Revenue and Expenditure.—In 1680 the whole corporation were estimated to be worth 120,000l. They had 30 small vessels, 26 churches, and, as above mentioned, 20,000 inhabitants. If their value had increased only in proportion with the inhabitants, who, as I have said, amounted to 200,000 in 1770, the corporation would then have been worth no more than 1,200,000l., a sum not equal to 10s. per acre, though in a great measure cultivated, and surrounded with stone walls which alone cost 10s. by the rod; but in that year, viz. 1770; land sold in Connecticut from 4l. to 50l. per acre; their vessels, also, had increased to about 1200, and the churches—least in proportion—to about 300. The true method, therefore, of forming the valuation of Connecticut in 1770, is not by calculating upon this State in 1680, but by estimating the number of its acres, appreciating them by purchases then made, and adding a due allowance for the stock, &c. Now, Connecticut has been reputed to contain 2,500,000 solid acres, which, at the very moderate price of 8l. each, are worth 20,000,000l. sterling; and 14,000,000l. being added as a reasonable allowance for stock, shipping, &c. the whole valuation of Connecticut would amount to 34,000,000l. The annual income, supposing the 2,500,000 acres and stock rented at 10s. per acre, one with another, would be 1,250,000l. A list of rateables, called the General List, is the foundation upon which the revenue is raised in Connecticut, being the valuation of a man’s property by the year. It is formed in the following manner:
Every person annually gives his list, specifying the property he possesses, to the selectmen, who send the sum total of each town to the General Assembly, when a tax of one shilling, more or less, according to public exigencies, is imposed on each pound.
According to the general list of the colony for 1770, I have underrated its annual worth, which then was fixed at 2,000,000l.; for, though that list includes the poll-tax of 18l. per head for all males above sixteen and under sixty years of age, the faculty tax, and the tax on shipping, all which may amount to 600,000l., there nevertheless remains a surplus of 150,000l. above my calculation. But, supposing a tax of one shilling in the pound (the common colonial assessment) on 1,250,000l., the produce will be 62,500l., exclusive of the poll, faculty, and other taxes. Small, however, as this assessment is, it has never been collected without much difficulty and clamour; yet the people lose, by trading with Boston, New-York, and Newport, in exports and imports, 600,000l. annually; and that for nothing but to oblige the traders of those towns, and disoblige one another.
The annual expenditure of the colony is as follows:
| Salary of | Governor | 300 | l. | 00 | s. |
| “ | Lieutenant-Governor | 150 | 00 | ||
| “ | Treasurer | 150 | 00 | ||
| “ | Secretary | 150 | 00 | ||
| “ | the twelve assistants in Council with the Governor | 800 | 00 | ||
| “ | 146 Representatives | 2,500 | 00 | ||
| “ | 300 Ministers, 100l. each | 30,000 | 00 | ||
| Allowance for contingencies | 28,450 | 00 | |||
| Total | 62,500 | l. | 00 | s. | |
The above-mentioned list of the colony, including the poll-tax, &c. would afford 32,500l. more for contingencies.
Religion and Government.—Properly speaking, the Connectitensians have neither, nor ever had; but, in pretence, they excel the whole world, except Boston and Spain. If I could recollect the names of the multifarious religious sects among them, it might afford the reader a pleasant idea of the prolific invention of mankind. I shall mention a few of the most considerable, specifying the number of their congregations:
An account of some of these sects is to be found in the history of Munster; but the Bowlists, Separatists, and Davisonians are peculiar to the colony. The first allow of neither singing nor prayer; the second permit only the elect to pray; and the third teach universal salvation, and deny the existence of a hell or devils. The presbyterians and episcopalians are held by all to be the enemies of Zion and the American Vine; nay, the former are even worse hated than the Churchmen, because they appear to be dissenters, and are not genuine enemies to episcopacy, but “hold the truth in unrighteousness.” Some travellers have called the fanatical sects of Connecticut by the general name of Legionists, because they are many; and others have called them Pumguntums, Cantums, &c. because they groan and sing with a melancholy voice their prayers, sermons, and hymns. This disgusting tone has utterly excluded oratory from them; and did they not speak the English in greater perfection than any other of the Americans, few strangers would disoblige them with their company. Their various systems are founded upon those of Peters, Hooker, and Davenport, of which I have already spoken; yet the modern teachers have made so many new-fangled refinements in the doctrine and discipline of those patriarchs, and of one another, as render their passions for ecclesiastical innovation and tyranny equally conspicuous. But the whole are enveloped with superstition, which here passes for religion, as much as it does in Spain, France, or among the savages.
I will instance that of an infant, in 1761. Some children were piling sand-heaps in Hertford, when a boy, only four years old, hearing it thunder at a distance, left his companions and ran home to his mother, crying out, “Mother, mother, give me my book, for I heard God speaking to me!” His mother gave him his book, and he read A, B, C, D, &c.; then gave up his book, saying, “Here, mother, take my book; I must go to my sand-houses: now I am not afraid of all the thunder and lightning in the world.”
As to their government, we may compare it to the regularity of a mad mob in London, with this exception: the mob acts without law, and the colonists by law. They teach that legal righteousness is not saving grace. Herein they are right; but it appears they believe not their own doctrine, for legal righteousness is their only shield and buckler. In January County Court, at Hertford only, 1768, there were about 3000 suits on the docket; and there are four of these courts in a year, and perhaps never less suits at a court than 2000.
In the course of this work my readers must necessarily have observed, in some degree, the ill effects of the democratical constitution of Connecticut. I would wish them to imagine, for I feel myself unable adequately to describe, the confusion, turbulence, and convulsion arising in a province where not only every civil officer, from the governor to the constables, but also every minister, is appointed as well as paid by the people, and faction and superstition are established. The clergy, lawyers, and merchants or traders, are the three efficient parties which guide the helm of the government. Of these, the most powerful is the clergy, and, when no combinations are formed against them, they may be said to rule the whole province; for they lead the women captive, and the women the men; but when the clergy differ with the lawyers and merchants, the popular tide turns. In like manner, when the clergy and lawyers contend with the merchants, it turns against these; and is the same when the clergy and merchants unite against the lawyers. This fluctuation of power gives a strange appearance to the body politic at large. In Hertford, perhaps, the clergy and merchants are agreed, and prevail; in Weathersfield, the clergy and lawyers; in Middletown, the lawyers and merchants; and so on, again and again, throughout the colony. Thus the General Assembly becomes an assembly of contending factions, whose different interests and pursuits it is generally found necessary mutually to consult in order to produce a sufficient coalition to proceed on the business of the State.—Vos ipsos pseudo-patres patriæ, veluti in speculo aspicite?—Sometimes, in quarrels between the merchants and lawyers of a particular parish, the minister is allowed to stand neuter; but, for the most part, he is obliged to declare on the one side or the other; he then, remembering from whence he gets his bread, espouses that which appears to be the strongest, whether it be right or wrong, and his declaration never fails to turn the adverse party.—En rabies vulgi!—I must beg leave to refer my readers to their own reflections upon such a system of government as I have here sketched out.
