Recollections of a Lifetime, by Samuel Griswold Goodrich (New York & Auburn: Miller, Orton & Mulligan, 1856)
-----
[frontispiece]
Edinburgh. Vol 2, p. 180
-----
[title page]
RECOLLECTIONS OF A LIFETIME, OR MEN AND THINGS I HAVE SEEN: IN A SERIES OF FAMILIAR LETTERS TO A FRIEND, HISTORICAL, BIOGRAPHICAL, ANECDOTICAL, AND DESCRIPTIVE. ----- BY S. G. GOODRICH. ----- VOL. II. NEW YORK AND AUBURN: MILLER, ORTON AND MULLIGAN. New York, 25 Park Row;--Auburn, 107 Genesee-st. M DCCC LVI.
-----
[copyright page]
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1856,
By S. G. GOODRICH,
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
------------
R. C. Valentine,
Stereotyper and Electrotypist,
17 Dutch-st., cor. Fulton,
New York
-----
[II, p. 3]
CONTENTS. ------- LETTER XXXI.
The Hartford Convention--Its Origin--Testimony of Noah Webster--Oath of Roger M. Sherman--Gathering of the Convention--Doings of Democracy thereupon--Physiognomy of the Convention--Sketches of some of the Members--Colonel Jessup--Democracy in the Streets--Report of the Convention--Reception of the Doings of the Convention by Madison and his Party--Its Effect and Example--Comparison of the Hartford Convention, with the Nullifiers--The Union, forever ... 9
The Count Value--Lessons in French, and a Translation of René--Severe Retribution for Imprudence--The End of the Pocket-book Factory--Napoleon returns to Paris and upsets my Affairs--Divers Experiences and Selections upon Danciny--Visit to New York--Oliver Wolcott and Archibald Gracie--Ballston and Saratoga--Dr. Payson and the three Rowdies--Illness and Death of my Uncle--Partnership with George Sheldon--His Illness and Death ... 61
The Famine of 1816 and 1817--Panic in New England--Migrations to Ohio--T'other Side of Ohio--Toleration--Downfall of Federalism--Oliver Wolcott and the Democracy--Connecticut upset--The new Constitution--Gov. Smith and Gov. Wolcott--Litchfield--Uriah Tracy--Frederick Wolcott--Tapping Reeve--Col. Talmadge--James Gould--J. W. Huntington--The Litchfield Centennial Celebration ... 78
Stephen R. Bradley--My Pursuit of the Vocation of Bookseller and Publisher--Scott's Poems--General Enthusiasm--Byron's Poems--Their Reception--The Waverley Novels--Their amazing Popularity--I publish an Edition of them--Literary Club at Hartford--J. M. Wainwright, Isaac Toucey, William L. Stone, &c.--The Round Table--Ori-
-----
II, p. 4
ginal American Works--State of Opinion as to American Literature--Publication of Trumbull's Poems--Books for Education--Rev. C. A. Goodrich--Dr. Comstock--Woodbridge's Geography ... 90
Sketches of the "Hartford Wits"--Dr. Hopkins--Trumbull, author of McFingal--David Humphries--Dr. Strong--Theodore Dwight--Thomas H. Gallaudet--Daniel Wadsworth--Dr. Coggswell--Mrs. Sigourney ... 114
Dr. Percival--His early Life--His Father's attempt to cure his Shyness--College Life--His First Love--His Medical Experience--His Poetical Career--An awkward Position--The Saddle on his own Back--Cooper and Percival at the City Hotel--Publication of his Poems at New York--The Edition in England-- Other Literary Avocations--His Station at West Point--His great Learning--Assistance of Dr. Webster in his Dictionary--State Geologist in Connecticut--In Wisconsin--His Death--Estimate of his Character ... 121
A few Wayside Notes--The Poet Brainard---His first Introduction--Ripley's Tavern--Aunt Lucy--The little back-parlor--Brainard's Office--Anecdote--The Devil's Dun--The Lines on Niagara--Other Poems--One that is on the Sea--The Sea-bird's Song--Publication of Brainard's Poems--General Remarks--His Death ... 141
My first Voyage across the Atlantic--England--London--My Tour on the Continent--Return to England--Visit to Barley Wood--Hannah More--Inquiries as to Books for Education--Ireland--Dublin--The Giant's Causeway--Scotland--Scenery of the Lady of the Lake--Glasgow--Edinburgh ... 161
Edinburgh--The Court of Sessions--Cranstoun, Cockburn, Moncrief--Lockhart--Jeffrey--Sir Walter Scott ... 170
Preparations for a Ride--Mr. Jeffrey in a Rough-and-tumble--A Glance at Edinburgh from the Braid Hills--A Shower--The Maids of the Mist--Durable Impressions ... 177
-----
II, p. 5
William Blackwood--The Magazine--A Dinner at Blackwood's--James Ballantyne--Lord Byron and Lady Caroline Lamb--The General Assembly of Scotland--Dr. Chalmers ... 184
A Dinner at Lockhart's--Conversation about Byron--Mrs. Lockhart--Irving--Professor Ticknor--Music--The Pibroch and Miss Edgeworth--Anecdotes of the Indians--Southey and Second Sight--Cooper's Pioneers--The Pilot--Paul Janes--Brockden Brown--Burns--Tricks of the Press--Charles Scott--The Welsh Parson--The Italian Base-viol Player--Personal Appearance of Sir Walter--Departure for London--Again in Edinburgh in 1832--Last Moments of Sir Walter--The Sympathy of Nature ... 195
Journey to London--Remarks on, England, as it appears to the American Traveler--The Climate--The Landscape---Jealousies between the English and Americans--Plan for securing Peace ... 210
London Thirty Years Ago--Its Great Increase--George IV.--Ascot Races--The Duke of Wellington--Jacob Perkins and the Steam-gun--The Duke of Sussex--Duke of York--Hounslow Heath--Parliament--Canning--Mackintosh--Brougham--Palmerston--House of Lords--Lord Eldon--Rhio Rhio--Catalani--Signorina Garcia--Edward Irving--Byron's Coffin ... 222
Return to America--Removed to Boston--Literary position of Boston--Prominent literary characters--The Press--The Pulpit--the Bar--New York now the literary metropolis--My publication of various works--The Legendary--N. P. Willis--The era of Annuals--The Token--The artists engaged in it--The authors--Its termination ... 252
The Contributors to the Token--N. P. Willis--N. Hawthorne-- Miss Francis--Mr. Greenwood--Mr. Pierpont--Charles Sprague--Mrs. Sigourney--Miss Sedgwick--Mrs. Osgood, and others--Quarrels between Authors and Publishers--Anecdotes--The Publishers' Festival ... 264
-----
II, p. 6
The First of the Parley Books--Its Reception--Various Publications--Threatening Attack of Illness--Voyage to Europe--Consultation of Physicians at Paris--Sir Benj. Brodie, of London--Abercrombie, of Edinburgh--Return to America--Residence in the Country--Prosecution of my Literary Labors--Footing up the Account--Annoyances of Authorship--Letter to the New York Daily Times ... 279
Republication of Parley's Tales in London--Mr. Tegg's operations--Imitated by other publishers--Peter Parley Martin--Letter to Mr. Darton--An edition of the false Parleys in America--The consequences ... 292
Objections to the Parley Books--My theory as to books for children--Attempt in England to revive the old nursery books--Mr. Felix Summerly--Hallowell's Nursery Rhymes of England--Dialogue between Timothy and his mother--Mother Goose--The Toad's Story--Books of instruction ... 308
Journey to the South--Anecdotes--Reception at New Orleans ... 322
Retrospection--Confessions--The mice among my papers--A reckoning with the past ... 333
Speech at St. Albans--Lecture upon Ireland, and the Irish--The Broad-street Riot--Burning the Charlestown Convent--My Political Career--A. H. Everett--The Fifteen Gallon Jug--The Harrison Campaign of 1840--Hard Cider and Log Cabins--Universal Bankruptcy--Election of Harrison--His Death--Consequences--Anecdotes--The Small Tail Movement--A Model Candidate--William, Cpp, or Shingling a Barn ... 339
International copyright--Mr. Dickens' s Mission--His failure and his revenge--The Boston Convention--Inquiry into the basis of copyright--Founded in absolute justice--What is property?--Grounds upon
-----
II, p. 7
which government protects property--History of copyright--Present state of copyright law--Policy the oasis of local copyright law--International Copyright demanded by justice--Scheme for International Copyright with Great Britain--Reasons for it . .. 355
Statistics of the Book Trade--Its Extension--The Relative Increase of American literature, as compared with British Literature ... 379
Recollections of Washington--The House of Representatives--Missouri Compromise--Clay, Randolph, and Lowndes--The Senate--Rufus King--William Pinkney--Mr. Macon--Judge Marshall--Election of J. Q. Adams--President Monroe--Meeting of Adams and Jackson--Jackson's Administration--Clay--Calhoun--Webster--Anecdotes ... 393
