T‘ 1WD Ob)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- .
.
h h
-
--
.
. J. -
h K
.
Q. a.-
.. ..
.
.
‘l
‘
.
‘1, T’.
._‘
.
I
M. I
~p
'\
l D. .7
.
1“
~.
”I. Q Q
'1 u s
U Q
.-
'u
,.
.-
\
_.
:- .‘.
‘ .
I‘ '
‘v
i.
.. '.
‘I
~
.
J
‘x‘
‘ ‘~
I
. _.
.“ it-
.-‘,
\-
.
.“
.I .7
..~
'. Is
I. -
3
§ I
u“
‘ur‘.
.
‘A
‘.‘\
. .
.
‘n. w.
t .“T
‘V
.
'“n‘
.
u, i
' I §.
-
...~
.
\
.
‘ .
.,r. ,,
. .A
n‘;

 

ABSTRACT

THE AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY, 1825-1865: AN
EXAMINATION OF ITS RELIGIOUS, ECONOMIC,
SOCIAL, AND POLITICAL IDEAS

BY

Harvey George Neufeldt

The four and one-half decades between the War
of 1812 and the Civil War were years of religious,
economic, social, demographic, and political change for
America. Thesechanges were both welcomed and feared.
For many concerned Protestants, the key to guaranteeing
America's future and to controlling the direction of
Change was to Spread a blanket of Christianity and
morality over the nation. In order to accomplish this
taflg,ndnisters and laymen joined together to forge
national, interdenominational societies. One SUCh
Organization was the American Tract Society. The aim Of
this study was to examine the reaction of the Tract
Society to the manifold changes taking place in Jacksonian
America.

The dissertation was not intended to be a history

0f the American Tract Society. The major focus was on

the Society's managers and leading supporters. The study

¥

 

 

 

. Q

 
 
 

v n 1 u p. I
.. v. s-. . u .H. ..~
. . 9 . .
s . . . s . .- . .3
. e :0 s .-.
h. '3 “l. ‘
. n - . \
u l u c . ‘
.0. \ n u u
n u
an ... . .
, a. . < ...\

 

 

Harvey George Neufeldt

examined the background of these men and analyzed their
reaction to change as well as their view of the ideal
Republic. In examining these topics, this writer uti—
lized the publications of both the Tract Society and its
managers.

The organizers and managers of the Tract Society
were drawn primarily from the New York and New England
middle class. The clerical representatives were an elite
group, selected from prominent members in the Congrega-
tional, Presbyterian, Dutch Reformed, Episcopalian, and
Baptist churches. The leading laymen within the Society
were merchants (especially from New York City), land-
owners, lawyers, doctors, and teachers. The majority of
the lay members were moderately well—to-do. Some came
frmnnmdest rural homes, but none came from the indus-
trial working class.

Although many of its clerical members were well
educated, the Society contributed to the anti-intellec-
tual tendencies of its day. Its vast number of tracts
and volumes stressed simplicity and correct conduct.

The Society emphasized action and results rather than

reflection.

The managers of the Tract Society did not reject
all change. They accepted voluntarism and interdenomina-
tionalism in religion. They de-emphasized God's sover-

eignty and stressed human ability. Although they

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

" 'v-.
o .
-‘ 'e 0-. 1
o
.
. ...
.
-“-- D
' .' 'U-t
". ' VI-
‘ *i .
‘ 0
‘ —
-- ..
-
.-
' 0v
.
.. .-
._ c
c. .
9
J
\-
‘Q
l . .
‘.. -
...- f
A
I
‘
‘7‘ .
- .“¢..
.
_p
" h i
'-
“
-.
o .
>1 ..
‘4 I .
.
._' ‘
o
.
‘-
.K ..
'.. v _
.-
. a
\Q '-
.~
.v
.
.-
. . <.
-' .
'-
o
.
-‘.
u
s
- ‘.'
‘3‘ 4
c..
‘.
v ‘.
“u s,-
.. - c
'u. n a
c
.-
‘Q r
s... '0
a v.
.n
0-: .
“ .
sh
.
.
‘O
u. a
u. ..
0“. ‘~_
v‘
.‘v
.
‘-
n
' t
.
_.
n .
u a",
‘-,M
v

 

Harvey George Neufeldt

disliked large corporations, they gloried in technology
and industry. They feared the untamed West and the City
but accepted them providing they could be recreated in
their own image.

The Society both reflected and moulded public
oghfion of its day. Its fears that urbanization, wealth,
immigration, population migration, excessive individu—
alism, political partisanship, and geographic sectional-
ism were undermining the foundations of the Republic
were felt by many. Although the Society's emphasis on
education ran counter to a dominant trend within the
RePUblic, its anti-intellectual tendencies were typical
forjxs day. Its optimism evident in its millennial
and nationalistic views was shared by others. It
reflected a commonly held assumption that a drastic
reordering of society was unnecessary. The key to
reflnmlwas individual moral regeneration and self-help-
This PhilOSOphy had its limitations when it came to the

faCtorY worker and was a complete failure when it came

to the slave .

-.- .

 

 

THE AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY, 1825-1865: AN
EXAMINATION OF ITS RELIGIOUS, ECONOMIC,

SOCIAL, AND POLITICAL IDEAS

BY

Harvey George Neufeldt

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of History

1971

@ COpyright by
I‘IARVEY GEORGE NEUFELDT

1971

For Anne

 

 

 

 

 

.
'-
. O
I .t' 0.
ts... ... ..
- .. ‘l .
.. ‘. ' ..
- r
.,
..
. _ “
4' ‘5 __-.
. . . '.
. .- ..
..._. .’ ..
.__. .
.. " 7
~- ~.‘.-.
t .
.' , ‘.
.s-_.. l
\" 'u..
. I
~"|I .
i“ M'-
s. “‘
\
.
. _~-
.,‘.
‘II
\ a...
a - --
.‘ _\.
‘i
--.
~.
.‘ ‘.' ‘
s . '
'-
."'
s
'|
o‘ ‘-
" D.
.- ‘~ ~
“\ ‘v-
a...
. I
'~
I. .‘v‘
u“ ‘ _~
' ~
Q
’~‘.
.
u
~
-.
‘;~-
‘\U‘\
~. ’2.’
a C~‘
I.
v
.I
..
. O
‘Q t..."
. F.
I. a,
I ‘.
n
a.
v
‘ ,-
'n
1‘0 _
I A
.‘ D.:
t I ‘ ‘
“

AC KNOWLEDGMENTS

I am indebted to several institutions and indi—
viduals for their assistance and guidance in the prepara-
tion of this study.

The Canada Council Fellowships (1967-1970) assisted
HR in my doctoral studies and dissertation research. I am
indebted to the staffs of several libraries including the
Inter-Library Loan Department of the Michigan State Univer—
Sity Library, the Mid-West Lending Center at Chicago, and
the Burton Historical Section of the Detroit Public Library.

Several individuals have aided and encouraged me in
my research. I am indebted to Professor Frederick Williams
and Professor John Harrison for their editorial comments.
Professor Douglas T. Miller first turned my attention to
the American Tract Society as a possible research topic.
His criticisms and suggestions were invaluable throughout
the writing of this dissertation. Finally, I wish to
EXpress my appreciation to my wife Anne for her help and
moral encouragement throughout the years of graduate study
and research. I am also indebted to her for typing the

rough drafts of this study.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Chapter
I. AN HISTORICAL STUDY . . . . . . . . 7

II. A BIOGRAPHICAL STUDY—-THE CLERGY . . . . 59
III. A BIOGRAPHICAL STUDY—-THE LAITY . . . . 124
IV. RELIGIOUS VIEWS. . . . . . . . . . 193
V. ETHICAL IDEAS . . . . . . . . . . 262
VI.’ WORK, LEISURE TIME, AND PROPERTY . . . . 338
VII. SOCIAL VIEWS. . . . . . . . . . . 397
VIII. LIBERTY AND ORDER, THE CITY AND THE WEST . 454
Ix. NATIONAL UNITY . . . . . . . . . . 492
x. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . 531

BIBLIOGMPHY I O O O O O O O O O O O O 540

iv

--..

 

 

KEY TO TITLES IN FOOTNOTES

Annual Repprt, Bost. Annual Report of the American Tract
Society, Presented at Boston, Vols. IX—LI. Andover
and Boston, l823~1865, *TOn list of available volumes
see Bibliography.)

 

 

 

Annual Report, N.Y. Annual Report of the American Tract
Society, Instituted at New York, 1825, Vols. I-XL.
New York: American Tract Society, 1826-1865. (On
list of available volumes see Bibliography.)

 

 

Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society. Annual Report of
the New York City Tract Society, Vols. I-XXXIX. New
York, 1828—1865. (On list of available volumes see
Bibliography.)

 

 

 

The Christian Almanac. The Christian Almanac(k), Vols. I-
II. (Boston?), Lincoln and Edmands, 1821-1824, 1826,
1831, 1833-1835.

 

 

2&9 Christian A1manac--Mich. The Christian Almanac for
MIChiganLAforithe Year of Our Lord and Saviour, Jesus
Christ, Vol. II. Detroit, 1838-1840.

 

Qfle Christian Almanac--Western District. The Christian
Almanac for the Western District, for the Year of Our
Lord and SaViOur, Jesus ChriSt, Vol. II. Utica,
I828-1830, 1832.

 

 

The Family Almanac. The (Illustrated) Family Christian
Almanac for the United States. New York: American
Tract Society, 1842-1861. (On list of available
Almanacs see Bibliography.)

 

 

Tracts. Tracts of the American Tract Society: General
Series, I2RVols. New York: American Tract Society,
n. .

 

 

 

 

u‘t

 

 

 

INT RODUCT ION

The four and one-half decades between the War of
1812 and the Civil War were years of change for American
society. Vast numbers of settlers were rushing into the
Mississippi Valley in search of cheap land. Other migrants
moved from old established rural communities into the grow-
ing urban centers. During these decades, particularly
after 1830, several million European immigrants came to
America, many of whom made their way into the urban ghettos.

America's economic institutions changed markedly
during this period. The transportation revolution created
a national market which stimulated the growth of cities and
factories. For the ambitious entrepreneurs, urbanization,
factories, and a widening marked spelled economic oppor-
tunities. But for many of the displaced journeymen, immi-
grants, and other urban workers, these innovations often
meant low wages, unemployment, and poor working conditions.

The religious institutions also underwent a trans-
formation during this era. The last vestiges of establish-
ment disappeared. Churches were forced to rely solely on

VOluntary support. The trend to voluntarism in religion

 

 

 

 

' "'U...
" -.~-..
M
A D
g

..

;'. a.

“~00 . .
' o

‘0‘. .‘-

oA_ 0 O

.' 0...-

I“: 1 .
’ t -
\~, '

.-

. I

. . ‘
N...: .
..,
.
D.-
‘.;
.
,' _' ..

“~ ‘ l

" o: ..
.;..~.

. - '

It-.. D
I.

ll

\ ‘..
.
c...

‘»

4:. .

... ‘0‘.V
‘ »
~..

‘1
. "v
". .9-

' u

‘-.; .~

‘-

i.-

“ u o

N'. .v‘
.'"~
~
D .‘_
s

I.
C ..
-._

.

I u

\‘ n
I g..

-
‘~

b-

v. I‘

.. a

‘- “.-
._I
'5
’.
. n
.' flu
.-
.

”u.-

. u

0“

A. ‘b

. .-
._ _
.‘v

‘

«—\

. .

." ‘

CI .

A
‘t

t
K A

.

‘p‘nu_~
‘ s
.t

”I

.t

. s

..,

\ ‘.
“'t .
‘V p.

‘

.

.

.

n "

.b‘

v v.
‘ 9
is.
y

.

.._

«P.

y

~
\“
t
C.

Q

.

\

.t
u.

.;‘

~
* as

-
n

was accompanied by a shift in theological emphasis; clergy-
men increasingly emphasized human ability rather than God's
sovereignty. Another Change in the religious scene was
brought about by the large influx of Roman Catholic immi-
grants. A Protestant Republic was gradually becoming a
pluralistic nation.

Changes were evident in the social and political
Spheres as well. Artificial distinctions in society were
rejected. Increasing lip service was paid to the "common
man." Suffrage restrictions for white males were removed
in most states. In order to win elections both Whigs and
Democrats attempted to persuade the voters that theirs
was the party of the peOple.

These changes were simultaneously welcomed and
feared. They promised a bright but also an uncertain
future. For some persons these innovations meant greater
economic Opportunities and freedom from cumbersome moral,
economic, and social restraints. But for others, these
Changes threatened their accustomed leadership roles in
society. This was eSpecially true for the Federalist
politicians, merchants, landowners, and clergy whose social
Status was dependent, at least in part, on education and
inherited wealth. The Federalists were especially sensi—
tive to immigration and population migration since they

felt most at home in ordered, homogeneous communities.

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

a... i.
' s- It
'9. ..
. '
... .Io . . .- ’.
.-.....: ...-.c .‘
o
. .. .'_:. v. .
.. '. ."..-o... .-
s . ..
--
.0 o. z.._-- ‘
\. on 0", ..O-..
‘0‘
Ir.- 0. .I"__ .7.
‘-. no .-.I _.--.
I
.-~. ._.‘. . -
. I ‘ .
- o-Q-O.... "
‘
o .-.,' i - .
.. u _. ... ~
~ .
.. . ' ~
I. o.“ ‘_’ ‘ .
-‘ —. . .
. -‘eo-A ‘
. ' 5-. .,
"‘a.’ s ‘ '
u-u.‘.' ‘ .-
o
."‘ ‘
s. , .
. . -
.-.',' .. .“ . .
0 HO..- ‘ - ‘
s
» ..,--
‘7'. :, ' a .
. -“ , . ’
.. L‘- g
5.
.. .“..
..~.; _'_.. ». .
..'Q s .'
. .‘ .
.
,‘ .
-~ .
i'.
._..‘
' o
a
. O
v.
we o~‘:. ‘5' -'
a ‘..-‘.I
Q
‘ .
‘-.'; “ g,
...'0 ~ '.
‘ ”,1 ..'
n
.
v'.
\ -. '
\. .
. D
Q...- V—.
s‘ -
.5. I‘.
.
.‘,.
3."; u
~.,_ I‘;' ‘
-‘
a ‘ ‘.‘ .
‘F ‘.
. “n ‘-
"m: .-
Q
's
.' .
V -.
s“ .a
V‘ :‘ :
u"~. .
Q“-.
m,
’. .‘L
‘ A
‘ u
‘t.'.'c. ,
5 h” .
"'s a ,-
~~
'Q
‘ u
...
kn u..
‘.l~- ‘
“

D
(I)

 

For many concerned Protestants the key to guaran-
teeing the future of the American Republic was to spread a
blanket of Christianity and morality over the nation. In
order to accomplish this task ministers and laymen joined
together to forge national, interdenominational societies.
One such institution was the American Tract Society.

A major aim of this study was to examine the reac-
tion of the American Tract Society to the religious,
economic, social, political, and demographic changes tak-
ing place in Jacksonian America. This dissertation was
not intended to be a history of the Tract Society. The
first chapter is the only section devoted to.giving an
historical sketch of the Society and a description of its
method of operation.

The time span (1825-1865) was selected for several
reasons. The first date, 1825, needs little explanation.
This was the year in which the American Tract Society was
organized in New York City. The selection of the date,
1865, can be justified on several grounds. By this date
the divisive force of slavery had been eliminated. Reli-
gious pluralism, industrialization, and urbanization had
become realities by 1865. Even before this date Americans
had settled and tamed the Mississippi Valley. The issues
Which had brought the American Tract Society into existence

in 1825 were no longer issues in 1865.

“‘Ci

.-
-.: ‘n..' _
't.....
. a
n ' .‘
s
_. .

 

 

 

on!
9

CI;

Ill

 

 

w
(I)

The American Tract Society is important because this
institution reflected the fears, aspirations, and values
cm a large segment of the American population. The Society
emmhasized thrift, work, simplicity, and morality. These
same values were found in such nineteenth-century textbooks

as the McGuffey Readers. Like many other Americans, mem-

 

bers of the Tract Society were both fearful and optimistic
cwer the impact that the increase of wealth, industriali—
zation, urbanization, and the Westward expansion would have
tmon the Republic. They shared a commonly held belief that
immigration, excessive individualism, religious sectari-
amism, political partisanship, and geographical sectionalism
Immld jeopardize liberty and national unity. And yet,
éhspite these fears, they were confident that the young
FMpublic was destined to fill a special place in God's
kingdom.

The American Tract Society not only reflected but
also moulded public opinion. Its presses turned out mil—
lions of pages of tracts, magazines, almanacs, and books.
The Society's literature was written with the average man
in mind; it was intended for the masses and not for the
intellectual elites. Many of the Society's publications
nede their way into remote areas where schools, books,
magazines, and newspapers were scarce or non-existent.
Consequently, it is only reasonable to assume that the Tract

Society had an impact on the popular culture of its day.

.0.

.-

.u~

 

 

 

 

s s .
Fe 5 b
A... :-
\ he
‘nufi ‘ e
.u. NI.
o.\ .et‘
a . . s
1.

 

eon AN‘
5 . A . I...
u.. is
s \ .m:
I Axh ‘ \
-\~
.‘5 el"
e I I\
~ vu\ flow.
. a I

A brief explanation should be made concerning the
scope of this study. After a brief historical sketch in
chapter one, chapters two and three have been devoted to a
biographical analysis of several of the main clerical and
lay supporters of the Tract Society. These brief biogra-
phies attempt to answer such questions as: Did these men
come from an elite group in society? Did they come pri-
marily from an urban or rural background? Did they hail
from areas which were gaining or losing in the population
migrations? Chapters four and five examine the religious
and ethical views of the Tract Society. The last four
chapters deal with the Society's reaction to economic,
social, demographic, and political changes taking place in
nineteenth-century America.

A few comments would be in order concerning the
historical evidence utilized in the study. This writer has
relied on two major sources of documents. One has been the
various publications of the American Tract Society at New
York, the American Tract Society at Boston, and the New
York City Tract Society. Included in this group are the
ILnnual Reports, Tracts, magazines, and almanacs. A second
Source has been the biographies, sermons, and other publi-
cations of individual members and officers of the Tract
Societies. This, however, raises a problem for the his-
torian. Since the membership of the American Tract Society

was very large, it is unreasonable to assume that all

 

 

 

 

 

a

as

.

' ' a. .
'\
-s....'

I...

 

-
a...‘-..

 

 

 

nembers agreed at all times with all the statements and
policies of the officers who operated the Societies.
Consequently this study has relied primarily on the writings
and statements of large doners, members of the executive
committee, or members who were elected to fill honorary

positions such as president, vice-president, or director.

 

 

CHAPTER I

AN HISTORICAL STUDY

On May 11, 1825, a group of Protestant ministers
and laymen gathered at the City Hotel of New York. The
group included some of the leading members of the evangeli-
cal-Calvinist camp. It was a concerned group, anxious over
the future of Protestant Christianity and the American
Republic. But it was also an Optimistic group, hopeful
about the future of Protestant Christianity and the Ameri-
can Republic. And so the concerned, yet Optimistic, Protes-
tants gathered in New York to forge another national society
for God. By evening the American Tract Society had been
"solemnly organized."1

The American Tract Society was neither the first
nor the last benevolent institution to begin regionally and
then mushroom into a national organization. In 1816, dele-
gates from various States had met in New York City to organ-
ize the American Bible Society. Eight years later the
American Sunday School Union replaced the Philadelphia
Sunday and Adult School Union. In 1815, New England Congre-

gationalists had formed the American Education Society.

 
 
 

. .. 1
C. . u ._ . . .. . o . .x. I
. h v. . - i I h.
.. .. p. ... .. 0. on ... . u. a ._ vs V.
O. r. p» v. 2‘ . ., .4. a e. a - ti. . :-
... o. ... a: .. . v. be u. .h.
.s- .n .I o., . s I .Q a a In . u a.
‘4‘ D. I5. . . 0- O 5 ‘\ Q 7n . Q DI:
U . u 5. . o a. . .c. \u. ... . . . e is
o.o so. ... .o. 5. u . . s .- .‘o as» n o
.u. .. . . a. ... .. .._ a. v. 2. ...
.s~ ‘4. v. o . ... «a . .u. v.
. . u . o. a. o. ..
u: o: u A. .. ... . o e a . x. H o 2.. :-
n . o s .9. a u . Q Q in I
h u s I . Ix o u 1.. c a
.o .. . . . u .. . u . .s . :s
. 9‘ h. .- st. I 1 O \‘n. I. \ us.

 

Its purpose was to subsidize needy college and seminary
students and thereby increase the supply of orthodox minis-
ters. In 1826 the American Home Missionary Society was
(nganized by the Presbyterian and Congregational churches
to aid in the spread and growth of Calvinist churches,
especially along the frontier. And there were other socie-
ties--the American Colonization Society (1817), the Society
for the Promotion of Temperance (1826), the American Peace
Society (1828), and the American Antislavery Society
(1333).2

The American penchant for organizing societies was
especially evident on Anniversary Week held annually in
thy in New York City. Since many societies had their
Imadquarters in New York, and since many individuals served
as officers in more than one society, it was customary to
set aside one week in May during which time many of the
societies would hold their annual meetings. The purpose
Of Anniversary Week was to conduct business, to gather
together for prayer, and to build up enthusiasm and support
for the work of the societies. In 1834 the following
societies held meetings during Anniversary Week in New York:
The American Seamen's Friend Society, American Antislavery
Society, Revival Tract Society, American Tract Society,
American Peace Society, New York Sunday School Union, Ameri-
can Bible Society, New York Colonization Society, American

Home Missions Society, American Baptist Home Missions

 

..
. .
h -

O _
~ r. ..
L we.
-“ q. .
o. .r ..
s“ as.
L. l s
A .-. t
C. s. v.
~\t an. n-
. at.

no

I .l
O. . . .0
.D. .Q
l. L ..

 

 

 

u v.
.
‘5 .

O. u
s. g; t
..

a. s. .s
a. .

I. ...
. .~ L.
u. .«I
A. ... ..
..O
I. I‘
I. -.‘
.
xx \

.
“NIB

 

 

 

 

a“
8 . '1'
Va .3
.\ Mt.
.N. .n‘
sh UH
Ԥ
It:
at: P-
u .-
.QI
c~e
ht

 

 

 
  

. .\ s No
a. i: . a . x
. s F~ a» hid ‘9.
a ‘ .9 no 5e
.K v n ~ c 4‘ C a .\ a
A! a: f»
at. n» in Wu
0 Q. sun
L» ' A: In
.I a. ‘5‘ t ‘ F d A\V
h a I H snfi -‘
La . I HI.
. § .R I
2.... . .. s 1..

 

 

Society, Seventh Commandment Society, Presbyterian Educa—
tion Society, American and Presbyterian Education Society--
united, Foreign Missions Board, New York City Temperance
Society, and New York Infant and Sunday School Society.
Lest these meetings did not keep the delegates sufficiently
cmcupied, prayer meetings were scheduled from Tuesday to
Friday at 5:30 A.M.3

The origin of tract societies, like that of the
Ifible Society, can be traced back to England. In May,
1799, the Religious Tract Society was formed in London, in
part to combat the "blasphemous and licentious tracts"
Emblished by the "infidels of France."4 Reverend George
Emrder, one of the originators of the Religious Tract
mxfiety and a minister at Coventry, had previously written
six tracts under the title, "Village Tracts." When Rever-
end Burder's publisher suddenly went out of business, the
ndnister and his friends began to think seriously of
organizing their own society which could be relied upon to
publish tracts at a cheap rate. Their hopes and plans were
realized on May 9, 1799.5

The publication of tracts in the United States, as
in England, can be traced back to the efforts of concerned
individuals. The formation of tract societies came after
individuals had given their time and money to publish
tracts. One of the first men to write tracts in the United

States was an immigrant English clergyman, Reverend John

....(

 

 

.‘cce

.uco '

 

v.

.‘~ b

.n» O
is

p . o
v.
.7

.a a

L.

a .A
p..
Q 3‘
L»
I... r.
u .y .4:
A w
&b
F. no.
. u D.
at. n.-
. a
I.
D‘III

 

» .l
v. .n
F- “I.
:«
so.
..-. . .
s. .u.
a~u Q C
s
Q. '0.
an i a
...
a. ..
.nlx

vs
a a . x
U... . a
-L a a ..
z H. \
. e A a
.I I
.u- is
4 s L s .q a
1. l. .:
I I ‘o \ b
I .II

.t.‘ . Q
Mu rs
.. a t a
S 5 «a»
.1 . ‘
Eu an
~\~ )e
.‘ k 3‘
.uM b\
r:
l I H
De .5.
1. sv.

u I
a a r .3
C»
Wu
L. $ s
E C
I“ a
s s it
~ ‘ b
‘ fl
. \
\u.1
a...\

 

 

lO

Stanford, who had begun Circulating tracts in England around
1780 and continued to do so when he moved to New York City.
Another individual to print tracts in America was Reverend
Jedediah Morse, of Charlestown, Massachusetts. In the fall
of 1802 he printed 32,806 copies of 19 tracts for distribu—
tion by missionaries in Maine, Kentucky, and Tennessee.
(Reverend Morse's aim forshadowed one of the major goals
cm the American Tract Society, namely, to diffuse a Chris—
tian influence on the frontier.) Meanwhile Reverend David
Tappan, professor of Divinity at Harvard College, was also
involved in the work of printing and publishing tracts.6

For one individual to diffuse a Christian influence
cwer a large area was impossible. But where one individual
failed, a group might succeed. The example of the Religious
Tract Society formed in London was not lost upon the Ameri—
cans. In 1803 New England led the way with the formation
cm the "Massachusetts Society for Promoting Christian
Knowledge." The promoters of the Society, including Rever-
end Jedediah Morse, were spurred on by the generous offer
cm their own Lieutenant Governor, Samuel Phillips, who
donated A51,000, "five-sixths of the interest of which was
to be expended in the distribution of pious books in
Andover, his native town" and another 163,000 “for, 'a
fibre general distribution of like pious books.”7

Between 1803 and 1825 a host of regional and denomi-

national tract societies were organized. In 1807 Reverend

5-...

Mk

 

O

.4. ..:'

o- .‘ ' .

‘. h

-

.~ .... ._..'

on - .‘-. _.

“ ..

l
.. - ."
' o. . . .b
I“... .«c- t .
‘ .

.‘.' ‘Fsg

. .~.‘ A. h- '.

‘h‘; ‘h. . .5
I .

I‘ .- . l‘ -r v ‘.
. \
~..e..‘- .. “ .

.cl. :. I'.--.

.

o... .: :_-.‘-."
I

.I-' I. ‘

Q

\.I 5 -'
O U i... ~~

‘3... -

o‘ I. - .
\' ...

o of. ‘. .~
6.. ‘-
.- ...: ._ _’_ A
i .-... ‘
5‘ _ I
.. .I“ ‘- Ii" ‘ 4
D .~". .I‘

‘l.

. - ‘ .".
‘e. '.

a. .. ' - .
n ~_,"
a.
\t' ~
'. ’;‘. C.
5 ~-

A.‘

\.-‘ ‘. i
.-..,,u- ..;';

l.“.
N‘-
-\ ‘n .‘
I“. .FA‘LA‘ .
‘ -4
C-.-~“
.-_‘
o ‘ .
us 'c'. .
' Era.“
_
\ . ‘

t
u

u‘ .

e.‘ . ‘.
u . H
I .v‘ ‘ "_r
o v,.‘\

‘ I

"t a. .
N sire".
‘r“
I",
‘u D‘
C
a
Ial,‘ “‘.‘ ‘
\ea- Cav‘
‘w-
‘
.‘.
v' .
e‘ =
I
. \x. dc..:."
‘I‘ n
‘A‘

.

bl-

.J N

‘
'-.c.
H p“. s
‘5 h.
J .‘

 

 

 

 

-‘
'. .0
.-.-§.

ll

Timothy Dwight of Yale College became president of the newly
organized Connecticut Religious Tract Society at New Haven.
The next year the trustees of the Vermont Missionary Society
were given control of the Vermont Religious Tract Society.
In 1813, the Evangelical Tract Society was organized at
Boston, and the Albany Religious Tract Society was organized
at Albany, New York. Two years later Philadelphia had its
own Religious Tract Society of Philadelphia. (This Tract
Society was eventually taken over by the American Sunday
School Union.) Between 1816 and 1817 tract societies
;sprang up in Hartford, Connecticut, Baltimore, and Newark.
.JEven the western city of Cincinnati could boast of having
.jits own Western Navigation Bible and Tract Society of
‘EZZincinnati by 1819. Meanwhile, denominations also formed
their own tract societies. The Protestant Episcopal Church
<:::-rganized several of its own societies, beginning in 1810
“*€"ith the "Protestant EpiSCOpal Tract Society" in New York.
:JE: an 1817, Reverend Nathan Bangs led the Methodists in organ-
:ie--=2ing the New York Methodist Tract Society. Between 1811
‘Es‘dltnd 1824 the Baptist organized several tract societies
:i"3lracluding the Baptist Evangelical Tract Society (1811), and

1t:‘Zlbfle Baptist General Tract Society (1824). By 1825, there
‘~a>

$3:

‘Efiaere over forty different tract societies in the United

fi.:=-ates of which thirty-three claimed to be interdenomi-
til
isal'tiona1.3

 

 

«
.I
5‘:
S ;
.I .
| Q
- h
I .'
o.
C ‘
. "-. ,
‘.
"§ -
.0
Q
.“
.7 - .
.. "
‘. .
.. I
~ .
“u - ..“
._.'-‘
. . .
~;. -._'
"a ‘0.
.v' '
Q.-
-.'
V-
o. ,
.. 0.
-
.‘_
n ' .
.. ‘
r.,: . ..
U i
Q ~.‘;
. I
n.’ .
.l
" (nu
.. Ou.‘
‘-..
L“.
.‘I " .
- r
R‘-
‘ \
lo.
‘ a
.
v "
a“ .'
‘.
I‘
.
.... ' ,'
u . '
"I I...‘
“-
...‘ .
.
I.
..
‘ 0-
" I.
‘ t||. -

 

 

 

 

0' .'
V-..‘ ...'.
.

“L e... .
., .

O. u,.

set. .‘. .-
.. ‘
- -.'..v.'

 

‘ s._ ‘
.C
I. ‘ fl ‘
Du. . ‘
3’. .. |
.‘A. |‘
..- ' -
.-. _
C. - I.
.._
O._
’C

c-.‘
a
\ ...
av .";.
‘ Iv
. .7
.- o .
o
4“, ‘
.‘

O-

.0.

e

p

12

Of all the non-denominational tract societies
organized prior to 1825 in the United States, two deserve
special mention since they were to play the major role in
the organization of the American Tract Society in 1825.
These were the New York Religious Tract Society organized
in 1812 and the New England Tract Society organized at
Andover-Boston in 1814. By its first anniversary in 1813,
the New York Religious Tract Society had published 38,586
tracts. Its total receipts for the year were listed at
$696. By 1815 its receipts had declined to $139. This
‘was probably due, at least in part, to the depressed
economic conditions caused by the War of 1812. Thereafter
its receipts rose to over $2,000 in 1819, dropped to just
under $850 in 1820 and then rose steadily until 1825 when
its annual receipts exceeded $5,500. By 1825 the New York
group had published a total of 4,316,694 tracts of which
over 30 per cent had been published in the last year alone.
Meanwhile the New York Religious Tract Society had formed
auxiliaries in various cities including Augusta, Georgia,
Lexington, Kentucky, and Providence, Rhode Island.9

The New England Tract Society, located at Andover,
was even larger in scope than the New York Religious Tract
Society. In 1814, several leading.Congregationalists
including Andover's Congregational minister, Reverend
Justin Edwards, Charlestown's minister, Reverend Jedediah

Morse, and the Andover Seminary Professor, Reverend Leonard

-~ I..( .‘4’. -
“ olol .‘O. Q
I
- . ‘ ,.

. . : -
" ' .' -- -0
F ’ ’ rv ~-
w a
1.. .l.-... _

 

 

 

 

' Op
_ b. 0.;
“-- c-..--.
.. . ,
~ -9 .- _ ‘
"'~~.‘ U.‘
‘. . 9- ...' -
'-.._ t o '
.‘o - - ‘
‘I
L 0- u
. —
. .., .
. __
. ' . on. .
"‘v. u -0 -
v ‘ .
a _‘
9
... . ,.
. .._
“a- a ‘o .
"'.-....' c
I
--l.‘-
° , ’o.

"c .—
"'u -r
-..

. t
' §-_
'~---o \ o
O " _
s.
.
.' 5..
" . ~-
‘b-
'..|. fi '
O .V. .
-
.‘ ;;
v--.q
I.
I.
-‘ l
. .
H‘
‘ .I“‘
I
.
.
.
.
~ A..
.. s.
‘-
0
5
..
~‘I l
‘.-.r v. ‘
._‘
h' I' v.‘
o “. fi-
c_“
u
\ ‘-I II
.
~Q - -
‘o"‘”. -..
"-.'
.
.,~
. . .
..-a .
u‘ a -
N ‘n

 

'n-‘ s
.L
”a :0
. ,‘
1"
‘ ‘
u -v,
‘s‘ ~- .~ ,
v H
'a. u,
U.'
.1.»
I. l.
I
l .1".

 

 

 

13

WOods, took part in the formation of the New England Tract
Society. A sum of $3,830 was raised in Andover, Boston,
Salem, Newbury, and adjacent towns. Within three months
two volumes containing fifty tracts were printed. In 1816
the Society was officially incorporated by the Massachusetts
Legislature and seven years later its name was officially
changed to the American Tract Society. The change in name
revealed the intention of its promoters to become a national
organization.10 By 1825 its annual receipts had risen to
over $10,000. From 1814 to 1825 it had published over five
million copies of nearly 200 tracts, which had been distrib-
uted through its numerous auxiliaries and depositories in
twenty-three states and territories.11

That New England should be the home of a national
Christian society was in keeping with the region's history.
The early Puritans had attempted to carry out their "Errand
in the Wilderness" along the Massachusetts coast. New
England had been the home of the Mathers--both Increase and
Cotton--as well as the home of Jonathan Edwards. Although
Harvard could no longer be considered an orthodox strong-
hold, New England still had Yale College, Andover Seminary,
and later, the Seminary at East Windsor.

Consequently, it was only natural that the New
England organization should take steps to become a national
tract society. Not only had the New England Tract Society

changed its name to the American Tract Society in 1824, it

‘4'-

‘ ‘ I ... ....:
a-...

. v
p
s . hv~-' \D- -.
. ' Cr
“"‘ -o u...
' I
... -- '
§’.
‘.c.. ...t' .
n... I . 1
' s
‘& ‘._

 

 

 

'. l. . . . o
I .
\....~_.' -~.'
... . .. .. '.
o
NICO-.CQ‘, .' - -’
. ’ I.
.... - ~. _.,’__
7 v
..
a-._‘._ ' I
’ U
.. . .:
‘4. .
ON .I... . h
_ .
.
C. ,-
.
j .'r ‘-I —
... ‘ ‘Ol
. H-.. __ .
.
u:.
”6., '0- ‘
— . ‘. ‘
.I
' ' ‘.s a
a.” .. O— - I
u. .
c a ...'_ ..l
“I v 4
._‘

 

 

‘7 _
cu -.‘; r
n.
.
u
-
"\.‘-..'
. y.\ A; h, ‘
1‘...-
-. “.
.\
l‘ .- I
N: s.“
s .'.
"“6 a. .
‘-
\“'l.
"2;... .
ast.‘ I :;~
. “. .
‘-
.; .,_
. I .1 1-
u_ h
I it“.‘ . "
l 4 ..
.l‘
\: I.
H. "I.
~a¢..fl 7;,
t“
i
‘4
.' V
.\c n .
u ‘ v
:\ .‘v- ’1"
.. “.‘
.9“
3‘30.“
u. “
C~ a‘
““55 =
u
‘I
\E ‘bu
h‘:fla .
H
b

14

had also, in 1822, appointed a young theological student
at Andover Seminary, Reverend William A. Hallock, to become
its full-time, paid agent for a year. Hallock, who thus
began his long association with Tract Societies in October
1822, was instructed to "disseminate information concerning
the Society," obtain donations, and "furnish Tracts for
circulation throughout the country, and as Providence . . .
[should] open the way, throughout the world."12

However, when the American Tract Society was organ-
ized in 1825, its managers decided to locate the Society's
headquarters in New York City rather than in New England.
New York had several assets which New England lacked.
First, there was New York's location and size. The real
strength of the New England group was in Andover, not in
Boston. Andover was merely a country town. New York, on
the other hand, was a growing metrOpolis. Andover's great-
ness lay in the past when the small towns and the rural
countryside dominated the scene. New York's greatness lay
in the future when the urban metropolis would become an
increasingly familiar landmark in America. Furthermore:
the opening of the Erie Canal in the very same year that
the national Tract Society was organized ensured New York's
future growth and importance. This meant that the Middle
Atlantic States and not the South or New England would tap

the trade of the rapidly eXpanding West.13

a
1'-.. ' ‘
‘2' ....s v.
. ._
~ ..... .-
“‘ . "' ..-
‘ 0- -.. - .
I
" ""'-'oo- .-
’| b . ‘ . .-
“ ‘fiou..‘..._'

v
‘. g-o. .;'-._r
— u
“‘ "Ol coat ..
.
‘.._ " ‘
. w ’. . .
um... ‘ ._ '
'2’ .. .
‘----.-' ,_-.‘_. '
.

 

 

 

 

 

‘ - " -
k .,
4‘. .u‘.‘ ”- .rg .
_ O _
- C- M,
iv. - ‘0
‘4 ‘ ‘ ’ _- ox
‘...'.“. a. 4-. o
.
’ P
‘ "L' -. v '
‘ 1
~.. ’. .1. --.
-.l o. ’. .' .
. :
-‘." v“ I. I.
.O.
.- ..‘- . .
.l
2 .h.‘ o 1-.
'o
:~ ~.. ..
-.n..: .fiv; '. .
. - ___.‘
‘,Q
.‘ o. _
1‘.-l\‘ ~~~ .
. u
u. ~"’0-_.
C
-
-,‘. -. u.~
a... . ._. .
cl _ ‘
Q-.
4.... .
..__
.. -..
.i. - a .
l-.' .0 ’~.
““ ~u
a
Q
R: ‘
a-
. .
,5
n‘_. -'
b‘-.
6 -.
._ - .
"u s’lh .‘
. ‘ fl 0. I. -
d‘._ ‘ "
4
.
,
‘ o.
v‘ .6
s
L-
' I
.
RI. _'c_. .
\ a_ ‘v-fl
.‘~ c (‘9.
6..
VI
'1. c
N
no... '.’
‘ D
“‘ no. I
‘1
_.

 

15

New York City had more than size and location; it
also had money. Although the Andover group could rely on
a few merchants, much of its support would have to come from
landowners, farmers, and professionals such as lawyers or
doctors. The New York City Tract Society could rely on an
increasing number of well—to_do merchants whose contribu-
tions would be measured not in tens or fifties but in hun—
dreds or thousands of dollars. This was evident even before
the national organization had become a reality. As soon as
a number of New Yorkers began to seriously consider the
possibility of transforming the New York Religious Tract
Society into a national organization, a series of prayer
meetings were held and money was pledged for the erection
of a Tract Society House. First $10,000 was pledged by
four individuals; this was soon increased to $12,500, then
to $20,000 and "by a subsequent effort to $25,852.95."14
This $25,000 donation reflected a change taking place in
American society as a whole; namely the rising importance
and influence of the urban centers and the decline of the
rural areas and small towns.

One further advantage of New York City was its
religious community. The leaders of the Tract Society at
.Andover were drawn primarily from one denomination, the
'Congregationalists. The New York Society, on the other
Lhand, could rely on prestigious Baptist, Presbyterian,

JDutch Reformed, and Episc0pa1ian churches for support.

 

r 'I-pu... --

-5.-.
~GooO
-5. - 1

 

... .._,v -.
\
L " .I a - -
~'o'.- '...,.
.
..... . __ '
to - . ‘
‘fi' ' in..- .
.
s... c.‘._' '
. I
~ " 0-0..-. .
o-._ . ‘. ..
_) .
~ -.,,‘.‘ "
. ‘
' " o~. _ '
- ., .
- " o.._ -. ‘.
‘ ;v..,_ .
O. " i
0‘.- O...— ..I
. ._ - '
..' .- °' .. .
I " ...-‘ -'
._. “-
\‘- .-‘ ' -
.~ --..~
s
.l .‘ Q... ~ 5
‘ I. w
u.._ ..~
.
.N
-'.. .2- - - _
.‘u_. .
-.,‘~
.
. \
O.-
-‘-
1.‘ h
‘. -’ ‘-v -
~“f . 0- v
H- I.
-
§,_ '
M u
- .,.
bk ~
¢.~.I.
.
.‘
'-.
1 .~
' ~:I~';-. “
’ .
..-~H ‘
. ._‘V -
..H
\v .‘
- P-
'-_6- ‘ .'
‘ .‘s. ..
““
"~.
.._.
'1': d‘ .D'
.'
‘ '-
6"
u...’
'-
.
I ’-
" \ .-.
'I ..
..' '
5".
-
.
n
v~.
I I
'. .O.-. .
‘~ 7‘
'0
l “

 

ll.

16

The Congregational Church never became truly national.
Besides their stronghold in New England, Congregational
Churches also spread into the West. But they never became
a major factor in the Middle Atlantic States and were virtu—
ally nonexistent south of the Mason—Dixon line. The deci-
sion of the American Tract Society in 1825 to locate its
headquarters in New York rather than Andover was but further
evidence that the torch of leadership in the religious com-
munity was being passed not only from the country and the
town to the city but also from the Congregationalists to
other denominations.

In selecting New York City rather than Boston or
Andover, the Tract Society was following a growing trend
in the publishing world. By 1833 the City of New York had
65 newspapers and monthly magazines, while Boston had 43
newspapers and 38 other journals. By 1850 New York City
boasted 104 publications having a combined circulation of
78,747,600 c0pies. Meanwhile Boston's 113 publications had
circulation of 54,482,644 and Philadelphia's 51 publications
had a circulation of 48,457,240. Thus although Boston had
more publications, these publications did not enjoy the
vast circulation of some of the New York papers. Further-
more,the transportation revolution meant that New York
papers could circulate outside the large metropolis. The

weekly edition of the New York Tribune became popular in

rural New England and the Mid-West as well. And, as

mi

 

 

 

 

.
D
‘ . ~ ‘-
‘w-o- .<-O.": '-
:-~. 'O'fi".
. ‘
--4
"'7'"; "'2'- :.
‘~-o..- :—-
. -
" 0 “.0. . '
. - b‘ 9 -9
l... ......'
. .
.
.... ‘-. ...:‘ .v
. . c o.
-..,‘ .-..-.-
.
. _ _
.. ' ~—- r- _. .
. ‘ .1
~' ‘00.-..” .__'
’ ou- ... .
a
.-..-...-‘ ‘
‘. ‘- I C
«. mg. . .
a
k. "‘ o - —.
. .. ’
m. 0.. _‘_ v 7
.‘. D a
"' I
' ". ‘ u I
-- ... o, . . ‘ .
\..o. _}y ',
o 5, . ‘.“.‘
.
I.
._ (I. . .‘ .’ —
. u... ‘
h .' v ..v
‘. .
I ;.'~.
~' o I! t'-'_ '
d.-._. U ..
I.
‘ -
.u', . - .. _
u-..._'...
.-
3.3.. “.1
o'-‘..' -."h'.‘.
- _‘ _‘
U o
' ">. a
‘I a - .
. _ A
~--- . 0‘ A
I ~.._
Z‘ .
2' 'v‘ '
..‘ a. ..’ ‘
‘I .4
Q - ' "
:. r.,‘_ .‘
*OA“ .
‘4' ..
.
‘r
-‘| -
.
" \D~~-
' '. _O., . ‘
.’ .. .
o ”s. ‘
.
~
F “ -
“‘ 0.
-..
. I
Q‘,
.~. '
'l " :.‘u
N‘ '5’
- -
a..~‘.
I
a“
A
0 .fl‘ . ‘1
"‘ Q ;.~. -,
"a: -..
HP. “‘4.
h. n, -
\ ‘L-‘n‘. '..
‘ a 5‘
. l
' ."l
u v. n
n ‘flA'
.- A
u¥.,~c cc‘
. -
.1. vv‘
‘o q I...‘
\. .
.
. ‘ai I‘h."
n ‘. f
\ _ .‘-
I. ‘. ‘
"'e ~.
r.‘.9‘.r.n:
«v.
.
.‘
‘-
‘h‘
'u. Ara
.: .__
‘ I'-
Q‘..

17

Leonard Richards has pointed out, mass circulation of cheap
literature posed a threat to the power and prestige of the
local elites. Rural New England and the Mid-West were no
longer isolated from the urban centers of New York, Boston,
and Philadelphia.15
Although the whole process of organizing a national
society at New York took place rather quickly, it did not
occur without some Opposition from the New England group.
Exactly when the New York Religious Tract Society first
decided to eXpand from a regional to a national society is
not known to this writer. It is obvious, however, that
such a decision had been reached by late 1824. In December,
1824, a Committee from New York, consisting of a Baptist
clergyman, Reverend Charles G. Sommers, and two laymen,
Dr. James C. Bliss and Arthur Tappan, sent a letter to the
Secretary of the Andover-Boston Tract Society in which the
Committee suggested that the headquarters of the American
Tract Society be established in New York. This letter
"awakened" in the Andover group "the most anxious solici-
tude."16 Hallock later explained his own reaction.
I was a Massachusetts youth with no attachment to
the great wicked city of New York; but Divine
Providence seemed to have gone before me, indicating
his will that the city should be the centre and home
0f the American Tract Society.l7
After calling a meeting on January 11, 1825 to discuss

New York's invitation, Andover's executive committee finally

decided to oppose the move and offered Hallock an annual

\k.

.UII v

;- no \. .-
‘—-' 'DII .-

n
.
.,,
o .
\ V

n
.‘ 'v-

-.
.

—..

 

 

 

w....
o

 

 

s»

. v-
4.1 2)
J.

18

salary of $800 if he would become their permanent secretary.
They then invited New York to join the American Tract Soci-
ety at Boston.18

The New York group, however, was not to be denied.
Partly through the insistence of William Hallock, the New
England Society consented to reconsider New York's invita-
tion. In February, 1825, Hallock was sent by his own Tract
Society to New York with a set of instructions. First he
was to invite the New York group to join with Boston.
Should New York refuse, then he could accept New York's
prOposals provided they met several conditions. One condi-
tion was that New York would publish only such tracts as
would be approved by the Andover-Boston Society. This
condition was met by placing Reverend Justin Edwards of
Andover on the publishing committee. Since no material
could be published by the Society unless there was unanimous
consent by that committee, Edwards held a veto power.
Secondly, the New York group was asked whether they would
Publish tracts as cheaply as New England had. The New
England group was also concerned that the constitution of
the new society at New York would meet with Boston's
approval. Finally, the New Yorkers were asked whether they
would be willing to purchase stereotypes belonging to the
AndoYer-Boston group, if the New England Society should
desire to dispense with them. Obviously New York turned

dOWn the first proposal—-to join with the Boston Society--

19

but was able to answer the other questions in such a way
as to satisfy the New England group.

After the February meeting the remaining steps for
the formation of a national society in New York were quickly
taken. A preliminary constitution was drawn up and a tempo-
rary executive committee was appointed. On March 11, 1825,
a.preliminary public meeting was held at the City Hotel in
New York City for the purpose of organizing a national
mxflety. On March 15 the temporary executive committee held
its first meeting in the home of New York City's leading
Ikfiscopalian clergyman, Reverend James Milnor. Finally on
May 11, 1825, the American Tract Society was "solemnly
Enganized" at a meeting in the City Hotel, and the corner—
stone for the new Society's House was laid in Nassau Street,
Opposite the City Hall and the Park. Hallock now became
the Corresponding Secretary and General Agent of the new
American Tract Society. All that remained in order to
complete the formation of a national organization was for
New England to formally join the new Society. It did so
<MlMay 26, 1825, during the anniversary celebrations of the
Andover Society.19

New England's importance in the new Society was
reCOgnized in several ways. As mentioned previously, the
SOCiety appointed Reverend Justin Edwards to the publishing
committee. It offered the honorific position of president

to Sampson Vryling Stoddard Wilder, a wealthy, retired

I
"“'90 O'-.
o o
~—~o o. .0

as. .Q.

"’ Uni.

. Q .
.n. ~o-I
.

 

 

 

 

' -u‘ocsc-d.
C
"D- . --_. .-
. ‘ _”
... -.-.
‘I
O.-
. ‘ ..
‘.'.I
-
n. , -
0-1 , r
“" ~-.._
~o
~. .
‘:... 0..-. -
. ."-~ g
-
.
i.
'-~.. -t . .
” .“.. g F
. u
a.
v.._
‘y- a ' . .-
...- .
.0 .l .4
o
"v-
.. .Q
‘0
.n
."u, .
p ‘ _
. ,.V 0
~. .
3"
.
-\ n, .
u. D‘. .5
l .---‘
‘o...
.
1v: 4.-
~‘.~D..
t.-.._ ,. .. .
' ". d
a
u
‘D
' o. I.
."~‘ ’n T'
9.
u. v.
I a
.
a
s
“.- .' "'- ‘ g
."0 V .
o“
O‘.
P;-._ .
“':
a I
n
.
.
.
t‘n~..
-
' ‘A. _‘
\“‘ at .
'u' I. ‘
‘c,.' a
v.
"n a-
...t ‘—h .
T u
1".