The historians of New-England boast much of the happiness all parties there enjoy in not being subject, as in England, to sacramental test by way of qualification for preferment in the State; on which account, with peculiar propriety, it might be called a free country. The truth is, there never has been occasion for such a test-act. The Assemblies never appointed any, because the magistrates are annually chosen by the people, of whom the far greater part are church members; and this church-membership, in its consequences, destroys all liberty in a communicant, who is necessitated to swear to promote the interests of that church he is a member of, and is duly informed by the minister what that interest is. The minister is the eye of conscience to all freemen in his parish, and tells them that they will perjure themselves if they give their votes to an episcopalian, or any person who is not a member of the Church of the Sober Dissenters. Those freemen dare not go counter to the minister’s dictate, any more than a true Mussulman dare violate the sacred law of Mahomet. What need, then, is there of a civil test, when a religious test operates much more powerfully, and will ever keep Churchmen, Separatists, Quakers, Baptists, and other denominations from governmental employments in Connecticut, and confine them to the Old and New Lights; whilst the test act in England prevents no dissenter from holding any civil or military commission whatsoever? Upon this subject Mr. Neal has exerted himself in so signal a manner, that he ought to be styled the Champion of New-England. He represents that there were two State factions in New-England: the one out of place he calls spies and malcontents, chiefly because they had no share in the government. He adds, p. 615: “I can assure the world that religion is no part of the quarrel; for there is no sacramental test for preferment in the State.”--Many people in New-England have not been able to assign a reason for Mr. Neal’s choosing to hide one truth by telling another, viz. that there was no statute in New-England to oblige a man to receive the sacrament among the Sober Dissenters as a qualification for civil office. This assertion is really true; and when Mr. Neal speaks a truth, he, above all men, ought to have credit for it. But Mr. Neal well knew it to be the truth, also, that no man could be chosen a corporal in the train-band unless he was a member of the Church of the Sober Dissenters, because then every voter was subject to a religious test of the Synod or Consociation. Mr. Neal, indeed, seems to think that a civil test is heresy itself, but that a religious test is liberty, is gospel, and renders “all parties of christians in New-England easy—a happy people.” The reason, however, of his muffling truth with truth, was, he wrote for the Old Lights and against the New Lights for hire; the New Lights being the minority, and out of place in the State. Those two sects differed about the coercive power of the civil magistrate. The Old Lights held that the civil magistrate was a creature framed on purpose to support ecclesiastical censure with the sword of severity; but the New Lights maintained that the magistrate had no power or right to concern himself with Church excommunication, and that excommunication was all the punishment any one could undergo in this world, according to the rules of the Gospel. These were, and always have been, two great articles of faith in New-England; nevertheless, Mr. Neal says he can assure the world that “religion is no part of the quarrel.” I hope Mr. Neal did not mean to quibble, as the New-Englanders generally do, by Jesuitism, viz. that religion is peaceable and admits not of quarrels; and yet, if he did not, he meant not a full representation of the matter, for he well knew that the difference in respect to the intent and power of the magistrates was a religious point, and formed the partition wall between the Old and New Lights. The civilians and magistrates were too wise to countenance the New Lights, who promised little good to them; while the Old Lights gave them a power of punishing, even unto death, those whom they had anathematized, and who would not submit to their censures by penitence and confession. The Old Lights, in short, supported the practice of the inquisitors of Spain and Archbishop Laud—the ostensible occasion of their ancestors flying from England to the wilderness of America.
But Mr. Neal contented not himself with one mistake; he added, “that the people of New-England are a dutiful and loyal people.” They never merited this character, and they always had too much honesty and religion to claim it. From the first they have uniformly declared, in Church and State, that America is a new world, subject to the people residing in it, and that none but enemies of the country would appeal from their courts to the King in Council. They never have prayed for any earthly king by name. They have always called themselves republicans, and enemies to kingly government, to temporal and spiritual lords. They hate the idea of a Parliament, consisting of King, Lords, and Commons; they declare that the three branches should be but one, the king having only a single vote with the other members. Upon this point they have always quarrelled with the governors. They never have admitted one law of England to be in force among them till passed by their assemblies. They have sent agents to fight against the kings of England. They deny the jurisdiction of the Bishop of London, which extends over America by a royal patent. They hold Jesus to be the only King, whom if they love and obey they will not submit, because they have not submitted, to the laws of the King of Great Britain.
Mr. Neal, furthermore, professes his want of conception why the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts should send missionaries into New-England, when Oliver Cromwell had, in 1640, instituted a society to propagate christian knowledge there. Mr. Neal might have learnt the cause of this phenomenon from the charter granted to the first-mentioned society by King William III., who was a friend to civil and christian liberty, and who endeavoured to suppress the intolerable persecutions in his days prevailing in New-England. But, besides, Mr. Neal could not but know that there were many Churchmen in New-England desirous of the use of the liturgy and discipline of the English Church; and for what reason should they not have ministers of their own persuasion, as well as the sober and conscientious dissenters? I hope my readers will not think me a partial advocate for the Church of England, which, perhaps, has lost the opportunity of civilizing, christianizing, and moderating the burning zeal of the dissenters of New-England, who were honest in their religion merely by the sinful omission of not sending a bishop to that country, who would have effected greater things among them than an army of 50,000 men. I avow myself to be liberal-minded towards all sects and parties; and, if I had power, I would convert all sorts of ministers into popes, cardinals, prelates, dominies, potent presbyters, and rich Quakers, that the world might be excused from hearing again of preaching, defamation, insurrections, and spiritual jurisdictions, which result more from pride, poverty, avarice, and ambition, than the love of peace and christianity.
It has been said by the deists, and other politicians, that ministers, by preaching, have done more hurt than good in the christian world. If the idea will hold in any part it will be in New-England, where each sect preaches, for Gospel, policy and defamation of its neighbour; whence the lower classes think that christianity consists in defending their own peculiar Church and modes, and subverting those of others, at any rate; while the higher ranks value religion and the Gospel as laws of a foreign country, and the merchants powwowers, subtle, cruel, and greedy of riches and dominion over all people. For this reason the savages have taken an aversion to the protestant religion, and they say they would rather follow Hobbomockow and the Roman priests than New-England christians, who persecute one another, and killed their ancestors with a pocky Gospel. With scorn they cry out: “We value not your Gospel, which shews so many roads to Kicktang; some of them must be crooked, and lead to Hobbomockow. We had, therefore, better continue Indians like our ancestors, or be Catholics, who tell us of only one way to Kicktang, or the invisible God.”