London and Paris compared--Paris thirty years ago--Louis XVIII.--The Parisians--Garden of the Tuileries--Washington Irving--Mr. Warden, the American Consul--Société Philomatique--Baron Larrey--Geoffroy St. Hilaire--The Institute--Arago--Lamarck--Gay-Lussac--Cuvier--Lacroix--Laplace--Laennec--Dupuytren--Talma--Mademoiselle Mars ... 437
Death of Louis XVIII.--Charles X.--The "Three Glorious Days"--Louis Philippe--The Revolution of February, 1848 ... 449
Events which immediately followed the Revolution--Scenes in the streets of Paris--Anxiety of Strangers--Proceedings of the Americans--Address to the Provisional Government--Reply of M. Arago--Procession in the streets--Inauguration of the Republic--Funeral of the Victims--Presentation of Flags--Conspiracy of the 15th of May--Insurrection of June --Adoption of the Constitution--Louis Napoleon President ... 471
The Duties of a Consul--Pursuit of a missing Family--Paying for Experience ... 480
Character of the French Republic--Its Contrast with the American, Republic--Aspect of the Government in France--Louis Napoleon's ambitious Designs--He Flatters the Army--Spreads Humors of Socialist Plots-- Divisions in the National Assembly--A Levee at the Elysée--The Coup d'Etat--Character of this Act--Napoleon's Government--Feelings of the People ... 489
-----
II, p. 8
Meeting in Paris to commemorate the Death of Clay and Webster--Termination of my Consular Duties--Character of the French Nation--The Black-coat Circular ... 504
Visit to Italy--Florence--Rome--Naples ... 521
Leave-taking--Improvement everywhere--In Science--Geology, Chemistry, Agriculture, Manufactures, Astronomy, navigation,, the Domestic Arts--Anthracite Coal--Traveling--Painting--Daguerreotypes--The Electric Telegraph--Moral Progress--In Foreign Countries: in the United States ... 530
APPENDIX ... 537
INDEX ... 554
-----
[II, p. 9]
RECOLLECTIONS OF A LIFETIME. ---+--- LETTER XXXI.
The Hartford Convention--Its Origin--Testimony of Noah Webster--Oath of Roger M. Sherman--Gathering of the Convention--Doings of Democracy thereupon--Physiognomy of the Convention--Sketches of some of the Members--Colonel Jessup--Democracy in the Streets--Report of the Convention--Reception of the Doings of the Convention by Madison and his Party--Its Effect and Example--Comparison of the Hartford Convention, with the Nullifiers--The Union, forever.
My dear C******
I come now to the "Hartford Convention." Methinks I hear you remark, with an aspect of dismay--are you not venturing into deep water in treating of such a subject, generally regarded as an historical abyss, in which much may be lost and nothing can be gained?
Well, my friend, suppose you do ask this--is it really a good reason why I should not tell what I have seen, what I know, what I believe, in relation to it? The Hartford Convention was in my time: my uncle, Chauncey Goodrich, was one of its prominent members. I was then living with him;* I saw all the
-----
II, p. 10
persons constituting that famous body, at his house; the image and superscription of the most distinguished individuals are fresh in my recollection. I remember the hue and aspect of the political atmosphere, then and there. Why should I not tell these things? You may, perhaps, entertain the common notion that the Hartford Convention was a congregation of conspirators--traitors--and I shall invite you to abandon this delusion. It may not be pleasant to hear your cherished opinions controverted: it is always a little disagreeable to receive truth, which requires us to sacrifice something of our self-esteem, by giving up errors which have become part of our mental constitution, But certainly you will not silence me on any such narrow ground as this. The time has come when one may speak freely on this subject, and surely without offense. Forty years have passed since the gathering of that far-famed body. Every member of it is dead. I will not insist that you shall say nothing of them which is not good ; but I claim the privilege of saying of them what I know to be true. I am sure you will listen to me patiently, if not approvingly.
-----
II, p. 11
You may perhaps suppose that there is but one opinion in the country as to the character of that assembly; but let me observe that there are two opinions upon the subject, and if one is unfavorable, the other is diametrically opposite. In New England, the memories of those who constituted the Convention are held in reverence and esteem, by the great body of their fellow-citizens, including a large majority of those whose opinions are of weight and value, and this has been so from the beginning.
I have said that they are now all gathered to their fathers. As they have gone down, one by one, to their last resting-place, public opinion has pronounced sentence upon their lives and characters. I ask your attention to the historical fact, that in every instance, this has been a eulogy--not for talent only, but the higher virtues of humanity. Of the twenty-six members who constituted the Convention, every one has passed to an honored grave. The members of the Hartford Convention were, in effect, chosen by the people, at a time of great trouble and alarm, for the purpose of devising the ways and means to avert threatening--impending evils. All felt the necessity of selecting persons of the highest wisdom, prudence, and virtue, and never was a choice more happily made. Most of these men were indeed of that altitude of talent, piety, dignity, and patriotism, which partisan pigmies naturally hate, by the inherent antipathy of littleness to greatness, and of vice to virtue; but in New England,
-----
II, p. 12
the enlightened generation among whom they lived, estimated them according to their true merits. These never believed them to be conspirators; they knew, indeed, the fact to be otherwise. Even the blinding influence of party spirit has never made the better class of democrats in New England believe that the Convention meditated treason. As to the mass of the people, they held and still hold that the Hartford Convention was one of the ablest and wisest assemblies ever convened in the country.
I am aware, however, that the prevailing opinion in the United States at large has been, and perhaps still is, the reverse of this. Out of New England, democracy is "the dominant party. The war was a democratic measure, and the Convention was the work of the federalists, who opposed the war. It is, doubtless, too much to expect that party spirit will, exercise candor toward those who brave and baffle it--at least during the conflict. There were many reasons why the Convention was an unpardonable sin in the eyes of democracy: it was opposition to the war, and that itself was treason: the war was attended with defeat, disaster, disgrace, and to turn retribution from the heads of the war-makers, it was considered politic to charge every miscarriage to the war opposers. In short, it was deemed the best way for self-preservation, by the democratic leaders, to sink the federalists in undying infamy. Hence they persisted in denouncing the Convention as an assembly
-----
II, p. 13
of conspirators. It is admitted that there was no overt act of treason, but it is maintained that there was treason in their hearts, the development of which was only prevented by the return of peace, and the indignant rebuke of public sentiment.
The foundation of this tenacious calumny is doubtless to be traced to John Quincy Adams, who, having lost the confidence of his political associates--the federalists of Massachusetts--and not being elected to a second term as Senator of the United States, speedily changed his politics, and made a disclosure, real or pretended, to Jefferson, in 1808,* to the effect that the federalists of the North--taking advantage of the uneasiness of the people on account of the distresses imposed upon them by the embargo--were meditating a separation from the Union, and an alliance with Great Britain--of all things the most likely to obtain democratic belief, and to excite democratic horror.
Here was the germ of that clinging scandal against New England, which has been perpetuated for forty years. It certainly had a respectable voucher at the beginning, but its utter want of foundation has long since been proved. For about twenty years, however, the libel was permitted--in secret and of course without contradiction--to ferment and expand and work itself over the minds of Jefferson and his associates.
