7^ r,^^ CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE Cornell University Library BX5980.N33 S14 History of Saint lUlarit's Churcii, New Brit olin 3 1924 029 458 597 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029458597 SAINT MARK. HISTORY OF Saint Mark's .'rtf ^:«^'> ^iTiya^ /^z^/y ,^^^ '7,;^,.^.V// z^--^'' i/i-?, .'. >'/-'-- 1''?'' A^ •-e^t-rLc', .V ■■.r^ :ci/ji. /'/i. .^.:-'...^://' ^/i Z^-- /TA^cZ-t.-A />/ ^ r^L/^^^, /{-^JU^A\ Xi^.^^'K^'- *-^^/ «r ^^>7, ' v>,vAv £ ^-r? ^ >^2-- '2r ^V -^r:^ - ?^'/- ?^ A- ■ CERTIFICATE BY BISHOP SEABURY. THE CHURCH IN CONNECTICUT HISTORY The early towns or plantations in Connecticut were first settled as religious societies. These societies each brought with them their minster, and the ministers and people, who had been educated and trained in the Episcopal Church, were dissenters. It was only in matters of worship and Church government that they dissented. In all the cardinal doctrines of religion their beliefs were the same. Even as late as 1774, the Rev. Elizur Goodrich of Durham, a prominent Congregationalist, declared that the principles and faith of the Congregationalists was in general the same as that contained in the doctrinal articles of the Church of England. But in matters on which the Puritans dissented, they were very emphatic and radical. To worship in their own way and manage their Church affairs without refer- ence to any one else, was the main object of their coming to America. In this way, the people of the several towns were practically all of one mind, both as to their civil and religious government. While the Church was, in a sense, separate from the town, the distinction was not clear, and there was practically no distinction between the town and the ecclesiastical society, all matters relating to the society being voted upon in town meeting until about 1657. Until 1669, there was precisely the same number of ecclesiastical societies in the Colony as there were towns or plantations. Every town before 1658 was, for anything in the laws of the Colony, free to establish worship according to the practices of any denomination, (excepting such as were considered notorious heretics), but no one expected to follow any other than the " Congregational way." Laws for the support of ministers were passed in 1644; compulsory attendance on " Gospel service " and respect for the ministers was enacted in 1650. No exceptions were made, so that every 38 THE CHURCH one had to attend service, and all males over 16 years of age, whether saints or sinners, had to pay their due proportion for supporting the minister. When part of the people were dis- satisfied with the Gospel Service, and their number was large enough, they banded together, went to some new field and established a new plantation and ecclesiastical society by them- selves. In 1657, for local causes not necessary to mention, a party led by Elder Goodwin attempted to withdraw from the Church at Hartford and start a second Congregational Church and society in that town. The Legislature was equal to the occa- sion and all persons were prohibited from embodying them- selves " into Church estate without consent of the General Court and approbation of the neighboring Churches." After this date new ecclesiastical societies applied to the General Court for permission to organize. But, for the particular benefit of the Hartford seceders, the General Court further enacted a law forbidding the people from attending any ministry or Church administration " distinct and separate from and in opposition to that which is dispensed by the settled and approved minister of the place." This resulted in the removal of the seceders to Hadley, Mass. In 1656 severe laws were passed against " Quakers, Ranters, Adamites, or such like notorious Heri- tiques," and this is the first mention by name in the statutes of any religious sect or denomination. There were no such sec- taries then in Connecticut, but Quakers had arrived in Boston and this law was passed at the recommendation of the Commis- sioners for the United Colonies. The first record of the name of any denomination not con- sidered heretical is dated October, 1664, when William Pitkin, John Steadman and Robert Reeve, of Hartford, Michael Humphreys, James Enno, John Moses, and Jonas Westover, of Windsor, presented a memorial to the General Assembly stating that they were members of " the Church of England " ; that they were not given the Communion, and that their chil- dren were not baptized ; and praying that " no law shall make us pay or contribute for the maintenance of any minister or-officer in the Church that will neglect or refuse to baptize our children and to take care of us as members of the Church." [Ecclesi- IN CONNECTICUT. 39 astical manuscripts, Vol. i, Doc. lo, b.] Whether these men were in fact Episcopalians or not depends upon when they were members of the Church of England, for that Church was legally Presbyterian from 1645 to 1660. Whatever they desired, it is clear that they did not expect nor ask for the establishment of worship in accordance with the usages of the Episcopal Church. The Court recommended the ministers and Churches to entertain persons " who are of an honest and godly conversation " by an " explicit covenant and that they have their children baptized." Stiles' "Windsor," Vol. i, p. 196, says that a copy of this recommendation or act was sent to every minister in the Colony. This was the beginning of the legal establishment of the so-called half-way covenant which cul- minated in legalizing the Saybrook Platform, in 1708. The standard of morals and religion that would entitle one to have his children baptized is not stated in the act of 1664, but pre- suming the law to have been applicable to the memorialists, we may say that the General Court acknowledged members of the " Church of England " to be persons " of an honest and godly conversation." Two years later, (Nov. 22, 1666,) this same William Pitkin and John Steadman with four others, viz., Joseph Fitch, Nicholas Olmstead, Jno. Gilbert and Edward Grannis, called on Mr. Whiting, (minister of the First Church of Hartford,) and requested full privileges " in all the ordinances of Christ," on account " of a union they had already," referring to their Church membership in England. Mr. Whiting knew of no such union but agreed to consider the matter. [Walker's History First Church, p. 200.] The first mention by name in the laws of the Colony of any orthodox denomination is in the act of May, 1669, whereby the " Congregational " Churches (profession and practice) were approved, and others " orthodox and sound in the fundamentals of Christian religion, may have allowance of their perswasion and profession in church ways or assemblies without disturbance." This in effect prevented the law of 1657 from being applied to any ministry or Church administration other than Congregationalists. Such application of the law was also prevented by the law of 1665, which gave all persons full and free liberty to worship 4° THE CHURCH God in the way they think best, provided they make no disturb- ance of the pubHc or minister's support. Thus the way was open for all denominations to organize new societies, subject to the approval of the General Court. In October, 1669, the Second Church at Hartford was legally established and given permission to " practice the Congregational way without dis- turbance." This is the first instance in Connecticut of two ecclesiastical societies in one town. For more than ten years the " half-way covenant " had been agitated, so that there were two kinds of Congregationalists then in the Colony, the old and straight kind that would baptize the children of none but those who were "'fit for the Lord's Supper," and the new and large kind that would baptize the children of those who were " not yet fit for the Lord's Supper," provided they were persons " of an honest and godly conversation," or, according to the General Assembly of 1664, provided they had as much rehgion as mem- bers of the Church of England were supposed to have. The Second Church of Hartford was the first in the Colony that made a special issue of straight Congregationalism in its forma- tion, but notwithstanding this fact, it was overcome by the raging tide that swept over nearly all the Congregational Churches in the Colony, and it began immediately to practice the half-way covenant. By request. Gov. Leete reported to the English Commis- sioners for Trade and Foreign Plantations on July 15, 1680, that " in our corporation are 26 towns and there is one and twenty churehes in them. In one of them, (Hartford,) we have two churches. Our people are some strict Congrega- tional men, others more large Congregational men, and some moderate Presbyterians ; and, take the Congregational men of both sorts, they are the greatest part of the people." " There are 4 or 5 Seven day men and about so many more Quakers." These Seven-day men and Quakers were probably the Rogerenes of New London, founded about 1675. They were variously called Quakers and Baptists, and no other Seven-day men or Quakers are known to have been in the Colony at that date. The Rogerenes were the first disturbing sect within our borders. The Presbyterians and Congregationalists were so IN CONNECTICUT. 4I nearly alike as to be considered practically the same, and appar- ently there was no trouble as to taxes, with the sinners who may have resided in the Colony. The first general complaint against compulsory minister's support came from the Rogerenes, in the memorial of Richard Steere et al. of New London, to the Gen- eral Assembly, dated Jan. i6, 1694-5. It was a tirade against the Colonial Government, based largely on alleged violations of the English act of toleration. We quote the following: "For do not the Presbyterian party here being most numerous and powerful forcably seize by Distress the estates of some and threaten to do the like by others of their fellow dissenters, viz., Baptist and Quaker, for the building of a Presbyterian meeting house and for the maintainence of a Presybterian minister. Nor are such who are of the Church of England Communion like to fare any better, though the same is contrary to nature, reason and the laws of the realm of England." Their expression of contempt for the civil authority seems to have been the main object of this memorial, rather than relief from taxes, and Steere was promptly called to answer for his contempt. The reference to "the Church of England Com- munion " in this memorial was probably for effect, as no Churchmen were known to have been in the vicinity of New London at that date. There were, however, about ten or fifteen families then at Stratford, " who had been bom and bred in England " and were already Episcopalians. From them came the first expression in this Colony of a desire for the services of the Church. Some of them were in Stratford about 1675, but it was not until 1702, after the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts had been organized, that they petitioned for a missionary. The first preaching in Connecticut by Episcopal ministers was Sept. 13, 1702, when the Rev. John Talbot, missionary of the S. P. G., preached at New London in the Congregational Church in the forenoon, and the Rev. George Keith, his com- panion, in the afternoon. They were invited to preach there by the minister. Rev. Gurdon Saltonstall, who entertained them at his house. After the morning service they were invited to dinner by Governor Winthrop, who also entertained them at 42 THE CHURCH his house " then and the next day." This was the only stop in 1702 of these missionaries in Connecticut. On Oct. 26, 1704, the Rev. Mr. Vesey of Trinity Church, New York, wrote to the Secretary of the S. P. G. that " Mr. George Muirson, a sober, ingenious youth designs, God willing to receive Holy Orders and is recommended by my Ld. Corn- bury & the Reve'rd. Clergy convened at New York." Some- time in 1705, the Churchmen of Stratford, Conn., applied to Mr. Vesey for services at Stratford. Mr. Muirson was sta- tioned as missionary at Rye, N. Y., before Nov. 21, 1705, on which day he wrote that he had " lately been in ye Government of Connecticut where I observe some people well affected to ye Church." The people of Connecticut were then attending services at Rye on Sundays. On Sept. 2, 1706, Missionary Muirson came in company with Col. Caleb Heathcote to Stratford, and Mr. Muirson preached both forenoon and afternoon to a numerous congregation and baptized about twenty-four persons. Inasmuch as Keith's Journal makes no mention of services at New London in 1702, other than preaching, this service at Stratford is supposed to have been the first in Connecticut, in accordance with the Book of Common Prayer. The Churchmen of Stratford applied to the authorities for the use of the meeting house, (which the Churchmen had helped to build,) but this request was refused. Mr. Muirson says that the people of Stratford " ignorantly called " the Church "Rome's sister." Col. Heathcote writes to the Society that they found the " Colony much as we expected, very ignorant of the constitution of our Church and for that reason great enemies to it." At the second coming to Stratford of Messrs. Muirson and Heathcote, (they were there three times before April 4, 1707,) Mr. Joseph Curtice and James Hudson read a paper to Mr. Muirson forbidding him, under threats of fine and imprison- ment, from holding service or administering the Sacrament, the purport of which paper Mr. Muirson says " was to let me know that I had done an illegal thing in coming among them to establish a new way of worship, and to forewarn me from preaching any more. And this he did by virtue of one of their laws." Mr. Muirson asked for a copy of the paper and was IN CONNECTICUT. 43 refused. The day following, Curtice and others stood in the highway and forbade any to go to the assembly of Churchmen. The ministers and magistrates were remarkably industrious, going from house to house and persuading the people from hearing Mr. Muirson and threatening fines and imprisonment to all who should go to hear him. Mr. Muirson describes the law that the officers read to him with such accuracy as to clearly identify it as the act of March 8, 1657-8 that was enacted to sup- press the seceding Congregationalists of Hartford, and which prohibited people from entertaining or attending any minis- try or Church administration " distinct and separate from and in opposition to " that which is dispensed by the settled and approved minister of the place. A minister or Church adminis- tration could not be in opposition to another, unless they were both of the same persuasion. The true intent and object of the law was to regulate the Congregational Churches. It could not have been intended to apply to any other denomination, for there was not then in the Colony any body of people of any other persuasion. The toleration act of 1669 gave all Dis- senters from the Congregational way, who were orthodox and sound in the fundamentals of Christian religion, the right to worship in their own way " without disturbance." But this act was omitted from the revision of 1702 and no substitute for it was enacted until 1708, and thus, at this particular time, (1707,) there was no law to modify the law of 1657, which was so vaguely worded as to be improperly applied to suppress Churchmen, although it was never so intended. This one instance at Stratford is the only record we have of any attempt to so use this law. There never was a law of the Colony that could have been properly used to prevent Episcopalians having a minister in orders from assembling and worshipping God in accordance with the rules of the Church. Beardsley's " History of the Church in Connecticut " says : When the Commissioners of Charles Second visited Connecti- cut in 1665, they reported to England that the Colony " will not hinder any from enjoying the Sacrament and using the Common Prayer Book, provided they hinder not the mainten- ance of the public minister." " But the Commissioners could not have meant by this statement that there was any legal pro- 44 THE CHURCH vision for such liberty. . . . For there was no letting up of the Puritan rigor, nor relaxation of the rule that none should have liberty to worship God publicly, except after the order of the religion established by the civil Government until 1708." In this Beardsley was clearly in error. The law of April, 1665, (which had just been enacted,) provided for that liberty of worship which the Commissioners reported, and so did the law of 1669, while it was in force. In fact the toleration act of 1665 was the most liberal of all and applied to " all persons of civil lives " giving them full liberty to " worship God in that way which they think best." The act of 1669 was restricted to persons " orthodox and sound in the fundamentals of Christian religion," while the act of 1708 was still farther re- stricted, and encumbered, each successive toleration act making liberty to " worship God in that way they think best " still more difficult than it had been before. " Quakers, Ranters, Adamites, or such like notorious heretiques," are the only sectaries that were ever prohibited, or against whom any law was ever directly enacted, and the law against them was repealed in May, 1706. Mr. Muirson wrote to England that the laws here " deny a liberty of conscience to the Church of England people, as well as to others," and that such denial is " repugnant to the laws of England." He therefore disregarded the attempted applica- tion of the law to him because such an application was a clear violation of the English toleration act, which guaranteed to all freedom to worship God in their own way. The people of Stratford were not intimidated by the acts of the authorities. On the contrary, more and more came to hear Mr. Muirson and to receive baptism and the Holy Communion, many of whom had never received it before. Mr. Muirson writes to the Secretary of the S. P. G. under date of April 4, 1707, that on invitation, he had lately preached in a private house at Fairfield and baptized some children. The Rev. Mr. Evans of Philadelphia was with him. He also asks the Society to send over some Common Prayer Books and some small treatise in defense of the Church. For years after, this request for Church books was often and earnestly repeated by the several missionaries. The Church at Stratford was IN CONNECTICUT. 