Laws.—A stranger in the colony, upon hearing the inhabitants talk of religion, liberty, and justice, would be induced to believe that the christian and civil virtues were their distinguishing characteristics; but he soon finds his mistake in fixing his abode among them. Their laws grind the poor, and their religion is to oppress the oppressed. The poll-tax is unjust and cruel. The poor man is compelled to pay for his bread eighteen shillings per annum, work four days on the highways, serve in the militia four days, and pay three shillings for his hut, without a window in it. The best house and richest man in the colony pays no more!
The law is pretended to exempt episcopalians, Anabaptists, Quakers, and others, from paying rates to the Sober Dissenters, but, at the same time, gives the Sober Dissenters power to tax them for minister, school, and town rates, by a general quota; and no law or court can put asunder what the town has joined together. The law also exempts from paying to Sober Dissenters all Churchmen “who live so near that they can and do attend Church.” But hence, if a man is sick, and does not attend more than twenty-six Sabbaths in a year, he becomes legally a Sober Dissenter; and if the meeting lies between him and the Church, he does not live so near the Church that he can attend, because it is more than a Sabbath-day’s journey, and therefore unnecessary travel.[38]
The law provides whipping, stocks, and fines, for such as do not attend public worship on the Sabbath. The Grand Jury complains, and the Justice inflicts the punishment. This has been the practice for many years. About 1750, Mr. Pitt, a Churchman, was whipped for not attending meeting. Mr. Pitt was an old man. The episcopal clergy wrote to England, complaining of this cruel law. The Governor and Council immediately broke the Justice who punished Mr. Pitt, and wrote to the Bishop of London that they had done so as a mark of their disapprobation of the Justice’s conduct, and knew not what more they could do. This apology satisfied the Bishop, and the next year the Governor and Council restored the Justice to his office; however, Quakers and Anabaptists only were whipped afterwards.
Formerly, when a Sober Dissenter had a suit in law against a Churchman, every juryman of the latter persuasion was by the Court removed from the jury and replaced by Sober Dissenters. The reasons assigned for this extraordinary conduct was, “that justice and impartiality might take place.” The episcopalians, Quakers, and other sects not of the Sober Dissenters, were not admitted to serve as jurymen in Connecticut till 1750. Such of them whose annual worth is rated at not less than 40l. in the general list, have enjoyed the liberty of voting for civil officers a much longer term; but for parish concerns they are still totally excluded.
Other laws I have occasionally animadverted upon in the course of this work; and a specimen of the Blue Laws, and of various courts, is inserted.
Nothing can reflect greater disgrace upon the colony than the number of suits in all the County Courts, amounting in the whole to between 20 and 30,000 annually; the greater part of which are vexatiously commenced from expectations grounded upon the notorious instability of the judges’ opinions and decisions.
The spirit of litigation which distracts the province in general is, however, a blessing to the judges and lawyers. The court has one shilling for every action called, and twenty shillings for those that come to trial; and the fee to each lawyer is twenty shillings, whether the action be tried or not, besides various other expenses. There are as many suits of conscience before the justices of the peace, and ministers, and deacons; so that the sum annually expended in law in the whole colony is amazing. It was not without reason, therefore, that the judges, the lawyers, the ministers and deacons, the sheriffs and constables, opposed the stamp-act with all their might. They told the people that, if this act took place, their liberties would be destroyed, and they would be tried by King’s judges without jury.
The singular nature of some of the suits entitles them to particular notice. When the ice and flood prevail in the great river Connecticut, they frequently carry off large pieces of ground on one side, and carry them over to the other. By this means the river is every year changing its bed, to the advantage of some persons and the disadvantage of others. This has proved the source of perplexing lawsuits, and will most likely continue to produce the same effects so long as the demi-annual assemblies remain in the colony; for the judgment of the Assembly in May is rescinded by that in October, and so vice versa. Thus a lawsuit in Connecticut is endless, to the ruin of both plaintiff and defendant.
The County and Superior Courts, also, in different years give different judgments; and the reason is the popular constitution of the colony, whereby different parties prevail at different times, each of whom carefully undoes what the others have done. Thus the glorious uncertainty of the law renders the possession of property in Connecticut extremely precarious. The question, however, touching the lands being removed from place to place by the floods and ice, requires the skill of both juries and casuists. The most simple case of the kind that has been communicated to me is the following:
A piece of land belonging to A., in Springfield, with a house, &c. standing upon it, was removed by the flood to another town, and settled on land belonging to W. A. claimed his house and land, and took possession of them; whereupon W. sued A. for a trespass, and the court ejected A. But A. afterward obtained a revision of the judgment; when W. again sued A., and got a decree that A. should remove his own land off from the land of W., or pay W. for his land. Further litigation ensued, both parties pleading that the act of God injured no man according to the English law. The judges said that the act of God in this case equally fell upon A. and W. The dispute rests in statu quo, the jurisprudence of Connecticut not having yet taught mankind what is just and legal in this important controversy.
Supposing the flood had carried A.’s ship or raft on W.’s land, the ship or raft would still belong to A., and W. could recover damages; but then A. must take away his ship or raft in a reasonable time. Yet, in the case where an island, or point of land, is removed by the waters, or an earthquake, upon a neighbouring shore, Q. Ought not the islanders to keep possession of the superficies? This may be a new case in Europe.
Manners and Customs.—Gravity and serious deportment, together with shyness and bashfulness, generally attend first communications with the inhabitants of Connecticut; but after a short acquaintance they become very familiar, and inquisitive about news. Who are you? whence come you? where going? what is your business? and what your religion? They do not consider these, and similar questions, impertinent, and consequently expect a civil answer. When the stranger has satisfied their curiosity, they will treat him with all the hospitality in their power, and great caution must be observed to get quit of them and their houses without giving offence. If the stranger has cross and difficult roads to travel, they will go with him till all danger is past, without fee or reward. The stranger has nothing to do but civilly say, “Sir, I thank you, and will call upon you when I return.” He must not say, “God bless you,” or “I shall be glad to see you at my house,” unless he is a minister; because they hold that the words “God bless you” should not be spoken by common people; and “I shall be glad to see you at my house” they look upon as an insincere compliment, paid them for what they do out of duty to the stranger. Their hospitality is highly exemplary; they are sincere in it, and reap great pleasure by reflecting that, perhaps, they have entertained angels.
