USA > New York > New York City > A history of the parish of Trinity Church in the city of New York, pt 4 > Part 24
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49
The publication of this pamphlet was soon followed by "meetings of the Episcopalians" from various parishes, especially St. Mark's, St. George's, Ascension, and Grace,
267
Attack on the Parish
1846]
in which learned gentlemen of the legal profession spoke persuasively of the great wrong done to the whole body of " Episcopalians " in New York by those portions of the Act of 1814 which defined the rights of the Corporation and changed its name.
At these meetings a course of action was determined upon. A committee of fifteen was appointed to draft and present to the Legislature at its session in January, 1846, a memorial on this subject. The persons selected for the committee were conspicuous for social rank, ability, and legal knowledge. Their memorial set forth the facts of the change made thirty-two years before, claiming that it dis- franchised the great body of the "Episcopalians" of the city ; that the present corporators of the mother Parish were few in number ; that the Vestry of Trinity was prac- tically a self-perpetuating body ; that the Trust Fund of which it was the custodian was managed solely for the benefit of Trinity Parish and not for the extension and aid of "the Episcopal Church " at large in the city of New York. The memorial prayed for the repeal of the Act of 1814, or those sections which related to the right of suf- frage in Trinity Church.
Copies of the memorial were industriously circulated for signature. It is said that several clergymen when they received their friends on New Year's day, 1846, had copies upon a convenient table to which the attention of guests was called and which they were invited to sign. Notices were also published in the daily press, of times and places where signatures would be received.
Thus assailed the Vestry took action. The Comp- troller had already placed before the Standing Com- mittee " a copy of the Public Notice, given as prescribed by law, of an intention to apply to the legislature at its present session for the repeal in whole or in part
268
History of Trinity Church
[1846
of the act of January 25, 1814, relating to this Cor- poration." It was recommended at a meeting held January 12, 1846, that a " special Committee be ap- pointed to conduct the opposition of this Corporation to certain intended applications to the Legislature of which notices have been given in the public newspapers." 1 This committee was to do its work in the way it thought best, and had authority to employ counsel and to issue such publications as might be advisable. It was also directed to prepare at once on behalf of the Corporation, " A Re- monstrance to the Legislature."
The suggestions and recommendations of the Standing Committee were approved by the Vestry ; and the Comp- troller, William H. Harison, the clerk, William E. Duns- comb, Mr. David B. Ogden, Mr. John I. Morgan, and Mr. Samuel G. Raymond were appointed as the commit- tee. 2 They reported January 14th. The Remonstrance was ordered to be engrossed, and signed officially by the Rector, Comptroller, and Clerk. It was also to be signed by the Churchwardens and the Vestrymen, "or such of them as shall see fit to sign the same." The Comptroller and Clerk were authorized to affix the seal of the Corporation and forward the document to Albany for presentation to the Legislature.3
As might have been expected the "Remonstrance" was calm, dignified, and deliberate. It recited the pro- visions of the charter, and claimed that under its direc- tions, the Colonial Act of 1704, and the State Acts of 1784 and 1788, a definite corporation was intended. It showed that even in the early days of the Corporation it was popu- larly known as Trinity Church. The sole reason for the Charter and the several acts was to form a parish of the
1 Records, iii., folio 383.
2 Ibid., folio 383.
8 Ibid., folio 384. A Remonstrance. 8 vo. New York, James A. Sparks, 1846.
الحرية 7 6
269
Attack on the Parish
1846]
Church of England in the City of New York and to con- form the legal status of that parish to the political changes from Colony to State. It enforced the arguments used by Bishop Hobart in his pamphlet written at the time when the Act of 1814 was passed and also the lucid explanations of Col. Troup before the Council of Revision. It then commented on the time chosen for this application and the questionable taste of the memorialists in seeking to throw a firebrand into the Church at a time of great excite- ment, when very many of its members unfortunately could not calmly and temperately act on any matter of great interest.
