USA > Vermont > Early history of Vermont, Vol. II > Part 21
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
The attempt to exercise this undoubted right by individuals in monarchial governments has led to many a sanguinary conflict in ages past, and this too has been the result in limited monarchies. Even in England, that boasted land of liberty, dis- senters from the established Church have, on that account, been deprived of many important rights and privileges both civil and political, or per- mitted to enjoy them on conditions and compli- ances without any just measure of religious lib- erty, but this was when church and state were united.
In any country and under any government the Romish Church, according to its former teachings and practices, would not contribute to the peace, welfare and happiness of the people. In the Rom- ish Church the authority and dictation of the Pope is law to their people, hence conflict must arise between Romish authority on the one hand, and civil authority on the other.
The genius of our institutions is such, under
336
EARLY HISTORY
our republican government, the people have some- thing to say as to what the character of those in- stitutions shall be, who shall be their governors, leaders and representatives, and what authority they shall exercise over the people, and if the wishes of the people are not listened to, they are sent to the rear and others put forward that will do their bidding within the limits of the constitu- tion of the land. There is but one voice and that is the voice of the people. That voice and power may be heard in the national and state councils, and in our county and town affairs. This is not the voice of one man, but it is the voice of the peo- ple represented generally by a majority vote.
It is a government "of the people, for the peo- ple and by the people." This same principle is es- pecially carried out in Congregational Churches. And so far as form of government is concerned it will include the Unitarian, Baptist and perhaps some other church organizations. The organiza- tion and government of the Congregational Churches are such as to give the largest liberty to the individual member-free to exercise and ex- press his opinion ; his power and influence may be felt in the organization by vote, by speech, and by practice and action. His conscience is not to be dwarfed and twisted to suit the notion of any man or set of men.
In a general way of speaking there is but one essential requisite to become one of its members. He must believe in God and his Word, and obey his will. To serve and worship him is but the die- tates of common reason about which believers do
:
:
337
OF VERMONT.
not differ. The mode and manner of worship is left to the conscience of every man upon the best infor- mation he is capable of attaining. Where in all the ecclesiastical bodies is there a freer and better opportunity of governing their body in a manner that shall suit the majority of its members than the Congregational Churches? At the same time the principles by which they govern themselves accords with the Word of God and the genius of our institutions.
The agreement is such between the two that if a person is well versed in the order, management and conduct of the Congregational organiza- tions he will have no difficulty in exercising his rights in the management of our political and civil institutions. So that if one is well versed ir the control or management of the one, they will not be strangers if they are called upon to exercise re- sponsible duties in the other. In these United States religious liberty is secured, and the right of conscience enjoyed to their full extent. No state establishment of religion, no religious test is per- mitted by the Constitution.
All the different sects enjoy equal privileges and equal rights, natural, civil and political. Our own State Constitution declares, "that all men have a natural and .inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences and understandings as in their opinion shall be regulated by the Word of God; and that no man ought to or of right can be com- pelled to attend any religious worship or erect or support any place of worship or maintain any
23
33S
EARLY HISTORY
minister contrary to the dictates of his conscience &c." This gives the fullest liberty. Where can a person have a better chance to exercise his judge- ment in these regards than in the Congregational Church? No pastor or spiritual adviser can be forced upon them for any length of time against the will of its members, as expressed by a major- ity vote, the manner of support of their pastor is left to the will of its members; when and where their meetings are to be held and whether few or many is left to its members.
In electing their officers for the management of the church, the body does not have to get permis- sion from any higher authority. The members have a right to look to the fitness, the talents and the integrity of the candidate, the same as in the management of their local, civil and political af- fairs. Not only have they the right to exercise their free, unbiased judgement in respect to the management of both the religious and political bodies, but it is their duty to be active members of both. Understanding the duties in the one, ought to fit a person to some extent, at least, for the duties of the other.