The Rev. Mr. George Whitefield, in one of his sermons, gave them the following character: “I have found,” said he, “the people of Connecticut the wisest of any upon the continent; they are the best friends and the worst enemies; they are hair-brained bigots on all sides, and they may be compared to the horse and mule, without bit and bridle. In other colonies I have paid for food and lodging, but could never spend one penny in fruitful Connecticut, whose banks flow with milk and honey, and whose sons and daughters never fail to feed and refresh the weary traveller, without money and without price.”
On Saturday evenings the people look sour and sad; on the Sabbath they appear to have lost their dearest friends, and are almost speechless; they walk softly; they even observe it with more exactness than did the Jews. A Quaker preacher told them, with much truth, that they worshipped the Sabbath, and not the God of the Sabbath. These hospitable people, without charity, condemned the Quaker as a blasphemer of the holy Sabbath, fined, tarred, and feathered him, put a rope about his neck, and plunged him into the sea; but he escaped with life, though he was about seventy years of age.
In 1750 an episcopal clergyman, born and educated in England, who had been in holy orders above twenty years, once broke their sabbatical law by combing a discomposed lock of hair on the top of his wig; at another time, for making a humming noise, which they called whistling; at a third time, by walking too fast from church; at a fourth, by running into church when it rained; at a fifth, by walking in his garden and picking a bunch of grapes: for which several crimes he was complained of by the Grand Jury, had warrants granted against him, was seized, brought to trial, and paid a considerable sum of money. At last, overwhelmed with persecution and vexation, he cried out: “No Briton, nay, no Jew, should assume any public character in Connecticut till he has served an apprenticeship of ten years in it; for I have been here seven years, and strictly observed the Jewish law concerning the Sabbath, yet find myself remiss in respect to the perfect law of liberty!”
The people are extremely fond of strangers passing through the colony, but very averse to foreigners settling among them; which few have done without ruin to their characters and fortunes, by detraction and lawsuits, unless recommended as men of grace by some known and revered republican protestant in Europe. The following story may be amusing:
An English gentleman, during a short residence in a certain town, had the good luck to receive some civilities from the Deacon, Minister, and Justice. The Deacon had a daughter, without beauty, but sensible and rich. The Briton (for that was the name he went by), having received a present from the West-Indies of some pineapples and sweetmeats, sent his servant with part of it to the Deacon’s daughter, to whom, at the same time, he addressed a complimentary note, begging Miss would accept the pineapples and sweetmeats, and wishing he might be able to make her a better present. Miss, on reading the note, was greatly alarmed, and exclaimed, “Mamma, mamma! Mr. Briton has sent me a love-letter.” The mother read the note and shewed it to the Deacon, and, after due consideration, both agreed in pronouncing it a love-letter. The lawyer, justice, and parson were sent for, who in council weighed every word in the note, together with the golden temptation which the lady possessed, and were of opinion that the writer was in love, and that the note was a love-letter, but worded so carefully that the law could not punish Briton for attempting to court Miss without having obtained her parents’ consent. The parson wrung his hands, rolled up his eyes, shrugged up his shoulders, groaned out his hypocritical grief, and said, “Deacon, I hope you do not blame me for having been the innocent cause of your knowing this imprudent and haughty Briton. There is something very odd in all the Britons; but I thought this man had some prudence and modesty however, Deacon,” putting his hand on his breast, and bowing, with a pale, deceitful face, “I shall in future shun all Britons, for they are all strange creatures.” The lawyer and justice made their apologies, and were sorry that Briton did not consider the quality of the Deacon’s daughter before he wrote the letter. Miss, all apprehension and tears, at finding that no punishment could reach Briton in the course of law, cried out to her counsellors, “Who is Briton? Am I not the Deacon’s daughter? What have I done, that he should take such liberties with me? Is he not the natural son of some priest, or foundling? Ought he not to be exposed for his assurance to the Deacon’s daughter?”
Her words took effect. The council voted that they would show their contempt of Briton by neglecting him for the time to come. On his return home, the parson, after many great signs of surprise, informed his wife of the awful event which had happened by the imprudence of Briton. She soon communicated the secret to her sister-gossips, prudently cautioning them not to report it as from her. But, not content with that, the parson himself went among all his acquaintance, shaking his head, and saying, “O sirs! have you heard of the strange conduct of friend Briton—how he wrote a love-letter, and sent it, with some pineapples, to the Deacon’s daughter? My wife and I had a great friendship for Briton, but cannot see him any more.”
Thus the affected parson told this important tale to every one except Briton, who, from his ignorance of the story, conducted himself in his usual manner towards his supposed friends, though he observed they had a show of haste and business whenever he met with any of them. Happily for Briton, he depended not on the Deacon, minister, or colony, for his support. At last a Scotchman heard of the evil tale, and generously told Briton of it, adding that the parson was supposed to be in deep decline merely from grief and fatigue he had endured in spreading it. Briton thanked the Scotchman, and called on the friendly parson to know the particulars of his offence. The parson, with sighs, bows, and solemn smirkings, answered, “Sir, the fact is, you wrote a love-letter to the Deacon’s daughter without asking her parents’ consent; which has given great offence to that lady, and to all her acquaintance, of whom I and my wife have the honour to be reckoned a part.” Briton kept his temper. “So, then,” said he, “I have offended you by my insolent note to the Deacon’s daughter! I hope my sin is venial. Pray, sir, have you seen my note?” “Yes,” replied the parson, “to my grief and sorrow. I could not have thought you so imprudent, had I not seen and found the note to be your own handwriting.” “How long have you known of this offence?” “Some months.” “Why, sir, did you not seasonably admonish me for this crime?” “I was so hurt and grieved, and my friendship so great, I could not bear to tell you.” Mr. Briton then told the parson that his friendship was so fine and subtle, it was invisible to an English eye; and the Gospel ministers in England did not prove their friendship by telling calumnious stories to everybody but the person concerned. “But I suppose,” added he, “this is genuine New-England friendship, and merits thanks more than a supple-jack.” The parson, with a leering look, sneaked away towards his wife; and Briton left the colony without any civil or ecclesiastical punishment, telling the Scotchman that the Deacon’s daughter had money, and the parson faith without eyes, or he should never have been accused of making love to one who was naturally so great an enemy to Cupid. Of such or worse sort being the reception foreign settlers may expect from the inhabitants of Connecticut, it is no wonder that few, or none, choose to venture among them.