 

.e .

I
‘u
Q

20

merchant from Boston, Massachusetts. Furthermore, the
Boston Society retained its own auxiliaries and depositories
in New England. Finally, the New England group held its
own annual meetings and continued to publish its own annual
reports.20

The benevolent societies were usually organized in
such a way that membership could be given to many, but the
decision making process could be restricted to a few. This
was certainly true of the American Tract Society. Accord-
ing to Article II of the Constitution, any subscriber could
become a member for a year by donating $2 and a "life mem-
ber" by donating $20 at one time. Any subscriber donating
$5 was designated as "director" for the year, and anyone
Contributing $50 in one or two donations was designated
"director for life." However, the individual life member
and the average life director had very little power when
it came to electing committees and selecting material for
PUblication . 21

The Society's constitution called for an annual
eleation of a slate of officers to serve on the Board. This
Board was to consist of a president, a number of vice presi—
6(”111%, a corresponding secretary, a recording secretary, a
treafiurer, and thirty-six directors.22 Article V of the
constitution vested extraordinary power in the board of
direCtors. It elected the executive committee which was

InAde up of the publishing committee, the finance committee,

o
‘ .-
‘0'

o ‘-
‘ou. ‘

. :‘9-...‘
O...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Q.
.. H. ‘n— o-

.

\uo.": v..- . -.
. '; a-Q- ..
v.01..lb .'.-‘...
.‘ on- - . ‘.

a ‘ v.—
“ _.' ‘.‘~-.1

_ ..

.. _..’ “

.‘- ‘

O I.....-‘.

v. .

.g . u..a ‘ V
IQ. d.“ ‘.“.I
a. ‘-

-.; -O.: '5

.a..,_. -.
v
" .2 «a _ .
-.-.‘|. z“
‘0
I. ‘.
y. '
a L’: ."~
.' ‘ao
h ’.
. ’...

‘v .

g .. ~.

.1...‘ .~‘ ‘.

. b. a‘..‘.'

'0
..' .

\' tn...

.“ “‘ . V.
‘5.-. “"

v.

3‘.

...-‘ ‘-

‘-."

 

 

Ԥ.'
6
b." : '
o
‘0
‘6
" \
uua. ‘fi ‘.':.:
5 ‘v
.l
“ ‘
"’ on
I v.'
“‘ Lvu r
.'b‘s..
Q
‘.
. a .,_
.O. l.‘.‘
‘.’
.
"t b. p
,‘ ‘ ‘
. “d‘ r!- ‘.
b JI."

 

21

and the distributing committee. The directors also appointed
the honorary vice presidents, the honorary directors, and
the honorary members. Furthermore, it also had the power
to enact the Society's by-laws.23 But constitution or no
constitution, it was not the board of directors but the
executive committee which actually exercised power. The
executive committee would draw up a slate of names, present
it to the directors, and the latter merely made the nomina-
tions official. Annual elections were held, but they were
little more than formalities. The presidents and vice
presidents exercised no real authority. They were usually
leading clergyman, college professors and presidents, and
lay members from the world of politics, business, or the
legal profession. The Tract Society selected these clergy-
men, politicians, lawyers, judges, and merchants from
Various denominations and from all geographic areas. This
gave the Society a truly national appearance desPite the
fECt that it was primarily a New York-New England organiza-
tion. Furthermore, these appointments were undoubtedly
IWide with the hope that the Society would receive financial
support not only from these prominent individuals them-
selves but from their denominations as well.24
Evidence that the annual elections had become mere

formalities was the repeated re-election of members of the
execil-ltive committee. Of the original five members on the

distributing committee in 1826, two served for only one

v- .
.-,..

“O D.»

a

.-
F '1“ ‘
0w. 9..
o c u .,
- .
-qa. . .- .-.
‘e... .... ..
- -
.-.¢.- .-. g -
" c - .
-’. 0‘ .I- .

-. ..-.

 

 

 

‘ -
.1: ‘ .
--.... I,_ .. ._
u .. ‘.. '

a- .‘ "
‘~-..' .’- *-
.

. ‘.-.
1'.-. ' ‘ .-
\..~ .--' --
. .‘
. o
. tr- . -
Oil
on ..._ ...
s-. .
-.
n O
u u..‘ ..'.
. .‘ ‘ _
u. _ ‘.- T.
D‘.
u.....‘-l
¢\ .... f
x‘ u. '
‘. .'o. ' ~‘
-. Cu
,' . I
A l
u.‘. ‘
‘.
' 't
-.. . 9...-" -
‘ s4
5.. ‘ .
- ‘..
I
. '
s ‘r
a- ._
~‘ -'
u. ‘—.
I .l.
‘ l' 5
.o.l o,--‘ a
0 fl‘
u-._‘\‘ ~
.
1h.
\‘_

 

22

year, one served until 1832, and another served in 1826 and
again in 1828-1831. But the fifth, Dr. James C. Bliss,
served in the committee until 1855. William Forrest, first
elected in 1831, was still serving in 1865, and William
Winterton was a member from 1833 to 1857. Furthermore, this
committee was reduced from five to four members in 1827.
Thus from 1833 to 1855, three of the four members were
re-elected annually.

In the finance committee a similar pattern was
evident. All five of the members who served in 1826 were
re-elected annually until 1831, and four of the five served
until 1836.25 (At this time Arthur Tappan dropped out due
to his financial difficulties.) The third member of this
group withdrew in 1844, but the other two were still being
Ire-elected in 1865.26 Furthermore, Tappan's replacement
in 1837, Thomas C. Doremus, was still serving in 1865.
There seemed to be only two ways of being drOpped from the
finance committee--financial embarrassment or death.

On the all important publishing committee, the
cIontinual re-election of officers was also the rule. One
Of the original members served only one year, but his
replacement held his seat from 1827 to 1844. The Episco-
palian representative served until his death in 1844, the
ongirlal representative of the Dutch Reformed Church
remained a member until 1857, and the Baptist representative

SeI‘ved until 1844. The average Span of service on the

 

o9 Q¢_r..
~.
‘ " UH" on.
...-.. o

o ‘
. q—p .
.‘ ." .'o .
. ~ 5‘ ..
a-.. ... --¢.

..o‘—-.'

 

v....-.o..

.. ._'.b
- ~ ‘
......, J-‘ .-.

v. .— Q-.. ..;-’ .
a-“-

 

 

-~. . .. h
-
."‘ ~u..\
.
~‘ ‘nn .
v .‘ 0. .V.‘ ,.
o H u. u." A
.
_ 1.: -¢-..‘. ~ I‘
“NM” .".51) o . 4
4

5..-

‘ M; v -. ‘.

~...u -.~.‘__ ‘.*“

.'. .

' .I.

...U ‘ . ‘
I la‘. " ..A4
."h...

-. -Nv '.'. r.

‘. ‘§n .-
.

a. ‘l

I‘ t ‘v-.‘

‘ ,
n ‘ ‘
- n~~..--,.

. u
.

..‘ ‘ ~.‘-

.~a .- ~ ‘
‘ c “‘h“

‘ U

u

‘g 9‘3, "-"

Va. . ~ - n
- .._ \

A"' V.

'\.

..

,.o
- x

.‘.

‘ o

' o

‘,. - ‘;-. ”b '

. —I
v -_,__:.
d . ‘i‘.

s

'c\

‘u v.-

‘ no. ‘ .-_ "

' ‘.. .4
A

 

23

publishing committee was just under twelve years. Besides
this personal concentration of authority,there was a geo-
graphical concentration of power resulting from the tendency
to elect New Yorkers. In 1845 all six members of the pub-
lishing committee were residing in New York City»?7

The publishing committee had been organized in such
a way as to prevent, if at all possible, the emergence of
problems which might impair interdenominational unity among
orthodox Christians. Any tract or book published by the

Society had to have unanimous approval of all members, and
each member represented a different denomination.28 (It
was this absolute control of the publishing committee over
all publications that caused a division within the Society
during the 1850's. The committee used its veto power to
Prevent the Society from publishing antislavery tracts so
as not to jeopardize its Operations in the South and dis-
rupt Christian and national unity.)

The continual re-election of members to the execu-
tive committee finally caused the New Englander to raise
its voice in criticism. The New Englander had been founded
in 1843 by a Yale graduate and Congregationalist minister,
ReVerend Edward Royall Tyler. Most of the men associated
with Reverend Tyler in establishing and publishing this
DeI'iodical were also Yale graduates and Congregationalist
ruinisters. Although the periodical was not strictly a

theological journal, Congregational theology and religious

1“

 

I - ‘ .
'° to; z. 3
..~ "" to. -

 

 

.
.
‘C
..r .
,t-c' \
"" cc
.
-
N; “v '1‘. v
. ‘- .
.. -r... . .. ‘
‘
n. o -._'_.
..
~N... ...‘_. __.
;£-- :"~ '
fl 0
I. L. ~--L . ‘
.. . .c. '
“ "-‘

 

..~
‘ ‘ '° .u. _‘
"'—. .-
'. 6-..-
I' .‘
I " a. .
.-- - ~_..:
.__ '
...;., H
-
""“... .
I
5.,
~b D" _ .
A. b-
...‘l" ‘9
c .-
~.. -, . '-
.-
-- .30 ,..:
§ 9
n
u._
cl. ~ ’-
o¢.~ .,
.'- ~
In: ‘.:-" ~‘ ‘
~v...‘-
u
‘.
-

 

'-
wt"
4

 

‘9
v»
. .
..
-.
o .
- c
I
‘ A

 

 

a C

 

' 'o‘_.‘
.
“--: ~ .. .
s..
a ‘u‘.‘.
\
H‘s.’
‘..n; ~ .
"' . t.

 

\.A‘
~_..>'~ r
a
.5. 'J’r‘g
o._.
'\‘:A"
. p‘
"J ‘ ~
‘~ Ag+ ‘
~ r
‘5 .VJ

24

issues received ample coverage.29 The New Englander agreed

 

with the basic aims of the Tract Society, but not with its
organization. It pointed out that during the 1845-1846
fiscal year, $153,916.16 had passed through the hands of
the American Tract Society. This large amount of money
made it imperative that the executive committee be answer-
able to some board of managers and not merely to the "Chris-
tian Community at large." The annual meetings were not
conducive to deliberating policies, and examining the
actions of the committee. Instead they were more
like a college commencement than like a deliberative
assembly. . . . And if any man whose name was not in
the printed schedule, should be so "cleandaft" as to
rise in his place and bring forth a motion or speak
out of his own private judgment, the huge calmness of
the Tabernacle would hardly endure the disorder.
The New Englander acknowledged the fact that the Society's
cxmstitution gave to the thirty-six elected directors the
Power to elect the executive committee. But this power
wasxfixtually nullified by the practices of the executive
Cmmuttee. The latter presented a list of names to the
general meeting. This list did not state which office a
Person was being nominated to fill. After the whole slate
was accepted, the executive committee would designate
which office each person was to hold. Thus in the end,
the executive committee designated the thirty-six elected
directors.

Once the meeting was closed the newly "elected"

directors met to elect the new executive committee, using

 

 

 

 

‘
.4 1'
‘~. .';’)'8‘ up..-
boon. no.5‘.
. O
h‘"""' -t 0... O
-‘ .Q.l .3 .‘
a.....-— . .
Q
h . .h‘ Or... a ‘
D
.--.:.... .-.-.. .-
O
3-, u: ._ ...".
&-.-.1' a... .. _
a
U". - - 4..
. 0 II’-.. ..-.
...-|o .....‘~.
. . .
. ..._ _ ‘ .
y
"Wk“: --. .
h I
.-
'.
x. '-
- ’ I
I. .“1
‘ 4
to 3“..." .
.1
-—
._ ‘ .
I".. . ~v. ~ '
' >-
.-I g ¢._‘~\_ —
. l
.
”b
b. ‘
«d.‘
'0.
.\_ ...~ .
..,.. .‘
“t. 0- A
‘ o
. :- \p- (0..
. . .
I. 8'..- ‘
O
‘C
. ..
‘ I
c A... .Q ‘
ea, .”3 ‘
._. I.
so. a a c“' ‘ :
ud .‘ '
o .a ‘

 

a. ‘I.
.‘.4 '
' r
‘QQ' VS. ".> ‘
o
I. t y‘.
. A
l O

 

 

25

ballots prepared and printed beforehand at the Tract House,
and presumably by the outgoing executive committee. "The
whole story then is," concluded the New Englander, "the
executive committee virtually appoints not only the direc-
tors but themselves also, and are really reSponsible to
nobody, while yet they control more than $150,000 annu-
ally."31

To facilitate eXpansion across the nation at a
nunimal expense to the Society, The American Tract Society
encouraged groups of individuals to form auxiliaries. The
Thact Society sold the tracts to the auxiliaries which in
turn resold them if possible or gave them away if neces-
sary. The Society at Andover had used this method prior
to 1825, allowing any group of individuals to form an aux-
iJiary society if it was willing to agree to the Tract
&xfiety's constitution, set a time for annual payment,
appoint an agent, and forward one-quarter to one-third of
518 funds to Boston.32 Under the constitution of the
national Society organized in New York, any local society
"annually contributing a donation from its funds to the
Treasury of this Society" was to be considered an auxiliary.
Furthermore, agents or officers of the auxiliaries were
muitled to vote at all meetings of the board of directors
proVided they contributed annually a certain sum of money.33
muing the fiscal year, 1829-1830, 119 new auxiliaries were

f
<nmed. By 1830 there were over 2,608 auxiliaries and

 

..--. .A-‘&.
.3: ..... -.
.. .

' s‘:.
.n
u- ..; V a
"" '<-~o. v
“’ .-
Qs ’ ..
.0. -.,_

. .

- a
D- 5 , .
-.. v..-_--.- ': .
'Q
' u- . . ‘.
. ‘ .-
~....: -: .-.‘ ‘_
'. ....‘ v-
‘ " b -
x. I.....‘-‘. .‘
-.
I.) n. . .. . .'
. u
s ....- v. u...- -.
v- 0-- -~._‘ . .
l -
«.4 N... _... ‘-
4
O. a-.. ‘ ‘
‘x. "‘- . - .
.A... ."l .‘
. - .
I Q
'..1: M .-'. v,
'v5~_. _-‘. ‘
. ._ .
A. ...' ..
'0
-| -‘-‘_.‘ ...‘.
a
u.‘ .
. . ‘
' O. _ ‘
“ .'I n'fi . ', ‘
u. ‘tl. ....‘ ‘
.:..
\.": 5", ’- ‘-
'o"_.
I .~ do ‘
‘-
. 'v.__ .
. R p,.
.- an: ‘k‘-.."
v»‘. ~..’
o‘-. .c
‘u.. v A
'.' - "v. . -
..
‘d~-':
s
.
.‘l
I. .
‘- ~.v" . '
..‘ bc" ‘
‘ §
.I
\' .. I.
‘ v
'-.\C- A. .'
V\ w ' r
J ,‘
s n —...P
.
.
O in: LR ‘ ’ .R
V‘ -
I‘..‘-‘_
at
. n |
. ‘ "5‘.
., ‘
”g, n-
‘ ‘. :“”‘n
ҤJI.;
‘4
v -
'I .A .
‘1'“ ~‘A
~ u \‘ .
Q‘- I
-“~

9.....-'

 

 

 

 

.
‘
.3
CC.
1“"
0-. x
" 3
.60 d
.n,
0
.v.

26

branches connected directly or indirectly with the parent
society in New York.34 Meanwhile women were also encouraged
to form their own auxiliary societies.35

As the work of the American Tract Society increased,
its promoters began to rely on full-time agents and col-
porteurs as well as on voluntary tract visitors and auxil-
iary societies. Not many areas of the nation escaped the
attention of the tract visitors and colporteurs. They
scoured the city of New York and remote areas on the fron-
tier. From 1830-1850 the West received special emphasis.
In 1849 colporteurs even followed the American Army into
Mexico. During the 1850's special attention was given to
the South and the South West. Tracts were also donated to
various groups of individuals. Particular care was taken
1x>provide seamen, boatmen, soldiers, and politicians with
tmacts.36 Copies of the Sabbath and Temperance Manuals
were distributed to members of the United States Senate and
the House of Representatives. One gentleman in New York
(Hiy donated funds so that a "select Library of the Soci—
etY'S publications" and c0pies of "Home Evangelization"
mnfld.be distributed to members of the United States Con-
grass as well as to several members of the state legisla-
Uuns of New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Ohio.37

As mentioned previously, the Tract Society used
different types of personnel. One was the "tract visitor"

o n . . . . . . .
I? tract m1331onary" often utilized by the auXiliaries.

we

 

' V
Jr. a-
~II...‘ ~.~
‘ r
.I:0 I'-:..... .'
~a-o p..‘....-"
I
o... 1"“... V .
. u‘ I.
».9'. I.-.... .
. .3-
. ...
c'- o. ..

9‘. so -..‘ ..
-...I. ‘~. '» -. 1 O
.. ‘4‘ .‘ .

“I. '* ~n--‘ -

’ .
. .I: o. ‘ ."
<o-ht‘ab- ._ - ‘. -
N
‘: I... . '3...
~g.u.o' .d..‘
9.
~ I
. .. ~ ..
"u . . ..
‘,. .-.
u.
.5
~ ‘v.,_.’
‘uh “Qua...
'I‘ ‘
‘ A - -
.u.‘.._ ‘ v ..
. v..~.-.
c
.
.‘ . v
c". .H :- “'. '-
U ‘h“ d
‘o
._ '-
. ‘ .‘ '
u~t . ‘ ~.
-' 'v .
§.‘. -‘-
II.
t L... .
n...‘ : ".-‘. ..
§.". '
I n
I‘
n! " r:.'- ‘. .
C
I- ‘ 9‘
§ '-.--
.
‘-
‘5—
.“ u '
b..~ ..

 

27

In 1829, the New York City Tract Society established the
first organized, urban tract visitation system in the
United States. Most of the tract visitors worked in their
spare time and without remuneration. The tract visitation
program was based on the principle that it was the duty of
Christians to "carry and deliver" the gospel "to all who
have it not," rather than to wait for his fellow man to
seek for it.38
The organization of the tract visitation program
was quite simple. The several wards of the city were
divided into approximately 500 districts, each containing
(nose to 60 families. A superintendent was placed over a
ward and a tract visitor was assigned to each district.39
Nearby 50 per cent of the tract distributers were women.40
Each month the urban auxiliary selected a tract and then
distributed it to as many families as possible. In March,
1829, over 28,000 families were visited in New York City,
andcnfly'about one family in seventy-five refused to
accept the tract.41 Within five years New York City had
nearly 1,000 tract visitors.42
To encourage diligence in every tract visitor, the

fOIlowing pledge was drawn up:

Resolved, The grace of God assisting me, to fix my

nund on some one or more individuals for whose

eternal welfare I will, by all suitable means, attempt

what I can; and never more to live without having the

ESIVEEISK—of some immortal soul resting as a burden
1” nW'heart.43

LN

 

 

 

.

. ..' '

fin .I-Q. co. ‘ - r.

' . .ou.

-... On...

0- .
.
u».-;-Qa :. .‘-‘

. . ‘.

“-‘

".
.

u. “'0‘. .G .

O -\ -.. -
k....
-

u. .0 ..; -P ’

u. ‘ h-.-

' o..-
. O
....~. . z...

. . u ‘1‘ .
-.-....." ‘

.2-~ on on; ..-.

~g....d .H‘ .~ .

~-

. . 5.
.,v
n.,.. 2;; ..

.‘ ‘

_ ... . .h. . ‘

.F .

Q... ..~.._.- ‘

- t U
I. .b 0.“- ’ —

.‘ .-
!.. s..- .k--
t

.. -- .

u ._ u.“ .7.- a

b§~‘ . . “

.

. ". ’. I
-‘o AW- . “‘ I

...-¢.' u,“ I
C
."
1.
g..

0. ."P.‘ “ .
.. wt :1.“ .
.- ‘
~ -

1... ~::._. ‘-~ - ‘ .

k... u
.I.~ ""
a

.

‘.‘.

.. ‘ . - ‘

C‘ - .." ‘-
qu hog-l“...
C
h
\‘ZN‘
I .. '

a
Q

\‘ O. .

. u A z.“.-
U.“
u“‘.’

.u
u‘ “.9

a
a“ "as ‘
.‘s.“‘ v
v‘ “

.

v

..I

‘~ A. ‘ I
._ ‘

‘ p
fiss “Ch,“—
‘2...“
3|“

"‘ .A .

~. "c.
v§\‘\ fr ‘
V .
‘ c

.

\‘;.;

. I
n.‘~ ‘Q “-
an.“ ‘H'#
~‘sa

l

 

 

 

 

;

28

What this pledge meant was Spelled out in detail in 1838.
The tract visitor was instructed to encourage and promote
attendance at "Sabbath and other schools"; he was to supply
"the destitute with the Bible," and to minister "to the
wants of the necessitous"; he was to aid "the cause of
Temperance," and to further "almost every other means of
advancing the temporal and eternal interests of men."44

Whereas tract visitors worked during their spare
time and without remuneration, colporteurs worked full
time, if possible, and received a stipend. The Americans
had copied the concept of tract publications from.England.
Colportage, hoWever, was not an English invention. In
1853 the executive committee of the London Tract Society
discussed the possibility of implementing the colportage
system in England. This was twelve years after the Ameri-
can Tract Society had begun to hire colporteurs. Accord-
ing to one authority, the Americans borrowed the concept
cfi'colportage from France.45 Colportage expanded rapidly
after its beginning in 1841. The country was divided into
territories or areas, and Society agents and volume super-
intendents'were assigned to as many areas as possible to
8“Pervise the work of the colporteurs and to solicit funds
fIt'om churches and individuals."6

The main task of the colporteur was to sell the
mmfirOUS Volumes published by the Tract Society, to con-

Verse With families on religion, and to distribute tracts.

 

 

..
n. I
‘4‘
O
O
.1
u..
. .
o
.-
_..
o.
...

 

 

-
A
q. .
-..
.
.uu
.Hs .
\ .
7. u
. g .
y . .
-
.n .

 

 

fl . s . C a
a L .. ,
... . {1
a 4 c Q Va 0 no
. A m s .ks . v
. . p .. . .. a . a
a . s s s a; T v
Q . I u‘- .
. u L» 5;.
«s» .s- I be as»
.h- VA .p'. p a. . u
v s Q o . .~u . s
.s- .—. - u ._q
su- u u s ‘ s
a .‘x .. .‘ -.—. ...

7 § § 1 »

pa .3 £2 .
L. . a a; .
s . .1 » o
w .. a; .3 no.
Le

a

.

 

s . .
.1
u \ '
e vs
>u‘ .nn
9 . r:
.u. u!
H.116 V‘
‘ \ -‘
L. . u.
xx.

r.

J

29

They were to be men "of ordinary education but well-

attested piety."47 One advantage of publishing and selling

volumes was that it enhanced the status of the American

 

Tract Society and removed the "prejudice . . . that Tract
operations . . . (were) 'penny matters.”48

The colporteurs were largely responsible for the
ultimate success of the Tract Society. In 1841, 2 col-
porteurs were employed by the Society; in the next year
27, and by the fourth year over 145 worked in 24 states and
territories including Texas. Within ten years, 569 persons
were employed full or part time in this work. At the annual
fleeting in 1851 a resolution was passed to increase the
xumber of colporteurs to 1,000 as soon as possible.49
This resolution was no utopian dream; by 1858 some 787 col-
;mmteurs (including 174 students) were working for the
&xfiety. Thereafter the number declined, perhaps due to
'Umedepression of 1857-1858, and the rising tide of sec-
tionalism.50

To enter the work of colportage demanded dedication
because the salaries were low. The Society thought it
best to pay a set salary rather than a commission so that
°°1Porteurs would not be tempted to by-pass outlying and
sparsely populated areas.51 The base salary was set at
$150 per year, in addition to which there was an allowance
for expenses. One hundred and fifty dollars was not a

h19h salary for the 1840's and 1850's. William Hallock

g

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘ I
0.. . ‘ .
‘. 'Z'y-n v
'Ocyo-
O
O
.
..¢ ..
... ‘f "H. .
--. ...-~- ..‘~". -~
-
. . .
0-. O;- .;'.."‘
~\.-ol ' l .~_“ u
.
u ‘.-‘
.-I .A O.
Us! .\ .." ‘7‘.
n
.- Va, ‘ ‘ ..
70"... u“ ._.
0-
Vi. " i'.- ’ 7.
.. u-.._ -‘.:
.
u 5... .2?
~.., , ‘ .. '
.~‘..‘ .‘-0 I .-
‘-“-
‘~~ :’.’.“ a. O
-, ‘
‘8‘. le.‘ i‘.\
N.“ . a.
V‘.-‘ ‘v.‘ I
~t-v '..~-
.- .-
u. ~.1“.'V“
. ‘ .
79t.““ “‘
' ‘4
‘0 .v. ..
\l ‘
,
. ... ‘.' .
c. _
~ I A.
.
.
I...
. -.
.‘ . v.
.~ ~ ‘.
. v-
~~s: .C‘ h .1
-.~ ‘
..’~ .
.-1~I‘ -
““ .I a:
-. ' I
vfi..‘ '
L"
.
.
HF‘.
u .'_
u..‘ .1 I
...-
O'.‘
‘I.
‘-
'I
I
.' .
-a'~
. u
“- 4~;"~
v11“ ‘. -‘
‘ h"; A §,
‘
'—.
l.
a..-
“v "p‘
Q a.
I
“'H v,

 

firh$

30

had been offered $800 per year in 1825 to serve as the per-
manent secretary for the American Tract Society at Andover.

The Brick Presbyterian Church of New York City paid its

 

pastor, Reverend Gardiner Spring, a salary of $2,500 in
1817. By 1854 this had been increased to $5,000. The
same church had hired a charity school teacher for $250 in
1809.52 Both unskilled and skilled workers usually earned
more than $150 per year. Around 1830 unskilled laborers
earned approximately $4.50 per week. Skilled workers
earned from $1.25 to $2.00 per day. By 1850 the highest
paid compositors or typesetter in New York City were earn-
ing $12.50 per week, pressmen $9.00, and carpenters and
sflasterers were earning $10.00. Even rural teachers
averaged $4.15 per week in 1841.53

Both the officials of the Society and the colpor-
teurs made mention of the low salary. In fact one safe-
guard against attracting the wrong type of person was a
salary which provided "almost no temptation for selfishness
Oravarice."54 Mr. W. Y. Johnson, a sales superintendent
Of the Chicago Agency, reminded the American Tract Society
that low wages and high prices were forcing a number of
individuals to give up colportage for farming.55 One
C’OJ-POrteur in Illinois wrote that for the last six years
ids only income had been the salary which he had received
hm“ the Society. "How we have got along so far I hardly

knew," he wrote. His wife had been able to buy only one

;

 

 

 

 

 

 

u-

51‘

,
'.

ID

tn

u:
(I)

g
I
U

.
,.

I“

-1. .

n...
a

II‘
"

31

dress during this time, "and that but calico." He did not
even have enough money to buy himself a watch. One cloudy
day he started to cross a twelve mile prairie an hour
before sunset but was overtaken by darkness. He was
"obliged to go before and feel the path in order to avoid
getting lost" on the lonely prairie.56

As already mentioned, the Society did make some
allowances for expenses, especially traveling expenses.
Furthermore,somewhat higher salaries were paid to indi-
viduals working in high-cost areas. By 1858 the average
salary for rural workers was $210.91. In addition,
approximately $90 was paid for traveling and other expen-
ses. Urban workers cost the Society $367.23 per year.57
As late as 1865 many colporteurs received only $300 per
year*which covered not only their salary but also their
expenses.58

One factor which enabled the colporteurs to get
kW'With minimum expenses was the hospitality of the people
Whom they visited. One colporteur wrote that during his
tune years of service he had not been "charged in all . . .
the amount of a dollar for food or lodging" for himself
orlfis horse. "I propose to pay them," he wrote, "but
they Will not take pay."59 The St. Louis Agency estimated
that the total annual expenses for each of its colporteurs
(fid‘HOt average more than $12, and that this included such

lterns as meals, lodging, tolls, and ferriage.60

 

 

-0,-
5
"-uu0o¢t ..._
—.
i . I v-

. '.“ ‘ .14
... ...._....
..__~ .. --‘
.._ .0 -;'~F r
<..-...-. ..._..H.‘
.. ‘

 

 

 

. :V-vr 2.. .-
hI-I..-.' ‘..‘ .-
.-._.oe;; a, .
~I¢:~..._‘ ' d.“
.. o ..
l.. . .V’.. Q
~. ~ .
-.. .0. b._,_‘--
.
"O
b ..-.. ’ ‘- .
“. .-
o.~.o._ -~ -v ‘.
u
i.
. . ‘ ‘
. <”.—.
v‘.‘ ‘.._' -
.
;"'c. _
su.‘> .- ‘.;.‘;: .
"IV ~‘ -~V‘
..._ h .
u... -v‘.‘_- .’
v". ' "
‘ .4-
; I..." so
‘ V-.. .-‘."‘
._
.,..‘ ‘
,, r 0-,
... .- ~_ —.,.
. ..,‘
vv._."‘ ‘
.
u .
. v
‘ ‘ '
. .~
q..- .A: ’2",
‘~ ‘.' -
.‘
..'.
. U
‘ o.
. A
' ‘n.
~._ s ‘ ’. ’ v
Q- .
“'Cu
. ..
.
y
”‘3 3. ’. ‘
.' .4 ,« ‘
‘ ‘.I“
.‘4
e
-v V.
-.. "-~
. .‘u ‘r-
"v
a...‘
‘l

 

-
',_
. ’A
'1
‘-..E= V .-
U. J . h
I
z...
\I I

32

 

Mention should be made concerning the recruitment
of colporteurs. The executive committee had the sole power

to appoint personnel, to stipulate their terms of service

 

and salary, and to determine their location.61 But since
the committee could not possibly have first-hand acquaint-
ance of all prOSpective employees, it left much of the
recruitment up to the agents and superintendents.62 The
agents would attempt to recruit colporteurs to work in
their home states or territories since, presumably, they
hmuld understand their own people. The agents and the
executive committee would also contact the pastors of the
subspective colporteurs for character references. Once an
individual was appointed he was kept under the watchful
eye of his agent or volume superintendent.63

One advantage of tract visitation and the colpor-
tage system was that it brought religion to those who did
luk.attend orthodox Protestant churches. (Orthodox Protes-
tantism could be a large umbrella; it included Evangelical
Episcopalians, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Baptists,
Dutch Reformed, Lutherans, and Methodists. It included those
groups Who taught God's sovereignty-~1imited sometimes by
"whosoever will,"--salvation by grace, man's depravity, and,
mflike the Unitarians, accepted the Trinity.) Sometimes
‘Um lack of church attendance was encouraged by the lack

OfChurChes. J. W. Crowder, the Society's Agent for North

Carolina ,

g

noticed that one could travel from six to eight

 

 

‘-
a
Q... .~

:31:

C »
t. I

h.
.' o.

u“ "

. C

. . . '
. z.

“ ~~ ,.

 

 

 

 

 

" n
3 a. be.
a ,.

Or 9“
n..-.

v. .

.

‘ .3-

- w..-

A

. .._‘ ‘
5-. ~
....:. ,_ “r
-.._ . ‘ '
.u .. 'q A b.
._ ‘
'-<.. ..a~:: .'....
. ’ '
v- _
b” 3v ., '
"‘-.‘ -‘
' ‘c. .
a
q
\-_N.
‘o u 5": ‘
n.-_ .I-‘
I...
.1 .
‘1.
. _ a
.k.‘» 5,. .'. h .
t.‘ " v §
§“ ‘
:0
‘.- n .\ -
. C u‘.
“ fiu. ‘-
. ‘.-‘. ‘ f
V“-‘.
_. _‘
‘5. ‘-
." ':-... .;
VQQ“: .r .
O U ~v
.
I ‘u_ A
.
. \F
' a.
- he ‘2‘». - ‘
-“' v . .
o ‘.
5"
A.‘
""Q r.
“.‘
a
I‘
. v.-
\'“ 33:».
"o

 

 

 

33

miles in parts of his state without finding a church.

Furthermore, transportation could be difficult. One col—

porteur walked one-half a mile on poles through a swamp in
cmder to reach a family living in a "miserable log hut."
This family had been so isolated that only one of the

duldren could recall ever having seen a book.64 In the

West the situation was similar. Colporteurs repeatedly

raported the lack of churches or church attendance. Even.

where churches were available, people often neglected to

attend regularly.65

Since the colporteur was paid a set salary he was
encouraged to visit these isolated and unchurched families.

Yet a qualification should be made here. The colporteur

‘Vas encouraged to visit the destitute and the unchurched,
blat the Society also had colporteurs selling books to and

agents soliciting funds from the wealthy and the regular

church goers. In 1855 over 25 per cent of all colporteurs

employed by the Society were stationed in New York and

Pennsylvania. The Tract Society sent some of its agents

to all corners of the land, but it also sent many of its

agents to those corners where peOple were most likely to

Purchase its books.66

Most tract visitors and colporteurs were dedicated
menand women. This is evident in the impressive statis-
tics released by the Society at its fortieth anniversary.

BY1865 the Society's sales had surpassed the $5,000,000

 

'9
' .
Dj'( c .:’. A. .
ks! .... . '-
l-'.-H ...‘ In:
_ u . ‘ . .l
h..- CC“.. V. ...
. a
‘ “.1, ..
fin- -‘ ‘s
o
‘ .
:'< \ .v..
13... .I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In!
I
.—
. r
r
\ ‘ .
‘u
i . ‘
""1 'c‘.
n._.
‘-
i
av: _
I . l
.‘ v n. ‘
..."“
'I
’ J... o.‘..
.V .- 9"-..
.'o. .4 O y
”'1 -‘.
.._.
‘ o ‘ N
a “v. K
n g ‘
h-‘A-\
_.-‘
l
.4
>— F
’ ..: ~ K.
l,‘:‘
Lb .
. -
\‘I .._
‘~ no .
‘3
o.‘
‘I1
I'-
'1 D‘
‘I -‘ .'.
7..
‘.. ‘k’.
b“‘
V-
‘~~.. .
5... ,.
§,eo
‘1
,.
. .-
\
.. .\.~’
"~. .,
U o.
e‘vyb—L: .‘
1““ “1
r..
\. a.‘
u
~.:‘
‘. '. ‘
§.' ,

" $
“I. r '- ‘
._‘
~
I“.
a
'u: § .
5..:§ .c
‘t‘ v V
. :“‘:
3..
a \ ‘ '
o .h“ .
a‘.‘ ‘-
‘1.“ ‘ _‘
~ :1 ‘.I
. t, .
s V..-
". v.
u ‘s‘
e
. l.
\ § ‘
's n

‘5
\
. $,‘.
u‘.‘ “
‘Jel‘
\‘V‘,’
' "a r-
‘I a -
5- ‘
re...
3.9 e_
“9;” ‘
"I a.
~4.¢
"‘w d\‘
“M,“
t‘ ‘
I P‘
‘(:h
t \_ h
" ‘5 Fw-
‘. J-
.a‘ ‘
'::n~
‘3 A;
H‘ s
\ a...
V 4'
‘ t“.

“ I
II)

 

 

 

34

mark.57 Part of this success must be attributed to the
perseverance of the Society's salesmen. This perseverance
was well summed up by Mr. Shepherd Wells, agent for Southern
Kentucky and North West Tennessee, in the following report:
Three times I have been swimming in the river--horse,
wagon and all. Once I rode all the afternoon covered
with mud and saturated with water, when frost formed
on my horse. I have been lost in the woods till late
at night, and frequently have gone without meals.
Yet what of all that?68
The tract distributors and colporteurs did not
always win friends, but they did try to influence people.
A twentieth-century theologian, Karl Barth, has stated that
although a Christian must be ready to face the world's dis—
Pleasure, he "must not seek to antagonize the world; when
Daniel was in the lion's den he did not pull the lion's
‘tai1."59 In reading the reports of the agents and colpor-
‘teurs one receives the impression that several of the Soci-
‘ety's employees were not adverse to pulling the tail now
and then. In their forthright approach they often had
little room for tact. One agent in Western Pennsylvania
Wrote that he preached "as if there were but two parties-—
God's and the Adversary's."7o
A forthright approach was used when combatting sin.
(me of the sins attacked by the colporteurs was gambling.
mule traveling on a boat, a colporteur came across a group
Ofsmople engaged in a game of cards. He responded by

Putting tracts on the table which had been used for gambling.

The cards disappeared.71 A colporteur in Wisconsin accepted

 

;‘ ‘k.....
a
.n.‘

Is-..
. _..l
\ "a;
.Q' u.....

 

I .h-
u .9.
.___

 

.. .a ’0

-.. " .Q-O
O

u.‘ ’. 4

n...

 

-

Y
0

“on
‘ v.»

(I:
0 n

J )

 

\I\ ‘4‘.
‘ 4
a
‘u‘ .v“ .
' “‘ - '

 

“1" ‘..
‘n‘
i:
'v...
i av.
I‘\. I,’ A A
'.“j \“ ,l
V
v.
I ‘
._ .-~
N‘-‘Q
h» F?
N
P‘E‘C.-‘
~-..‘
.
._.
-‘s_'.
's“~ ‘
' \
‘9 fr.”
a -
‘n.s.r
. 9‘ I
‘D
. .
.‘- a

 

35

an invitation to play cards on the condition that he could
substitute his own deck. When this condition was accepted,
he proceeded to deal each player the tract entitled, "Ruin-
ous Effect of Gambling." He was somewhat disappointed when
each player, instead of eXploding with wrath, "accepted
vfith expression of thanks one or two of these little truth
letters."72
Another vice to be boldly confronted was profanity.
The same colporteur who put tracts on the card table while
traveling on the boat also distributed tracts to persons
Who swore. Tracts, he wrote, were a "cheap and useful
WEapon" for Christians to use while traveling. It saved
them "from being annoyed with profane language."73 One
'individual, upon hearing a blacksmith "uttering horrid
Oaths," went into the blacksmith's shop and inquired "who
‘Vas praying so?" He then gave a few words of admonition to
all those present and handed the blacksmith the tract, the
"Swearers Prayer." One month later the blacksmith was con-
Verted.74
There were few vices worse than liquor and so it

is not surprising that the colporteurs opposed the consump-
tion of alcoholic beverages in a most determined and forth-
right manner. One colporteur in Indiana lectured some
twenty men and two women in a whiskey shop. He then pro-
Ceeded to distribute approximately 200 tracts in the area.

That same night a grocery store was broken into and whiskey

 

'1'

r.
.
u

n,
or v.‘
N

a.
a“ ... .
.."Vt-.

‘ ._.
. ‘ v
s ,c .
u ..H ‘v.

 

 

..
§

 

(I'
'l

(f

.5
b»..,

0',

'1

 

 

36

was spilled on the floor. The following day a scuffle broke
out at the store and one man was killed. The enraged store-
keeper blamed the colporteur for inciting a riot and wanted
to charge him with burglary. "So much for trying to do
them a little good," the colporteur wrote when reporting
the incident to headquarters.7S Another colporteur entered
a tavern and began to distribute tracts. When he coura—
geously reproved a person who observed that it would be
delightful "to tear the heart out of the bodies of kings
and ministers of the Gospel," and advised him to "flee from
the wrath to come," the colporteur was "stunned by a blow
to the head from this person's clenched fist." The colpor—
teur then "solemnly addressed" this man's conscience.
Fortunately for the colporteur his assailant "fairly gnashed
his teeth and turned as white as a cloth" but somehow kept
himself from lashing out at the colporteur again.76 The
forthright approach of many colporteurs was well summed up
by M. C. F. Waldecker, who was working for the Society in
Wisconsin.

I have admonished the gay, stood warning at the gam-

blers' tables, shouted "poison" when the drunkard put

the cup to his lips, and warned the indifferent of

the dangers before them.77

Waldecker's statement demonstrates more than the

unperteur's forthright approach. It also points out the
&xuety's fears concerning changes which were taking place

<huing the nineteenth century. The ethical system of the

c3hristian stewards and their Puritan ancestors was being

L

 

u

D. N-
o “ \ a
u. .-'
Q .
‘I a
1"' .‘.Q
a. 1 ‘
.-h. 4 ‘
' u 0“.
u “.
‘ ~“~ :
9
I" .

. '.
‘u' u I.

o

‘v

a
N e
a. u
u
o... .

 

A
w.'
s“
U
,. ‘
.0
.
"v
-._ ‘
-.
-~“
J
~ Q

 

 

37

called into question. This was especially evident in the
West, the cities, and in the life style of the immigrant.
But more was involved than haggling over ethical systems.
Behind the dispute over alcohol, profanity, and church
attendance was the question of social and political control.
At stake was the right of the righteous to rule.78
The Society's colporteurs were not only zealous and
forthright, they were also thorough in their work. If part
of the population lacked the English language, the Society
employed colporteurs who were fluent in foreign languages.
Inthe 1851-1852 fiscal year, 104 colporteurs were employed
tO‘work among immigrants, including the German, Irish,
Fr’ench, Welsh, Spanish, Norwegian, Danish, and Dutch popu-
1ations.79 Furthermore, each worker had to be prepared to
<30mbat any erroneous doctrine or sin. Isaac Leonard
recounted his experiences for one day. In the morning he
'had conversed on temperance and on universalism. At noon
he met an individual inclined towards Mormonism and spent
One hour in trying to show him the error of his way. Later
he encountered three men working on the roadside; he
{Reached to them from his horse and presented them with
tracts. Whatever the problem, the American Tract Society
and its representatives had the answer.80
It is difficult to evaluate the results of forty

Years of work by the Society since statistics can be mis-

leading. Many tracts were handed out, but they were not

 

 

. .
.‘. ‘
‘0.-
.
h. ...“ ’v~-ao~
.. ~
g

 

 

 

 

o..- o-
‘ .3 '

on -v. ' .

'h. I"“ «~. -

\ ‘ I
"l....'. . .‘ “
I" 2..;--‘L" >— e

.."“'-d ~v s
. . ‘
. .t O
H'. 2. '5: .. r
‘. i...“l s‘.
' a
'o
..-
...'~ __I
... .- ~ ‘.I
0 '1' .i‘\ ~‘l
-
u. ..; ‘AA' .. I
)0
—.~ .v..- , .
o
... ... ~
0 ’ ' .‘
ac h-““
fi
-.
a . .
. . .
I.‘.-' .v-~
..‘;. ‘
'> .. -
.\.. F .- ~ I.’
' - D-‘
u. A
M “‘h‘
., .
. .. ...
.. . ' ’
1..
u
l
' V"~.'
‘
‘7;- ‘
eon: t Av'.
.
_.
4
.. .
‘s-.‘
‘- "‘
-‘ s.
b..‘
.
‘-
h‘-
hi
‘°~. .
~ F
. “ N A
-h‘l“ ‘.r
Ԥ

 

 

 

 

38

always handed out wisely. Reverend (Mark?) Tucker informed
the Boston branch that overzealous workers had made mis-
takes. "Prejudices," he stated, "have been awakened by
injudicious conversation, Tracts have been left at improper
places, in some instances injury has resulted."81 And yet
statistics can suggest the magnitude of the work the Soci-
ety attempted to perform. By its fifth year of Operation
it had already published over 3,800,000 tracts of which
1,500,000 were sent to the Mississippi River Valley.82 By
1847 the Society had published 3,375,624 volumes and some
39,643,713 publications totaling over 1,800,000,000 pages
in a11.33 From 1825-1865, the Society circulated 20,000,000
kmmnd volumes and 250,000,000 tracts--a total aggregation
of 6,000,000,000 pages.84

There are other statistics which suggest the magni-
‘tude of the Society's undertaking. One was the new five
story building erected in New York City in 1846-1847, con-
taining 53 rooms, 17 presses and employing 136 persons.85
Another statistic was the Society's income. From 1825-1865
it had taken in over $8,000,000 in sales, donations, and
legacies. Prior to the formation of the national Society
in 1825, the total annual income of all local societies
ind not reached $20,000. The total receipts for the Tract
mxfiety at Andover in 1823 amounted to less than $4,300.86
The number of families visited by representatives of the

&xdety is also impressive. The Society estimated that

 

 

 

-
' ' I n o . . .
. 5
.'.""“U
' A
s .I' .. ..'.g "
I ‘—
.0. -...-..~‘.
. -
I C
.-a - _ .
an. _. --.-
I
A‘No .I .93...” 3'-
”- a. .od._a “I.
..‘ - .
. .o I, v; _. v“
~ . ... . .‘ g. ‘ . ‘
n
.p 7‘ . '
..
.- ~ ~~‘
. O
'c".. Q ~ ~
‘. - ‘ f...
.h“ '0 to ~
.-. oi.-.. . . ’ . .
0‘ ' b - V
‘uvd so. .vt‘
.. .
'i
I.‘ .."-’ . a v
a...‘ ' . .‘
-..~ .“
I
.l'. A I
h . - z A ‘ e o e u
. ’Oo‘ b” \ 4
-.‘~_' .
e . -
.v‘... .4- ; .. .‘
- ‘.‘ ..
‘0. .
. D
‘ D. ‘ ;.; : ‘
'0... .
h‘ ‘ “
.a.:
‘u' -' s. .
u- a. . "~ ‘.I
..‘ ‘ ‘

 

. ‘.A
.
s ‘ ‘ n
o F .-
§' ‘ ‘
‘ .V‘-“I
.
:u
‘
- H. Pu...”
-"'-.uv‘
~ -
.‘\,
..'- .
‘I ..'~ ‘
s ‘3: ' A“
‘t;‘
v
‘-
yes“
“u. A-“
‘
' 't. ~ ‘.
‘3 Q'v‘
a ‘ ~
‘,
- i
.0. ‘5‘.
‘ ‘
v
Q d.::‘:‘ r‘ r; *
¥~t“.
'v
F n
‘ "~ ei‘; ‘-
a
K
'«
l I-
i is
‘5 ‘0‘

y.
5 $.“
'\,
“31$;
“«3!
“ tea, '
H “
~.
0“
l“‘
‘25 v.
“06 Mr
‘ IN
.. ‘ Q ~
I
‘I:\'.
's

 

 

39

nearly 6,500,000 families (not individuals) were visited
by the colporteurs during the period from 1841-1858.37
The ability of the Society to sell over $5,000,000

worth of tracts and volumes during the period 1825-1865

is even more impressive when one remembers that many sales
were made to people who had little cash and education.
Reverend S. T. Wells, working in Western Pennsylvania,
estimated in 1852 that the average sale per family visited
was thirty-one cents; a few years previously it had been
twenty-one cents.88 The first contact was the most dif—
ficult. To aid the colporteur the Society often authorized
him.to donate a few tracts or volumes to the families. The
Second or third visit to the same area often resulted in
increased sales.89 To overcome the lack of money, Reverend
Eflijah Demond, working in Vermont and New Hampshire,
3resorted to barter. He reported that he had exchanged
'Volumes for "mittens, footings, and yarn," which he was
"able to convert into money without sacrifice."90 One col-
porteur was less fortunate. He was able to sell only
ninety cents worth of books and in making change received

a two dollar counterfeit bill.91

However,it would be misleading to assume that the

&xflety's vast income alone accounted for its impressive

Pmflication record. The Christian stewards who joined to

Organize the Tract Society reaped the benefits of the

lhmustrial revolution in the printing trade. In the late

 

 

v
.‘l-Oo.‘
- _ p
c.

..‘.'H.-‘

a ‘ .
Q ‘,
u. 0...: I...
.O
I "--
0....

0
1 :— .
i‘v. ..
a
' i
F.
o .I ‘
.
. ‘ _
-V‘O ~
‘.-..‘
e
.. u.
.0. .._

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.‘ . :‘O- .
. ‘ ' u— 'v ,
“on fi‘O. ..I.-—
‘ A D
“~' -' N- ‘7
es... . .__ .. _‘
. .
1.- ~, ’ .
O‘. .
u u-«..“ -
i: ‘L. o._ .. .
..—. _ . .. . '
u..- .. - . .
F -
. .- o.
\l H ‘
I..-
s,
.
.,u A.“ _
4 ._ n.
'v‘. 5.
¢ ‘ .
- .n._ b-..
A.
o
’ u
.. hr , ~-.
0“..-‘. ‘
a
..'
. I
\ «"~ ‘
H o.
v. r r .
aunb_‘ ‘.
- v‘
F, .
c
I a‘.
. r
. - ‘_. . =7
‘4‘. H‘-
o
v-“
N R " ’ .
u ‘ ’
I .\‘.3 Q a ’
-‘.
0.
§
"c I.
"0‘ . .a". ,
‘b
a.
.I
.
a. A‘
. ..
'. 5-“‘
a“- P:
o‘. J "“
‘.._
I..I
~\,- ‘
"t ‘ . .
H :0" '-
‘-
‘n his ‘ .
~ -‘

 

 

 

 

 

4O

eighteenth century, rapid printing was held back by the
press technique. Around 1800 the cylindrical Koenig Press
was invented. By 1814 steam was harnassed to move the
printing apparatus of the Koenig press thus increasing the
output from 200 impressions to 550 impressions per hour.