45 organized by Mr. Muirson, and wardens and vestrymen elected in April, 1707. Under date of April 14, 1707, Col. Heathcote writes that Mr. Read, the minister at Stratford, had come over to the Church and had been dismissed. Again, under date of Feb. 24, 1707-8, he says: "I acquainted you in my former letter that there was a very ingenious gentleman at Stratford, one Mr. Read the Minister of that place, who is very inclinable to come over to the Church. By reason of this, he has undergone persecution by his people who do all in their power to starve him." Mr. Heathcote desired Mr. Read to go to England for orders, and writes that in case of " any proposal of his coming over for ordination, his family, which is pretty large, must be taken care of." This was the Rev. John Read, Congregation- alist minister at Stratford. In Orcutt's " History of Strat- ford " we find that he was called to Stratford in May, 1703, and very soon after, Sept. 25, 1706, " perhaps before, some talk was indulged in by the public which Mr. Read resented and demanded inquiry." " No indication as to what was said offensive to Mr. Read . . . has been found except the intimation that he had made overtures to join the Episcopal Church." He resigned March 27, 1707. He was the first Congregational minister in Connecticut to go over to the Church and also the first person to do so whose name is known. Perhaps he was one of the ministers who had opposed the services of the Church at Stratford. He was born 1673, graduated at Harvard 1697, married Ruth, daughter of Major John Talcott of Hartford, preached at Waterbury, 1698-9, at East Hartford two years, then at Stratford, 1703 to 1707, removed to New Milford and settled in a log hut, bought large tracts of land of the Indians, was involved in large and unsuccessful land litigation and was finally rewarded by a grant of 20,000 acres of land from the General Court. Part of this land was in the present town of Redding, (originally spelled Reading,) the town being named after Mr. Read, whose son John was one of its first settlers. The people at New Milford used Mr. Read's house as a place of worship, Mr. Read himself preaching there occasionally. He was admitted to the bar in 1708 and then both preached and 46 THE CHURCH practiced. In 1712 was appointed Queen's Attorney for the Colony; removed to Boston in 1722, where he was a successful lawyer, Attorney General of that Colony, and a Communicant at King's Chapel. He died at Boston, Feb. 14, 1748-9- [D. C. Kilbourn in Connecticut Magazine, and Orcutt's History of Stratford.] Mr. Muirson extended his services into several places in Fairfield County and was so well received that the Rev. John Talbot, (who had probably preached there about that time,) writes to Mr. Keith in February, 1707-8, that " Nor walk and Fairfield are ready to break open their meeting house doors and let him, (Mr. Muirson,) in if he would sufifer it." And also that they had " taken measures at Stratford to build a church, which never was seen in that country before. I pray God sent them an able minister of the New Testament for they have been long enough under the old dispensation." Mr. Muirson writes that the people of Connecticut " say the sign of the cross is the mark of the beast and the sign of the devil, and that those who receive it are given to the devil." The Society finally tranferred Mr. Muirson from Rye to Strat- ford, but he died Oct. 12, 1708, before he learned of this appointment. The parish with about 30 communicants and a respectable number of families was left to the occasional services of missionaries who chanced to visit them. In 1710 the Rev. John Sharpe, Chaplain to the Forces in the Fort of New York, officiated frequently at Stratford and several other places in Connecticut. He records in his diary the baptism at Long Hill, Jan. 27, 1710, of " Isaac Styles, the first Man Child born in the Colony of Connecticut, a man of 80 years of age." In this year the people of Stratford petitioned for a missionary and at length Rev. Francis Philips was appointed, arriving there just before Christmas, 1712, and staying part of the time till the mid-summer of 1713. He left without orders from, or the knowledge or consent of the Society whose agent he was. But the Church continued to grow, and on April 9, 1714, they write to Col. Heathcote that they " have at last got the timber felled and do hope to have it raised in three months time," meaning a house of worship. In order to prevent as much as possible the growth of the Church in Stratford, the Standing Order, IN CONNECTICUT. 47 after consulting the rest of Connecticut and the wise men of Boston, determined that one of the best preachers that both Colonies could afford should be sought and sent to Stratford to counteract the growth of the Church. Accordingly the Rev. Timothy Cutler, then of Boston, or its vicinity, was settled at Stratford. But while the Congregationalists were thus sup- plied with an able minister, the poor Episcopalians had none. Their house of worship did not materialize, and the venerable Society failed to send them a missionary, although they promised in 1720 to do so. Two years afterwards the Rev. George Pigott was sent to them and on May 29, 1722, they say of " his care over us, we are well satisfied that it will be to the advantage of the Church." But about five years before Mr. Pigott came, the Rev. Mr. Cutler had become the Rector of Yale College, and little did the wise men who had placed him at Stratford to check Episcopacy, dream that in eight short years he would be the means of imparting to the Church in Connecticut its first susbtantial growth, whereby the one poor struggling Church in a single town was soon multiplied many times, and extended throughout the western part of the Colony. Not only in Connecticut, but throughout all the Colonies was there great consternation when it became known, in 1722, that Timothy Cutler, the Rector of Yale College, Daniel Brown the tutor, and the Rev. Samuel Johnson, pastor of the Congre- gational Church at West Haven, had declared for Episcopacy and were going to England to receive ordination by a Bishop. At this time there was not an Episcopal house of worship in Connecticut and the little band at Stratford was the only organized Church. The Rev. James Wetmore, Congregational minister in North Haven, soon followed the others to England for Episcopal ordination. Mr. Brown died in England, Cutler and Johnson returned in the fall of 1723, Mr. Cutler going to Christ Church at Boston, while Mr. Johnson relieved Mr. Pigott at Christ Church, Stratford, the latter being transferred to Providence. Mr. Wetmore eventually settled at Rye, N. Y. Referring to the conversion of Dr. Cutler and his three com- panions, Mr. Pigott says Oct. 3, 1722, " This great onset towards a reformation in this deluded country has brought in vast numbers to favor the Church of England." Newtown and 48 THE CHURCH Ripton, if not Fairfield, he adds, intend to petition the Society for ministers. On Nov. 6, 1722, Mr. Pigott writes, " The sub- scribers at Ripton have been of long standing incHned to the Church, yet among them there are some lately brought over. But those of Newtown to a man have been induced by my means to embrace our profession. I believe two missionaries might serve all four towns, that is one might attend on Stratford and Fairfield and the other on Newtown and Ripton, alternately." During the year ending June, 1723, sixty-seven new communi- cants were added to the Church at Stratford, and when Mr. Johnson arrived there to take charge on Nov. i, 1723, he found seventy-nine communicants and a house of worship in progress of construction. The Churchmen of Stratford gave what they could for building the church, to which was added liberal con- tributions of several pious and generous gentlemen of the neighboring provinces, and something from travellers who passed through the town. Mr. Pigott's labors in addition to Stratford, Fairfield, Ripton and Newtown, had been extended to Norwalk, North Haven and perhaps other places, and this so disturbed Deputy Gov. Nathan Gold of Norwalk, that he proposed to the General Court a law to prohibit Mr. Pigott practicing the function of a minister in any place in the Colony other than Stratford. But no such law could be passed. Dr. Johnson under date of Jan. 18, 1723-4 writes that the Church- men are chiefly in six or seven towns and "yet there is not one Clergyman of the Church of England besides myself in this whole Colony." He was obliged to ride about to other towns, (some ten, some twenty miles off,) " where there is as much need of a minister as at Stratford. ... A considerable number of young men, five or six, I am sure of would be ordained, but for want of Episcopal ordination decline the ministry and go into secular business." About a year later Dr. Johnson refers to a young man of Fairfield, (Mr. Henry Caner, grad. Yale 1724,) whom the Doctor was preparing for the service of the Church. This is the first person studying for the ministry of the Church in Connecticut of whom we have any account. He was probably brought up in the Church, as he was born in England, about 1703. In 1725, Dr. Johnson writes " Sundry of the young candidates for the ministry repair IN CONNECTICUT. 49 to me frequently for books and conversations upon religious subjects. People are poor, (many of them,) and thirst after Prayer Books, Catechisms, &c. but these books are not to be had in this country even if they had money to purchase them." The church at Stratford, the first Episcopal church in Con- necticut, was so far finished as to be opened for Services on Christmas day, 1724; the second church was opened at Fair- field, in the fall of 1725, and the third church was opened at New London on Dec. 9, 1730. Gov. Talcott wrote to the Bishop of London under date Dec. I, 1725, that " there is but one Church of England minister in this Colony and the Church with him have the same protection as the rest of our Churches and are under no constraint to the support of any other minister." He refers to " some few persons " in other towns " who have declared themselves to be of the Church of England ; and some of them that live 30 or 40 miles from where the Church of England's minister lives " have made some objection to compulsory minister's support. It may be true that the Churchmen of Stratford were not vinder " constraint to contribute to the support of any other minister," but if so, it was through the leniency of those in authority, as before May, 1727, the law, if enforced, would have compelled them to do so. Mr. Johnson writes to the Bishop of London, Sept. 26, 1726, as follows : " I cannot but think it very hard, that that Church of which our most gracious King is the nursing father, should not, in any part of his Majesty's domains, be at least upon a level with the Dissenters and free from any oppression from them." " As soon as any stranger, though an Englishman, comes into any town, he is according to their laws, immediately warned to go out, which they always do if he is a Churchman, and it is in the breast of the selectmen of the town whether they will accept of any bondsman for him. Neither can he purchase any lands without their leave, and unless they see cause to allow him to stay, they can, by their laws, whip him out of town, if he otherwise refuse to depart. By this means several professors of our Church, for no other crime but their profession, have been prevented from settling here." so THE CHURCH In January, 1726-7 Mr. Johnson writes that he has been to Fairfield " to visit a considerable number of my people in prison for their rates to the dissenting minister. ... I wish your Lordship, or some of your sacred character, could have been by to behold the contempt and indignity which our holy religion here suffers among an ungrateful people." "Unless we can have relief and be delivered from this unreasonable treatment, I fear I must give up the cause, and our Church must sink and come to nothing." And yet these people were legally put in prison and could not reasonably have expected any other treat- ment as long as the law remained as it then was. Referring to Church and State in Old England and in New England, one writer says " The real difference was, that in Old England the Church was subordinate to the State ; but in New England the State was subordinate to the Church." " This mode of government answered a tolerable purpose so long as the community continued Christian, and so long as the people were united in sentiment," and we may add, in religion. Such unity had been the case for nearly one hundred years, but it no longer existed. The Baptists came to Groton in 1704 and organized a Church in 1705, although it was about twenty-five years before a second Church was organized. The Quakers of New York state had also crossed our borders, and the Con- gregationalists had split up into two factions, those adopting the Saybrook Platform of 1708, and the dissenters therefrom, known as Separatists. These with the Presbyterians and Churchmen made six different religious denominations then in the Colony, besides the Rogerenes of New London. These new conditions made the old law for the minister's support both unreasonable and unjust. The toleration acts of 1665, 1669, and 1708, in terms complied with the law of England by extend- ing freedom of worship to persons of all denominations, but the laws in general were so framed that those who elected to worship in any other than the Congregational way were sub- jected to various annoyances and made to pay for it so dearly as to discourage all other worship, as far as it could be dis- couraged without actual prohibition. Mr. Johnson considered the law of the Colony for the minister's support to be contrary to the indulgence granted the Colony "by their charter, which IN CONNECTICUT. 5 1 forbade them to do anything contrary to the laws of England." The toleration act of 1708 expressly provided that dissenting worshippers should not be " excused f roni paying minister's rates", for the " way " established by law. The Church wardens and vestry of Fairfield petitioned the General Court which assembled May 15, 1727, for some act to " excuse us from paying any dissenting minister, or to the building of any dissenting meeting house." Also requesting that the money formerly taken from them by distraint, (as they say " contrary to His Honor, the Governor's advice,") be restored to them again. A law purporting to give Church- men relief from taxes was passed, and it is difficult to conceive how any law for such purpose could have possibly been so framed as to give as little relief. It was the first law to name the Church of England, and the first law granting any relief from taxes to those who were not of the Standing Order. It has been stated that this law was passed at the request of Churchmen, but they never requested this law. It was like asking for bread and receiving a stone. The rights of Epis- copalians under the laws of the Colony have generally been misunderstood, and the importance of this act of 1727 in the history of the Church is so great as to warrant an extended discussion. The preamble to the act shows that it was granted " Upon the Prayer of Moses Ward of Fairfield, Church Warden, and the rest of the Church Wardens, Vestry M§n and Brethren, representing themselves under Obligations by the Honorable Society, and Bishop of London, to pay to the Support of the established Church," and that " said Ward appeared, and by his attorney declared to this Assembly, that he should not insist on the return of the money prayed for." The law enacted " That all persons who are of the Church of England, and those who are of the Churches established by the laws of this Government, that live in the bounds of any Parish allowed by this Assembly, shall be taxed by the parishioners of the said Parish, by the same rule, and in the same proportion, for the support of the Ministry in such Parish." The condi- tions here imposed are the controlling features of the act. It is imperative that Churchmen shall be taxed to support the 52 THE CHURCH ministers of the Standing Order, " by the same rule, and in the same proportion " as all others, and further, the conditions of this act are applicable only to those " that live in the bounds " of the particular Congregational parish where the tax was laid. The omission to notice this condition has been one of the chief causes of misunderstanding the law. The law gives no conditions for relief to the tax payer as to taxes for supporting ministers of the Standing Order. The only relief is directly for the Episcopal Minister and is as follows : " But if it so happens that there be a Society of the Church of England, where there is a person in Orders according to the Canons of the Church of England, settled and abiding among them, and performing divine service, so near to any person that hath declared himself of the Church of England, that he can conveniently, and doth attend the public Worship there, then the Collectors, having first indifferently levied the Tax, as above- said, shall deliver the Taxes collected of such persons declaring themselves, and attending as aforesaid, unto the Minister of the Church of England, living near unto such persons ; which Minister shall have full power to receive and recover the same, in order to his support in the place assigned to him." But before the Episcopal minister could recover the taxes paid by the members of his flock to the Collector of the Stand- ing Order, he must prove that he " is a person in orders accord- ing to the canons of the Church " ; that he resides in the same Congregational parish with those Churchmen whose taxes he demands ; that he has regularly performed Divine Service in that vicinity ; that the persons whose taxes he demands have " declared " themselves to be Churchmen, and that they have regularly attended services at the public worship conducted by this minister. The remainder of the act is as follows : " But if such proportions of Taxes be not sufficient in any Society of the Church of England to support the incumbent there, then such society may levy and collect of them who profess and attend, as aforesaid, greater Taxes, at their own discretion, for the support of their Minister. " And that the parishioners of the Church of England, attend- ing as aforesaid, are hereby excused from paying any Taxes IN CONNECTICUT. 