viz. Thomas Motley, Salmon Chase, James Lunt, Wm. Symmes and John Bagley. Wm. Gorham was chosen president and Nath'l Dummer of Hallowell, secretary. The members present were favourable to separation, but as there was not a full representation, they did not think it proper to come to any decision on the subject ; they therefore adjourned to the second Tuesday of Oct. 1794, after having made a new calcula- tion of the expense of a separate government, and prepared an ad- dress to the people to unite with them in discussing the question.2 The people seem to have been weary of the continual agitation of the subject.
1
1 The towns represented were Fryburg, Brownfield, Waterborough, Port- land, Falmouth, Gorham, Hebron, Georgetown, Hallowell, Bowdoin, Winth- rop, Readfield, Monmouth, Mount Vernon and Winslow.
2 Their calculation was as follows : " The amount necessary for the sup- port of government as appears by the treasurer's report to the legislature in January last is £30,122. 13. 6. per annum. The proportion of this to be paid
260
Separation. [P. II.
At the meeting in October, twenty towns and 5 plantations were represented, the subject of separation was debated for four days, when the sentiment of the convention was digested in the form of 13 resolutions, which stated the inconveniences to which they were subjected from the union with Massachusetts, their ability to support a separate government, that their prosperity required " a total sepa- ration," "and any expedient short of that would not be salutary, but dangerous, as it might amuse and deceive the people for a while."
A committee was chosen to prepare an address, which should embody the facts contained in the resolutions, together with a revised calculation of the expense of a new government, to be sent to all the towns, with a renewed invitation to join the convention by their del- egates at the adjournment on the last Wednesday in January 1795. At this adjournment an address was prepared, signed by Wm. Gor- ham president, attested by Salmon Chase secretary pro tem. and with the other proceedings of the convention published in a pamphlet containing 31 pages.
In the address the people were requested to think of the subject, and give in their votes upon it at the annual meeting in April ; the convention was adjourned to receive the votes. Very little attention was paid to the recommendation, and the friends of the cause had the mortification of witnessing another repulse of their suit to the people. In this town the vote was taken May 6 1795, on this ques- tion, " whether it is now or soon will be expedient for the three western counties of the District of Maine to be separated from Mas- sachusetts and formed into an independent State," and stood yeas 19, nays 10.1
by the District of Maine, on the principles of the last valuation will be about £5000. An additional sum, not less we presume, than £1200 is remitted to the general treasury from this District, in duties of excise. The sum total is £6,200. The proportion of public taxes on the principles of the last valuation, to be defrayed by the counties of Hancock and Washington, is to that which is to be defrayed by the counties of York, Cumberland and Lincoln, nearly as 16 to 140. The probable expense of a new government is calculated as fol- lows : Governor's salary £300, Lt. Governor £120, Secretary and Treasurer £300, Clerks of ditto £140, Judges of the S. J. Court £850, Attorney General £150, legislative department £1500, Clerks of both houses £60, messenger £30, contingencies £1200-£4650-difference in favour of a new government £1550."
1The legal voters then on the question were such as paid a poll tax and another tax equal to two thirds of a poll tax. The exceedingly small vote shows that very little interest was taken on the subject in this town.
C. 13.]
Separation. 261
No further public movement was made until January 1797, when the subject was presented to the legislature in a number of petitions from different parts of the District, praying that the votes of the in- habitants should be given on the question. The petitions were com- mitted and contrary to expectation, the committee reported in favor of the prayer and a resolve was passed March 2d, authorising and directing the qualified voters to assemble on the second Wednesday of May, and give in their votes on this question, " shall application be made to the legislature for their consent to a separation of the District of Maine from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and that the same may be erected into a State ?" ?!
At the same session an act was passed which obviated one of the grievances that had found a place in every catalogue which had been issued by the various conventions in the District ; this was the re- moval of the records of the Supreme Judicial Court from Boston to the several counties to which they appertained, and the clerks of the counties were authorised to authenticate copies, which had hitherto been done in Boston. This, although public convenience and jus- tice required it, was regarded as a sacrifice to the pending question of separation, and no doubt conciliated many opponents.
The result of this new effort was alike unsuccessful, and it was found that a majority of the people were not yet ripe for the measure.
After the unfortunate termination of this renewed experiment, the subject was permitted to repose until 1806, when a still small voice was lifted in its favor, which was hushed almost as soon as uttered. In this town an article was inserted in a warrant for calling a meeting of the inhabitants, to see what steps the to vn would take in the case. The article was debated in the meeting, and the further consideration of it dismissed. Little was said in the papers on the subject at that time, but its introduction was probably a prelude to measures adopt- ed the following winter at Boston, by a number of senators, repre- sentatives and citizens of Maine, who assembled together in the sen- ate chamber, and passed a resolve to apply to the legislature for an order to take the sense of the people again on the subject. In pur- suance of this application, a resolve was passed appointing the first Monday in April 1807, as the time for the people to give in their votes on the measure.