We have said that a person under the govern- ment under which he lives has the fullest liberty and complete right to enjoy his opinion and exer- cise his rights. In one sense this is taken with some restrictions and qualifications. No one has the right to violate the rights of others, to dis- turb the peace and good order of society, under pretense of conscience or of religious duty. And to do it would be acts equally criminal as though
339
OF VERMONT.
perpetrated under any other pretense, and are equally prohibited by the laws of nature, by the Supreme Being (the Author of religion) and justly punishable by the laws of society. In fact to pun- ish the abuse, instead of its being a restraint upon liberty, it is its greatest surety.
All political, civil and religious bodies have, or should have, certain principles and rules by which their respective bodies and its individual members are governed and the conduct of its members are controlled and regulated. Those principles are usually embodied in a constitution, articles, cove- nant or by-laws to which every member is ex- pected to conform: But instead of its narrowing his rights and privileges it is enlarging and ex- tending them. In one sense every man, on enter- ing into society or any organization gives up a part of his natural liberties in consideration of re- ceiving the advantages of mutual commerce, and he is obliged to conform to the laws and rules which the society or organization have thought proper to establish. These rules and laws are his own will. The will of the socity or organization is made up of the wills of the individual members, collected.
The Congregational polity is democracy, and is quite fully carried out in our town organizations. If it is asked if we are not bound and controlled by the general laws enacted by the General Assem- bly and required to submit to officers appointed by it, and to the authority of the officers of the State? We say, yes : but all of its powers and au- thority are derived from the people, and the Leg-
340
EARLY HISTORY
islature and their appointees and State officers have no power or authority except what the peo- ple invest them with. The theory is this: The le- gal voters in all the minor divisions of a State, such as cities and towns, meet in their respective limits, precincts and wards and choose, usually by ballot, one or more to represent them in the State Legislature and in the national councils. At first the States were independent of each other, they owed no duty or service to any other, but for the sake of greater protection and the enlargement of their rights and to insure greater peace and tran- quillity, the people, through their representatives, surrendered certain rights and privileges to a na- tional government. They delegated certain pow- ers to the nation.
The power and authority of the national gov- ernment are limited and restricted. It can only exercise what has been delegated to it by the peo- ple. All power and authority not delegated to Congress or not prohibited to the States are re- served to the States respectively and to the people thereof. Whatever power or rights that have been surrendered to the national government has been done by the free act and will of the people. The source of all power and authority in this land resides with the people, and that power and au- thority is exercised in its purest and completest manner in our town system of government.
Like the Congregational mode of government it is democratic, and it is exercised when the peo- ple meet to elect, appoint or designate their officers and adopt measures to regulate and control their
341
OF VERMONT.
action. In an early day parishes stood in the place of towns, and the parishes for a time controlled and managed the affairs of the religious organiza- tions throughout New England, so that the parish or town system of government which was a gov- ernment of the people, was also carried into Con- gregational organizations, and this democratic policy and polity fully adopted by them, or the principles governing Congregational Churches, which was thoroughly democratic at an early day, were taken up and adopted by our New En- gland communities in the management of their town offices and government. The government of the Congregational organizations and Churches and of that of the towns and parishes have been so essentially the same and are so interwoven, it is difficult to tell which was the father of the sys- tem.
For a time, since the landing of the Pilgrims on Plymouth Rock, church and state, especially in Massachusetts, was run and supported by one and the same organization, and it was carried to such an extent that the interests of church and state began to clash and the courts had to settle their controversies. At one time the parish or town, by the action of its general court or town meeting, claimed the right to dictate to the church who their pastor should be. This was so in Vermont.
Massachusetts Colony on the 10th day of May, 1631, enacted by their general court or town meet- ing as follows, to wit: "And to the end that the body of the commons may be preserved of hones
342
EARLY HISTORY
and good men, it was likewise ordered and agreed that for time to come, no man shall be admitted to the freedom of this body politic, but such as are members of some of the churches within the limit of the same."