-----
II, p. 14
It had created such an impression, that Madison--when President--had only to be told by an unaccredited foreigner, that he had the secret of a federal plot for disunion in Massachusetts, and he at once bought it, and paid fifty thousand dollars for it out of the public treasury.* No doubt he really expected to find that he had a rope round the necks of half the federalists in New England. He soon discovered, however, that the biter was bit. John Henry duped the President, who seized the hook, because it was baited with suspicions, the seeds of which John Q. Adams had furnished some years before.
It was not till the year 1828, when that person was a candidate for the presidency a second time, that the whole facts in regard to this calumny were developed. He was then called seriously to account,† and such
-----
II, p. 15
was the effect, that from that time he was silent. In vain did he attempt to furnish evidence of a plausible foundation for his story. He referred to various witnesses, but it was pointedly remarked that all, save one,* were dead. Yet these even seemed to rise up
-----
II, p. 16
and speak from their very graves. Sons, brothers, relatives, associates--including some of the first men in the United States--indignantly denied, in behalf of those for whom they had a right to speak, the imputations thus cast upon them. No fair-minded man can read the discussion now, and fail to see that Mr. Adams either invented his story--which, however, is by no means to be presumed--or that, according to the peculiar structure of his mind, having become hostile to the federal leaders in Massachusetts, he really thought he saw evidences of mischief in events which, fairly viewed, furnished not the slightest ground even for suspicion.
Thus, as I think, this foundation, this beginning of the idea that the Hartford Convention originated in treasonable designs on the part of its members, is shown to be absolutely groundless. Not one particle of evidence, calculated to satisfy an honest inquirer after truth, has ever been adduced to sustain the charge. The investigation has been in the highest degree inquisitorial: it was deemed vital to the interests of the democratic party to prove, to establish this allegation of treason. Public documents, newspaper articles, private correspondence, personal
-----
II, p. 17
intercourse--all have been subjected to the rack and the thumb-screw. The question has been pushed to the conscience of an individual member of the Convention, and he has been called to testify, on oath, as to the origin and intentions of that assembly. Its journal, declared to contain every act, every motion, every suggestion, that took place, has been published; and now--after forty years of discussion, thus urged by hostile parties--sober history is compelled to say, that not a public document, not a private letter, not a speech, not an act, secret or open, has been brought to light, which proves, or tends to prove, the treasonable origin of the Hartford Convention!
The charge of treason is a serious one: so far as it may have a just foundation, it is fatal to personal character: it is a stain upon the State to which it attaches: it is a discredit to human natures especially in a country like ours, and in a case like that which we are discussing. It should therefore not be made--surely it should not be maintained---unless upon positive, undeniable proof. It should not rest for its defense upon partisan malice, or that inherent littleness which teaches base minds to accept suspicion as conclusive evidence of what they believe, only because it coincides with their evil thoughts. While, therefore, there seems to be no proof of the alleged treasonable origin of the Hartford Convention--I am. able to do more than can-
-----
II, p. 18
dor demands, and I here present you with direct testimony from a source that will not be impugned or discredited, showing that the said Convention originated with the people and from the circumstances of the times, and not with conspirators, and that its objects were just, proper, patriotic. I shall hereafter call upon you to admit, that the proceedings of the Convention were in accordance with this its lawful and laudable origin.
I now ask your candid attention to the following statement, made some years after the Convention, by Noah Webster*--a man perhaps as universally
-----
II, p. 19
known and esteemed as any other in our history. He testifies to facts within his own knowledge, and surely no one will deny that, to this extent, he is a competent and credible witness.
Few transactions of the federalists, during the early periods of our government, excited so much the angry passions of their opposers as the Hartford Convention--so called--during the presidency of Mr. Madison. As I was present at the first meeting of the gentlemen who suggested such a convention; as I was a member of the House of Representatives in Massachusetts when the resolve was passed for appointing the delegates, I advocated that resolve; and further, as I have copies of the documents, which no other person may have preserved, it seems to be incumbent on me to present to the public the real facts in regard to the origin of the measure, which have been vilely falsified and misrepresented.
After the War of 1812 had continued two years, our public affairs were reduced to a deplorable condition. The troops of the United States, intended for defending the seacoast, had been withdrawn to carry on the war in Canada; a British squadron was stationed in the Sound to prevent the escape of a frigate from the harbor of New London, and to intercept our coasting-trade; one town in Maine was in possession of the British forces; the banks south of New England had all suspended the payment of specie; our shipping lay in our harbors, embargoed, dismantled, and perishing; the treasury of the United States was exhausted to the last cent; and a general gloom was spread over the country.
In this condition of affairs, a number of gentlemen, in North-
-----
II, p. 20
Northampton, Jan. 5, 1814.
Sir: In consequence of the alarming state of our public affairs, and the doubts which have existed us to the correct course to be pursued by the friends of peace, it has been thought advisable by a number of gentlemen in this vicinity, who have consulted together on the subject, that a meeting should be culled of some few of the most discreet and intelligent inhabitants of the old county of Hampshire, for the purpose of a free and dispassionate discussion touching our public concerns. The legislature will soon be in session, and would probably be gratified with a knowledge of the feelings and wishes of tho people; and should the gentlemen who may be assembled recommend any course to be pursued by our fellow-citizens, for the more distinct expression of the public sentiment, it is necessary the proposed meeting should be called at an early day.
We have therefore ventured to propose that it should be held at Col. Chapman's, in this town, on Wednesday, the 19th day of January current, at 12 o'clock in the forenoon, and earnestly request your attendance at the above time and place for the purpose before stated.
With much respect, I am, sir, your obedient servant,
Joseph Lyman.
In compliance with the request in this letter, several gentlemen met at Northampton, on the day appointed, and after a free conversation on the subject of public affairs, agreed to send to the several towns in the three counties on the river, the following circular address:
Sir: The multiplied evils in which the United States have been involved by the measures of the late and present administrations, are subjects of general complaint, and in the opinion of our wisest statesmen call for some effectual remedy. His excellency, the Governor of the Commonwealth, in his address to the General Court, at the last and
-----
II, p. 21
present session, has stated, in temperate, but clear and decided language, his opinion of the injustice of the present war, and intimated that measures ought to be adopted by the legislature to bring it to a speedy close. He also calls the attention of the legislature to some measures of the general government, which are believed to be unconstitutional. In all the measures of the general government, the people of the United States have a common concern, but there are some laws and regulations, which call more particularly for the attention of the Northern States, and are deeply interesting to the people of this Commonwealth. Feeling this interest, as it respects the present and future generations, a number of gentlemen from various towns in the old county of Hampshire, have met and conferred on the subject, and upon full conviction that the evils we suffer are not wholly of a temporary nature, springing from the war, but some of them of a permanent character, resulting from a perverse construction of the Constitution of the United States, we have thought it a duty we owe to our country, to invite the attention of the good people of the counties of Hampshire, Hampden, and Franklin, to the radical causes of these evils.
We know indeed that a negotiation for peace has been recently set on foot, and peace will remove many public evils. It is an event we ardently desire. But when we consider how often the people of the country have been disappointed in their expectations of peace, and of wise measures; and when we consider the terms which our administration has hitherto demanded, some of which, it is certain, can not be obtained, and some of which, in tho opinion of able statesmen, ought not to be insisted upon, we confess our hopes of a speedy peace are not very sanguine.
But still, a very serious question occurs, whether, without an amendment of the Federal Constitution, the northern and commercial States can enjoy the advantages to which their wealth, strength, and white population justly entitle them. By means of the representation of slaves, the Southern States have an influence in our national councils altogether disproportionate to their wealth, strength, and resources; and we presume it to be a fact capable of demonstration, that for about twenty years past the United States have been governed by a representation of about two-fifths of the actual property of the country.
In addition to this, the creation of new States in the South, and out of the original limits of the United States, has increased the southern interest, which has appeared so hostile to the peace and commercial prosperity of the Northern States. This power assumed by Congress of bringing into the Union new States, not comprehended within the territory of the United States at the time of tho federal compact, is deemed arbitrary, unjust, and dangerous, and a direct infringement of the Constitution. This is a power which may hereafter be extended, and the evil will not cease with the establishment of peace. We would ask, then, ought the Northern States to acquiesce in the exercise of this
-----
II, p. 22
power? To what consequences would it lead? How can the people of the Northern States answer to themselves and to their posterity for an acquiescence in the exercise of this power, that augments an influence already destructive of our prosperity, and will in time annihilate the best interests of the northern people?