53 for building Meeting Houses for the present established Churches of this Government." The provision for further taxing Churchmen for their own support requires no explanation, but the relief from paying meeting-house taxes applies, by reason of the words "attending as aforesaid " only to such Churchmen as have fulfilled the conditions named in the previous portion of the act, and there- fore only those Churchmen who resided in the same Congrega- tional parish that the Episcopal Minister resided in, could properly claim exemption from meeting-house taxes. In the spring of 1727 when this act was passed, there were only two Episcopal houses of worship in use within the Colony, one at Stratford and an unfinished one at Fairfield. There was another in the process of building at New London. These three towns had each organized a parish or society ; so also West Haven, Ripton, Ridgefield, Newtown, Norwalk, North Haven, Poquonnuck, (North Groton,) Green's Farms, Green- field, Chestnut Ridge, (Redding,) and Danbury, either had parishes or had laid the foundations for a parish, and yet, to take care of all these fourteen places, there was only one Minis- ter " in Orders according to the Canons of the Church of Eng- land settled and abiding among them ", and Stratford, where the Rev. Samuel Johnson resided, was the only place in the Colony where Churchmen could get any relief under this law. Fairfield, however, was soon added to the list by the appoint- ment as missionary of Rev. Henry Caner, who had been study- ing for the ministry for three years last past and had also per- formed good service as catechist and lay reader. He returned in the fall of 1727 from England, where he had been for ordina- tion. His first report to the Society is dated March 15, 1727-8. He says the heavy taxes levied for the support of dissenting ministers renders his people " almost inacapable of carrying on the Church." Under the same date he writes to the Bishop of London that "the Dissenters in this government have lately passed an act to exempt all professors of the Church from pay- ing taxes to support their ministers, yet they take the liberty to determine themselves who may be called Churchmen, and interpret that act to comprehend none that live a mile from the Church minister, but of its revenues likewise, we are entirely 54 THE CHURCH deprived of the benefit of; and tlie favor which they would seem to do us proves, in reality, but a shadow." Under date of April 2, 1728, Mr. Johnson of Stratford writes to the Bishop of London, that " The Government have pre- tended to make a law in favor of the Church, whereby all that live near our parish churches are exempted from paying taxes to dissenting ministers, and it is of some service to such, but those that live scattering in the country are yet persecuted as bad as ever, and in this law they still call themselves the Established Churches, and treat us as Dissenters." Mr. Caner mentions nearness to the Church minister as the controlling condition for exemption from taxes, but in fact, the bounds of the established parish where the Church minister resided was the real limit of exemption, while the words " near to " in the law relate to the place of worship and not to the abode of the minister. The law itself defines what " near to " means, so that if a person could and did attend worship in any place he was " near to " that place within the meaning of the law. We are at a loss to see on what ground the taxes of the Churchmen of Fairfield who attended Mr. Caner's services there should not have been paid over to Mr. Caner, unless they were assessed before Mr. Caner's return from England. It was certainly the rule to give Episcopalians the benefit of this law in all places where the Episcopal ministers resided, and in most other places Episcopaliaws legally suffered. The authorities might however have claimed that a general missionary for two or more different places was not a minister " settled and abid- ing " in any particular place according to the intent of the law. That a minister should have several parishes to serve alternately, was foreign to the conceptions of the Standing Order. They might well have raised the question as to who were " declared " Churchmen. The only law bearing on the declarations of dis- senters was the toleration act of 1708, which required those who desired to worship God in a way different from that of the Standing Order, to qualify themselves at the County Court " according to an act made in the first year of the late King William and Queen Mary." We find no record of any such qualification in Hartford County and do not know that any one ever qualified under it except a few Straight Congregational- IN CONNECTICUT. 55 ists in New Haven County. The words " hath declared himself of the Church of England " as used in the act of 1727 could be fairly construed as so declaring under the toleration law of 1708. We do not know that the law ever was so construed. On May 9, 1728, the Church wardens and vestrymen of Fair- field presented a memorial to the General Assembly saying that the act of 1727 " is not fully understood " and particularly they did not understand " what part of the professors of the Church of England are exempted, all being within the district of the Rev. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Caner's ministry, within the county of Fairfield." They ask for an explanation, and also for a law that taxes be granted " by the book of canons . . . and not by your collectors." No action was taken on this petition. A little before April i, 1728, Mr. Johnson preached at New Haven. He says, " Great pains were taken to hinder people from coming to Church and many well wishers to it were over- persuaded not to come; however, I had near a hundred hearers." After sermon, " some ten of the members of the Church there subscribed one hundred pounds towards the build- ing of a church in that town." , The act of 1727 encouraged the Quakers to apply for relief from taxes, which was granted at the May session in 1729 and the same favor was extended to the Baptists in October, 1729. We presume the law makers preferred Quakers and Baptists to Episcopalians, for the most objectionable features of the law of 1727 were omitted from these acts of 1729, whereby all Quakers and Baptists that attended their respective meetings were wholly exempted from taxes on behalf of the Standing Order. The Straight Congregationalists had no relief whatever from the oppressions of the Standing Order until 1777. The Rev. Samuel Seabury, father of Bishop Seabury and the Congregationalist minister at North Groton, (now Ledyard,) declared for Episcopacy, went to England for ordination, and returned as missionary to New London, Dec. 9, 1730. The Rev. John Beach, Presbyterian minister at Newtown, soon followed, and was returned here as missionary for Redding and Newtown in 1734. The people of North Groton consoled themselves over the loss of the Rev. Samuel Seabury by securing the services of the 5 6 THE CHURCH Rev. Ebenezer Punderson, and they were so well pleased with him as to say " we looked upon ourselves as favorites of Heaven," but in about two and a half years he "publicly declared himself to be a conformist to the Established Church of England," and they say some " ten or twelve of the people of our Parish and heads of families have signed his paper and contributed money to him to have his expenses " to England paid for him "to be ordained by a bishop." [Ecclesiastical Mss., Vol. 4, Doc. 51.] Mr. Punderson was recommended by the clergy of Connecticut, who said there was " a good prospect that many of his former parish will go with him." He came back in 1734 as missionary for North Groton and parts adjacent. In December, 1733, Mr. Johnson wrote to the Bishop of London that he believed two or three worthy young ministers of this Colony "will in a little time declare for us," and that " two of them especially have hopes that the most of their con- gregation will conform with them." One of these two was Mr. Punderson and the other was Jonathan Arnold, who had suc- ceeded Mr. Johnson at West Haven. In 1734 Mr. Arnold returned from England with the appointment of itinerant mis- sionary of the Colony, and the Standing Order at West Haven, like the people of North Groton, were grieved at the loss of two successive pastors and part of their congregation. The honorable Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Plantations of the Realm of England breathed into the Church in Connecticut the breath of life, and by its foster- ing care sustained the Church until it was strong enough to stand the shock of the American Revolution. Each missionary was requested to " keep a constant and regular correspondence " with the Secretary of the Society, besides making semi-annual reports. It is by this correspondence that we have such a com- plete history of the Church. The missionaries were paid from twenty to seventy pounds steriing per annum, and each mis- sionary was allowed a library valued at ten pounds sterling with five pounds worth of tracts. Of the 83 missionaries on the Society's list in New England more than one-fourth were brought up Dissenters. In Connecticut there was a much larger percentage of those who had come over to the Church. Of the first nine missionaries appointed to stations in Connecti- cut, six of them had been dissenting ministers. IN CONNECTICUT. 57 The missionaries were instructed " that they take special care to give no offence to the Civil Government, by inter-med- dling in affairs not relating to their own calling and function." "That they particularly preach against those vices, which tliey shall observe to be most predominating in the places of their residence." No missionary was appointed to any place without first being petitioned for, and without being recommended by some mis- sionary or other person known to the Society. Even then no missionary was sent until the Society knew " whether those places are able and willing to contribute towards the mainten- ance of a missionary," and those places which were most willing to contribute were always supplied first. Ripton and Newtown in 1722 both asked for a missionary and referred to certain lands for Church support, but did not state specifically how much they could do. Two years later they were informed that the " Society are inclined to send them a Missionary, but write first to know what the value of the land is . . . and what they will contribute further annually ? " The people soon learned that it was necessary to offer the Society something substantial towards supporting a missionary before they could have one, and even then only a few mission- aries were to be had. There was at Hebron in 1736 " a numerous congregation who attended the services of the Common Prayers with great seriousness " when Missionary Seabury of New London, thirty miles away, came to visit them. They could not get a mis- sionary and so desired Mr. Seabury to " administer to them four times a year until one could be sent." In 1740 the " Church newly planted " at Wallingford was served only once a quarter by a minister and every Lord's day besides they were served by a lay reader. They knew that Mr. Morris could not come to them oftener, but, say they, "we hope God in his providence, will so order it that we may at last be oftener attended." Mr. Morris writes that upon Mr. Arnold leaving, the people " seemed to despair of having another to succeed him." ..." Should I give an account of the geography of my mission you would find it large enough for a Diocese." 58 THE CHURCH In 1741, Mr. Morris visited Simsbury, (Bloomfield,) where " they are in hopes of having a minister at last, and have accord- ingly prepared some timber to build a church." He arranged with the other missionaries to assist him so that Simsbury might be served " eight times a year." He agreed to attend Walling- ford three times a year, " which they seem satisfied with, for they know it is as much as I can do." In October, 1743, Mr. Beach speaks of attending about twenty families at New Milford and New Fairfield, where he goes several times a year " but seldom on the Lord's day." They frequently go fifteen miles to attend church at Newtown. In April, 1744, the Church wardens of Simsbury write to the Society that they have "nothing so much to object against as the want of a settled minister." Mr. Punderson of North Groton writes, " I am at present the only missionary in this half of the government and part of Rhode Island," and urges the Society to fill the vacancy at New London occasioned by the transfer of Mr. Seabury to Long Island. Other removals occurred, so that in 1747 Dr. Johnson says, " I am now alone here on the sea coast, without one person in orders besides myself for more than a hundred miles." The Church wardens of Litchfield asked for a missionary in 1747, and say they are remote from all the missionaries, except the Rev. Mr. Gibbs, twenty-seven miles away, and Rev. Mr. Beach, between thirty- five and forty miles away. In 1756, the people of Norwich were desirous of having a missionary, and before they had one the Mohegan Indians petitioned the Society to have this missionary give them a share of his time, "that we may be taught to go to that good place when we die, as well as the white man." They would pay some- thing but they could not pay much save a few oysters, fish, etc. In 1764 the Rev. Mr. Viets, missionary at Bloomfield, was thirty-five miles from any other Episcopal minister. In 1768, the Church wardens of Guilford tell a long story about having tried in vain, since 1744, to have a minister settled among them, but could get nothing but transient service, although some came and staid long enough to greatly encourage them, and left soon enough to grievously disappoint them. They conclude as follows : — " We have labored under the IN CONNECTICUT. 59 greatest discouragements for upwards of twenty-three years and built a church, purchased a Glebe and " obtained everything that we have so " long struggled for except the Society's patron- age." We " are stripped of our minister and left to mourn our loss, and to be the derision and scoff of the dissenters." They asked to have Mr. Tyler, who was going home for orders, sent to them. But still again they were disappointed, for Mr. Tyler came back as missionary to Norwich and adjoining parts. He opened the church at Pomfret, (Brooklyn,) April 12, 1771, the last church built in the Colony, and which is now, (1906,) standing. [Mention is made of this old church by the Rev. George Israel Browne, with illustrations, in the Conn. Magazine, Vol. X, p. 69, etc.] It was built by Mr. Godfrey Malbone, an ardent Churchman, who for years had without murmur paid one-eighth of all the taxes in the parish. When he began, in 1769, to build the church, there were but two Churchmen that he knew of besides himself. The Standing Order decided to build a new meeting-house, which Mr. Malbone objected to as unnecessary, but he was told that they would build it and compel him to pay for it. His lawyer, a Churchman, advised him that as the laws stood he could not help himself, unless the Episco- palians had a church and minister of their own.. Consequently Mr. Malbone decided to have both a church and a missionary. In October, 1770, this Church was legalized by the General Assembly. With a little outside aid the building was ready, as before stated, in 1771. About twenty heads of families, brought up in the Dissenting way, joined with them before the church was completed, and more joined later, for there was not another church nearer than Norwich, twenty-two miles away. But the great difficulty which Mr. Malbone encountered was to get a missionary. He applied for one in 1769 and engaged to pay one hundred pounds annually. Without a minister settled there the people were bound by law to pay for the meeting- house and minister's rate of the Standing Order. Failing to have a missionary sent to him by the Society, he employed the Rev. Mr. Moseley, a chaplain in the British Navy, but still they were not freed from taxes as the Dissenters would not admit that Mr. Moseley was " in orders in accordance with the Canons of the Church." In 1772 Mr. Moseley withdrew in favor of 6o THE CHURCH the Rev. Daniel Fogg, a missionary of the S. P. G., and then the Churchmen in the parish of Brooklyn were relieved from further taxes to the Standing Order. There never were in the Colony half as many missionaries as were being earnestly begged for, and all the while that this cry for more ministers was heard throughout the land, the Dis- senters were complaining about the S. P. G. sending ministers where they were not wanted. Dr. Blake's " Separates " of New England says that the S. P. G. was a society for aiding the Church of England in America and for planting " its Churches where the ground was abundantly occupied and supplied with the ministrations of the Gospel, though not after the Episcopal order." The great Anti-Episcopal Convention, 1766 to 1775, complained of the S. P. G. for paying considerable salaries to missionaries where the Convention thought they were not wanted. There was no minister of any denomination at Red- ding, when Mr. Henry Caner first ministered to the people there. At the present day it is hard to realize how much the S. P. G. did for the Church in Connecticut. The Rev. John Beach in 1743 said : " I bless God for the pious care and charity of the venerable Society . . . and had it not been for that, we have reason to think there would not have been at this day as much as one congregation in this Colony worshiping God according to the Church of England." The missionaries frequently represented to the Society the great want of schools for the instruction of children in the principles of religion and convenient learning. The Society from the first paid salaries to several catechists and school masters, particularly in the Provinces of New York and Massa- chusetts. The school masters were to instruct the children in reading, writing and arithmetic, also in the Catechism, reading the Holy Scripture and in the use of the Prayer Book. They were required to frequently consult and advise with the ministers ; to take all their scholars regularly to Church, and to teach them to join in the worship. They were to teach the children special morning and evening prayers for use in school, and also for private use at home • a short prayer for every child to use when they first come into IN CONNECTICUT. 