In 1825 the New York Daily Advertizer became the first

 

American paper to utilize a steam driven Koenig press which
by this date printed up to 2,000 sheets per hour. Seven
years later Richard Hoe of New York enlarged the Koenig
press and doubled its output. In 1846 the Hoe Company had
devised the Hoe Press which could print 8,000 sheets per
hour. The Tract Society's new printing house, erected in
1847, contained six power-presses and two hand-presses
capable of printing over 500,000 pages a day. Meanwhile,
the introduction of stereotyping made the combination of
mass production and low prices possible. Without this the
penny press would have been impossible.92

The Tract Society, like the Penny Press, also reaped
the benefit of the common school movement. Although that
nmvement had not taken hold in most southern states except
in North Carolina prior to the Civil War, this was not
true of the states north of the Mason-Dixon line. Conse-
quently, at least in the North, most members of the native—
born laboring classes were literate. The question was not
whether they would read but what they would read. The

finact Society was concerned that they might read the "wrong"

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘
3 'v
‘ 5..
‘ ‘
l‘ . I; .9q--'_ :,9
.... b. on.-_‘ ‘ -.
n
.\ ‘ .
._- p s ..- q '
‘ - o.
u . .o-......‘ .-
- o
..-,' .' .
F4
sab"..‘ ‘h
‘ A
~.
. ~- '
‘.
.ny 9...-” --.
h
u , .,
;._QI .'_‘
...
' ..
8:. -I. ‘V-an
. .
u .. ~c_-.;'
.I‘U 3‘ I
.‘ . '
».-u,;_“£§; '. . .~
‘ i..' ‘.‘ ‘
o
‘. _§.- "'-
. ‘ a i
' .
V ‘c‘--“
.
o
.
.‘- ' ’
Q.. ~
.~ 5‘.
n
._-
‘4“ ...
§.-.. ’
.
v. .
5..
,-
. ‘ ‘-.
. ‘
no: ’t‘ ‘
Ԥ

 

 

 

41

novels and periodicals. But the important point is that

 

 

K the Tract Society had a ready-made reading audience.93
Even a brief history of the American Tract Society
would be incomplete without some discussion of the Society
as a publishing house. At first the American Tract Society
relied heavily upon tracts published by the Society at

Andover, which in turn had received many of its tracts from

 

England. However the New York group also began to issue
their own tracts, and between 1827-1850 they published
approximately fifteen new tracts annually.94 By 1837 it
had tracts available in fifty-six languages.95

In its publication of volumes, the Society relied
upon both contemporary authors and writers from the past.
One of the first volumes to be published was Philip

Doddridge's Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul of

 

Men. Four men had donated $800 in 1828 for the publication
of this book,but the actual publication did not begin until

1829.96 One of the Society's best sellers was John Bunyan's

 

/ Pilgrim's Progress. In 1837 the Committee even received a

donation of $1,000 for a special publication of Pilgrim's

 

Progress for the blind.97 Later such titles as Richard

Baxter's Saint's Rest and Call to the Unconverted, Jonathan

 

 

 

‘ Edwards' Life of Brainerd and Treatise on Affections, J. G.

Pike's Persuasives to Early Piety, Jean Henri Merle

 

IPAubagne's History of the Reformation, William Nevin's

 

 

Eggctical Thoughts and Thoughts on Popery, and Justin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. F I- . I ‘
.
n iodv ‘“..-.."
. u
'. . ‘.O ..
~ ‘ . P’
.5...“ . u ‘. v.
.7»
‘.“ .u': 1..-,
.~. nfi h-».,"__ .
A. I. ..
-._ .. ~ .
‘K.‘ ‘. . .
u. nu ~-n.-.¢._‘-.
. .
.I'...-‘.’ -
u... .v.‘.
.
.‘_‘
’w. . ‘
~_.: ‘ v” »,, .
-.‘I ~. ‘-
a
I“.
‘.6., .
.. i
. ..' ' '
-_ . .I
5
--_‘ ‘.
>~ _ .
~ ‘_~ v
~
‘1.“‘- -A
.
.
- .-‘
‘ "b-
. .. . ’
.L‘.“-‘ ‘
\ i...
'n
. I
.,; . ' g
. ~ 0
p
‘ .Q: to ‘ o .
-.~‘ ~
0
._‘
.~ _
“' -v._‘~
‘ .
\“.‘ '- .F‘!
s-_
O.‘
'l n- -
s
u‘ ..
01.: ." ‘
a C
~.‘ .
.a
\
1’.
g
.1 ‘ a,
t. ‘H»,'.
“'<‘« .y
d ‘3...‘
3..
. ‘
I... ‘--
b In F “
¢.. -’ ‘
‘ A . F
u ?'
‘3‘
‘ a
.“
‘.‘ "‘
~.. ‘
“.
‘-.'; s,
‘..‘
‘
\.;
"~":b.h-
‘Q‘n-
“a r ,..
\
‘~
‘I
h
\i

   

\'-
S
'o. ‘I ‘
‘ \l‘ ‘r_
p I
‘u
(6,.
D.
\‘ .I.
r
‘ 4 u
'1' ‘+
\ v.
' ..,C.y-h
\‘ r‘
:5
.- h
‘..I:.'. ‘
“ {P‘- I
V -' t.
\. F
. ‘..
.
,\
' .
'1‘”.
‘ u
"“us .
M.‘ ‘*R
. “°
'::EI‘

 

 

 

 

42

Edwards' Sabbath Manuals were added to the list. The Soci-
ety also published children's books. In 1834 it began to
publish a number of Jacob Abbots' books. In 1843 Abbot's
works were combined with those of other authors, including
Thomas H. Gallaudet's scriptural biographies, to form a
special forty-volume Youth Library selling at $10.98
Furthermore, by 1850, the Society's publications listed
forty-two books in German, eleven in French, and six in
Spanish.99

Besides tracts and volumes, the Society also pub-
lished almanacs and magazines. The Christian Almanack was
first published by the group at Andover in 1821. In 1831
the American Tract Society published twenty-two separate
e(iitions of the almanac, designed to meet the needs of the
various geographic regions of the country. Four years
later the number of separate editions had dropped to seven-
teen.loo The three most pOpular magazines published by
the American Tract Society were the American Tract Magazine,
the American Messenger, and the Child's Paper. The first
cDue was begun as a bi-monthly magazine by the Andover
group in 1824. In 1828 it became a monthly magazine and
in 1843 it merged with the American Messenger, published
in New York. The American Tract Society at Boston did
Ilot publish its own magazine again until after it had
severed its relationship with the New York organization

in 1859.101 The American Messenger proved to be successful.

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

.
~
I .17‘.-"
Ole-8-.
O
. ‘ ‘ .
.5. i- n -. ...‘ -
\s.~-.-‘. 0-. .'.~
. :-
OI. .fi‘ ‘.-'.. ‘I-
’ a
nu... u..— .v". _‘_ _
"" -‘D .
' ~" r.- ‘
.........., ‘. ‘
...
. .. .
n .I. \ 0....
u .'.. l. h —‘
I
p. I
v" r
~i““ .-
o
'“ 0,
ct... ~' ..‘
‘ I
. 'C’ c
I.-. "
.
" .3‘0- ’_
u..- .Iv“.
.-
1'2‘o.“ _
u... E fin; gr.“
-.' ‘EL'J. ‘-
A.
A
u. . . “v I
' u " I. _'_
s... '~.~ ..

 

o..
iu,‘
..:::. f‘ “
‘~ c tr ~.
.94 :4 -
' .
5. ‘n ‘
~‘~a ‘ .
' fir.hh
§|.‘4l3'°. “
I!
.
‘.\ ‘-
-‘ 3'
in: e. " ‘
In (‘5‘..-
.;-. .
I,
V
o .‘ ,"
‘ If. 9'.
dun» r~ifiar
‘\
‘
.
.‘I y. a”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

L

43

In 1849 it had a circulation of 140,000 and boasted of
"reaching a larger number of families . . . than any
periodical in the world."]-02 Two years later its circu-
lation had increased to 186,000 and the German edition,
the "Amerikanischer Botschafter," had a circulation of
18,000.103 A special periodical for children, the Child‘s
32231;, was begun in January, 1852. Its sales increased
rapidly and by May, 1853, its circulation reached the quar—
ter million mark.104

One factor which helped in boosting sales was the
attractive appearance of the Society's publications. In
1823 the American Tract Society at Andover began to use
stereotype plates and wood cut engravings. It also trimmed
the edges of the tracts and utilized a better quality paper
t1‘lan the New England Tract Society had used previously.105
BY 1827 the American Tract Society at New York began to put
sDecial covers on all tracts containing at least eight
Pages. It also stressed the importance of illustrations
in its almanacs.106 The Society emphasized the art work
to such an extent that, according to Thompson, it led the
‘Vay for other American publishers during the 1850's and the
1860's.107

At the same time that the Society was attempting
to make its products as attractive as possible, it was also

attempting to sell them as cheaply as possible. The New

\Englander praised the Society for selling a "beautifully

 

 

-v~.

~
“~- . h.

 

.
u n. 9... u.
"’ 0-
M... -...u.
,
n .
,3. '.'v a,
" ... ._.-
l.' “‘ a.
i... u .
-~ I»... ‘-
.
-&
‘. ~. A ~
. .e...." .
4
'0
. . - _
. .., .- .
i. p
."b .
. ..
v . -.
.. ‘,_ .. ‘
... in. "
‘- -
. ._ I . .
~‘I.' “a. .-
~
‘. ‘s
.p .. '.
..-." ~
‘5”
.. __ . g
“'P ~\. u.‘
u 'i'...‘
.
I -
.'~ ~- ‘ -.'F
-"‘ ~ 5-.
s -.._
o

 

 

 

4.. ~_’_
‘ . x
'5 u.

 

O
a. _ .
V. O...
A '
..
~~..__
:7
-.. ‘
‘~, r.
s
”we...
. . _.
_..,. _.
4
'-> .
n. _
5". '.
N. A‘-
,
..,- .
.c
'h.. -V
' v
.~.“
4
s," ‘
0-
-~_.. -.
FR ‘0-
‘ 0
Il‘-.‘
‘
r-” ‘
.o‘
."‘v 0.
o

 

c...'_
u. 5...:
H 'I.
‘ e.":" P‘
"~D '.
:r‘f“ r"
s s“.‘:
'n" ‘F
‘b

e

 

 

 

 

44

printed almanac" containing sixty pages and twelve illus—

trations at six cents when other almanacs containing only

twelve pages "of dingy paper and miserable print" were sell—

ing for twelve cents.108 The tracts were sold for 1,000

pages per dollar. But if one included the covers and the

mlper cent discount to auxiliaries, the Society was actu-
ally selling‘many of its tracts at 1,500 pages per dol-
la.r'.109 The first volumes to be printed by the Society

SOld for an average of thirty-seven and one-half cents per

\Rllume. But even this price decreased. Its special forty-

‘Nllume Youth Library sold at $10 in 1843. In 1855 the

SCNZiety estimated that it could publish six books for $1.

The least expensive volume to be sold by the Society was
the Tract Primer; it sold for ten cents per copy.110 As

one historian has pointed out, this

was the first American eXperience with a uniform,
standard package, sold nationally at a uniform,

standard price stated on the package, backed by a
national campaign of advertising and sales promo—

tion.1
It was precisely the application of the industrial

1‘evolution to the printing presses which made these cheap

Exrices and mass circulation possible. Nor was the Tract
SQciety's pricing policy atypical for Jacksonian America.
tune 1830's witnessed the rise of the penny newspaper. Prior

t4) this time papers were usually sold by subscription at $10

‘t<3 $14 per week. Those that were sold over the counter cost

five to six cents per c0py. The cost of these papers was

 

- D
"“5 9‘r o .
.i. “-
oe..r- fir. .
1.__

‘. ‘
.’ ".‘."".. _-
‘ ~m.¢_‘ .
”" ¢. .. .
.
" o-.. ‘
“o .
O '3.) .. I
.‘......-

 

 

 

 

 

 

“ I .: V _.
u l d
-. "A ”v.” ..' .
.. . . H ’
'.; “b 0- ‘ n
h. .""’ be...—
.
.Q. g. A.‘ .;-.
... ‘0 -. -.-: '- .‘- :
".. -‘
.0 D th‘v ..' > '
‘~. 5...-» _
.
‘ I
u... . .
'.c - h.‘-V .‘" ' I
.. ~ -~ -- - "‘. I
.t. ‘. . ‘ - u -
l.‘h .' . c
- .‘I‘ .. ....’ ‘
.u .
-... l—Lr |:‘: r.- ,. . _.
OvI.‘~U ¥,.._‘.
- ‘ .
... ‘a .
n. “ ..
sur- -u .._--v
‘ F
I.._~ . 9. " ' ‘.
un". ~ .
.‘..~.. ..' I
v
Q‘ l.. ‘. I
‘ I
vi». fl.';. ‘
._.
n I: “
.v“. ‘
vo.‘
V. " A ‘ .
-. v -\ I.
‘0. ' g. A
C
.4
u
.“
.-
.‘.- ’ .
n
u.‘..:‘ h "‘ '
Qua s..t ‘4‘
s
V.‘
I l
11.! ‘n,. ‘
.-
s I ‘u. ”5' y,
3-..\‘ .1.
is,
Q~?-.n
s. ‘
H" V" 4- . ...
e.
an ...~ a".
,ul'
\I L ‘
‘ dP _
no» . ~,."- r‘_*' ’
‘H ‘Al A
U -.. ‘
u
‘3‘, v
e
5% “FA . '
. ““v ' A '

‘., ‘4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

45

prohibitive for the common man. The penny press changed
this. It changed not only its price but its clientele.
Journalism was now also for the masses. By 1833 the Ngw
York Sun sold its papers to the newsboys at 100 copies for
sixty-seven cents who in turn attempted to resell the lot
for $1 or one cent per c0py. The presses also put out a
number of cheap weekly and monthly magazines. Theodore
Dwight's American Penny Magazine, published in New York
from 1845 to 1851, sold at three cents per copy while fic-
tion weeklies containing pirated stories and "spicy" tales
Sold for as little as two cents per copy. In fact entire
pirated English novels were sold for a dime.112
Just what was contained in the tracts, periodicals,

and books which the Society distributed and sold over the
vast country-side at a uniform, low price? Since future
chapters will be devoted to a study of the religious,
political, social, and economic views of the Society as
cOntained in the publications, it will be necessary to make
cDuly a few general statements at this time. There was
rt1aterial for the skeptic, the Unitarian, the "errorist,"
aJud the Roman Catholic. There were moralistic treatices
0n temperance, sabbath observance, profanity, and vain
I3leasures. There was literature designed to teach children
the need for evangelical religion, industriousness, and
Obedience. And of course, there were the Tract Primers

designed to teach the illiterate the art of reading.

 

 

 

 

 

 

46

The Society claimed to have something for everyone.
This is evident in the following report of a colporteur:

Gave a volume of Tracts to a Frenchman who can read
English; he is a Protestant, but has no Bible and no
book, except a spelling book. Baxter's Call to an
impenitent family whose library of "reformers" in

the same condition. Alleine's Alarm to another
impenitent family, with but one small book in the
house. Dairyman's Daughter to a lad, the only

reader in the family, which was destitute of the
Bible and all religious books. Baxter's Call to an
impenitent woman, who appeared thoughtful about her
soul, but with no Bible or other religious book.
Practical Thoughts to a Methodist family with only

a part of the Testament for their library. Bible
Thoughts to a family without a book. "Keeping the
Heart" to a Methodist family destitute of the Bible
and all other books. Volume of Tracts to a family
who had joined the Reformers the previous week, but
had no part of the Bible, and only one other book,
and that of no value. Alleine's Alarm to a converted
German Catholic who desired it to lend to his impeni—
tent friends. Thoughts of Popery to a man surrounded
with Romanists, to whom he wished to read it.113

In its publications the Society often aimed at

"Jight literature." Jacksonian America was not noted for
ists love of scholarly or classical works and neither was
the Tract Society. One speaker at the annual meeting in
31856 frankly recognized this fact. He praised the Society
'for stressing "light literature." Such literature, he
Stated,

instead of taking rank on the shelves of a library,

passes at once into the hands of the peOple, incor—

porates itself with the thoughts and feelings of the

community, and then, having accomplished its mission,

drops into the ground.
“Phe same speaker further stated that the "greatest names

iin.literature, Homer and Shakespeare," were names about

Vfihich his society knew the least. This was "but an index

 

 

 

O
s
u
v".
u.
". ..Q
C
' v
:.-.--: ,
‘ .-
'5'.'v~ o.“
. . .A '
.:' :0...-.;.
~.' ...:Q.--‘ .- .-
«-
o
. "-b~-..-_'
I ‘ “
Ac.“ w..‘.‘...”‘
.
;" Av- . .' ..
.0...‘.. a ..-- ‘l
‘
on 2.- _ -' ~.
s . ‘
U. .-_‘- "'A-.. i
C
.0. " .,-A '
a ....
—.. e.~._ " .
~ \
0.9..- ".- . I
4 . ‘. .
I..-.. .‘: ..-I‘
.
.
.0
e
.c: .t‘ V ... z- I
.‘ “.' “' ‘
'I. ‘
Ir -. .
: ‘ P v ' . ‘
CI-. ."‘ h‘ “
. d
l'-., .
._ t :n .’ 2 ~. -. .
.‘ cu ‘ . e..‘.
.
. F-
uu'~ \ .p; ‘“A‘ ' ‘-
l ' be. to
\- E‘-‘h-
.
o". .
c... .
I I A .I "
‘0‘...‘ A
i‘. -o..
9..
I
\ o .
IN: “.1" A-" w
u- ‘ ‘ ‘
. “' I
I
Q
‘:‘I.
“ ~ “. "n-
. A
‘ ‘ .:\ ~‘_ .
~ . ‘-
'.'
._ .
. D
‘0": ‘;‘>-r ‘ .
4‘...“ ..‘
G‘. (.‘
II
..; ~
"‘ m s” ‘
:‘c ' r
I ‘1‘ u
'u
l '
“‘. h I .
sua. NH‘ "
U
II. “.
;I
. __
'-..\' ‘
' \
n... ”’ ".'~
“ a~c ..
“ ta.
.-
‘ |
..‘ .'
II \ a;
.‘I‘ -F
cc 5‘: .‘l‘
I.“.
.1
v
:. '5.
r" ‘ I,
." .u' .
c. ., ‘
-x» ~ ”5‘ .
Q‘;;
N
' I
Q
\.\ ‘
a. e '
~ .
‘ T.
K H.
'.c
I
. .
" :~ ‘
'-5 $'
“Ce P.‘.
Itq~lpr
U

 

47

of the fact, that they had least influence in their own
day."114
Besides publishing "light literature," the Society

also attempted to publish material which was simple and
straightforward. The publishing committee sought tracts
which contained

enough of the Gospel to guide the wandering sinner

to Jesus Christ, should they find their way where

the Bible was never seen, and the preaching of the

Gospel was never heard.115
This was quite an admirable undertaking since some tracts
were only four pages in length. Truth would have to be
conveyed in a minimum number of words. According to the
reports the Society received, some of the tracts did meet
this qualification. One boy in Boston received a tract
and the next day "resolved" that he "would serve the Lord."
One tract was "made an arrow" by the Holy Spirit to the soul
of the father. After reading the tract he was no longer
"found guilty of using profane language, or of excessive
drinking." But the ultimate in success was achieved when
a physician "was brought to serious consideration by read-
ing a single sentence in a Tract."116 Obviously these
reports were biased. But they demonstrate the optimism of
the Society. If only the right words would be broadcast
across the nation, the Republic could be saved.

Few could have better summarized the aim and metho-

dology of the American Tract Society than Reverend John

Breckenridge of Baltimore. In his address at the sixth

 

 

“‘ ""‘w- n‘ .-
' . \G ..
' "‘ ' u. .--5
N... " -o-u.-. .- .
.' . I- '..4
"‘ .o....,..
n
" ’va.l
. .
'.-o...u
.
n

a.

-.., ___;
"‘~ v -
.
.‘H -o- -
. ‘ ‘
'Ia.‘¥-.-1
'.
- ..‘_
- .- Uh.
'1
wt .
.v 9
.g
‘
~.
.
.
._.I

 

48

anniversary of the national Society, Reverend Breckenridge
heartily endorsed the Tract Society's work in the follow-
ing words:
Such is the cheapness and profusion with which you
throw them off from the press, that they offer a
most extraordinary facility for widely and rapidly
Spreading Christianity through every reading com-
munity on earth.117
The Society had used mass production and low prices to
diffuse Christianity throughout the land. It may not have

reached every reading community on earth, but it had reached

a goodly number.

 

FOOTNOTES--CHAPTER I

1Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 23.

 

2The formation of benevolent societies in America
is well portrayed in Clifford S. Griffin, Their Brothers'
Keepers: Moral Stewardship in the United States, 1800-1865
(New BrunszCk, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1960),
pp. 23-43. (Hereinafter cited as Griffin, Their Brothers'

Keepers.)

3Charles 1. Foster, An Errand of Mercy: The Evan-
gelical United Front, 1790-1837 (Chapel Hill: University
of North Carolina Press, 1960), pp. 149-50 (hereinafter
cited as Foster, Errand of Mercy). The tendency of Ameri-
cans to form societies impressed foreigners (see Alexis
de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, ed. by Richard D.
Heffner, Mentor Books [New York: New American Library,
1956], pp. 95-101 [hereinafter cited as Tocqueville, 23m,
in America]).

 

 

4Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 16. The English
origins of the benevolent societies is discussed in Foster,
Errand of Mercy, pp. 3-118.

 

5Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 16; Robert Baird,
The Christian Retrospect and Register: A Summary of Scien-
tific, Moral, and Religious Progress of the First Half of
the Nineteenth Century (New York: M. W. Dodd, 1851),
p. 247 (hereinafter cited as Baird, Christian Retrospect
and Register). There seems to be some confusiOn as to
date. According to Robert Baird, the Religious Tract
Society in London was formed one day later, on May 10,
1799 (see Robert Baird, The Christian Retrospect and

Register, p. 247).
6

 

 

 

Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, pp. 16-17.

49

 

 

50

7Ibid., pp. 17-18; Baird, Christian Retrospect and
Register, p. _254.

8Annual Report, N. Y., 1850, p. 18, Annual Report,

Bost., 1823, p. 46: Charles Roy Keller, The Second Great
Awakeningin Connecticut (New Haven: Yale University

Press, 42), p. 210 (hereinafter cited as Keller, Sec.
Great Awakening in Conn.); David M. Ludlum, Social FEEment
in Vermont, 1791-1850 (New York: Columbia University Press,
1939), p. 53 (hereinafter cited as Ludlum, Soc. Ferment

in Ver.).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 19.

 

loIbid., pp. 20- 22; Annual Report, Bost., 1845,
pp. 5- 6, Dr. —Hallock' 3 Golden Wedding: Fifty Years in
the Tract Society, September 26,1822--September 26, 1872
(New York: American Tract Society, (1872?T), p. 6 (herein-
after cited as Hallock's Golden wedding).

 

 

11Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, pp. 20-21; Annual
Report, Bost.,,1845, p. 5; Lawrence Thompson, " he Print-
ing and—Publishing Activities of the American Tract
Society from 1825-1850," Bibliographical Society of Amer-
ican Papers, XXXV (Second Quarter, 1941), 86 (hereinafter
cited as Thompson, "Printing and Publishing").

 

 

 

12Annual Report, Bost., 1823, p. 5; Hallock's

 

 

13H. C. Knight, Memorial of the Rev. Wm. A. Hallock,

D. D., First Secreta_y of the American Tract Society (New
York: American Tract Soc1ety, n. d. ), p. 35 (here1nafter
cited as Knight, Hallock); Stuart Bruchey, The Roots of
American Economic Growth, 1607- 1861. An Essay in Social
Causation (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), pp. 153-60
(hereinafter cited as Bruchey, The Roots of Am. Ec. Growth).

 

 

 

14Annual Report, N.Yg, 1850, pp. 22-23. Reverend
Hallock later recalled the pledges for a new Society House
by New York businessmen. Arthur Tappan stated, "Well, I've
determined to give $5,000 to it." Mr. Moses Allan added,
"I'll give another three, and I think my brother Solomon
will give to it." Mr. W. W. Chester stated, ”Put me down
for a thousand," and another New Yorker, Richard T. Haines,
also pledged $1,000 (see Hallock's Golden wedding, pp.
10-11). The complete list ofiNew York city donors for

 

 

 

It'
1a

51

tine Society's House as listed in Annual Reports, N.Y.,
1826, pp. 46-47, includes 6 donating $1,000-$5,000, 6
aonating $500-$999, 34 donating $100-$499, 52 donating
$50-$99 as well as a number donating less than $50.

15Frank Luther Mott, A History of American Maga-

EliénesJL 1741-1850, I (Cambridge: Harvard University

Press, 1939), 3:75 (hereinafter cited as Mott, Hist. of

Ami. Ma .); Bernard A. Weisberger, The American Newspaper-

Imarx C icago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), p. 105
ereinafter cited as weisberger, Am. Newspaperman). On

the impact of the printing revolution on the local elites

See Leonard Richards, "Gentlemen of Property and Standing:"

AUlti—Abolition Mobs in Eackgonian America—(New York:

Ch! ord University Press, 1970), passim (hereinafter cited

3&3 Richards, "Gentlemen of Property and Standipg").

 

 

 

16Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 22.

17Hallock's Golden Wedding, p. 8.

181bid.; Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 22.

 

19Annua1 Report, N.Y., 1850, pp. 22-26; Annual

IheEort, Bost., 1845, pp.i5-6; Hallock's Goldgn wedding,
Pp. 8-11; John S. Stone, A Memo1r of the Life of James
Efiglnor, D.D., Late Rector of St. George'skghurch, New
'York (New York: American Tract Society, 1848), pp. 245-
9 hereinafter cited as Stone, Milnor); S. V. S. Wilder,
Eggords from the Life of S. V. S. Wilder (New York:
American Tract Society, 1868), pp. 230:31 (hereinafter
Cited as Wilder, Records); Lewis Tappan, The Life of

Arthur Ta an (New York: Hurd and Houghton, 1870),
Pp. 73-74 (hereinafter cited as Tappan, Arthur

Tappan) .

20Wilder, Records, pp. 230-31; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1865' pp. lS-Ijo

 

 

21Annual Report, N.Y., 1826, p. 5; Annual Report,

Bost., 18237—57‘31;

22Annual Report, N.Y., 1826, p. 5.

 

231bid.

 

52

24Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers, p. 191;
'Tuesponsibility in the Management of Soc1eties, New
Englander, V (April, 1847), 28-40 (hereinafter cit—5d
as Responsibility in . . . Soc.").

. 25The finance committee was later increased to
81): members .

26These included two of the original large donors
t1) the Society's House in 1825, Moses Allen, and Richard

T. Haines.

27Griffin, Their Brothers} Keepers, p. 275. There
Seems to be a confusion in Griffin's account. On footnote
nNumber 2, page 275, Griffin points out the duplication in
the executive committee. He calculates that there were
210 possible openings during the first 35 years. He may
1leave reached this figure by multiplying 6 openings times 35
Years. However, if he is counting the whole executive com-
Illittee, the number of openings per year would be more than
E3- If he is counting only the publishing committee, the
number would be less than 6 because, until 1841, there

were only 5 openings.

28Annual Report, N.Y., 1826, pp. 6-7; Annual Report,
M'! 1842’ p0 fi-

29Mott, Hist. of Am. Mag., II, 312-15.

30"Responsibility in . . . Soc.," p. 36.

311bid., pp. 37-38.

32Annual Report, Bost., 1823, pp. 65-66; A Brief
Eistory of the American Tract Society, Instituted at Bos-
3on, 1814, and its Relations to the American Tract Societ
at New York,Instityted1825 (Boston: T. R. Marvin, 185 ,
:pp. 16-17‘Thereinafter cited as A Brief Hist. of the Am.
flmact Soc.,_. . . Bost.); Foster, Errand of Mercy,

Pp. I§3-§Io
33Annual Report, N.Y., 1837, Article VII, p. 3.

34Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 25.

 

no.

1.
4..

 

 

 

n<

... v;

u. .11

wk. «3

9* wt
rp- «:1
"A [.5-

Z.
.4

o.““

)
f‘.

.n4

 

53

35For example, see the list of female branches and

auxiliaries in Annual Report, N.Y., 1845, pp. 141-58.

 

36Annual Report, N.Ye, 1837, p. 46; Annual Report,
NQY}, 1843, p. 69; Annual Reporp, N.Y., 1848, p. 80;
‘Nmnnal Re ort, Bost.,_1848, pp. 82-83; Agnual Report, N.Y.,
lEZg, pp. 49-55; Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 51; Annual
1&3 ort, N.Y., 1864, pp. 116-23: Annual Report, N.Y., I865,
FL- 30; Halioékis Golden Wedding, p. 18.

 

 

 

 

 

 

37Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 51.

38Annual Report, N.Y., 1829, p. 27.

39Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 31.

40Annual Report, N.Y., 1829, pp. 28-29.

 

. 41Ibid. By December, 1829, the refusals had
ilncreased to one family out of every sixty (see Annual
_R_emrt, N.Y., 1830, p. 31).

42Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 43.

43Annual Report, N.Y., 1838, p. 13: Hallock's

Qplden wedding, p.10.

 

44Annual Report, N.Y., 1838, p. 30.

45Baird, Christian Retrospect and Register, p. 257.

46Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 127.

47Baird, Christian Retroepect and Register, p. 257.

48Annual Report, N.Y., 1836, p. 43.

49Annual Repprt, N.Y., 1851, pp. 4, 71.

5°Annua1 Report, N.Y., 1858, pp. 39, 63; Annual

Report, N.Y., I860, pp. 43-44T‘

51Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 59.

...-.

 

 

fi/h
rhv

52

Eerian Church in the C
Presbyterian Ehurch, 19

29C).

54

 

Shepherd Knapp, A History of the Brick Presby-
Br1c

lgesbyterian Church . )

53

1%

James L. Crouthamel,

: PP-

113,

121, 144,
(Hereinafter cited as Knapp, Hist. of the Brick

of New York (New Yofk:

270, 285,

 

, "The Newspaper Revolution
III New York, 1830-1860," New York History, LXIV (April,

 

1-964), 104-05, 112, 58-59 (hereinafter cited as Crouthamel,
The Newspaper Rev. in N.Y."); R. Freman Butts and Lawrence

A.

Ytlrk:
T.

New York ,

Cremin, A History of Education in American Culture (New

 

1830:1860

 

-1860:

¥

Holt, Rinehart andWinston, 1953), p. 284; Douglas

Miller, Jacksonian Aristocracy: Class and Democracy in

 

(New York:

Oxford University Press,
6 ), pp.—5i, 130-34 (hereinafter cited as Miller, Jack-
SOnian Aristocracy); Norman Ware, The Industrial Worker,

 

TheReaction of American Industrial §ociety
E§3_the Advance of the Industrial Revolution (Boston:

 

Ehpughton Mifflin Co., 1924), p. 38; Philip S. Foner,
Iilstory of the Labor Movement in the Upited States, Vol. I:
From Colonial Times to the Founding of the AmeriCan Feder-

 

\F—T—
ation of Labor (New York:

Pp. 88-101.

54

55

56

International PubliShers,l947),

Annual Report, N.Y.,

1852, p.

 

Annual Report, N.Y.,

1856, p.

 

Ibid., p.

61.

124.

110; See also Annual Report, N.Y.,

 

1848, p. 74; Annual Report, N.Ye, 1856, p. 144.

57

gpy., 18587‘pf‘fifi.

58

59

60

61

62

63

 

Annual Report, N.Y., 1857, p.

Annual

 

Report,

N.Y.,

1865, p.

 

Annual

Repert,eN.Y.,

1855, p.

 

Annual

Report,

N.Ye,

1857, p.

 

Annual

Report,

N.Y.,

1852, p.

 

Annual

Annual

Report,

Report,

1844, p.

1852, p.

135; Annual Report,

 

117.

71.

129.

61.

22.

61.

55

64Annual Reporp, N.Y., 1857, pp. 98-100.

 

65Annual Report, N.Y., 1842, p. 50; Annual Report,

 

 

11:23, 1843, p. 45; Annual Repert, N.Y., 1844, pp. 65,
69; Annual Report, N.Y.,_1855, p. 143.

 

 

66Annual Report, N.Y., 1855, p. 62.

 

67Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 155.

 

68Annual Report, Bost., 1843, pp. 38-39.

 

69William Hordern, A Layman's Guide to ProtestanE
Tflaeology (rev. ed.; London: MacMillan Co., 1969), p. 147.

 

70Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 36.

 

71Annual Report,_N.Y., 1848, p. 80.

 

72Annual Report, Bost., 1843, p. 45.

 

73Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, p. 80.

 

74Annual Report, Bost., 1826, pp. 9-10.

 

75Annual Report, Bost., 1843, p. 35.

 

76Annual Report, N.Y., 1846, p. 92.

 

77Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 112.

 

78Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers, pp. 11-15;
Richard J. Purcell, Connecticut in Transition, 1775-1818
(Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press,
1919), passim.

 

 

79Annual Report, N.Y., 1852, p. 55.

 

80Annual Report, N.Y., 1844, p. 54.

 

81Annual Report, Bost., 1836, p. 7.

 

56

82Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 15.

 

83Annual Report,eN.Y., 1837, p. 20.

 

84Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 6.

 

85Annual Report, N.Y., 1847, pp. 32-35.

 

86Annual Report, N. Y., 1865, pp. 6, 155; Annual
Report, Bost., 1823, p. 32.

 

87Annual Report, N. Y., 1858, p. 37. This would,
Tubwever, probably include families visited for the second
or third time.

 

88Annual Reporp, N.Y., 1852, p. 44.

 

89Annual Report, N.Y., 1855, p. 38; Annual Report,

 

 

ZELYy, 1857, pp. 26,104.

90Annual Report, Bost., 1842, p. 28.

 

91Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 101.

 

92Frank L. Mott, American Journalism: A History

of Newspapers in the United States Through 250 Years,

40 (New York: The MacMilIan Co., 1941), pp. 203- 04,
314 (hereinafter cited as Mott, Am. Journalism); Weis-
berger, The Am. Newsp_perman, pp. 88- -93, 122; Louis Dudek,
Qiterature andithe Press: A History of Printing, Printed
Media, and Their Relation to Literature (Toronto: Ryer-
son Press, 1960), pp. 74-75, 92-96 (hereinafter cited as
Dudek, Lit. and the Press); Crouthamel, "The Newspaper
Rev. in‘NTYT7w—E§T_IU5:U6.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

93W’eisburger, Am. Newspeperman, pp. 89-90.

 

94Thompson, "Printing and Publishing," pp. 90-91.

95Annual Report, Bost., 1837, p. 13.

 

96Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, p. 10; Annual Report,
ELY., 1829, p. 10.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

57

97Annual Report, N.Y., 1837, p. 22.

 

98Annual Re ort, Bost.1 1843, p. 79; Thompson,

"Printing and PuinsHing," pp. 95-96. Jacob Abbot was
‘t:he author of the "Rollo" books. He was the brother of
John C. Abbot who had joined with Thomas H. Gallaudet in
iffounding the American Asylum for the deaf, and the dumb

( see Thompson, "Printing and Publishing," pp. 95-96;
zagnnual ReportL N.Y., 1852, p. 17).

 

99Annual Report, N.Y., 183 , pp. 14-15; Hallock's

§§<oldepiwedding, p. 14; Thompson, "Printing and Publishing,"
E>];.’IO7-08.

 

loomnual RgPort' N.Y., 1831, p. 9; Annual Rgportr

'EL,Y3, 1835, p. 23.

 

101The Boston Society published its own Tract

{Tournal and The Child at Home in 1859. By this time it
llad severed its relationship with New York due to dif~
Iferences of opinion concerning the slavery issue (see
finnual Report, Bost., 1860, p. 9).

102Annual Repert, N.Y., 1849, p. 21.

103Annual Report, N.Y., 1851, p. 21.

104Annual Report! N.Y., 1853, p. 23.

105Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 21.

106Annual Repert, N.Y., 1827, p. 11; Annual Report,

 

y.Y., 1849, p. 21.

107Thompson, "Printing and Publishing," p. 102.

108Annual Re ort N.Y., 1849, p. 21; Thompson,
"Printing and PuBIisHing,“ p.4104f' (Thompson cites the
fgpual Report, N.Y.L 1849 but cites page 19 instead of
Page 21 . )

 

109Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 24.

-
u 'l
. . ~
.
.._ \
u
. ‘~
v-
.. t-

 

p.
.Q
‘
~

 

 

(I)

58

110Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, p. 10; AnnualiReport,
lBost. 1843, p. 79; Annual Report, N.Y., 1855, pp. 38, 97.
flifie Tract Primer and the Picture Alphabet were modelled,
aitzleast in part, after the New EnglandPrimer. They
elnployed the format of including a Bib1e verse or a bib-
1.;ical injunction for each letter of the alphabet. For the
1.<etter "C," the Tract Primer included the following:
C, is for Christ, Who for sinners was slain;
By Him, 0 how freely, salvation we gain.
(Child's Paper, VII [July, 1855], 26) . Meanwhile the
Picture Alphabet included the following statements for

FEe letter "C":
Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this

is right.
Eph. 6:1

 

Let children that would fear the Lord,
Hear what their teachers say;
With reverence meet their parents' word,

And with delight obey.
(:Ehe Pictgre Alphabet: In Prose and Verse [New York:

‘Punerican Tract Society, n.d.], p. 5).

111Foster, Errand of Mercy, pp. 139-40.

112Mott, Hist. of Am. Mag., I, 358-65; Mott,
{gm Journalism, pp. 216-43; Weisberger, Am. Newspaper-

113Annual Report, Bost., 1843, p. 35.

114Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, pp. 11-12.

115Annual Report, N.Y., 1826, p. 27.

116Annual Report, N.Y., 1829, pp. 32-33.

117Annual Report, N.Y., 1831, p. 83.

CHAPTER II

A BIOGRAPHICAL STUDY--THE CLERGY

Few eras have been more fruitful in Spawning benevo-
lent societies than the first three decades of the nine—
tEBenth century. When the promoters of the American Tract
S<>ciety proudly announced the formation of yet another
Ibenevolent and religious organization in 1825, the public
llflight well have asked why men should organize so many
EJhilanthropic and religious societies. According to Cotton
1Weather, the eighteenth century Puritan divine, "doing good
VVas a sound policy, a mild but effective instrument of

Esocial control." In other words, "pious example, moral
leadership, voluntary effort, and private charity were the
Heans by which the competing and conflicting interests in
society might be brought into harmony."l If Cotton Mather
felt a need for "moral leadership" and "voluntary effort"

to bring into harmony the conflicting interests of society
in his day, the Christian stewards of the nineteenth century
could justifiably argue that the need was even greater in

their day. At stake was the preservation of an ordered or

8 table society .

59

‘H-QV

60

The ideal of an ordered society found its expression
130th in politics and religion. The Federalists attracted
t:hose persons who wanted to preserve order, stability, and
stratification.2 In religion the Puritan ideal of the

ministry also served to reinforce the concept of an ordered
society. The Puritans had taught that a clergyman and his
congregation were bound by ties that neither the pastor nor
the parishoners could sever at will. It is not surprising
that long pastorates became the norm. The minister's
Prestige, his lenghty association with one community, cou-
I>1ed with the fact that even as late as the end of the
eighteenth century there was often only one minister within
a community, tended to foster community solidarity.3

The supporters and organizers of the benevolent
Societies were aware that the old social order was breaking
down. The colonial period had not been free of disharmony
0r dissension, but compared to the Jacksonian era its soci—
ety could be described as stable and relatively immobile.
Furthermore,its population was more homogeneous. As
Rowland Berthoff points out, the non-English immigrants
Who arrived in the eighteenth century came to America
after the "pattern of colonial society" had already been
established by the English.4 (The only real exception to
this was the Dutch settlers in the mid-Atlantic states.)
The "homogeneity" of culture was further reinforced by the

fact that from 1775 to 1815 immigration declined.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

61

However,it would be erroneous to point to immigra—

t:ion as the major cause for the breakdown of ordered, homo-

geneous communities after the War of 1812. The influx of

C;<arman and Irish settlers was more a phenomenon of the period

1.1330-1860 than of the 1820's. But by 1825 there were other

ffcarms of population movement, the most dramatic of which

was the westward movement. Prior to the American Revolu-

tion, the westward movement of population was gradual and

<3<3ntrolled. This changed in the late eighteenth and early

rtineteenth centuries. The trickle into the West turned

into a torrent as thousands of families and individuals

Itushed westward in the search of cheap land. The pOpula—

‘tion in these communities was "transient," and consequently

"mixed," making it difficult to establish "integrated local

communities . " 6

By 1825 another form of internal migration was

Tbecoming evident--the migration to the city. Many of the

organizers and supporters of the Tract Society had taken

part in this migration. Urbanization was stimulated by

the industrial and transportation revolution. The latter

created a national market, the former expanded the amount

of goods available for this market. Both led to centrali-

zation and urbanization.7 But cities did not fit the con-

cept of an ordered, homogeneous community. And, as will

be pointed out in this study, the majority of the organizers

62

and managers of the Tract Society had difficulty coming to

 

terms with urbanism.

The migration of people affected not only the West
atznd the cities but also the towns and villages of the
Ehaastern states. The growth of cities and the expansion of
the West was often at the expense of the rural areas of
the original colonial settlements. At best their popula-
t:i.on lagged behind that of New York, Boston, Philadelphia,
cZzianinnati, or St. Louis. Sometimes, however, their pOpu-
liation even declined. This was especially true of the New
EIngland back country, the birth place of several of the

<21ergymen studied in this chapter.8 This caused a decline

Jin the relative importance of both New England and its

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

llocal elites within the Republic.

Social disorganization and mobility were also evi-
tient within the religious institutions. The Great Awaken-
ing of the mid-eighteenth century had served as an impetus
to the growth of denominationalism, but it had not been
able to bring about the legal disestablishment of religion
This remained for the post-Revolutionary generation to
accomplish. Virginia adopted Jefferson's Bill for Estab-
lishing Religious Freedom in 1785; Connecticut, New
lumpshire, and Massachusetts passed bills of disestablish-
nent in 1817, 1818, and 1831 respectively.9 Whereas one
Church and one pastor had served previously as a unifying

Symbol within the community, competition among the

 

‘1‘.

 

63

denominations heightened communal disunity. Added to this

“has the breakdown of lengthy pastorates.

During the colonial era the minister was often given

11<Dnor and prestige. This was especially the case in New

Etrdgland. Obviously the minister's status in the community

was not determined by his income. But even today a person

Clean "often enjoy high quotients of honor and low quotients

Crif proPerty rewards."10 The pastor's prestige, eSpecially

1111.New England, rested on such aspects as the exalted
1“lature of the office itself, the minister's education, and

1“his lengthy association with one congregation.

By the nineteenth century, however, the clergymen

‘Vere becoming aware of the fact that their influence in

‘the community was declining. The "awesome prestige"

Eiccorded to their predecessors was lacking. This concern

(over the declining status of the clergy is evident in
several of the publications of the Tract Society. One
tract writer reminded his readers that ministers were
engaged in "mental work" like physicians and counselors

but were often paid like individuals who performed "mere
physical or bodily powers" such as mechanics or laborers.ll
The Almanac for Michigan advised its reader not to hold

his head down on the pew nor to take out his watch and

look at the time while listening to a sermon. Both were

disreSpectful to the minister suggesting that his services

were tedious and of no interest.12 In his tract, the

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

64

"Duties of Church-Members," Reverend Thomas H. Skinner
pointed out that church members ought to "hold their pastor
in respect" because the pastor was their messenger and
minister of Christ}:3

One of the most noticeable changes in the concept
0f the ministry after 1800 was the breakdown of the lengthy
Pastorate. During the colonial period ministers usually
a.Cicepted a pastoral call with the assumption that they
would serve that particular church until death. One extra-
ordinary example of this was East Hampton, New York, where
from 1650 to 1798 only three ministers served the church.
Thus each minister remained there for an average of forty—
nine years. This changed dramatically in the nineteenth
century. In a study of New Hampshire clergymen, Daniel
Calhoun concluded that after 1807 the life-long association
of a pastor with one church was no longer typical. After
1321 the average pastorate never exceeded ten years. The
Cl’lristian stewards deplored the effect of mobility on
oI‘der and stability, but by 1821 it was evident that they
too had become mobile. The ambitious clergyman realized
t1‘lat his future lay not in rural New England but in the
growing urban centers.14

The organizers of the American Tract Society sensed
that changes were taking place. They were acutely aware
of the centrifugal forces which were destroying "the still

I‘evered ideals of the past essentially communal."15 They

65

realized that they were living in a voluntaristic and
pluralistic society where "moral and religious influence"
rather than legislation or force was the key to influencing
public opinion.16 (However their acceptance of a pluralis—
tic society was limited to the acceptance of only the ortho-
dox or evangelical Protestant denominations.) And, like
many of their countrymen, the promoters of the Tract Society
revealed an ambivalent attitude; they simultaneously seemed
to glorify and fear the impact that technology, industriali—
zation, internal migration, and mobility would have upon
the Republic. In the end they chose not to Oppose these
forces per se, but to Spread a Christian influence over
the growing nation, an influence which would serve to
bring order and stability to a fluid and changing society.

Since the Tract Society was a religious as well as

a benevolent organization, the clergy naturally played an

important role in its activities. After 1826, the publish-

Jirlg committee, which had the responsibility of examining

ail-l tracts and volumes to determine their acceptability
for publication, was composed entirely of clergymen from
1:}Le Congregational, Presbyterian, Dutch Reformed, Episco-
:53Eilian, and Baptist churches.17 Furthermore, approximately
two-thirds of the vice presidents and directors were clergy-
“1311.18

The American Tract Society had economic motives

’Qr eliciting the support of the clergy. In the "Address

 

66

0f the Executive Committee" the Society appealed to all

churches and ministers for support. Clerical support from

various denominations would aid in fostering a Spirit of

"oneness in Christ." But clerical support also Opened the

doors of churches and the pocket-books of church members

to the Society's agents and colporteurs. As Mr. Peter

Winn, an agent in North Carolina pointed out, his success
had "always been in the ratio of the interest of the minis-

ter or pastor."19 The Society's financial reports would

indicate that the Tract Society had been able to win the

S'llpport of many pastors by 1865. The biographical studies

in this chapter will focus on several of these.

A brief explanation should be made concerning the

criteria utilized in determining which clergymen should be

iI1c:1uded in the following biographical section. No attempt

was made to include all the ministers who served as vice
president, director, or even as member of the publishing
ccDrumittee. The study did, however, include the majority
of those who were active in the organization of the Tract
chiety and those who served on the publishing committee
15<>r a long period of time. Some were active not only in
the American Tract Society but in its predecessors in New
YQrk or Andover as well. The study also included clerical

hfipresentatives of all the major denominations represented

iwithin the Tract Society.

 

67

The American Tract Society received much of its
support from Calvinistic churches, especially from the
(kulgregationalists and the Presbyterians. These two
Churches had joined in a Plan of Union in 1801 and later
cooperated in such joint ventures as the American Educa-
tion Society and the American Home Missionary Society.

Thus it was not surprising to see them take a leading posi-

‘tion in the American Tract Society. They had participated

in the Plan of Union so as to be better able to coordinate
'their efforts in Christianizing the frontier; they had
ifotmed the American Education Society to subsidize the
eEducation of future ministers, and they had organized the

AInerican Home Missionary Society to aid struggling churches

irl the West. The American Tract Society would augment the

WOrk of the other societies by Spreading a blanket of
<21‘lristian literature over the vast countryside. And,
L11'llike the other Societies, its influence was more likely
1:C> spread directly to the non-church goer as well as to
13f1e church member.

One of the leading supporters of the original

z\mnerican Tract Society at Andover, and a member of the

t1Eitional Society's first publishing committee was Reverend

crlastin Edwards of Andover. While pastor of South Parish

jL 1 Andover, Edwards had met weekly with several leading
1‘Members of his church and with the professors of the Theo-

:14ogical Seminary at Andover to devise "plans for doing

68

9006 and advancing the interests of the Redeemer's King-

dou'l."20 In 1814 this group took part in the founding of

the New England Tract Society. Seven years later Edwards

became the corresponding secretary of this Society, and in

1825 he was appointed New England's representative on the

PUblishing committee of the American Tract Society at

New York . 2 1

Edwards came from a rural, middle-class New England

home. He was born in 1787 in Westhampton, Massachusetts.

The Edwards family traced its lineage back to Alexander

IE3dWardS who had emigrated from Wales to Springfield,

Massachusetts, in 1640. According to one account Reverend

EC1Wards' ancestors "were all farmers, industrious men,

neither rich nor poor.22 In actuality it seems that his

parents were not well-to—do. Edwards taught school prior

to enrolling at Williams College in 1806. His college

edlication was financed largely by his own efforts. The

cost of tuition, room, and board at Williams College was

l‘CDt excessive. As late as 1836, a year's tuition, room,

Eind incidental charges came to $33.23

Williams College was to have profound influence

Q11 American religious life in the nineteenth century. The

Q<>llege had been literally planted in the wilderness at

williamstown in the late eighteenth century. Its isola-

tion had nearly led to its abandonment, and prior to 1836

hhe trustees of Williams College divided their energies

 

 

 

69

between attempting to close the college or moving it to a

less remote location.24 However its isolation had not

insulated it from the ideas of "French liberty and French

philosophy"; some students "made Volney their oracle and

Openly professed it."25 But in 1805 signs of religious

revivals began to appear at the college. The class of 1805

included such future missionaries as Samuel J. Mills and

Jaines Richards. By 1806, the year that young Justin Edwards

entered college, the revival was fully evident within the

cOllege. Revivals and missions were to leave their mark

on Reverend Edwards.26

In 1811, Edwards entered the Seminary at Andover.