The question was agitated at an unfortunate time for the advocates -
" The answer of Portland to this question was yea 38, nay 70.
33
262
Separation. [P. II.
of the separation ; political excitement was then raging violently, and absorbed every other subject of a public nature. Very little discus- sion took place in the papers, and the vote was almost silently taken. In this town, the ballot stood 73 yeas, and 392 nays, while at the same meeting the votes for governor stood for Strong 492, Sullivan 428, making an aggregate of 455 votes more than were given on the question of separation. In the 150 towns, from which returns were made, the vote was 3,370 for separation and 9,404 against it.1
This decisive expression of public sentiment put the question,' which had been before the public with little intermission for 22 years, at rest for some time, during which, the suspension of foreign inter- course and the war became more engrossing topics of consideration. But soon after the conclusion of peace in 1815, the subject was again revived, and a more organized effort was made to accomplish the object ; societies were formed in different places, public meet- ings were held, and leading gentlemen in the District made great ex- ertions to arouse the people to a favorable consideration of the sub- ject." They succeeded in procuring a number of petitions to the legislature for a separation ; these were referred to a committee who reported favourably to the petitioners, and a day was appointed for the people to give in their votes in favor or against the measure. The whole number of votes returned on this occasion was 16,894, of which 10,393 were in favor, and 6,501 opposed to separation.3
On this state of things, the legislature passed an act regulating the principles on which a separation might take place, the detail of which it is not necessary here to give, and authorised the inhabitants to assemble in their respective towns on the first Monday in Septem- ber 1816, to choose delegates to a convention to meet at Brunswick on the last Monday in September. They were also required to give their votes on the question whether it is expedient to forin the Dis- trict into an independent State, which votes were to be returned to said convention, and if it appeared that a majority of 5 to 4 of the votes so returned were in favor of separation, the convention was to proceed and form a constitution and not otherwise.
The votes of Portland are not in the official returns.
2 The Union Society established in June 1815 for this District, in a circular sent to every town, remark-" In our exertions for the general good of our country, we must keep an eye to the separation of Maine from Massachusetts. This subject will soon be spread before the people."
3 The whole number of legal voters in the District of Maine at that time was 37,858.
263
Separation.
C. 13.]
Under this act the people proceeded to vote and to elect delegates to the convention. The whole number of votes returned was 22,466, of which number 11,927 were in favor and 10,539 were against separation ; a majority of 5 to 4 of the votes returned is 12,481 1-9, so that there was a deficiency of the number required of 554 1-9 votes. The committee of the convention, however, to whom the subject was referred, by a peculiar mode of reasoning arrived at a different conclusion. They construed the act to mean not an aggregate majority of 5 to 4 of all the votes returned, but this ratio of the majorities of the several towns and plantations. Their own language will perhaps make their meaning more clear. " As the delegates must be apportioned according to the respective majorities of their towns, so on the question of separation, the majorities of yeas in the towns and plantations in favor must be, to the majority of nays in those opposed as five to four of the votes returned. The corporate majorities of yeas must be placed in one column, and those of nays in the other, and each added-then as five is to four, so is the aggregate majority of yeas in the towns and plantations in favor, to the aggregate majority of nays in those opposed." The result of this calculation gave 6,031 yeas and 4,825 nays, exceeding the le- gislative majority by 416 votes. This report was accepted in the convention by a vote of 103 to 84 ; the minority entered their pro- test upon its journals. The convention proceeded to raise commit- tees to draft a constitution in the recess, and to apply to Massachu- setts and to Congress for the requisite sanctions ; but all measures were suspended until the result of the application to the legislature of Massachusetts was known, which being unfavorable to the construc- tion of the act given by the majority of the convention, no further proceedings were had on the subject.1 The protest earnestly con-
1 Of this convention Wm. King was chosen President, and Samuel K. Whiting of Portland, secretary-the votes of Portland were yeas 475, nays 201. The convention consisted of 188 members.
A committee of the Legislature of Massachusetts, to whom the subject was committed, use the following language in their report relative to the con- struction of the convention, they " have no hesitation in saying that the com- mittee have misconstrued the act by which their powers were defined : that the word "majority" refers to the majority of votes returned, and not to the aggregate of local and municipal majorities : that this is a self evident po- sition, resulting from the perusal of the act and not susceptible of illustration or contravention by any argument. That of consequence the contingency provided by the act as prerequisite to the formation of a constitution, and as a condition of the consent of this legislature, to the separation of Maine, has not occurred, and that the powers of said convention are at an end."