6 1 their seats at church and before they leave their seats. Also " A Grace before " and " after Meat." The first mention found of a catechist in Connecticut is Nov. 6, 1722, when the Rev. Mr. Pigott asks to have a French gentle- man of Fairfield appointed as catechist. He refers to Dr. James Laborie, a Hugenot who was ordained at Zurich, Oct. 30, 1688, removed to England, and was licensed by the Bishop of London for teaching grammar and catechising in the parish of Stepney. He officiated in several French churches of London for nine or ten years and in 1698 came to America and was settled in the ministry at " New Oxford", Mass., with a commission from Bishop Compton to instruct the Indians there, which he did with great success. He removed to New York and had charge of the French Church there from Oct. 15, 1704, to Aug. 25, 1706. He then engaged in the practice of medicine and removed to Stratford, Conn, about 1709. He was Surgeon for the Colony at Wood Creek, 1709, and in the expedition to Port Royal and Nova Scotia, 1710, being also Chaplain on the Brigantine " Mary." He removed to Fair- field about 17 16. Here, without any salary, he continued his labors and began to teach both Whites and Indians. He says he was interrupted by Lieut. Gov. Nathan Gold, " a mortal enemy to the Church and violently compelled to surcease my endeavors " on the ground that " my commission extended no farther than Boston Colony." After the arrival of missionary Pigott in 1722, he worked with him and instructed the people at his own house on the Lord's Day when Mr. Pigott could not be present. On Jan. 13, 1723-4, the latter writes that " Dr. Laborie's industry there, (Fairfield,) takes off the present necessity of a missionary for that town. He is an excellent preacher, but Episcopacy cuts off his practice in physic." Although he became a Churchman, he does not appear to have ever received Episcopal ordination. His name is not found in the annual reports of the S. P. G. and although called a cate- chist his work was in the nature of a missionary. Sometimes lay readers who were preparing for the ministry were called catechists when not in the employ of the S. P. G. This was the case with Mr. Ebenezer Thompson of Simsbury, 1742. The only other record we have of a catechist is that Dr. Johnson 62 THE CHURCH was paid ten pounds a year for a catechist at Stratford, from 1746 to 1755, inclusive. Rev. Samuel Johnson of Stratford writes, June 23, 1724, to the Bishop of London "that this town, and indeed the whole colony, is destitute of any Episcopal school, by which means our youth are trained up in prejudice against the established Church, and since your Lordship hath expressed so pious a care as to enquire concerning the state of schools, I have been encouraged to recommend this honest gentleman, the bearer hereof, Mr. Thomas Salmon, to your Lordship and the honor- able Society ; he is one of our Church wardens and is well quali- fied for an English school master, and hath kept the school for several years in this town to the universal satisfaction of both the Church people and Dissenters." It does not appear that he was ever appointed. Mr. Johnson writes to the Secretary, Sept. 16, 1726, that Mr. Henry Caner of Fairfield " designs about two years hence to wait upon the honorable Society for orders and a mission, " meanwhile the people would be very thankful if the Society would " grant him a small encouragement for the pains he takes in instructing that people and their children in the principles of religion as catechist." Instead of waiting two years, Mr. Caner was ordained and returned as missionary at Fairfield within a year. Mr. Johnson writes Sept. 20, 1727, that he " should be very glad that the same salary which was allowed to him, (Mr. Caner,) as school master at Fairfield, might be allowed for a school in this town, (Stratford,) where there is great need of one, and it might be of good service, not only for forming the minds of children to a sense of religion, but likewise for a resort for such young gentlemen, successively, as from time to time leave the College here. . . . They might while they keep school, improve themselves in the study of Divinity, till they are qualified for higher business." And so Mr. Caner was paid a school master's salary in remuneration of his ser- vices to the Church at Fairfield until he could be appointed as missionary. His service as schoolmaster was less than one year and hence does not appear in the annual reports of the S. P. G. In the same letter, Mr. Johnson says, " The Dissenters have two poor schools in this town, but the Church hath none." IN CONNECTICUT. 63 Again, Oct. 23, 1727, he says, in my " last I informed the Society of what service it might be to the interest of reUgion to have a school here, and that Mr. Bennett (who has for above half a year kept school among the Dissenters here, and been rejected by the greatest number of them upon conformity to our Church,) would be very serviceable and acceptable, . . . We have already raised nigh thirty pounds per annum " and could give a good support to a school which he asks for, as " nothing could so happily contribute to the enlargement of our Church. " Mr. Johnson writes, Nov. 20, 1729, that he finds " in the abstract of the proceedings of the Society last year, mention made of a salary for a school at Stratford but have never received any letter or otherwise any intimation from the Society about it, . . . However, I should be very thankful if there was a salary appoihted for that purpose, and there is great need of it, yet since we want ministers more of the two, than school masters, I would not desire that the providing for a school should stand in the way of providing missionaries." An anonymous letter dated Stratford, Oct. 30, 1727, was sent to the Bishop of London, discouraging the school. It purported to have been written in the interest of Churchmen and claimed that a school would be " a prejudice and a wrong to us, " by disturbing the " friendship between us and the committee of the schools," who now employ " a man of our persuasion in one " of the schools. Mr. Bennett was not appointed, but finally the prayer for a school master at Stratford was granted and Mr. Johnson writes to the Bishop of London, Dec. 10, 1733, thank- ing him for his " interest with the honourable Society for set- tling a school in this place. " The school at Stratford was prac- tically the first sectarian school for general education ever set up in the Colony, aside from the schools of the Standing Order. All the public schools of the Colony were controlled by ecclesiastical societies of the Standing Order, although other denominations were permitted to vote. Episcopalians could have no vote on school matters without attending the meetings of the Congregational Societies. In the report of the S. P. G. for the year 1733, Mr. Joseph Brown is put down as " School Master " at Stratford with a salary of fifteen pounds per annum. 64 THE CHURCH and he is so reported for twenty-one consecutive years. Mr. Brown was one of the vestrymen of Christ Church and sub- scribed thirty pounds for building the church in 1742-3. On the first Monday in February, 1733-4, the Rev. Samuel Johnson, in behalf of the members of the Church of England in Stratford, asked for liberty to erect a " School House on the Common near the southeast corner of Lieut. Joseph Beach'es house lot," and the town voted to grant his request. [Orcutt's Stratford, Vol. i, p. 322.] Probably the house was built and this is where Mr. Brown taught. In May, 1728, a law was passed requiring the Treasurer of the Colony to " deliver the sum of forty shillings upon every thousand pounds in the list of the respective towns " to the school committee of the said towns " to be by them distributed to the several parishes or societies in each town for the benefit of their respective schools. " In October, 1737, a law was passed permitting certain school funds to be appropriated " to the support of the Gospel minis- try, as by the laws of this Colony established." This of course all went, said Dr. Johnson, to support ministers of the " Presby- terian or Congregational persuasion, (being those that are peculiarly countenanced by the Laws of this Government,) to be divided in proportion to their several lists and this in such manner that we of the Church of England cannot lay claim to any share of them for the support of our Ministers or Schools." By reason of these laws, a long memorial, drafted by Dr. Johnson, was presented to the General Court at their May session, 1738, praying " that we may be secured of our propor- tion of those public monies toward the support of our Ministers & that our schools also, where we have any peculiar to our- selves, may have their proportional benefit of the said act, as also the 40 shillings on the iiooo, which has hitherto been denied to the School of the Church of England at Stratford. " [Ecclesiastical Mss., Vol. 10, Doc. 324.] The objectionable law was repealed in 1740. This memorial gives us positive proof that there was, in 1738, an Episcopal school at Stratford, which was of such a general educational character as to warrant a demand for their share of " the 40 shillings on the £1000 ", given for public schools. IN CONNECTICUT. 65 Mr. Richard Caner appears in the annual reports for the years ending February, 1740 and February, 1741, as " School Master at Fairfield." In November, 1739 he reported thirty scholars. In the report for 1742 he was reported as missionary, thus showing that his salary as school master was in remunera- tion for missionary work. In 1742, the Rev. Timothy Allen was conducting a school at New London known as ," The Shep- perd's Tent" and which was designed for educating young men to become exhorters, etc., for the so-called New Lights. An act passed in October, 1742, (and said to have been aimed at these " New Lights " ,) imposed heavy penalties upon any one who should teach, keep, or maintain " any public school whatsoever, " other than as " established or allowed " by law. This law, (which was enacted for four years only,) was broad enough to have suppressed the Episcopal school at Stratford, but the authorities do not appear to have had any desire to do so. The school was finally discontinued at the request of Dr. Johnson, as appears from his letter to the Society dated April 14, 175 1, stating " that, as it is now much less charity to provide for a school in this town than heretofore, " and " Mr. Brown tells me he is, willing to resign", he advises the Society to appoint a missionary for Ripton in place of the school master at Stratford. Mr. Hutchinson appears in the reports of the S. P. G. as school master at North Groton, (Ledyard,) from 1745 to 1764 inclusive. A school master whose name is not given was paid for work among the Narragansett Indians from 1767 to 1777, inclusive. On June 5, 1765, the Rev. Matthew Graves of New London recommends " to the care of the Religious Society " for a school master " Mr. Bennett, the school master among the Mohawks," who designs " to return when the small pox is abated. " The Digest of the Reports of the S. P. G. says that Cornelius Bennett of the Mohawk mission, New York, labored among the Narragansett Indians for a short time. On June, 1770, Dr. Johnson writes the Secretary from his old home at Stratford, thanking him for ordering Mr. Somas- ters to be placed at Stratford, and says : " This happily falls in with a design I have entertained of holding a little Academy, or resource for young students of Divinity to prepare them for 66 THE CHURCH Holy Orders. Have now four, Marshall, Fingley, Perry and Jones. Marshall will go next fall to Woodbury. This I shall continue while I live with the assistance of Mr. Kneeland." Mr. Somaster's name is not found in the annual reports of the S. P. G. No doubt the Somaster's Library which was trans- ferred from the Church at Stratford to the Episcopal Academy at Cheshire and then back again to Stratford, originally belonged to this teacher. The foregoing account includes all the Episcopal schools in Colonial Connecticut of which we have any record. Referring again to the laws of the Colony, a fine of 20 shil- lings was imposed by the law of 1721, on those who should assemble in any public meeting-house without the consent of the minister and congregation. This made it more difficult for the Episcopalians to get permission to use the meeting-houses which they had helped to build. The poorer Churches of the Standing Order were also favored by having their county rates remitted to them or by otherwise receiving substantial aid from the Colony. In 1728 the county rates were remitted to the parish of Redding, where Mr. Caner had preached when there was " no minister of any denomination whatsoever " there, and this favor was continued for twenty years or more. In October, 1730, the Society of Horse Neck, (Greenwich,) petitioned the General Court for aid, saying that " of our small number not a few have listed themselves under the banner prelatical and also not a few under the banner of yea and nay and how far the leaven may spread we fear more than we are sure of." The county rates collected in the town of Greenwich for the year 1730, (from Episcopalians and others,) were ordered to be paid over to the treasurer of this Congregational parish. We have already referred to the withdrawal of two ministers in succession and many of the people from the societies of the Standing Order at North Groton and West Haven. The for- mer asked for aid in 1734 and fifty pounds was granted them. West Haven petitioned for aid in 1735, showing " the broken circumstances of said parish by reason of their ministers one after another declaring themselves to be of the Church of Eng- land principles and carrying from them considerable estate and IN CONNECTICUT. 67 inhabitants, whereby they are incapable to maintain the gospel." A committee was appointed to investigate. [Ecclesiastical Mss., Vol. 10, Docs. 51 and 271.] Many other places were granted favors and their memorials asking for aid appear in the archives of the State. They often give the number of inhabitants in their respective parishes with a statement of how many Episcopalians, Baptists or Quakers they had in order to show how the ranks of the Standing Order had been diminished. We have before referred to the money appropriated for schools being refused the Episcopal school at Stratford, and to the school funds belonging to the State, (including the Episco- palians,) being devoted to the support of the Gospel ministry for the Standing Order, without giving any portion of it to the Churchmen. The lengthy memoral of 1738, in protest of these practices, is very interesting reading. It gives numerous reasons as to why the Churchmen should receive their "propor- tion in the said public monies ", the first reason being as follows : " Because the Doctrines and Principles of the Church of England do professedly and most certainly tend, (at least equally with those of any other persuasion,) not only to fit and prepare men for eternal happiness in the life to come, but also to promote the public good of society in this world, by teaching them to be sober, virtuous and industrious in their callings, serious and devout towards God and just and charitable towards men, and in every respect to be good Christians, kind neighbors, upright magistrates, dutiful subjects and faithful and conscien- tious in every relation and condition of life, and consequently Her professors ought to have the like equitable and favorable treatment wit;h those of any other denomination of Christians." It closes with a prayer for equal rights and then says : " In hopes of which, (as in duty bound,) we shall ever pray for the health and happiness of your Honors and all the members of this Assembly and for the peace and prosperity of this Colony." The memorial was signed, (so says the document,) "to the number of about 636." [Ecclesiastical Mss., Vol. 10, 324.] We thus have the autographs of nearly all the Episcopalians over 16 years of age residing in the Colony in 1738. Dr. Johnson says more names could have been added if there had 68 THE CHURCH been time. The names are arranged as from Greenwich and Stamford under Rev. Mr. Wetmore; of Groton under Rev. Mr. Punderson ; of New London under Rev. Mr. Seabury ; of Hebron under Rev. Mr. Seabury; under Rev. Mr. Arnold; under Rev. Mr. Beach ; under Rev. Mr. Johnson of Stratford ; and under Rev. Mr. Caner at Norwalk and Fairfield. Nothing was granted. The law as to attendance upon the worship of the Standing Order was of course applicable to Churchmen who did not attend a service of their own, but we do not think that it was generally enforced against them. Mr. Morris, in 1740, writes that two warrants were issued before his time " to take up two men in Waterbury for not attending their meetings, and when one of them offered to give his reasons why he could not go to their extempore prayers he was silenced and ordered to prison or pay his fine." Under the law the accused could be fined unless he should " make it appear that he did attend . . . or was necessarily detained therefrom." Mr. Beach writes, in 1743, that the people of New Fairfield when they had no preaching on the Lord's day meet together " and one of their number reads some part of the Common Prayer and a sermon " and that they were " lately prosecuted and fined . . . for their meeting to worship God according to the Common Prayer." " The case of these people is very hard, if on the Lord's day they continue at home, they must be punished; if they meet to worship God according to the Church of England, in the best manner they can, their mulct is still greater, and if they go to Independent meeting they must hear the Church vilified. " They could have been lawfully prosecuted for staying at home, or for leaving home except to worship " in some Con- gregation by law allowed " , or in " some place by law allowed for that end." After 1727, every Church of England congrega- tion and place of worship was " by law allowed " , but by a narrow construction of the law, a private house with service by a lay reader, might have been held not to be a place or con- gregation allowed by law, inasmuch as the law of 1727 legalized the societies of the Church of England only " where there is a person in orders according to the canons " of that Church IN CONNECTICUT. 69 " settled and abiding among them." There was no such minis- ter at New Fairfield and hence the laws which were passed in 1721, to prevent noisy itinerant persons, who had no authority whatever to preach, from preaching in private houses and on the streets, were made to do duty against this devout band who from necessity were without a minister. This is the only in- stance we have found of prosecuting those who attended Prayer Book service by a lay reader, and perhaps this circumstance was the cause of adding the proviso to these laws in 1750: " That this act shall not be taken or construed to hinder the meeting of such Persons upon any Religious Occasion. " The law of 1740 forbade " any person not a settled and ordained minister " from holding services in any parish without being expressly invited by the minister of the parish, and in 1767 the Rev. Mr. Boardman of Middle Haddam unsuccess- fully tried to use this law to keep Episcopal ministers out of his parish. The most serious grievance the Churchmen had was the failure of the law of 1727, or any other law, to give relief from taxes for the Standing Order. Such relief was asked continu- ously from 1727 until 1775. The first relief from ecclesiastical taxes of the Standing Order came from New London in 1726, when the rates of all other denominations in that town were paid by voluntary con- tributions. This was continued for three years and in Octo- ber, 1729 the selectmen of New London petitioned the General Court for permission to leave out of " the minister's rate " all those who are of the Church of England, the First and Seventh- day Baptists, and some "which we call Quakers." The peti- tion was granted in the Lower House provided that persons so exempted cannot vote in " Society Meetings, " but it was dissented from in the Upper House. As to relief under the laws of 1727, Missionary Punderson writes in 1750, that the law is " expressed in such limited and ambiguous terms as to be the occasion of many disputes and difficulties to the messengers of peace to whose care they belong." There is no doubt but that many Episcopalians were released from taxes that could not have been released had the law been strictly and rigidly enforced. It was the general rule 70 THE CHURCH that collectors accepted certificates of the missionaries as to the payment of rates, the same as if they had themselves collected them and paid them over to the missionary, provided the amount so paid was equal to the tax assessed and that no question other than such payment was involved. After 1728, there was no trouble within those parishes where the missionaries resided. No matter how long a society had been organized, nor how large a parish they had, if no missionary abided among them they were by law compelled to pay rates to the Standing Order, while under the law these rates were always assessed even when the Standing Order had no minister to support. Under date of March 30, 1750, Dr. Johnson writes to the Secretary that " the people must be forced to pay the dissenters till they have ministers of their own in orders." That the law was so con- strued has also been stated by missionaries Gibbs, Graves, Pun- derson and others, some of whom had been advised by lawyers who were Churchmen. The minister's rates for the Standing Order that was paid over about 1763 to Missionary Winslow at Stratford amounted to thirty pounds sterling per annum. Missionaries Gibbs, Wetmore and others sued collectors of the Standing Order for the rates of their parishioners outside of the parish where the missionary resided, and in each case were defeated. Mr. Gibbs refused to pay the cost and was put in jail according to law, and so barbarously treated by the officer who took him to Hartford, that he was incapacitated for life. The cases of Episcopalians put in jail for non-payment of eccle- siastical taxes of the Standing Order are too numerous to men- tion. The people of Wallingford about 1740, or before, peti- tioned for redress to the Governor, who had proved a strong opponent to them, and they say that " when the other party hath applied to him for advice how to proceed against us, he hath lately given his sentence to enlarge the gaol and fill it with them" (that is, fill it with Churchmen). They even followed a Churchman for ecclesiastical taxes after he was dead. The Society of North Guilford laid taxes for building the meeting- house in 1748 and for minister's support for four years against Samuel Fowler " a Professor of ye Church of England " , but failed to collect the same in his lifetime. They sued his execu- tors in the New Haven County Court and it was decided that IN CONNECTICUT. 