The custom of settling and dismissing a sober dissenting minister is very singular. All the parishioners meet and vote to apply to the Association for a candidate, and one is accordingly sent. If he pleases, the people vote to give him a call; if he accepts the call, the actual communicants, and they alone, make the covenant between him and them as Christ’s Church, and thus they are married to him. After the candidate is ordained, others, by acknowledging and swearing to support the covenant, become married to him also. (N. B. Baptism is not sufficient to take them out of their natural state.) The call is an invitation from the parishioners to the candidate to take upon him the ministerial office of their Church, on condition that he be allowed 300l. or 400l. settlement, and perhaps 100l. salary, besides wood, &c. &c. during his residence among them in that capacity. The candidate, after looking round him and finding no better terms offered from any other parish, answers in this manner: “Brethren and friends, I have considered your call, and, after many fastings and prayers, I find it to be the call of God, and close with your offer.” The Church then appoints a day for his ordination, and the ministers who shall assist in the ceremony, which is as follows:
1. The meeting is opened with a hymn. 2. Some one makes a prayer. 3. Another hymn succeeds. 4. A sermon. 5. Another prayer. 6. The covenant is read. 7. The prayer of consecration, with imposition of hands by the minister. 8. The right hand of fellowship, which conveys that half of ministerial power which I have already spoken of as communicated by the Churches. 9. The charge—that is, to behave well in the office whereto God has called him. 10. Prayer. 11. Another hymn. 12. The young minister dismisses with his benediction. Numerous as the ceremonies are in a minister’s ordination, there are but few judged necessary in dismissing him; a majority of the Church is enough to turn the minister from bed and board, or, in their language, “to divorce him”—which happens more frequently than is decent. The minister has no remedy but in appealing to the Association, which step entitles him to his salary till dismissed by that powerful body. Incontinency, intemperance, lying, and idleness, are the common accusations brought against the minister, but seldom founded in truth, and yet always proved by knights of the post. However, the minister carries off his settlement in case he is dismissed for immoralities, but not if he turns Churchman; then his old parishioners are mean enough to sue for the settlement. A recent instance of this kind happened at New-London, where the minister, Doctor Mather Byles, desired a dismission, which was given him; but, finding the Doctor’s design was to become a Churchman, the people demanded the settlement given him twelve years before. The Doctor, with a spirit worthy of himself and his venerable ancestors, returned the money, with, “You are welcome to it, since it proves to the world that you could not accuse me of anything more agreeable to ungenerous minds.”
The manner of visiting the sick in this province is more terrible than charitable. The minister demands of the sick if he be converted, when, and where. If the answer is conformable to the system of the minister, it is very well; if not, the sick is given over as a non-elect, and no object of prayer. Another minister is then sent for, who asks if the sick be willing to die—if he hates God—if he be willing to be damned, if it please God to damn him? Should he answer No, this minister quits him, as the former. Finally, the sick man dies, and so falls out of their hands into better.
Amidst all the darkness of superstition that surrounds the State, the humanity it shows to poor strangers seized with sickness in the colony, or to such persons as are shipwrecked upon its coasts, shines with distinguished lustre. These unfortunate sufferers are immediately provided with the necessaries of every kind, by order of the selectmen, whose expenses are reimbursed out of the colony Treasury.
Thus is laudably employed a part of the money allowed for contingencies; but another part is consumed in a very different manner. It frequently happens that, whenever the episcopalians become so numerous in a parish as to gain the ascendency over the Sober Dissenters, and the latter cannot, by their own strength, either destroy the episcopal or support their own Church, the Governor and Council, with the advice of the Consociation, kindly relieve them with an annual grant out of the public Treasury, sometimes to the amount of the whole sum paid into it by every denomination of the parish. An act of charity of this kind lately took place at Chelsea, in Norwich, where the Sober Dissenters were few and poor, and without a meeting-house or minister, so that they were obliged to walk a mile to a meeting, or go to church. The young people chose the latter, which alarmed the Sober Dissenters to such a degree that they applied for and obtained from the generous Governor and his virtuous Council 300l. per annum out of the Treasury, besides the duties on the vessels of the Churchmen of that port. This largition enabled them to build a meeting-house and settle a minister. When the Churchmen complained of this abuse of the public money, the Governor answered, “The Assembly has the same right to support christianity as the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, or the Parliament of Great Britain.”
The murmurs of the people on the collection of the revenue bespeak embezzlements of another kind. It should seem that they believed the General Assembly to be in the same predicament as the devil thought Job was, when he said, “Doth Job serve God for nought?”
Estates in Connecticut pass from generation to generation by gavelkind; so that there are few persons, except of the labouring class, who have not freeholds of their own to cultivate. A general mediocrity of station being thus constitutionally promoted, it is no wonder that the rich man is despised, and the poor man’s blessing is his poverty. In no part of the world are les petits and les grands so much upon a par as here, where none of the people are destitute of the conveniences of life and the spirit of independence. From infancy, their education as citizens points out no distinction between licentiousness and liberty; and their religion is so muffled with superstition, self-love, and provincial enmity, as not yet to have taught them that humanity and respect for others which from others they demand. Notwithstanding these effects of the levelling plan, there are many exceptions to be found in the province of gentlemen of large estates and generous principles.
The people commonly travel on horseback, and the ladies are capable of teaching their neighbours the art of horsemanship. There are few coaches in the colony, but many chaises and whiskeys. In winter the sleigh is used—a vehicle drawn by two horses, and carrying six persons in its box, which hangs on four posts standing on two steel slides or large skates.
Dancing, fishing, hunting, skating, and riding in sleighs on the ice, are all the amusements allowed in this colony.
Smuggling is rivetted in the constitution and practice of the inhabitants of Connecticut, as much as superstition and religion, and their province is a storehouse for the smugglers of the neighbouring colonies. They conscientiously study to cheat the King of those duties which, they say, God and Nature never intended should be paid. From the Governor down to the tithing-man, who are sworn to support the laws, they will aid smugglers, resist collectors, and mob informers. This being a popular Government, all the officers are appointed by the freeholders. There are very severe laws against bribery. The candidates are not suffered to give a dinner, or a glass of cider, on the day of the election, to a voter. Indeed, bribery is the next greatest crime to a breach of the Sabbath; yet open bribery, as established by custom immemorial in Rhode-Island, is more praiseworthy than the practice of Connecticut. I will give the reader some idea of the mode in which an election is managed in Connecticut.
All the voters in a township convene in the town meeting-house. One of the ministers, after prayers, preaches from some such text as, “Jabez was more honourable than his brethren.” The people keep their seats, while the constables take their votes in a box; and if a voter has not his vote written, the constable gives him one. So Jabez is elected; and the meeting is concluded with a prayer of thanks to the Lord God of Israel for “turning the hearts of his people against the enemies of Zion, and for uniting them in Jabez, the man after his own heart.” The manner in which the preacher treats his text will more particularly appear from the animadversion of a certain Quaker on one of these occasions. “Friend,” said he to the pedagogue, “I do thee no wrong in telling thee that thou hast prayed and preached against bribery, but forgot to keep thy tongue from speaking evil against thy neighbour. Dost thou think the Lord will regard thy preaching so much as the voters whom thou dost call freemen? If thou believest it, thou hast bribed not only the people, but the Lord also, to reject Ebenezer and Benjamin.” The preacher called upon the constable to take away this babbler and open the meeting; which was done, and Ebenezer and Benjamin were rejected by the voters.