264
Separation. [P. II.
tended against the construction given to the word majority by the committee, and against adjournment or the appointment of commit- tees with reference to a future meeting of the convention, declaring that the majority required by the legislature not having been obtained, the duty of the convention then terminated and "the exercise of further powers" by it, was " usurpation."
The legislature of Massachusetts sustained the views of the minor- ity and resolved " that the powers of the Brunswick Convention have ceased," and that it was inexpedient for the present general court to adopt any measures in regard to the separation of the Dis- trict of Maine.
Thus terminated this struggle in which the most strenuous and persevering exertions had been used, and in which, for the first time a majority in favor of separation had been obtained.
The proceedings and unfavorable result of the Brunswick Con- vention, for a time rendered the cause of separation unpopular, and chilled the ardour of its friends. The first attempt made to revive it was in Dec. 1817, by a committee, of which Gen. Chandler of Monmouth was chairman ; which addressed letters to gentlemen in various parts of the District, with a view to sound them and ascer- tain the expediency of again acting on the subject. A meeting of a number of members of the legislature, of which Gen. King was chairman, was held in Boston early in February following, before which the doings of this committee were laid, and which proceeded languidly at first to resuscitate the favourite measure. Nothing ma- terial was done until the session of the legislature in January 1819, when another meeting was held in Boston of persons friendly to sep- aration, which appointed a committee of fifteen gentlemen, " under instructions to make preparatory arrangements for carrying into effect a separation from Massachusetts, and the establishment of an inde- pendent State government.""1
This committee published a circular in April, urging the people to active exertions in the cause, and the several towns to send a full representation to the legislature, and to forward petitions to the next session, " soliciting the passage of a law authorising the sense of the inhabitants of the District to be again taken." This appeal set the
'Circular. It is a noticeable fact that in most of the attempts at separa- tion, the first movements proceeded from meetings held in Boston.
265
Separation.
C. 13.]
ball once more in full motion, and the question was discussed with much animation.
The subject came early before the legislature in June 1819, and was committed to a large joint committee, who entered immediately on the duty assigned them.1 In a few days they reported a bill con- taining the conditions of separation, the majority necessary for secur- ing the measure, the time for taking the vote, and in case of success the ulterior course to be pursued, which after slight amendments passed into a law. The act provided for taking the vote on the fourth Monday in July, and that a majority being obtained of 1500 in favor of separation, that delegates should be chosen to meet in convention at Portland, on the second Monday in October 1819, to frame a constitution for the new State. Some opposition to the passage of the law was made in both branches of the legislature of Massachusetts, but it passed by a large majority, the 9 senators and 112 of the 132 members of the house present from Maine voting in the affirmative.
As the period for testing public sentiment on the question approach- ed, a warm and brilliant discussion of the subject took place, in which the arguments on both sides were presented in every point of view, . and although former divisions of party were not allowed openly to mingle in the discussion, yet they undoubtedly had some influence on the final question ; the political papers admitted communications on both sides. On the day of trial the vote was strong and decisive, giving a majority in favor of separation of 9,959.ª Other proceed- ings were subsequently had pursuant to the act of the legislature, and the convention met at Portland October 11 1819, by which our pres- ent constitution was formed. The State was admitted an indepen- dent member of the Union by Congress March 4 1820, and became an independent State the 16th of the same month. The first elec- tion of State officers under the new constitution, took place April 3, 1820, and the first legislature convened at Portland, on Wednesday May 31st of the same year.
" There were about 100 petitions from incorporated towns and plantations, and others from individuals in favor of separation, and a number of remon- strances against it. The representatives from Maine were 125 for, and 25 against separation.
2 The vote of Portland was 637 yeas, 188 nays ; the official list of returns from the District was yeas 17,091, nays 7,132.
-
266
Miscellanies.
[P. II.
CHAPTER 14.
Miscellanies-Cumberland and Oxford Canal-Bridges-Acade- my and Schools-Library-Atheneum-Charitable Societies- Epidemics-Change of government to city form-Population and character of the inhabitants-Customs of the people at different periods-Amusements-Theatre-Conclusion.
AFTER the adoption of the Constitution of the U. S. and the po- litical affairs of the country had become settled on a firm and stable foundation which were productive of general prosperity, our people began to look around them to increase the facilities of trade and to make improvements in their local condition. As early as 1791 a committee was chosen by several towns in this county to ascertain the practicability of opening a canal from Sebago pond to the Presumpscot river. A report was made in September of that year very favorable to the design, in which it is said that lumber, produce &c. might be brought, if the canal should be opened, a distance of 60 or 70 miles to the falls at Sacarappa. The plan was prosecut- ed with considerable zeal by Woodbury Storer and some others, who in 1795, obtained an act of incorporation under the name of the Cumberland Canal, to open a canal from the Sebago to the Presump- scot river at Saccarappa. Another company was incorporated at the same time, by the name of the Proprietors of the Falmouth Ca- nal for the purpose of uniting the waters of the Presumpscot river above Saccarappa with those of Fore river.1
But the limited capital of our people was not equal to their enter- prising spirit, and subscriptions to the stock could not be obtained within the ten years fixed by the charter for the completion of the undertaking. As the time of its expiration drew near, an extension of five years was obtained, which also passed away without witness- ing even a commencement of the work. The undertaking was evi- dently more expensive than was contemplated by its projectors and much beyond the means and resources of the country at that period. We may judge of the under estimate of the proprietors by the fact that the amount of property they were allowed by the first charter
' The leading persons in these projects were Woodbury Storer, Joseph Noyes, Nathaniel Deering, and Joseph Jewett.