Though not the first seminary to be established in the

United States, Andover was the first to be set up "on the

plan of having several professors," and it inaugurated a

new era in professional training of ministers in America.27
(By 1851 the country boasted forty-two theological semi-

IlaAII:ieS.)28 Andover Seminary had been founded to offset

Harvard's defection from the ranks of orthodoxy, but it

sQon gained wide publicity for its impact on foreign mis-

Si(ans. While studying at Andover, Edwards came into contact

with Samuel J. Mills, Gordon Hall, and James Richards (for-
merly students at Williams College); and Adoniram Judson
SQmuel Nott, and Samuel Newell, all pioneers in foreign

[t‘ission work. In fact, during the first ten years of its

agitistence, the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign

‘

 

70

Missions drew all but one of its missionaries from

Andover.29 Of more immediate interest is the large number

of Andover students who became active clergymen within the

Tract Society .
After completing his studies Edwards was prepared

to devote his life to promoting the causes of Christianity,

morality, and stability. He was fortunate to begin his
PaStoral career at Andover's South Parish, since areas like

Boston, New York, Providence, Hartford, and Andover had

the larger and more prestigious congregations. In 1814

SeVenty male members of his congregation organized the
South Parish Society for the Reformation of Morals. Its

aim was "to discountenance immorality, particularly Sabbath-

b5'i‘eaking, intemperance, and profanity, and to promote
“Industry, temperance, order, piety, and good morals."30

EdWards was not content, however, to promote order, temper—

ance, and piety in Andover alone. He also supported

lnational efforts such as the American Tract Society, the
In

Bible societies, Sunday Schools, and mission societies.
1826 he joined with fifteen laymen and clergy to form the
v.

American Society for the Promotion of Temperance." Three
yQars later he accepted a full-time position with the
theIuperance Society, arguing that the millennium would not
QQme and that "the gospel and the means of grace would

[ hot] have their legitimate effects on the minds of men"

‘3 long as "sober men" continued to use alcoholic

‘

 

71

beverages.31 In 1836 he relinquished his position with the

Temperance Society and accepted the presidency of Andover

Seminary. He also became the secretary of the "American

and Foreign Sabbath Union," stating that "rum, whiskey, and

brandy drinkers . . . [would] break the Sabbath, and Sabbath—

breakers . . . [would] neglect the Bible, and neglectors of

the Bible . . . [would] disobey God."32 Seemingly, rum
drinkers and Sabbath breakers were not conducive to good

Order. So that the views of the Temperance and Sabbath

SoCieties could be popularized, Edwards wrote Temperance

 

and Sabbath Manuals, some of which were published by the

American Tract Society.33

Edwards' view of America was one of ambivalence.

Americans, he felt, possessed "invincible energy" and were

characterized by "ceaseless action." He lauded America's

civil and religious liberty as well as its wide diSpersal

of prOperty. But freedom and ceaseless action could also

e disastrous. A government rest1ng on the W111 of the

beQple presupposed public virtue, and public virtue

demanded holiness.34 In order to produce holiness which

w
(3‘11d provide virtue and stability, Edwards turned to God's
I:‘IDOinted means such as the benevolent soc1et1es. His
'EESEiSion to give up his pastorate for a position in either

Society or seminary was typical of numerous other clergy-

‘\h in his day, thus signalling a decline in the prestige

Q
s the local minister.35

 

 

I U
.r

.5.-

“h "a ..
.
“" bu

 

 

‘In..‘. _

'0‘ .
-
tn‘ _
-
.., .
' .

n u
... .-
...
A-

72

Probably no New England minister gave more of his
time and energy to advance the cause of the American Tract
Society than Reverend William A. Hallock, corresponding
secretary and full time employee of the Society for over
fifty years. In several respects, his background resembles
that of Justin Edwards.

Both hailed from rural Massachusetts. Reverend
Hallock was born in Plainfield, Hampshire County, in 1794,
where his father, Moses Hallock, was a minister. The
I‘1allocks, like the Edwards, were not wealthy, and William's
father prepared students for college to supplement his
pastoral salary, which in 1791 was a meager 0-660. He
a3.30 prepared two of his sons, William and Gerald, for
<=<>llege. Like Edwards before him, William Hallock attended
williams College and Andover Seminary. But unlike Edwards,
he never served as pastor of a church, choosing instead to
ca-st his lot immediately after Seminary with a benevolent
Society.35

Another New Englander who was associated with both
the New England Tract Society and the American Tract Society
at New York was Reverend Leonard Woods, one of the founders
a‘rld original professors of Andover Seminary.37 Woods was
E1 (:lose associate of Justin Edwards and had been involved

with him in founding the New England Tract Society and the

Atherican Temperance Union. He was also a founder of the

73

Education Society in 1818, and served as a vice president
of the American Tract Society from 1825 until 1854.38

Woods, also a product of rural New England, was
l:><orn in Princeton, Massachusetts, attended the Leicester
Academy, near the town of Worcestor, and then entered
Harvard College. Actually his parents intended for him to
l:><a a farmer, but due to his poor health and strong desire
to become a minister, they permitted him to attend school.
The Woods family, like the Hallocks, was hard pressed
financially. Woods' studies at the Academy were limited
to three months, and during his student days at Harvard he
‘h’<3re only those clothes which his mother had spun for him.
After graduating from Harvard and a brief experience in
teaching, Woods- studied theology under Reverend Charles
Backus in Somers, Connecticut. He was licensed to preach
in 1798 and became pastor of a rural church in present day
west Newbury, Massachusetts. 39

Woods' career illustrates a tendency which would
]become prevalent among the nineteenth-century, New England
Q:l-ergy. As one authority pointed out, teaching posts in
Seminaries and leadership positions in benevolent organi-
2ations proved to be more attractive than many rural
E)alz'sonages where the salary was low and opportunity for
adVancement was limited. Woods' original pastoral contract
QeAllled for $400 and eight cords of wood per annum, as well

Q‘s settlement expenses and the use of the parsonage land.

74

In 1843, the professors at Andover were receiving a rent
free house and $1,500 per year.40 Furthermore, the seminary
post gave Woods visibility within the religious community
and brought him into contact with the organizers of various
1:) enevolent societies . 41

A biographical study of New England and Congrega—
tionalist clergymen active within the Tract Society would
not be complete without the inclusion of Reverend Nehemiah
Adams. Adams became the focal point of the slavery con-
troversy within the Tract Society. As indicated in chapter

eight, the publication of his South-Side View of Slavery,

 

coupled with the Tract Society's refusal to elect a replace-
ment for Adams on the publishing committee, were two of
the factors involved in Boston's secession from the national
Tract Society in 1859.42

Besides publishing A South-Side View of Slavery,

 

Adams had the distinction of serving as pastor of the Essex
Street Church from 1833 to 1878. According to Calhoun's
S":udy of New Hampshire clergy in the nineteenth century,
urban centers proved to be more attractive to ministers
ulan rural areas. Consequently, there was less turnover of
I“inisters in urban centers than in rural districts. This
c"'Eartainly was true of the Essex Street Church in Boston.
Adams' predecessor, Reverend Samuel Green, only left the
Qblurch because of a fatal illness, while Adams remained

i=11ere for over forty years.43

75

Adams can best be described as a conservative,
111;iddle-class New Englander. Available evidence suggests
1t:lnat he came from a moderately well-to-do home. He was
l:><:rn in 1806 in Salem, Massachusetts, where his father was
ESL deacon in the Tabernacle Congregational Church. After
attending the Salem Latin School,he enrolled first at
lEIiarvard College and later at Andover Seminary. Many of his
I;>1ublications were in defense of the status quo. He defended
<:>:rthodoxy against the inroads of Unitarianism, Universalism,
iaLlnd infidelity, arguing that dethroning God would result in
ialznarchy and mob rule. He Opposed the lectures of the Grimké
JEBJisters because they enticed "women out of their proper

Sphere." During the 1850's he published A South Side View

 

$81avery in which he opposed abolitionism. He commended
the South for its orderly society. At least there, mobs
were not prevalent.44

Like many members of the Tract Society, Adams was
an ardent nationalist and pro-unionist. He attributed
'IKQWkerica's fortunate location between two oceans to Divine
Providence. It had thus remained "secluded till the world
was able to people it with a seed which should be worthy
‘:<3' fulfill its great destiny." By God's grace,America
would also be exempt from history. Its "afternoon . . .
[had] not yet come," and if God remained on its side,
.‘lifit . . . [would] never come." Such a destiny, however,

Qt31:11d not be achieved without national unity.45

76

One point that should be stressed is that all of

the Congregationalist representatives on the publishing

committee came from the Boston area. Samuel Green and

Nehemiah Adams came from Boston; Justin Edwards, who

Served on the publishing committee during the 1820's and

then again in the 1840's and early 1850's, came from
ikarzdover; and Reverend Warren Fay, who succeeded Green on

the publishing committee in the mid-1830's, came from

czlnarlestown. It is true that one cannot build a case on

<:>Jnly four members. However, these four members were typi—

‘:=£al rather than atypical in that the majority of the mem-

bers who were elected to the publishing committee were

pastors of urban churches. This is also further evidence

of the decline of the relative importance and prestige of

the rural churches in New England.

Thus far the study has included only those clergy-

rnken who were pastors of Congregational Churches. But the

Atherican Tract Society also received support from the
Presbyterian Churches which, like the Congregational

Ql'lurches, claimed to be in the Reformed or Calvinist tradi—

tion. The Presbyterians provided both leadership and

I“"cmey for the Tract Society. One example was the Brick

P:lresbyterian Church and its pastor, Reverend Gardiner Spring.

Sjpring served first as a member of the publishing committee

find later as a vice president. But even more important to

 

77

the Tract Society was his ability to unlock the pocket

books of many of his well-to-do parishoners.

Spring hailed from New England. His grandfather,

C<>lonel John Spring, had been a large landowner, a Justice

of the Peace, and a deacon at Uxbridge (later Northridge) ,

Massachusetts. His father, Reverend Samuel Spring, had

l:=><E:en instrumental in the founding of Andover Seminary and
1tllrhe.American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions.46

Much of Spring's life revolved around the Brick

Presbyterian Church in New York City. After studying at

AIidover Seminary, he received a call from the Brick Church.
He was ordained and installed as pastor in 1810 and

retained this position until 1873. Like Nehemiah Adams,

he retained a lengthy association with one church at a

time when less prestigious churches were unable to retain

their pastors. The Brick Street Presbyterian Church had

been formed when the Wall Street Presbyterian Congregation

divided. At that time the mother church retained the

majority of the wealthier parishoners as well as those of
Scotish and Irish background, while the Brick Street Church
drew heavily from New Englanders who were migrating into
New York City in increasing numbers during this period.
But by the mid-nineteenth century the Brick Street Church
k>oasted its own share of financiers, lawyers, and merchants
including such men as Rensselaer Havens, Moses Allen,

Z\nson G. Phelps, Jasper Corning, and Daniel Lord. The

78

wealth of the church was also reflected in its high pew

rents and in Spring's high salary.47 His talents and

association with the prestigious, urban church enabled

Reverend Spring to attain a position of eminence within

the religious community.48

Spring's religious, socia1,and political views can

1:><e described as conservative but not reactionary, a charac-

teristic which was typical of the American Tract Society

as a whole. He sided with the Old School Presbyterians,

Opposed Charles Finney's new measures but did not rule out

revivalism. Like Edwards he also had been influenced by

revivals; his church experienced revivals in 1814 and 1815,

and he lauded Lyman Beecher's stress on saving souls. He

only insisted that revivals be orderly and not create

' ‘ - - u u - ' u
irregularities and spurious emotions as so often hap-

pened in the West.49 Furthermore, Spring endorsed revivals

because they were useful in promoting correct conduct,

l"loting "that when the Spirit of God . . . [was] poured out

~ . ., there . . . [were] no balls and assemblies; there

. . [was] more prayer and praise than dancing.50 But
revivals were not the only means of enforcing correct con-
QUCt; benevolent organizations also aided in Spreading a
Christian influence "among all classes" of the Republic.
Besides actively supporting the American Tract Society, he

became a secretary of the New York Evangelical Society of

Young Men, he aided in founding the American Home Missionary

79

rican Bible Society, and was active in
School Union, the American Board of
Dreign Missions, as well as in the
riends Society.51

a1 and political philosophy Spring

ues of Protestantism, unity, and obedi-
icism he associated with despotism,
ense as evidenced in the French Revolu-
abolitionism and secession since both
of the nation. Unity, according to

of "Divine favor."53 He was no vision-
former. He would grant the Negro his
vote. Spring criticized reformers for
ate the root of evil within man and for
iminating and bitter" attitudes towards
n the end he Opted for a Protestantism
r and obedience over liberty and radi-
wed the Civil War as a test to deter-

t liberty . . . [was] consistent with
or not Americans . . . [could] be a
people."55

that the South ever came to placing

be publishing committee was the election
ld Alexander and later the election of
ames W. Alexander, to this office.

e was residing in the South at the time

80

of his election, both were born in Virginia and the elder
Alexander had received his education there.56
Both Alexanders rose to positions of eminence

Within the Presbyterian Church. Archibald Alexander, the
son of a well-to-do Presbyterian merchant, began his pas-
toral career as a rural minister and itinerant missionary
in Virginia. His first step to prominence came when he
was appointed president of Hampden—Sydney College. (This
college had begun virtually as a branch campus of the Col—
lege of New Jersey. It was founded in 1769 as Prince
George Academy by Samuel Stanhope Smith, a son—in-law of
PJE'inceton's president, Reverend John WitherSpoon.)57 In
1806 Archibald Alexander left Hampden—Sydney College for
Philadelphia where he accepted the pastorate of the Third
Presbyterian Church. Although his congregation was not
drawn primarily from the elite, nevertheless, this pas-
torate launched him into a leading position within the
Presbyterian Assembly. The Philadelphia Presbyterian
chInches prided themselves as being "among the most dis-
tinguished American Presbyterian Congregations" who "were
s‘ezrved by clergymen of note."58 Alexander also gained
Visibility in the community through his support of various
IQenevolent societies such as the Philadelphia Tract Soci-
Q‘l:y, the Evangelical Society, the Society for Promoting
Qliristian Knowledge among the Poor, and the Sunday School

\ssociation. His leadership within the Presbyterian Church

81

became evident when he was elected moderator of the Gene—

rel Assembly in 1807 and Princeton Seminary's first Pro-

fessor of Theology in 1812.59

Unlike his father, Reverend James Alexander did not
have to begin his pastoral career as a rural minister and
an itinerant missionary. He was educated and later taught
at both Princeton College and Princeton Seminary, and

served churches in Trenton, New Jersey, and New York City.60

Again it was the teaching positions and the urban pastorates
Which brought him visibility and prominence both within the
cOmmunity and within the Presbyterian denomination, a
prOminence which was reflected in the $5,000 annual salary

he received as pastor of the Fifth Avenue Church in New
YOrk.“

In his political, economic, and social views the

e1-der Alexander can best be described as conservative.

3(at: he was willing to institute changes which he felt were

l"ecessary to preserve the old order. Like Gardiner Spring
he stayed with the Old School Presbyterians after the

shcism in 1837, but accepted revivals provided they were

nQt associated with "enthusiastic excesses and false doc-
trine."62

His solution for reforming the poor in Phila-

delphia was the formation of the "Evangelical Society"

and "The Society for Promoting Religious Knowledge among
the Poor."63

Both societies envisioned bringing the gospel

to the poor, but neither envisioned bringing the poor into

—A i 7 it;

82

his church. His attitude towards slavery was also conserva-

tiVe. He supported the African Colonization Society, as

aid most of the other leaders within the Tract Society, and

undertook to write its history. Throughout his life he

remained an opponent of abolitionism. Alexander's answer

to the race question was to evangelize the Negro. He pro—

moted the erection of an African Church in Philadelphia
but he did not propose to bring the Negroes into his own
church.64

In the main, Reverend James Alexander was in basic
agreement with his father's religious and social views.

Like his father he was influenced by the revival movements

of his day. He saw controlled revivals as the key to all

reforms. "I see that when a people become godly," he
Wrote, "all the rest [ecumenical, political, and literary

re forms] follows."55 He differed with his father on the

Value of Societies which were devoted to taking the gospel
to the poor, and advocated, instead, the abolition of pew

rents for at least part of his congregation. But this did

hQt imply that James Alexander was a leveller or a radical

reformer. He viewed the rise of "Working Men's Parties"

with "unfeigned alarm," and wrote the American Mechanic as
Well as its sequel, The Workingmen to ward off the propa-
ganda of "infidels, socialists, agrarians, Owenites,

Wrightists, and diabolians generally."66 He opposed easy

credit because it enticed a person into "making haste to

e

I—-—

83

be rich out of ones proper calling."67 James Alexander

Seemed to take a stronger stand against slavery than did

his father. But like the elder Alexander, his only solu-

tion was to evangelize the Negro. He also opposed aboli-

t ionism, insisting that one must not attempt "to do at a

1:) low, what Providence does by degrees."68

As mentioned previously, the New School Presby—

terians also supported the American Tract Society. But

because the Tract Society shied away from all controversy
and remained conservative in its outlook, the support of
the New School was not always given enthusiastically.

James Alexander wrote that "certain New School men .

[Were] bent in awakening a New School sectarianism, as

against all Union Societies." They wanted "a sectarian

Board of Publication" because they were "angry with the
Tract Society for being so old—fashioned in doctrine."69
But in spite of this opposition on the part of some New
s'Qhool men, men like Reverend William Adams and Reverend
Thomas McAuley, did serve on the publishing committee.

Little is known of Reverend Thomas McAuley's early

life. Unlike the other men discussed already, he was not

born in the United States. McAuley hailed from Ireland,

having emigrated to the United States at the age of eigh-

teen. Apparently he served for a time as a missionary on

the frontier before making his way to Union College. After
graduating at Union in 1804, he stayed on as a tutor, and

finally became a professor.'70

e

—

L

 

84

The Union College of 1804, where McAuley began his
teaching career, resembled Williams College in several
respects. Its location in Schenectady rather than in

Jpxlbany aided in separating the students "entirely .

:ifrom the great world."71 Its fees were minimal and its

<Eearly enrollment was small. In 1804 the student pOpulation
did not exceed 40, but by 1813 it had jumped to 200.72
IIBoth Union and Williams Colleges were the scene of reviv-
Eals.73 Union College, like Williams, Andover, and Prince-
1:on, is also important to this investigation because several
Ileaders of the Tract Society studied here.74

In 1823, McAuley severed his relationship with
LThion College to accept the position as pastor of the
Rhatgers Street Presbyterian Church in New York City. Once
asgain a familiar pattern emerges: a teaching position in
51 college or seminary, an urban pastorate, membership within
benevolent societies, all serving to catapult him into a
Phosition of leadership within the Christian community. In
:1826 McAuley, like Archibald Alexander before him, was
EElected moderator of the General Assembly. In 1826 he
joined the staff of the newly formed Union Theological
Seminary in New York City and served as its first president.
The next year he worked unsuccessfully for reconciliation

within the Presbyterian Assembly and became one of the few

Irish (probably Scotch-Irish) to align with the New School

Presbyterians.7S

 

85

Brief mention should be made of Union Theological
gEieaminary. This insitution, like the Tract Society,
<fiea-emphasized denominational distinctives and doctrinal
niceties. The aim of the founders of Union Theological

=Eieeminary had been to build a seminary "around which all men

<:>cf moderate views and feelings," who desired to live above

"jparty strife and to stand aloof from all extremes of
doctrinal speculation, practical radicalism, and ecclesias-
‘t:ical domination," could "cordially and affectionately
-J=ally." Its name, like that of Andover Seminary and Prince—
120n, crops up frequently in literature on the background of
tflie organizers and supporters of the Tract Society. Rever-
end Erskine Mason and Reverend William Adams, both members
(XE the publishing committee, were involved in the founding

of Union Theological Seminary. William Adams, like McAuley,

aiLso served as president of the Seminary.76 Furthermore,

343 will be pointed out in the next chapter, several of the
ihract Society's lay supporters actively promoted the cause
c>fUnion Theological Seminary.

One congregational—Presbyterian clergyman who
<3eserves mention is Reverend Lyman Beecher. Although
‘Beecher never served on the executive committee of the
Tract Society, he was a vice president for nineteen years
and author of several of the Society's publications includ-

ing the "Six Sermons on Intemperance."77

86

Beecher came from a rural, middle-class, New

England home. His father, David Beecher, was a blacksmith

and farmer in New Haven, Connecticut who "lived well accord-
ing to the times and laid up four or five thousand dol-

lars."78 But due to the death of his mother, Lyman Beecher

was raised by his uncle, Lot Benton, a substantial farmer

in North Guilford. Beecher entered Yale College in 1793.

After completing his undergraduate work, he stayed on at

New Haven for another nine months in order to study theology

under President Timothy Dwight.79

After completing his theological studies under
President Dwight, Lyman Beecher spent the next three decades

Serving Presbyterian and Congregational churches in New

3f012k and New England. It was during this time that Beecher

es‘tablished himself as a "prime mover in the crusades
El(Jainst dueling, intemperance, lotteries, Sabbath-breaking,
cieism, disestablishmentarianism" and Unitarianism.80 While
EDastoring a church in Litchfield, Connecticut, he aligned
l-‘:'.~1"lself with such leading Federalists as Judge Reeves of
Litchfield. He also found time to support the Connecticut
Inestic MiSSionary Soc1ety, the Litchfield County Foreign

M ~ . . .
lssion Society, the Connecticut Education Soc1ety, the

Att‘erican Bible Society, and to establish two periodicals,

h .
he Christian Spectator and the Connecticut Observer.“-

During the 1830's and 1840's, the saving of the

WQSt became one of the major tasks for the Christians of

 

 

 

 

 

a
c

‘7

rt.-.‘:_.

- .
\G3o
Q“--.

 

87

Dieaw England, the Middle Atlantic States, and for Reverend
Ihfifman Beecher. In 1832 Beecher moved to Cincinnati to
1>£ecome a professor at Lane Seminary and the pastor of the
Eseecond Presbyterian Church of Cincinnati. While in Ohio,
lice became a spokesman for an educated and Protestant West.
3113 1834 he returned for a brief visit to Boston, but stayed
long enough to preach three anti-Papal sermons and thereby
iian the fires of anti-Catholicism which were already burn—
ing in the East.82

Beecher felt keenly the declining status of the old
Gastablishment, be it in the social, political, or religious
Siphere. While pastor in East Hampden, he watched "with
sareat anxiety" the rise of the "democrats" who "were getting
1:he better of the Federalists in New York."83 He opposed
'the disestablishment of religion in Connecticut, but later
<=oncluded that ministers gained more influence by relying
<Dn "voluntary efforts, societies, missions, and revivals,"
'than by depending on state support. Throughout much of
1115 ministry,Beecher also tried to bolster the declining
Exrestige of the minister and the church by staving off
linner church quarrels over Nathaniel Taylor's theology and
<2harles Finney's new revivalistic measures. He attempted
to unite the Christian community behind such non-controver-
SSial issues as anti-Catholicism, temperance reform, and
EStrict observance of the Puritan Sabbath laws. These

issues, he hoped, would unite the evangelical community

 

 

a; .. ..; = - -.
' \
—— ~--'~ u-.4
0
~.-..... 1
~ —
-.-.-.'| .50 -
o n ’
' n- . -..‘.
‘ ”p.4
RIM-‘n we--.
a
e.
" ' -~> F'-.
..
"‘0‘ nan-u 5.-
.
.-
-_-'_
“.5.- .
~—--.
\
‘v-
0-4 w.
.-..¢__
- .
-0~ ._ ,.
‘- '7
O—e.
.‘. ...
' “on. ‘ '

 

.
’I.

 

an‘
e 9*

'v-

H _
~—
¢...‘

“.
-

O-r-

an.

‘ he.

5

~—

 

.:;,~ .
8‘1‘: 1‘ :r
C.‘ A‘-
que
. ;‘.
”:HN C
‘s‘ C): v
o ‘7‘
NC
‘-
§
.3 .Q.
~43“me
“‘d". ‘2'-
‘ ‘Vlh
.
'\
.‘p. .
“‘l= ‘r .
‘A tag 3.
‘ \- y.
‘W
b‘ "‘
u: CF
f‘
Ul;\":'
”II
A
‘.
\“hz
'4 f.~
415::t‘:(i (i.
‘ 1 5
\Y
‘VI

)
"h

88

and solve social ills without disrupting the status quo in
Society. In the end his efforts proved unsuccessful, and
although Beecher survived a heresy trial in 1835-1836, he
could not prevent the Presbyterian schism of 1837.84
Beecher's pastoral career illustrates the break—
down of lengthy pastorates and the decline of rural New
ISrlgland. Prior to accepting his first pastorate at East
Hampton, New York, in 1799, Beecher wrote his fiance,
Roxanna Foote, that if the East Hampton congregation were
" sufficiently united to offer an adequate support," he
would probably accept their call and "conclude to Spend . . .
[his] days in East Hampton." However, in 1810, due to
insufficient financial support, he requested that the pas-
toral relationship between himself and the congregation be
" dissolved." He accepted a call from Litchfield, Connecti—
Cut, with the intention of "spending . . . [his] days with
the people," provided God enabled him to adequately support
his family. By 1826 he found that his salary was not meet-
ing his expenses and requested another dismissal. After six
years in Boston, Beecher informed the committee, acting in
behalf of Lane Seminary in Cincinnati, that he was willing
to relinquish any position and to spend the rest of his
days in the West.35 Thus although venerating the tradi-
tional concept of a life-long pastorate, Beecher repeatedly
1i‘equested dismissals from his congregations. The direction

c3f Beecher's moves is also noteworthy. His last two moves

.
... . . o,
4 --

'O-l an.»

 

a. ‘r
0-”
-"- ‘O
‘ .-

vu: \I- .

eh... .\ Q _

H
‘ o
u.
e..-

 

 

1:.L ."9 Do-
... .". .00
" o‘..~
.- ~ 3 7
ud ,.‘ v n .
13": ‘—---
"D W
—-..-_‘
o
I .‘
. _ ~
.- "
e
"0- I ‘
‘V -JI
.
'-
.
,
u
._~‘
.
' s-_ '- ~
4.. m“ _, '
a
. *1.
.
...‘. _ ..
"‘vu‘\ » .
‘5 ~~.‘
- -
.
a. '
v-
'. *-:“'n~
Q‘-
J
n. .
"‘ 5". r.
““ Q...
l‘.
:..‘\o A ’
. I. v
"' "ta -
‘
n.“
a. 2:. .
"s ,-
se. _,
1' ,
a C. Q,
‘v v -
u.

C
"1".
a .
‘I
e.‘s "L"
\u..
“L: ' $.1
in. .
‘
. .
.
N.
H‘i‘d‘gfig
‘v k T".
v“ A
La
‘ ‘
I
v::
‘ "N .
‘u‘kl f‘
H

89

took him from rural New England to Boston and to Cincinnati.
E3c>th the urban centers and the West were areas on the make;
Irlaral New England, however, was an area in decline.

Although the Presbyterian and Congregational denomi-
nations were the major supporters of the Tract Society, they
were not the only churches within the Calvinist tradition
to have a representative on the publishing committee. They
were joined by the Reformed or Dutch churches, whose strong-
hold was in the mid-Atlantic States of New York and New
Jersey.

The two representatives of the Dutch Reformed Church
On the publishing committee, Reverend John Knox and Reverend
Thomas DeWitt, were typical in that they were both pastors
<>f prestigious urban churches. This pattern can be explained

in part by the attempt of the American Tract Society to
elect New Yorkers, wherever possible, to the executive com-
Inittee in order that the members could be immediately avail—
able for any business at hand. Yet it is also obvious that
the Society selected the leading New York clergymen of the
Various denominations. In choosing Knox, who served from
1825 until 1858, and his successor, DeWitt, the Society
Selected pastors of the richly endowed Collegiate Dutch
Reform Church.86 This Church, which was actually composed
0f several congregations, was the oldest ecclesiastical
<Dirganization in New York. But more important was its large

endowment which enabled it to build "splendid churches"

 

- g. .Q o .‘r
.e)
a
"n... o‘ ‘—
o o

"'0 n-au no
. _,.
V... "voo --

.
.

,
.- .

:-- ----..
“ 0“
our og‘.“-.

.""‘ a.
‘

..
"VO-..

‘60..-.-
'v...
‘

1'“ I

I

'.f" :_
'en "
~\-.. -

‘0‘” \'

l ."
'.' ”L“

."
. ( .., .

a.-‘

.".

'h

--.
k
“e.

.
§ I

In;
”'I hp ‘
..V“~HCA" P ‘
VIA._,.
::~
‘v‘ 5‘ ‘
v‘ s
"G Lr'l ‘
\J.‘ l
“a
:u
V

90

Eirld to pay its minister "in splendid style" without levying
61 high tax upon its members. In 1865 the Collegiate Church
EPEiid each of its four ministers $5,000 which was supple—
lumented by a $2,000 New Year's gift.37

It would seem that both Knox and DeWitt, like the
congregations they served, came from well-to-do, middle—
<=1ass homes. Dr. Samuel Knox, the father of John Knox, was
61 "physician of fine education and a large practice" near
<3ettysburg, Pennsylvania. DeWitt was a descendant of an
<>ld Dutch family which had originally settled in Ulster
(Zounty, New York. Both pastors had attended college and
Sieminary; Knox studied at Dickinson College and the Theo-
ILogical Seminary of the Associated Reform Church in New
Tfork, while DeWitt enrolled at Union College and at the
SSeminary of the Reformed Dutch Church in New Brunswick,
New Jersey.88

Knox and DeWitt, like the other members included
-in.this study, enhanced their status within the community
by’accepting positions of leadership within denominational
a11d non-denominational societies. Besides his lengthy
iissociation with the American Tract Society, Knox served
Eis president of Columbia College, the Leake and Watts
()rphan Asylum, and as a trustee of the New York College of
Physicians and Surgeons. He also supported such denomi-
Ilational ventures as Rutgers College, and the Board of

3Education and the Sunday School Union of the Reformed

"h.-. II---.
.
‘ C" :nq .
.
‘ ...¢
.:¢:-' 5.
e

'I‘_
-
r“...
. 1
.K. .n;’;‘
- ‘ ‘4
-‘.. ..,‘-_
....--_’_r:
‘ \. .'—‘5
“O-—. _
o ..
' .‘-
. h... a w
..-.-..‘-_
e
‘ I -
., r.
..... .H
.
.1. '
\ 7"
‘.~ ~“
.
”R... -'
.—
'_‘.. i.‘
a
.
”v..-
w'
.._‘_. .
.P ..__.
~- n..._
e
.A -‘
‘ e
“ -~ ‘.
b—~,‘v- ..
u__“‘ ‘4
., . ~
if u. “‘a I
U V
O Q- I-“ ‘
‘ ‘ Q
'A' “v-..
.
h-‘Qvo‘ “.‘:A
‘ C
e. .
I“: »‘§.:v_ '
oa-_~‘ .
.II a
- _.' -
0‘. '
. “eye :1.
. V
.. . I. -
\‘edl .c.~ :
~-~.‘“~
'.
.
v- .’
be. ~‘ ‘
.
V~.
.
.-
““35; se,- ‘
V w
.0“..‘ ‘
v
t ;«A_~
' N"v-
.‘h‘y h“
‘ V
p. .
' -
.‘ "‘.
"“ a ‘.
'g.- 9‘
~'
r‘;
lh~
.‘|‘
..

 

91

IDIJtch Church.39 DeWitt was elected secretary of the Presby-

terian Mission Board, trustee of Columbia and Rutgers Col-
leges, and president of the New York Historical Society.90
Available evidence suggests that these two clergy—
mnen shared the conservative social attitudes of their rich
£>arishoners. The New York Tribune pointed out that the
(Iollegiate Church drew from the "fashionable part of New

ifork." The writer went on to state:

Its preachers are learned and sound. They wear the
gown and bands and do all things decently and in

order. It is a conservative church, holding on rather
to what it has, than seeking new acquisitions. . . .

It is an enemy of all new schemes and measures, and
demands the good old ways in all things.91

IDeWitt did not seem overly concerned that the Collegiate
(Zhurch drew the "fashionable" rather than the poor person.

'Ihe latter he assigned to the benevolent societies such as

‘the Bible and the Tract Society. He was pleased that "so

“any means . . . and efforts" were employed in the City

"for the Spiritual and temporal benefit of the poor, to
iraise them from their degradation in ignorance, vice, and
‘Vretchedness, to the light, hOpes, comforts, and holiness
‘Vhich the GOSpels" provided.92

The fourth denomination to be represented in the
IPublishing committee was the Protestant Episcopal Church.
VVithin the Episcopal Church, it was especially the group
linown as the "Low Churchmen" or the "Evangelical Churchmen"
‘Nho supported non-denominational societies. Their leaders

included BishOp William Meade of the Diocese of Virginia,

a- - -
D ‘7 ’
IOU"- --U‘---

 

' o
.".o 0.-

'v'

\
'-b~‘v. v-u-ao
-

..
O- y-»-
.-. u..‘--... _

‘Nficnvl -
' "I‘ .
‘~..l“n..~‘-._‘

 

 

' ” 0—... .
I .- >-
"" we... -
.. ..-..
I’r.
.. ‘3’. .
.. ‘- ‘I
O ' ‘ ,
- 'q~ .
...-.-‘.'-‘- s.
'».
h -'R.' '
-'- "‘".s-.."
r». _;
-. :o- ,
u v. ..
--..
. -. a-
‘o1‘. v~. _
, -...‘~_..
l“:.“
"- -. _
a -.d.-' . -
¢
n
\ .-
'- V . fl
." U A v
‘ ‘ L.
‘ e
.
.O.,'
.“-:. :VI- 7
a‘v-iu
-
.-
L ~.
“c. ‘— v_‘A
v ‘o;. ..’s
.._
.
.-
7‘,
. v
.1“.- ‘_fl
“o, .‘..
h“- ,
.
'v.'
-. a
. .. _
stvb Au,‘ ”-
‘n.‘ ‘ .‘n
~_‘~
‘
n
r .
\
.. I. ~Pl’
“. o-’p~
‘5
' I
a
‘u
v..

 

‘
~._;‘v .
'-e C r~~
v‘v‘ST‘
‘ I
”K.”
“'4‘: "‘r-
.
I «y;
“f‘
AIJ Pg
4-
I“. ,
e... 5'
‘ w
..e may
£
.I
e
'o Q"
5 6
(‘3 prr‘a
-_ ‘v
V
A
if.
"c. r
‘3» {Jay-J "r
a;
NM» .
u
”r 1n 3+
'5
‘3

92

Bishop Charles P. McIlvaine of the Diocese of Ohio, and
Bishop John P. K. Henshaw of the Eastern Diocese. The
" Low Churchmen" dominated the Virginia Theological Seminary
at Alexandria and Kenyon College at Gambier, Ohio. Mean-
while the "High Churchmen," led by Bishop John Henry Hobart
Of New York, founded the New York Protestant Episc0pal
Theological Educational Seminary.93 Both groups accepted
the doctrine of man's depravity and the "consequent neces-
Sity of atonement and justification."94 But, whereas the
" High Churchmen" stressed primarily the "sacraments and the
apostolic ministry," the "Low Churchmen" stressed conver-
Sion or a "personal acceptance of Christ by faith."95 The
latter group did not deny the validity and importance of
the sacraments and the apostolic ministry. But, unlike the
former, they did not "impinge the validity of other minis-
1:ries and sacraments" and were more willing to cooperate
in non-denominational ventures.96 The "Low Churchmen"
considered themselves more as presbyters than as priests.
Their slogan, taken from one of Bishop McIlvaine's publi-
c3ations, was "No Priest, no Altar, no Sacrifice."97

No other Episc0palian was as intimately connected
with the American Tract Society during its first two decades
01E existence than Reverend James Milnor, rector of St.
Q-eorge Parish in New York City. Although Milnor was a
Jrector in Bishop Hobart's diocese, he was an ardent sup-

Porter of Evangelical Episcopalianism and interdenominational

 

 

v"... |
.""'~ -...
p
o-u.....g _.-
l
. C
:---‘-,. .

x - ‘—
..."“".-:.
.

.
A y ‘

uu
CII
"I

"-.
N

 

I.“ I; ‘.-
'w

.4

. .
0‘.

c 1
II:
a
(u
(D

( i

O 9'

(I)

n
a
n

(I!

 

 

 

93

‘rentures.98 Milnor and the Evangelical Churchmen were
Striking evidence of the Americanization process within
Episc0palianism. Prior to the American Revolution, the
Calvinists had Opposed the Anglican Church not merely
because of its hierarchy and ceremony, but also because of
its Arminian doctrine which could serve as an instrument of
anti-revivalism.99 But during the nineteenth century the
Evangelical wing accepted revivals and took its place along-
side the other major denominations within the new Republic.
They did not endorse predestination, but then neither did
men like Nathaniel Taylor and Charles Finney. Milnor con-
t:inually stressed interdenominational unity. He took part
in the founding of the American Tract Society and served
<>n its publishing committee until his death in 1845. In
1830 he was a delegate for both the American Tract Society
and the American Bible Society in London. He promoted the
Cause of Sunday Schools and was actively involved in the
New York Deaf and Dumb Institution.100

Milnor came from a middle-class, Quaker home in
Philadelphia. His father, William Milnor, had been trained
as a cooper but by the time of the American Revolution had
established himself in the fishery business. When William
1“ilnor applied for an army commission in the Revolution, he
was formally disowned by the Quakers. Whether William
hdilnor was ever wealthy is doubtful. James Milnor left the

Ul'iiversity of Pennsylvania at the age of sixteen due to

o- u...
‘ ha
'9 nee-..‘

~..

’ r.-

r-

. t-
‘. on... .

 

 

y
o..'
a

Q

'5

 

.
“A"

94

his father's financial difficulties. On the other hand,
judging from the fact that young James Milnor had been able
to attend a Philadelphia Grammar School and the University,
it would seem to indicate that William Milnor had been at
least moderately successful at one time in his business.
Furthermore, a number of the Milnor children faired well
socially. One daughter married a "physician of eminence"
in Philadelphia, one brother went into business, and
another brother became a merchant, a United States Congress-
man, and a Mayor and Alderman of Philadelphia. James
Milnor became a lawyer, president of the "Law Society" in
Philadelphia, grand-master of the Grand Lodge of Pennsyl-
vania, and a Congressman. He married the daughter of Henry
Pawling, a substantial farmer from Montgomery County,
Pennsylvania. Since his wife was a non-Quaker, James Milnor,
like his father before him, was read out of the Quaker Meet-
ing.101
Milnor's political career spanned the years of
1800-1812. In 1800 he was elected to the council in Phila-
delphia, in 1805-1810 he was a member of the Select Council,
but lost the presidency of the Select Council in 1809 when
the Democratic Party gained a majority of the seats. In
1310 he was elected to the House of Representatives as an
anti-Jeffersonian. In 1812 he signed the Federalist anti-
war pamphlet. According to his biographer, James Milnor

was a "Washington-federalist" from his "boyhood" and "his

l‘r

-,
....,,._.‘ .
-' ' new -
— -. .

n.. >
..._
~.. .V... .

‘n. M
~.- 'II- .

.... ....‘_ _
~3 3
"' Q...

'r‘

n v
‘7. Q.’ '
‘ ~ .‘

". ‘.'...I4

I.
‘-.__-'
o e...4.‘.

 

.. .
3. ;“‘;~ ..
hotbvb“ ...
‘;“V'Pu ‘~~ ‘
'but-“ 1 :14 .2. ‘
‘
5,. -h - ‘
.v .U .‘-= 4
.
.-:I. y.“" '
‘." A
a ~“,
"v.
“~.::O'. :r r
I ,‘
L
y
"ME I‘: ' r‘.
e...“
~ V
“"74 ",r .
v.“ A'J
~«
""rfl'" 4. ;.
v.1 ‘n ‘
.
,
‘e
. I
.Ieu t’_‘ ‘
.I ““3‘5 '
‘
'Fn‘
"" ‘h V
eye.) of t,
‘u
‘
‘5

.358
In S
“is";

 

 

95

principles cleaved to him unchangingly through life."102
By 1812 he was finding politics increasingly distasteful.
He despised the new breed of young politicians who were
"everyday increasing in number and diminishing in respecta-
bility and worth."103 Milnor respected politicians who did
not form their Opinions "from motives Of self interest,"
and one might well suspect that part Of Milnor's disillusion-
ment with politics was due to the fact that politicians
were finding it increasingly necessary to cater to public
Opinion. This many Of the Federalists refused to dO.104

Milnor's trek from an urban legal practice tO a
political career and finally into the EpiscOpalian ministry
reflected his difficulty in coming to terms with nineteenth-
century America. Politics, urbanism, and materialism were
not to his liking. In 1813 he suggested to his wife that
they buy a "small farm for some bodily exercise, and a
library for the employment of the mind" and devote their
time to more than "all the perishing concerns of this
World.105 But in the end it was within the Episc0palian
Church in the City of New York, rather than on a country
farm, that Milnor found his solace. In 1816 he became
ReCtor Of the St. George Parish in New York, and shortly
thereafter established himself as one Of the most prominent
leaders of the Evangelical Churchmen.106

In several reSpects Milnor's ideas and practices

resemble other leading clergymen within the American Tract

'0 .‘b
DI...-

-
. I n..- F’.‘
.‘.. 40‘ bou—
' “A .'.,
H.

---‘-~ 7”
50-h! ‘-
." '~~...1
~~"":° tn:
-¢--_.__ _‘.‘
.
H L-
.I.-~ ' ‘
. u - .— *
ML,” .
C
..-. ." ‘u- ..
\
.— 3.----vu
s
I“ ~ Cd"?
,...u ~-.---‘
on- I
‘~’p':-
”C .u..-._”
u
' .
" ;..,_ :.
u“' _"..' d
.
.-‘. ‘
... ~~V .. :
.vi.-‘_-“‘
2.. . ~“VD N
.01 e..5“~.
‘~-.
‘
(‘I‘I I

..
..J
W”...

‘v-

’-

I
(n

'n‘ .
' ‘e,
"4 2..

“o ‘

'1;

C
”'H P!
u D ‘ i

In

96

Society. He was influenced by the spirit of revivalism
which was prevalent in his day. And one might also infer
from his biographer, that his revivals did not lead tO dis-
orders and overt enthusiasm.107 Certainly he was not unique
in seeing revivals and benevolent societies as bulwarks
against the triumph of evil and Romanism.108 Like James
Alexander he Opposed "visionary schemes for levelling."109
His solution for aiding the poor was to build Sunday schools
which enrolled 4,000 tO 6,000 pupils drawn especially from
the "ignorant and needy classes." Religious instruction,
education, and a realistic view of fallen man, and not
indiscriminate charity, would bring the poor true happiness
and insure "tranquility, good order, and liberties Of man-
kind."110 His stand on slavery was also similar to that Of
many of the clergymen included in this study; he Opposed
both slavery and abolitionism, supporting instead the
Colonization Society.111 In the end one might suspect that
Milnor's wholehearted support for revivalism and inter-
denominational societies was born partly out Of a need for
unity and order which seemed to be lacking in nineteenth-
century America.112

The American Tract Society received the support Of
anumber Of Episcopalian Bishops, including BishOp Charles
In. McIlvaine of the Diocese of Ohio. .McIlvaine was appointed
president of the American Tract Society in 1863, after hav-

ing served as a vice-president from 1835 to 1862. He also

_..-
H
“'5 r"s _
..-.- v

41.9.0 .0

-vol ..

 

“A
‘h
'-

"n a

‘-
- A

‘0' ~~.

‘ 5'-.-‘

d

u
- ;~‘;" “‘7
uouvv.‘ ~..-
.._. .

'—
It‘ ‘ :5-..
. “' .dwb.
.
9‘. I..." .
v ‘

‘0’ ”CV c
"Q
s... _M N
‘V t.

p
‘0.
"'35 it I.
9‘ ~-
I
“AA‘.
u.~::‘: a:
\d
fir ' e.
... .’
£..:
5.
I‘~
't‘KL ‘ .
\
4.
«E +,. ”‘5
\J L.“-
in“.
. V
i‘ ‘ K
. V
ab ,e“
9"
4 “kn .
““5 H n
r.

97

wrote several tracts, attended numerous anniversary meetings,
at which he occasionally delivered addresses, including one
in 1858 in which he defended the publishing committee's
decision not to publish a tract on the duties of masters to
their slaves.113
McIlvaine came from a well established, middle-
class, New Jersey home. He was born in 1799 in Burlington.
His father, Joseph McIlvaine, was one Of New Jersey's lead-
ing lawyers, served as State's Attorney, and in 1823 was
selected as a Democrat to the United States Senate. Five
Of Senator McIlvaine's sons, including Charles, attended
the College Of New Jersey. In 1822 Charles McIlvaine was
elected chaplain Of the United States Senate, and three
years later, partly through the influence Of John C. Cal-
houn, was appointed Chaplain and Professor Of Ethics at
West Point.114
In 1832 McIlvaine replaced Reverend Philander

Chase as Bishop of the Diocese Of Ohio and soon established
himself as one Of the leaders Of the "Evangelical Church-
men." The Bishopric Of Ohio became vacant when BishOp
Chase took the unprecedented step Of resigning his office
due to the Diocese's refusal to endorse his authoritarian
rule at Kenyon College. Although Bishop Chase was inclined
tOWards High Church views, the majority Of the clergy in
(”110 were not. Under McIlvaine, Ohio had a bonafide evan—

cJelical leader. He took the lead in Opposing the Tractarian

.'

 

Co-

‘5‘.

-o

I...

u.'

'-

'-

 

 

 

98

or Oxford Movement and, like Milnor, stressed interdenomi-
national unity. His stance regarding revivals was similar
to that Of men like Gardiner Spring and Archibald Alexander.
He advocated revivals, but warned against using "artificial
expedients for arresting and exciting emotion."115

McIlvaine's residence in the West made him aware of
the impact that mobility was having upon the community. He
observed people moving away from settled communities, from
churches, and from a "well ordered social state" to new
territories where everything seemed to be "undisciplined
and at random." He saw entire communities captivated by
an ”unprecedented excitement" for wealth, a pOpulation
hasting to be rich" and "upsetting Old methods because
they . . . [were] too slow."116

Rapid mobility and the haste for wealth created
not only a lack Of stability but also a lack of unity.
McIlvaine sought for unity both within the church and the
state. His cooperation with interdenominational societies
like the American Tract Society demonstrated his Opposi-
tion to sectarianism within the churches. He felt that
the Civil War would be instrumental in building a more
unified nation. Although the war was a tragedy, it had
Led" nevertheless, to the emancipation of the slaves and

had thereby removed the "only element that ever divided"

the country . 117

99

The one remaining denomination to have a representa-
tive on the publishing committee was the Baptist Church.
Although persecuted at first in Massachusetts, the Baptists
won toleration in the charter Of 1691. But toleration did
not imply equality. The Middle States, Pennsylvania and
New Jersey, seemed to be a more promising center for Baptist
expansion. In 1707 the Philadelphia Baptist Association
was formed and in 1742 this association adopted the London
Confession Of Particular Baptists of 1689 as its own state—
ment Of faith, thus giving evidence of its shift from
Arminianism towards Calvinism, and thereby entering the
mainstream Of American religion. The New England Baptists
were somewhat slower to adopt Calvinism. However, a number
Of "Separate" congregations, formed during the Great Awaken-
ing, later affiliated with the Baptists and brought their
Calvinist theology with them. With the disestablishment
Of religion in the early nineteenth century,the Baptists
were freed from the last legal impediments and their
Churches increased rapidly, especially in the South and
along the frontier.118

One Of the founders of the American Tract Society
and an original member Of the publishing committee was
Reverend Charles Sommers, a Baptist clergyman in New York
City. He, like several other Baptist clergymen who were
a'lltive in the American Tract Society, was born and raised

111 England.119 (The Baptist Church was the only major

100

denomination within the Tract Society whose leading clergy-
men were born outside the United States.) The economic
status Of Sommers' parents is unknown. His father was a
Norweigian and moved to Denmark where Sommers spent his
early life and probably received his early education. He
entered a mercantile house at Elsinore, and at the age of
fifteen, emigrated to America. Within three years he was
”fairly installed in the counting-house and fur trade of
the late John Jacob Astor."120

Sommers did not join the Baptist Church until
several years after his arrival in America. For a time
he espoused Universalism. However, on a business trip tO
Canada in 1812, he began tO have second thoughts about
his religious views. He eventually abandoned universalism,
joined the Baptist Church, gave up a potentially successful
career in business, and moved tO Philadelphia to study
theology under Reverend William Staughton, a graduate Of
a Baptist College in Bristol, England. After completing
his theological studies and serving a church in Troy,
New York, Sommers began his thirty-four-year association
with the South Baptist Church in New York City.121

Once again a familiar pattern emerges: pastoring
an urban church, promoting Sunday schools and home missions,
and being appointed to positions Of leadership within non—
denominational societies such as the Tract and Bible soci-

e":ies. These experiences helped tO give Sommers visibility

101

and prominence within the religious community. His lauda-
tory biography of a fellow Baptist clergyman and a vice
president of the American Tract Society, Reverend John
Stanford, implies that Sommers shared Stanford's concern
for the poor and society's outcasts. But one might also
infer that he endorsed Stanford's method of alieviating
their condition, namely, by bringing them Christianity and
education. He concluded that the Baptist forefathers were
correct in their "scrupulous" attempts to withdraw "as much
as possible from political concerns," thereby letting all
men know that they were "engaged in the more important
interest Of . . . [their] Redeemer's Kingdom."122

In several respects, Sommers typifies the Baptist
clergymen selected by the Tract Society to serve on the
publishing committee or as vice presidents. First Of all,
they were usually men of prominence within both the religious
and secular communities. Reverend William R. Williams, the
only other Baptist clergyman to serve on the publishing com-
mittee, pastored several New York churches, was a member
of the New York Historical Society, served as trustee Of
Columbian College and as Trustee and president Of the
Rochester Theological Seminary.123 Reverend William
Staughton, a vice president in the Society, became president
of Columbian College after serving as pastor Of a Baptist

Church in Philadelphia from 1305 to 1822.124

102

One other example was Reverend Jessie Mercer, a
self-educated but prominent Baptist clergyman from Georgia.
A perfect marriage tO a widow from Washington, Georgia,
provided him not only with "a companion of great Christian
liberality and worth" but also with "a considerable addi—
tion to his worldly property" as well. He dabbled in poli-

tics, published the Christian Index from 1833 to 1840, and

 

promoted the cause Of missions and education. By 1840 he
was probably the leading Baptist clergyman within the state,
with power like that of a bishop.125

The Baptist clergymen who were elected as members
of the publishing committee or as vice presidents were
usually well educated at a time when their own church was
not noted for its emphasis upon education. William R.
Williams had studied at Columbia College, while William
Staughton was a graduate of a Baptist College in Bristol,
England. Another example was Reverend Jonathon Going, a
vice president in the Tract Society and a Baptist clergy-
man in Vermont. When Going had first returned to Vermont
in 1811 after completing his studies at Brown University,
he was the only one of forty-five ordained Baptist minis-
ters in the state who had a college education. It is true
that Jessie Mercer did not have much formal education.
However, after his ordination he had studied part time at

an Academy while pastoring a church in Georgia.126

\\““‘I-__._

103

These, then, were some Of the clergymen who played
a leading role within the American Tract Society. Several
of these individuals had been involved in the organization
Of the Society in 1824 to 1825; many of these ministers
had been elected to positions of leadership within the
Society after 1825. The question now remains, what con-
clusions, if any, can one draw from this sample?