71 action did not lye against them. A special act was passed by the General Assembly in 1753 to enable these taxes to be col- lected from the estate. [Colonial Records, Vol. X, p. 182.] In 1738, forty-one Churchmen of Greenwich and Stamford who attended worship in the borders of New York petitioned for exemption and were refused, although such exemption was granted to Connecticut Quakers who worshipped in the borders of New York. In 1740, Samuel Johnson, J. Wetmore, Henry Caner, John Beach, Jon. Arnold, Samuel Seabury and Ebenezer Punderson, ministers of the Church of England, renewed their petition for relief. In 1742, twenty-seven Churchmen of Sims- bury petitioned for exemption and organization. In 1743, forty-five Churchmen of Simsbury renewed this petition. In 1744, thirty-eight Churchmen of Waterbury petitioned for relief. In 1745, thirty-three Churchmen of Redding petitioned for relief. In 1748, thirty-eight Churchmen of Redding renewed their petition, reciting the favor that the General Court had extended to the Presbyterians of Redding for twenty years, and " disclaiming any suspicion that the Assembly will be partial or their charity confined to Christians of one denomina- tion to the exclusion of all others. Nor can we suppose that their wisdom will account our worshiping God in the manner established in our mother country such a crime as to forfeit and render us unworthy of enjoying for a short season that charity which our fellow parishioners have ever and do enjoy." Nega- tived in both houses. [Ecclesiastical Mss., Vol. 10, Docs. 334, 336, 337, 339, 340 and 341.] Other petitions of a similar character failed to receive any favor. The missionaries and others complain that " it is found by repeated experiments, that a poor Churchman can expect no redress in any court here ; " that, " the Independents by force and under pretence of authority, have carried away our estates, to support their teachers, to build their meeting houses and to procure their parsonages, " that " The Church people, your Lordship's sons, are imprisoned, arrested and non-suited with prodigious cost, contrary to the laws of God and man ; . . . a cruel injustice and usurpation imposed on no other society ; " that they are " totally discouraged and discredited " but " had our religion the same privileges throughout this Colony, that 72 THE CHURCH the Baptists have, we would flourish and increase like the lily of the valley and the cedars of Lebanon. " Complaints of this character, it is said, arrived in London almost with every ship. The complaints about unfair decisions and biased judges came largely through a belief that the law of 1727 was for the relief of Churchmen, whereby relief was expected in cases for which the law gave no relief. As the Colony laws were framed, we do not know of a decision as to taxes that was improperly rendered against Churchmen. Missionary Punderson had grievances, but was advised by a lawyer who was a Churchman that he had no case. However unjust the law may seem to have been, its enforcement did not show that antagonism to Episcopacy that was shown at Stratford in the early days of the Church. Missionary Caner says, in 1733, that " the spirit and temper of the people formerly so hot against us very much abates and that they begin to treat us in a much more friendly manner than they were wont.'' Missionary Seabury says, in 1735, that "the dissenting party are very civil and obliging to me." Missionary Punderson says, in 1739, that the dissenting brethren, many of them, " are brought to have a good opinion " of the Church " and occasionally attend our worship." Mis- sionary Johnson says, in 1746, that " there seems a very grow- ing disposition towards the Church in the town of New Haven as well as the College." In 1746 there was no dissenting minis- ter at Stamford and Missionary Dibblee was given the use of the meeting-house, where the people of all sorts generally attended when he preached there. Missionary Hubbard, in 1772, says : " I have the happiness to see the greatest unanimity reigning amongst us and the denominations with whom we live." Missionary Beach says : " The rising generation of the Independents seem to be entirely free from every pique and prejudice against the Church." In 1752, the law makers began to look upon Episcopalians with more favor when special privileges were granted to the Churchmen of Newtown. The parishioners of Trinity Church, Fairfield in 1761, those of St. John's Church, New Milford, and of the Church in Brooklyn in 1770, were incorporated in Church estate by acts of the General Court, with substantially the same rights as Churches of the Standing Order. No other IN CONNECTICUT. 73 favors were granted until 1784, when it was enacted that upon filing a proper certificate and attending church, all Churchmen could be relieved from paying Congregational taxes. Before this more than half of all the Churchmen in the Colony were compelled to pay double taxes. One of the most unreasonable accusations ever made against the Churchmen of the Colony was that imputing to them the insincerity of being Churchmen for the sake of smaller taxes. And strange to say, these charges sometimes came from Churchmen, instead of their enemies. The first record found of such a charge is in the letter of missionary Philips to the Society, dated Sept. 9, 1713, excusing himself for leaving Stratford so abruptly, and in which he says that he found " the greatest part of those who pretended to be of the Church way were only so to screen themselves from taxes imposed on them by Dissenters." On Dec. i, 1725, Gov. Talcott of Connecticut wrote to the Bishop of London, saying that there are some few persons, outside of Stratford " who cannot well be judged to act from any other motive than to appear singular, or to be freed from a small tax, and hence have declared themselves to be of the Church of England." Prior to 1727, the particular denomination of Christians a person belonged to, or did not belong to, made no difference whatever as to the amount of his taxes to the Standing Order, and hence it is utterly inconceivable how these charges could have then been made. After the law of 1727 which purported to grant relief, the charge does not seem so strange, but was still unreasonable. It was often made by people who ought to have known better, as for example the Rev. Elizur Good- rich of Durham, who in his report on Connecticut to the Anti- Episcopal Convention in the year 1774, says of Episcopalians that their ministers " as may be feared sometimes beguile them with promises of discharging their rates, if they become Churchmen." It is true that some men will do mean things in order to lessen their taxes, but when there is no possible chance for one to accomplish that object there is no reason for imput- ing to them any such motive. All persons throughout the Colony were assessed alike without regard to what denomina- tion they belonged. Episcopalians, under the law, were com- 74 THE CHURCH pelled to pay this assessment and no collector would cancel their rate until he knew that it had been paid in full. The amount was the same whether the rate went to the Congregational or Episcopal minister, so that it was utterly impossible for any one to reduce the amount of their ecclesiastical taxes by being a Churchman, even when they had the full benefit of exemption from taxes to the Standing Order. But only a few Churchmen could have this exemption, so that most of them paid double rates for the privilege of being Churchmen, one rate to the Church and one rate to the Standing Order. The Standing Order was large and strong, and received substantial aid from the Government, while the Church was small and weak and received aid from a charitable society that helped only those who helped themselves. Consequently the demands of the Church on its members were greater than those of the Standing Order even when Church rates only were paid, so that it cost more to belong to the Church than it did to be a sinner, or belong to the Standing Order. The Rev. John Beach of New- town and Redding writes to the Society in 1746 that " it is very certain that our people generally expend more by far for the support of religion than their neighbors of the dissenting per- suasion. " He also certifies to this before the General Court in 1748, as to the members of the Church at Redding and also that he holds " in the utmost indignation " any " insincerity in mat- ters of religion in order to save purses. " The taxes raised by the Standing Order from non-professors and from professors of all denominations, together with other benefits from the Government, made the religion of that order, in a financial sense, the cheapest religion in the Colony and consequently it was the only religion of which a person's motive for adoption could be reasonably imputed to a desire to save purses. The law under which the Dissenting minister of Middle Haddam attempted to keep the Episcopal ministers out of his parish was made in 1742 to suppress the great number of vagrant preachers and sundry illiterate persons that appeared after the coming of Whitefield, and some of which had no authority whatever as preachers. Missionary Punderson of New London wrote in December, 1741, that " there are at least twenty or thirty of these lay holders-forth within ten miles of IN CONNECTICUT. 75 my house, who hold their meetings every night except Satur- day. " Even Whitefield's preaching was not pleasant to many, as is shown by a letter of six members of the Church in Ply- mouth, 1744, who were formerly Dissenters, but who say they " fled to the Church of England " after reading the Prayer Book and hearing Whitefield's " extemporaneous jargon. " Several missionaries write in substance that the wild enthusiasm drove many Dissenters into the Church. In 1742, there were fourteen churches built and building, and seven clergymen. When Dr. Johnson came to Stratford there " were not one hundred adult persons of the Church in this whole Colony, whereas now (1742,) there are considerably more than two thousand, and at least five or six thousand young and old. " At the commencement at New Haven in 1748, " there were nine of our Clergy together " there and " among the candidates for their degrees there were no less than ten belonging to our Church." At the beginning of 1756 there were twelve missionaries of the S. P. G. in the Colony. In 1760, Dr. Johnson says there were thirty Churches in the Colony, though but fourteen minis- ters. President Stiles' sermon on Christian Union of the same date gives twenty-five parishes and fourteen ministers. In 1 761, the Rev. Mr. Beach says that in twenty-nine years the Church " is increased more than from one to ten, and what is of much greater importance, their conduct for the most part, is a credit to their profession " and is also an advantage to the " Independents, for they who live near to the Church of Eng- land acquire juster notions of religion and become more regular in their worship. " In 1766, Mr. Viets said that " the propor- tion of Church people to the Dissenters in Simsbury is nearly as one to three." In 1768, he writes that " there are 52 Congre- gational ministers in this County, viz., Hartford, (which then included Middletown, the Haddams, Chatham, Colchester, Bol- ton, Somers, Tolland, Willington, Hebron and Stafford). In all the four New England Colonies there are 586 Congrega- tional ministers, 38 of the Church Clergy, 39 Anabaptists, 10 Presbyterians, 30 Quaker assemblies and about 50 congrega- tions of those called Separatists, somewhat resembling the old Independents. " 76 THE CHURCH In 1769, Mr. Beach says: "There are in these two parishes, (Newtown and Redding,) about 2400 souls of whom a Httle more than half profess the Church of England. Here are about 50 negros most of whom have been baptized. Here are no heathens or infidels, no Papists or Deists. " Of Newtown, he says : " It is of some satisfaction to me to observe that in this town of late in our elections, the Church people make the major vote, which is the first instance of this kind in the Colony, if not in all New England. " In the annual report of the S. P. G. for 1777, the missionaries of Connecticut were Ebenezer Kneeland, Stratford and Mil- ford ; Christopher Newton, Ripton and North Stratford ; John Sayre, Fairfield ; Ebenezer Dibblee, Stamford ; Matthew Graves, New London and Charlestown ; John Beach, Newtown and Redding; Bela Hubbard, New Haven and West Haven; Wil- liam Gibbs, Simsbury and Hartford ; Roger Viets, assistant to Mr. Gibbs ; Richard Mansfield, Derby and Oxford ; Richard S. Clark, New Milford, Woodbury, Kent, New Fairfield and Sharon; James Scovill, Waterbury and Westbury; Samuel Peters, Hebron; Samuel Andrews, Wallingford, Cheshire and North Haven ; John Tyler, Norwich ; Daniel Fogg, Pomfret, Plainfield and Canterbury. Dr. Beardsley's list of clergy at this time gives all the above except Mr. Gibbs, and adds the Rev. John Rutgers Marshall, of Woodbury; Rev. Gideon Bostwick, of Great Barrington, Mass., (who was reckoned as with the Connecticut clergy;) Dr. Samuel Seabury of Westchester, N. Y. and Rev. James Nichols, Plymouth and Bristol, a graduate of Yale 1771, and the last missionary of the Society that went to England for ordination. Abraham Jarvis of Middletown should also be added. These twenty-one ministers and their predecessors had regu- larly read the first and second lessons at each service, which was so pleasing to the people generally that the Congregational ministers by this time had generally adopted the custom of reading the Scripture in public. It is claimed that before the Episcopalians came, the Bible was never read in public, not even so much as the Ten Commandments or the Lord's Prayer. Dr. Beardsley speaks of this in his history of the Church, and we find that several missionaries refer to it in their letters to IN CONNECTICUT. 77 the Society. The Rev. Mr. Arnold, in 1736, performed Divine Service at Milford and describes the town as a place " where the use of the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Command- ments, or the reading of the Scripture in Divine Service was never before known. " Rev. John Beach, in 1772, writes' that he has " performed divine service in many towns where the Common Prayer had never been heard, nor the Holy Scrip- tures read in public . . . and in some places where there never had been any public worship at all, nor any sermon preached by any teacher of any denomination. " The digest of the reports of the S. P. G. tells of two Dissent- ing ministers in New England who " put on ye courage to read the Holy Bible in the meeting and say the Lord's Prayer, a thing not done before, and they resolved to continue it tho' very much opposed." In Solomon Palmer's "Mission," (1754 to 1771,) one parish of Dissenters, from observing the regular method of reading the Scripture in Church, " Voted, that a new folio Bible be bought for them and that their Teacher read lessons out of it Simday, morning and evening. " Some of the missionaries who gave us these facts had for years been Dis- senting ministers and therefore were in a position to know what the custom of the Standing Order was before the Episcopalians came here. The reading of the Scripture in public was prob- ably omitted so as to avoid all appearance of everything ritualistic, and no doubt this omission was made in England at the time they left the Mother Church and made so many radical changes in order to avoid the forms which they denounced as Popish. That the Puritans and Pilgrims as early as 1624 were not accustomed to read the Scripture in public, is indicated from the fact that before that date a young woman member of the Separatists Church, at London, was the subject of dis- cipline for the offense of " attending the service of the Church of England, especially for the purpose of hearing the Scrip- ture read and explained. " [John Robinson, by Rev. O. S. Davis, D.D., p. 176.] She would not have gone to the service of the Church of England especially to hear the Scripture read, if it had then been the custom to do so in the Dissenting church. In 1765, five of the missionaries of Connecticut wrote a letter to the Society relative to what is called " the imposition of 78 THE CHURCH Stamp duties : saying that " We think it our incumbent duty to warn our hearers in particular of the unreasonableness and wickedness of their taking the least part in any tumult or opposition to his Majesty's acts. " As a rule the Episcopalians, remembering with the sincerest gratitude the favors they had received from the mother country, were not inclined towards rebellious conduct. For these reasons, those who were bitterly opposed to the Stamp act, (although the act was repealed about 1766,) were displeased with the Episcopalians, much of the old bitterness towards them was revived and the establishment of an American Episcopate was looked upon with increasing terror. In May, 1766, steps were taken by the Synod of New York and Philadelphia to organize an Anti-Episcopal Convention for the sole object of opposing an American Episcopate. A fuller account of this Convention is given in the preceding chapter. Connecticut had her full share in this Convention, the Standing Order having resolved in their Association at Guilford, June 3, 1766, to accept the invitation of the Synod and join them in Convention. The first Convention was held at Elizabethtown, N. J., Nov. 5, 1766, with six members present from Connecticut the first day, and two more on the day following. The sermon was by Noah Wells. Nearly a month previous, the Episcopal clergy of Connecticut had petitioned for a Bishop. The peti- tion was dated Oct. 8, 1766, and signed by Samuel Johnson, President, and eleven other clergy. The Anti-Episcopal Con- vention met annually for ten years, 1766 to 1775 inclusive, meeting every alternate year in Connecticut. The Congre- gationalists of Connecticut had several different Associations, three of which were not represented at the first Convention, and in 1768, the Association from the Western district of New- London County sent a letter to the Convention giving reasons why they declined to send delegates. The Rev. John Smalley of New Britain was one of the committee in 1768 to prepare the letter to the Dissenters in London and also one of the com- mittee to carry on correspondence with friends in London, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Hampshire. Rev. Eliphalet Whittlesey preached the Convention sermon in 1768. and on Connecticut matters their friends in England were to IN CONNECTICUT. 