This Week @ MHS
June is arrived, and with it come brown bags and conversations at the MHS.
On Monday, 1 June, stop by at noon for a Brown Bag lunch talk given by Kristina Garvin of Ohio State University. "The Cultural Work of the Serial in U.S. Literature, 1786-1815" gives an overview of serial ficiton in the early republic and explores its particular uses and features. This program is free and open to the public.
Wednesday, 3 June, sees another Brown Bag starting at noon, this time given by Jordan Smith of Georgetown University. His project, "The Invention of Rum," investigates the history of rum in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
On Wednesday evening, there is a special author talk and conversation facilitated by independent author and activisit Jim Vrabel. "How Community Activism Made the New Boston Better" will focus on the rise in community activism in the 1960s and 1970s as well as the state of activism today. Joining Vrabel are Tom Corrigan, Moe Gillen, Renee Loth, and M. Daniel Richardson, Jr. This event is open to the public with a fee of $10 (no charge for Fellows and Members), and registration is required so please RSVP. A pre-talk reception begins at 5:30PM with the event starting at 6:00PM.
And on Saturday, 6 June, stop by at 10:00AM for the History and Collections of the MHS. Docent-led and lasting about 90 minutes, this free tour explores the public rooms in our historic building and touches on the art, history, architecture and collections at the Society. Tours are open to the public, free of charge, with no reservation needed for individuals or small groups. Parties of 8 or more should contact the Curator of Art, Anne Bentley, in advance at 617-646-0508 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Also on Saturday, beginning at 1:00PM, is the third installment of "Begin at the Beginning: Boston's Founding Documents." Led by historian Abby Chandler and the Partnership of Historic Bostons will look at the Massachusetts 1641 Body of Liberties, the first legal code in the English colonies. The talk is free and open to the public, RSVP required. No expertise necessary, just an interest in the history of where we live.
Finally, don't forget to come in and view our current exhibition: "God Save the People! From the Stamp Act to Bunker Hill." This exhibit is open to the public free of charge, Monday-Saturday, 10:00AM-4:00PM.
| Published: Sunday, 31 May, 2015, 8:57 AM
Untangling North Atlantic Fishing, 1764-1910, Part 4: The Halifax Fisheries Commission, 1877
By Andrea Cronin, Reader Services
The United States abrogated the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 regarding free trade and inshore fishing on 17 March 1866, as discussed in a prior post. The fishery arrangements then reverted back to the Treaty of 1818 agreement that secured the 3-nautical mile coastal area for resident Canadian fishermen and prohibited further inshore fishing to Americans. Canadian inshore fishing regulation transformed into a licensing business applied to American vessels at per-tonnage fee from 1866 until 1870. When Canadian authorities discarded the licensing system and began seizing American vessels over a two-year period, the need for improved arrangement led in part to the Treaty of Washington in 1871.
Among other issues of Northwestern border disputes and damages caused by British-built warships in the Civil War, the Treaty of Washington also addressed the future state of fishing rights between the newly formed Dominion of Canadian and the United States. The commissioners settled the issue of rights of American fishermen in Canadian waters by proposing a mixed commission meet in Halifax, Nova Scotia to determine value for reciprocal privileges. The Halifax Fisheries Commission met in June 1877. The representatives included British-Canadian Sir Alexander Tilloch Galt, American Ensign H. Kellogg, and Belgian Minister to the United States, M. Maurice Delfosse. William Henry Trescot and Richard Henry Dana, Jr., represented the United States counsel against a 5-man British-Canadian contingent.
Richard Henry Dana, Jr. of Boston, Mass. advocated that fishing in Canadian waters should remain free to Americans. “[The Reciprocity Treaty of 1854] made no attempt to exclude us from fishing anywhere within the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and it allowed no geographic limits,” he argued. “And from 1854 to 1866 we continued to enjoy and use the free fishery, as we had enjoyed and used it from 1620 to 1818.” He reasoned that the precedent for the free fishery had been established, that the fish do not adhere to ocean limits, and asked the purpose in establishing these limits:
“The right to fish in the sea is in its nature not real, as the common law has it, nor immovable, as termed by the civil law, but personal. It is a liberty. It is a franchise, or a faculty. It is not property, pertaining to or connected with the land. It is incorporeal. It is aboriginal. … These fish are not property. Nobody owns them … they belong, by right of nature, to those who take them, and every man may take them who can.”