One Obvious conclusion is that most Of these men
were leaders not only within the Tract Society but also
within the religious community at large and within their
own congregation. One historian has suggested that some
Of the leaders Of the benevolent societies were Often
clergymen whose advancement within their denomination was
limited. Two examples were James Milnor, an "Evangelical
Churchman" in Bishop Hobart's diocese, and Lyman Beecher.127
This may have been true of some of the members, but this
was not the case with the majority of the clergymen included
in this study. The Society was careful to select leading
denominational representatives. These men would be better
able to attract funds from their churches.

Regarding the foregoing observation, it should also
be pointed out that these men had Often gained their pres—
tige within the religious community through their associa-
tion with prominent, urban churches. The one exception was
Andover, which had prestigious churches but was not an

urban center. Urban pastorates had brought these men into

 

‘ .
.
‘- ' D

.e. '
‘ o. u
"U‘thcu .
' e

3".

...
a...

" va.-.. ,_

 

 

 

9.
a
.._ .

.- ‘-...- .
.l‘ “.'h ~~
'.

. -. r
I \ . .
.-" ‘ -d v
' Nu, _"
-‘h— ~' ~ .-

'-."‘ y.”

,
-
. i

4‘ \.,_r -‘ ..

...‘ .A h
"“ .

‘-I\ .-c k

I... v...‘ :,_.I

7..

\~-P “Fry

‘0. ’4‘.
o...

rt

‘a-

 

u
‘l
v
4“”? ..:‘
\-
‘.
F
‘9' ‘ I
\vls ns“““;
8
D
.3 ...~ ’-
‘ \
*1“ L.
O I
‘6
"1' ’1- ‘ .
‘V‘ N.“
Na.
M
A.
'\

I“ ‘ ‘
”Lugzo‘l
: H
e ‘5:

104

areas which were experiencing industrialization, and rapid
population growth from internal migration and immigration.

Yet many Of these same leaders,who now served urban
churches,hailed originally from rural New England or Vir—
ginia, regions which could be characterized as "mature,
static, homogeneous, and ingrown."128 On the one hand,
these men symbolized the changes taking place within
America. They too had become mobile. The trend during
the ante-bellum era was tO move to the city or to the West.
Most Of these clergymen chose the former, while Lyman
Beecher even chose both. And yet these same men shared the
anxieties of rural New England and rural Virginia. They
had moved to the city but feared the influx of immigrants
and the seeming breakdown of order, especially among the
urban poor.

These clergymen belonged to an elite group, not
only because they had risen to positions of prominence
within their churches, but also because Of their education.
During the ante-bellum period little emphasis was placed
upon higher education by the American society as a whole.
This was the age of Jackson's "spoils system." And even
before Jackson brought his common man concepts into poli-
tics, the Baptists and Methodists brought theirs into the
ministry by demonstrating that God's call to service within
his kingdom was not necessarily—~or even primarily--through

a college education. But the American Tract Society thought

105

otherwise. They selected those men who respected education.
The promoters of the Tract Society were not levellers. They
endorsed the subsidization of students so that even the poor
could climb up the ladder to the ministry, but they would
not lower the qualifications for ordination to the point
where a ladder was no longer necessary.

Although these men were aware Of the fact that the
minister's dominant position within society was seemingly
fading away, their actions revealed that they themselves
were partly to blame. The prestige of the colonial minis-
ter had been enhanced by two factors: the concept Of only
one church or minister for one community, and the accepted
practice Of a lengthy association between a minister and
the congregation. The first factor was put into jeopardy
by the Great Awakening and received its final death blow
by disestablishment, both not immediately within the minis-
ter's control. But the change from a long to a short
pastorate in one church was partly within his control.
True,there were men like Gardiner Spring, John Knox,
Nehemiah Adams, and James Milnor who served primarily one
church. But they were exceptions. Justin Edwards went
from pastor to secretary of the Temperance Society, to
president of Andover Seminary, to pastor. James Alexander
pastored a church, taught at Princeton College, pastored a
church, taught at Princeton Seminary, and pastored a church.

Then there was Lyman Beecher who moved from East Hampton,

106

tO Litchfield, to Boston, to Cincinnati. And yet one
detects in Beecher a certain uneasiness of conscience. He
venerated the Old concept of a life—long association between
a minister and his congregation. To at least three of his
positions he came--or so he claimed—-with the intention of
remaining there the rest Of his life; yet he left the first
two pastorates partly because another church Offered a
higher salary. One might suspect that Beecher was not the
only clergyman to venerate the old New England concept of
the ministry, yet violate it himself.129 They venerated
order and stability, but by their actions encouraged
mobility.

Since later chapters of this thesis will examine
the religious, social, and political philosophies of the
American Tract Society, it is not necessary to make a com-
prehensive study Of these at this time. However, a few
general remarks can be made on the basis of the facts
gleaned from the brief biographies in this chapter. In
their attitude towards revivals these men took a moderate
position. They endorsed revivals as a means Of promoting
the growth of Christianity. In fact the means-—revivals--
replaced or at least rivalled the content-—doctrines, creeds,
or theology—-as the distinguishing mark of orthodoxy.
Revivals were useful in warding Off infidelity, Unitari-
anism, and in countering attacks against the established

order. Whereas theology could split denominations,

107

revivals, hopefully, would unify Protestantism. But the
revivals must be orderly. The leaders of the American
Tract Society were products of the Second Great Awakening
which, under men like Beecher, had combined "stability and
zeal." Their solution had been to use "settled pastors
with systematic itineration" to reap orderly harvests,
thereby avoiding the divisiveness and disorders associated
with "irresponsible exhorters."130 In 1863 one speaker was
careful to point out that the Tract Society was not replac-
ing the settled pastor. Its function was to reach those
who never came to church.131 It is not surprising that
Charles Finney was never elected to even an honorary posi-
tion in the Tract Society. His tactics were tOO extreme.
His Arminian theology was too divisive for a society which
was conservative and moderately Calvinistic.

In their attitude towards social reforms the clergy—
men within the American Tract Society were not reactionaries
for their day. It is true that men like Archibald Alexander
were basically conservative, but there were others like
James Alexander and John Stanford who saw the need for a
more positive action in meeting the problems of the poor.

In the end, however, they never went beyond advocating
reforms such as revivals, moral instruction, and education.
In this they reflected the "conservative" reform ideology

of their day which sought to alleviate social ills while,

108

at the same time, leaving "the foundations of the social

order undisturbed."132

 

FOOTNOTES--CHAPTER I I

1Robert H. Bremner, American Philanthropy (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1960), p. 13. (Hereinafter
cited as Bremner, Philanthropy.)

 

2Shaw Livermore, The Twilight Of Federalism: The
Disintegration of the Federal Party, 1816-1830 (Princeton,
N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1962), pp. 4-5. (Here-
inafter cited as Livermore, Twiiight of Federalism.)

3Daniel H. Calhoun, Professional Lives in America:
Structure and Aspirations, 1750-1850 (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1965), pp. 91-93, 119. (Hereinafter
cited as Calhoun, Prof. Lives in America.)

4Rowland Berthoff, "The American Social Order: A
Conservative Hypothesis," American Historical Review, LXV
(April, 1960), 503. (Hereinafter cited as Berthoff, "The
Am. Social Order.")

51bid.

6Ibid., pp. 501-03.

7Stuart Bruchey, The Roots of American Economic
GrowthL71607-186l: An Essay in Social Causation (New
York: Harper and Row, Pub., 1965), p. 210. (Hereinafter
cited as Bruchey, The Roots Of Am. Ec. Growth.)

8Calhoun, Prof. Lives in America, p. 160.

9Clifton E. Omstead, Religion in America, Past and
Present, Spectrum Books (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice
Hall Inc., 1961), pp. 52-53 (hereinafter cited as Olmstead,
Ikfli.ion in America); Anson G. Phelps Stokes, Church and
£§tate in the Unite States, I (New York: Harper and Bros.,

 

109

 

110

1950), 366-446. On religious liberty in Virginia, see
Ibid., pp. 366-97; on Conn., see Ibid., pp. 408-18; on
Mass., see Ibid., pp. 419-27. On the reaction of the
Protestant ministry tO voluntarism and religious freedom
see Sidney E. Mead, "Denominationalism: The Shape of
Protestantism in America," Church History, XXII (April,
1959), 291—320 (hereinafter cited as Mead, "Denomination-
alism"), and Sidney E. Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor,
1786-1856: A Connecticut Liberal TChicagO: Chicago
University Press, 1942), pp. 38-53 (hereinafter cited as
Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor).

 

 

 

 

10Melvin M. Tumin, Social SEigtification: The
Forms and Functions of Inequality, Foundations of Modern
SociOIOgy Series (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall,
Inc., 1967), p. 36.

 

11James Bennett, "The Gospel Ministry Entitled to
Support," Tracts, V, No. 147, p. 10. The author was an
Englishman But the fact that the Tract Society saw fit to
publish it in America suggests that it agreed with the
sentiments expressed in the tract.

12The Christian Almanac-~Michigan, 1838, p. 6.

l3Tracts, VIII, NO. 265, p. 2.

14Barbara M. Cross, ed., The Autobiography of
Lyman Beecher (2 vols.; Cambridge: Belknap Press of
Harvard University Press, 1961), I, 60, 67 (hereinafter
cited as Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher). On March 26, 1799,
Reverend Lyman Beecher wrote that if East Hampton would
unite to call him to the pastorate he would probably
accept "and conclude to spend" his days there. At this
time he also thought in terms Of a "life-pastorate" (see
Ibid., p. 73; Calhoun, Prof. Lives in America, pp. 119-22).

 

 

 

15Fred Somkin, Unquiet Eagle, Memory and Desire in

the Idea Of American Freedom, 1815-60 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cor-
nell University Press,’I967), pp. 647. (Hereinafter cited
as Somkin, Unquiet Eagle.)

 

 

16"Address of the Executive Committee . . ."
Tracts, I, NO. l, 12.

17After 1842 both the Old and New School Presby-

terians had a representative upon the publishing committee.
frhe Methodists had a representative on this committee in

 

'u A.

~..

I
_‘_r.
.L. V

u._

 

'5;

 

 

111

1825 (see Clifford S. Griffen, Their Brothers' Keepers:
Moral Stewardship in the United States, 1800-18654TNew
Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1960], p. 66).
(Hereinafter cited as Griffen, Their Brothers' Keepers.)

 

 

18For example, in 1840, fifteen of the twenty-two
Vice presidents as well as twenty-four Of the thirty-six
directors were clergymen (see Annual Repprts, N.Y., 1840,
p. 8). In 1858 twenty-one Of thirty-three vice presidents
and twenty-seven of thirty-six directors were clergymen
(see Annual Reports, N.Y., 1858, p. 2).

 

 

19Annual Reports, Bost., 1843, p. 29.

 

20Rev. William A. Hallock, "Light and Love": A
Sketch of the Life and Labors Of the Rev. Justin Edwards,
9:D" the Evangelical Pastor, The Advocate of Temperance,
The Sabbath, and the Bible (New York: American Tract
Society, 1855), p. 43. (Hereinafter cited as Hallock,
Justin Edwards.)

 

 

 

 

 

ZlIbid., pp. 43-44; Annual Repprt, N.Yiii1850,
pp. 22-26; Dr. Hallock's Golden Wedding: Fifty Years in
the Tgact Society, September 26, l822-—September 26, 1872
(New York: American Tract Society [1872?1), pp. 8-9
(hereinafter cited as Hallock's Golden Wedding).

 

 

 

22Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 9.

 

23Ibid., pp. 8-9, 12-13; Annual Report, N.Y.,
1854, pp. 14-15; Frederick Rudolph, Mark ngkins and the
Log: Williams College! 1836-1872 (New Haven: Yale Uni;
Versity Press, 1956), p. 69 (hereinafter cited as Rudolph,
Mark Hopkins).

 

 

 

 

24Rudolph, Mark Hopkins, pp. 8-9.

 

25Calvin Durfee, A Histogy of Williams College
(Boston: A.Williams and Co., 1860), pp. 110-11. THerein-
after cited as Durfee, Hist. Of Williams Collegg.)

 

 

26Rev. Edwards had been influenced by a revival
in 1800 (see Ibid., pp. 110-11, 114-15; Calvin Durfee,
Williams Biographical Annals: With an Introduction by
Rev. Genaeus Prince, D.D. [Boston: Lee and Shephard,
1871], p. 13 [hereinafter cited as Durfee, Williams Biog.
Annals]; Hallock, Justin Edwards, pp. 12-13YT’

 

 

 

 

112

27Robert Baird, The Christian Retrospect and Regis—
ter: A Summaryggf the Scientific, Moral, and Religious
Progress of the First Half of the Nineteenth Centuiy‘TNew
York: M. W. Dodd, 1851), p. 47. (Hereinafter cited as
Baird, Christian Retrospect and Register.)

 

28Ibid. By 1851 there were six Congregational,

fifteen Presbyterian, five Lutheran, two Dutch Reformed,
one Methodist, three Episcopalian, two Unitarian, and ten
other—-including Baptist--seminaries.

29Robert Baird, Religion in America; or an Account
Of the Origin, Progress, Relation to the State, and Present
Condition of the Evangelical Churches in the United States,
With Notices of the UnevangeliCal Denominations (New York:
Harper and Bros, 1844), p. 162. iHereinafter cited as
Baird, Relig. in Am.)

 

 

 

30Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 44.

 

31Letter Of Justin Edwards, January 2, 1830, cited
in ibid., p. 324.

32Letter, Justin Edwards to American Tract Society,

January 21, 1848, in ibid., p. 489.

331bid., pp. 412-13, 465-66, 494-96; Annual Report
N.Y., 1854, pp. 14-15; William B. Sprague, Annals of the
American Pulpit (6 vols.; New York: Robert Carter and
Bros., 1857-1861), II, 572-76 (hereinafter cited as
Sprague, Annals).

 

 

34Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 207.

 

3552i93; Calhoun, Prof. Lives in Am., p. 161.

 

36Hallock's Golden Wedding, pp. 1-4, 13. See also
Allen Johnson and Dumas Malone, ed., Dictionary Of Ameri-

can Bio ra h , VIII (New York: Charles Scribners, 1932),
158-59 ihereinafter cited as Diet. of Am. Bigg.); Franklin
B. Dexter, Bio ra hical Sketches of the Graduates Of Yale
College with AnnaEs of the ColIegg History, VOI. IV, 1778—
1792 (6 v61s.; New York: Henry HOIt and Co., 1885-19I9),
603 (hereinafter cited as Dexter, Grad. of Yale College);

The National C clo edia of American BiO ra h Bein the
History of the United States as IIIustrateS in the Lives

 

 

 

 

113

Of the Founders, Builders, and Defenders of the Republic
and the Men and WOmen who are Doing the Work and Moulding
the Thought of the Present Time (40 vols.; NeinOrk:
James T. White and Co., 1898-i955), XI, 193 (hereinafter
cited as Nat. Cyclop.); Durfee, Williams Biog. Annals,
pp. 390-93).

37Justin Edwards and William Hallock had also been
associated with the local New England Tract Society prior
to 1825.

38Gardiner Spring, Personal Reminiscences of the

Life and Times Of Gardiner Spring, Pastor Of the Brick
Presbyterian Church, in the Ciiy of New York (2 vols.;

New York: Charles Scribners & Co., 1866), I, 308 (herein-
after cited as Spring, Pers. Rem.); Williston Walker,

Ten New England Leaders (New York: Silver Burdett and
Co., 1901), pp. 376-83, 389, 403-04 (hereinafter cited as
walker, Ten New Eng. Leaders); Annual Report, N.Y., 1855,
pp. 13-14.

 

 

 

39Walker, Ten New England Leaders, pp. 364-65,
360-72, 376-87; Annual Repprt, N.Y., 1855, pp. 13-14.

 

 

4oCalhoun, Prof. Lives in Am., p. 161; Walker,
Ten New England Leaders, pp. 370-71; Baird, Relig. in
fig., pp. 162, 168.

 

 

41Walker, Ten New Eng. Leaders, p. 389.

 

42[Seth Bliss], Letters to the Members, Patrons
and Friends of the Branch American Tractigpciety_in
Boston . . . (3rd ed.; Boston: American Tract Society,
1858), pp. 106-07. According to John Jay, the New England
group was so upset over Adams' stand on slavery that they
demanded his dismissal from the publishing committee.
This, however, the Tract Society refused to do (see John
Jay, The Proxy Bill and the Tract Society: A Rgply to the
Attacks of the Christian Intelligencer and the Journal pf
Commerce, gpon the Bill passed by the Assembly Givingfito
Life Membe£§_of Charitable Societies the Right to Vote_by
Proxy [New York: Roe Lockwood and Son, 1859], p. 29).

 

 

 

 

43Samuel Green had succeeded Justin Edwards as New
England's representative on the publishing committee. He
died prematurely in 1833 (see Sprague, Annals, II, 658-61;
Annual Report, N.Y., 1853, p. 17). For a Brief background
on Reverend Nehemiah Adams see Annual Report, N.Y.L 1812.
p. 13; Diet. of Am. Biog., I, 94.

 

114

44Dict. of Am. Biog., I, pp. 93-94; Nat. Cyclop.,
II, 318; Nehemiah Adams, A South Side View of Slavery; or
Three Months at the South (3rd ed.; Richmond, Va.: A.
Morris, 1855), p. 44; Nehemiah Adams, Truth for the Times:
The Reasonableness Of Future Endless Punishment, number 1
(Boston: Gould and Lincoln, 1858), pp. 3-5; Nehemiah
Adams, A Sabbath Discourse on the Death of Hon. Rufus
Choate Together with the Address at His Funeral (Boston:
J. E. Tilton and Co., 1859), p. 26.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

45Nehemiah Adams, Our Famiiy of States: Oration

Delivered before the Phi Beta Kappa Societyiin Amherst
Colle e (Boston: James Monroe and Co., 1861), pp. 16-17;
Ne emlah Adams, A Sermon Preached to the Congregation at
the Essex Street Church, October 31, 1852, the Sabbath
after the Interment Of Hon. Daniel Webster (Boston:
George C. Rand, 1852), p. 10.

 

 

 

 

 

46Spring, Pers. Rem., I, 12, 21, 28, 32.

47Shepherd Knapp, A Historyfiof Brick Presbyterian
Church in the City of New York (New York: Trustees Of
the Brick Presbyterian Church, 1901), pp. 318, 33ln.
(Hereinafter cited as Knapp, Hist. of Brick Presbyterian
Church.)

 

 

 

48Rev. Spring turned down the presidencies of
Dartmouth and Hamilton Colleges as well as a professorship
at Princeton Theological Seminary (see Knapp, Hist. of
Brick Presbyterian Church, p. 319).

49Spring, Pers. Rem., I, 14-15, 161, 222, 237,
270-71.

50Ibid., p. 128.

51Ibid., pp. 263-64, 323, 327.

52Ibid., II, 19; Gardiner Spring, The Contrast
Between the Good and Bad MenLiIllustrated by the Biography
and Truths of the Bible (2 vols.; New York: M. W. Wood,
1855), II, 271 (hereinafter cited as Spring, Contrast).

 

53Spring, Pers. Rem., II, 292-93.

541239,. pp. 202-03: Spring, Contrast, II, 35-36.

115

55Spring, Pers. Rem., II, 201.

56Diet. Of Am. Biog., I, 162; James W. Alexander,

The Life Of Archibald Alexander,iThe First Professor in
the’Theological Seminary at Princeton, New Jersey (New
York: Charles Scribner, 1856), pp. 8-9, 12-13, 17, 77,
83, 105-06 (hereinafter cited as Alexander, A. Alexander);
Hugh T. Kerr, Sons of the Prgphets: Leaders in Protes-
tantism from Princeton Seminary (Princeton, N.J.: Prince-
ton University Press, 1936), pp. 6-7, ll, 13, 18 (herein-
after cited as Kerr, Sons of the Prophets).

57Samuel Stanhope Smith, who later became President
Of Princeton College, was assisted at the Academy by three
other graduates Of Princeton College, one of whom was
President Witherspoon's son. The influence of Princeton
on the South is further seen in Archibald Alexander's edu-
cation. He attended Liberty Hall, which was under the
direction of William Graham, a Princeton graduate. The
South revered Princeton for its "sound scholarship, true
piety, and men of high character." The trek Of students
from the South to Princeton is evident in the fact that
Southerners had a majority in the Whig (Literary) Society
forty times between 1800 and 1860, and in the Clio (Lite-
rary) Society, eleven times during the same period (see
Thomas Jefferson wertenbaker, Princeton, 1746-1896 [Prince-
'ton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1946], pp. 114—15,
206 [hereinafter cited as Wertenbaker, Princeton];
Iilexander, A. Alexander, p. 17).

58Alexander, A. Alexander, pp. 269-70.

59Ibid., pp. 281-88, 465; Kerr, Sons of Prophets,
I). 8' 10-11, 14.

19‘ 60The names, College of New Jersey, Nassau Hall,
Irinceton College, and Princeton Theological Seminary,crop
‘J.“]P repeatedly when studying the lives of the leading clergy-
It; Qn within the American Tract Society. Besides the two
t: :lexanders, Reverend Samuel Miller, a vice president of
e Tract Society and a former New York City minister,
leo taught at the Seminary. Students who attended either
hail?inceton College or Seminary included Reverend Erskine
t:geison, a Presbyterian New York minister and a member of
haplle publishing committee from 1843 to 1851, Bishop Charles
<311vaine Of the Episcopal Church, who served both as a
JLce president and president of the Tract Society, his
ESEallow bishop from Virginia, the Right Reverend William
I“IE—eade, a vice president Of the Tract Society, Reverend

116

Norris Kirk, a minister in Albany and Boston and president
of the American Tract Society at Boston, and Reverend
Samuel S. Schmucker, a leading Lutheran clergyman and
vice president of the Tract Society (see Kerr, Sons Of
Prophets, p. 16; Wertenbaker, Princeton, p. 155; Annual
J Repprt, N.Y., 1852, p. 13; Alexander, A. Alexander, p. 352;
’/ Diet. Of Am. Biog., X, 428).

 

 

61Annual Report, N.Y., pp. 13-14; John Hall, ed.,
Porgy Years' Familiar Letters of James W. Alexander, D.D.,
Containing with the Notes a Memoir Of His Life (2 vols.;
New York: Charles Scribner, 18607} I, 119, 203, 208;
II, 5, 163 (hereinafter cited as Hall, ed., Fortinears).

 

62Alexander, A. Alexander, p. 72.

 

63Ibid., pp. 283, 286-87.

64Ibid., pp. 281-82, 366-67.

65Hall, ed., Forty Years, I, 289.

 

66Ibid., 145, 283; II, 38, 208.

671bid., I, 285.

' 68Ibid., p. 27; II, 9, 54, 65.

691bid., II, 10,17.

1 70Dict. of Am. Biog., X, 554; Nat. Cyclpp., VII,

1:316; Annual Report, N.Y., 1863, pp. 16-17; C. Van Sant-

“EJoord, Memoirs of Eliphalet Nott., D.D., L.L.D., for

.S§§ixty-two Years President of Union COIlege (New York:

=5Sheldon and Co., 1876), p. 122 (hereinafter cited as Van
' =5Santvoord, Memoirs Of Eliphalet Nott).

 

 

71Van Santvoord, Memoirs of Eliphalet Nott, p. 12.

72Ibid., pp. 118, 121 (see also Frederick Rudolph,
.I'he American College and University: A History, Vintage
hook's INew York: Random House, Inc., 1962], pp. 114, 184).

.P
L w. "a

 

‘fle.

117

73Van Santvoord, Memoirs Of Eliphalet Nott, pp. 221,

226-27.

74Besides McAuley two other members of the publish-
ing committee and one vice president were students at
Union College during Eliphalet Nott's presidency. The two
members Of the publishing committee were Reverend John S.
Stone, Episcopalian, and Reverend Thomas DeWitt, Dutch
Reformed. The vice president was Reverend Francis Wayland,
president Of Brown University. In fact nearly ninety
future college presidents, besides Reverend Wayland,
studied at Union during the "Nott" era (see Dixon Ryan
Fox, Dr. Eliphalet Nott, (1773-1866), and the American
8 irit (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,

9 , p. 10).

75Diet. of Am. Bigg., XI, 554; Nat. Cyclop., VII,
316; Annual Repprt, N.Y., 1863, pp. l6-l7. Besides his
work in the American Tract Society, McAuley also supported
the American Bible Society and took part in the founding
of Union Theological Seminary.

 

76George L. Prentiss, The Union Theological Semi-
nary in the Ci_y Of New York: Historical and BiOgraphiEal
Sketches of its First Fifty Years (New York: Anson D. F.
Randolph & Co., 1889), pp. 8- -9, 70. (Hereinafter cited
‘as Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem.)

 

77Annual Report, N.Y., 1863, pp. 15-16.

78

 

Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, I, 247; Dexter, Yale
\Q raduates, I, 247.

79Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, I, l6- -l7, 23, 27,
4- 45, Dexter, Yale Grédnates, I, 247; Annual Report, N. Y.,
Jl-863, pp. 15-16.

 

80William G. McLoughlin, Modern Revivalism: Charles
:I:§§andison Finney to Billy Graham (New York: Ronald Press,
59): pp. 30- 31.

81Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, I, 89, 163-64.

 

82Ibid., II, 177- 93; Lyman Beecher, A Plea for
IEJne West (3 3rd ed.; Cincinnati: Truman and Smith, 1836 6);

118

Ray Billington, The Protestant Crusade, 1800-60: A Study
Of the Origins of American Nativism, Quadrangle Paperbacks
(Chicago: Quadrangle Books, Inc., 1938), p. 73.

83

Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, I, 84. For similar
events in Connecticut see ibid., pp. 188-89, 191-93.
84 . ..
Ibid., I, xx-xx11, 251-56;

II, 14-16, 26-27,
259-60, 307, 323; Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor, p. 136;

Dexter, Grad. Of Yale College, I, 249-50.
85
Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, I, 73; II, 29, 32,
190, 202.

86

John Knox served the longest period Of any pub-
lishing committee member during the ante-bellum period.

87New York Tribune, December 16, 1865; Annual
Report, N.Y., 1858, pp. 12—13; Nat. Cyclop., II, 434.

88Annual Report, N.Y., 1858, pp. 12-14; Nat.
Cyclop., II, 434; VI, 219.

89Annual Report, N.Y., 1858, pp. 12-14; Nat.
Cyclop., VI, 219.

 

 

 

90New York Tribune, Dec. 16, 1858; Nat. Cyclop.,
1:, 434.

91New York Tribune, Dec. 16, 1858.

92

Thomas DeWitt, A Discourse Delivered in the
3535:9rth Reformed Church, in the City Of New York, on the
-;EE:;3st Sabbath in August 1856 (New York: Bd. Of Pub. Of

lhe Ref. Dutch Church,’1857), pp. 55-56.

93William Wilson Manross, A History Of the Ameri-
gfiiiin Episcopal Church (New York: Moorehouse Pub. Co.,

t:; 5 , pp. 24, 228-30; Raymond W. Albright, A Histogy of
it:£1e Protestant Episcopal Church (New York: MacMillan Co.,

5364), pp. 163-64 (hereinafter cited as Albright, Hist.
Egigg the Prot. Episc. Church); William Stevens Perry, T e
-elaiscopate in America (New York:

 

The Christian Literature
5L<>., 1895), p. 91; E. Clowes Chorley, Men and Movements

elzagthe Am. Episc. Church (New York: Charles Scribners
ESCDnS, 1950), p. 132 (hereinafter cited as Chorley, Men

 

119

and Movements in the Am. Episc. Church). Chorley tends to
give a superficial treatment but is Obviously in sympathy

with the Evangelical Churchmen. Manross gives a more sym-
pathetic portrayal Of Bishop Hobart and the High Churchmen.

94Albright, Hist. of the Prot. Episc. Church,

p. 116.

951bid.

96Ibid.

97Chorley, Men and Movements in the Am. Episc.
Church, p. 74.

98John S. Stone, A Memoir Of the Life Of James
Milnor, D.D., Late Rector of the St. George Church, New
York (New York: American Tract Society, 1848), pp. 273-
73, 297. (Hereinafter cited as Stone, Milnor.)

99Alan Heimart, Religion and the American Mind:
From the Great Awakening to the Revolution (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1966), pp. 366-67. Heimart
argues that the "Calvinist" clergy did not Oppose the
creation of an Anglican bishop per se, provided he was
:not given special privileges.

100Stone, Milnor, pp. 219, 237, 299-300, 418, 595-
337, 625-27; Annuai Report, N.Y., 1845, p. 10; Annual
agapporp, N.Yi, 1850, p. 23 (see also Mead, Nathaniel
LEEyIIliam Taylor, pp. 87-88, 99).

 

101Stone, Milnor, pp. 13-20, 25-27; Sprague,
:EEAnnals, v, 562-63.

102

Stone, Milnor, p. 45 (see also ibid., pp. 48-50,
‘558-69). “"“‘ ““

103Ibid., p. 114.

104Ibid., p. 48. On the ideology of the "Feder-

‘Eillists of the Old School" and their concept of "a speaking
§ristocracy in the face of a silent democracy," i.e., a
(overnment where the people only elected the rulers but
:id not dictate its policies, see David Hacket Fischer,

'sxri.

120

The Revolutiop Of American Conservativism: The Federalist
Party in the Era of Jeffersonian Democracy (New York:
Harper and Row, 1965), pp. 1-28, 454(hereinafter cited as
Fischer, The Rev. of Am. Cons.).

 

105Stone, Milnor, p. 132 (see also ibid., p. 114).
106 .

Ibid., pp. 199, 206-07; Sprague, Annals, V, 564.
107 .

Stone, Milnor, pp. 207, 625-27, 636.
108Ibid., pp. 448-49, 557-61, 612-22.
109

James Milnor, Oration on Masongy, Delivered at
St. John's Church in the Cipy Of Philadelphia . . . On

St. JOhn's Day, June 24, 1811 (New York: Bradford and
Insheep, Inskeep and Bradford, 1811), pp. 24—25. (Herein-
after cited as Milnor, Oration on Masonry.)

 

 

110Stone, Milnor, pp. 622-23; Milnor, Oration on
Masonr , pp. 29-30; James Milnor, Sermon Occasioned By the
Death of his Excellepgy DeWitt Clinton . . . (New York:
Gray and Bunce, 1828), p. 16; James Milnor, "The Parable
of the Tares," American National Preacher, X (April, 1836),
362.

 

111Stone, Milnor, pp. 21-22, 191-93; 295-97;
‘Crames Milnor, Plea for the American Colonization Society:
£E§78ermon Preached in St. George's Church, New York, on
SEEunday, July 9L71826 (New York: John P. Haven, 1826),
1EE13§§£E (hereinafter cited as Milnor, Plea for the Am.

5:230 on. Soc.).

112Stone, Milnor, pp. 151-53, 597-98; Milnor,
EEEZiea for the Am. Colon. Soc., pp. 12-14.

 

 

113Annual Report, N.Y., 1858, pp. 6-10, 200-201.
lhjnhe American Tract Society published a tract on the duties
“:3f'slaves to their masters but balked at publishing a tract
‘:311 the duties of masters to their slaves.

 

114William Carus, ed., Memorials of the Right
gfigeverend Charles Pettit McIlvaine; D.D., D.C.L., Late
:SEjShOp of Ohio in the Protestant Episcopal Church of the
nited States (London: Elliott Stock, 1888), pp. 8-11,
6-18’(hereinafter cited as Carus, ed., Memorials of
- . . McIlvaine); Biographical Directory Of the American
SEpngress, 1774-1961((Government Printing Office, 1961Y7
p, 1,301.

 

121

.es Pettit McIlvaine, The Work of Preaching
{e,Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese
IForty-Sixth Convention, in St. PaulTs

>n the 3rd Of June 1863 (New York: Anson
1864), p. 93; Timothy L. Smith, Revivalism
.m in Mid-Nineteenth Century Amerlca

igdon Press,_I957), pp. 64-70; Carus,

3f . . . McIlvaine, pp. 64- 68, 143.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.es P. McIlvaine, A Series Of Evangelical
gcted for the Use Of Families and Destitute
2 vols.; Columbus, Ohio: Isaac N. Whiting,

 

 

1, ed., Memorials of . . . McIlvaine, p. 251.

 

:ead, Religion in America, pp. 31-32, 45,

 

tend William Staughton, Reverend John
zverend Daniel Sharp were other Baptist
:act Society vice presidents who were born

11 Report, N.Y., 1869, p. 11; Nat. Cyclop.,

 

 

i1 Report, N. Y., 1869, pp. 11- 12; Nat.
>. 116; Nat. Cyclop., III, p. 151.

 

 

.es G. Sommers, Memoir Of the Rev. John
Late Chaplain to the Humane and Criminal
the C1ty of New York (New York: Swords,
T, 1835), pp. 43, 46,100,111-12, 184.

 

 

 

Cyclop. X., 149; Dict. Of Am. Biog., XX,

 

Jhton also aided in the formation Of the
>1e Society and of one of the world's

>1e societies (see S. W. Lynd, Memoir of

1 Staughton, D.D. [Boston: Lincoln Edmands
pp. 57-59, 67-69, 73, 81, 155-57, 160;

 

 

122

Nat. C clo ., III, 151-52; Robert G. Torbet, A History Of

the Baptlsts: Revised [Valley Forge: The Judson Press,
1963], pp. 249-50).

125Mercer Institute, which was named after Jessie
Mercer, received $40,000 from his estate (see Sprague,
Annals, VI, pp. 283-88; Dict. Of Am. Biog., XII, pp. 542-
43; Jessie L. Boyd, A History Of the Baptists in America
Prior to 1843 [New York: Am. Press, 1957], pp. 119-20
[hereinafter cited as Boyd, Hist. of Bapt. in Am.]).

126Nat. Cyclop., X, 144; Diet. of Am. Biog., XX,
295; Nat. Cyclop., III, 151-52; Sprague, Annals, VI, 591;
Sprague, Annals, VI, 283-88; Boyd, Hist. of Bapt. in Am.,

Pp. 119-200

127Charles I. Foster, The Evangelical United
gipnt: 1790-1837 (Chapel Hill: University of North
(Catalina Press, 1960), pp. 128-29. However, Foster does
«admit that the evangelical forces in the cities were led

try "outstanding clergy" (see ibid., p. 138).

128Fischer, The Rev. of Am. Cons., pp. 213, 215-16.
.Arzcording to Fischer's study,Windsor County, the home of
iR€3verend Lucius Bolles, a Baptist clergyman and vice
President in the Tract Society from 1825 to 1843, had
a. Llow population increase in the first decade of the
n:‘l-I'leteenth century. The Connecticut Valley, except
lft>JC'the extreme northern part, also had a low popu-

Vii”tlion increase. This was also true Of Louisea County,

Rétlt‘ginia, the home of Reverend James Alexander, while

fa. karidge County, Virginia, the birthplace of his

ttl‘t:11er, was actually declining in population during

tin same period. It might also be pointed out that
§E§Ese areas had formerly been the strongholds of Feder-

3L 3“8111.

at; 129Beecher could at least rationalize that a more
cc)“::l:active pastorate, as far as location and salary were
Irlltj‘tzerned, had not led him to terminate his contracts.

me‘_ 1:wo cases he had received the call after he had already
baitslse up his mind to leave. As he grew Older he could look

ptp‘:=]< and attribute all to God's leading. The financial
It was God who "in times past

8 lolem was forgotten.
r::r“1noned" him from one station to another Of increasing
23§ponsibility (see Cross, ed., Lyinan Beecher I, 73; II,
0 32, 190, 202).

123

 

 

130Mead, Nathaniel William Tayior, pp. 78-79.
131 . .
Annual Report, N.Y. C1ty Tract Soc1ety, 1863,
pp. 11-12.
132

John L. Thomas, "Reform in the Romantic Era," in
Intellectual Historyiin America: Contemporary Esggys on
Puritanism, The EnIightenment, and Romanticism, ed.(by
Cushing Strout, I (New York: Harper and Row, Pub., 1968),
194-95.

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER III

BIOGRAPHICAL STUDY-~THE LAITY

In the "Address Of the Executive Committee" the

Tract Society appealed not only to ministers but also to
"wealthy individuals" and tO "benevolent males and

females" for support.:L And indeed, by the time the

Society celebrated its fortieth anniversary in 1865, it
could look back with pride at its own success in elicit-

ing the support of not only the prominent clergymen but

also Of many affluent laymen. Besides its receipts from

sales Of tracts and volumes totalling over $5,000,000,

the Society had received $3,000,000 in donations and

legacies} Not all of these donations were from the

w
Qfilthy. One individual started his regular contri-
b
1:. tions by sending the Society $1 per month for two
YQ
firs, $2 per month for the next two years, $3 per
“lg:
11th for two more years, and finally $5 per month.
D
he "colored seaman" contributed $4 to the Society,
K?
hile still others made contributions of 88 cents,
s Q . 3
cents, and 25 cents respectlvely. But these

QOations were not sufficient to finance the large

124

 

 

125

operation which the organizers of the Track Society
envisioned. They needed the support of the wealthy,
the directors for life who contributed at least $50

per year, the southern gentlemen who supplied the annual

 

 

 

salary of a colporteur (which would amount to at least
$150), and the massive contributions of the merchants.
The large donations of the benevolent individuals

did not go unrewarded. The Society extolled the virtue

of giving, even if it was only a poor widow's mite, but
the poor widow was never elected to either the executive
ccnmmittee, to a vice presidency, or to a directorship.
UIldoubtedly,the selection of the prominent politicians,
lawyers, doctors, and merchants along with the ministers
was designed, in part, to be an advertising technique.
But it also reflected the Society's social philosophy.
It: accepted both stratification and vertical mobility
ix; Society. The Tract Society venerated those indi-
Vi‘<slllals who had reached the top of the ladder; It
as Qtamed that such persons rightly deserved more influence
:r“:3. power than those at the bottom of the social ladder.
‘nk‘:3- by selecting the merchants, lawyers, politicians,
'D I‘Tge landowners, physicians, and preachers,the American
‘:>€ict Society was turning to those who in the early
‘a‘sgtbades of the nineteenth century held the positions

“as . . .5
power and influence in the community.

 

. M—
I-L
I“. .L
_I
‘ .1: ,' IzzhL.

 

 

 

126

st important lay group within the Tract

a New York merchants. They had the where-
substantial contributions to the Society.

:hese donations, several of their members

> the Society's executive committee.

Lr prominent role within the Society,

:al study intentionally focused on New
and businessmen.

i played a more important role in the early
American Tract Society than the New York

1r Tappan. Although his abolitionist

a not endorsed by his fellow members in

committee, and although his financial

835 led him to resign his position on the

tee, he still merits inclusion in this

of his contributions to the Tract Society
It was Arthur Tappan, along with Dr.
and Reverend Charles Sommers, who had

American Tract Society at Andover in

, inviting its members to join with the

ions Tract Society in forging a national
Tappan pledged $5,000 towards the

e Society house, and his total contri-
Society amounted to at least $20,000.

were not overlooked by a grateful Society,

sequently elected chairman of the finance

 

127

committee, a position which he retained until his business
losses relieved the Society of the embarrassment of either
having a confirmed abolitionist on its executive committee
or of neglecting to nominate him for re—election. But
for the Society to take the latter step would have been
tantamount to dismissing one of its largest contributors
because re-election had become customary as long as the
officer did not move away from New York City or die.6
Arthur Tappan was raised in a lower, middle-class
New England home. His paternal ancestor, Abraham TOppan,
[gig] had emigrated from England in 1637, and his maternal
iancestor, Reverend William Holmes, had left Ireland in
.1700.7 Arthur Tappan was born in 1783 in Northampton
VVIHere his father, Benjamin Tappan, had set himself up
fSix-st as a goldsmith and later as a proprietor of a
S?<3171eral store. But unlike his son, Arthur, Benjamin
Tappan lacked ambition to excel in business; his income,
aJL‘tihough adequate, was never more than $1,000 per year.

A
$3 .long as he could provide for his family's needs he

Wea_a53 satisfied. Arthur Tappan's brother and biographer
cthd look back in later life, however, and extol his
ffi ‘her's business ethic-~he had refrained from selling
Sb ixitous liquor.8

If Tappan did not inherit his zest for business

IT‘2Mm.his parents, he was, nevertheless, indebted to them

E O 0
Q1? his political and religious views. In all probability

128

he aligned himself with the Federalists as his father had
done. His wife, Frances, had grown up in the home of
Alexander Hamilton after her parents' deaths. (Her father
had been a close friend of Hamilton during the Revolution.)
Tappan was also a close friend of the Federalist clergy-
man, Lyman Beecher.9 From his mother, Sarah Tappan, a
New Light Congregationalist, he learned several religious
"truths," namely, man's depravity, the necessity of
revivals, and the obligation of all Christians to "hate
sin sincerely." But unlike his mother, he was not wholly
committed to the doctrines of Calvinism. Sarah Tappan
‘Wiote that she would "not willingly consent to abrogate"
any Calvinist doctrine. For Tappan revivals were more
.iJmportant than doctrines, an attitude that was evident
aunuong other lay supporters of the Society.10
Tappan's entry into the world of business began
e‘aili‘ly in life, and his mercantile career spanned three
c£i ‘lies, Boston, Montreal, and New York. At the age of
fi :Eteen he left school and the rural countryside for
3Q §ton where he became an apprentice in the importing
ij‘zthm of Steward and Salesbury. This was followed by a
1?b ief business career in Montreal until the War of 1812
llak‘tiervened.11 He then moved to New York City where he
0aned a wholesale store in 1815. Tappan's trek from

El
Q» England to New York City was a common phenomenon

‘qllring this period. In his study of New York City from

 

129

1815-1860, Robert G. Albion pointed out that by 1820 the
New Englanders had captured the New York port and domi-
nated it until the Civil War.12 Tappan specialized in
selling goods such as silks imported from India and
France. At the height of his career his annual gross
income reached the million dollar mark. This made him
a merchant to be reckoned with as far as volume was con-
cerned. William E. Dodge estimated that in 1818 New
York City probably had no more than six merchants whose
sales exceeded $1,000,000. His personal income, however,
was not excessive. According to one authority, a con-
.servative estimate of his personal income after deducting
t:he shares of Tappan's minor partners would be $25,000 to
$ 30,000 per year. In his analysis of the "wealthiest
”VSEW’Yorkers" in 1828,Edward Pessen listed Tappan in the
group whose personal wealth was estimated to be between
$5 0,000 to $100,000.13

During the 1830's Tappan encountered a series of
f .

:l‘lrlancial reversals from which he never recovered. The
dgE:
“3truction of his store by fire in 1835, the losses of
s .

‘V’eral Southern accounts due to his abolitionist activ-
int:

ies, unwise speculations in real estate, and the 1837
‘1‘3

JE>ression wiped out all of his assets. Finally, in 1841,

i£>pan was forced to declare bankruptcy.

It would be misleading to see Tappan merely as a

EQII:~erunner of the captains of industry of the late

..,-_
a. '- uu
~IObI¥DU~

'v--s. q

.-
'O‘Vb.~
.

 

 

-‘
\—
~—

(I)

.-
r ,v
.._"‘

‘q.. .
‘1... .

~

‘
V.‘.
.. w
‘1 -
\a. “’h
5-
‘V
-r. nu
“5 fi-‘\‘
"~

. .
-..~’ '7-
‘5 ~
:_‘ w.
u.‘ F
A h.“

 

130

nineteenth century. In his opposition to the credit
system he reflected the economic views of Colonial
America. He attempted to combine capitalist business
practices and Christian principles. In 1827 he estab-
lished the Journal of Commerce which was to "exert a
wholesome influence" by abstaining from publishing
"immoral advertisements" for spiritous liquors, cir-
cuses, and theaters.15

For Arthur Tappan success in business could
never be an end in itself. Financial success was impor—
tant because it provided him with the opportunity to
take--or buy--a leading position in various benevolent
societies.16 Throughout his life he stressed simplicity
in dress, moderation in food, and abstention from drink.
He was noted for his sterness, frugality, punctuality,
land self discipline.17 One historian has pointed out
‘that because of the popular prejudice against the con-
spicuous use of riches, philanthropy was often the only
e33~ztravagence the rich could indulge in prior to the

18 Undoubtedlypthis is an overstatement, but

c:i.vil War.
-i-1: certainly seemed to be true for Tappan. Philanthropy
Siiave him status or prestige within the community, a
prestige he could not enjoy through conspicuous con-
£3Illrnption.

Tappan's solutions for solving the moral and

sCK::ia1 ills of his day included revivals, the formation

. -Ios
- .5...
.
v'v
'0 5C.-

0

.
v

i u
..- .-.

*V‘. Iioo .
' v

"'on.

QM.... ..

"w.

n
a..‘-

 

\
1....“ --~
s

'-
up

H.
o-.. ‘

‘I. ..
‘ "1
«5.. -'

.’ "v ..
’_ I
., ‘1‘».
.
.
.._._. :
“~.H:w“

. ,
.fil‘.
a P .
‘-.-.‘ ‘
o
a. Q.-
in"
P. . V
1 ’1‘
b“‘
. I
‘ . F
a l h.
§.‘_-

.
.3" ,:
fl“
.‘M
1::

 

131

of benevolent societies, education, and temperance reform.
Although he seemed to hate sin more vehemently than most
of the other Christian stewards, especially when the sin
was slavery, and although he seemed to take a more radical
stand on some social issues than other leading laymen
within the Tract Society, his solutions were basically
similar to theirs. He supported such noted revivalists
as Lyman Beecher and Charles Finney.19 He supported the
attempts of the New York Magdalen Society to rescue
fallen women, and stressed the importance of moral
instruction both in the homes and the pulpits in order
to prevent prostitution.20 Despite the fact that he,
himself, did not have an extensive education, Tappan
contributed generously to colleges and seminaries. His
faith in education was especially evident in his support
(of the Phoenix Society. Tappan was one of the founders
(Df this society whose aim was "to promote the improvement
(Bf the colored people in morals, literature, and the

mechanic arts . " 21

In his temperance reform, Tappan
‘Vsould brook no half way measures. He even opposed the
use of fermented wine at communion and the use of tobacco
ElJrguing that there were very few men who, after using
1=-<:>bacco, " . . . [contented] themselves with washing out
their throats with cold water."22
Another New York City merchant to actively support

‘ihe Tract Society was Richard T. Haines. He was one of

' a

DA .A‘v F
. 0' H. V
In. on
"“:‘i¢' .

»
"Ion ‘_:‘
..-A- ...~
p
.Q. A. .
a
‘.J- g. -
u 0
‘ "I--
‘ \

-."‘ F-
\ ~. "
'.l" n...
‘.--
.
. I ~
on O.“
.A .I, a
n.-
.‘ ‘..~ .
.. '
n. .H“
_ I
"Vu
.- .A~'l
“M
.' igvi“
Q..
r»
Ha

a
‘A

A
‘Vsh

(I
"

A‘ ~ '

i C." ‘

u_~"
L'.