79 write to Messrs. Whitman and Wells, and in 1769 to Wells and Mather. In 1769, Connecticut had a majority in the Conven- tion, there being eleven members from Connecticut and only seven from New York and New Jersey. In 1770, Rev. Nathaniel Taylor was president of the Convention and Messrs. Hobart and Ross were appointed to " collect instances of lenity of their government with regard to Episcopal Dissenters therein. " In 1771, Mr. Wells was appointed to canvass Nova Scotia and Mr. Goodrich to canvass Connecticut and report the character of the laws relating to ecclesiastical affairs, and the number of Episcopalians and Non-Episcopalians in these prov- inces. From this we see that no less than nine Congrega- tional ministers of Connecticut were prominent in, and received special honors from this Anti-Episcopal Convention. The General Association of Congregationalists in Connecticut also voted their support and sympathy from time to time, and at Watertown, June 16, 1772, instructed their delegates to "heartily concur with the Southern Gentlemen in counteracting any Motions that have or shall be made for sd. Episcopate." The report of the Rev. Elizur Goodrich, D.D., of Durham, is the only one of the several reports that has been printed. His essay on the ecclesiastical laws of the Colony attempts to show how good the " religious Establishment " of the Colony was ; that the Hardships which the Episcopalians complained of did not exist, and that the laws regulating taxes were made for their benefit and at their request. He also appears to think that the Established Churches would not be adverse to an alteration of the law so as to make the Episcopalians " altogether disconnected " and to enable them " to do their own business without any concern " of the Established Churches. His census was as follows: — 8o THE CHURCH An account of the number of the inhabitants of Connecticut, Jan. I, 1774, and an estimate of the proportion of the Episco- paHans and Non-Episcopalians: Hartford County. Town. Epis. Non-Epis. Total. Bolton, .... 994 994 Chatham, 90 2289 2369 East Haddam, 88 2655 2743 Enfield, 1353 1353 Farmington, 244 5719 5963 Glastenbury, 1992 1992 Haddam, 23 1690 1713 Hartford, III 4770 4881 Simsbury, 914 2757 3671 Somers, 1024 1024 Suffield, 1980 1980 Tolland, 5 1242 1247 Wethersfield, 6 3341 3347 Willington, . 1000 1000 Colchester, No report. 3057 East Windsor, 2961 Hebron, 2285 4680 Middletown, Stafford, Windsor, 1333 2082 I to 22. Total, Town. New Haven, Branford, Derb)^, Durham, Guilford, Milford, Wallingford, Waterbury, I to 7. Total, 1471 32806 50675 New Haven County. Epis. Non-Epis. Total. 942 7080 8022 86 1852 1938 725 1094 I8I9 6 1025 I03.I 213 2633 2846 153 1812 1965 626 41 5 I 4777 No report. 3498 2751 19647 25896 in CONNECTICUT. 81 New London County. Town. Epis. Non-Epis. Total. Preston, . . . . 221 2034 2255 Groton, 222 3266 3488 Killingworth, / 68 1889 1957 Stonington, . 32 4924 4956 Saybrook, .33 2595 2628 New London, No report 5366 Norwich, (( n 7032 Lyme, (I tc 3860 I to 25. Total, 596 14708 31542 Fairfield County. Town. Epis. Non-Epis. Total. Danbury, .... 420 2053 2473 Greenwich, . 443 221 1 2654 New Fairfield, 87 I20I 1288 Newtown, 1084 1084 2168 Norwalk, 792 3451 4243 Redding-, 478 711 1 189 Ridgefield, 329 1344 1673 Stamford, 710 2793 3503 Fairfield, No report 4544 Stratford, (t tt 5201 10 to 34. Total, 4343 14848 28936 Windham County. Town Epis. Non-Epis. Total. Coventry, . . . . 11 2021 2032 Pomfret, 55 2186 2241 Kilingly, 30 3409 3439 Lebanon, 36 3805 3841 Mansfield, 12 2431 2443 Plainfield, 1479 1479 Voluntown, 6 1470 1476 Union, 512 512 Canterbury, . No report. 2392 Ashford, tf It 2228 Windham, « It 3437 Woodstock, . It It 1974 1 to 115. Total, . 150 I73I3 27494 82 THE CHURCH Town. Litchfield, Canaan, Cornwall, Hartland, New Hartford, Norfolk, Salisbury, Sharon, Torrington, . Barkhampstead, Colebrook, Goshen, Harwinton, Kent, . New Milford, Westmoreland, Winchester, . Woodbury, . I to i6. Total, Litchfield County. Epis. Non-Epis. 91 1482 53 904 49 451 25 960 38 928 91 1845 83 1903 31 912 No report. 655 10600 Total. 1509 1573 957 500 985 966 1936 1986 843 250 150 1098 1015 1922 2742 1922 327 5224 25944 Summary. County, Hartford Co., New Haven Co., New London Co., Fairfield Co., Windham Co., Litchfield Co., Total, Epis. I47I 2751 596 4343 150 655 Non-Epis. 32806 19647 14708 14848 I73I3 10542 Total. 50675 25896 31542 28936 27494 25944 9966 I 19922 190487 I Epis. to 12 Non Epis. nearly ; the Episcopalians about one to thirteen of the whole number of inhabitants, and probably there would be no great difference from this proportion were the account of all the towns come in, which I hope soon to gain. Elizur Goodrich. Durham, Sep. 5, A. D. 1774. IN CONNECTICUT. 83 There are a few errors in footing that do not affect the proportion of EpiscopaUans to the Non-Episcopalians. The figures here given are the same as in the printed Goodrich report. Of the towns not reported, Hebron and Middletown in Hart- ford County ; Waterbury in New Haven County ; New London and Norwich in New London County; Fairfield and Stratford in Fairfield County; and New Milford and Woodbury jn Litchfield County, are among the towns where the Episcopa- lians were the most numerous, so that a full report would no doubt have shown a much larger percentage of Episcopalians. Only eight towns are reported as containing no Episcopalians. Newtown is the only one reported in which the number of Epis- copalians equals that of all others, besides having the largest number, 1084, of any reported town. New Haven is second with 942, and Simsbury third with 914. The Revolutionary War terminated these conventions and suspended all efforts towards establishing an American Episco- pate. The history of what others did against the Church people dur- ing the war would alone make a large volume, while the history of what the Church people did for the advancement of the Church may be told in few words — they did nothing but exist. That was all they could do. Naturally and properly, the mis- sionaries and their people were slow to commit any overt act against the king, and hence were censured and abused. For a time all of the churches were closed and public services suspended, save at Newtown and Redding, where the Rev. John Beach presided. The few churches that were after- wards opened omitted the Prayers for the king, and some otherwise modified their service. Nearly all of the clergy, excepting Messrs. Jarvis, Hubbard and Tyler, were subjected to imprisonment, mob violence, banishment, or other persecu- tion, and even these had narrow escapes. Acts of violence that would never have been thought of except in war time, were perpetrated, of which we will give only one case by each party. The Rev. Dr. Mather of Stamford, who figured in the Anti- Episcopal Convention, was, with his four sons, taken from the parsonage at night by eight loyalists and carried to New York. The Rev. Jeremiah Leaming, D.D., of Norwalk, one of the ablest and most respected missionaries of the S. P. G., had his 84 THE CHURCH estate confiscated. His picture was defaced by a mob and then nailed to a sign post bottom side up, and finally, Dr. Learn- ing was confined in the Fairfield County jail for so long a time that he contracted a hip disease that made him a cripple for life. In New London, however, the Congregationalists and Episco- palians dwelt together in harmony, (although some indignities against the Rev. Mr. Graves were indulged in by the crowd.) In January, 1780, the Episcopalians voted to allow the Congre- gationalists the use of the church during the winter. For a fuller account of revolutionary history and acts, we refer to Beardsley's " History " , Chapter xxiv ; Sabine's " American Loyalists " ; and Hawk's and Perry's " Documentary History of the Church in Connecticut." For other facts before the Revolution see " Sketches of Church Life in Colonial Connecti- cut " , by Lucy Cushing Jarvis, 1902. The Rev. John Beach of Newtown writes to the Secretary of the S. P. G., Oct. 31, 1781, that Newtown and Redding he believes are " the only parts of New England that have refused to comply with the doings of the Congress, and for that reason have been the butt of general hatred. Am now in the Bad year of my age, " have been " 60 years a public preacher, and after conviction in the Church of England 50 years." But in 1783 Messrs. Beach, Gibbs and Kneeland were dead, and others had removed, so that, including Bostwick of Great Barrington, there were only fourteen clergy left in the Colony. Messrs. Andrews, Scovill, Clark and Viets soon after removed to Nova Scotia, leaving only nine clergymen of the Church within the bounds of the State. In March, 1783, ten of the clergy met quietly at Woodbury and elected the Rev. Samuel Seabury for their Bishop. He had been before introduced to England by a letter of Dr. Samuel Johnson dated Sept. 29, 1748, saying that young Seabury's father has " a promising son, and as he designs him for the Society's service, he desires me to mention what I know of him, and as he has lived for four years much under my eye, I can truly testify of him that he is a solid sensible, virtuous youth, and I doubt not may in due time do good service. " Dr. Samuel Seabury arrived in London, July 7, 1783, but it was over a year before he could return as the first Bishop in IN CONNECTICUT. 85 America, and " do good service " in Connecticut, as he finally did. The work of the S. P. G. had now ceased in the United States but was continued in the British Provinces of America. Dr. Seabury was made very uneasy when in London, by hear- ing reports that several of the Connecticut missionaries were expected in Nova Scotia with a large portion of their congrega- tions. In May, 1784, he says if these gentlemen " do not choose to stay in Connecticut why should a Bishop go there, I answer one reason of their going is the hope of enjoying their religion fully, which they cannot do . . . without a Bishop." He was also desirous of having a law passed to per- mit a Bishop to reside in Connecticut, fearing that the absence of such a law might be urged against his consecration. He was informed that the new laws of the State, 1784, (which had not then been published,) gave all that was desired. The law relating to denominations other than the Standing Order was the first to use the word " Episcopal ", and gave that Church the same powers and privileges as the ecclesiastical societies estab- lished by law, and " all the legal rights and powers intended by our constitution to be given to any denomination. " The Rev. Dr. Leaming and Rev. Abraham Jarvis were instrumental in having this law enacted. Taxes were still laid on every adult male, for ministers' support and " meeting-houses " of the Standing Order, but all persons of every other denomination could be exempted from such taxes, by filing a proper certi- ficate showing that they attended Divine Service elsewhere and paid their full share for its support. From this time on the much abused Separatists or Strict Congregationalists and the doubly- taxed Episcopalians, had no substantial grievance under the law. In fact by this time the distinction between the Straight Congre- gationalists and those of the Standing Order had vanished, for now the rock upon which they split, the half-way covenant, had been largely discontinued. It was discontinued at New Britain in 1767; at Southington before 1780; at Hartford between 1771 and 1804; at Newington between 1775 and 1805, and about the beginning of the 19th century it was universally abandoned. The early laws of the Colony were not hard on the people during the conditions for which they were made. They did well enough for the first seventy-five years. In. 1708 86 THE CHURCH the followers of Hooker were overthrown, and for about seventy-five years more the Saybrook Platformists were the new Standing Order; they ruled with an iron hand and refused to modify their laws to adapt them to the new condi- tions of the Colony. It was under the rule of the new Standing Order that Episcopalians had to suffer; but even the Episco- palians fared better under the law than did the Straight Con- gregationalists. The latter were practically told by the Gen- eral Court of 1743 that they need not expect any favor of the Assembly. But in 1784, when the new Standing Order were returning to the ways of Hooker, who was a Straight Congrega- tionalist, they began to look upon others with more favor, and then, for the first time they placed all who differed from them in religion upon substantially an equal footing. And now that Standing Order of Connecticut, who for seventy-five years treated Episcopalians and Straight Congregationalists with great injustice, is a thing of the past; the Episcopalians still survive, and there are none other than Straight Congregation- alists now in Connecticut. A united people once more at peace, a repeal of all Colony laws, and an entirely new revision of State laws, were the new conditions in Connecticut that greeted the first Bishop of America upon his return from Scotland in 1785, where he had been consecrated Nov. 14, 1784. He had been thirty-one years a missionary of the S. P. G., was absent for consecration full two years, had more than expended all he had, and now there was no provision whatever for his support. The London "Seabury Commemoration", 1884, says "Providence had per- mitted his native land to be a state without a King; it was his cherished task to see that his native land should have a Church, and not without a Bishop." Two days after arriving at his home. in New London, he wrote to the Rev. Mr. Jarvis concerning the first Convention, which met at Middletown, Aug. 2, 1785, with the Rev. Dr. Leaming as Chairman and the Rev. Mr. Jarvis Secretary, and ten others in attendance. On the next day, the Bishop was formally received, greeted and accepted by the clergy, as their Bishop. Four persons were ordained deacons, the first in the American Church. At the IN CONNECTICUT. 87 conclusion of the service the Bishop dissolved the Convention and directed the clergy to meet at five o'clock in " Convocation." There had been voluntary conventions of the clergy from 1739, but this is the first time that the word "Convocation" was applied to a meeting of the clergy in Connecticut. It was so called because they were convoked by Episcopal authority. After the organization of the Convention of clergy and lay delegates in 1792, the Convocation ceased to act upon affairs concerning the temporal interests of the Diocese, while it still, if requested, advised upon them. [Printed " Records of Convocation ", pp. 12 and 13.] The four last recorded meetings of the Convoca- tion were held in 1830, 1837, 1847 and 1848, respectively. The subject of changes in the Prayer Book was discussed at Middletown, and on Aug. 12, 1785, the Bishop issued a pastoral letter enjoining the clergy to make certain changes in con- nection with the State Prayers and mention of the British government. The Convocation at Derby, Sept. 22, 1786, adopted further changes in the Prayer Book, including " The Communion Office " based upon the Liturgy of the Church in Scot- land. The day after Bishop Seabury's consecration he made a " Concordate " with the Scottish Bishops. Without " prescribing to their Brethren in this matter " of the Com- munion Office, they recommended "the most primitive Doc- trine and practice in that respect, which is the pattern the Church of Scotland has copied after in her Communion Office. " And on the other part " Bishop Seabury agrees to take a seri- ous View of the Communion Office recommended by them and if found agreeable to the genuine Standards of Antiquity, to give his sanction to it, and by gentle Methods of Argument and Persuasion, to endeavor as they have done to introduce it by degrees into practice without the Compulsion of Authority on the one side or the prejudice of former Custom on the other. " The " Communion Office " with "Private Devotions Recom- mended to the Episcopal Congregations in Connecticut By the Right Reverend Bishop Seabury " was printed at New London by T. Green in 1786. At this time there were many, especially in the South, that thought Bishop Seabury's conse- 88 THE CHURCH cration illegal and for that reason an effort was made to have New England, under Bishop Seabury, remain only a branch of the American Church. But in strict accordance with the Con- cordate " by gentle methods of argument and persuasion . . . without the compulsion of authority" and with a sacrifice of all personal rights and interests, Bishop Seabury and his friends succeeded in uniting all conflicting elements in one American Church, bringing together the Bishops of the English and Scottish succession and adopting, in 1789, the revised Prayer Book with that ancient " Communion Office " which was after the pattern of the Church of Scotland, but which is now in regular use only in the American Church. The first occasion on which Bishop Seabury wore his Epis- copal attire and mitre is said to have been at the consecration of St. James's church at New London, Sept. 20, 1787. The Psalms were beautifully chanted and most of the clergy present were vested in their robes. In 1787, an unusual incident occurred at Barkhamsted, when the Rev. Jonathan Marsh, A.M., Congregational minister at New Hartford, preached a Christmas Sermon to the Episco- palians, which he did at their request. It was printed at Hart- ford that year and a copy of it is now in the library of the Connecticut Historical Society. On June 2, 1790, the Bishop and fifteen clergymen met in the Presbyterian Meeting-house at Litchfield and appointed a committee on the Constitution and Canons of the Church, and Oct. I, 1790, at Newtown, the enactments of the " General Con- vention at Philadelphia on the 2* day of Octob' 1789 " were approved and adopted by a vote of 13 to i. In 1790, Rhode Island was added to Bishop Seabury's charge. The dying grip of the Standing Order on the purses of other denominations rallied a little in May, 1791, when an act was passed in addition to, and in alteration of, the certificate exemption law of 1784, whereby no certificate was legal unless the party claiming exemption was examined by two justices, (or one in case the town did not have two,) who should give the desired certificate if " they shall judge the same well founded." The Convocation of Oct. 5, 1791, voted to ask for the repeal of this law and in that month both certificate laws IN CONNECTICUT. 