An attempt at a reply to the "Remonstrance " was made by the Committee for the Memorialists, in which the arguments there presented are traversed by the recital of facts concerning the original Charter and other acts. The claim is made that the broad and liberal terms by which the only qualification for membership was inhabitancy in the City of New York, could not be abrogated by an act of the Legislature, and that, while there could not be any legal claim set up to the property of Trinity Church by the other Church Corporations of Episcopalians, " or a right as corporations " to participate in the management of the affairs of the mother Parish, yet the rights of individual members of those corporations, being inhabitants of the City of New York in communion of the Protestant Episcopal Church, could not be abrogated by "non-user." The memorialists say that they do not seek to disturb Trinity Church in the possession of the property which is a Trust Fund for the benefit of all the inhabitants of the City of New York, but seek to be reinstated in their legal rights by a judicial decision of the courts of the State as soon as the obstacle of the Act of 1814 shall have been re- moved by the Legislature. The date of this "reply " is
270
History of Trinity Church
[1846
February 2, 1846. It is signed by all the members of the committee. 1
To this reply an answer was made, by a writer signing himself "A Vestryman of Trinity Church " ; it appeared in print in the New York Express for February 7, 1846, and in it many of the positions of the reply are refuted. The literature of this controversy is extensive, but of small value ; no further citations need be made. 2
A petition to the Legislature protesting against the Memorial was drawn up to be signed by members of Trinity Parish. The fact that for nearly one hundred and fifty years the Wardens and Vestrymen had been elected solely by members of the Parish, and the confusion and disorders that a new method would introduce, were dwelt upon. There was great danger that by such a course the property of the Corporation would be dissipated. Upon these grounds the petitioners prayed that the request of the memorialists be not granted. This was signed by one hundred and fifty-eight representative members of the Parish. Another petition of remonstrance, to be signed by "members of the Protestant Episcopal Church not in the Parish of Trinity Church," was circulated and received the signatures of seven hundred and sixty-four persons from various parishes.
The Memorial and the Remonstrances were duly pre- sented in the Senate of the State of New York and by that body referred to its Committee on Charitable and Religious Societies. Arguments for the memorialists and
1 Their names were Luther Bradish, Peter G. Stuyvesant, Frederic De Peyster, Isaac Carow, Robert B. Minturn, Frederick L. Winston, John Smyth Rogers, Stewart Brown, James W. Dominick, Peter Lorillard, Jr., Stephen Cambreleng, Philip S. Van Rensselaer, Richard L. Schiefflin, Jeremiah Van Rensselaer, M.D., etc., Prosper M. Wetmore.
? A list of documents and pamphlets in this controversy, with such extracts as seem most important, is given in the Appendix.
E
271
Attack on the Parish
1846]
remonstrants were heard by the committee. A majority report recommended that no legislative action be had on the subject, and that the prayer of the petitioners be denied. Mr. Orville Clark of Washington County presented a minority report recommending the repeal of the Act of 1814. He presented an elaborate argument in justification of his opinion and accompanied it with " so many extraor- dinary statements, and what are deemed erroneous repre- sentations of facts and documents and so many inferences believed to be entirely unwarranted," that a full examina- tion of it was made by a writer who ably exposes his fallacies and shows the essential justice of the report of the majority of the committee.1
On the 5th of February, 1846, a resolution was adopted in the Senate of the State of New York calling for a detailed return of the property of the Corporation of Trinity Church, both real and personal, a full description of " the several lots or parcels of land owned by them, or from which they draw an annual rent," their gross income and annual expenditures, " with a summary of the purposes to which it is applied."
The return was to be made within thirty days after the receipt of a certified copy of the resolution. After due con- sideration by the Vestry, it was ordered that, without ad- mitting the legal obligation to make a return, " the information desired by the Hon. Senate of the State be given to that body as soon as it can be prepared, and if possible within the time they ask to have it in." 2
The draft of the return to the Senate of the State was presented by the Comptroller at the March Vestry meeting, and, after consideration, adopted. It was resolved that it be signed and sworn to by the Comptroller, and that "a
1 P. 3, An Examination of the Minority Report Made by the Hon. Orville Clark. 2 Records, liber iii., folio 385.
.
1
272
History of Trinity Church
[1846
proper certificate signed by the Rector and Clerk under the seal of this Corporation be annexed thereto, stating the same to be the return of this Corporation, made in pur- suance of the said resolution of the Senate." 1
The Legislature adjourned without taking action, and so, for the time, the affair terminated. The renewal of this assault upon the Corporation, with the final vindication and victory of the Church, will be related in a subsequent chapter.
1 Records, iii., folio 387.
$
CHAPTER XII.
CONSECRATION OF THE NEW CHURCH.
Preparations for the Consecration of the New Church-Invitations to the Clergy- Protest from Nine Clergymen-The Consecration Service-Report of the Committee on Arrangements-Committee on Pews in New Church Appointed.