' C.
~..~

1::1

‘§C “c.
P" I
.43, ‘

132

the few original supporters still active within the
Society in 1865. Haines, the son-in-law of the Tract
Society's first president, S. V. S. Wilder, was associated
with the Society for forty-five years and served as chair-
man of the executive committee for twenty-seven years.
His financial contributions to the Society were exten-
sive; he subscribed $1,000 towards the Society's house
in 1825 and during his lifetime contributed over $20,000
to the Tract Society.23
Haines was a product of the middle-Atlantic States.
He was born in 1795 in Elizabeth, New Jersey, but moved
to nearby New York City at an early age. There he
joined with a well-known dry-goods merchant, and a
former son of Elizabeth, New Jersey, William M. Hal-
sted, in forming the Halsted and Haines Company, one
<of the few firms to survive the 1837 depression.24
Haines, like Tappan, attempted to combine business
Viith stewardship. He and his business associate were
"zpartners in business and partners in the service of
<31)rist."25 But being a partner in the service of Christ
<3nde not imply that one had to be overly concerned with
c1(Detrinal niceties. Both Haines and Halsted were long-
tszme supporters of Union Theological Seminary. This
Seminary, founded in 1836, was virtually a New School
I"DI‘esbyterian institution. It was established by "prac-

tical men," who had "definite practical ends in view."

-
“ADA A.

Jun: v.

0... .P

-
"H.“ .u

Q._ _ .
s 'I V
' vs.

J
V

cu...“

II

~ .

v.-

I“...

ll!

.1“.

_HS

1“ ..

'O'

 

F‘ f)

133

>unders were "theological leaders"; they were
'e in the "progress of the kingdom of God"

26 A number of its

pgical "speculations."

re also leading supporters of the American
including such men as Peletiah Perit,

Lge, Jasper Corning, Knowles Taylor, and

»s. Thus, it is not surprising that the

of the board of directors of Union Theo—

lry was held on January 18, 1836, at the

27 Haine's disregard for doctrinal specu-

:nominationalism is also evident in the

ras first a member of a Dutch Reformed

:er of a Presbyterian Church. He gained

:hin the religious community by his patronage

’ such non-denominational ventures as the
Union Theological Seminary, the American
and the American Board of Commissioners

.ssions.

i more closely fits the pattern of the typi-
steward than Arthur Tappan. He did not

['5 radical views regarding slavery and

>porter of the Colonization Society. He
anti-foreign and anti-Catholic biases of

ItS during this period and helped form the

29

arican and Foreign Christian Union in 1850.

.utions for aiding the poor was to provide

 

OI-C 9‘
..
w... t

.‘-l:

a
M... U
a

"O UA.‘

'F 5n,-

ou bu -

I"

(D

D.“
n‘
I
v
1

Us

' 1

.A»

5-
“ ‘5—
v‘.‘

 

134

.gious and moral instruction. To accomplish
advocated tract distribution and the erection
1 the city's poorer sections.30
:r New York businessman who warrants inclusion
is Moses Allen. Available material, how-

is scanty. Allen, a successful banker and
>er of the Brick Street Church, probably

31 Pessen's study of the

»nnecticut.

r Yorkers of 1845 places Allen in the

l0,000 group. His financial success is

[is large donations to the Tract Society.

l $3,000 towards the original Society's

Lde Allen and Tappan the two largest donors

.ke Haines,he remained a supporter of the

lization Society and a member of the finance

.ughout the first four decades of the

:tence.33

does not permit the inclusion of all the

:rved on the executive committee. However,
should be made of Thomas C. Doremus, a

York City merchant. Doremus was re-
finance committee for over twenty-five

5 initial election in 1837. Like many
merchants he opposed the abolitionist

took part in a public meeting held in New

ugust 27, 1835, which was called to protest

 

' .
‘F‘tvvgn

oat-I. I .s‘

—;.
vvn.o.-.

“V A-,
'- >—
..~. D

-4

..,_ ..
’l_“ c
sa._“.

"‘ -.
_v\»_
"'§5_-

I‘ll
'Ouv
‘

I“

§‘.

135

the actions of abolitionists and the "interferance of
individuals between the masters and the slaves of the
Southern States."34
But even more prominent in benevolent societies
than Thomas C. Doremus was his wife, Sarah Platt Doremus.
Her sex barred her from membership in the Tract Society's
executive committee; consequently, she had to content
herself with being appointed manager of the New York
City and Tract Mission in 1840. Some twelve years
earlier Mrs. Doremus had organized aid for Greek women
oppressed by the Turks. In 1840 she turned her attention
to prison reform and was instrumental in the formation
of the WOmen's Prison Association. She also took part
in the founding of the Nursery and Child's Hospital, the
Presbyterian Home for Aged Women, and campaigned success-
fully for a Woman's Hospital. Her concept of reform was
.basically self help, moral instruction, and education.
lIn 1850 she participated in the founding of the House and
School of Industry, which was designed to procure work
15<or poor women and support schools for children who were
tlsoo poorly clad to attend the regular public schools.
$3lne also deemed it important that religious and moral
il'lstruction should be provided for the destitute through
illracts and Bibles. In 1844 she joined the City Bible
£3<3ciety of New York which saw itself not only as a

religious organization but also as a relief agency or

‘.——m

 

a
: V;"‘F
I .b.-.
' Q
On;- art:
'° '5‘-

--V‘"“~l
'“ovn...
.

0"

an
.n

.
.4
. .

'I o..-

.—
CA. ..._

~
-. ‘V".
~‘ It. a
1

~.
..

 

':‘v-.
~"-oc:
u.
lr's

-._
‘r-_-
...‘:::
.-A N
.“t :7
"e.

i“\ ‘
i“ .

.

“t ‘v
" "E
II 4.
~._‘

4“
N-.‘
"L.
V 1
>‘S
‘0

§

\ ‘
nfifl
N.“

.
Csfi,‘
"ugn

H
. .
N n
‘3.“
u.

.

'

p! v

J‘i

136

a reform movement. (The City Bible Society assumed that
the destitute conditions of the poor would be ameliorated
through Bible reading.) Eleven years later Mrs. Doremus
saw fit again to aid the non-American women and took part
in the founding of the Women's Union Missionary Society,
an organization designed to promote the elevation and
Christianization of heathen women.35

Before concluding this section on the New York
businessmen, mention will be made of two merchants who
were elected as vice presidents of the Society. One of
these was William E. Dodge whose donations and legacy to

the Society amounted to at least $20,000.36

The other
was the conservative merchant and president of the State
of New York Chamber of Commerce, Peletiah Perit.

William E. Dodge came from a middle-class New
England home. He was born in 1805 in Hartford, Connecti-
cut. In 1806 the Dodge family moved to New York where
llis father, David Dodge, set up a branch of an importing

Eind jobbing business for a New England firm. Due to the

‘fiambargo (1807) and the War of 1812 the business faltered

(Eind the Dodge family moved back to Connecticut where

3t3avid Dodge became general agent for the Bozrah Manu-

1facturing Company in Bozrahville in 1813. Mindful of
ilhe degenerating moral influences which seemingly

Eiccompanied industrialism and urbanism, the founders

’ (Df the Bozrah Manufacturing Company covenanted to

 

 

was ‘vv
.~“.1.
." to.
‘ .-
-¢u “
I
-Ԥ a.
s
«.3 ~‘
on."

"-—1. f

---.-,'
" -
""vu

 

”v.

v‘ .‘

.
:‘q :
‘

4‘ ‘

'A
A

‘u ‘ :-
‘Vv‘.

:‘a
nu“

v“ t‘.
h

9' .
q a
\

. m
“‘2‘“

 

137

2 all else, a "moral and religious estab-

Zn 1815 the Dodge family was back in New

lve the 1819 depression force another

:ngland, where they remained for the next
all probability David Dodge was not wealthy.

1m, left school at the age of thirteen and

a wholesale store which paid $50 per year.38

a time William E. Dodge married he had risen

1ere he could rent a house for $300 per

7 William E. Dodge launched his business
he formed a modest partnership with the
Connecticut merchant. The next year he
irried into the Phelps family--of Phelps
in 1832 joined with his father-in-law,

3, in forming the firm of Phelps, Dodge,
Both partners in Phelps and Peck hailed

n Connecticut. Anson Phelps had been

:y, Connecticut, lived for some time in
:hen established a business in New York
where he became one of the country's

ars. Although never a leading supporter
>ciety, he had contributed $800 by 1836.
with other New York businessmen in pro-
>n Theological Seminary. Prior to joining
aet Presbyterian Church he was a member of

ier Spring's congregation.40

 

 

138

By the time Dodge retired from business he had
amassed a modest fortune of some $500,000. But by the
end of the Civil War this was not considered a great
fortune. His father-in-law, who died in 1854, had been
worth approximately $2,000,000 of which he contributed
over $500,000 to charity, especially to religious and
missionary projects.4

Dodge's religious, economic, social, and political
views were typical of the Christian stewards of the ante-
bellum period. He was interested in revivals, but not
in theology. Both he and his father-in-law were involved
in bringing Finney to New York. Dodge had been born
into a Congregationalist family; he joined a Presbyterian
Church in New York, and in 1837 he was a member of a New
School congregation. And yet he could state, "I have not
been aware of any change in my theological sentiments in
being a Congregationalist, an Old Presbyterian, or a New
Presbyterian." He supported both Asahel Nettleton and
Dwight L. Moody.42

Perhaps his views on revivalism were partly
influenced by his economic and social views. After all,
revivals did stress human ability and personal accounta-
lDility. But by 1880 his economic views seemed out of
Eilace. Dodge stressed the fact that a business must
never aid in promoting immorality or in detracting one

frOm fulfilling his other duties. When the Erie Railroad

139

decided to run a Sabbath train he resigned from the board

43 In his senior years

of directors and sold his stock.
he became increasingly critical of the trend towards
incorporation and the "reckless mode of manipulating
shares by a people bent on achieving instant wealth."

He looked back on the decade of the 1820's as the golden
age, when a man of "undoubted character" and moderate
capital could get credit and start a modest business.44
Dodge did not reject vertical mobility; he would permit
individuals to climb the social ladder if they could do

so by their own efforts. He would leave the ladder

there for the "industrious, high—minded youth," those

who were "conscientious in the discharge of their duties,"
those who practiced thrift and did not indulge in "plea-

sures."45

To this end he supported the Y.M.C.A. and the
Sunday School movement and endorsed public education.

He promoted the Mercantile Library Association, which

was organized for the benefit of young clerks, and served
as treasurer and trustee of Clinton Hall which contained

46

its main library. Not surprisingly, he advocated

temperance reform and helped organize a Congressional

5Pemperance Society shortly after his election as a Repub—

lican Congressman in 1867.47
Unfortunately, Dodge's reforms could never eman-

<2ipate the slaves. Although he disliked slavery, he was

‘Villing to leave it "in the hands of those who . . . [held]

140

the slaves." For over twenty years he served as a vice
president of the American Colonization Society.48 In
1860 he exhorted the Tract Society not to be deflected
from its "legitimate work" of "taking the gospel of
Jesus Christ" across the entire land. In all probability
he was encouraging the Society not to become embroiled
in the slavery controversy.49 Dodge's views regarding
slavery enabled him to disapprove of slavery while still
retaining his Southern business connections. Furthermore,
whenever he was faced with a choice between the preser-
vation of the Union and the abolition of slavery, he
always chose the former.50

In 1858 the Tract Society elected Peletiah
Perit, a close friend of Arthur Tappan, as vice presi-
dent, a position which he held until his death in 1864.
Perit was another ex-New Englander who accumulated a
modest fortune in New York City. He was born in Norwich,
Connecticut, and in all probability came from at least a
moderately well-to-do home. Both his father and his
maternal grandfather were merchants. The latter,
Peletiah webster, had acquired a "considerable estate"
by the time of the American Revolution, and after his
father died, Peletiah Perit and his mother lived in
the Webster home in Philadelphia. Perit later returned
to Connecticut and attended Yale College, graduating in

1802. While at Yale, Perit came under the influence of

. u
5......
"-~. v—
cgiugdv
'“III p
. o.

0". .‘

..
‘V' n.
'HQQU v

 

«
'un

.I..-“

. .
”1'“.
"¢.-

~:_v~,

'0'1“

." ~4-
'
V ..
.
A. .~
I“;
Q I
.
.. \‘
v. .‘I
a
..._
v...”-
.
\"
.
v" '

. "u.-
s...~

3,“
11;
(I)

M.
~.
D“

 

 

as

141

President Timothy Dwight and revivals. When the class of
1802 first entered Yale only one member was an avowed
Christian. But in 1802 the first great revival in over
fifty years swept through the college and prior to
commencement twenty-four members of the senior class,
including Perit, participated in a communion service.51
Perit was unique in that he was one of the few New York
merchants who had a college education.52
After serving as a clerk in a large importer's
store in Philadelphia, Perit moved to New York in 1809
to go into business for himself. After opening the firm
of Perit and Lathrop, he became a silent partner in one
of New York's leading shipping houses, Goodhue and
Company, which was under the direction of another ex-
New Englander, Jonathan Goodhue of Salem.53 Perit
invested his profits in real estate and much of his
wealth accrued from these investments. An indication
of his emminent stature within the business community
was his annual re-election to the presidency of the
State of New York Chamber of Commerce from 1853 to 1863.
(His election to the presidency was further evidence of
the dominant role played by ex-New Englanders in the
New York mercantile community. Except for an eight-
month period, only former natives of New England served
as president of the state's Chamber of Commerce from

1845 to 1875.)54 Perit also served as president of the

142

Seaman's Bank of Savings, became a director of the Bank

of Commerce, an officer of New York University, and was

active in a host of benevolent societies.55
No one could ever accuse Perit of espousing radi-

cal or utopian social and political views. At his funeral,

Reverend Leonard Bacon of Hartford, Connecticut, and a

life director of the Tract Society, admitted that "rash

and one-sided schemes of reformation were ever offensive

to his [Perit's] judgment." Perhaps, Bacon went on to

say, "he was more charmed with the idea of defending

and perpetuating and perfecting the good which has

descended to us from foregoing ages, than with the idea

of finding out what there is in existing institutions

that need to be reformed."56 His concept of social

reform was an admixture of benign paternalism--on the

part of the upper class-~and self help--on the part of

the lower class. The rich could promote the spread of

Christianity by supporting various benevolent societies

and by running their business according to Christian

principles. He agreed with Dodge that businessmen must

honor the Sabbath; he, himself, was successful in getting

packet ships to change their practice of leaving on a

specific day of the month, whether it be a weekday or

the Sabbath, to leaving on a specific day of the week.

Like Dodge, Perit stressed the virtue of thrift and

saving as exemplified in his support of the Seaman's

‘9‘...

"oe.
.

ts.

v».-

0v

on.
Q r

‘s,

v..-

'V
(1'
0"

P;
'V‘

Pm
..
w‘

.
“I

N
(1'
l

v

143

Bank of Savings. Philadelphia, Boston, and New York all
established savings banks between 1816 and 1819. The
spirit behind these banks "was a blend of paternalism
and the tenets of Poor Richard." They were established
and controlled by the economic and social elites for
the benefit of the lower classes. The latter would
presumably gain not only materially but also morally
through saving.57

There are several reasons for restricting this
study thus far to New York City businessmen. First of
all, the executive committee was chosen primarily from
New Yorkers; the major exception being New England's
representative on the publishing committee. Further-
more, it was the New York businessmen, more than any
other group, who financed the Tract Society. They put
up most of the money for the building of the Society's
house. Thirdly, it was New Yorkers who dominated the
policies of the Tract Society, as will be seen in the
discussion on the Society's policies regarding slavery.
But to portray the Society solely as a New York organi-
zation would not be entirely accurate. Among the busi-
nessmen from other areas who also supported the Tract
Society was Sampson Vryling Stoddard Wilder, the
Society's first president from 1825 to 1842.

Wilder was considered to be a resident of New
England although he spent much of his life in Paris and

part of his life in New York City. As already mentioned,

144

Wilder was selected as president in order to placate New
England. He had been born into a wealthy, old-line New
England home in Bolton, Massachusetts, in 1780. Wilder's
mother inherited the whole Vryling estate, worth approxi-
matelyfi40,000 which had been built up by her grandfather,
a distinguished merchant in Amsterdam. Unfortunately,
this fortune was lost at sea. The family then incurred
further losses when debtors paid off their mortgages on
real estate with depreciated continental currency. The
financial losses finally ended young Wilder's plans to
enter the ministry, and at the age of eighteen he entered
the Mercantile House of William Gray, one of the three
wealthiest houses in New England. In 1802 this firm
sent Wilder as its agent to Europe, and during the
next twenty years he crossed the Atlantic sixteen times
before returning to Bolton in 1823.58
Until the "Bank War" and the depression of 1837,
Wilder enjoyed financial success and the friendship of
several influential men of his day. In France he bene-
fited from the protection and influence of Talleyrand,
and his Paris home became a meeting place for all

59 In Paris he also became

"respectable Americans."
associated with the banking firm of Hottinguer and
Company, and after his return to the United States he
retained his association with this firm. Meanwhile, he

also became associated with the United States Bank, and

145

the downfall of this bank was partly the cause of his own

financial reverses. Finally, in 1841 he was jailed for

his inability to honor a draft. However, he refused to

permit his friends to pay the debt in order to secure

his release; instead he chose to go to jail in order to

protest the debtor's laws.6O
Few men better exemplified the concept of Christian

stewardship than Wilder. During his lifetime he was

associated with no less than twenty-one different

societies including such religious organizations as

the Tract, Bible, Education, and Sabbath Societies and

such charitable organizations as the Hartford Asylum for

the Deaf and Dumb.61

His contacts with leading Protes-
tants in Europe, including the originators of the Tract
Society in London, helped to forge a closer association

62 Doctrinal

between American and European Protestants.
distinctions between evangelical denominations were

never important to him. He had become a confirmed
Christian under the influence of Reverend Samuel Miller,
the minister of the Wall Street Presbyterian Church in
New York City, later a professor at Princeton Theological
Seminary and a vice president of the American Tract
Society. He was not, however, converted to a particular
denomination. After his return to Bolton, Wilder promoted

the building of an evangelical church which would engage

the services of all able preachers including the

 

146

Presbyterian-Congregational, Lyman Beecher, and the Evan-
gelical Episcopalian, James Milnor. He praised the Tract
Society because it enabled Christians to forget that they
could "be called by different [i.e., denominational]
names," and that it accepted "as brethren in Christ
Jesus all who . . . [bore] his image on their hearts
and . . . [devoted] their lives to his service." Uni-
tarians and Socianians, however, were beyond the pale
of orthodoxy.63

Wilder's membership in twenty-one societies did
not imply that he espoused any radical social and politi-
cal notions. His economic and social views were similar
to those held by men like Dodge and Haines. The Bible
was conducive to order in society since it had "better
ascertained the claims and duties of conjugal and filial
relations, the mutual obligations of governments and
people, the reciprocal interests of master and servants
than all other books put together."64 His God-given
formula for success was "strict honesty and integrity,

65 The thesis of

combined with energy of character."
chapter three of his autobiography was that his economic
success was due to his integrity and his obedience to
his parents.66 After returning to Massachusetts from
Paris, he became a manager and part owner of a manu-

facturing company in Ware Factory Village. Since the

village lacked an evangelical church, and since many

147

of the workers were Unitarians and Sabbath-breakers, he
subscribed $500 towards the erection of a church. Revivals
broke out, but in spite of religious excitement, the
workers productivity did not decrease but actually
increased.67
Coupled with the spread of orthodox Christianity
went temperance reform. William Hallock's Tract, "The
Well Conducted Farm," was based on Wilder's experiment
on his 600 acre farm at Bolton.68 He provided his
workers with food and non-alcoholic beverages rather
than with the accustomed daily portion of liquor,and con-
cluded that the farm laborers "were afterwards remarkably
uniform in their deportment, still, and peaceable."
Their work improved and they handled the tools with more
care.69 When his neighbors incurred debts, he informed
them that "as long as they continued to drink rum, they
must expect hard times." He declared himself willing
to provide them with loans whereby they need only pay
the interest for three months as long as they abstained
from drinking liquor. Those who accepted his conditions
"began to prosper" and became "thriving, reSpectable,
and useful members of the community." Those who refused

70 What more

lost their farms, reputation and health.
proof did he need that economic success was bound up

with moral stamina?

148

One other non-New York businessman to be included
in this study is Nicholas Brown. In 1827, the American
Tract Society elected Brown, Providence, Rhode Island's,
leading philanthrOpist and merchant, to one of its vice
presidencies, a position which he held until his death
in 1841. In 1828 Brown, Richard Varick, Colonel Henry
Rutgers, and Stephen Van Rennselaer donated $800 to help

pay the cost of stereotyping Philip Doddridge's Rise and

 

Progress of Religion in the Soul, the first volume to be
published by the Society. Although Brown's overall
financial contributions to the Tract Society were prob-
ably not excessive, his donations of $610 by 1838 made
him one of New England's leading contributors. In his
will he allotted $2,000 to the Society, but this fell
far short of the $30,000 legacy he left to an insane
asylum.71

Brown was born into a well-to-do New England home.
He traced his ancestry back to Chad Brown who emigrated
from Massachusetts to the Plantations of Providence in
1636, a few months after Roger Williams' arrival in
Rhode Island. His father, Nicholas Brown, was a well-
established merchant in Providence. Five years after
his graduation from the College of Rhode Island, Brown
inherited his father's estate. Shortly thereafter he
formed the Brown and Ives partnership with his brother-

in-law, Thomas P. Ives, and remained the senior partner

149

of this firm for over fifty years. They were pioneers in
the China trade, and by 1800 they were also extensively
involved in cotton manufacturing in Rhode Island.72
Brown can best be classified as a Federalist and
as a Christian steward. Politically he aligned himself
with the Federalist Party and was elected to one of the
houses of the state legislature almost continuously from
1807 to 1821. Later he was associated with the Whig
Party, and cast his vote as a presidential elector for
President Harrison in 1840. He agreed with the old line
Federalists that men of wealth and standing had an obli-
gation to enter into government but to do so without
selfish or partisan motives, being guided only by prin-
ciples which one "deemed important to the public weal."73
But his obligation to the community did not end with his
participation in government. As a Christian merchant
and a man of wealth he had an obligation to aid the less
fortunate and to promote God's kingdom through a "wise
and discriminating charity."74 Brown, himself, never
became a member of any church although he attended wor-
ship services regularly and adhered to the principles of
the Baptist Church. (It would be of interest to know
what was discussed by the executive committee of the
Tract Society when they nominated a non-church member

for vice president.) Like many other philanthropists,

Brown was especially interested in aiding educational

 

150

and theological institutions. Philanthropists endorsed
education because it fit into their philosophy of self-
help. Most noteworthy were Brown's donations to Rhode
Island College. He bought the privilege of renaming
the college for $5,000, but in the end the corporation
of the college could congratulate themselves for having
driven a hard bargain--Nicholas Brown's total contri-
butions amounted to approximately $159,000.75 Nor was
Brown's aid to education limited to colleges and semi-
naries. In 1836 he donated land and $10,000 to the
newly incorporated Providence Athenaeum for the erection

of a public library.76

He also agreed with other
Christian merchants that education alone was not
sufficient; religious and moral instruction were also
important. The Tract, Bible, and Mission Societies

and needy ministerial students were all recipients of
his support.77 He also realized that there were members
of society who needed a more direct form of material aid.
In his will he left $30,000 for the erection of an insane
asylum, later named Butler HOSpital. Brown took a
paternalistic interest in the poor and the sick by
visiting and giving aid to those in distress. He was
also one of the promoters of the Provident Institution
for Savings which received its charter in 1819.78 In

Brown, the stewards found an embodiment of the ideals

of enlightened and benevolent aristocracy. He was an

151

educated gentleman, a discriminating yet non-sectarian
philanthropist, and a man of integrity and simplicity.79

The dominant role of these merchants, bankers,
and industrialists in the Tract Society reflects their
growing importance in an age of increasing urban and
industrial development. They had access to ready cash
which the average landowner did not have. That these
businessmen should be attracted to the Tract Society is
not surprising. They were proponents of the self-help
and personal accountability theory both in the economic
and religious realms. However, several wealthy land-
owners whose personal fortunes gave them prestige and
power also actively supported the American Tract Society.
Three notable examples were Stephen Van Rensselaer and
Aritsarchus Champion, both from up-state New York, and
Jeremiah Morrow from Ohio.

Stephen Van Rensselaer, New York's largest land-
owner, was one of the original vice presidents of the
American Tract Society. As mentioned previously, he
had joined with Nicholas Brown and several others in
underwriting the cost of stereotyping the Society's
first evangelical volume. His contributions to the
Society, though not massive, were considerable. By 1838,
his donations were listed at $1,250.80

Van Rensselaer hailed from a prominent New York

home. He was born in 1764 into an old established Dutch

 

152

family; the first Van Rensselaer having taken up residence
in the New Netherlands in 1637. As a young boy he was
placed by his grandfather into a school at Elizabeth, New
Jersey, and in 1779 he was placed in the family of Reverend
Samuel Smith, the son-in-law of President Witherspoon of
the College of New Jersey. Three years later he graduated
from Harvard College and shortly thereafter he married
the daughter of General Philip Schuyler.81
One of Van Renssalaer's contemporaries aptly
described him as a "Federalist" of the old school"; a
man "of gentlemanly manners, one of the lords' noblemen,
of an amiable disposition, great benevolence, and active

public spirit."82

In an age when party politics was
becoming more and more a reality he sought to steer a
half-way course; Van Rensselaer endeavored to further

the cause of Federalist friends without succumbing to a
partisan spirit. During the 1821 State Convention, called
to revise New York's constitution, he was willing to make
concessions to the rising spirit of egalitarianism. He
went along with the movement to remove the distinctions
between "landed" and other personal property and to
equalize the voting qualifications for all elected
offices. But his obeisance to the rising spirit of
democracy had its limits. Although willing to abolish

many of the property qualifications for voting, he still

hoped to tie suffrage to some motion of "stability" or

r—v—v ' v

 

153

"fixedness" by demanding certain residence requirements
for voters and some visible demonstration of attachment

to the state.83

His relationship to his tenants was one
of benign paternalism. He offered long-term leases at
moderate prices. Yet the tenants regarded some of the
obligations as "burdensome" and "degrading." Van Rens-
selaer permitted many of the renters to fall behind in
their payment only to demand in his will that unpaid
rents should be collected in order to pay off his cred-

itors.84

Nevertheless, the kindly'patroon felt a sense of
responsibility towards the lower classes, especially
towards his tenants. He sent school teachers among the
poor families so that they would be better able to
improve their lot in life. Van Rensselaer stressed the
need for a more practical education for the sons and
daughters of mechanics, an education stressing the appli-
cation of "experimental chemistry, philosophy, and
natural history, to agriculture, domestic economy, and
the arts and manufacturers." Rensselaer Institute at
Troy was founded in 1826 with this purpose in mind. His
support of educational institutions and religious socie-
ties was typical of the Christian stewards of the ante-
bellum period.85
In 1851 the Tract Society elected Rochestor's

wealthiest bachelor and leading Presbyterian layman,

Aristarchus Champion, as a vice president. Champion was

 

154

the son of a wealthy New Englander, General Epaphroditus
Champion of Colchester, Connecticut. General Champion
had purchased lands in Western New York in 1805, and in
1826 his son moved to Rochester to take over the manage-
ment of the estate. Champion's home was in the Livingston
Park area, a district noted during the early days for its
"ruffled shirts" and its "air of exclusiveness."86 He
was not content, however, in being one of Rochester's
wealthiest citizens; he also had to be its most benevo-
lent citizen.87
Throughout his life Champion attempted to combine
business with Christian stewardship. Like Dodge he
attempted to subordinate business practices to Christian
ethics, at least as far as the Sabbath was concerned.
He invested $20,000 in the "Pioneer" or "Six Day" stage
line which he and a fellow Presbyterian layman, Josiah
Bissell, had established.88 He used his wealth to
support various benevolent and religious societies. He
supported the poor house and prison reform movements.
Champion, like Wilder, also emphasized temperance reform.
He paid the expenses of a Mr. Chapin who traveled over
4,000 miles visiting jails, penitentiaries, and poorhouses
in order to gather information linking intemperance to
crime and poverty. Although a bachelor, Champion also

felt called upon to support efforts being made to reclaim

destitute and fallen women. Above all, he stressed the

155

need for disseminating Christianity throughout the land.
He was an active member of a Presbyterian church, con-
tributed $10,000 to the Methodists on the understanding
that they would build ten churches in Rochester--actua11y
it was later reduced to four churche589--contributed at
least $1,000 to the Tract Society and willed the bulk of
his estate to the American Bible Society and the Presby-
terian Board of Foreign Missions.90

Preceding Champion as a vice president of the
Tract Society was Jeremiah Morrow, a successful farmer,
businessman, and politician from Ohio. Morrow's father
was a Federalist farmer from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania,
and in all probability he was neither rich nor poor.
Young Morrow was educated in the local public schools
where he received a good education for his day, espe-
cially in mathematics. In 1795, at the age of twenty-
four, he moved to the Northwest Territories (presently
Ohio) and worked as a surveyor and teacher. He invested
his earnings in land and was able to acquire a large
farm and a flour mill. Meanwhile,he also turned his
attention to politics. In 1803 he was chosen by the
Jeffersonians to represent his new state in the United
States Congress. After filling this position for ten
years, he was elected to the United States Senate in
1813. While a member of Congress he voted for the

declaration of war in 1812. From 1820 to 1840 his

156

interests were directed to state politics; he became a
Canal Commissioner in 1822, Governor of Ohio in 1822,
State Senator in 1827, and a member of the State House
in 1827 and 1839. During the 1828 election he supported
Adams and later became the leader of the Whig Party in
Ohio.91
Morrow merits inclusion in this study, primarily,
because of his view of the West. While in Congress he
established himself as a leader in land policy,and,
according to one historian, he was "one of the sanest

men who ever handled land legislation."92

His advocation
of cheaper land, canals, railways, and public education
bespoke an optimistic view of the West. Obviously
Morrow's West would not be the untamed wilderness but
rather an agricultural garden tended by literate yoemen
farmers.93
Joining with the merchants and the landowners in
founding and controlling the American Tract Society were
a group of laymen drawn from the professions such as
doctors, lawyers, teachers, and editors. These groups,
along with the clergy, were well educated for their
day. They all belonged to the middle class; none of
the Society's leaders were drawn from the laborers and
mechanics. It is true that teachers often lacked pres-

tige as well as adequate monetary rewards. However, the

teachers selected for leadership roles within the

157

Society were not drawn from the common schools but from
the more elite private grammar or college prepatory
schools.

One of the original founders of the Tract Society,
and a member of the distributing committee for thirty
years, was Dr. James C. Bliss. He also served as Sec-
retary of the executive committee for twenty-eight years
and as chairman of the distributing committee for twenty-
two years. In 1824 he served as corresponding secretary
of the New York Religious Tract Society and in one year
prepared seventy-five children's tracts for publication.
The first meeting held in February, 1825, in order to
discuss plans for the formation of a national tract
society, was held at the Bliss residence.94

Although he practiced medicine in New York City,
Bliss hailed originally from New England. He was born
in 1791 in Bennington, Vermont. The economic and social
status of his father is unknown. Perhaps he was at
least modestly well—to-do since Bliss was able to
receive a classical education. After completing his
classical studies, he began the study of medicine, first
in Lansingburgh, Vermont, and later in Troy, New York.
During the winter of 1811-1812,he arrived in New York
City, became resident surgeon of the New York Hospital,
and graduated from the College of Physicians and Surgeons

in 1815.95

   

'1.-.

‘An,

'uv.

' e

an

[3'

'v-

.‘v-.

(I,

 

 

158

In spite of the fact that Bliss became a leader
in medical and scientific societies during his four
decades as a practicing physician in New York City, he
was never content to devote all his time and energies
solely to the practice of medicine. Philanthropic
societies, especially religious societies, claimed
much of his attention. He served as an elder first
in a Dutch and later in a Presbyterian Church. Thus
it would seem that doctrinal speculations and denomina-
tionalism were not to his liking. This is also borne
out by the fact that he served as a director of Union
Theological Seminary and was involved in such non-
denominational ventures as the Tract Society and the
Young Men's Missionary Society. He realized that the
stately churches with their pew rents were not meeting
the needs of the poor. In 1831 he joined with others in
establishing and sustaining churches in the more desti-
tute parts of the city, a plan that was also advocated
by men like Reverend James Alexander and Arthur Tappan.96

Joining Bliss on the executive committee was Dr.
John Stearns, another New York physician and a former
native of New England. Stearns came from a middle-class
Massachusetts home. He was born on May 16, 1770, in
Wilbraham, Massachusetts, where his father was a physician.
The Stearns family traced its history back to Charles

Stearnes who had been one of the three original immigrants

 

 

159

to settle in Watertown, Massachusetts, during Governor
John Winthrop's administration. John Stearns undoubtedly
came from a relatively well—to-do home. He graduated
from Yale College in 1789 and then studied medicine with
Dr. Erastus Sergeant of Stockbridge, one of Massachusetts'
most "distinguished physicians and surgeons." In 1792
Stearns went to Philadelphia where he attended the
medical lectures at the University of Pennsylvania and
received his clinical training under Dr. [Benjamin?]
Rush and Dr. [William?] Shippin. In 1810 he ran suc-
cessfully for the New York State Senate and became a
close associate and personal physician of DeWitt Clinton
and Daniel Tompkins. His removal to New York City in
1819 was partly at their request. His marriage to the
daughter of Colonel Hezekiah Ketchum, a Waterford mer-
chant, merely reinforced his standing in the upper
echelons of society.97
Stearns and Bliss represented the better-trained
physicians of their day. In this they were similar to
the clergymen analyzed in the previous chapter who were
usually drawn from the well-educated ministers. The
Tract Society was no proponent of the philosophy which
claimed that all men possess a natural ability to per-
form any task in life. Stearns helped organize medical
groups from Saratoga, Montgomery, and Washington Counties

in order that the profession could more effectively guard

null

.7:

Q\

V.

.
‘v

 

9
k

160

against the influx of poorly educated doctors from New
England. Throughout his life he was active in medical
societies. He served as the first secretary of the
newly organized Medical Society of the State of New
York in 1807 and as president of the New York Medical
Society from 1819 to 1821. Stearns insisted that medi-
cine should be based upon science and not intuition. His
life-long aim was to remove the "imputation of quackery"
from medicine." In his paper read before the Medical
Society of the City and County of New York in 1823,he
called for the emergence of a "Newton" who would firmly
establish "medical science upon the immutable basis of
truth, too cogently demonstrated ever to be shaken by
the speculating innovations of succeeding theorists."
But being scientifically minded did not rule out the
transcendental realm. Stearns traced the 1819 epidemic
directly "to an offended God." His reason was scientific--
the city did not offer a "healthier spot than where the
fever commenced."98
Stearns, like Bliss, attempted to combine pro-
fessionalism with Christian stewardship. After moving
to New York.City,he gradually built up a "respectable
practice." Respectable would probably not refer to the
number but rather to the status of his patients. As
mentioned previously, he had been the personal physician

of DeWitt Clinton and Daniel Tompkins while a member of

161

the State Legislature at Albany. His "respectable prac-
tice" would include a number of patients who could afford
to pay him for his services and thus provide him with the
necessary means and status to become a leading member of
the Tract Society. This does not mean that he was
oblivious to the illnesses of the poor. His biographer
recalled that Stearns never refused "to attend to the

calls of the poor."99

He was an active vestryman of
James Milnor's respectable St. George's Parish and
joined with him in the founding of the American Tract
Society in 1825.100
In all probability, the largest professional
group represented within the Tract Society was the legal
profession. Entrance into law did not require a college
education. However, prior to 1800 most states set strin-
gent regulations governing the prescribed time an indi-
vidual had to spend in preparation before being per-
mitted to practice in the courts. After 1800 attacks
were levelled against these regulations on the grounds
that they were undemocratic. One method of preventing
the legal profession from becoming the private preserve
of the socially prominent and economically wealthy was
to abolish the stringent entrance requirements. Whereas
some fourteen of nineteen states and territories seemed

to require prescribed periods of preparation in 1800,

only eleven out of thirty states still required it in 1840.

r b.
-\V

a.

.0.

up

us.

~\_‘

162

Even the lawyers were feeling the brunt of Jackson's
"spoils system." Nevertheless, the profession, itself,
was able to encourage at least some educational require-
ments if by no other method than by "professional ostra-
cism."101 And, as will be seen in this study, none of
the lawyers included in this chapter were admitted to
the bar without any prior training.

Members of the legal profession were well repre-
sented in the American Tract Society at New York as well
as in the branch Society at Boston. Many of these law-
yers were also politicians or jurists. Within the
national Society they were elected to the honorary
positions such as president, vice president, and direc-
tor. They were selected from all geographic areas, New
England, the Middle Atlantic States, the South, and the
West. Perhaps this was to symbolize the national scope
of the Tract Society and its stress on national unity
in spite of the fact that its real leadership was com-
posed primarily of New Yorkers and ex-New Englanders.
Within the New England branch at Boston, distinguished
Federalist politicians and jurists filled many of the
honorary positions and several of the seats in the
executive committee. Here the merchants did not play
such a dominant role as did their counterparts in New

York.

163

Space does not permit a detailed analysis of all
the lawyers who actively supported the Tract Society.

In determining which members to include priority was
given to those who were instrumental in the founding of
the Society and those who were elected to the executive
committee of the American Tract Society at Boston. Fur-
thermore, representatives were included from various
geographic areas including the South.

In 1842 the American Tract Society elected as
president the Honorable Theodore Frelinghuysen, New
Jersey's prominent and conservative Whig Senator. Fre-
linghuysen was a favorite presidential or vice presi-
dential candidate of various benevolent societies; he
served as president of the American Board of Commis-
sioners for Foreign Missions for sixteen years, as vice
president and president of the American Bible Society
for thirty-two years, as vice president of the American
Sunday School Union, the American Home Missionary Society
and the American Education Society, and as vice president
and chairman of the executive committee of the Temperance
Union.102

Frelinghuysen came from a prominent New Jersey
family. His grandmother was the daughter of a wealthy
East India merchant. His father, General Frederick
Frelinghuysen, was a Federalist of the old school who

was elected to both the Continental Congress and the

164

United States Senate as well as to the State Legislature.103

Theodore Frelinghuysen was born in Somerset County, New

Jersey, in 1787. He was educated at a grammar school,

at a classical Academy and at Princeton College. After

graduating from Princeton in 1804 he returned to his home,

studied law, and was admitted to the bar in 1808. Fre-

linghuysen excelled especially in the legal forum, and

several of his friends and legal associates regarded his

later ventures into the academic community as chancellor

of the New York University and as president of Queens

College (presently Rutgers) as a mistake. Like his

father before him, Frelinghuysen also ran for public

office. He served as the State Attorney General from

1817-1829; he was elected as a National Republican to

the United States Senate in 1829, and served as mayor

of Newark from 1837 to 1839. In 1844 he was the unsuc-

cessful Whig candidate for the Vice Presidency.104
In spite of his political and economic successes,

Frelinghuysen found himself increasingly out of place in

nineteenth-century America. Undoubtedly, his family

had entered politics with a firm belief that persons of

wealth, talent, and social stature should govern and

rise above partisan politics. Frelinghuysen reflected

the values of a society dominated by the church, the

bar, and the farm. (He himself had temporarily dropped

out of school at the age of thirteen in order to take up

165

farming.) He found it difficult to adjust to living in
a Republic in which the old order was being disrupted by
immigrants, abolitionists,and Jacksonian Democrats. He
assailed President Jackson's "Sunday Mail" policy, argu-
ing that if the Sabbath were blotted out, "the hope of
the world . . . [would be] extinguished." He blamed his
1844 defeat partly on the "alliance of the foreign votes
and the most impracticable of all organizations, the
Abolitionists."105
Frelinghuysen's social, economic, and political
views can best be described as conservative. He accepted
stratification in society as inevitable. In his eulogy
of Henry Clay he agreed with his deceased friend that
human distinctions not only existed but were useful.
Before God, however, "there . . . [was] but one level."106
This does not mean that he was oblivious to the plight of
the poor. His solution for them was charity and self
help. He offered them religious and moral instruction,
he promoted the cause of Sunday Schools especially for
the Mississippi Valley, he stressed temperance reform,
and he contributed to organized charities. He even
spent Saturday afternoons searching out and aiding the
poor.107 Above all, he stressed the relationship between
liberty, order, and Protestantism. He saw the Sunday

schools as having a "benignant influence" on the politi-

cal sphere, "the best guarantee for the peace and good

 

.
Av..-
U. I“

99v

~.,~

ll:
11-
ll!

55“

'v

it.

n.

L“

166

order of society," countering the tendency of a "restless"
population overly infected by new found freedom and
desirous of breaking away "from all restraints."108
One New York City lawyer who merits inclusion in
this study is Daniel Lord. He was not elected as vice
president of the Tract Society, until 1860. However,
his conservative stance on slavery and his 1858 defense
of the publishing committee's refusal to publish a tract
on the duties of masters to their slaves made him a well-
known figure in evangelical circles. Like William E.
Dodge, Lord was especially interested in preserving
national unity. On December 18, 1860, a number of New
York merchants met at his home to discuss what possible
action could be taken to bring about an amiable settle-
ment of the national crisis.109
Lord, like so many other New Yorkers, hailed
originally from New England. His father, a New England
physician, left Stonington, Connecticut, for New York
City when Daniel Lord was approximately two years old.
Lord later returned to Connecticut in 1811 in order to
enroll at Yale College. Upon graduating in 1814,he began
to study law at the country's leading Law School, Judge
Tapping Reeve's Litchfield Law School, after which he
entered the law office of George Griffin, an eminent New

York lawyer. His first years in practice were discourag-

ing, but once his reputation was established his

 

167

advancement was rapid. He became a favorite lawyer among
influential businessmen including John Jacob Astor.
Many large firms sought his counsel after the 1835 fire
and the 1837 depression. According to Pessen's study,
Lord was worth at least $45,000 by 1845. His prominence
within the economic community also made him a person to
be reckoned with in religious circles, and in 1834 he
became an elder in the Brick Street Church.110
Lord resembled the Christian stewards in several
respects. As mentioned previously,he took an anti-
abolitionist stance. Like Arthur Tappan he emphasized
simplicity in his tastes. Furthermore, he placed a great
emphasis upon order. Reverend J. 0. Murray eulogized
Lord at his funeral for helping to preserve the true
order and stability of society, in which Christian insti-
tutions . . . [had] their best growth.111
One New England lawyer and politician who deserves
mention is George Briggs of Massachusetts. The presidency
of the American Tract Society at Boston and New York was
usually filled by a man of social prominence. One
example was the election of the Honorable George Nixon
Briggs, a former Whig congressman (1831-43), a Massachu-
setts governor (1841-51), and a judge of the Court of
Common Pleas (1851-56) to the presidency of the Boston

branch. Prior to his accidental death, Briggs had also

served as president of the Baptist Foreign Mission

A.-

S...

u a.
In

-,_

an

IV:

168

Society, the Massachusetts Sabbath School Union, and the
Berkshire Insurance Company.112
Although Briggs rose to a position of social
eminence in Massachusetts, he came from a non-
distinguished New England home. He was born at
Adams, Massachusetts, a town which was heavily popu-
lated by Baptist settlers from Rhode Island. His father
was a blacksmith, and after completing one year of grammar
school, Briggs began to prepare for a vocation by being
apprenticed out in order to learn the hatter's trade.
Three years later he gave up the trade, studied law, and
was admitted to the bar in 1818.113
In several respects, Briggs differs from the other
members included thus far in this study. First of all,
his lower class background was atypical. Even merchants
like Dodge and Tappan, who could point to their modest
beginnings, hailed from middle-class homes. Secondly,
he took a more pronounced stand against slavery than did
most leading members in the national Society with the
exception of Tappan. He opposed the Mexican War and the
annexation of Texas partly on the grounds that it would
extend slavery. However, it should be pointed out that
his antislavery stand was not atypical for New England.
The Boston branch finally broke away from the American

Tract Society in 1859 because of the refusal of the

national Society to speak out on slavery. Furthermore,

 

169

Briggs' greatest contribution to education was in promoting
the Massachusetts common schools, not the grammar schools,
colleges, and seminaries. He was aware of his own lack of
formal education and supported the colleges, but he was
especially noted for his efforts, while Massachusetts'
Governor, to support Horace Mann and to prod the State
Legislature into providing more educational facilities
for the many children outside the schools.114
The Tract Society also appointed members from the
South as vice presidents. It prided itself in being a
national organization. One way to bolster this image
was to appoint members from various geographic regions
to the vice presidencies and directorships. One such
example was the Society's appointment of Duncan Cameron
as vice president in 1825, a position he held until his
death in 1853.115
Few Southern lawyers could point to a longer
association with the American Tract Society than Duncan
Cameron, one of North Carolina's leading and most active
members of the bar. Cameron was raised in a middle-
class Virginia home. He was born in 1777 in Mecklenburg
County, Virginia, where his father was an Episcopalian
clergyman. Cameron moved to North Carolina in 1797, was
appointed clerk of the Superior Court in 1800, served

as a member of the State House of Commons from 1806 to

1813, and was appointed Judge of the Superior Court in

170

1814. In 1819, 1822, and 1823 he was successful in his
bhi for election to the State Senate. Evidence suggests
that he was a Democrat; he helped a former Whig--turned
Democrat--take over the North Carolina Standard, a Demo-
cratic newspaper. His economic fortunes did not lag far
behind his political successes. He owned his own plan-
tation, in all probability manned by Negro slaves, and
served as president of the Old State Bank in 1829 and

its successor, the State Bank of the State of North Caro-

lina from 1834 to 1849.116

In several respects, Judge Cameron reflected the
View of the leading supporters of the Tract Society.
Business and economic interests were important but so
Were religious concerns. Although he did not follow
his father into the ministry, he did establish himself
as one of North Carolina's leading lay Episcopalians. He
aetively promoted the cause of Episcopalianism within
North Carolina and served as a trustee of the denomi-
national seminary. His answer for the slavery question
Would have elicited strong support from men like BishOp
William Meade and Reverend Archibald Alexander. In 1827
he erected "a neat and pleasant place of worship" on his
Plantation designed especially for Negroes.117

In addition to doctors and lawyers, teachers also
Were represented in the Tract Society. College presidents

and professors--especially instructors in seminaries--were

‘1

   

171

often active within the Society. But since these were
usually ordained clergymen they were not included in this
chapter. Consequently, this section will deal with one
instructor, William Forrest, a Society member who taught
at the pre-college level.

Although most members of the executive committee
could be classified as prominent merchants, clergymen,
lawyers, doctors, or landowners, this was not true of
William Forrest, a member of the distributing committee.
Forrest's economic background is unknown. He was born
at Larne, County of Antrim, in Northern Ireland in 1791.
At the age of ten he was sent by his father to New York
in order to prepare for a business career. He applied
hinmelf diligently both to his work and studies and gave
up all "follies" and "vices" in order to acquire a
Superior education. After publically making a pro-
fession of his Christian faith at the age of eighteen,
he gave up the pursuit of business for a career in teach-
ing. His aim was to aid the boys and young men of the
City to be successful by providing them with an oppor-
tunity to receive an education under a Christian influence.
In 1821 the Collegiate School was established, with which
FOrrest was associated for nearly forty years.118

In William Forrest the Tract Society had a living
example of the benefits of education, religious instruction,

and self-discipline. He had received much of his education

172

after working hours. His aim to provide educational
opportunities for New York's youth must have fallen on
attentive ears. Men like Dodge, Tappan, and Brown
stressed the importance of education, religion, and hard
work for all who would climb the social and economic
ladder. But education and self help alone were not
sufficient; religion was also necessary. Forrest
emphasized religious and moral instruction; he sup-
POrted such institutions as the American Bible Society,
the American Tract Society, and the New York Sunday
School Union. The graduates of Forrest's Collegiate
Institute who later became successful businessmen,
13Wyers, and ministers must have provided further proof
to the Christian stewards that diligence, self-discipline,
education, moral instruction coupled with a helping hand
nOw'and then could prOpel one up the social ladder.119

These were some of the leading laymen who joined
with the clergy in organizing and operating the American
Tract Society. Although not all inclusive, this study
has included many of the early organizers of the Society,
Several of the large donors, leading representatives
from the earlier Tract Societies organized prior to 1825,
and a few prominent supporters of the American Tract
Society at Boston.

It is possible to draw several conclusions from

this study. First of all, it is obvious that these were

173

prominent laymen in the religious community. They occu-
pied important posts in various benevolent societies.
They were usually selected because of their economic

and social stature, and their membership within these
societies further enhanced their prestige or standing
within the community. Furthermore, as mentioned pre-
viously, philanthropy was nearly the only acceptable
method of conspicuous consumption available to the
Christian stewards.

These members, like the clergy, were all drawn
from an elite group. The ministers gained their standing
because of their education and their profession, these
menigained their standing because of either their wealth,
Profession, or education; some men like Van Rensselaer,
Perit, and Frelinghuysen had all three. Yet it should
also be pointed out that very few of the merchants
belonged to the very rich, the leading industrialists
and the millionaires of their day. Men like Brown were
the exception and not the rule. The typical merchants
were the Tappans, the Wilders, and the Dodges, men who
had sufficient wealth to give them stature within the
religious and secular communities. They were men who had
built up their businesses to the point where they could
afford to devote at least part of their time to non-secular
Concerns. Similarly, the lawyers, doctors, editors, and

teachers who were elected to the vice presidencies or to

174

the executive committee were usually prominent members
within their professions. Stearns served as president
of the New York Medical Society, Frelinghuysen ran as a
vice-presidential candidate for the Whig Party in 1844,
Briggs was a Massachusetts governor, and Cameron was a
state legislator and judge of the Superior Court.120

Most of these men came from middle-class homes.
Some, like Tappan and Dodge, came from modest homes.
Nevertheless, their parents belonged to the middle
class. Some came from unpretentious farm homes. How-
ever, there is no evidence to suggest that any belonged
to the industrial working class.121 Perhaps the closest
to this was the father of George Briggs, who was a
blacksmith. But it should also be emphasized that
Briggs was the exception.