89 were repealed and a new one passed, granting exemption on the same conditions as before, upon filing of a certificate merely signed by the applicant. On Oct. 5, 1791, the Convocation at Watertown appointed the first Standing Committee, consisting of five clergymen, as laymen at that date had no part in the management of Diocesan matters. This has never been changed, and the Standing Com- mittee of to-day is composed of five clergymen. Of the ninety- four Dioceses of the Church in America, only four, Connecticut, Maryland, Easton of Maryland and Michigan City of Indiana, have no lay members on the Standing Committee. On Oct. 7, 1791, the same Convocation voted — "That each Clergyman recommended it to the people of his Cure to choose one or more persons to represent them at a Convocation to be holden at the Church in New Haven on the 30th of May next. . . . which representatives are to be considered as a Committee of conference, to confer with the Convocation, at that time & place, on all matters that respect the temporal interest of the Church." In conformity therewith the clergy met separately in Convocation at Trinity Church, New Haven, June 6, 1792, and on the same day in that church the "Bishop, Clergy and Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Con- necticut " held their first Annual Convention. There were twenty of the clergy and twenty-four of the laity present. The lay delegates are arranged in the Journal by counties, and Hart- ford County is the only one not represented. The first busi- ness of the Convention was the adoption of " The constitution of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Connecticut." They then appointed four clerical and four lay deputies to the next Gen- eral Convention and appointed a committee to report to the next Diocesan Convention a plan for a religious and charitable society. After the several parishes in the State approved the Constitution adopted in this Convention, the Diocese of Con- necticut was duly established and thereafter met annually in convention. The first society or parish formed within the Diocese was that of Exeter in the town of Lebanon, which was voted to be " a separate ecclesiastical society " by the Convo- cation at Huntington, Oct. 10, 1792. The same Convocation also took steps towards establishing a " Fund for the Bishop's 90 THE CHURCH support"; but it did not mature in Bishop Seabury's time. After numerous delays, an act of incorporation was passed in May, 1799, but the trustees do not appear to have been active until about 1803. In that year the Convention voted that no delegate be admitted to the Convention unless he delivered, with his certificate, the grand levy of the Church he wished to represent. This levy was to be used as a basis of assessments for the Bishop's fund. When the annual Convention met at Middletown, June 5, 1793, it appeared from the reports of the lay delegates and certificates exhibited that the " Constitution of the Church in Connecticut had been fully approved and adopted by a great majority of the Churches in the State. " The practicability of instituting an Episcopal Academy in this State was considered as early as the Spring of 1789, and in the Convocation of Feb. 15, 1792, the several clergy were requested to see what could be done towards erecting an Episco- pal Academy. The matter was considered in the annual Con- vention of 1794. The committee reported to the Convention of 1795 and it was voted that the Academy be established. The constitution of the Academy was adopted in the Convention of 1796. In 1802 the State authorized a lottery to raise $15,000 for the Episcopal Academy. The Bishop's address to the Con- vention of 1892 refers to this Academy as " our oldest Diocesan Institution." Also in 1894, one hundred years after the Academy was instituted, when the Bishop says that from 1796 the " Trustees have been elected by the Convention of the Diocese. " The Convention of 1795 voted that the Journals of the Con- vention from the first be printed, and that in future they be published annually. Bishop Seabury's Psalter " was also printed in 1795, by Thomas C. Green, New London. " It is mentioned at length in Beardsley's " Life of Bishop Seabury," and is described also in Dr. Wright's " Early Prayer Books of America." It was a book for family use and was never known to have been used in the churches. Only three copies of it are now known to be in existence. They belong respectively to Mr. James Terry of Hartford, Mr. Henry White of New Haven, and Mr. George Ploadley of Hartford. IN CONNECTICUT. 9 1 A national Thanksgiving was appointed by George Wash- ington, the President, for Feb. 19, 1795. The proclamation was not read at New London because the date appointed fell in Lent, which was not considered an appropriate time for Thanks- giving. It was also considered objectionable to observe Fast day during Easter week, although not objectionable during Lent. These matters were discussed in the Connecticut " Gazette " and Bishop Seabury gave his views of the matter, although his name did not appear as the author. Governor Huntington of Norwich was a friend of the Bishop. The Con- gregationalists of Norwich were then worshipping in the Epis- copal Church by the courtesy of the Episcopalians. The annual State Fast for 1795 was appointed for Good Friday by Gover- nor Huntington, and this was the first time that the State Fast in Connecticut had ever been appointed on Good Friday. It was again so appointed for 1797, and since then that has been the continuous practice. [Fast and Thanksgiving days in New England, by Rev. W. DeLoss Love, Jr., Ph.D.] At the General or Triennial Convention in 1792, Bishop Sea- bury waived his right to preside, and agreed to exercise the Presidency in rotation with the other Bishops. This made Bishop Provoost the Presiding Officer, and the consecrator, with the other Bishops, of the Rev. Thomas Claggett, D.D. Bishop Seabury's first ordinations were at Middletown, Aug. 3, 1785, when Messrs. Furgeson, Van Dyke, Baldwin and Shelton were made deacons. His last ordination was at St. Matthew's, East Plymouth, Oct. 21, 1795, the day of conse- crating the church, when Alexander Viets Griswold, after- wards Bishop of the Eastern Diocese, was ordained priest. The first confirmation in America was by Bishop Seabury at Stratford. His first consecration of a church was at Norwalk, in July, 1786, and his last known official act was the consecra- tion of St. Mark's Church, Harwinton, Oct. 22, 1795. He died suddenly on Feb. 25, 1796. Bishop Seabury's first charge to the clergy, at New Haven, Aug. 4, 1785, is printed in the reprint of the Journals 1792 to 1820, p. 147, and a list of the ordinations by Bishops Seabury, Jarvis, and Brownell, appear in the same reprint, and again with additions up to date in the Journal for 1865, pp. 151-165; 92 THE CHURCH again in the Journal for 1866, pp. 166-180, and in the Journal for 1886. The latter also contains a list of ordinations from Connecticut by English Bishops and a list of clergymen deceased up to July i, 1886. In the Journal of 1882, pp. 152, etc., appears not merely a list but the full record of Bishop Seabury's Ordinations. The " Calendar " of Hartford for 1854 contains short biographical notices, by Rev. A. B. Chapin, of all the clergymen ordained by Bishops Seabury and Jarvis. They begin with the issue of July I, and are concluded with the issue of Nov. 25. At a special Convention held in Trinity church. New Haven, May 5, 1796, the clerical and lay delegates formed two separate houses for the purpose of deliberating separately on the subject of electing a Bishop. The clergy made choice of the Rev. Abraham Jarvis, but he declined the office. The Rev. John Bowden was elected for Bishop, Oct. 19, 1796, and on June 7, 1797, he signified to the Convention, in writing, his non-acceptance of the Episcopate. On June 7, 1797, at Derby, the Rev. Mr. Jarvis was unani- mously reelected by the clergy. The laity were notified of his election and they unanimously concurred. At the Commence- ment at Yale in September, 1797, the degree of Doctor of Divin- ity was conferred on the Rev. Abraham Jarvis, Bishop-elect of the Church in Connecticut. In the church where he was first elected he was consecrated on Oct. 18, 1797, by the Right Rev. Dr. White of Pennsylvania, the Right Rev. Dr. Provoost of New York, and the Right Rev. Dr. Bass of Massachusetts and New Hampshire. The Convention of June 6 and 7, 1798, appointed a com- mittee " to draft an address to the President of the United States." This address appears in the " Conn. Journal & Weekley Advertiser" of New Haven, issue of Jan. 31, 1799, together with a letter of acknowledgment and thanks from the President, John Adams. The occasion for sending the address was the war among the nations of Europe. The closing lines of the address are as follows : — We " assure the Rulers of our Country that we will use our best endeavors to promote unity of opinion, respect for the laws, and reverence for all that are in authority over us. And to do our best endeavors we add our IN CONNECTICUT. 93 prayers to Almighty God Beseeching Him to direct and dispose the hearts of all Christian Rulers, that they may truly, and impartially administer justice to the punishment of wickedness and vice, and to the maintenance of true religion and virtue. " Signed " Abraham Bp. of Connecticut. " The Records of Convocation, p. 53, show that the Rev. Mr. Baldwin was appointed Aug. 22, 1798, to draft an address to the President in behalf of the Convocation. The first men- tioned address was in behalf of the Convention. The English custom of omitting the surname in the official signature was followed both by Bishop Seabury and Bishop Jarvis, the latter being the last Bishop of Connecticut that thus signed. A facsimile of one of Bishop Seabury's certificates is shown at the beginning of this chapter. The Canons for the Church in Connecticut were adopted at the Convention held June 6, 1799, and are printed in the Journal. When the Convention met at Newtown, June 3, 1801, a procession was formed by its members, the clergy, in their gowns, and marched from the house of the Rev. Mr. Burhans, to the Episcopal church, attended by a band of music. This custom of marching to the Convention in procession was followed for many years. Dr. Beardsley says that about this time there were not more than half a dozen churches in the Diocese supplied with organs, and their number was not much increased for twenty-five years. Organs were used in Episcopal churches in this country for more than fifty years before the Congregationalists began to use them. The first church organ in New England was placed in King's Chapel, Boston, about 1714. The first organ in aay house of public worship in Connecticut, (according to Dr. Beardsley,) was delivered to Christ Church, Stratford, the last of April, 1756. Christ Church, Middletown, was finished in 1755, and Richard Alsop imported an organ from England and presented it to the parish, but this was probably some time after April, 1756. Trinity Church, New Haven, voted June 30, 1794, to hire Mr. Salter as organist for six months. The first organ in any house of public worship in what is now Hartford 94 THE CHURCH County was placed in the Congregational church at Worth- ington, (now Berlin,) 1792, and the first in an Episcopal church of this county was in use at Christ Church, Hartford, at the consecration of that church, Nov. 11, 1801, and for several years these were the only organs in that part of the State. At the annual Convention of 1804, the members were requested to procure various historical information as to early Churches, clergymen and prominent lay brethren, and to trans- mit the same to the editors of the " Churchman's Magazine." This magazine was first published at New Haven in 1804, and was the first diocesan paper in Connecticut, and also the first Episcopal periodical ever published in this country. With various interruptions, changes in management and place of publication, it was continued until 1827, when it was succeeded by the "Episcopal Watchman", of Hartford, until 1834. In 1837, the " Chronicle of the Church " was published at New Haven by order of the Convention. In 1841 the name was changed to the "Practical Christian, and Church Chronicle" and it continued to the end of 1844. It was succeeded by the " Calendar " of Hartford in 1845 ^^'^ the " Calendar " was succeeded in 1866 by the " Connecticut Churchman." In 1867 the name was changed to " The Churchman ", and in July, 1877, the office of publication was removed to New York City, where it is still published. A paper called " The Churchman " had been published in New York, 183 1 to about 1859, but as it had ceased to exist, the proprietors of the paper published at Hartford felt free, in 1867, to adopt that name. The present New York paper is therefore a continuation of the diocesan paper which was started in the Diocese of Connecticut and pub- lished in that Diocese for seventy-four years. The fashion set by the certificate law of 1784 and 1791, for avoiding ecclesiastical taxes to the Standing Order, was often followed in withdrawing from other societies. The following is from the papers of the Episcopal Society of Barkhamsted, and is dated June 20, 1805. " This certyfies that i . . . having seriously taken it into Consideration in what way is most Exceptable to worship god i think the presbyterian way of worship the Best & shall imBrace it in Future. " IN CONNECTICUT. 95 The Journal of the annual Convention for 1807 is the first in which the Bishop's address appears. It was more in the nature of a charge to the clergy and people than are the addresses of recent years. Wardens and vestrymen of to-day will find in this address such a clear and comprehensive state- ment of their duties as to repay them for reading it. The Bishop refers to, and rebukes, the practice of employing lay preachers or preaching candidates. At this time there was upon an average " more than two congregations to one Clergy- man " in this Diocese and from lack of ministers or other cause, as soon as persons were registered as candidates for holy orders they began to preach as if they had a license. One person began to preach in 1788 and was not made deacon until nearly three years thereafter; another commenced to preach in 1802, more than a year and a half before he was ordained, and there were many more doing the same thing. No objection was made to the employment of candidates to say the prayers and to read a sermon, in the absence of a clergyman, but for one to preach on the ground of being a candidate was contrary to the principles of the Church and an error both on the part of the candidate and of the parishioners who employed him. At the annual Convention of 1808, the several parishes in the Diocese were divided into thirty-four cures, covering by name seventy-two parishes, and " parts adjacent." At that time there were only twenty-six clergymen for these seventy-two parishes, eight of the thirty-four cures being reported as vacant. There were only four cures limited to one parish each. One cure was composed of one parish and parts adjacent, nine- teen cures were each composed of two parishes, one cure of two parishes and parts adjacent, and nine cures were each composed of three parishes. Even as late as the fall of 1819, there were only seven parishes in the Diocese capable of supporting full services independently. The first parish reports appear in the Journal for 1809, but out of the seventy-two parishes named in the cures of 1808 only twenty parishes are included in these reports. In this Journal we also find a committee was appointed to publish documents respecting Mr. Ammi Rogers " and distrib- ute them to all persons who may wish for information on that 96 THE CHURCH subject." There was no lack of material for this committee. Without going into details, we may say that Mr. Rogers was attempting to force himself upon the Diocese and to officiate within it, in violation of the ancient canons of the Church. The 41st Canon passed at the Council of Laodicea, A.D. 321, pro- vided " that no clergyman ought to travel without the consent of his Bishop." The 13th Canon passed at the Council of Chalcedon, being the fourth Council, A.D. 451, provided "that a foreign clergyman and not known shall not officiate in another city, without commendatory letters from his own Bishop." The present canons as to removals had not then been adopted here, but they are the same in substance as these ancient canons. The Convocations of 1801 and 1803 requested of Rogers testimonials from his Bishop, and in 1804, Bishop Jarvis for- bade the clergy and Churches in this Diocese to allow Mr. Rogers to officiate. But he continued to officiate, and after the death of Bishop Jarvis, Bishop Hobart of New York, Rogers' own Bishop, turned his back on him at Hebron. The Bishop's address to the annual Convention 1812 gives a history of the Bishop's fund and shows how insufficient it had been and " with what languor, the support of the Bishop has hitherto been regarded." All that his " worthy predeces- sor received from the Diocese " he believed " did not amount to the interest of the money he expended of his own property to accomplish for us, the object of our wishes." These words of Bishop Jarvis were not spoken for himself at his advanced age, " with no rational prospect of any great length of days to come." This was his last address to the Convention. He died May 13, 1813, nineteen days before the sitting of the annual Convention. This Convention passed a resolution requiring every clergyman to preach a sermon to his parish strongly enforcing the importance of raising " an adequate and reason- able support of the Episcopate." The Grand Levy of the Parishes ordered in 1803 was not required to be entered on the Journal until 1805 and first appears in the Journal for 1806. This course was continued for many years. In August, 1813, a committee was appointed to lay a special assessment on each parish in the Diocese " for raising the Bishop's Fund." At the November Convention in that year, the Treasurer of the IN CONNECTICUT. 