There are other measures of the general government, which, we apprehend, ought to excite serious alarm. The power assumed to lay a permanent embargo appears not to be constitutional, but an encroachment on the rights of our citizens, which calls for decided opposition. It is a power, we believe, never before exercised by a commercial nation; and how can the Northern States, which are habitually commercial, and whose active foreign trade is so necessarily connected with the interest of the farmer and mechanic, sleep in tranquillity under such a violent infringement of their rights? But this is not all. The late act imposing an embargo is subversive of the first principles of civil liberty. The trade coastwise between different ports in the same State is arbitrarily and unconstitutionally prohibited, and the subordinate offices of government are vested with powers altogether inconsistent with our republican institutions. It arms the President and his agents with, complete control of persons and property, and authorizes the employment of military force to carry its extraordinary provisions into execution.
We forbear to enumerate all the measures of the federal government which we consider as violations of the Constitution, and encroachments upon the rights of the people, and which bear particularly hard upon the commercial people of the North. But we would invite our fellow-citizens to consider whether peace will remedy our public evils, without some amendments of the Constitution, which shall secure to the Northern States their due weight and influence in our national councils.
The Northern States acceded to the representation of slaves as a matter of compromise, upon the express stipulation in the Constitution that they should he protected in the enjoyment of their commercial rights. These stipulations have been repeatedly violated; and it can not be expected that the Northern States should ho willing to bear their portion of the burdens of the federal government without enjoying the benefits stipulated.
If our fellow-citizens should concur with us in opinion, we would suggest whether it would not be expedient for the people in town meetings to address memorials to the General Court, at their present session, petitioning that honorable body to propose a convention of all the Northern and commercial States, by delegates to he appointed by their respective legislatures, to consult upon measures in concert, for procuring such alterations in the federal Constitution as will give to the Northern States a due proportion of representation, and secure them from the future exercise of powers injurious to their commercial interests: or if the General Court shall see fit, that they should pursue such other course,
-----
II, p. 23
as they, in their wisdom, shall deem best calculated to effect these objects. The measure is of such magnitude, that we apprehend a concert of States will be useful and even necessary to procure the amendments proposed; and should the people of the several States concur in this opinion, it would be expedient to act on the subject without delay.
We request you, sir, to consult with your friends on the subject, and, if it should be thought advisable, to lay this communication before the people of your town.
In behalf, and by direction of the gentlemen assembled,
Joseph Lyman, Chairman.
In compliance with the request and suggestions in this circular, many town meetings were held, and with great unanimity, addresses and memorials were voted to be presented to the General Court, stating the sufferings of the country in consequence of the embargo, the war, and arbitrary restrictions on our coasting trade, with the violations of our constitutional rights, and requesting the legislature to take measures for obtaining redress, either by a convention of delegates from the Northern and commercial States, or by such other measures as they should judge to be expedient.
These addresses and memorials were transmitted to the General Court then in session, but as commissioners had been sent to Europe for the purpose of negotiating a treaty of peace, it was judged advisable not to have any action upon them till the result of the negotiation should be known. But during the following summer, no news of peace arrived; and the distresses of the country increasing;, and the seacoast remaining defenseless, Governor Strong summoned a special meeting of the legislature in October, in which the petitions of the towns were taken into consideration, and a resolve was passed appointing delegates to a convention to he held in Hartford. The subsequent history of that convention is known by their report.
The measure of resorting to a convention for the purpose of arresting the evils of a bad administration, roused the jealousy of the advocates of the war, and called forth the bitterest invectives. The convention was represented as a treasonable combination, originating in Boston, for the purpose of dissolving the
-----
II, p. 24
Union. But citizens of Boston had no concern in originating the proposal for a convention; it was wholly the project of the people in old Hampshire county--as respectable and patriotic republicans as ever trod the soil of a free country. The citizens who first assembled in Northampton, convened under the authority of the bill of rights, which declares that the people have a right to meet in a peaceable manner and consult for the public safety. The citizens had the same right then to meet in convention as they have now; the distresses of the country demanded extraordinary measures for redress; the thought of dissolving the Union never entered into the head of any of the projectors, or of the members of the Convention; the gentlemen who composed it, for talents and patriotism have never been surpassed by any assembly in the United States, and beyond a question the appointment of the Hartford Convention had a very favorable effect in hastening the conclusion of a treaty of peace.
All the reports which have been circulated respecting the evil designs of that Convention, I know to be the foulest misrepresentations. Indeed, respecting the views of the disciples of Washington and the supporters of his policy, many, and probably most of the people of the United States in this generation, are made to believe far more falsehood than truth. I speak of facts within my own personal knowledge. We may well say with the prophet--"Truth is fallen in the street, and equity can not enter." Party spirit produces an unwholesome zeal to depreciate one class of men for the purpose of exalting another. It becomes rampant in propagating slander, which engenders contempt for personal worth and superior excellence; it blunts the sensibility of men to injured reputation; impairs a sense of honor; banishes the charities of life; debases the moral sense of the community; weakens the motives that prompt men to aim at high attainments and patriotic achievements; degrades national character, and exposes it to the scorn of the civilized world.
-----
II, p. 25
Such is the testimony--direct, positive, documentary--of Noah Webster, as to the origin of the Hartford Convention.* This, be it remembered, is evidence furnished by one outside of that assembly: let me now present you with the testimony of Roger Minot Sherman--a member of that body, and a worthy bearer of one of the most honored names in American history.
[From the Norwalk Gazette, January, 1831.]
To the Editor of the Gazette:
Previous to the trial of Whitman Head, on the charge of libel, of which you gave a brief notice in your last number, the pris-
-----
II, p. 26
oner moved the Court for a subpoena, to Mr. Sherman, of Fairfield, Mr. Goddard, of Norwich, and others, as witnesses in his behalf. It was allowed by the Court, and was served on Mr. Sherman, but could not be, seasonably, on Mr. Goddard, on account of the lateness of his application. One of the articles charged as libellous, compared a recent political meeting at Hartford with the Hartford Convention, and the prisoner supposed that a full development of the proceedings of that Convention would furnish a legal vindication of the article in question. With a view to such development, he wished the testimony of the gentlemen above named. At the instance of the prisoner, Mr. Sherman testified on the trial of the case, and the inclosed paper contains his testimony, exact in substance, and very nearly in his language--which you are at liberty to publish.--[The trial took place at Fairfield, Connecticut, the place of Mr. Sherman's residence, in January, 1831.]
State of Connecticut,}
vs.}
Whitman Mead.} Hon. Roger Minot Sherman's Testimony.
Question by the Prisoner. What was the nature and object of the Hartford Convention?