T HE preparations for the consecration of the new edifice proceeded rapidly ; but the committee having them in charge met with peculiar difficulties in their work. Embarrassment was caused by the antagonism developed through the movement to obtain a repeal of the Act of 1814, and many stood aloof, regarding the pro- ceedings with discontent, and refusing to participate in the joy of the occasion. Under the peculiar circumstances and the anomalous position of the Diocese, it seemed in- expedient to invite all the Bishops of the American Church as guests. To discriminate was impossible; so that it was finally resolved to limit the invitation to the Bishop of Western New York, Dr. William Heatchcote De Lancey. His paternal ancestors had borne an honorable part in the affairs of Trinity, for he was a lineal descendant of Col. Caleb Heathcote.
The correspondence with the Bishop is as follows :
" NEW YORK, May 9, 1846.
" MY DEAR BISHOP :-
"You are invited by me as Chairman of the Committee of Arrange- ments to attend the Consecration of Trinity Church on the Festival of the Ascension May 21st. The hope is entertained that you will be able to come on a variety of accounts, but more especially from the VOL. IV .- 18.
273
:
274
History of Trinity Church
[1846
deeply grateful sense of your important services in behalf of our Cor- poration in our recent difficulties.
"In case you should find it convenient to come, I beg you will make my house your home.
"Yours very respectfully, " WILLIAM BERRIAN.
"P. S. You are the only Bishop to whom a special invitation has been extended ; there being thought to be a peculiar propriety in send- ing it to you : much delicacy and difficulty in going any farther."
" GENEVA, May 15, 1846.
" MY DEAR DOCTOR :-
"I found your letter here on my return home from a visitation.
" It will afford me great pleasure to be present at the Consecration of Trinity Church. Under its walls lie the remains of my ancestors, one of whom, Col. Caleb Heathcote, was a vestryman appointed by the Charter of 1697.
" I remain sincerely "Your friend and brother, "W. H. DE LANCEY.
" Rev. Dr. BERRIAN,
" Chairman of Com. of Arrangements." 1
Special invitations were also issued to all the clergy- men of the city and Diocese, and to those clergymen of the American Church "who manifested, pursuant to a published request, an inclination to be present." ?
A selected list of laymen, who held offices of honor or trust in the Church, was made, and invitations sent to the persons thus chosen.
It was also determined that admission to the Church should be by cards, which were issued to all corpora- tors, the families of the city clergy, and to others who had any special claim.
And now came a new cause of dispute and discussion
1 Nos. 440, 441, Berrian MSS.
º See Consecration Correspondence, Appendix.
275
Consecration of New Church
1846]
which is not without its comical side. The invitations to the clergy ran thus :
"OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION OF TRINITY CHURCH. "NEW YORK, May 7, 1846. " DEAR SIR :-
"The vestry of Trinity Church in the City of New York, respect- fully invite you to be present at the Consecration of their new Parish Church on the feast of the Ascension of our Blessed Lord, (21st instant) at half past ten o'clock, and to meet at the residence of Mr. William J. Bunker, No. 39 Broadway.
" If agreeable to you to accept this invitation you will please send a surplice and scarf for your use upon the occasion, to the place and before the hour on the day before named.
" We are very sincerely, "Your Obedt. Servts.,
"WILLIAM BERRIAN, D.D., ADAM TREDWELL, PHILIP HONE, WM. E. DUNSCOMB, WM. H. HARISON,
Committee of
Arrangements."
In this invitation there appears a clause which caused great searchings of heart, and gave rise to a brief but mighty sensation. The request to appear in surplice and scarf was thought to symbolize the Rome-ward tendencies of the Puseyites. The columns of the city newspapers and of the Prostestant Churchman were filled with in- dignant and sorrowful communications. A writer in The Commercial Advertiser, after expressing the great interest all Episcopalians took in the welfare of Trinity and the "noble building which will remain we trust for centuries as a monument of the liberality, and, in most respects, the taste of that venerable Corporation, which caused it to be erected," says there is "one cause of deep regret with respect to the approaching consecration, and that is the novel terms on which the acceptance of the invitation to the clergy has been placed by the Rector and lay Com-
276
History of Trinity Church [1846
mittee of arrangements." In his opinion "the surplice is ever associated with the offering of prayer and the admin- istration of the sacraments in houses set apart for the wor- ship of Almighty God." To wear " this vestment in public processions in the streets we look upon as an innovation on established customs and also not justified by good taste." This is not "the first nor the second, nor the tenth, nor the twentieth innovation; to submit in silence any more strikes us as a plain dereliction of duty." He is troubled at the attempt to unprotestantize the very name of the Protestant Episcopal Church itself. He considers " all and every innovation as tending in one way, and that toward a church which anathematizes our own." He thinks that all the members of "our Protestant Church " will appreciate the reason why "all reflecting Protestant Episcopal clergymen " will refrain from "participation in the services of the occasion." 1
Nor was this all; nine clergymen of New York City and its vicinity joined in a note of declination to the committee. Their remarkable communication is given here in full, as an apt illustration of the temper of the alarmists of that day :
"NEW YORK, May 18, 1846.