The men in general throughout the province are tall, stout, and robust. The greatest care is taken of the limbs and bodies of infants, which are kept straight by means of a board—a practice learnt from the Indian women, who abhor all crooked people—so that deformity is here a rarity.
Another custom derived from the Indians is, to welcome a new-born infant into the world with urine and honey, the effects of which are wonderful; and hence it is that at groanings there are always a little hog and a rattle-snake’s skin, the latter of which prevents numbness and the cramp. The women are fair, handsome, genteel. They have, indeed, adopted various customs of the Indian women, but cannot learn, like them, how to support the pains of child-bearing without a groan. Naturalists and surgeons have not been able to assign the reason why a negro woman should have a hundred pains, a white woman ten, and an Indian none. Some have said that the fatigues and hardships which negroes endure are the cause; but the Indians undergo many more: others have said it was owing to the change of climate; but this is suppletory: while the enthusiastic divines attribute it to the sin of Eve, and to the curse laid on the Canaanites. The deists ask these divines if Eve was not the common mother of the white, black, and copper-coloured women, and how it appears that negroes are the descendants of Canaan? Their answer is, that all Nature is mystery.
The women of Connecticut are strictly virtuous, and to be compared to the prude rather than the European polite lady. They are not permitted to read plays; cannot converse about whist, quadrille, or operas, but will freely talk upon the subject of history, geography, and mathematics. They are great casuists and polemical divines; and I have known not a few of them so well skilled in Greek and Latin as often to put to the blush learned gentlemen.
Notwithstanding the modesty of the females is such that it would be accounted the greatest rudeness for a gentleman to speak, before a lady, of a garter, knee, or leg, yet it is thought but a piece of civility to ask her to bundle—a custom as old as the first settlement in 1634. It is certainly innocent, virtuous, and prudent, or the puritans would not have permitted it to prevail among their offspring, for whom, in general, they would suffer crucifixion. Children brought up with the chastest ideas, with so much religion as to believe that the omniscient God sees them in the dark, and that angels guard them when absent from their parents, will not—nay, cannot—act a wicked thing. People who are influenced more by lust than a serious faith in God, who is too pure to behold iniquity with approbation, ought never to bundle. If any man, thus a stranger to the love of virtue, of God, and the christian religion, should bundle with a young lady in New-England, and behave himself unseemly towards her, he must first melt her into passion, and expel heaven, death, and hell, from her mind, or he will undergo the chastisement of negroes turned mad; if he escapes with life, it will be owing to the parents flying from their beds to protect him.
The Indians, who had this method of courtship when the English arrived among them in 1634, are the most chaste set of people in the world.
Concubinage and fornication are vices none of them are addicted to, except such as forsake the laws of Hobbomockow and turn christians. The savages have taken many female prisoners, carried them back three hundred miles into their country, and kept them several years, and yet not a single instance of their violating the laws of chastity has ever been known. This cannot be said of the French, or of the English, whenever Indian or other women have fallen into their hands. I am no advocate for temptation, yet must say that bundling has prevailed 160 years in New-England, and, I verily believe, with ten times more chastity than the sitting on a sofa. About the year 1756, Boston, Salem, Newport, and New York, resolving to be more polite than their ancestors, forbade their daughters bundling on the bed with any young man whatever, and introduced a sofa, to render courtship more palatable and Turkish. Whatever it was owing to, whether to the sofa or any uncommon excess of the feu d’esprit, there went abroad a report that the raffinage produced more natural consequences than all the bundling among the boors with their rurales pendantes through every village in New-England besides.
In 1766, a clergyman from one of the polite towns went into the country and preached against the unchristian custom of young men and maidens lying together upon the same bed. He was no sooner out of the Church, than attacked by a shoal of good old women, with, “Sir, do you think we and our daughters are naughty because we allow bundling?” “You lead yourselves into temptation by it.” They all replied at once, “Sir, have you been told thus, or has experience taught you?” The Levite began to lift his eyes and to consider his situation, and, bowing, said, “I have been told so.” The ladies, una voce, bawled out, “Your informants, sir, we conclude, are those city ladies who prefer a sofa to a bed. We advise you to alter your sermon by substituting the word sofa for bundling, and, on your return home, preach to them: for experience has told us that city-folks send more children into the country without father and mother to own them, than are born among us; therefore, you see, a sofa is more dangerous than a bed.” The poor priest, seemingly convinced of his blunder, exclaimed, “Nec vitia nostra, nec remedia pati possumus,” hoping hereby to get rid of his guests; but an old matron pulled off her spectacles, and, looking the priest in the face like a Roman heroine, said, “Noli putare me hæc auribus tuis dares.” Others cried out to the priest to explain his Latin. “The English,” he said, “is this: Woe to me that I sojourn in Meseck, and dwell in the tents of Kedar!” One pertly replied, “Gladii decussati sunt gemina presbytericalvis.” The priest confessed his error, begged pardon, and promised never more to preach against bundling, or to think amiss of the custom; the ladies generously forgave him, and went away.
It may seem very strange to find this custom of bundling in bed attended with so much innocence in New-England, while in Europe it is thought not safe, or scarcely decent, to permit a young man or maid to be together in private anywhere. But, in this quarter of the Old World, the viciousness of the one and the simplicity of the other are the result merely of education and habit. It seems to be a part of heroism, among the polished nations of it, to sacrifice the virtuous fair one whenever an opportunity offers, and thence it is concluded that the same principles actuate those of the New World. It is egregiously absurd to judge of all countries by one. In Spain, Portugal, and Italy, jealousy reigns; in France, England, and Holland, suspicion; in the West and East-Indies, lust; in New-England, superstition. These four blind deities govern Jews, Turks, christians, infidels, and heathen. Superstition is the most amiable. She sees no vice with approbation, but persecution, and self-preservation is the cause of her seeing that. My insular readers will, I hope, believe me, when I tell them that I have seen in the West-Indies naked boys and girls, some fifteen or sixteen years of age, waiting at table and at tea, even when twenty or thirty virtuous English ladies were in the room; who were under no more embarrassment at such an awful sight in the eyes of English people who have not travelled abroad, than they would have been at the sight of so many servants in livery. Shall we censure the ladies of the West-Indies as vicious above their sex on account of this local custom? By no means; for long experience has taught the world that the West-Indian white ladies are virtuous prudes. Where superstition reigns, fanaticism will be minister of state; and the people, under the taxation of zeal, will shun what is commonly called vice with ten times more care than the polite and civilized christians who know what is right and what is wrong from reason and revelation. Happy would it be for the world, if reason and revelation were suffered to control the minds and passions of the great and wise men of the world, as superstition does that of the simple and less polished! When America shall elect societies for the promotion of chastity in Europe, in return for the establishment of European arts in American capitals, then Europe will discover that there is more christian philosophy in American bundling than can be found in the customs of nations more polite.