Answer. I was a member of that Convention. It met on the 15th of December, 1814. The United States were then at war with Great Britain. They had, in their forts and armies, twenty-seven thousand effective men: of these about thirteen hundred only were employed in New England. The war had been in operation two years and a half. We had a seacoast of almost seven hundred miles to protect, and with the exception of about thirteen hundred men, had the aid of no military force from the United States. By internal taxes, all others having become unproductive by reason of the war, the national government raised large sums from the people within our territory. Direct taxation was the only resource of the State governments, and this had been carried to as great an extreme in Connecticut as could be sustained. The banks, which furnished all our currency, either withheld their accommodations or stopped payment, and the people were embarrassed by a general stagnation of business. Powerful fleets and armies lay off our
-----
II, p. 27
coasts, and were making or threatening invasions in all parts of our defenseless sea-board. Commodore Decatur, with his squadron, had taken refuge in the waters of Connecticut, and attracted a powerful concentration of the enemy's forces on our borders. Castine, if I mistake not, and some other parts of the territory of Massachusetts, had fallen into the hands of the British. The New England States, under all these disadvantages, were obliged to protect themselves by their own militia, at their own expense. The expenses of Connecticut greatly exceeded our resources. The duration of the war could not be foreseen, and our credit was exhausted. Attempts were made to borrow money, but without any adequate success. The national Constitution prohibited the emission of bills of credit. In this extremity, while the legislature was in session at New Haven, in October, 1814, a communication was received from the legislature of Massachusetts, proposing a convention of delegates from the New England States, to consult on the adoption of measures for their common safety. This communication was referred to a joint committee of both houses. General Henry Champion and myself were appointed from the Upper House. He was chairman of the committee. I drew the report, recommending a compliance with the proposal made by the State of Massachusetts, and assigning the reasons at length. This report was published by order of the legislature, and extensively circulated in the newspapers of this and other States. Seven delegates were appointed to represent the Convention. As soon as it was organized, Mr. Otis, a delegate from Massachusetts, proposed, after some prefatory remarks, that it should be recommended to our several legislatures to present a petition to the Congress of the United States, praying that they would consent that the New England States, or so many of them as should agree together for that purpose, might unite in defending themselves against the public enemy; that so much of the national revenue as should be collected in these States, should be appropriated to the expense of that defense; that the amount so appropriated should be credited to the United States; and that the United States should agree to pay whatever should be expended beyond that amount. This proposal was approved by the Convention. The same views had been stated here before the meeting of the delegates. By the Constitution of the United States, no such compact for mutual defense could be formed, without the consent of Congress. By thus augmenting our immediate resources, and obtaining the national guaranty that the expenses of the war, to be increased by the States thus uniting, should be ultimately paid out of the national treasury, it was supposed that our credit, us well as our present pecuniary resources, would be enhanced. A debate was had in the Convention as to certain amendments to the Constitution of the United States, to be proposed for adoption by the State legislatures. One was, that Congress should not have power to declare war without the concurrence of two-thirds of both houses. I can not, from recollection, detail the proposed amendments;
-----
II, p. 28
but they appear on the printed report of the Convention, of which I have a copy at my office, which the prisoner may use on the trial, if he pleases. A committee, of whom I was one, was appointed by the Convention to draw up that report to present to their respective legislatures. The proposal of Mr. Otis was adopted with little variation. This report was immediately printed by order of the Convention, and was circulated throughout the country.
Among other things, as may be seen by that report, it was recommended to the legislatures represented in the Convention, to adopt measures to protect their citizens from such conscriptions or impressments as were not authorized by the Constitution of the United States. This resolution originated from a project of the then Secretary of War, which I believe was not adopted by Congress. The secretary of the Convention kept a journal of their proceedings. This, as I understand, was deposited by Mr. Cabot, the President, in the office of the Secretary of State of Massachusetts, and a copy transmitted to Washington, and lodged in the office of the Secretary of State of the United States. It was afterward published in certain newspapers. I saw it in the American Mercury, a newspaper published at Hartford, by Mr. Babcock. The legislatures of Massachusetts and Connecticut, pursuant to the recommendation of the Convention, sent a delegation to Washington, to present their respective petitions to the Congress of the United States. The gentlemen sent from Connecticut were Mr. Terry, Mr. Goddard, and, I think, Mr. Dwight. On their arrival, the Treaty of Peace, concluded at Ghent, reached the national government, and further measures became unnecessary.
This is an outline of the origin and proceedings of the Hartford Convention. There was not, according to my best recollection, a single motion, resolution, or subject of debate, but what appears in the printed journal or report. If any further particulars are requested, I will state them.
Question, by the Prisoner. Was it not an object of the Convention to embarrass and paralyze the government of the United States in the prosecution of the war with Great Britain?
Answer. It was not. Nothing of the kind was done or entertained, by the Convention, or, so far as I know or believe, by those by whom it was originated. On the contrary, its principal object was a more effectual co-operation in that war, as to the defense of the New England States.
Question by the Prisoner. Has not that Convention been generally reputed in the United States to be treasonable?
Answer. Much has been said and published to that effect, but without the least foundation. I believe I know their proceedings perfectly; and that every measure, done or proposed, has been published to the world. No one act has ever been pointed out, to my knowledge, as inconsistent with their obligations to the United States, nor was any such act ever contemplated by them.
-----
II, p. 29
Here is the testimony of a great and good man--a member of the Convention--under oath. Who will venture to gainsay it? Certainly no individual who feels the claims of truth, and appreciates the requisitions of logic, unless he is armed with proofs, clear, indisputable, demonstrative; he must bring facts sufficient to destroy the direct testimony of such men as Noah Webster and Roger M. Sherman, and, indeed, a cloud of other witnesses of equal weight and responsibility.
It seems to me that every candid mind, upon these statements, will be constrained to admit that the Convention thus originated in public necessity, and not in treason; I think the additional evidence I am about to present will satisfy you that their proceedings were in harmony with the wise and worthy motives that brought the members together.
If you look into certain partisan histories of the times, you might be led to suppose that on the day of the gathering of the Convention at Hartford--the 15th of December, 1814:--the heavens and the earth were clothed in black; that the public mind was filled with universal gloom; that the bells--tremulous with horror--tolled in funereal chimes; that the flag of the country everywhere was at half-mast; and that the whole American army marched with muffled drums and inverted arms, and all this in token of the quaking terror of the public mind, at the ominous gathering of a committee of some two dozen mild, respect-
-----
II, p. 30
able, gray-haired old gentlemen, mostly appointed by the legislatures of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, to investigate and report upon the state of public affairs! Such, I recollect, was the picture of Hartford, that was circulated over the country by the democratic papers* remote from the
-----
II, p. 31
scene of action. The whole is very well reflected in the inspired pages of Charles Jared Ingersoll,* who may be considered as the Jeremiah of democracy, for this period of our history. He seems to have regarded himself as specially raised up to prophesy against New England. "The sin of Judah"--that is, of federalism--he has written "with a pen of iron," though not "with the point of a diamond."
Now I perfectly well remember the day of the gathering of the Convention.† There was in the city
-----
II, p. 32
a small squad of United States recruits--I think some two dozen in number. These, assisted no doubt by others, ran up the American flag at their rendezvous, with, the British flag at half-mast, beneath it. They also--these two dozen, more or less--marched through the streets with reversed arms and muffled drums. A few persons, I believe, got hold of the bell-rope of the Baptist meeting-house, and rang a funereal chime. All this--chiefly the work of the rabble--was the scoff of the great body of the people; nevertheless, it was reported in the democratic papers abroad, as if some black and mighty portent had signalized the arrival of the Convention. The simple truth was, that the six and twenty gray-haired men--legislators, senators, judges--honored for long years of service--came quietly into town, and were welcomed by the mass of the citizens, according to their standing and their mission, with respect, esteem, and confidence.
Let us take a sketch of what followed from the prophet Jared: "On the 15th of December, 1814, with excited sentiments of apprehension, mingled approval and derision, the inhabitants of Hartford awaited the nefandous Convention, which takes its bad name from that quiet town." "One of their number, Chauncey Goodrich, was mayor of Hartford, by whose arrangements the Convention was disposed of
-----
II, p. 33
in the retirement of the second story of an isolated stone building, in which the little State Senate or Council sat, when, in rotation, Hartford was the seat of government. Locking themselves up stairs, there, in awfully obscure concealment, for three weeks, twice every day, except Sunday, Christmas and New Year's-day, they were continually in conclave," &c.
What an accumulation of horrors! Tell me, my dear C...., does not your hair bristle at the grisly picture? It indeed sounds like a tale of the Inquisition. What a pity it is to spoil it! And yet, this infernal Rembrandt coloring--this violent contrast of light and shade--is wholly imaginary. The Convention met in the council-chamber of the State-house, which the gazetteers tell us--and tell us truly--is a very handsome building. It is in the center of the city, and the most prominent edifice in the place. The room in which they met is still the senate-chamber, and is neither isolated nor obscure: on the contrary, it is one of the best and most conspicuous rooms in the building: at the time, it was probably the finest public hall in the State.*
It is true that the Convention sat with closed doors, as probably every similar convention, had done be-
-----
II, p. 34
fore. The State Council--in whose room the Convention met--had furnished this example from time immemorial. The General Assembly of Connecticut had always done the same, at periods of difficulty and danger. The Convention that framed the Constitution of the United States had done likewise. The Continental Congress did the same, through the whole period of the war of the Revolution. A great part of the executive business of the United States Senate is now done in secret session, and is never known to the public. The archives of the State Department, at Washington, are under the lock and key of the Executive. The legislature of every State has the capacity to hold secret sessions, and nobody questions their right to exercise it according to their discretion. Both houses of Congress discussed, resolved upon, and voted the war of 1812, in secret session! And yet, what was useful, proper, and of good re-
-----
II, p. 35
port in all other similar bodies, was "nefandous" in the Hartford Convention! So saith Jared, the historian, whose account seems to consist largely of the prejudices and exaggerations of the democratic papers of that day--raked together in one undigested heap. As such it is amusing--nay, instructive--but alas, how is history degraded, when such a mass of incongruities assumes its sacred name!