The prose of Dana’s argument did not impress the Commission. In a split decision on 23 November 1877, the Commission determined that the United States was to pay $5,500,000 in gold to the British Government for fishing rights in Canadian waters. Despite Ensign H. Kellogg’s protest, the United States paid this sum to the British Government.
| Published: Friday, 29 May, 2015, 10:30 AM
The More Things Change....
By Susan Martin, Collection Services
Today’s media commentators like to decry political polarization and incivility in the United States. It’s become a well-worn cliché: Why can’t we all just get along? Some will even claim that this polarization is worse now than ever before. (Of course, we only have to go back 150 years to find Americans literally at war with other Americans, but let’s put that aside for the moment.) I’d like to present, as evidence for the defense, a letter written in 1813, when this nation was still in its infancy. The letter forms part of the Henry P. Binney family papers at the MHS.
In mid-1813, Benjamin Homans (1765-1823) worked as chief clerk of the Navy Department in Washington, D.C. His friend and colleague Amos Binney (1778-1833) was the Navy Agent at Boston. The United States was a year into the War of 1812, and Boston was a hotbed of dissent. New England Federalists and merchants vehemently opposed “Mr. Madison's War”, largely because of their reliance on trade with England. Binney lived and worked in the belly of the beast as an agent for the federal government, and Homans sympathized. He wrote to Binney on 23 June 1813:
You may be very sure, that I am no stranger to the active operation of evil spirits in Boston, party spirit, selfish spirit, envious spirit, proud spirit, family spirit, mean dirty spirit, assassin spirit, infernal spirit, tory spirit, royal english spirit, pseudo patriot spirit, hypocritical sanctity spirit, professional spirit, Jew spirit & Turk spirit. […] I conceive that every good quality, every moral virtue, and every social principle to be rapidly depreciating in Boston, and that it is at this day the vilest and most profligate spot on Earth, and for myself, my heirs & successors, I would prefer a residence in Algiers, Siberia or Botany Bay, than to live within one hundred miles of the atmosphere tainted by the noxious breath of Ben Russell and the Junto and their satellites.
Wow! Homans certainly didn’t mince words. A little bit of context: Benjamin Russell (1761-1845) was the editor of Boston’s hugely popular and staunchly Federalist Columbian Centinel. He had editorialized against Thomas Jefferson and now regularly attacked his successor James Madison. The “Essex Junto” was a group of hardline New England Federalists, so-called because many of its original members hailed from Essex County, Mass.
It would be difficult to overstate the Junto’s opposition to the Madison administration and the Democratic-Republicans. Governors of Federalist states refused to send their militias to join the war effort. There was even talk of secession. Just before Homans wrote this letter, John Lowell (1769-1840), a prominent member of the movement, published a pamphlet entitled Thoughts in a Series of Letters, in Answer to a Question Respecting the Division of the States. In this pamphlet, Lowell argued that the Louisiana Purchase had been an unconstitutional overreach by Jefferson and a violation of the original compact of the thirteen colonies. In truth, the annexation of all that new territory meant a shift in the balance of power and a dilution of the political and economic influence of the North. Lowell thought the original colonies should expel the western territories from the Union. Russell at the Columbian Centinel agreed.
In his letter, Homans advised Binney to stay strong and ignore the haters:
There is but one course a man can take, and that is to fix the pole star in his mind and steer by his own Compass, without attraction deviation or variation; the privilege of finding fault gives employment to the idle and food to the envious and vicious, and Saint John or Angel Gabriel could not go from the Town House to the head of Long Wharf without having some fault found with them, and even some would be self-righteous enough to cast a stone; in my opinion, no event in the progress of human affairs will ever restore Boston, to a state of social happiness civil liberty & personal independence. Since the Essex Junto took possession of it, every unclean Beast has found an asylum there.
Homans also referred to the capture of the U.S.S. Chesapeake just three weeks before and took one more swipe at Madison’s domestic adversaries: “We have a desperate, enraged and brutal Enemy to deal with. And their friends & advocates are ten times worse and deserve ten times greater damnation.” Though he didn’t use the word, there’s little doubt that he considered these men traitors. In fact, some people called them “Blue Light Federalists” because they were alleged to use blue signal lights to communicate with British ships from the harbor.
For better or worse, bitter partisanship and vitriolic attacks have been a part of our political landscape from the beginning. When Homans’ letter was written, the United States was just 37 years old, and acrimonious debates were already raging about vital issues: territorial expansion, states’ rights, international alliances, and regional conflicts between the mercantile North and the agrarian South.