97 Bishop's fund was requested to visit the various parishes to receive the money due on this assessment. Dr. Beardsley says that the parish assessments of 1813 amounted to $16,570.00 and not quite one half of that sum was afterwards received. In the Journal for 1817 there is a list of seventy-five parishes, fourteen of which had paid their assessments in full, including the parish of Christ Church, Middletown, which not only paid its assessment early, but paid " one hundred and ninety two dollars more." There were fifteen parishes that had paid their assessments only in part, and forty-six parishes that had not paid any of the assessment of 1813. In the Journal for the year 1853, pp. 92-106, the amounts assessed in August, 1813, against the seventy-five parishes is given, with a statement of those that had paid nothing. The committee reported that some of these parishes were not then recognized by the geog- raphy, and even the locality was not quite certain. At the annual Convention of 1854, no one of the parishes reported as delinquent for the assessments of 1813 and 1832 had paid any part thereof, and their assessments were remitted. The first effort for a missionary society, made at the Con- vention of 1792, was reported in 1793 to have been too general in its object to obtain the sanction of the Legislature. The Journal of the 1797 Convention shows that money had been collected " for the purpose of supporting Missionaries," but in 1798 such money was applied to the benefit of the Episcopal Academy. At the annual Convention of 1813, a committee was appointed on the subject of a missionary society for the Church in this State, to report to the next Convention. That Convention appointed a new committee and at the October Convention, 1814, they reported a " Constitution for the establishment of said Society." The report was read and accepted but does not appear to have been adopted. At the annual Convention of 1815 a committee was appointed to draft a constitution for a Bible and Prayer Book Society. This committee reported to the annual Convention of 18 16 and their report was approved, but it was deemed inexpedient to connect said Society with the Convention and the matter was referred to the consideration of a meeting held later by friends of the cause. The Society 98 THE CHURCH was formed and its officers were reported in the first issue of Swords' " Almanac " for the year 1817. The matter of a missionary society was again before the Convention in the spring of 1817, and the annual Convention of 1818 organized a society under the name of " The Protestant Episcopal Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge." Provision was made in its constitution for the dissolution and absorption of the " Bible and Common Prayer Book Society." The Christian Knowledge Society is now known as the " Missionary Society of the Diocese of Connecticut." Shortly before the sitting of the annual Convention of 1815, Bishop Griswold of the Eastern Diocese, at the invitation of the Standing Committee, performed Episcopal acts in this Diocese which he reports in his address to the Eastern Convention in 1816. It appears from this address that he supposed he had been invited to take charge in Connecticut. The Middlesex " Gazette " for June 15, 1815, reports the confirmation of twenty-two persons by Bishop Griswold at Christ Church, Middletown, on Sunday, June 4 ; five ordinations Tuesday, June 6, and one ordination on Friday, June 9. The Convention was held June 7, and Bishop Griswold was " requested to take a seat in the Convention." He was also thanked for his sermon at the ordination at Christ Church on June 5, not June 6, as reported in the " Gazette." The October Convention of 1816 voted to invite the Rt. Rev. John Henry Hobart of New York to perform the Episcopal Offices in this Diocese. He accepted and delivered the sermon at that Convention. Also at the annual Conventions of 1817 and 1818. Dr. Beardsley says that Bishop Hobart confirmed in Connecticut 3,057 persons, only eleven less than the entire number by Bishop Jarvis in his whole fifteen years of his Epis- copate. Part of Bishop Hobart's Episcopal acts are reported in the Middlesex " Gazette " issues of Eeb. 29, 1816, Nov. 14, 1816, and Aug. 26, 1819, and in the " Christian Journal " for October, 1817. The Connecticut Bible Society issued a large edition of Bibles and distributed them in the west, particularly in Ohio. The word " ye " was substituted for we in Acts vi, 3. In conse- quence of this edition, the October Convention of 1816 IN CONNECTICUT. 99 instructed their Deputies to the General Convention to endeavor to have some specific edition of the Old and New Testament recognized. This resulted in the adoption of the standard version now in use. The story of its adoption is told by the Bishop on pages 38 and 39 of the Convention Journal for 1881. The first Episcopalian to be elected as a State Officer in Coimecticut was Jonathan Ingersoll, one of the wardens of Trinity Church, New Haven, who was elected Lieutenant Governor in 1816. In October, 1817, Governor Wolcott appointed as usual a minister of the Standing Order to preach the annual Election Sermon in May, 181 8. At the same time he appointed the Rev. Harry Croswell, Rector of Trinity Parish, New Haven, as sub- stitute preacher, in case of failure on the part of the regular appointee. The latter early informed the Rev. Mr. Croswell of his intention to default. Bishop Hobart advised the per- formance of the full service of the Church, the same as usual, and the use of Bishop Seabury's State Prayers. The sermon was preached by Dr. Croswell in the Center Church at Hartford. Two of the oldest Divines of the Standing Order were seated in the pulpit. This was the first time an Episcopal minister ever preached the State sermon in Connecticut. According to the usual custom the sermon was printed. In 1822, Governor Wol- cott appointed Bishop Brownell to preach the State sermon in May of that year. " The Governor, State Officers, members of the Legislature, and a numerous body of the clergy, moved under a military escort to the Episcopal church at New Haven, where Divine Service was performed and an eloquent and patriotic sermon delivered by the Rt. Rev. Bishop Brownell." [Conn. Mirror of May 6, 1822.] This is the first time that the State of Connecticut ever worshiped in an Episcopal church. What a marked contrast this shows over the days when Rev. Abraham Jarvis, sometime after having been ordained in Eng- land, attended an Election sermon at Hartford and the preacher pointed at him in contempt, saying " What do they not deserve who cross the Atlantic to bring Episcopal tyranny and super- stition among us?" In 1828, the Rev. Nathaniel S. Wheaton preached the Election sermon. These three are the only Epis- copalians that ever delivered the Election sermon. Election sermons were discontinued in 1830. lOO THE CHURCH The Rev. Thomas C. Brownell, Assistant Minister of Trinity Church, New York, was elected Bishop of this Diocese at the annual Convention held in New Haven, June 2, 1819. At New Haven, on Oct. 27, 1819, a procession from the house of Gover- nor Ingersoll was formed and proceeded to Trinity Church, where the Rev. Thomas Church Brownell was consecrated to the holy office of Bishop, by the Right Rev. Bishop White, Right Rev. Bishop Hobart, and Right Rev. Bishop Griswold. Morning prayers were read by the Rev. Reuben Ives and a discourse delivered by the Right Rev. Bishop White. The degree of D.D. was conferred by Columbia College upon Bishop-elect Brownell, shortly before his consecration. At the Convention which elected Bishop Brownell, the ven- erable Dr. Richard Mansfield, in the ninety-seventh year of his age, was present. He was made Doctor of Divinity by Yale in 1792, the first Episcopalian to receive that honor. He was the Rector of St. James's Church, Derby, for seventy-one years and eight months. He had seen the Church in New Haven grow from but two or three families to a society of about 2,000 souls. The only other minister in Connecticut whose service in one parish exceeded his was the Rev. Samuel Nott, pastor of the Congregational church at Franklin, who served that parish seventy-one years and ten months. ' Rev. John Beach of Newtown was the only Episcopal minister of fifty years service prior to the close of the Revolutionary war. Dibblee of Stamford and Tyler of Norwich both served before and after the war for more than fifty years in all ; Hubbard of New Haven nearly fifty years, while Croswell of New Haven, Fogg of Brooklyn, and Shelton of Bridgeport, each served forty or more years in the same parish. The Theological Seminary of New York was transferred to New Haven and opened Sept. 13, 1820, but was transferred back to New York in October, 182 1. Bishop Brownell's address to the Convention in 1820 called attention to, and urged, Sunday schools, which were then generally established through- out the Diocese. A " Commentary on the Book of Common Prayer " was prepared by Bishop Brownell and published in 1823. It was the first work of the kind ever prepared in this country and IN CONNECTICUT. lOl was SO well received that an edition was afterwards published by Bishop Hobart of New York. Several unsuccessful efforts had been made to change the Episcopal Academy at Cheshire into a college. At the annual Convention of 1816, a committee was appointed to apply to the General Assembly for an act of incorporation and charter for an Episcopal College and this committee was continued by the annual Convention of 1817. In December, 1822, at the house of Bishop Brownell, steps were taken to renew the efforts to obtain a charter for an Epis- copal College, which charter was granted to Washington Col- lege, (now Trinity,) of Hartford, May 16, 1823. It was said to have been the first college in America " under the special patronage and guardianship of Episcopalians." It was built in 1824, and Bishop Brpwnell was its first President. On Feb. 15, 1828, Jacob Oson, a man of color, was made deacon, and on the next day he was ordained priest with a view to missionary service in Africa. The Bishop's address to the Convention of 1829 refers to the death of this mission- ary, which occurred as he was about to embark. " By this dispensation of divine Providence one of the first efforts in our Church in the cause of foreign missions has been defeated." At that time there was an African Mission School in the Dio- cese, where three very promising young men of color were in course of preparation for the same field of labor. At the sitting of the General Convention of the Church at Philadelphia, in August, 1829, Bishop Brownell preached a sermon before the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society. He referred to the destitute condition of many places in the southwest. As Bishop Brownell was then the youngest Bishop, it was arranged that he should make an Episcopal visitation to that country. Accordingly he started early in November and visited parts of Ohio, Kentucky, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, and other of the Atlantic States, and returned home early in March, 1830, having traversed an extent of country of at least six thousand miles, three hundred of which he traveled on horseback. He performed " Episcopal functions where never a prelate of our Church had before been wel- comed." [Christian Journal for 1830.] In the Bishop's 102 THE CHURCH address to the annual Convention of this Diocese in 1830, Bishop Brownell gives a report of this visitation. In his address to the Convention in October, 1835, he states that the Diocese of Alabama was placed under his charge several years ago, and refers to attending the annual Convention of that Diocese at Tuscaloosa, in January, 1835, and performing Episcopal func- tions. In his Address to the annual Convention of this Diocese in 1845, he refers to the twenty-five years of his Episcopate with a summary of ordinations and confirmations, and adds — " in my Visitation in the Southwestern States, I have Conse- crated two Churches in Kentucky, four in Mississippi, two in Louisiana and two in Alabama, and have confirmed 245 persons in those States." Bishop Brownell presided over the General Convention at New York in 1853, being then the senior Bishop, instead of the youngest Bishop, as he was in 1829. For other historical matter we refer to the " Records of Convocation ", printed by order of the Convention 1904, with many valuable historical notices by the Rev. Joseph Hooper, M.A., of Durham, and to the Journals of the Convention from 1792 to date. A list of parishes in this Diocese with dates of organization may be found in the Journal for 1878, also in 1891, to which is added, in each case, the date when the present church building was used. That of Christ Church, West Haven, was first used in 1740, and in 1906 was the oldest in Connecticut. In the Journal of 1896, p. 179, is an account of extinct parishes ; of the Ancient records, in the Journal for 1897, p. 175; of the changes in parish names, in the Journal for 1900, p. 112; of the growth of the Diocese, in the Journal for 1901, p. 2; and a list of all the Deputies from Connecticut to the General Convention is in the Journal for 1904. And it may be of interest to turn to the Journal of 1905 and compare its list of two hundred and eleven clergy, besides the Bishop, and a total of just exactly that number of places of worship in this Diocese, with the fourteen clergy of 1783 with no Bishop and about forty-five parishes ; or with the following list of twenty-five Connecticut clergy from the Journal of the Triennial Convention of 1799, when there were about sixty parishes. IN CONNECTICUT. I03 The list is as follows: The Right Rev. Abraham Jarvis, D.D., Bishop. Rev. Jeremiah Learning, residing at New Haven. Rev. John Bowden, D.D., Principal of the Episcopal Academy at Cheshire. Rev. Richard Mansfield, D.D., Rector of Christ Church, at Derby, and of the Churches of Oxford and Great Hill. Rev. Bela Hubbard, Trinity Church, New Haven, and Christ Church, West Haven. Rev. John Tyler, Christ Church, Norwich. Rev. Daniel Fogg, Rector of Trinity Church, Pomphret. Rev. William Smith, D.D., Rector of St. Paul's Church, Norwalk. Rev. Philo Shelton, Rector of Trinity Church, Stratfield, St. John's, Fairfield, and a Church in Weston. Rev. Ashbel Baldwin, Rector of Christ Church, Stratford, and Trinity Church, Trumbull. Rev. Chauncey Prindle, Rector of Christ Church, Water- town, and St. Peter's, Plymouth. Rev. Reuben Ives, Rector of St. Peter's Church, Cheshire, and the Churches at Hamden and Southington. Rev. Tilotson Brownson, Rector of St. Peter's Church, Waterbury, and the Churches at Salem. Rev. Truman Marsh, Rector of St. John's Church, New Milford, and the Churches of Roxbury and New Preston. Rev. Ambrose Todd, Rector of St. Andrew's Church, Syms- 'bury, and St. Peter's Church, Granby. Rev. Solomon Blakesley, Rector of St. Stephen's Church in East Haddam. Rev. Seth Hart, Rector of St. Paul's Church, Wallingford, and a Church in Berlin. (Christ Church, Worthington.) Rev. Charles Seabury, Rector of St. James's Church, New London. Rev. Smith Miles, Rector of the Churches at Chatham and Middle Haddam. Rev. David Butler, Rector of Christ Church, Reading, and the Church at Ridgefield. Rev. Alexander V. Griswold, Rector of St. Matthew's Church, Bristol, (East Plymouth,) St. Mark's, Harwinton, and a Church in Northfield. 104 THE CHURCH Rev. William Green, Rector of St. John's, Seabrook. Rev. Calvin White, Deacon, St. John's Church, Stamford, and a Church at Horseneck. Rev. Evan Rogers, Deacon, the Churches of Hebron and Pomphret. Rev. Bethel Judd, Deacon. The names of the Rev. Daniel Burhans, D.D., Rector of Trinity Church, Newtown, and John Callahan, Deacon, should be added, to make the list complete. IN CONNECTICUT. I05 THE BISHOPS OF CONNECTICUT BRIEF MENTION The Right Reverend Samuel Seabury, D.D. The first American Bishop and first Bishop of Connecticut, for eleven years, three months and eleven days. Consecrated Nov. 14, 1784; died Feb. 25, 1796. The Right Reverend Abraham Jarvis, D.D. The eighth American Bishop and second Bishop of Con- necticut, for fifteen years, six months and twelve days. Conse- crated Oct. 18, 1797; died May 13, 1813. The Right Reverend John Henry Hobart, D.D. The eleventh American Bishop and third Bishop of New York. Consecrated May 29, 181 1; died Sept. 12, 1830. Act- ing Bishop of Connecticut for three years and ten days, from Oct. 17, 1816, to Oct. 27, 1819. The Right Reverend Thomas Church Brownell, D.D. The nineteenth American Bishop and third Bishop of Con- necticut, for forty-five years, two months and ten days. Con- secrated Oct. 27, 1819; died Jan. 13, 1865. The Right Reverend John Williams^ D.D. The fifty-fourth American Bishop and fourth Bishop of Con- necticut, for forty-seven years, three months and eight days, being Assistant Bishop for the first thirteen years. Conse- crated Oct. 29, 1851 ; died Feb. 7, 1899. The Right Reverend Chauncey Bunce Brewster, D.D. The one hundred and eighty-third American Bishop and fifth Bishop of Connecticut, being Bishop Coadjutor the first year of his episcopate. Consecrated Oct. 28, 1897, one hundred years after the consecration of the second Bishop of Con- necticut. Io6 THE CHURCH BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES The Right Reverend Samuel Seabury, D.D. Samuel, the second son of Samule and Abigail, (Mumford,) Seabury, was born at North Groton, (now Ledyard,) Con- necticut, on November 30, 1729; died Feb. 25, 1796, in the sixty-seventh year of his age. Early in life he married a Miss Hicks of New York, who died before 1784 and he did not marry again.. At the time of his birth his father was officiating as a licentiate of the " Standing Order " in the meeting-house of the Second Ecclesiastical Society of Groton located in North Groton, but soon after conformed to the Church of England, was ordained in England and became the first incumbent of St. James's Church, New London. The future bishop was educated by his father and in the common schools of the town until his father's removal to Hempstead, Long Island, in 1742. He entered Yale College in 1744, and was graduated with honor in 1748. Mr. Seabury was sent by his father to Huntington, Long Island, as "catechist" in 1748, in which position he was confirmed by the Venerable Society with a salary of ten pounds sterling per annum. He commenced the study of medicine while at Huntington and in 1752 went to Edinburgh to continue his medical course until of age to present himself to the Bishop of London for ordination. He was made deacon in the Chapel of Fulham Palace on St. Thomas's Day, Dec. 21, 1753, by the Rt. Rev. John Thomas, Bishop of Lincoln, acting for the infirm Bishop of London. Dr'. Thomas Sherlock. He was ordained priest in the same chapel on Sunday, December 23, 1753, by the Rt. Rev. Richard Osbaldiston, Bishop of Carlisle. He was immediately appointed by the Propagation Society to the mission of Christ Church, New Brunswick, N. J. In 1757 he went to Grace Church, Jamaica, from which he removed in 1766 to the rectorship of St. Peter's Church, Westchester County, N. Y. To add to his small income, he opened while at Westchester a classical school. As the Revolution approached, with his friends Dr. Chandler, Dr. Inglis, and the Hon. Isaac Wilkins, he allied himself with the cause of the united British Empire, which to his mind d \ ^^H< ^""mH ...--^■' ^-dj^^^B ' -^^^ Ww ^ ■^>-::-:> 1 ■'--.. ..,-i«^i\_^ --rtP*?^'''" ■ <-f . ■ ■