I have told you that I was at this time living with my uncle, Chauncey Goodrich--then a member of the Convention. His house, of course, became the frequent rendezvous of the other members, and here I often saw them. On one occasion, in the evening, they all met at his bouse, by invitation--the only instance in which they partook of any similar festivity. At this time, the other persons present, so far as I recollect, were William Coleman,* editor of the
-----
II, p. 36
New York Evening Post, Theodore Dwight, secretary of the Convention, my cousin, Elizur Goodrich, now of Hartford, and myself. The majority of the members were aged men, and marked not only with the gravity of years, but of the positions which they held in society--for some of them had been governors, some senators, some judges. I do not recollect ever to have seen an assemblage of more true dignity in aspect, manner, and speech. They were dressed, on the evening in question, somewhat in the ancient costume--black coats, black silk waistcoats, black breeches, black silk stockings, black shoes. I wonder that this universal black has not been put into the indictment against them! Perhaps the silvery-whiteness of their heads--for the majority were past fifty, several past sixty--may have pleaded in extenuation of this sinister complexion of their dress. The most imposing man among them, in personal appearance, was George Cabot,* the president. He was over six feet in height, broad-shouldered, and of a manly step. His hair was white--for he was past sixty--his eye bluer his complexion slightly florid. He seemed to me like Washington--as if the great man,
-----
George Cabot. Vol 2, p. 36.
-----
II, p. 37
as painted by Stuart, had walked out of the canvas, and lived and breathed among us. He was, in fact, Washingtonian in his whole air and bearing, as was proper for one who was Washington's friend, and who had drunk deep at the same fountain--that of the Revolution--of the spirit of truth, honor, and patriotism. In aspect and general appearance, he was strikingly dignified, and such was the effect of his presence, that in a crowded room, and amid other men of mark--when you once became conscious that he was there, you could hardly forget it. You seemed always to see him--as the traveler in Switzerland sees Mont Blanc towering above other mountains around him, wherever he may be. And yet he was easy and gracious in his manners, his countenance wearing a cairn but radiant cheerfulness, especially when he spoke. He was celebrated for his conversational powers, and I often remarked that when he began to converse, all eyes and ears turned toward him, as if eager to catch the music of his voice and the light of his mind. He came to my uncle's almost every morning before the meeting of the Convention, and I have never felt more the power of goodness and greatness, than in witnessing the intercourse between these two men.
The next person as to prominence, in the Massachusetts delegation, was Harrison Gray Otis,* then in
-----
II, p. 38
the zenith of his years and his fame. He had a name honorable by tradition, and a position--social as well as political--due to his great wealth, his eminent talents, and his various accomplishments. He was doubtless the most conspicuous political character in New England--for the sun of Webster was but just rising in the horizon. He was deemed ambitious, and hence was regarded by the democrats as the arch instigator of the traitorous Convention. Such, an opinion, however, shows the greatest ignorance of his character and the actual state of things. Mr. Otis was a far-seeing politician, and knew there was no treason in the hearts of the people of New England: he stood at the highest point to which ambition could lead him, and any step in that direction must be downward. Besides, he was of the cautious, not the dashing school of statesmanship, as well by constitution as training. To suppose him a plotter of treason, is to divest him of all his attributes-- inherent and conventional. It is, furthermore, historical and beyond dispute, that he was averse to the Convention. By his influence, it was delayed, long after it was proposed and almost clamored for by the
-----
II, p. 39
people. He objected to being a member of it, and only yielded at last, that he might use his influence to secure to it a safe and tranquilizing direction. At the very opening of the Convention, he signalized himself by proposing the safe and discreet measures which were finally adopted. Hence, he always felt, with a keen sense of injustice, the imputation which long hung about him, as being the leader in a treasonable enterprise.
The impression he made on my mind upon the occasion I am describing, was deep and lasting. He had not the lofty Washingtonian dignity of George Cabot, nor the grave suavity of Chauncey Goodrich; he was, in fact, of quite a different type--easy, polished, courtly--passing from one individual to another, and carrying a line of light from countenance to countenance, either by his playful wit or gracious personal allusions. He seemed to know everybody, and to be able to say to each precisely the most appropriate thing that could be said. He was one of the handsomest men of his time; his features being classically cut, and still full of movement and expression. To me--who had seen little of society beyond Connecticut, and accustomed therefore to the rather staid manners of public men--Mr. Otis was an object of strange, yet admiring curiosity. I knew him well, some years after and when I was more conversant with the world, and he still seemed to me a very high example of the finished gentleman of the assiduous and
-----
II, p. 40
courtly school. He lowered himself, no doubt, in the public estimation by his somewhat restive and querulous--though masterly and conclusive--vindications of the Convention; while all the other members, conscious of rectitude, scorned to put themselves in. the attitude of defense. We may forgive what seemed a weakness in Mr. Otis, while we must pay homage to that dignity in his associates, which would not stoop to ask in life, the justice which they knew posterity must render them, in their graves.
Of the other members of the Massachusetts delegation, I have less distinct personal reminiscences. Mr. Prescott, father of the historian,* and Mr. Longfellow,† father of the poet--worthy, by their talents, their virtues, and their position, of such descendants--I only remember as two grave, respectable old gentlemen, seeming, by a magic I did not then comprehend, to extort from all around them peculiar
-----
II, p. 41
marks of deference and respect. Since I have known their history, I have ascertained the secret.*
One of the oldest, and in some respects the most re-
-----
II, p. 42
markable member of the Convention, was Mr. West,* of New Hampshire. I recollect him distinctly, partly because of his saintly appearance, and partly because of the terms of affection and respect in which my uncle spoke of him. He, too, was often at our house,
-----
II, p. 43
and seldom hare I seen a man who commanded such ready love and admiration. He was then sixty-eight years old: his form tall but slender, his hair white, long, and flowing, his countenance serene, his voice full of feeling and melody. His appearance indicated the finest moral texture; but when his mind was turned to a subject of interest, his brow flashed with tokens of that high intellectual power which distinguished him. His character and his position were well displayed in a single passage of his history: "He was chosen a member of Congress under the old Confederation; a member of the convention which framed the Constitution of his adopted State, and a member of Congress under the Constitution; he was appointed Attorney-general and Judge of Probate, and yet all these offices he refused, owing to his aversion to public life, and his sincere, unambitious love of domestic peace and tranquillity." His great abilities, however, were not hidden in a napkin., He devoted himself to the practice of the law, which he pursued with eminent success, for the space of thirty years. It was in the evening of his days that he accepted his first prominent public station, and that was as member of the Hartford Convention. This he did, under a conviction that it was a period of great difficulty and danger, and he felt that duty called upon him to sacrifice his private comfort to public exigencies. Who will
-----
II, p. 44
believe that man to have been a conspirator, or that the people who designated him for this place were traitors?
As to the Connecticut members of the Convention, I could easily gather up pages of eulogy. There are, indeed, few such men now; I am afraid that in this age of demagogism, there are few who can comprehend them. I shall, however, present you with brief delineations of their lives and characters from the sober records of the historian.
"At the head of the Connecticut delegation stood his honor, Chauncey Goodrich,* whose blanched locks and noble features had long been conspicuous in the halls of national legislation; a gentleman whose character is identified with truth and honor in all parts of the Union; a gentleman of whom Albert Gallatin was wont to say, that when he endeavored to meet the arguments of his opponents, he was accustomed to select those of Mr. Goodrich, as containing the entire strength of all that could be said upon that side--feeling that if he could answer him, he could maintain his cause; a man whom Jefferson--no mean judge of intellectual strength--used playfully to say, 'That white-leaded senator from Connecticut is by far the most powerful opponent I have, to my administration..'