" The Rev. WILLIAM BERRIAN, D.D., ADAM TREDWELL, PHILIP HONE, WM. E. DUNSCOMB, WM. H. HARISON, - " GENTLEMEN :--
Committee on
Arrangements.
"The undersigned have been respectfully invited by you on the part of the Corporation of Trinity Church to be present at the Conse- cration of the new Parish Church on the 21st inst., at the residence of Mr. Bunker, 39 Broadway.
1 The New- York Commercial Advertiser, Tuesday afternoon, May 19, 1846.
277
Consecration of New Church
1846]
" This invitation is accompanied with a request that if agreeable to us to accept it, each one will please to send a surplice and scarf and before the hour mentioned.
" It has heretofore been the custom of the clergy with the sanction of the ecclesiastical authority of the Diocese to appear at Consecrations in the gown and bands, and we have not learned that on the present occasion any change has been thought needful or expedient by the acting Bishop or the Standing Committee of our Church.
"In our judgment a deviation from the established usage of the Diocese in such case is uncalled for, and at this time especially open to much animadversion.
" We are unwilling to sanction such innovation or to accept an invita- tion based upon such a condition and must therefore respectfully decline to be present at the approaching Consecration.
" We remain, Gentlemen, " Very sincerely your " Obt. Servants,
" HENRY ANTHON,1 HUGH SMITH,' B. C. CUTLER,3 ROBERT BOLTON,4 JOHN S. STONE,5 KINGSTON GODDARD,6
R. C. SHIMEALL,7
JOHN W. BROWN,8 WM. H. LEWIS."'
And here is another letter on the subject :
" BROOKLYN, May 18, 1846.
"REV. AND DEAR SIR :-
"The invitation from the Committee of Arrangements of which you are chairman, to be present at the Consecration of Trinity Church
1 Rector of St. Mark's Church in the Bowerie, New York City.
2 Rector of St. Peter's Church, New York City.
3 Rector of St. Ann's Church, Brooklyn, New York.
4 Rector of Christ Church, Pelham, New York.
5 Rector of Christ Church, Brooklyn, New York.
6 Rector of St. John's Church, Clifton, Staten Island, New York.
7 Rector of St. Jude's Church, New York.
8 Rector of St. George's Church, Astoria, New York, and Editor of The Protestant Churchman.
9 Rector of Calvary Church, Brooklyn, New York.
1
278
History of Trinity Church
[1846
has been duly received, and I deem it respectful to you to assign my reasons for not attending.
"It is expected if the invitation be accepted that I should send my surplice for my use on that occasion.
" Now as our own Bishops heretofore have never made any such requisition : as it appears an innovation particularly uncalled for in the present state of affairs, and it gave much offence on a recent occasion,1 when left to the voluntary choice of the clergy, I shall feel it my duty to decline the acceptance of your invitation, regretting at the same time that any further obstacles should be thrown in the way of that unity and peace which all must desire for our diocese.
" Very respectfully,
"Your friend and brother in Christ,
" WM. H. LEWIS.
" Rev. Dr. BERRIAN, " Chairman, etc."
The attitude of these nine clergymen, their parish- ioners and sympathizers, did not, however, check the enthusiasm of Churchmen throughout the Union; nor did the warning against "innovation " repress the desire of many clergymen to attend the Consecration or the urgent request of laymen for cards of admission. Dr. Berrian says in his Historical Sketch : " The consecration of Trinity Church awakened a more general curiosity and excited a deeper interest than anything of the kind I have ever known. In some, indeed, whose families had been for generations connected with it, and some who had been connected with it for generations themselves, but who still surviving remained as scattered monuments of the past, this interest was intense." ?