And on June 10, 1650, the general court en- acted "that whosoever shall hereafter set up any churches or public meetings diverse from those al- ready set up, without consent as aforesaid, shall be suspended from any voice in town meetings and presented to the next general court to receive such punishment as the court shall think meet to inflict." And on the 6th of June, 1651, it was or- dered "that if any lazy, slothful or profane per- son doth neglect to come to public worship of God, such person shall forfeit for every such de- fault ten shillings, or be publicly whipt."
Governor Winthrop of Massachusetts, in 1637, declared "Whereas the way of God hath always been to gather his churches out of the world. Now the world, or civil state, must be raised out of the churches." The New Haven Colony en- acted, "That church members only shall be free burgesses, (citizens) and that they only shall choose magistrates and officers among them- selves, to have power of transacting all the public civil affairs of this Plantation, of making and re- pealing laws, dividing of inheritances, deciding of differences that may arise."
In those early days town or parish and church were regarded as coterminous-it covered the same extent of territory. It belonged to one for civil purposes and to the other for ecclesiastical
343
OF VERMONT.
purposes. The plan was for a church for each town. The same persons acting for the town in civil matters and for the parish in ecclesiastical affairs. All who resided within the limits of the town, were under the spiritual care of the minis- ter of the church, and all were required to attend its public worship, and aid in the erection of the sanctuary and in the support of the pastor.
Taxes and assessments were imposed for these objects, the same as for town expenses, and if the assessments were not voluntarially paid they were enforced by civil process. Finally in some parts of New England this compulsory process was adopted without regard to town limits against all who worshiped at the sanctuary in the town. In June, 1662, the people of a town in Massachusetts at their town meeting or general court adopted the following proposition, to wit : "The court proposeth it as a thing very commend- able and beneficial to the towns where God's providence shall cast any whales, if they should agree to set apart some part of every such fish or oil for the encouragement of an able, godly minis- try amongst them."
In those days civil supervision of the churches was direct and decisive. On May 11, 1655, upon motion and desire of the people of Greenwich, this court doth declare that Greenwich shall be a township entire of itself, providing they procure and maintain an orthodox minister. October 10, 1697, it was ordered by the court that good and marketable grain and pork, in payment of the minister's rate shall pass at the prices named in a schedule.
344
EARLY HISTORY
For a time after the landing of the Pilgrims the churches had the right and exercised the privilege of electing their own minister without the concur- rence of the parish, but in 1692, it was enacted in Massachusetts "that every minister, being a per- son of good conversation, able, learned, and ortho- dox, that shall be chosen by the major part of the inhabitants of any town, at a town meeting duly warned for that purpose, shall be the minister of that town." But the next year this act was mod- ified so as to give the church a right and a voice in the selection of their minister.
In the early days of the New England church ministers were called to and settled in a town long before the organization of a church there, hence all matters pertaining to the supply of a preacher were entirely left to the action of the town in town meeting. About the year 1780, there were incorporated into the Massachusetts bill of rights the following provisions, to wit: "Providing notwithstanding, that the several towns, parishes, precincts and other bodies politic or religious societies, shall at all times have the exclusive right of electing their public teachers and of contracting with them for their support and maintenance." This gave the parish a right to hire and dismiss the minister as the act was con- strued by the court. And it followed that when the church began to assert its supposed rights in this regard, conflict between church and state ensued. Churches were hampered till they sought relief, in Massachusetts, by acts of incorporation.
Enough has been said to see that the parish
345
OF VERMONT.
and church system for the support of the Gospel grew together in Vermont and in all New Eng- land, and all their affairs ivere largely managed and controlled by the same men, by the same methods, and by the same organizations. And the internal machinery by which they were kept up and propelled was the same. It was natural that. the same system of government that was adopted in their parish and town governments, should be used and adopted in the government of the churches with which they had so long been con- nected so far as it was applicable. In the civil government of all New England towns, all their officers are chosen by the legal voters assembled, by a majority vote; all their measures for the sup- port of schools and for the support of their govern- ments are adopted in the same way, and if they keep within the limits of the constitution under which they act and by which they have consented to be governed, no one can interfere with their right and action.