I should not have said so much about bundling had not a learned divine (Dr. Burnaby) of the English Church published his Travels through some parts of America, wherein this remarkable custom is represented in an unfavourable light, and as prevailing among the lower class of people. The truth is, the custom prevails among all classes, to the great honour of the country, its religion, and ladies. The virtuous may be tempted; but the tempter is despised. Why it should be thought incredible for a young man and young woman innocently and virtuously to lie down together in a bed with a great part of their clothes on, I cannot conceive. Human passions may be alike in every region; but religion, diversified as it is, operates differently in different countries. Upon the whole, had I daughters now, I would venture to let them bundle upon the bed, or even on the sofa, after a proper education, sooner than adopt the Spanish mode of forcing young people to prattle only before the lady’s mother the chit-chat of artless lovers. Could the four quarters of the world produce a more chaste, exemplary, and beautiful company of wives and daughters than are in Connecticut, I should not have remaining one favourable sentiment for the province. But the soil, the rivers, the ponds, the ten thousand landscapes, together with the virtuous and lovely women which now adorn the ancient kingdoms of Connecticut, Sassacus, and Quinnipiog, would tempt me into the highest wonder and admiration of them, could they once be freed of the skunk, the moping-owl, rattle-snake, and fanatic christian.
My readers will naturally be desirous of information in what manner the people of Connecticut conduct themselves in regard to the Stamp Act, which has proved the subject of so much speculation and controversy both in America and Europe. I will, therefore, give a particular account of their proceedings concerning it, which will, perhaps, appear to have been of far greater consequence than is generally supposed in England.
The American colonists were no sooner extricated from all danger of Gallic depredations by the peace of 1763, than they began to manifest symptoms of ingratitude and rebellion against their deliverers. Connecticut, on several accounts, particularly that of its free constitution in Church and State, which prevented every interruption from a King’s Governor, was fixed upon as the fittest site for raising the first-fruits of jealousies and disaffection. Nor did the hatred which kept the province at eternal strife within itself on all other occasions, prevent its political coincidence upon this. In 1764, delegates from every dissenting association in America convened at Newhaven and settled the plan of operations. They voted that the American Vine was endangered by the encroachment of the English Parliament and the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts; that episcopacy was established in Nova-Scotia, and missionaries maintained by the English Government, while New-England and other American States were taxed to support that same Government; that a league and covenant ought to be made and signed by all good protestants against the machinations of their enemies, and in defence of their civil and religious liberties; that it was the duty of all good protestants to stand upon their guard, and collect and send every kind of interesting intelligence to the Moderator at Hertford, whose business would be to communicate the same in his circular letters to the true friends of protestant liberty. In my opinion, whoever does not perceive the spirit of civil as well as religious independence in this convention, and these resolutions of dissenting divines, must be politically blind. Whilst Mr. Grenville was exerting his fanatical faculties for the relief of the Mother Country; ready to sink under the load of expense brought upon her by that war which had opened an avenue to highest exaltation for her American offspring, Connecticut was early advertised by merchants, divines, and ladies, in England, that the Parliament was about to give the colonies a specimen of English burthens. The Consociation ordered a fast, to deprecate the threatened judgments. This fast was served up with sermons pointing out the reigns of wicked kings, lords, and bishops, in the last century; and concluded with, “One woe is past, and, behold, there come two woes more hereafter!”
A requisition having been made, in 1763, that each colony in America should raise a revenue to assist Great Britain in discharging the national debt, which had been partly incurred at their request and for their preservation, the General Assembly was instructed by Dr. Franklin and others how to act. Accordingly, the Assembly resolved not to raise any money towards the national debt, or any national expenses, till the Parliament should remove the Navigation Act, which, they said, was advantageous to Great Britain and disadvantageous to America; and, therefore, Great Britain, in defraying the whole of the national expense, did nothing more than justice required, so long as that act should be continued. Such were the arguments and resolutions of the General Assembly, although their agent in England had informed them that, if they refused to comply with the requisition of the minister, the Parliament would tax them.
The agent’s intelligence proved to be well founded. In 1765 the Stamp Act passed, because the colonies had refused to tax themselves. News so important soon arrived in America, and the Consociation of Connecticut appointed another fast, and ordered the angels to sound their trumpets, and great plagues followed. Thomas Fitch, the Governor, shewed some dislike to the proceedings of the Consociation, but was given to understand that Christ’s ministers acted by an authority superior to that of the Governor or a king. The episcopalians, and many sects, saw no reason for keeping the fast; but the Governor observed it with a view of securing his election the next year, and was successful. The episcopalians were rewarded for their disobedience with what is called “a new religious comic Liturgy,” which was printed and circulated through the colony as the performance of Doctor Franklin, and acted in many towns by the young people on evenings by way of sport and amusement. The litany was altered in many places, especially in the paragraphs respecting the King, nobility, &c.; and instead of “We beseech thee to hear us, good Lord!” was substituted, “We beseech thee, O Cromwell, to hear (our prayers) us.” “O holy, blessed, and glorious Trinity!” was altered thus, “O Chatham, Wilkes, and Franklin, have mercy upon us!” “From plague, pestilence, famine,” &c. was followed by “O Cromwell, deliver us!” An episcopal clergyman had courage enough to complain of these blasphemous proceedings, and the Grand Jury indicted the comic actors; but the magistrate to whom the complaint was made refused to grant a warrant, using worse maledictions against the King than were contained in the ludicrous litany. Hereupon the Grand Jury indicted the magistrate for high treason; but no magistrate could be found of resolution enough to grant a warrant against the traitor. However, the comic liturgy was acted but privately afterwards, and, upon the repeal of the Stamp Act, was suppressed as far as they could do it.
This second fast was sanctified with preaching on this and similar texts, “And there arose a new king in Egypt who remembered not Joseph,” and with praying God to grant the King a heart of flesh, and to remove popery out of the British Parliament.