Upon the morning of the Feast of the Ascension, the invited guests assembled in the spacious rooms of the Mansion House in lower Broadway, which had been courteously offered for the occasion by Mr. William
1 The Consecration of Grace Church, Broadway, above Tenth Street, on March 7, 1846.
2 Pp. 316, 317, Dr. Berrian's Historical Sketch.
The present church was commenced in 1839 and completed in 1846. It was consecrated on Ascension Day, May 21st, 1846.
279
Consecration of New Church
1846]
Bunker, the proprietor. Clergy from New York and the neighboring dioceses were in attendance, as well as many laymen who held official positions in the Diocese, beside the wardens and vestrymen of the various city parishes, and the scholars of Trinity School.
The procession was formed in the following order :
I. The sextons and their assistants, with staves.
2. The Rector, teachers, and scholars of Trinity School, founded in 1709, and from that time continued with- out interruption.
3. The architect, his assistants, and master workmen.
4. The Vestry of Trinity Church, with the officers of the Corporation.
5. The vestries of the city churches, in reverse order of dates of organization, viz., the last organized to be first in line.
6. Students of the General Theological Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States. 7. Lay Trustees of the Protestant Episcopal Society for Promoting Religion and Learning in the State of New York.
8. Trustees of Columbia College.
9. Lay members of the Standing Committee of the Dio- cese, and lay delegates and supernumerary dele- gates to the General Convention.
10. Strangers especially invited.
II. Clergy in surplices, not of the degree of D.D.
12. Doctors in Divinity in surplices.
The Church was filled long before the appointed hour by the fortunate holders of tickets. Hundreds gathered on Broadway and Rector Street to view the procession and hear the strains of the organ and the first joyous peal of the chimes. As the clergy and laity approached the
2
٢
ラ
T
280
History of Trinity Church [1846
great central entrance, the iron gates swung open. The massive oaken doors were thrown back; the procession divided to allow the Bishop and clergy to pass through, and re-formed. One observer notes the thrill of pleasure which came to many when Dr. Morris preceded the Bishop and clergy leading by the hand the two youngest pupils of Trinity School: "when these children came into the church love filled every bosom, and admiration and love mingled their streams to brighten the eye of the world." 1
The sextons, the architect, and the Wardens and Ves- trymen of the Parish had previously entered the Church by another door. The Bishop was received at the foot of the middle aisle by Mr. Adam Tredwell and General Edward W. Laight, the Wardens, and the other members of the Vestry, and escorted by them to the chancel, followed by the laity bringing up the rear. The processional psalm was read responsively by the Bishop and clergy as they marched up the aisle to the chancel. While the procession was being seated the organ burst forth with the strains of Dr. Hodges' " Voluntary" composed for the occasion. The Bishop having taken his chair at the right of the altar, Mr. Tred- well, the Senior Warden, read the " Instrument of Dona- tion and Request to Consecrate," which was received by the Bishop and placed on the altar, after which he pro- ceeded with the office of Consecration. The Sentence of Consecration was read by the Rev. Thomas H. Taylor, D.D., Rector of Grace Church.2
Dr. Hodges' anthem, "The Lord is in His Holy Temple," was then sung with wonderful precision and effect by an excellent choir which included many well- known vocalists of the day, both men and women.3
1 Gen. Geo. P. Morris in The National Press, Saturday, May 23d, as quoted in The Churchman for May 28, 1346.
" For a copy see notes to this chapter, " Consecration Documents."
' See "Notices of the Consecration," in Appendix.
T
لـ
281
Consecration of New Church
1846]
The Morning Prayer was commenced by the Rev. Dr. Wainwright ; the proper Psalms, lxxxiv., cxxii., cxxxiii., were chanted. The first Lesson, I Kings viii., 22-63, was read by the Rev. Samuel L. Southard, Rector of Calvary Church.
The Te Deum was sung to music composed for this occasion. It is one of the best of Dr. Hodges' works and became very popular.1
The second Lesson, Hebrews x., 19-26, was read by the Rev. Benjamin I. Haight, Rector of All Saints' Church. The Benedictus was also a special composition of Dr. Hodges which gained much praise for its beauty and melody. The concluding portion of the Morning Prayer was said by the Rev. Dr. Higbee.
The Introit, as the rubric then directed, was the twenty- first selection of the Psalms in Metre, the second and third stanzas. This was announced and read by the Rev. Dr. Thomas Lyell, of Christ Church. It was sung by the choir to the tune of Bristol.
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.