And so it is with the Congregational Churches, they choose their pastor and deacons and their minor officers of clerk, treasurer and committees to arrange and carry out their temporal affairs, by majority vote; and if any of their services are no longer wanted they have the right and power of removal; if they violate none of the covenants and rules and contracts that they have assented to, they remain in undisturbed control. In one. sense a Congregational Church is an independent body, owing no allegiance to any higher or supe- rior body in the management of its affairs. When
346
EARLY HISTORY
they make their decision, by a majority vote, it is final. No appeal is allowable. There is no body to appeal to; and none that has any authority over it. Of course it is proper for them in matters of moment to ask for advice of other churches and to follow that advice, if in their judgement it ac- cords with the Word of God, and does not inter- fere with civil authority.
But they are not bound, because a council of churches advises a certain course of action, to adopt it. A Congregational Church in the con- ducting of its business is controlled and gov- erned by parliamentary practices and usages. A Congregationalist, well fitted to conduct its meet- ings through complicated business, will be fitted to condnet any other political or business meeting where good order and parliamentary rules obtain.
CHAPTER XIX.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF THE PIO- NEERS OF THE NEW HAMPSHIRE GRANTS AND VERMONT.
Among the men whose lives and influence were the most prominent in establishing the inde- pendence of Vermont and getting her admitted into the American Union were Thomas Chitten- den, Ethan Allen and Ira Allen. The part that these brave men officially took in conducting the affairs of the settlers in the New Hampshire Grants and in establishing the State of Vermont has been so fully set forth in this and the previous volume it would add nothing of importance to here give a further sketch of their services. No ac- curate history of the early days of the territory now called Vermont could be written without re- cording the deeds of those men. And it will make the history that I have endeavored to write of that territory more complete by giving a bio- graphical sketch of many of less prominence who took part in that early struggle. I commence with General Bayley.
GENERAL JACOB BAYLEY of Newbury was an officer under New York and commissioner to ad- minister oaths of office, Judge of the inferior court of common pleas, and justice of the peace ; he was
( 3-47)
TTNAHO
348
EARLY HISTORY
elected deputy for the session of the New York Provincial Congress of May 23, 1775, but did not take his seat ; he was appointed Brigadier-General of the militia of Cumberland and Gloucester Coun- ties August 1, 1776. He continued nominally un- der the jurisdiction of New York, and a mild ad- herent of her cause until June 14, 1777, when he wrote to the New York Council of Safety that "I acknowledge the receipt of an ordinance from you for the election of governor, lieutenant-governor, senators and representatives for the State of New York. The Sheriff and committee gave the proper orders, but I am apt to think our people will not choose any members to sit in the State of New York. The people before they saw the constitu- tion, were not willing to trouble themselves about a separation from the State of New York, but now they are violent for it."
On July S, 1777, he was appointed a member of the Vermont Council of Safety, and in March fol- lowing was elected Councillor. He was elected as one of the committee by the Convention of dele- gates of the Grants held at Westminster Court House, October 30, 1776, to go through Cumber- land and Gloucester Counties to carry the pro- ceedings of that Convention to complete an asso- ciation in the interest of the New Hampshire Grants. At a session of the Westminster Conven- vention January 15, 1777, he was elected as one of the delegates to carry a petition of the Conven- tion to the Continental Congress and to negotiate business in behalf of New Connecticut. He was one of the members from Newbury in the Windsor County Convention of July 1777.
349
OF VERMONT.
General Jacob Bayley was born in Newbury, Massachusetts, July 2, 1728, and married Pru- dence Noyes October 16, 1745, and settled in Hampstead; was Captain in the French War, 1756, and escaped from the massacre of Fort William Henry in August, 1757; was Colonel at the taking of Ticonderoga and Crown Point by Amherst in 1759, and arrived in Newbury, Ver- mont, in October, 1764. In 1776, he commenced the celebrated Hazen Road, designated as a mili- tary road from Connecticut River to St. Johns, Canada, that was afterwards completed by Gen- eral Hazen to Hazen's Notch near Montgomery line; he was Commissary-General during a por- tion of the Revolutionary War. He was a leading man in his town and county and represented his town in the Legislature, a member of the State Council and a Judge of Gloucester and Orange County Courts. He died March 1, 1816. In March 1778, he was appointed one of the Court of Confiscation and was Judge of Probate for the Newbury District. In 1775, he sent an address to the Northern Indians to persuade them to join the Americans against the British.