"Next to him was James Hillhouse,† the great financier of the
-----
II, p. 45
State, who found our School Fund in darkness, and left it in light; the scholar and the father, who superintended the early culture of that poet-boy, and laid the foundation of that bright and glorious intellect, which in the bowers of 'Sachem's Wood' saw, as in a vision, the magnificent scenes of Hadad, and received as guests in western groves, the spirits of oriental oracle and song; Hillhouse--the man of taste, who planted the New Haven elms; the native American, with Irish blood in his veins--the man who, like Washington, never told a lie.
"John Treadwell* was the third delegate, whose life was filled
-----
II, p. 46
honors and usefulness." He was then on the verge of threescore and ten, and the oldest man in the Convention.
"The fourth was Chief-justice Swift,* the first commentator upon the laws of our little republic, of whom no lawyer in the United States would dare to feign ignorance, lest he should put at risk his professional reputation.
"Nathaniel Smith† was the fifth, whom the God of nature chartered to be great by the divine prerogative of genius; a jurist wiser than the books; whose words were so loaded with convincing reasons that they struck an adversary to the earth like blows dealt by a hand gauntleted in steel; to listen to whom, when he spoke in the Convention, Harrison Gray Otis turned back as he was leaving the chamber, and stood gazing in silent admiration, unconscious of the flight of time.
"The sixth was Calvin Goddard,‡ who long enjoyed the repu-
-----
II, p. 47
tation of being the most learned and successful lawyer east of the Connecticut river: an upright judge, a wise counselor, an honest man.
"Last, but not least of the Connecticut delegation, was Roger Minot Sherman,* a profound metaphysician, a scholar equal to the younger Adams, one of the principal oracles of the New York city bar for the last twenty years of his life, who seemed more fitly than any other man to represent the lawgiver, Roger Ludlow, and to inhabit the town which he had planted, whose level acres he had sown with the quick seeds of civil liberty, and then left the up-springing crop to be harvested by the sickle of his successor."
This is the verdict--not of the apologist, not of the partisan--but of the historian, in a sober review of the past, with all the light which time has thrown
-----
II, p. 48
upon the lives of those whom he thus characterizes.*
And now, my dear C...., let me ask you to look at the Hartford Convention, through these Connecticut delegates--all grave and reverend seigniors--one of them sixty-nine years of age, and having been governor of the State; one of them, at the time, chief-justice of the State; another a judge of the Superior Court; two of them grown gray in the Senate of the United States: all past fifty, all distinguished for prudence, caution, sobriety; all of the Washington school in politics, morals, manners, religion. Look at these men, and then tell me if there was treason, conspiracy, dismemberment of the Union, either in their hearts, or the hearts of the people who elected them? If there be any thing holy in truth, any thing sacred in justice, degrade not the one, desecrate not the other, by calling these men traitors! Say rather that their presence in the Hartford Convention is proof--clear, conclusive, undeniable, in the utter absence of all evidence to the contrary--that it was an assembly of patriots, chosen by a patriotic people, wisely seeking the best good of the country. If this be not so, then there is no value in a good name, no ground for faith in human virtue. Treason is the highest crime against society: is there not something shocking to the universal sense of decency in char-
-----
II, p. 49
ging this upon men thus signalized for their virtues? Such perverse logic would make Judas a saint, and the eleven true disciples, betrayers.
But I must leave discussion, and proceed with my narrative. As the Convention sat with closed doors, the world without, despite their eager curiosity, were kept in general ignorance as to their proceedings. There was a rumor, however, that Mr. Otis opened the debate, and was followed, first by Chauncey Goodrich and then by Nathaniel Smith--the latter making one of those masterly speeches for which he was renowned, and which shook even this assembly of great men with emotions of surprise and admiration. The first day's debate was said to have brought all minds to a general agreement as to the course to be adopted--that of mild and healing measures, calculated to appease the irritated minds of their constituents, to admonish the national government of the general feeling of danger and grievance, and thus to save the country from an example either of popular outbreak or organized resistance to the laws. Subsequent events showed that these rumors were well founded.
While such was the course of things in the Convention, some curious scenes transpired without and around it. I cannot do better, in order to give you an idea of these, than to transcribe part of a letter, which I recently received from a friend in Hartford, to whom I had written for some details, to refresh and confirm my own recollections. This was hastily
-----
II, p. 50
written, and with no idea of its publication; but it is, nevertheless, graphic, and coming from an old democrat, will be received as good authority for the facts it presents, even by the contemners of the Convention and its federal supporters.
"Previous to the war, Captain Morgan recruited in Hartford a company of light dragoons. Elijah Boardman was his lieutenant, and Owen Ranson--afterward Major Ranson--was cornet. When war was declared, and an army was to be raised, the first thing was to appoint officers, and the respectables--that is, the federalists--being to a man opposed to the war, none of them applied for commissions; so that the administration was compelled--nothing loth--to officer the army from the democrats. Having a great number of appointments to make, and little time to examine the qualifications of the applicants, and, as I have remarked, having only the democrats to select from, many men received commissions who were hardly qualified to carry a musket in the ranks. Among the appointments was a general of brigade in the Vermont militia--Jonas Cutting, a boatman on the Connecticut river--who obtained his appointment of colonel through the influence of J. and E. L...., good democrats, for whom he boated. He was ordered to Hartford on recruiting service, where he established the head-quarters of the 25th regiment. He was a rude, boorish, uncouth man, and received but little attention from the citizens generally, and none from the respectables--the federalists: he was, however, successful in raising recruits. After a time he was sent to the lines, and was succeeded by Lieutenant-colonel Jos. L. Smith, of Berlin--a large, handsome man, of some talents, but a good deal of a fire-eater. He assumed the command at Hartford, but was not kindly received by the federalists. There was in fact no love lost between him and them.
"This brings us near the time of the Hartford Convention,
-----
II, p. 51
the winter of 1814, preparatory to another campaign on the frontier. A very considerable force of regular troops were in cantonment in Hartford. The federalists, who were a large majority, as you know, hated the democrats, denounced the war, and detested the troops generally, and Lieutenant-colonel Smith in particular--for he thought it a part of his duty to make himself as odious to them as possible. His recruiting parties were constantly parading the city, and monopolizing the sidewalks, in all the pomp and circumstance of glorious war. With gun, drum, trumpet, blunderbuss, and thunder, they crowded the ladies into the gutters, frightened horses, and annoyed the citizens. Some of them called on Colonel Smith, as the commanding officer, and begged of him, as a gentleman, to keep his recruiting parties from Main-street--our principal avenue. I need not say that by this time an intensely bitter feeling had grown up between the two political parties, and the democrats were overjoyed that Colonel S. took pains to show his hatred and contempt for the anti-war party, and so they encouraged him to persevere, and do his duty by flouting the feds, and in raising recruits for the glorious war. So the more the citizens requested him to desist, the more he would not.
"In this state of things, the city council assembled, and passed and published an ordinance that no military parties should be permitted to march on the sidewalks, but should confine themselves to the streets. The democrats and Col. S. scouted the idea that the council had the power to regulate the march of United States troops, and so the troops persisted in this annoyance. The Governor's Foot Guard, one hundred muskets strong, composed of our most respectable young men, and all federalists, commanded by Nathaniel Terry, Esq., now prepared a quantity of ball cartridges, which, with their arms, were deposited in the old Hartford Bank. The men were required to be always ready to act when necessary. The government recruits not heeding the ordinance, Capt. Boardman and some other officers and non-commissioned officers were arrested and imprisoned.
-----
II, p. 52
The United States troops, reinforced by all the out parties in the neighboring towns, now came into the city, and completely monopolized the streets by night and by day.