With only superficial changes, Homans’ words might have been spoken by any number of today’s political commentators. And if Benjamin Russell’s Columbian Centinel were an online publication, it’s easy to imagine what the comments sections would look like!
| Published: Wednesday, 27 May, 2015, 8:00 AM
This Week @ MHS
It is a shortened week here at the Society with a couple of early closures and a long weekend.
Please note that the Library closes early on Tuesday, 19 May, at 3:45PM, and on Wednesday, 20 May, at 3:30PM.
On Tuesday, 19 May, there is an Early American History seminar taking place at 5:15PM. "Slavery in Massachusetts" is a panel discussion featuring Barbara A. Mathews of Historic Deerfield, Gloria McCahon Whiting of Harvard University, and Maria A. Bollettino of Framingham State University. The session considers two papers, Mathews' "'Is This Where Titus Lived?' Researching and Intepreting African-American Presence in 18th-Century Rural New England," and Whiting's "The Body of Liberties and Bodies in Bondage: Dorcas the Blackmore, Dorchester's First Church, and the Legalization of Slavery in the Anglo-Atlantic World." This event is free and open to the public.
And on Wednesday, 20 May, is the second installment of the Utopian Settlement series. "Mr. Ripley's Utopia" consists of a lecture and walking tour at Brook Farm (670 Baker Street in West Roxbury). The event is guided by Peter Drummey, Stephen T. Riley Librarian (MHS) and Maggi Brown, Regional Interpretive Coordinator (DCR). The program begins at 5:30PM - Sold Out
The MHS is CLOSED on Saturday, 23 May - Monday, 25 May, in observance of Memorial Day. Normal hours resume on Tuesday, 26 May.
| Published: Saturday, 16 May, 2015, 3:22 PM
"Covered with Egyptian Darkness": New England's Dark Day of 1780
While the weather in Massachusetts was sunny and beautiful over Mothers' Day weekend, many other places in the country experienced extreme and severe weather ranging from hail and tornadoes to flooding and blizzards. On 19 May 1780, Massachusetts, along with the rest of New England, experienced a different type of extreme weather event in what became known as the "dark day."
Abigail Adams, home in Braintree while John continued his diplomatic mission in Europe, recorded her impressions of "a strange Phenomena":
"On fryday the 19 of May the Sun rose with a thick smoaky atmosphere indicating dry weather which we had for ten days before. Soon after 8 oclock in morning the sun shut in and it rained half an hour, after that there arose Light Luminous clouds from the north west, the wind at south west. They gradually spread over the hemisphere till such a darkness took place as appears in a total Eclipse. By Eleven oclock candles were light up in every House, the cattle retired to the Barns, the fouls to roost and the frogs croaked. The greatest darkness was about one oclock. It was 3 before the Sky assumed its usual look. . . . About 8 oclock in the Evening almost Instantainously the Heavens were covered with Egyptian Darkness, objects the nearest to you could not be discerned tho the Moon was at her full. . . . I hope some of our Philosophical Geniousess will endeavour to investigate so unusual an appearence. It is matter of great consternation to many. It was the most solemn appearence my Eyes ever beheld but the Philosophical Eye can look through and trust the Ruler of the Sky."
In a letter to John Adams, Abigail's uncle Cotton Tufts included his own account and noted the various explanations local people were giving for the strange occurrence:
"This uncommon Darkness, greater in Degree and longer in Duration than had ever been before amongst us occasioned much Speculation, some attributed it to the Influence of the Planets, some to the Effects of a Comet and some to an Eruption of a Vulcano. The Vulgar considered it some as portending great Calamities, others as a Prelude to the general Dissolution of all Things. A close Attention to what appeared before and during this Event will help us to (at least) a probable Solution of this Matter, without having Recourse to the Planets &c. for a Cause. Prior to this, The Woods from Ticonderoga for Thirty Miles downwards had been for some Time on Fire. No Rain for many Days, Winds chiefly at West and N. West. By these the Smoak and Vapours were carried to a great Distance, insomuch that in our Vicinity, the Sky was at Times obscurd, the Air crowded with Smoak and Vapours, a disagreable Smell like what proceeds from Swamps on Fire."
Indeed, Tufts' explanation of forest fires proved correct; however, it was only recently that examination of tree rings in the forests of Ontario, Canada, indeed confirmed a widespread fire sending smoke far into New England, coupled with fog and cloud cover combined to produce a weather event that was remembered for generations.
| Published: Wednesday, 13 May, 2015, 10:00 AM