DOCTOR PAUL SPOONER Was appointed one of the Committee of Safety by the Windsor Conven- tion of July 1777; he appears first in Vermont as a delegate from Hartland in the Convention at Westminster of October, 19, 1774, called to con- demn the tea act, the Boston port bill and other kindred measures; and he was one of the commit- tee of the Convention who made a written report expressing surprise that the King and Parliament
350
EARLY HISTORY
should dare assert a right to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever. He was a delegate at sub- sequent Conventions in 1775, and was chosen one of the three delegates to represent Cumberland County in the New York Provincial Congress in 1775 and 1777.
On May 5, 1777, he was chosen Sheriff of Cum- berland County under New York but declined to accept the office; he was appointed one of the Ver- mont Council of Safety in July 1777, and accepted of the same; he was a member of the first Council under the Constitution, and was re-elected five times, serving from 1778 to October 1782, when he was elected Lieutenant-Governor in joint As- sembly, there having been no election by the peo- ple, and was annually re-elected until 1787. Twice he was agent from Vermont to Congress in 1780 and 1782, and nine years Judge of the Su- preme Court.
In 1781, and 1782, he was Probate Judge for Windsor County. It has been erroneously stated by some authorities that he removed from Hart- land to Hardwick, and was the first town clerk of the last named town in 1795, and was its first representative to the General Assembly and served as such from 1797 to 1799, but that Paul Spooner was a nephew of the Doctor. Doctor Paul Spooner was well educated and had a good pro- fessional reputation. On June 19, 1782, the Coun- cil requested him and Jonas Fay to call upon the disaffected inhabitants of Orange County and the northern towns of Windsor County, explain the action of Congress and use their utmost endeav-
351
OF VERMONT.
ors to unite the disaffected people to the Vermont government. He died at Hartland September 5, 1787.
COLONEL WILLIAM MARSH was one of many others who signed a declaration in July 1776, de- claring that they would "at the risk of their lives and fortunes defend by arms the United States against the hostile attempts of the British &c." and was regarded a valuable Green Mountain Boy in 1777, but in the dark days of the Revolu- tion fled to Canada leaving his family in Dorset. His property was confiscated and his return to the State forbidden by an act passed February 26, 1779, that continued in force till November S, 1780.
There has been something said in extenuation of his conduct .. It has been truly said he was not a Tory ; he had been an efficient friend of the new State, but when the army of Burgoyne swept along the western border and was reported to be marching to the valley of Connecticut River, and but a little force in Vermont to oppose a trium- phal march, Colonel Marsh became panic-stricken, and hastened with other disheartened Whigs and a greater number of Tories to seek refuge in Can- ada. His wife secured her most valuable goods, filling her brass kettle with her pewter ware and silver spoons and sank them in a pond so perfectly safe that she never recovered them. Colonel Marsh, however, returned and was permitted to remain.
CAPTAIN HEMAN ALLEN was a brother of Ethan Allen and born in Cornwall, Connecticut,
352
EARLY HISTORY
October 15, 1740, and died May 18, 177S, of dis- ease contracted in Bennington Battle; he was a member of the Convention of January 16, 1776, and was its agent to present its petition, to repre- sent the situation of the New Hampshire Grants to the Continental Congress; he was a delegate for Middlebury in the Convention of July 24. 1776, and a member at large with Colonel Seth Warner in the Convention of September 25, 1776, and a delegate for Rutland in the Convention of January 15, 1777, and for Colchester in the Con- vention of June 4, 1777. He served with Warner in the Canada expedition of 1775, and in July 1777, was appointed a member of the State Coun- cil of Safety.
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.