The only group within the Tract Society which
lacked money, education, and professional status was the
colporteurs. Although their ranks were augmented by
students during the school vacations, the majority of
the colporteurs were neither wealthy nor well educated.
Some colporteurs and distributors were men of senior
age, some were ministers--although not ministers of
prestigious churches--, a few were former immigrants
and converts from Roman Catholicism. As Reverend A. M.
Stone, the Society's agent in Western New York stated:

”They come not with the learning of our highest schools

175

and seminaries, but Bible truth in Bible language is
their single message."122
It is also evident that the Tract Society was
basically controlled and financed by New Yorkers. They
dominated the all important executive committee which
not only set the Society's policies, but nominated the
slate of officers for all positions in the Society. The
domination of the Society by New Yorkers is also evident
among the directors for life. During its first twelve
years of existence, the Society had been able to create
approximately 800 directors for life of which just over
100 were from New York City alone and over 300 were
from the State of New York.123
However, the observation that the Society was
dominated by New Yorkers needs one qualification, namely,
that many of these New Yorkers were originally from New
England. The majority of the laymen included in this
study made at least one major move during their lifetime,
the most common being a move from New England to New
York City. In this respect they resembled the clergymen
analyzed previously. The promoters of the Tract Society
feared the changes taking place in society which were
breaking down the established order, changes that were
brought about in part by immigration and internal
migration. Yet these men contributed to the changes

which they feared. Like the clergy, they too had become

mobile.

@ ‘ "me:

176

Available evidence suggests that no one political
party gained the allegiance of the vast majority of the
Society's members. It does seem, however, that members
favored certain parties over others. The Federalists
Party received the nod over the Republican Party,
especially in New England and New York. After the
demise of the Federalists, the Whigs appear to have
the numerical advantage over the Democrats. Men like
Frelinghuysen, Brown, Morrow, and Briggs were Whigs.

This would tend to substantiate the findings of Lee
Benson that individuals who shared the religious and
ethical views of the Tract Society tended to vote Whig.
In his analysis of the religious affiliation and politi-
cal allegiance of New York City's wealthy citizens, Frank

124 This writer

Otto Gatell comes to a similar conclusion.
identified fifteen members who were accorded the title,
"Hon." in the Tract Society's lists of presidents, vice
presidents, directors, and directors for life, and who

were also identified as Whig or Democrat in the Bio-

graphical Directory of American Congress. The breakdown

 

favors the Whigs by a nine to six margin. But if one
omits the five members who came from New England, the
breakdown becomes five Whigs and five Democrats. (How-
ever the only area where Democrats had a majority was
in the west.) Thus it would appear that outside of New
England no one Party had a monopoly on Protestant mor-

ality.125

 

 

177

Although the next chapters will deal with the
religious, ethical, social, and political philosophies
of the American Tract Society, it would not be amiss to
draw some general conclusions based on the brief biogra-
phies in this chapter. These laymen, like several of
the clergymen included in the previous section, placed
little emphasis on doctrinal niceties. Several were
products of the Second Great Awakening which swept
through the country during the early decades of the
nineteenth century, and, like the colporteurs, the
majority "were blessed with the training of pious par-
ents."126 Probably the majority were heirs of the
Calvinist tradition although there were some Methodists
like John McLean in the Society.127 However, all could
unite around revivalism; here doctrinal speculations
receded into the background. Furthermore, whereas
theology implied intellectual speculation, revivals
stressed action and brought immediate results which
were more in keeping with the practical mindedness of
the merchants.

In their social and political views these laymen
stressed education, religious and moral instruction,
self help, and discriminating charity. Their aim was to
preserve a Christian Republic--meaning an orthodox Pro-
testant Republic--composed of self-reliant Christian

farmers, mechanics, merchants, and professionals.

 

178

In other words, their ideal was a nation made up of
middle-class white, Dutch, and Anglo-Saxon Protestants.
It would be a nation where both credit and corporations
would be limited, a nation where the Dodges, Phelps, and
Tappans could begin modestly and, through thrift and
diligence, attain a level of respectable affluence. It
would be a nation where business, communication, and
government were subordinated to the Christian ethic,

one where the mail, the trains, and the factories did
not operate on Sunday.

One can see a certain parallel between their
religious and social views. Their concept of revivals
assumed that man must reach out for salvation and that
God would respond by lending a helping hand through the
work of the Holy Spirit. Their concept of economic
individualism also stressed individual initiative with
the understanding that the affluent would lend a helping
hand by ensuring the availability of education, religious
and moral instruction, and discriminating charity. When
applied to a growing urban, industrial working force this
philOSOphy had its limitations, but when applied to the
slave on the Southern Plantation this philosophy was a
complete failure. Diligence, thrift, and human initia-
tive on the part of the slave was no guarantee that he

would be emancipated.

 

 

 

FOOTNOTES --CHAPTER I I I

1"Address of the Executive Committee of the Amerié
can Tract Society to the Christian Public," Tracts I, No. 1,
p. 14.

2Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 155.

 

3Annual Report, Bost.,A1843, pp. 12-13; Annual

Report, Bost.,7I837, p. 80.

 

4Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 101; Annual Report,
N.Y., 18547’p. 51; Annual Report, N.YLJ 1827, p. 57;
D. Stuart Dodge, compiler and editor, Memorials of William
E. Dod e (New York: Anson D. F. Randolph and Co.,71887),
p. 35 hereinafter cited as Dodge, Memorials of wm. E.

Dodge).

 

 

 

 

 

5David Hackett Fischer, The Revolution of American
Conservativism: The Federalist Party in the Era of Jef-
fersonian Democracy (New York: Harper & Row, 1965),
p. 206i7’(Hereinafter cited as Fischer, The Rev. of Am.
Cons.)

 

 

6Lewis Tappan, The Life of Arthur Tappan (New
York: Hurd and Houghton,71870), pp. 74-75 (Hereinafter
cited as Tappan, Arthur Tappan); H. C. Knight, Memorial
of Rev. wm. A. Hallock,_Q{D., First Secretary of the Amer- ‘
ican Tract Society (New York: American Tract Society,
n.d.), pp. 32-37 (hereinafter cited as Knight, Hallock).

 

7Tappan, Arthur Ta an, pp. 411-13; [Lewis
Tappan], Memoir of His. Sarah Tappan: Taken in Part From
the Home Missibnary Magazine, of November, 1828, and'
Printed fer Distribution Among her Descendants (New York:
west and’Trow, Printers, 1834)) pp. 10-11 (hereinafter
cited as Memoir of Mrs. Sarah Tappan).

179

 

180

8Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan and the Eveggel-
ical War Against Slavery (Cleveland: Case Western Reserve
University Press, 1969), pp. 1-2 (hereinafter cited as
wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan); Tappan, Arthur Tappan,
p. 13.

 

 

 

 

9Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan, p. 43. It would also
seem that Tappan nevergbecame a Jacksonian. He aided
Frederick Schmidt in establishing a German paper, Qeg
National Demokrat. One of the aims of this paper was to
"undeceive" the German immigrants from the misconception
that the "name DEMOCRAT does not always indicate the
political character of those who bear it" (see Tappan,
Arthur Tappan, p. 308). Arthur's brother, Lewis, also
5_Federa1ist, wrote in the 1840's that he had become
more democratic than he had been when he lived in
Boston (see Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan, p. 274).

 

 

 

 

loSarah Tappan to A. Tappan, June, 1807, in
Memoir of Sarah Tappan, p. 86. See also ibid., pp. 70,
88; Tappan, Arthur Tappan, p. 388. Tappan was an
admirer of Charles Finney. He contributed to the
renovation of the Chatham Street Theater in New York
City, so that a free church for Finney could be estab-
lished. He also supported Albion College and persuaded
Finney to become a professor there (see Tappan, Arthur

Tappan, pp. 90, 238-42),
11

 

Tappan, Arthur Tappan, pp. 19, 33, 56.

 

12Robert G. Albion, The Rise of New York Port,
1815-60 (New York: Charles Scribners and Sons, 1939),
pp. 241-42 (hereinafter cited as Albion, Rise of New York
Port); See also David Maldwyn Ellis, "The—Yankee Invasion
of New York, 1783-1850," New York Histogy, XXII (January,
1951), 9-10 (hereinafter cited as Ellis, "The Yankee
Invasion of New York").

 

 

 

13William E. Dodge, Old New York: A Lecture:
Qelivered at Association Hall, April 27th . . . (New
York: Dodd, Mead, and Co., 1880), p. 10 (hereinafter
cited as Dodge, Old New York); wyatt-Brown, Lewis Ta an,
pp. 44-45; Edward Pessen,’“The Wealthiest New Yorkers
of the Jacksonian Era: A New History," The New York
Historical Society Quarterly, LIV (April, ,
(hereinafter cited as Pessen, "wealthiest New Yorkers").

181

14Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan, pp. 169-70, 174-75,
241; Tappan, Arthur Tappan, pp. 264-67; Bertram Wyatt-
Brown, "God and Dun and’Bradstreet," Business History
Review, XL (Winter, 1967), 33-35.

 

 

15Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan, pp. 43-44; Tappan,
Arthur Tappan, pp. 59, 91-93.

 

16Tappan helped found the following institutions:
The American Tract Society, The American Seamen's Friends
Society, American Missionary Society, Magdalen Society
(presently named the Inwood House in Bronx, New York),
American AntiSlavery Society, Phoenix Society, Oberlin
College, Lane Seminary, and the Mercantile Library Associ-
ation in New York City. He was also a member for life of
the Young Men's Missionary Society of New York, a member
of the United Domestic Missionary Society, and the American
Education Society (see Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan, pp. 44,
51-52, 58n.; Tappan, Arthur Teppen, pp. 73-74, 76-79,
158, 168-76).

 

 

1
7Tappan, Arthur Tappan, pp. 62, 392.

 

18Robert H. Bremner, American Philanthropy (Chi-
cago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), p. 43.

19Tappan, Arthur Tappan, pp. 90, 225-42.

 

2°Ibid., pp. 121-23.

21Ibid., p. 158. Tappan also supported the efforts

of a Miss Crandall to establish a school for Negro girls
in Canterbury, Connecticut (see ibid., pp. 154- 58).

221bid., pp. 106-09.

23Annua1 R_port, n);., 1871, pp. 13- -14; George
Lewis Prentiss, The Union Theological Seminary in the City
of New York: Historical and Biogrephical Sketches of its
First Fifty Years (New York. Anson D. F. RandoIph & Co.,
1889), P.7137 (hereinafter cited as Prentiss, Union Theo.
Sem. ); Dr. Hallock' 5 Golden Wedding: Fifty Years in the
Tract Society, September 26,1822--September’26,’1872 (New
York: American Tract Society, [1872?1), pp. 10-11 (herein-
after cited as Hallock' 3 Golden wedding).

 

 

 

182

24Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem., pp. 16-17, 137;
Annual Repert, N.Y.,II87I, pp. 13-14; Dodge, Old New York,
p. 51.

 

 

 

25Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem., pp. 16-17; Annual
Report, NeYoL 1864' pp. 17-18.

 

 

 

 

261bid., p. 37.
27Ibid., pp. 20—21.
28 .
Ibid., p. 137; Annual Report, N.Y., 1871,
pp. 13-14.
29

Clifford S. Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers:
Moral Stewardship in the United States, 1800-60 (New Bruns-
wick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1960), p. 216.
(Hereinafter cited as Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers.)

 

 

 

3OAnnual Repert, N.Y., 1871, pp. 13-14; Prentiss,
Union Theo. Sem., p. 137.

 

 

31Shepherd Knapp, A History of Brick Presbyterian
Church in the City of New York (New York: Trustees of the
Brick Presb. Church, 1901), pp. 198-99 (hereinafter cited
as Knapp, Hist. of Brick Presb. Church); wyatt-Brown,
Lewis Tappan, p. 73, n. 2.

 

 

 

 

32Annual Repert, N.Y., 1849, p. 39; Hallock's
Golden Wedding, p. 10; Pessen, "Wealthiest New Yorkers,"
p. 165.

 

 

33Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers, pp. 178-79;
Annual Repert, N.Y., 1865, p. 3.

 

 

34Bayard Tuckerman, ed., The Diary of Philip Hone,
1828-51 (2 vols.; New York: Dodd, Mead and Co., 1889),
I, 157 (hereinafter cited as Tuckerman, ed., The Diary of
Philip Hone); Nat. Cyclop., VI, 166.

 

 

 

 

 

36

Dodge, Memorials of Wm. E. Dodge, p. 354.

183

37Ibid., p. 7; Dict. of Am. Biog., v, 352-53;
Richard LOWitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth
Centugy,eWilliam E. Dodge (New York: Columbia University
Press,71954), pp. 5-6 (hereinafter cited as Lowitt, A
Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth Cent.). _

38Dodge, Old New York, p. 6; Lowitt, A Merchant

Prince of the Nineteenth Cent., pp. 5-6, 10.

 

 

39Dodge, Old New York, pp. 6, l7; Lowitt, A
Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth Cent., pp. 5-6, 10.

 

40Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem., p. 163; Annual

Report, N.Y., 1836, p. 132; Albion, Rise of New York Port,
p. 68; George L. Prentiss, A Sermon, Preached in the Mer-
Cer Street Church, on the Occasion of the Death of Anson

G. Phelps, on Sabbath Morning, December 11, 1853 (New York:
John A. Gray, 1854), pp. 15, 33-34.

 

 

41Albion, Rise of New York Port, pp. 248-49;

Lowitt, A Merchant PrifiCe of the Nineteenth Cent., p. 187.
Pessen estimates Dodge's wealth in 1845 to be somewhere
between $45,000 and $100,000 (see "The Wealthiest New
Yorkers," p. 166).

 

42Cited in Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nine-

teenth Cent., p. 194. See also Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem.,
p. 208; Charles G. Finney, Memoirs of Rev. Charles G.
Finney (New York: A. S. Barnes and Co., 1876), pp. 275-76.
Reverend Asahel Nettleton had been active in revivals but
by 1827 turned against Charles Finney due to reports of
"irregularities" in Finney's revivals. He now became a
zealous opponent of Finney's "new measures" (see Barbara

M. Cross, ed., The Autobiogeepey of Lyman Beecher [2 vols.;

Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, 1961],
II, 68-71) a

 

43Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth Cent.,

pp. 33-34, 64-67, 70-75; Dodge, Old New York, p. 56.

 

44Dodge, Old New York, pp. 41, 56.

451bid., pp. 58-59.

46Dodge, Memorials of wm. E. Dodge, p. 51.

184

47Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem., pp. 207-08; Dodge,
Memorials of wm. E. Dodge, pp. 57, 149-50, 162, 181, 246-
48; Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth Cent.,
pp. 199-200; Dodge, Old New York, p. 59.

 

 

 

 

48Dodge, Memorials of wm. E. Doege, pp. 31-32,
74, 78-80; Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth

Century, p. 196.
49

 

 

Annual Report, N.Y., 1860, pp. 11-12.

 

50Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth
Century, pp. 196-97.

 

51Freeman Hunt, ed., The Merchant Megazine and
Commercial Review, L (July-December, 1839), 250-51 (herein-
after cited as Hunt, ed., Merchant Magazine); Prentiss,
Union Theo. Sem., p. 148; Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, p. 14;
Nat. gyclop., I, 499-500.

 

 

 

 

 

 

52Albion, Rise of New York Port, pp. 252-53.

 

53Ibid., pp. 245, 247; Nat. Cyclop., I, 500; Hunt,
ed., Merchant Magazine, L, 247.

 

 

54Albion, Rise of New York Port, p. 250; Annual
Report, N.Y., 1864, p. 14.

 

 

55Perit was a supporter of the American Bible
Society, the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign
Missions, the Seamen's Friend Society, the Seamen's
Retreat and Sailors Harbor, and Union Theological Semi-
nary (see Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, pp. 14-16; Hunt, ed.,
Merchant Magazine, L, 249; Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem.,
pp. 148-49).

 

 

 

56Cited in Nat. chlop., I, 499-500.

 

57Ibid.; Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, pp. 14-16;
Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem., pp. 148-49; Hunt, ed., Mer-
chant Magazine, L, 250-51. On the establishment of_EHe
savings’banks see Fritz Redlich, The Molding of American
Banking: Men and Ideas, Part I, 1781-1840 (New York:
Johnsen Reprint Corp., 1968), pp. 208-30, especially
pp. 208—23 (hereinafter cited as Redlich, The Molding
of Am. Banking); Lance Edwin Davis and Peter Lester Payne,

 

 

 

 

 

 

185

”From Benevolence to Business: The Story of Two Savings
Banks," Business History Review, XXXII (Winter, 1958),
386-406 (hereinafter cited as Davis and Payne, "From
Benevolence to Bus.").

 

588. V. S. Wilder, Records from the Life of S. V. S.
Wilder (New York: American Tract Society, 1865), pp. 20,
48-50, 52 (hereinafter cited as Wilder, Records); Annual
Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 16; Nat. Cyelop., VII, 490.

 

 

 

59
VII, 490.

 

Wilder, Records, pp. 17-18, 69; Nat. Cyelop.,

60Wilder, Records, pp. 248, 316, 323-25; Annual
Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 17.

 

61Wilder, Records, pp. 225, 231—32, 257-94.

62Nat. Cyelop., VII, 490.

 

63w11der, Records, pp. 54-57, 181-82, 193—94, 215-
20, 239; Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 16.

 

64Wilder, Records, p. 28.

651bid., pp. 65, 120.

66Ibide, pp. 28-380

67Ibid., pp. 196-209; see especially pp. 197-98,

208-09.

68Tracts, V, No. 176.

69Wilder, Records, pp. 296-99.

70Ibid., pp. 298-300. In his temperance efforts
Wilder had made enemies. When he ran into financial dif-
ficulties in 1841 they somehow got possession of a draft
drawn against him for $1,500 and had him put into jail
for debt (see ibid., p. 323).

 

71Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, p. 10; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1842, p. 2; Nat. Cyclep., VIII, 28; Freeman Hunt,

 

 

 

186

Lives of American Merchants, I (New York: Derby and Jack-
son, 1858), 212; William Gammell, "Nicholas Brown,"
Barnard Journal of Education, III (June, 1857), 246-97,
306 (hereinafter cited as Gammell, "Nicholas Brown").

 

 

72Gammell, "Nicholas Brown," pp. 293-94; Walter
C. Bronson, The History of Brown Universit , 1764-1914
(Providence, RZIs.: Published'by the University,
1914), p. 225 (hereinafter cited as Bronson, Hist. of
Brown Univ.). For a detailed examination of the Brown's
business career see James B. Hedges, The Browns of Provi-
dence Plantations: The Nineteenth Century (Providence, R.Is:
Brown University Press, 1968), pp. 29-64, 114, 116, 175,
177, 185, 190-91, 196, 201-02, 206-10, 214, 233, 245-46,
248, 250-51 (hereinafter cited as Hedges, The Browns of
Providence Plantations).

 

 

 

 

 

 

73Gammell, "Nicholas Brown," p. 295.

74Ibid., p. 307.

75Bronson, Hist. of Brown Univ., pp. 155-57, 227.
Actually the Corporation had previously attempted to sell
the name for $6,000 but no one took up the offer (see
ibid., p. 144). Other educational institutions and
soc1eties to receive aid from Brown included: Columbian
College, College of Waterville, Maine, the Theological
Institution at Newton, Massachusetts, the Northern Baptist
Education Society and the Rhode Island Sunday School Union
(see Gammell, "Nicholas Brown," pp. 303, 306).

 

76Gammell, "Nicholas Brown," p. 304.

77Ibid., pp. 304-07.

78$23§,: Bronson, Hist. of Brown Univ., pp, 225-
27; Hedges, The Browns of Providence Plantations: p. 202.

 

 

79Gammell, "Nicholas Brown," p. 301; Bronson,
Hist. of Brown Univ., p. 157.

 

80Annual Report, N.Y., 1842, p. 2; Annual Report,
1838, p. 175.

 

81Fischer, The Rev. of Am. Cons., p. 311; Dict.
of Am. Biog., XIX, 211-12; Daniel D. Barnard, "Stephen

 

 

 

187

Van Rensselaer," Barnards Journal of Education, VI (1859),
223-25 (hereinafter cited as Barnard, "Stephen Van Rens-
selaer").

 

82Tuckerman, ed., The Diary of Phiiip Hone, I,
348-49; Lee Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy:
New York as a Test Case (New York: Atheneum, 1966), p. 6n.
(HerEinafter cited as Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian
Dem.).

 

 

 

 

83Barnard, "Stephen Van Rensselaer," 230; Fischer,
The Rev. of Am. Cons., p. 311; Alexander DeAlva Stanwood, A
EeiiticaI’History of the State of New York (2 vols.; New —
York: Henry Holt and Co., 1906), I, 82, 341-43 (herein-
after cited as Stanwood, Pol. Hist. of the State of N.Y.).

 

 

84Barnard, "Stephen Van Rensselaer," p. 225;

David M. Ellis, Landlords and Farmers in the Hudson-Mohawk
Region, 1790-1850~(Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press,
I946), pp. 36-41; Douglas T. Miller, Jacksonian Aristoc-
racy: Class and Democracy in New York, 1830-1860 (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1967), pp. 65-69 (herein-
after cited as Miller, Jacksonian Aristocraey).

 

 

 

 

 

85Barnard, "Stephen Van Rensselaer," p. 234.
Van Rensselaer also contributed $5,000 to Yale College
and the College of New Jersey (see ibid., p. 237).

86Annual Report, N.Y., 1872, pp. 13-14; Jone M.

Chappell, "Livingston Park People and Traditions,"
Rochester Historical Publication Fund Series, IX (1930),
259.

 

87Annual Report, N.Y., 1872, pp. 13-14.

 

88Edward R. Foreman, "Historiettes: The Bissells,
Father and Son," Rochester Historical Publication Fund
Series, VI (1927), 334; Annual Report, N.Y., 1872, p. 14.

 

 

89The Methodists took up Champions offer of $10,000
to any denomination which would build ten churches in the
growing sections of Rochester (see Orlo J. Price, "One
Hundred Years of Protestantism in Rochester," Rochester
Historical Society, Publication Fund Series, XII I1933I,
292 [hereinafter cited as Price, "One Hundred Years of
Prot. in Roch."]).

 

188

90Ibid.; Orlo J. Price, "The Significance of the
Early History of Rochester," Rochester Historical Sociepy
Publication Fund Series, III (T924), 179; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1872, p. 14.

 

 

 

 

91William T. Utter, The History of the State of
Ohio, Vol. II, The Frontier State, 1803-1825 (Columbus,
0510: Ohio State Archeological Soc. and Hist. Soc., 1942),
82 (hereinafter cited as Utter, The Frontier State);
Dict. of Am. Biog., XIII, 235-36; Biographical Directory
Ef’Amefican Congress, 1774-1961 (Government Printing Office,
1961), p. 15 (hereinafter cited as Biog. Directory of Am.

Cong.).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

92Payne Jackson Treat, The National Land System
(New York: E. B. Treat and Co., 1910), p. 132.

 

93Utter, The Frontier State, II, 64; Dict. of Am.
Biog., XIII, 235-36.

 

 

94Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, pp. 16-17; Prentiss,
Union Theo. Sem., pp. 177-78. During his lifetime Dr.
Bliss attended 375 of the 416 executive committee meetings
(see Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem., p. 178).

 

 

 

95Prentiss, Union Theo. Sem., p. 177; Annual
Report, 1856, p. 15.

 

96Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, pp. 15-16; Prentiss,
Union Theo. Sem., pp. 177-78.

 

 

97Samuel Purple, "Biographical Sketch of the Life
of Dr. John Stearns" (non pub. M.S., n.d.), pp. 1-3, 12,
15 (hereinafter cited as Purple, "Dr. John Stearns");
Franklin B. Dexter, Biographical Sketches of the Grad-
uates of Yale College with Annals of the College History,
1778-92 T6 vols.; New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1885-

, IV, 652-53 (hereinafter cited as Dexter, Grad. of

Yale College).

 

98Purple, "Dr. John Stearns," pp. 4-5, 7-18, 13, 22;
Daniel H. Calhoun, Professional Lives in America: Struc-
ture and Aspirations, 1750-1850 (Cambridge: Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1965), pp. 30-31 (hereinafter cited as
Calhoun, Prof. Lives in America).

 

99Purple, "Dr. John Stearns," p. 15.

189

100Dexter, Grad. of Yale College, IV, 652-53.

 

101Alfred Z. Reed, Trainigg for the Public Pro-
fession of the Law: HistoriEal Development and'Principel
Contemporaiy Problems of Legal Education in the United
States . . . (Carnegie Found. for the Advancement ofi
Teaching,’l921), pp. 79-90.

 

 

 

102Talbot W. Chambers, Memoir of the Life and
Character of the Late Hon. Theo. Frelinghuysen, L.L.C.
(New York: Harper and Bros., 1863), pp. 214-15 (herein-
after cited as Chambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen); Dict. of
Am. Biog., VII, 17; Biog. Directory of the Am. Cong.,

 

 

 

 

 

p. 5; Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Dem.,
pp. 241-42.
103

Fischer, The Rev. of Am. Cons., pp. 323-24.

 

104Chambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen, pp. 28-40; Dict.
of Am. Biog., VII, 15, 17; Biog. Directory of the Am.

Cong., p. 915.

105Chambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen, pp. 28-32, 75,
177-78; Dict. of Am. 8iog., VII,_16.

 

 

 

 

 

106Cited in Chambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen: P- 181-

 

107Ibid., pp. 163, 181, 246, 248.

losIbid., pp. 232-44.

109"Mr. Daniel Lord and the American Tract Society,"
New Englander, XVII (August, 1859), 618-31; Philip S.
Foner, Business and Slavery: The New York Merchants and
the Irrepressible Conflict (Chapel Hill, N.C.: University
5f North Carolina Press, 1941), pp. 237-38.

 

 

 

110Pessen, "Wealthiest New Yorkers," p. 468;
Dexter, Grad. of Yale College, VI, 679-80; Dict. of Am.
Biog., II, 404-05. On Litchfield Law SchooI see Charles
Warren, A History of the American Bar (New York: Howard
Fertig, 1939), pp. 357-612

 

 

 

111L. B. Proctor, The Bench and the Bar of New
York (New York: Diossy and‘Co., 1870), pp. 666, 668.

190

112Annual Report, Bost., 1862, pp. 24-25; Biog.
Directory of the Am. Cong., p. 596.

 

 

113Diet. of Am. Biog., IV, 41-42; William T.
Davis, Bench and Bar of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
I (Boston: Bost. Hist. Co., 1895), 419; Biog. Directoiy
of Am. Cong., 596.

 

 

 

 

114Dict. of Am. Biog., III, 42.

 

115Annual Report, N.Y., 1853, p. 14.

 

116John Hill Wheeler, Historical Sketches of North
Carolina from 1584 to 1851, Compiled from Origipal Records,
OffiCial Documents, and Traditional Statements with Bio-
giaphical Sketches of her Distinguished Statesmen, Jurists,
Lawyers, Soldiers, Divines, etc. (Baltimore: Regional
Pub. Co., 1964), p. 417 (hereinafter cited as Wheeler,
Hist. Sketches of N.C.); Clarence Clifford Norton, "Demo-
cratic Newspapers sad Campaign Literature in North Caro-
lina, 1835-61," North Carolina Historical Review, VI
(October, 1929), 351; Gruion Griffs Johnson, Ante-Bellum
North Carolina: A Social History (Chapel Hill: UniVersity
of North Carolina Press, 1937), p. 347 (hereinafter cited
as Johnson, Ante-Bellum N.C.); Fanny Memory Farmer, "Legal
Practices and Ethics in North Carolina, 1820—60," North
Carolina Historical Review, XXX (July, 1953), 343.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

117Sarah McCulloh Lemmon, "The Genesis of the
Protestant Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina, 1701-1823,"
North Carolina Historical Review, XXVIII (October, 1951),
461; Johnson, Ante-Bellum N.C., p. 547.

 

 

118Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, pp. 21-22.

 

119Ibid.

120Another prominent member from the legal pro-
fession who was elected as a vice president of the Tract
Society was John McLean, an Associate Justice of the
United States Supreme Court.

121One example of an individual who came from a
rather modest home was the Tract Society's vice president,
Robert L. Caruthers. He was a member of the Whig Party
in Tennessee, served in the State Legislature,and was
appointed to the State Supreme Court.

 

191

122Annual Report, N.Y., 1857, pp. 74-75 (see also

ibid., pp. 135-37; Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, pp. 40-41;
Annual Report, N.Y., 1849, pp. 51-527'AnnuaI’Rep9rt, N.Y.,
185I, p. 67).

 

 

 

 

 

123Annual Report, N.Y., 1837, pp. 150-57.

 

124Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Dem., pp. 186-

207; Frank Otto Gatell, "Money and Party in Jacksonian
America: A Quantitative Look at New York City's Men of
Quality," Political Science Quarterly, LXXXII (June, 1967),
247-50.

 

 

125The breakdown of the fifteen members is as

follows:
New England

Jacob Collamer, Director, Woodstock, Vermont, Whig

Samuel Hubbard, Director for Life, Middletown, Conn., Whig

Ether Shepley, Vice President, Portland, Me., Dem.

Thomas W. Williams, Director for Life, New London, Conn.,
Whig .

Robert C. Winthrop, Vice President, Boston, Mass., Whig

Middle Atlantic States

T. T. Glagler, Director for Life, Lockport, N.Y., Whig

John Fine, Director for Life, Ogdensburgh, N.Y., Dem.

Theodore Frelinghuysen, President, New Brunswick, N.J.,
Whig

West

Lewis Cass, Director for Life, Detroit, Mich., Dem.

John McLean, Vice President, Cinci., Ohio, Dem.

Jeremiah Morrow, Vice President, Warren County, Ohio, Whig
Joseph A. wright, Vice President, Indianapolis, Ind., Dem.

South

George Badge, Director for Life, Raleigh, N.C., Whig
R. W. Barnwell, Director for Life, Beaufort, S.C., Dem.
Robert L. Caruthers, Vice President, Lebanon, Tenn., Whig

126Annual Repert, N.Y., 1853, pp. 140, 147.

 

127John McLean was one of Ohio's leading Methodist
laymen. After serving as Postmaster General from 1823-1829
he was appointed Associate Justice of the Supreme Court by

 

 

192

President Andrew Jackson. Judge McLean was elected as
one of the Tract Society's vice presidents in 1847 (see
Diet. of Am. Biog., XII, 127-28; Biog. Directory of Am.
Con ., p. 1,310; Francis P. Weisberger, The History of
t e State of Ohio, Vol. III: The Passing of the Frontier,

1825-1858 ICqumBus, Ohio: Ohio State Archeological and’
Hist. Soc., 1941], pp. 146-47).

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER IV

RELIGIOUS VIEWS

On October 12, 1812, Reverend Lyman Beecher
addressed a New Haven congregation on the topic, "A
Reformation of Morals Practicable and Indispensable."

In his sermon Beecher reminded his audience that the
ideals and practices of their Puritan ancestors were
being openly challenged. He proceeded to paint a dis-
mal picture of contemporary society:
Drunkards reel through streets. . . . Profane
swearing is heard, and even by magistrates as
though they heard it not. Efforts to stop
traveling on the Sabbath, have, in all places,
become feeble, and in many places even in this
state, they have wholly ceased. Grand jurors com-
plain that magistrates will not regard their in-
formations, and that the public sentiment will not
bear them out in executing the laws. And con-
scientious men, who dare not violate an oath, have
begun to refuse the office.1
Nor was this all; there was also a breakdown of discipline
within the homes and the schools. Children were no longer
"instructed in religion, nor governed in early life," as
they had been in the days of their forefathers. Instead

students were taught that their Puritan ancestors "were

fools and bigots" while the Bible, the rod, catechetical

193

194

instruction, and a due regard "to the moral conduct of
children" were all being exiled from the schools.2 Yet
these architects failed to see the wisdom of their Puri-
tan ancestors. Their forefathers "were not fools"; they
had had a realistic view of human nature, of man's
depravity and realized the consequent necessity of
moral, parental, and legal restraints. It was because
of this that the Puritans had been able to establish "the
most perfect state of society, probably that . . . had
ever existed in this fallen world."3

Beecher was not alone in his call for action.
The organizers of the Tract Society agreed that something
must be done to stem the tide of heresy, and to spread a
blanket of religion and morality over the nation. Like
Beecher, they were practical men. Sidney Mead has
pointed out that to understand Beecher's statements
one must first ascertain what end he had in mind when
he formulated a particular argument.4 This is also
true of the managers of the American Tract Society.
Many of their publications were aimed at specific
heresies or "errorists." Consequently, in order to
understand their writings one must know what error
they were combatting and why.

One religious error which the Tract Society
claimed to be combatting was infidelity, deism, or

scepticism. According to Reverend Thomas McAuley, the

195

Society undertook the publication of volumes in the late
18205 in order to save the Republic from the onsloughts
of "infidelity" and from "unsanctified intellectual
power."5 In 1843 Beecher commended the efforts of the
colporteurs in the West. "Infidels," he stated, "have
done much to spread their poison there, but we have done
more."6 Two years later one writer from New York City
sent a disturbing report to the Society. "At the time
of our writing," he wrote, "a large convention of infi-
dels from various parts of the country (English and
German) is in session in this city concerting measures
for the prepagation of their delusion by lectures, books,
tracts, etc."7
According to the organizers and supporters of the
American Tract Society, no section of the Republic had
escaped the onslaughts of infidelity. One could find
religious scepticism in the New England and Middle
Atlantic States. Beecher attributed the decline of
Connecticut's piety, in part, to the inroads made by
"European infidelity."8 When Bishop Philander Chase,
a future vice president of the Society, returned to
Vermont from New Orleans in 1811, he discovered that a
number of the younger members of society had been "seized
on by various classes of infidels in Vermont, and great
was their success."9 In the summer of 1846 a student

from Union Theological Seminary, working as a colporteur

¥________.

 

196

during his vacation in Pike County, Pennsylvania, came

across a settlement of "avowed atheists, some seventy

in number."10
The Christian stewards maintained that deism or

infidelity was also prevalent in the South. After Archi-

bald Alexander was ordained in 1792, he spent part of

the next year studying works which would better enable

him to combat the "alarming presence of infidelity" in

his native state. In Virginia, Paine's Age of Reason was

 

"widely circulated and much read," especially by the
"educated and professional young men."11 When Bishop
William Meade was first ordained in 1811, free thought
was "rife in the State [Virginia], and the College of
William and Mary was regarded as a hotbed of French
politics and religion." Meade expected to find every
educated young man to be a "sceptic, if not an avowed
unbeliever."12 Reverend Charles McIlvaine was warned
by military men in Washington, prior to his assumption
of the Chaplaincy at West Point, that he would find a
"widespread infidelity among officers and cadets." He
later wrote that cadets were hesitant to see a chaplain
lest it "indicate something towards religion" on their
part.13 In 1853 a colporteur in Mississippi reported
that more books were being circulated in his territory

than in preceding years, but "the destitution of preach-

ing . . . [was] as great if not greater." Furthermore,

197

in the wealthier counties which were also well supplied
with books, he "met with more sceptics, particularly
under the guise of Deism, than formerly."14
Reports from the West indicated that infidelity
or deism was believed to be prevalent there as well. A
group of men from the West attempted to combat free
thought by promoting the publication of one of the
Tract Society's volumes, Nelson's Cause and Cure of

Infidelity.15 In 1828 an Ohio clergyman sent in a

 

 

$25 order for tracts, explaining that Unitarians and
Universalists were distributing their tracts, and that
they expected "soon to see even Tracts avowedly Deistical

in circulation."16

The same year a concerned Christian
informed the Society that he had traveled a distance of
over 1,000 miles in the "interior of our western country."
During his travels he had seen only one religious tract
but had "often encountered the poisonous emissaries of
infidelity."17

Infidelity, deism, and atheism were attacked as
being un-American. In May 9, 1798, Reverend Jedidiah
Morse, one of America's early promoters of tract dis-
tribution, warned congregations at Boston and Charlestown
that a secret European Association known as the "Illumanit"
was conspiring to overthrow their "civil and religious

institutions."18 Beecher pointed out that the assault

upon Christianity predicted in the Bible 1,800 years ago

198

was now being fulfilled in the "atheistic conspiracy in
France." Furthermore, disciples of this school, both

"imported and indigenous," were attempting to carry out
a similar program in America.19 A colporteur from Wis-

consin wrote that one of his greatest enemies was the

Life of Jesus, written by the French historian and scho-
20

 

lar, Ernest Renan.
The Society also feared infidelity or free
thought because of its potential impact upon the working

class. Beecher dedicated his Lectures on Political

 

Atheism to the American workers hOping thereby to off-
set the attempts of militant infidel societies to win
over the lower classes. But even prior to Beecher's
publication, Timothy Dwight, the first president of the
Connecticut Tract Society, complained that French free
thought appealed especially to the "ignorant, unthinking,
and vulgar."21
Yet despite these warnings concerning the preva-
lence of infidelity, deism did not present a great threat
to the evangelical churches during the nineteenth century.
According to Yale's president, Timothy Dwight, deism had
reached its height in America by the end of the eighteenth
century.22 Beecher later recalled that atheism had been
so vanquished for a time that Dwight had ceased to preach

23

on the evidences of Christianity. The demise of deism

was personally experienced by one of its great proponents,

199

Thomas Paine. When he returned to America from France in
1800, he did not receive a hero's welcome. To many he
was little more than a "lying, drunken infidel," and in
1809 he died "in disgrace and poverty."24
How does one account then for McAuley's statement
that the Tract Society began its publication of volumes
in the late 18208 in order to combat infidelity? How
does one explain the Society's repeated warnings con-
cerning the danger presented by religious free thought?
First of all, it must be kept in mind that the terms
infidelity, deism, or religious scepticism were often
used indiscriminately. One writer stated that he
regarded infidelity, universalism, and unitarianism "as
essentially the same."25 They were useful terms to be
employed against anyone who disagreed with the moral and
religious views of the Christian stewards. Furthermore,
these terms seemed especially applicable to the rugged
individual living in the West who often seemed impatient
of all religious and social restraints. Such terms, when
defined loosely and used indiscriminately, could also be
applied to all enemies of the standing order both in the
church and the government. One further advantage to be
gained from waving the "infidelity" flag was its useful-
ness in uniting evangelical Protestants against a common

enemy and thereby keeping them from quarreling among

themselves. Deism, along with Unitarianism and Popery,

200

served as useful concrete targets on which all the faith-
ful could turn their theological guns.

The second group of "errorists" to come under
attack by the Tract Society were the Universalists and
Unitarians. The Universalists rejected the Calvinists'
conception of human nature and eternal damnation. One
of the first Universalist tracts to be written in

America was Reverend Charles Chauncey's Salvation for

 

All Men, published in 1782. It was written in reaction
against the hell—fire emphasis of the revivalists in the
Great Awakening. Whereas the Calvinists had emphasized
God's justice, the Universalists emphasized God's good-
ness. Although organized as a separate denomination in
1785, the Universalists were in basic theological agree-
ment with the Unitarians. But whereas the Unitarians
drew their converts primarily from the educated classes
in New England, especially in Boston, the Universalists
drew their recruits heavily from the lower classes,
especially along the frontier.26

It would seem that Universalism had penetrated
all classes and sections of the Republic. Reverend James
Milnor wrote that at one time he, himself, had "pacified"
his conscience by avoiding an absolute rejection of revel-
ation, and substituting an unintelligent acquiescence in

27

that miserable scheme of universal salvation." Reverend

Onman Eastman, the Society's first agent in the

201

Mississippi Valley, reported meeting an "intelligent lady"
who had been raised as a Universalist, but who had become
convinced of its error by reading the tract, "Reasons for
not Embracing the Doctrine of Universal Salvation."28 A
colporteur in Ohio encountered all shades of religious
belief; he met a "universalist, a Hicksite Quaker, infidel

"29 A tract dis-

father, Mormon family, [and] New Lights.

tributor in New York "met with an avowed Universalist"

but was unable to "convince him of his error," so she

sent him a tract which proved to be "the means of his

abandonment of that fatal and delusive doctrine."30 In

1832 twenty of the Society's 280 tracts covered such topics

as infidelity, universalism, Popery, and Judaism. In 1830

the American Tract Society published 24,900 copies of a

60-page tract on Universalism, but this fell far short

of the 122,000 copies of the tract, the "American Youth

on Temperance," published during the same period.31
Brief mention should also be made of Unitarianism.

Whereas atheism and deism was often attributed to French

influence, Unitarianism, at least in New England, had

its roots in Eighteenth Century, New England liberal

32

theology. The excesses of the French Revolution and

the association of free thought with French atheism
caused the Arminians or liberals to become disenchanted
With deism and probably postponed an open rupture

33

between them and the Calvinists. However, by the

202

end of the eighteenth century there were indications that
the Calvinists were disturbed over their association with
the Arminians. In reviewing the events of the eighteenth
century, Timothy Dwight warned that there had been a
dangerous trend towards too much catholicity and moder-
ation "towards what [was] emphatically called modern
liberalism."34 Three years later Jedediah Morse and
the orthodox publically demonstrated that their spirit
of catholicity had its limits. When Harvard College
appointed a liberal theologian, Henry Ware, to succeed
David Tappan in 1805 as Holis Professor of Theology, the
Calvinist camp raised the battle cry. Morse now turned
his energies to smoking the Unitarians out into the open
and to joining with moderate and Hopkinsian Calvinists
in founding Andover Theological Seminary.35

Unitarianism modified Calvinist theology in sev-
eral key areas. One was its attack on the concept of
the Trinity, especially as it related to the person of
Jesus Christ. In all probability, the majority of the
Unitarians during the first two decades of the nineteenth
century could be classified as Arians; they viewed Jesus
as a being inferior to God, yet superior to man. Although
they professed to revere this "Arian Jesus,” the Uni-
tarians still found themselves excluded from fellowship
by the Calvinists. Theodore Frelinghuysen claimed to

profess a love for all orthodox Christians, but this did

203

not include those who denied the divinity of Christ.36

Secondly, both the Unitarians and the Universalists
attacked the Calvinist concept of God. Whereas the
latter stressed God's glory and sovereignty, the former
emphasized God's benevolence.37 Furthermore, the Uni-
tarians and Universalists attacked the Calvinist's con-
cept of man; they stressed man's rationality rather than
his depravity. In fact the Unitarians justified their
rejection of man's depravity on the grounds that the
moral tendencies of such a doctrine were negative. By
denying man's free will Calvinism merely gave "excuses
to the bad." By arguing from moral tendencies the Uni-
tarians stole a weapon right out of the arsenal of the
orthodox. Men like Dwight and Beecher had battled
against infidelity and the opponents of the Standing
Order on the same grounds, namely, that the moral ten—
dencies of the enemies' doctrines were negative.39

And yet, upon reading the Society's Tracts and

the Annual Reports one can conclude that the Tract

 

Society did not believe Unitarianism to be a major
40

threat. It is true that the Society's vice presi-
dents, Lyman Beecher and Leonard Woods, were involved
in battling the Unitarian heresy; the former as a pro-
fessor at Andover Seminary, the latter as a revivalist

41

and preacher in Connecticut and in Boston. And yet,

relatively little mention is made of Unitarianism.

204

Perhaps this is partly due to the fact that little dis-
tinction was made between Universalists and Unitarians.
One Ohio clergyman wrote that Unitarians and Universalists
were distributing their tracts in his state.42 One man
who had "stumbled on Unitarianism and Universalism" gave
up these erronious doctrines after reading a tract.43
Unitarianism may have also received little attention
because it was not a threat to the nation as a whole.

By the mid-twenties it was becoming apparent that Uni-
tarianism would not post much of a threat outside of the
general Boston area. In 1832 Beecher even gave up fight-
ing Unitarianism in Boston to take on the immigrant, the
Roman Catholic, and the untamed population of the West.44
The emphasis on Universalism rather than Unitarianism is
also suggestive of the Tract Society's social views. It
assumed that the Christianity was necessary for all
classes. But in the final end its tracts and volumes
were intended primarily for the lower class. Unitari-
anism, unlike Universalism, appealed more to the educated
and the rich.

During the second quarter of the nineteenth
century the promoters of the Tract Society realized that
there was another religious error on the increase, namely
Roman Catholicism. In 1834 the editor of the Christian
Almanac gave its readers a brief lesson in American His-

tory.45 The Almanac pointed out that in 1780 there were

 

 

ii

 

205

only twenty-six Roman Catholic priests in Pennsylvania and
Maryland, the two states which contained the majority of
the Catholics within the United States. In 1790 the
first bishop was appointed, and by 1814 he was elevated
to the position of archbishop. Four new bishops had

been appointed by 1814, however, much of the increase

was due to the Louisiana Purchase. But between 1814 and
1833 the number of priests increased tenfold. The Almanac
then proceded to marshall the following solemn statistics
for 1833: one archbishop, ll bishops, 10 vicar-generals,
320 residual priests, 6 theological seminaries, 10 col-
leges, 28 male and female convents, 35 seminaries for
youth, 16 orphan asylums, 300 completed or partially
built churches, and approximately 500,000 Catholic
adherants.46 Prior to the late 1820's little emphasis
was placed on combatting Romanism. But with the influx
of immigration and with the expansion of Jesuit schools
in the West, the orthodox began to act.47 In his 1842
address to the Society's annual meeting, Reverend Milnor
called for interdenominational unity in order to combat
"infidelity and error, and the machinations of the Man

of Sin."48

But few surpassed Reverend Beecher when it
came to exposing the Catholic "conspiracy." His Plea

for the West did much to publicize the Catholic and

 

Jesuit "menace." On August 10, 1834, Beecher returned

206

from Cincinnati and preached three anti-Catholic sermons
in Boston. The following night a mob burned a convent
at Charlestown.49
Many Americans shared the Tract Society's dis-
trust of the Roman Catholic immigrant. The 1830's
the rise of the Native American Democratic Association
in New York City. The Henry Clay-Theodore Frelinghuysen
ticket in 1844 appealed to the native Protestants for
support. The Know-Nothing Party of the 1850's was an
attempt to build a national party by submerging the
slavery issue and raising the nativist-Protestant flag.50
Yet evidence suggests that the virulent anti-
Catholic campaign was lessening within the Tract Society
by mid-century. Thus during the same decade when nativist
feelings were running high in the nation, the Tract Society
seemed to be altering its tactics regarding the immigrant.
In 1845 a speaker at the twentieth anniversary of the
Tract Society suggested that since many of the Roman
Catholic immigrants occupied "inferior positions," it
might be possible to win their allegiance by "doing them
good."51 There were still men like a Reverend Duff who
addressed the annual meeting in 1854 and called upon all
Protestants to meet Catholics "with the same spirit with
which Cromwell met them in Ireland" when he refused to
permit the "idolatrous mass to be celebrated . . . in the

52

streets." In 1850 the FamilyiAlmanac carried the

 

207

statement of a Mr. King from Dublin who asserted "that
Saint Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, was a Pres-
byterian missionary."53 Nevertheless, the trend within
the Society was shifting away from polemics. Reverend
James Alexander had long taken issue with those who
equated Romanism with the Anti-Christ. He argued that
although the "popish creed" was "shrouded in great super-
stition," it still contained the "great fundamental

saving doctrines of the Bible."54

Although 104 col-
porteurs were assigned to reach the immigrant population
and contacted over 50,000 Roman Catholic families in
1851-1852, the Society pointed out that "centuries of
polemical controversy . . . [had] left Romanism unweakened
in its errors, and its millions of adherants with sub-
stantially undiminished ranks." The question was then
raised, "Is it not time to test more fully the power of
Christian charity and Christ-like compassion?"55

The American Tract Society found various reasons
for objecting to Roman Catholicism. They attacked it as

56

being contradictory and hostile to the Bible. They

opposed the Papacy, the Mass, and the use of images in

the churches.57

But their opposition to Catholicism was
not restricted to a disapproval of its theology. Romanism
was attacked on political grounds as well; it was assumed
to be a menace to liberty. In 1846 a writer from Western

Pennsylvania informed the Society that the only way to

208

save the West and the Republic was to send out more col-
porteurs in order to convert the immigrants. During the
eighteenth century the Jesuits had lost the military
struggle for the West; "now they were trying to win it by

58 Not that

building "school-houses instead of forts."
Roman Catholicism was to be equated with mass education.
Obviously the Jesuits had ulterior motives in building
schools. Whereas Protestantism stressed freedom of
thought and promoted education for all, Catholicism
stressed censorship and promoted ignorance and super-
stition.59 Furthermore, as will be pointed out in
Chapter VII, the Society feared the voting power of a
Catholic bloc--a bloc dominated by foreign powers.

The Society emphasized the importance of the
written word and colportage in combatting Catholicism.
One antedote for Romanism was the Bible. Reverend Spring
was confident that if a Catholic would read the Bible he
would "understand something," and the little he would
understand would "create inquiry" and a "passion for

60

learning God's truth." Besides the Bible, tracts

and volumes were distributed which exposed the "errors"

of Popery.61

The Society also prided itself in being a
direct heir of the Reformation and issued several publi-
cations glorifying the Reformers.62 Since many of the
Catholics were immigrants, the Society had several of

its publications translated into foreign languages.