267
Cumberland and Oxford Canal.
C. 14.]
to hold was only $20,000, which in 1804 was enlarged to $120,000. Mr. Storer, whose heart was bent on carrying this improvement into execution though frustrated in his first attempts, did not permit the subject to pass from his mind. During the period of commer- cial restrictions and war, all projects of improvement were of course suspended, but immediately after the separation of the State, when new life was sent into all the channels of industry and enterprise, the project was again revived, and in 1821 a charter was procured to construct a canal from Waterford in the county of Oxford to the navigable waters of Fore river, under the name of the Cumberland and Oxford Canal. To aid the projectors in this more extensive scheme, a lottery was granted to them in 1823, by which they were authorised to raise the sum of $50,000 to enable them to accomplish the laudable undertaking.1 In 1825 as a further measure to promote the design, the enterprising projectors procured the Canal Bank to be incorporated with a capital of $300,000, of which it was one of the conditions that a quarter part of its capital should be invested in the stock of the Cumberland and Oxford Canal.2
Under these advantages and by the aid of individual subscriptions the work was commenced in 1828. In 1823 the Engineer had esti- mated the whole expense of the work from Sebago pond to Fore river at Stroudwater at $137,343 ; it was eventually extended to the harbor in this town and completed in 1830 at an expense of $206,000, and is now in successful operation.3
Among other improvements contemplated by our inhabitants at the same time, was opening new avenues to the town. The Neck was nearly surrounded by water, and the only entrances to it were by the two roads over Bramhall's hill, one leading from Stroudwater and the west, the other from the east by Back Cove. In 1791, the in- habitants held a meeting on the subject of making an avenue at the
, 1 From the drawings of the Lottery and the sale of the grant, they raised $27,000.
2 As a consideration for this condition, the Bank was exempted from the payment of the usual tax to the State.
3 Mr. Storer, its early projector and faithful friend, did not live to witness the success of the undertaking ; he died in 1826. Mr. Storer came here very young from Wells during the revolution ; in 1780 he married a daughter of Dea. Benjamin Titcomb for his first wife and for his second, a daughter of James Boyd. He was for many years a respectable merchant and an active and in- fluential citizen ; he represented the town repeatedly in the house of repre- sentatives, and the county in the Senate of Massachusetts, and brought up a large and interesting family of children, who revere his memory.
268
Bridges. [P. II.
easterly end of the town to cross Back Cove between Seacomb's and Sandy points. A committee was appointed to apply to the court of sessions to have a road laid out in that direction, and another to petition the general court to assist the town by lottery or otherwise, in building a dam across the cove and erecting grist mills upon it.1
The application for aid from government being unsuccessful, cer- tain spirited individuals owning property in the easterly part of the town and a few at Back Cove, united in 1793 and obtained an act of "incorporation to build a bridge across the Cove at their own expense. The charter was procured in February 1794, under the name of the proprietors of Back Core Bridge, and in September 1796, they had pushed on their undertaking with so much expedition that the bridge was passable for teams.
At the west end of the town the owners of property assisted by persons in Cape-Elizabeth were not less enterprising ; at the same session of the legislature, they procured an act of incorporation to erect a bridge across Fore river from Bramhall's point, to be called the Portland Bridge. The work however was not completed until 1800, when its corporate name was changed to Vaughan's Bridge in honour of the principal instigator of the undertaking and its chief proprietor. Its length is 2600 feet. These two bridges are support- ed by tolls and are the most frequented avenues into town for the eastern and western travel ; they were built originally of cobb work in the manner of a wharf and filled in with earth, but have since undergone several thorough repairs and alterations. They were not profitable speculations to the original undertakers, but have both passed into other hands at such prices as to make them safe invest- ments.
Two other bridges have since been erected, one in 1806 across the western extremity of Back Cove called Deering's Bridge, built by the inhabitants of Portland and Falmouth and made free ; the other the Portland Bridge, constructed on piles across Fore riv- er at an expense of about $7000, under an act of incorporation granted in February 1823. There are now six avenues on the land . side into town all of which are over bridges, except the old road
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.