"The Superior Court was in session at this time, and each day during the session, the military bands, with divers supernumerary bass-drums, incessantly marched around the Courthouse with so much din that the court was obliged to adjourn. This was repeated daily, and matters had arrived at a terrible pass, when the administration at Washington saw the necessity of interfering. It was obvious that the difficulty arose chiefly from the impertinence and vulgarity of the army officers; so they ordered Colonel Je[s]up to come to Hartford and assume the command, and packed off Smith to the lines or somewhere else.
"Colonel Jesup on his arrival called at once on Chauncey Goodrich, the mayor, and begged him to let him know how matters stood. Jesup was a man of sense and a gentleman, and all difficulties speedily vanished. The troops were kept in their cantonments, a certain distance out of town; and only a few at a time, of the most orderly, were permitted to come into the city, and without military parade. Colonel Jesup was received into society, and caressed by the better class of citizens, and became a great favorite. He was dined and tea'd to his heart's content by the federalists, after which the democracy rather cut him. So ended this little war.
"The celebrated Hartford Convention assembled here about this time, and Mr. Thomas Bull, a large, portly, courtly old gentleman, was the doorkeeper and messenger. As it was proper that this dignified body should have all things done decently and in order, Mr. Bull was directed to call on the reverend clergy, in turn, to pray with the Convention. Dr. Strong made the first prayer, and Dr. Perkins and other eminent clergymen followed. The Rev. Philander Chase*--afterward Bishop Chase
-----
II, p. 53
--was at this time rector of Christ Church--a high Churchman, who probably never in all his ministry offered an extemporaneous prayer. He was, in his turn, called on by Mr. Bull, who in his blandest manner informed him of the honor conferred on him, and begged his attendance to pray at the opening of the morning session. "What must have been his horror, when Mr. Chase declined, saying that he knew of no form of prayer for rebellion! Mr. Chase himself related this anecdote to me soon after. Major J. M. Goodwin was present and heard it. Nevertheless, I believe this speech was hardly original: some of the tory Episcopal clergymen had said the same thing during the Revolution. They had forms of prayer for the king, but none for liberty.
"No annoyance was offered to the Convention. A body of United States troops, under command of Jemmy Lamb, a facetious old Irishman, and the town-crier, in a fantastic military dress, marched around the State-house, while they were in session--the music playing the 'Rogues' March.' The Convention, however, excited less attention in Hartford than in other places. ''Tis distance lends enchantment,' &c. Very little more notice was taken of their proceedings by the people here--exclusive of violent partisans--than of those of the Superior Court."
This sketch gives a clear insight into the state of popular feeling at this period, in Hartford, which has been the theme of much discussion and gross misrepresentation. It is obvious that, had there been no other reason for it, the danger of intrusion and interruption from the irritated United States recruits, led by incendiary officers and encouraged by reckless mischief-makers, rendered it a matter of prudence for the Convention to sit with closed doors. The State court had been braved and insulted, and the far more
-----
II, p. 54
obnoxious Convention would doubtless have experienced still more emphatic demonstrations of rudeness. Had the sessions been open, a guard of a hundred men would scarcely have protected them from interruption, perhaps violence.
It is creditable to all parties that Col. Jesup was sent thither: it showed a disposition on the part of the administration to afford no ground of offense; it proved that the citizens--the federalists--sought no quarrel, and would interpose no difficulties to the government troops or their officers in the lawful discharge of their duties. It showed, moreover, that they could appreciate gentlemanly qualities, and were ready to bestow honor on a gallant soldier who had fought and bled in battle for the country, even although they disapproved of the war.
As to Colonel Jesup*--Brigadier-general Jesup now--I must say a few words. At the time I speak of, he was some thirty years old. He had recently come from the northern frontier, where he had won laurels by the side of Scott, Miller, Brown, Ripley, and other gallant soldiers. He was of modest demeanor, pleasing address, and gentlemanly tastes: it was no disparagement to his agreeable appearance that he
-----
II, p. 55
had his arm in a sling--a touching testimonial of his merits brought from the field of battle. He was the complete antipode of the J. L. Smiths and Joseph Cuttings who had preceded him, and who thought it a part of their democratic duty to be conspicuously vulgar. He did not seek to promote democracy by rendering it disgusting to all who held opposite opinions. He mingled in amicable intercourse with the citizens; sought interviews with the leading inhabitants--with the mayor of the city, and the governor of the state when he chanced to be on a visit there. I know he took counsel with my uncle and became acquainted with members of the Convention, and thus found means not only to smooth away the difficulties which had been engendered by his rude and reckless predecessors in the military command of that station, but gained correct information as to the actual state of things.
It was perfectly well understood, at this time, that he was not only a military officer, but that he was the diplomatic agent of the government at Washington, and communicated his observations to the Executive. He was not, for this reason, either shunned or depreciated. It is evident, from his letters sent almost daily to Madison--and the substance of which has transpired, at least in part--that the real intentions of the Convention were penetrated by him almost from the beginning. It is evident that he never found the lightest proof of treasonable intentions on the part
-----
II, p. 56
of that assembly.* It has been reported that he intends publishing his personal memoirs, and that in these he will give some interesting revelations respecting the Convention: I trust he will fulfill his design, and I am equally confident that his report will be in unison with the views I have here presented. As a matter of principle--regarding it from his point of view--he will doubtless condemn that
-----
II, p. 57
assembly, but as to matters of fact, I am certain he will never furnish the slightest support to the charge of treason, either secret or open.
But I must draw this long letter to a close. The result of the Hartford Convention is well known. After a session of three weeks, it terminated its labors, and, in perfect conformity with public expectation and public sentiment at the North, it issued an address, full of loyalty to the Constitution, recommending patience to the people, and while admitting their grievances, still only suggesting peaceable and constitutional remedies. The authors of this document knew well the community for which it was intended: their purpose was to allay anxiety, to appease irritation, to draw off in harmless channels the lightning of public indignation. They therefore pointed out modes of relief, in the direction of peace, and not in the direction of civil war. They were federalists, as were the people who supported them; they belonged to that party who founded the Constitution, in opposition to the democracy.* Leaving it for democracy, which opposed the Constitution in its cradle, to fur-
-----
II, p. 58
nish the first examples of Nullification, Disunion, Secession--with a discretion and a patriotism which does them infinite credit--they found the means of removing the cloud from the minds of their constituents, and yet without in any degree shaking the pillars of the Union, which was their ark of the covenant of national honor and glory and prosperity.
It is said Mr. Madison laughed when he heard the result: it is very likely, for he had really feared that the Convention meditated treason; he perhaps felt a little uneasy in his conscience, from a conviction that his administration had afforded serious grounds for discontent. He, as well as those who shared his views, were no doubt relieved, when they found the cloud had passed. Some of the democratic editors satisfied themselves with squibs, and some found relief in railing. Those especially who had insisted that the Convention was a band of traitors, seemed to feel personally affronted that it did not fulfill their evil prophecies. There is perhaps no greater offense to a partisan who has predicted evil of his adversary, than for the latter to do what is right, and thus turn the railer into ridicule. At all events, so bitter was the disappointment of the fanatical portion of the democrats, on the occasion in question, that they sought relief in declaring that if the Convention did not act treason, they at least felt it! Perhaps in consideration of their disappointment, we may pass over this obliquity as one of those frailties of hu-
-----
II, p. 59
man nature, which time teaches us to forget and forgive.
As to the general effect of the course adopted by the Convention, no reasonable man can deny that it was eminently salutary. It immediately appeased the irritation arid anxiety of the public mind in New England; it taught the people the propriety of calm and prudent measures in times of difficulty and danger; and more than all, it set an example worthy of being followed for all future time, by holding the Constitution of the United States as sacred, and by recommending the people to seek remedies for their grievances by legal and not by revolutionary means. "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall see God." I know of no similar benediction upon the promoters of civil war.
And now I have done. The treaty of Ghent speedily came to smooth the ruffled waters. Monroe succeeded to Madison, and an era of good feeling seemed to dawn upon the country. It is true the promised millennium was not fully realized: the dying flurries of the old federal party, under the harpooning of triumphant democracy, caused some froth upon the sea of politics. Connecticut passed through the spasms of Toleration, in which that hard old federalist, Oliver Wolcott, became the candidate of democracy, and overturned the Charter of Charles II., and with it all his early political associations--public and personal. It was a strange dance, and with, a