The Stamp Act was to take place in November, 1765; some months before which the stamp-master, Jared Ingersoll, Esq. who had been the colony’s agent in England, arrived at Newhaven in Connecticut. In September a special Assembly was convened at Hertford, for the purpose of considering what steps to take. As if to avoid the supremacy of the British Parliament, they determined not to apply themselves for the repeal of the act, but secretly encouraged a number of lawyers, merchants, and divines to meet, by their own authority, at New-York, for that purpose. In the mean time three mobs were raised, under Durgy, Leach, and Parsons, who by different routes marched into Newhaven to seize the stamp-master. They succeeded; and, having brought their prisoner before the Assembly-house at Hertford, they gave him the alternative to resign or die. Mr. Ingersoll appealed several times by confidential messengers to the Assembly then sitting, but, finding them inclined to countenance the mob, he was forced to resign, and authenticate the same by whirling first his hat, and next his wig, three times round his head, and then into the air; whilst the General Assembly and Consociation (which last venerable body never fails to be ready with its counsel and assistance on all salutary occasions) shouted with the multitude, from their windows, at the glorious achievement.
This special Assembly, having sufficiently manifested the part they wished the colony to take, broke up, leaving further proceedings to the mob, who continued to act up to the specimen already given, and the Congress of New York, which met then accordingly, agreed upon and transmitted to England a petition for a repeal of the obnoxious act.[39]
The October session of the General Assembly is always holden at Newhaven: there and then they were informed by Mr. Dyer,[41] who had made one of the petitioners at New York, that it was recommended by the Congress for the colonial governors to take the oath prescribed by the Stamp Act.
The General Assembly, however, voted that the Governor of Connecticut should not take it; and, moreover, determined to continue Mr. Fitch in his office, notwithstanding the disfranchisement incident on his refusal, if he would be guided by their advice: the Rev. Mr. Ebenezer Devotion, one of the Representatives, and Eliphalet Dyer (above mentioned), one of the Council, offered to pay the imposed fine of 1,000l. However, the Governor presented himself before the Council, whose business it was to administer the oath, but which, it is thought, Mr. Fitch presumed would be denied, and therefore artfully devised this means at once of avoiding the oath and shifting the penalties from himself upon them. Seven out of the twelve, suspecting the Governor’s design, put their fingers in their ears, shuffled their feet, and ran groaning out of the house; the other five stayed, and administered the oath, with a view to saving themselves and the Charter and direct the wrath of the people against the Governor; but in this they were mistaken, incurring in common with him the odium of the patriots. The Stamp Act having thus gained footing, the Assembly broke up. Legal proceedings also were discontinued, and the courts of justice shut. The Consociations and Associations kept frequent fasts of their own appointment, prayers, and preaching against Roman Catholic rulers, Arminian governors, and false-hearted councillors and episcopizing curates. Hereupon the mobs became outrageous; sedition was law and rebellion gospel. The stamp-master was called a traitor to his country, and the episcopalians enemies to Zion and liberty.
The fastings, prayers, and riots brought about a revolution in the colony. Fitch, who had taken, and the five assistants who had administered, the oath, as well as many officers, both civil and military, who declined to take a rebellious part, were dismissed from their posts; and a new Governor, other councillors, &c. were chosen, and the people fitted for every kind of mischief—all, however, under the pretence of religion and liberty. The patriotic Mr. Dyer distinguished himself by furnishing the fasting ministers with proper materials to inflame the minds of the people against the just demands of the King. One of his Machiavellian dogmas was, that the King claimed the colonies as his patrimony, and intended to raise a revenue in each province; and that, having gained this point, his purpose was to govern England by America and America by England, and thereby subvert liberty and establish tyranny in both, as the kings of France had done by means of the various parliaments in that country. Mr. Dyer declared he had this information from the best authority in England, and added, that the liberties of both countries depended on America resisting the Stamp Act, even unto blood. These and such like reveries supplied the ministers of the Gospel with a great body of political divinity, and the mob with courage to break Churchmen’s windows, and cry out, “No bishops! no popery! no kings, lords, and tyrants!” Everything but decency and order overran the colony. Indeed, the General Assembly kept up their meetings, but it was only to transact such business as was not affected by the Stamp Act. The mobs of the fasting ministers continued their lawless proceedings, without further interruption and impediment than what they met with from the strenuous exertions of the King’s friends, who had repeatedly saved the lives of the stamp-master, Governor Fitch, the five rejected councillors, the episcopal clergy, and many good subjects, at the hazard of their own, though they could not preserve them from daily abuse and insult.
The mob, having been spirited up and trained to violence and outrage for several months, began to make some alarm even to the instigators, especially as they were hitherto disappointed in their expectations of the act being repealed. The Governor and Council, therefore, directing their attention to the dangerous consequences of the lawless state and refractory temper the people were in, and being struck with the foresight of their own perilous situation, resolved, early in 1766, to open the courts of law under the Stamp Act, if the very next packet did not bring certain advices of its repeal; and all parties who had causes depending in any court were to be duly notified by the Governor’s proclamation. This determination was no less mortifying to the mob than gratifying to the King’s friends, who were convinced that the Stamp Act ought, both in policy and justice, to be enforced, and therefore had risked their lives, fortunes, characters, and colonial honours in its support. The patriots, now apparently sickened with licentiousness, became very complaisant to the loyalists, declaring that, in all their opposition to the Stamp Act, they had meant nothing personal, and desiring to have past animosities buried in oblivion. All things thus settled, tranquillity seemed to be returning; when, lo! the packet arrived with the fatal news of the repeal of the Stamp Act. Then a double portion of madness seized the patriots, who, in their excess of joy “that victory was gained over the beast, and over his mark,” utterly forgot their late penitential and tranquil professions, branding the King’s friends with the appellations of tories, Jacobites, and papists. The Gospel ministers left off their fastings, and turned mourning into joy and triumph. “Now we behold,” they said in their pulpits, “that Great Britain is afraid of us; for the Stamp Act is repealed, even upon the petition of an illegal body of men. If, therefore, we stand fast in the liberties wherein Christ has made us free, we need not fear in future the usurpations of the kings, lords, and bishops of England.” The accompanying claim of Parliament to the power of binding America in all cases whatsoever was, indeed, a thorn which galled them much; but they found a salvo in ordering a copy of the repeal to be burnt under the gallows by the common hangman. The General Assembly also stepped forward, and voted the populace several barrels of powder, and puncheons of rum, together with 100l. in money, to celebrate the festival. A tremendous mob met together at Hertford and received their present. The powder was placed in a large brick school, and the rum on the common square. While each one was contending for his share, the powder took fire and blew up the school, killing fifteen or sixteen persons, and wounding many. This disaster shook the house where the Consociation was sitting; upon which they resolved that Heaven did not approve of their rejoicings because the repeal was but partial! They therefore ordered a new fast, to do away the iniquities of that day, and to implore the Supreme to direct them in what manner to guard against the machinations of “the locusts who had a king over them, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek Apollyon!”