209

One was Maurette's Farewell to Rome, which gave the

 

writer's ”reasons for leaving the ranks of Antichrist
at the pain of persecution, fine and imprisonment."
Evening with the Romanists was abridged and translated
into Spanish.63 The Societies employed immigrants,
especially former Catholics, to work among the foreign
population. Leger Retty, an ex-Catholic, was the first
German colporteur to be employed by the Society. He
in turn reported finding another prospective colporteur
who "was once a Roman Catholic and . . . [understood]
well how to converse on the errors of Romanism."64
The battle against religious heresy, be it
Romanism, infidelity, Unitarianism, or Universalism was
made even more difficult by the increased mobility of the
people during the first half of the nineteenth century.
The Society was careful to emphasize the fact that they
were not replacing ministers; rather they were attempting
to reach those who were outside the pale of the church.
This included those who would not or could not attend
orthodox Protestant churches. When Bishop Chase returned
to Vermont in 1811 and discovered the inroads which
infidelity had made upon the youth, he blamed it on the

65 In 1844

lack of available religious education.
Reverend S. T. Wells, a colporteur in Missouri, reported
that there were at least forty counties without educated

ministers in his state. Some areas were served solely

210

by an itinerant preacher and some had not had a minister
for years. One woman informed him that she had heard
only one sermon in five years and then she had had to
travel ten to twelve miles in order to hear it. In one
_ neighborhood the agent preached the first sermon that had
been heard there in eight years.66 Even as late as 1865
a colporteur in Pennsylvania visited a village where
there was no preaching, no Sabbath, and no day school.67
How typical were these cases? Obviously they
were not the norm. They were included to convince the
faithful that the Society deserved their support. Accord-
ing to statistics gathered by the various agents and col-
porteurs, it would seem that by the decade of the 1850's
approximately one-seventh of all those contacted by the
Society's employees "habitually" neglected public wor-

ship.68

This may not have included those who regularly
attended Mass. However, the Society's fears were not
completely unfounded. During its early stage of settle-
ment, the frontier lacked well-established schools and
churches. It seemed as if "Infidelity, Universalism,
and other destructive errors" prevailed in the West, and
that "duelling, gambling, horse-raising, profaneness,
intemperance, and Sabbath-breaking" were so prevalent
that it caused "the Christian's heart to bleed."69

In the end it was not Unitarianism, Universalism:

and Romanism which posed the greatest threat to the Tract

211

Society but the disorderly frontier communities. The
Society's reports continually made reference to indi-
viduals who neglected church, used profane language,
drank alcoholic beverages, and gambled. They were most
numerous in those areas where churches and schools were
lacking. These individuals rejected the values of the
Christian stewards and questioned their right to rule.
One method of reaching such persons was by revivals.

But, according to a study of Western New York, revivals
had less of an impact upon the newly settled agricultural
communities than upon the more mature ones.70

Thus far this chapter has emphasized only those
religious ideas which the Tract Society opposed. Con-
sequently, it would appear that the Society was pri-
marily a negative institution. But the managers of the
Society were not content only to identify those religious
views which it found to be objectionable. They also
attempted to define those doctrines which they found to
be acceptable. And as they interpreted these doc—
trines, they also departed at times from the religious
ideas of their forefathers.

In its conflict with Infidelity, Universalism,
Unitarianism, and later Roman Catholicism, the Tract
Society appealed to an outside authority, namely the
Bible. Sidney Mead has pointed out that as denomina-

tionalism developed, each sect attempted to confirm

 

 

212

more closely to the New Testament ideal. This involved a
rejection of the historical development of Church tra-
ditions and doctrines. The only common authority which
all denominations could appeal to was the Bible.71
Reverend Samuel Schmucker, a Lutheran minister, semi-
nary professor, and a vice president of the Tract Society,
argued that the Reformers had erred in appealing to the
Church Fathers. The Lutheran Church had since learned

"that in all controversies of doctrine, or dates, or

forms of Christianity, the bible, the whole bible, and

 

nothing but the bible must be the armor of the Protes-
72

 

tants."
The American Tract Society was not content to

merely prescribe the Bible as the final authority; it

also demanded that it be interpreted literally. The

writer of the tract, "A Scripture Help" instructed his

readers to always seek the "literal or first sense of

a passage" before looking "for any other."73 However,

the Society realized that some readers might read

erroneous conceptions into the Bible or stumble over

some obscure passages. Consequently, the American

Tract Society took up Justin Edwards' suggestion to

publish a Bible with marginal notes in order to enlighten

those deluded by false teachings. These included the

"multiform teachings of men denying the Lord that brought

us," and the false interpretations "appended to the

 

 

 

213

Doway version."74 The Bible was to become not only a

Protestant but also an evangelical book.

Another authority which the Tract Society appealed
to was history, but it had to be relegated to a secondary
level. The Society prided itself in being an heir to
the Protestant Reformation. As mentioned previously,
it published a number of "histories" of the Reformation.
Men like Beecher also pointed with pride to their Puritan
forefathers. However, appealing to history and tradition
could be a liability when it came to combatting Roman
Catholicism and the Tractarian Movement within the
Anglican Church since both appealed to Church tra-
dition.75 Consequently, it was not surprising that
Bishop McIlvaine warned against bringing a dual authority
into the church, namely tradition or history as well as
the Bible.76

The orthodox Protestants also appealed to reason,
but, like history, it could not become the final authority.
The opponents of orthodoxy, especially the Unitarians,
Universalists, and infidels, also appealed to reason.

Not that the managers of the Tract Society ever admitted
that their theology or Biblicism was either non-
intelligible or irrational. Tracts like "The Infidel's
Creed” attempted to portray the irrationality of deism
and the rationality of Christianity. Beecher appealed

to reason in discrediting Universalism. "The idea that

 

214

gratitude will restrain without fear of punishment where
the confidence of pardon precedes sanctification," he
informed his audience, "is at war with common sense."
If one would only take into account a realistic view
of man's nature, the "eternity of future punishment"
would seem reasonable; if an eternal punishment had but
little disciplinary value for man, then certainly a
temporal hell with only a "limited, saluatory disci-
pline" would have no restraining effect at all.77 But
all these appeals to reason had their limits. In the
final end the authority was still the Bible. One writer
demolished all the arguments of his enemy, presumably
the Unitarians, by marshalling over 100 "scriptural and
incontrovertible arguments" substantiating his belief in
the divinity of Christ.78
The American Tract Society was a religious, not
a theological society. Like the founders of Union Theo-
logical Seminary its leaders were primarily "practical
men." They considered themselves to be orthodox, evan-
gelical Protestants. Their aim was to publish works
which contained "the great distinguishing principles of
evangelical truth, free from denominational peculiari-

79

ties." These "distinguishing principles" or beliefs

were defined as follows:
Man's native sinfulness--the purity and obligation

of the law of God--the true and proper Divinity of
our Lord Jesus Christ--the necessity and reality of

 

215

his atonement and sacrifice--the efficiency of the

Holy Spirit in the work of renovation--the free

and full offers of the Gospel, and the duty of

men to accept it--the necessity of personal holi-

ness--and an everlasting state of rewards and

punishments beyond the grave.8
One can detect here the Society's disagreement with the
teachings of the Unitarians and the Universalists. But
its own doctrines are usually merely assumed, defined,
or defended in a rather simplistic fashion. Although
the Tract Society prided itself on publishing "the
choicest productions" of such seventeenth-century
English writers as Richard Baxter and Philip Doddridge,
and works of such American writers as Jonathan Edwards,
it made little, if any, contribution to American the-
ology.81

Many supporters of the American Tract Society

would not have been unduly alarmed to discover that they
made little, if any, contribution to nineteenth-century
American theology. They took pride in their simplistic
and common-sense approach. The original intention of the
Society was to publish no tract which did "not contain
enough of practical Gospel truth to lead the sinner to

82 Like

Christ, if he should never have another warning."
the revivalists, they were basically "anti-metaphysical"
and in this respect contributed towards the anti-
intellectual tendencies which were evident in Jack-

sonian America.83 In order to reach the masses with

sufficient ”Gospel truth" to lead them to Christ,the

 

 

 

 

216

material had to be simple enough for all to understand.
Simplicity could mean several things. It could mean
seeing all things in terms of black and white. One
agent wrote that he preached "as if there were but two
Parties--God's and the Adversary's," the "precious and
the vile . . . , the friends of God and his enemies."84
Simplicity could also imply a blurring between, or lack
of comprehension of, fine points in theology. This was
exemplified in William E. Dodge who never discovered
any particular difference "between a Congregationalist,
an Old School Presbyterian, and a New School Presby-
terian."85
Related to the Society's stress upon simplicity
was its emphasis upon results. In 1829 the Society
informed its supporters that a physician "was brought
to serious consideration by reading a single sentence

in a tract."86

As long as the tracts brought the
desired results, this was all that mattered. Simple
tracts playing on the emotions of the reader were more
likely than theological treatises to move men to
repentance. Like the revivalists, the Society attempted
to preach "deliberately to the hearts of men."87 One
method of preaching to men's hearts was to awaken in the

88 A somewhat

reader fears of eternal damnation or Hell.
related technique was to give lengthy and graphic

descriptions of illnesses and deathbed scenes. Legh

217

Richmond's tract, "The Young Cottager," devoted thirty-
four pages to describing the illness and the deathbed

89 Another common

scene of a poor but devout cottager.
tactic was to frighten people into immediate repentance
by warning them of the danger of stifling their con-

90 The

victions and thereby "grieving" the Holy Spirit.
writer might also stress the danger of postponing con-
version in the light of life's uncertainties. As the
tract, ”Don't put it off" warned:

One man died in the midst of a demonstration,

another in the midst of an argument, another

reading the newspaper, another walking in his 91

garden, another laughing at a ludicrous picture.
These emotional appeals, like the tract, "A Dying Mother's
Counsel to Her Only Son," were designed to reach the heart
before the mind.92 The Society paid lip service to
reflection, but what it really desired was action.

The publication of material which was noted for
its simplicity rather than profundity, and designed to
stimulate more action than thought makes it difficult
to define the theological stance of the Society on an
issue such as predestination. Furthermore, the Society
included both Old and New School Presbyterians after
their split in 1837; a split which was caused in part by
the former's opposition to the New School's de-emphasis

of God's sovereignty. But if one de-emphasized God's

sovereignty did this not bring with it a more exalted

 

218

view of man's free will? Yet it was precisely in their
view of man that the Calvinists disagreed with the Uni-
tarians and Universalists.

There are instances where predestination is either
implied or explicitly stated in the Tract Society's pub-
lications. Spring commended the Society in 1836 because
it ”still stood firm on the great doctrine of a divine
influence in the conversion of men."93 The clearest
example of this is found in some of the writings of
Jonathan Edwards which were published by the Society,
especially the tract, "Conversion of President Edwards:
From a Narrative Written by Himself." In this publication
Edwards stated that as a youth he rebelled against the
concept of God's sovereignty but that later it became
a "delightful conviction." He then went on to state:

The doctrines of God's sovereignty and free grace,
in showing "mercy to whom he would show mercy" and
man's absolute dependence on the operations of
God's Holy Spirit have very often appeared to me
as sweet and glorious doctrines.94

The Society also published an abridged version of

Edwards', The Treatise on Religious Affections. Here

 

the author stated that the Scriptures teach

that grace in the soul is so the effect of the
power of God, that it is with propriety compared
to those effects which are the furthest from
being owing to any strength in the subject.95

219

There were a few tracts which contained views
which even the staunchest or consistent Calvinists could
accept.96 One writer informed bereaved parents that
even if they had "a real ground" to fear that their
child had not died in Christ, they still had "no reason
to murmer against the dispensations of God"; instead
they should "consider his adorable sovereignty over the
souls which he . . . [had] made." However, the same
writer also encouraged the parents to view the situation
optimistically. "If there was the faintest speck of
grace" in the child's soul, it would not have been over-
looked by God.97 One of the clearest espousals of Cal-
vinist theology was the tract, "The Inquiring--Meeting."
The tract described a revival in which the pastor did
not adopt Charles Finney's new methods. He never advised
the persons under conviction to merely accept Christ's
invitation. Instead, the pastor advised the penitent to
pray that they might be able to give up their obstinate
and rebellious hearts. One sign of grace was a vision of
God, a vision where God appeared "glorious . . . for
being a sin-hating, sin-avenging God." One penitent
remarked that it would have been just "for God to leave

her and take others."98

It should be pointed out, how-
ever, that this tract was not typical of the Society's

publications. Nor does it characterize the early publi-
cation of the Society since this tract was published in

1840.99

220

The idea that God was glorious for being a "sin-
hating" and "sin-avenging" God, and that God would have
been just to damn the penitent individual resembled Hop-
kinsianism. Samuel Hopkins, the leader of this movement,
had been greatly impressed by the willingness of Jonathan
Edwards' wife, Sarah Pierpont Edwards, to resign herself
completely to the sovereign will of God, even to the
point of being eternally damned if it should enhance
God's glory. Furthermore, the Hopkinsians or Consistent
Calvinists jealously guarded God's sovereignty in sal-
vation emphasizing that God and not man had to make the
first move in the regeneration of sinners. They cate-
gorically rejected the notion that holiness could be
fostered by appealing to an individual's self-interest.100

God's sovereignty was also implied in conversion
accounts and in the emphasis upon self-examination. The
Tract Society published accounts of several individuals
who underwent lengthy periods in which they were bowed
down under feelings of guilt and then suddenly found
peace.101 Since regeneration was a work of God and
not of man, it was not easy to determine whether or not
one had received grace. However, the Christian was not
left without signs of grace. Hence the reader was
encouraged to continually examine himself in order to

determine whether or not one's hopes were well grounded.102

221

One remnant of Puritan theology evident in the
Society's publications and in the writings of its sup-
porters was an emphasis upon the means of grace. The
Puritan ministers had continually reminded their con-
gregations that regeneration and salvation were entirely
of God. In the covenant of grace which he had made with
Abraham,God promised man salvation solely on the basis of
faith. However, depraved man could never attain faith
”by mere human volition"; consequently faith and salvation
were both gifts which God gave only to his elect. But,
although God was sovereign, he was not arbitrary in his
dealings with man. In the covenant of grace he had volun—
tarily "consented to be bound and delimited by a specific
program." He had made available certain instruments by
which grace normally came to man. If man utilized these
instruments or means of grace, there was a strong possi-

103 One of

bility that God's grace would flow his way.
these means was religious education in the home. Gardiner
Spring realized that some children of devout parents were
not always pious. He admitted that God reserved "to him-
self the right of withholding his grace from some of the
children of pious parents." But the argument that chil-
dren of such parents were "no more frequently pious than
the children of other men" he rejected as having "no

104

foundation in reality." One writer exhorted his

readers to "consider the ways by which Christ was to

222

enter into a soul, and wait upon him in those ways."
These ways, or means, included attending to "the
instructions of his word, and the other solemnities of
his worship." It also included going "frequently into
the presence of God by prayer" in order to "importunately
entreat the regenerating and sanctifying influences of

105 Reverend Robert Hall admitted that God's

his spirit."
Spirit was a "free spirit" and that it was impossible to
understand how "faith or prayer should have an intrinsic
efficiency in drawing down influences from heaven."
Nevertheless, he assured his readers that if they used
the available "means," they would receive "such measures
of gracious assistance as . . . [were] requisite to sus-
tain and support them in their religious course."106
But the emphasis on means could lead to an exalted
view of human nature. Archibald Alexander warned his
readers that in spite of his exhortation to them to repent
and believe the gospel, they must not consider these acts
meritous of salvation.107
Yet, not withstanding the lip service paid to
God's sovereignty, the over-all emphasis of the Society
was to de-emphasize God's election and to stress man's
ability to either accept or reject salvation. There
were some who tried to harness man's free will to God's

sovereignty. They discounted the argument that the

sinner was not really responsible for his lost state since

223

salvation was only of God. One writer rejected this
argument outright. Another attempted to get around it
by informing his readers as follows: "Thou beginnist
at the wrong end, if thou disputest first about thine
election. Prove thy conversion, and then never doubt

"108 Others, however, were much more

of thine election.
explicit in stressing man's free will. Beecher argued
that there was no inconsistency between man's free will
and God's sovereignty because one of God's decrees was
to create man a free agent and not a machine.109 Not
that these writers eliminated the influence of the Holy
Spirit in regeneration. They merely assumed that man
could resolve to "turn to God" from his "ruined and

lost condition."llo

According to William Nevins, a

sinner could choose "when," "where," and "in what manner"

he would repent but not "whether" he would repent. If

he chose not to repent in this world, he would repent

in the next; only then it would be too late.111
If a man could choose to accept Christ's salvation,

it was only logical to assume that he could also reject

it. One writer stated that the Holy Ghost sought to save

man but was often resisted by the "very beings he . . .

112 Accompanying the emphasis upon "who-

[came] to save."
soever will" was a rejection of the concept of limited
atonement as far as God was concerned. This did not mean

that the Society espoused Universalism; its writers

 

__ —' 1:11 ’ . ‘ "‘ 'r‘ww—‘h‘fii
* LL

 

224

merely stressed the fact that Jesus would "receive all,
and cast out none that . . . [applied] to him earnestly."
It was man, and not God, who limited the efficacy of the
atonement by rejecting it of his own free will.113 Stres-
sing man's free will was in keeping with the American
assumption that the individual had the ability to shape
his own destiny. It could also be interpreted to mean,
however, that the poor and the destitute were responsible
for their misfortunes.

The Tract Society was able to embrace both pre-
destination and free will as long as it de-emphasized
theology and played up the danger of infidelity, deism,
Unitarianism, Universalism, and Roman Catholicism. Unity
was possible as long as evangelicals did not look too
closely at their own back yard. That this facade of
unity merely glossed over some deep cleavages between
members within the Society was evident in the events
leading up to the Presbyterian schism of 1837. Gardiner
Spring and Lyman Beecher were both members of the Tract
Society, yet when the latter applied for membership to
the Third Presbytery of New York in 1833, prior to his
removal to Lane Seminary in Cincinnati, the former

attempted to block it.114

In 1844 James Alexander
accused certain New School Presbyterians of attempting

to stir up Opposition against all "Union Societies"

225

including the Tract Society. Hopefully they could then
set up their own "Publication Board."115
A de-emphasis upon theology and predestination
fit in with the Society's endorsement of revivalism.
This is not to suggest that revivalism was a monopoly
of the ”free-willists"; Jonathan Edwards had promoted
revivals without sacrificing Calvinism. But Edwards was
surprised when revivals broke out as a result of his
preaching. Later revivalists like Beecher and Charles
Finney deliberately set out to create revivals.116 It
should also be pointed out that many of the leading
supporters of the American Tract Society had been
influenced by the Second Great Awakening which swept
through the Republic in the early 1800's.117 When Justin
Edwards taught at the Center School in Westhampton,
Massachusetts, a revival spread through the school and

118 As mentioned

"sighs and sobs were pervading the room."
previously, Peletiah Perit, a vice president of the Tract
Society and a New York merchant, was brought into the
Kingdom of God by the revival which swept through Yale

College in 1802.119

In 1816 and again in 1818, Arthur
Tappan's mother wrote that a "revival of religion" was
evident in Northamptonaand many were asking, "What shall

we do to be saved?"120

Spring later recalled that during
the first quarter of the nineteenth century revivals were

a common occurrence. During these years no month went by

226

where one "could not point to some village, some city,
some seminary of learning, and say: Behold what hath

121 Nor were revivals restricted to the

God wrought!"
first decades of the nineteenth century; in 1857 to 1858
the fires of revivalism were evident once again, espe-
cially in the large urban centers like New York City.122
The value of spiritual awakenings in the war
against religious and political error was evident to
the American Tract Society, and many of its supporters
endorsed and promoted revivals. In Virginia, Bishop
William Meade held "Associations" or protracted meetings

123

lasting up to three days. New York's Evangelical

Churchman, James Milnor, "prayed for God's blessings

"124

through revivals. Arthur Tappan, a supporter of

both Beecher and Finney, was noted for his "firm belief

125 WOrkers from the field

in the evangelical faith."
were pleased to report that there was a correlation
between the distribution of tracts and the outbreak of
revivals.126
It should be emphasized, however, that the support
which many members of the Society were prepared to give
to the cause of revivalism was not without certain
restrictions. Men like Anson Phelps and Arthur Tappan
were among Finney's staunchest supporters,but this was

not true of many of the clergy. The type of spiritual

awakenings which the latter advocated were revivals free

til

 

227

of wild extravagances and anti-clericalism. They pre-
ferred revivals which were under the control of settled
ministers and which were not associated with doctrinal
and social heresies. In short, revivals should be con-
ducive to order. Spring singled out Finney as the "prin-
cipal advocate" of the "new measures" and the "Pelagian
errors." He also condemned the "irregularities of the
West" and "their tendency to justify and encourage those

127

spurious emotions." Charles McIlvaine warned against

using "artificial expedients for arresting and exciting

emotion."128

Edward Kirk, a leading advocate of revivals,
was perplexed that appeals to emotions might be responsible
for some of the disorders accompanying revivals. One lady
"fell to the floor in a swoon" during a visiting clergy-
man's sermon while another man seemingly went "crazy."129
After investigating these cases,Kirk was pleased to dis-
cover that these aberrations were not caused by the
preaching of the gospel. The young lady's system was
"entirely unstrung" because she had been living on a
diet of sugar-candy. The man "had brought his nervous
system into a very abnormal condition by the use of
tobacco." Thus it was an improper diet, and not the
revival, which caused disorders.130
The Society's endorsement of revivals was in

keeping with its increased emphasis on human ability,

inter-denominational unity, and simplicity. The

228

revivalists and the writers of tracts both called for

131 Both stressed the ability

action rather than thought.
of the individual to respond to the gospel's invitation.
Both de-emphasized denominational distinctives and

132 Milnor called for a union

stressed Christian unity.
of all evangelical Christians to combat Romanism, to
bring the gospel to the destitute population, and to

133 Christian unity was also

evangelize the heathen.
seen as a patriotic act. One almanac informed its
readers that "Union is strength." Therefore, each
Christian should "join heart and hand with all the
friends of virtue and religion in efforts to bless this
country, and to save mankind."134
The promoters of the American Tract Society, like
the revivalist, stressed the responsibility of each indi-
vidual for his actions. In his address to the American
Tract Society in 1864, Reverend Robert Lowry contrasted
Christianity with "pagan" religions. Whereas the latter
regarded the human race "in the mass and provided for it
in the mass," Christianity looked after the spiritual
wants of man as they were known "in the case of the
individual." This, he stated, was aptly expressed in the
words, "Every man shall give account of himself to God."
Although it was true that "the nations that forgot God"
would be judged, it was "eminently true that 'the soul

135

that sinneth, it . . . [would] die.'" In his

229

biography of Harlan Page, William Hallock pointed out
that the "Kingdom of Christ" could only be "extended

. . . by the accession of individuals." The Holy Spirit
sanctified men "only as individuals," and it was "as
individuals" that men would "be raised to heaven, or

sink to hell.”l36

The Society did not deny man's inter-
dependence. The writer of the tract, "The Ox Sermon,"
warned his readers that every individual was responsible
for the evils others incurred because of his indifference

137

and selfishness. One writer went so far as to state

that one's moral influence would "have an effect in form—
ing and fixing the character of other moral beings."138
However, these statements were made to encourage the
reader to act circumspectly; they were never made to
absolve him of any guilt. The reader was informed that
his actions influenced others, but as far as he was con-
cerned he was responsible, as an individual, to repent
before God and then go to work for God. This contra-
diction was present in Spring's sermon commemorating the
twenty-fifth anniversary of the American Tract Society.
First he stressed the fact that every individual was
subject to various influences and in turn influenced
others. But then he went on to state that the "first
great and controlling element of influence . . . [was]

139

personal character." Undoubtedly, Spring would have

agreed with the author of the tract, "The Temptations of

230

Young Men," who concluded that although others might
entice a person into sin, yet God held "each individual
personally responsible for his opinions and conduct."140
And yet, in spite of this emphasis upon individualism,
it would seem that the Society's primary concern was not
the individual but the nation. It hoped to "bless this
country, and to save mankind."141
The stress upon individualism, revivalism, and
the acceptance of denominationalism was in keeping with
the Society's endorsement of the disestablishment of
religion. In 1815 Beecher praised the Puritan fore-
fathers for establishing a society where every community
was legally compelled to support a minister of the gospel.
He attributed the decline of religion in America, in
part, to the rise of denominationalism and the attacks

142 But once disestablish-

against established religion.
ment became law, men like Beecher soon forgot their former
opposition and publically supported voluntarism in
religion. Support for separation of church and state

came from various clergymen within the Tract Society.
Bishop Meade maintained that nothing would have hurt the
"cause of true religion" in the Episcopal Church "more
than the continuance of either stipend or glebe."143
According to Schmucker, one advantage that the American

Lutheran Church had over the European Lutheran Churches

was her freedom from that "unhappy union of church and

 

231

state" which had hampered the energies and corrupted the
purity of the church.144

Voluntarism in religion did not mean freedom
from religion or absence from public worship. The writer
of the tract, "True Prophesies," condemned the middle-
class individual who not only lived free from the "cares
of riches and the troubles of poverty" but also free from
God, "seldom bowing his knees before God, and never honor-
ing the Sabbath." He was blest by Providence "with a
kind of independence in this world" and then "foolishly
and wickedly" lived "as if he were independent of God

himself."145

This was insubordination to God, and the
Society was convinced that one who failed to respect
God's institutions would most likely show disrespect
for man's social, political, and economic institutions
as well.

One's duty as a Christian did not end, however,
with attending public worship. The Tract Society called
upon all of its supporters to do good at all times. "To do
good is our duty," stated the New York City Tract Society,
"and this duty we have endeavored to perform wherever

"146

we . . . had the opportunity. Jeremiah Evarts

called the "science of doing good" the "most noble of
sciences," and advocated that the "employment of doing
good . . . be made a part of the regular business of

147

every Christian." In its emphasis upon benevolence

232

the Society was following in the path of such men as
Cotton Mather and Jonathan Edwards who had also exhorted
the elect to "do good."148

One form which benevolence could take was to

support the local minister. In 1821 the Christian Almanac

 

reminded its readers to make all the "manure" they could
and then added, "Forget not your minister. Send him a

present from your dairy."149

The Tract Society was
careful not to depreciate the importance of the local
minister. The call to remember the minister may have
reflected more than merely a fear that the pastor was
suffering economically. It may also have reflected a
fear that his prestige within society was declining. One
writer pointed out that although regeneration was a work
of God, it seldom was accomplished without the use of
human instruments, namely the minister. "O unthankful
world," he complained, "little do you know what you are
doing while you are slighting the messengers of the Lord!
These are they whose business it is (under Christ) to
save you."150
Christian behavior also meant supporting the
benevolent societies which had been established to "bless
this nation and to save mankind." The American Tract
Society awarded the author of the tract, "The True

Believer Bountiful" a $50 prize. In this tract the

writer exhorted Christians to aid the cause of missions

 

 

 

233

and other benevolent institutions.151 The Christian

 

Almanac repeatedly reminded its readers to aid the
Mission, Bible, Education, and Tract Societies. Even
children were called upon to do their part. The Child's
Paper suggested that if a child lacked money he could

give up several hours of play-time and earn money so

that he also might have something to give for missions.152
One reason why Christians should support benevolent
societies, it was argued, was the fact that Christ's
kingdom could not be realized by individual effort
alone; "concert of action" was necessary in order to

"153

"insure general and permanent efficiency. Secondly,

by aiding the benevolent societies the Christians would

be hastening the day of the millennium.154

And finally,
Christians should aid the Societies in their efforts to
convert the world because Christianity was superior to
all other religions.155
Benevolence did not end with supporting the min-
isters and the benevolent societies. One almanac reminded
its readers that "an opportunity to do good . . . [created]
an obligation to do good." Although they lived "in a
great country, in the nineteenth century, in the dawn of
the latter day" much effort was still needed in promoting

the cause of virtue.156

And even though "concert of
action" was necessary, individual activity was also

important. The Child's Paper informed its youthful

 

234

readers that everyone had some "post of duty to occupy."
The writer then continued:

You cannot excuse yourself by saying, 'I am nobody-—
I don't exert any influence'; for there is nobody
so mean or obscure that he has not some influence,
and you have it whether you will or no, and you

are responsible for the consequences of that
influence, whatever it is. Take your stand before
the world then, with a determination to devote your
influence to virtue, to humanity, to God. Let the
children begin life and grow up with these solid
principles of action, to fear and to honor God, to
be true to your conscience, and to do all the good
you can.157

Benevolence could take several forms. One was to
provide material aid to those in need. (But as will be
pointed out in a later chapter, this aid was not to be
given indiscriminately.) The farmer was reminded not to
forget "to send a piece of pork from . . . [his] full

"158

barrel to the destitute widow and orphan. Benevo-

lence also included seeking the conversion of some indi-
vidual. This was evident in the following pledge of the
New York City tract distributors:
Resolved, the grace of God assisting me, to fix my
mind on some one or more individuals for whose
eternal welfare I will by all suitable means attempt
What I Can; and never more to live without having
the salvation of some such individual Resting as
a Burden On My Heart.159
Even though one might lack tact and finesse, it was still
"infinitely better, that a Christian's zeal should err,
if his motive . . . was to do good, than that he should

have none."160

235

Finally, benevolence also meant promoting virtue
in one's neighborhood by seeking out "all the talent and
piety” which might be concealed there. One almanac
warned its readers that they were even "accountable,
to a certain degree" if those in their immediate vicinity

wasted "their time and talents."161

Lyman Beecher called
upon his readers to let their benevolence extend to those
around them. "Become in your neighborhood," he exhorted,
"and throughout the whole extent of your intercourse and
influence, a humble, affectionate, determined reformer."162
Although he was speaking in terms of being temperance
reformers,it also had application for other areas as
well. Obviously the line between "doing good” and
being a busy body had become fine indeed. But then
being a "busy body" or "doing good" could be a powerful
instrument for social control.

It would be erroneous, however, to view benevolence
only as a means of social control. It would also be erro-
neous to view social control solely in terms of self-
interest. Undoubtedly there is much available evidence
to corraborate Clifford Griffin's thesis that the
Christian stewards who organized the benevolent societies
were intent on remaking American society in their own

image.163

But what should also be emphasized is the
fact that social control was not viewed merely as an end

in itself, nor was it promoted entirely for selfish

‘_!—‘d

 

236

purposes. Social control and benevolence were means of
hastening the millennium. As such it bespoke an Optimistic
rather than a pessimistic view of American Society.

The organizers of the Tract Society were disturbed
over changes taking place within the American Society,
but midst these perplexities there was always a ray of
hope. These men had battled against infidelity, Uni;
tarianism and Universalism. They had witnessed the
successful attacks against established religion. They
saw the break-up of established homogeneous communities
due to internal migration and foreign immigration. They
saw "Popery" raise its head in America, both in the
coastal cities and in the West. Yet despite these
desolate scenes,they remained optimistic. In 1836 the
supporters of the Society were informed that although
moral desolations existed in the land, there was cause
for hope; God's Kingdom might come "even in . . . [their]

day."164

It is true that millennial predictions, like
statements of gloom, may have been included to spur the
faithful into more action. But one cannot read the
writings of these men without concluding that many had
caught the millennial fever.

One such person was the Gardiner Spring. When his
daughter was born, he picked up the infant and said that
"it was not improbable that this dear babe would live to

165

see the millennium." One reason for this optimism

237

was the technological progress of the nineteenth century.

In 1850 Spring informed his audience that they were

probably living "in an age bordering on the spiritual

harvest of the world." It was an age "distinguished

by the ardor of its pursuits and its impulsive enthusiasm."

It was the age of steam and the "magnetic wires."166
The Society's first president, 8. V. S. Wilder,

also linked technological progress to the millennium.

He took a deep interest in Robert Fulton's steamboat

and in Samuel Morse's telegraph. Wilder saw the new

improvements in land and sea travel "as being but ful-

fillments of prophecy, when 'valleys should be exalted

and hills made low' to 'prepare the way of the Lord' that

knowledge 0f him might be increased."167

And yet tech-
nology and urbanism could also have a demoralizing effect.
Thus, the American experiment was to utilize industry
and technology in order to create material abundance for
all, but without the blemishes which marred European urban
and industrial centers.168
Another reason for optimism was the advances made
socially, politically, and intellectually. Spring felt
that in his age more was "being done to elevate the
intellectual, social, and moral condition of . . . [their]
race, than at any period since the Savior was born." He
saw evidence of a growing public conscience which would

make another St. Bartholemew's massacre impossible.169

 

238

Nor was Spring the only one who viewed the era optimisti-
cally. "Men are everywhere awakening," the Tract Society
at Boston informed its readers in 1826. "A Spirit of
inquiry and of enterprise is abroad. The mass of active
mind in the world, is vastly greater now, then it was
twenty years ago." One could realistically conclude that
it was possible to "meliorate the condition of man."170
The same men who attacked Universalism and Unitarianism

for over estimating man found no difficulty in relating
man's technological, social, and intellectual advances

to the millennium.

The proliferation of benevolent societies was
interpreted as a sign that the millennial era was near.
Probably no factor caused so much optimism among the
members of the American Tract Society than the increasing
emphasis upon foreign missions and the rapid growth of
the Tract, Bible, Education, and Home Mission Societies.171
In 1828 the executive committee of the American Tract
Society was pleased to announce that the circulation of
scriptures and the instruction in the Sabbath Schools in
their day were "without parallel in preceding years."
This provided "animating indications that God . . . [was]
about to accomplish a great work on earth." Who could
deny that this period was one "of momentous interest."172

In his tract, "The Church Safe," Reverend Daniel A. Clark

pointed to revivals and to the Bible, Tract, and Missionary

239

Societies of his day as causes for rejoicing. "Blessed
be his name," he exulted, "that we were not born a century
sooner. Then we had never seen the dawn of this millen-
nial morning, nor heard the glad tidings which now reach
us by every mail."173 A similar note was evident in
Wilder's address at the first anniversary of the Tract
Society. "Do we not already see the breaking twilight
of that millennial morn?" he asked. He then continued:

Are not the evangelical institutions which

characterize the present age propitious tokens

of its coming? And what a privilege do we who

are here assembled enjoy, being permitted to

bear a subordinate part in its advancement.174
Even as late as 1864 James L. Phillips, a missionary to
India, was still sounding the optimistic note. All that

was needed, he wrote the American Tract Society, was as
military men would express it, one general flank move-
ment, in order to sweep the intervening segments and
bring the whole world to the knowledge of truth."175

The relationship between the rise of benevolent
societies and the dawning of the millennial morning was
evidence of an important factor, namely, that man could
cooperate with God in ushering in the millennium. Norris
Kirk accepted the promises of the Bible that God's Spirit
would be "poured out from on high," and that God was

"coming to renovate the world." But before this day

appeared God proposed to "enlist human agency."176 Had

240

Christians throughout the land been faithful in tract
distribution, could one "not conclude that at this time
the wilderness and the solitary place would have been
glad, and the desert would have been blossoming as the
rose?" someone asked.177 Not that men could frustrate
God's plan. The millennium would come; if one group of
Christians would prove to be unfaithful, God would raise
up others.178
Millennialism also brought with it a call for
concerted action and Christian unity. As mentioned pre-
Viously, the Tract Society was pleased to note that God
had made room for human effort in his millennial plan.
The Christian stewards were also pleased to discover
that the effects of human effort could be maximized if
evangelical Protestants would unite, work in harmony,
and support the benevolent societies. The millennial
fever thus worked against religious sectarianism and
political sectionalism. When the French Protestants
disagreed with some aspects of the Americans' foreign
mission policy, S. V. S. Wilder wrote them and called
for harmonious action so that the cause of "evangelical
truth" would be furthered in France. Then its influence
would be felt in the present and succeeding generations
and its "beneficial effects" would be "recognized and
179

appreciated amid the splendors of millennial glory."

The Tract Society's greatest problem, however, was not

 

 

241

maintaining unity between American and European Protestants.
They faced a more immediate problem of maintaining unity
among Americans. Doctrinal issues could disrupt Christian
solidarity. The Republic's vast territory and diverse
and mobile population posed a constant threat to unity.
Above all, there was slavery which in the end split not
only the nation but also the American Tract Society. In
slavery the Society faced an insoluable dilemma. It had
taught its adherants that Christians must learn the
science of "doing good" in order to hasten the millennium.
But doing good also implied erradicating sin whenever
possible. Yet the Society had also emphasized the need
for Christian unity and "concerted action" in order that
the millennium could soon be realized. If the Society
attacked slavery as a sin, they would destroy both the
national and evangelical union. But if they retained
the union by maintaining a silence on slavery,were they
not negligent in erradicating sin?180
However, it would be erroneous to conclude that
the Society's efforts had been a total failure. The
American Tract Society had been organized in order to
combat religious infidelity, Unitarianism, and Uni-
versalism. Shortly thereafter it also felt itself
called to enter into a war against Romanism. By the
mid-nineteenth century it was obvious that evangelical

Protestantism would survive.

242

In its attack against religious error the Society
was forced to define its religious stance. It often
resorted to a simplistic Biblicism; the Society's doc-
trines were merely defined or stated and rarely examined.
Consequently, the Society made little contribution to
the American theological scene. Although it prided
itself in being in the tradition of the Reformers and
Puritan theologians, the Tract Society did make some
concessions to the American notion that each individual
could shape his own destiny. Like many of the revivalists,
the Tract Society de-emphasized predestination; "whosoever
will" replaced election.

To label the Society as being non-theological
would not have alarmed many of its supporters. It
stressed activism rather than reflection. The Society
emphasized the need for every Christian to master the
science of doing good. Benevolence served as a useful
tool for social control. But benevolence also had a
more radical aspect, namely,to erradicate the ills of
society and to prepare the nation for the millennium.
Both the millennium and benevolence demanded concerted
action. And yet, when individuals attempted to do good
and hasten the millennium by eradicating slavery, they

put both Christian and national unity in jeopardy.

FOOTNOTES --CHAPTER IV

lLyman Beecher, A Reformation of Morals Practicable
and Indispensable: A Sermon Delivered at New Haven on the
EveningofOctoBer 12,—1812”TAndover: Flagg and Gould]
1814), p. 22. (Heréinafter cited as Beecher, A Reformation
of Morals.)

 

 

 

 

 

21bid., p. 15.

31bid., p. 16.

4Sidney E. Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor, 1786-
1858: A Connecticut Liberal (Chicago: University of—
Chicago Press, 1942), pp. 99-100. (Hereinafter cited as
Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor.)

 

 

5Annual Report, N.Y., 1837, p. 11.

 

6Annual Report, N.Y.! 1843, p. 116.

 

7Annual Report, N.Y., 1845, p. 81.

 

8Lyman Beecher, A Sermon Delivered at Wolcott,
Sept, 21, 1814, at thejInstallation of the Rev. John
Ke s . . . (Andover: Flagg and Gould, 1815), pp. 8-9.
Hereinafter cited as Beecher, A Sermon Delivered at W01-
cott.)

 

 

9Philander Chase, Bishop Chase's Reminiscences:
An Autobiography (2 vols.; Boston: James B. Dow, TBZB),
I, 108 (hereinafter cited as Chase, Reminiscences). Bishop
Chase was elected as a vice president OfHEhe American Tract
Society in 1828. On the rise of deism in Vermont see
David M. Ludlum, Social Ferment in Vermont, 1791-1850 (New
York: Columbia University Press, l§39), pp. 26-31.

 

 

 

243

244

10Annual Report, N.Y., 1846, p. 28.

11James W. Alexander, The Life of Archibald Alex-
ander, First Professor in the Theological Seminary at
Princeton,_New Jersey_(New York: Charles Scribner, 1856),
p. 177. (Hereinafter cited as Alexander, A. Alexander.)

12William Meade, Old Churches, Ministers and Fami-
liesjof Virginia (2 vols.; Philadelphia: J. B. Lippencott
and Co., 1861), I, 29 (hereinafter cited as Meade, Old
Churches). On the appeal of deism to the Southern EEIs-
tocracy see Clement Eaton, Freedom of Thought in the Old
South (New York: Peter Smith, 1951), pp. 12-15 (herein-
after cited as Eaton, Freedom of Thought in the Old South).
On the popularity of infidelity—in the colleges see Thomas
Jefferson Wertenbaker, Princeton, 1746-1896 (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1946), p. 136 (hereinafter
cited as Wertenbaker, Princeton); Albert Post, Popular
Freethought in America, 1825-56 (New York: Colfifihia
University—Press, 1943), p. 392 (hereinafter cited as
Post, Popular Freethought in Am.); Barbara M. Cross, ed.,
The Autobiography of Lyman Beecher (2 vols.; Cambridge:
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1961), I, 17
(hereinafter cited as Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13William Carus, ed., Memorials of the Right Rev-
erend Charles Pettit McIlvaine D.D., D.L.C., Late BIsfiop
nghio‘in the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United
States (London: Elliott StoCk, 1882), p. 25. (Hereinafter
cited as Carus, ed., Memorials of . . . McIlvaine.)

 

14Annual Report, N.Y., 1853, pp. 79-80.

 

15Annual Report, N.Y., 1841, p. 12.

16Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, p. 24.

 

17Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, p. 26.

 

18James King Morse, Jedidiah Morse: A Cham ion
9f New En land Orthodox (New York: Columbia Univer31ty
Press, 19 9), p. SI. Hereinafter cited as Morse,
Jedidiah Morse.)

 

 

245

19Lyman Beecher, Beecher's Works, Vol. I: Lectures
9n Political Atheism and Kindred Subjects, Together with
Six Sermons on Intemperance DediEated to the Wofkingmen of
the United States’TBoston: thn P. Jewitt and Co., 1852),
91, 96-99 (hereihafter cited as Beecher, Lect. on Pol.
Atheism). A similar argument was made by—Piesident Timothy
Dwight. He maintained that Deism was first brought to
America by the English soldiers during the Seven Years War
(1756-1763) and after 1784 was brought to America by the
French (see Timothy Dwight, Travels in New En land and New
York, IV [New Haven: S. Converse Printer, 1832l, 364-7I,
373-81 [hereinafter cited as Dwight, Travelsl).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 111.

 

21Post, Popular Freethought in Am., pp. 70, 75-76,

121; Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, I, xix; Dwight, Travels,
IV, 374. It shouidibe pointed out, however, that in the
South deism appealed more to the upper than to the lower
class (see Eaton, Freedom of Thogght in the Old South,
pp. 12-15).

 

 

 

22Dwight, Travels, IV, 383-87.

23Beecher, Lect. on Pol. Atheism, p. 133; G. Adolf
Koch, Republican Religion: The American Revolution and
the Cult of Reason (Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1964),
p. 282 (hereinafter cited as Koch, Republican Religion);
Dixon Ryan Fox, "The Protestant Counter-Reformatidn in
America," New York History, XVI (1935), 19-35 (hereinafter
cited as Fox, "The Prot. Counter-Ref.").

 

 

 

 

 

24Russel B. Nye, The Cultural Life of the New
Nation, 1776-1830, Harper—Torchbooks (New York: Harper
and Row, Pub., 1960), p. 214 (hereinafter cited as Nye,
The Cultural Life of the New Nation); Richard J. Purcell,
CdnnectiCut in Transitidn: 1775-1818 (Middletown, Conn.:
WESleyan University Press, 19I9Y, p. 24 (hereinafter
cited as Purcell, Conn. in Transition).

 

 

 

 

 

25"The Infidel Reclaimed," Tracts, X, No. 351: P- 3-

26Joseph Haroutunian, Piet versus Morglism: The
Passing of the New En land Theo ogy' Hamden, Conn.: ArEhon
Books,I964), pp.’l3 - 3 (hereinafter cited as Haroutunian,
Piety versus Moralism); Clifton E. Olmstead, Religion in
AmeriCa, Past andiPresent (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:

 

 

 

 

 

246

Prentice-Hall, Inc: ,1961), p. 76 (hereinafter cited as
Olmstead, Religion in America); Nye, The Cultural Life of
the New Nation, pp. 226+27T+

 

27John S. Stone, Memoir of the Life of James Milnor,
D.D., Late Rector of St. GeorgeTs Churéh, New YorkhTNew
York: American Tract Society ,1848), p. 92. (Hereinafter
cited as Stone, Milnor.)

 

 

28Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 59.

 

29Annual Report, N.Y., 1843, p. 44.

 

30Annual Report, N.Y., 1826, p. 25.

 

31Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 12; Annual Repprt,
N.Y., 1852, p. 12.

 

 

 

32Frank Hugh Foster, A Genetic History of the New
En land Theolo (New York: Russeii ahd"Russeil ihc.,
I963), pp. 274-75, 277 (hereinafter cited as Foster, Gene-
tic Hist. of the New Eng. Theo.). According to Foster one
of the first Unitarian centers in New England was King's
Chapel in Boston under the Unitarian minister, Reverend
James Freeman. When Bishop Samuel Seabury of Connecticut
refused to ordain Freeman because of his theological views,
the latter was ordained by his congregation. See also
Conrad Wright, The Beginnings of Unitarianism in America
(Boston: Star King Press, 1955), pp. 5-6, 57+58 (herein-
after cited as wright, Unit. in Am). Wright stresses the
importance of the Great Awakening to New England theology
since it divided the ministers and theologians into two
camps, Liberals and Evangelicals. The battle between the
Unitarians and the Orthodox is also discussed in Mead,
Nathaniel William Taylor, pp. 128-57, 171-210.

 

 

 

 

33Wright, Unit. in Am., p. 251.

 

34Timothy Dwight, A Discourse on Some Events of
the Last Century (New Haven,71801), p. 12, cited in
Haroutunian, Pietyvs. Moralism, p. 179.

 

 

35Two decades later Beecher was still accusing
the Unitarians of hiding their true identity until they
had captured a University and about 100 churches (see
Lyman Beecher, The GosPel According to St. Paul: A Sermon
Delivered Sept._I7, 1828, at the InstallatiOn of the Rev.

247

Bennett Tyler, D.D. as Pastor of the Second Congregational

Church, in PgrtIandIMaine [Boston: T. R. Marvin, 1829],

p. 43; see also Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor, pp. 128-
57).

 

36Talbot W. Chambers, Memoir of the Life and Char-
acter of the Late Hon. Theodore Freiinghuysepi L.L.D. New
York: Harper and Bros., 1863), p. 164 (hereinafter cited
as Sgimbers, Theo. Frelinghuysen); Wright, Unit. In Am.,
p. .

 

 

 

37wright, Unit. in Am., p. 184.

 

38Haroutunian, Pietyvs. Moralism, p. 200.

 

39Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor, pp. 177-79.

40Most tracts were not addressed to Unitarians
but rather to Universalists. Two examples of tracts which
could be construed as being anti-Unitarian rather than anti-
Universalist were "More than One Hundred Arguments for the
Supreme Divinity of Christ," Tracts, VI, No. 214, and
"Napoleon's Argument for the DlVlnity of Christ," Tracts,
XII, No. 477.

 

41Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor, pp. 129-30,
133-34, 140-41, l7I-76; Cross, ed}, Lyman Beecher, I,
324-35, 411-18; II, 33-38, 64-65, 91-98.

42Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, p. 24.

 

43Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 48.

44Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, II, 179-87, 199-206.

 

45The Christian Almanac was published by the Ameri-
can Tract SOCietY at Boston and was printed for circulation
in New England.

46The Christian Almanac, 1834, p. 2. See also
Milnor's letter to the fiiShop of CaIcutta, July 2, 1842.
He wrote: "Romanism, however, among us is making rapid
strides. . . . When I came to my present charge in 1816,
there were but two Roman Catholic Churches in New York.
Now there are many, and several in a course of erection"
(see Stone, Milnor, p. 560).

248

47Charles I. Foster, An Errand of Mercy: The Evan-
gelical United Front, 1790-1837HTChapel Hill: University
of’North Carolina Press, 1960), pp. 64-66 (hereinafter
cited as Foster, Errand of Mercy). Foster maintains that
during the early 1830's only 5 per cent of the propaganda
issued by the benevolent societies stressed the anti-
Catholic theme. In 1836 the Tract Society issued its
first anti-Catholic volume, William Nevins' Thoughts on
Popery (see Annual Report, N.Y., 1836, p. l7)f' On the
reaction of the ChriStian stewards to the Roman Catholic
immigrant see also John R. Bodo, The Protestant Clergy and
Public Issues, 1812-1848 (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1954), pp. 61—84i(hereinafter cited as Bodo, Prot.
Clergy and Public Issues).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

48Stone, Milnor, pp. 616-22.

49Ray Allen Billington, The Protestant Crusade,
1800-60: A Study of the Origins of American Nativism,
Quadfangie PaperbaCk (ChiCago: Quadrangle Books, 1938),
pp. 72-75. Beecher later denied that his sermons had
instigated the riot (see Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, II,
251-53).

 

 

 

50Leo Hershkowitz, "The Native American Democratic
Association in New York City, 1835-1836," The New York
Historical Society Quarterly, XLVI (January, 1962), 4I459
(hereinafter citedias Hersthwitz, "The Native Am. Dem.
Assoc. in N.Y. City"); Clifford S. Griffin, Their Brothers'
Keepers: Moral Stewardship in the United States, 1800-
1865 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1960),

pp. 214-18 (hereinafter cited as Griffin, Their Brothers'
Keepers).

 

 

 

 

 

51Annual Report, N.Y., 1845, p. 137.

 

52Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 10.

 

53Family Almanac, 1850, p. 47.

 

54John Hall, ed., Forty Years' Familiar Letters of
James W. Alexander, D.D., Contaihing with the Notes, A
Memoir of His Life (2 vols.) New York: ”Charles SEribher,
, I, see also ibid., II, 17 [hereinafter cited
as Hall, ed., Forty Yearsl).

 

249

55Annual Report, N.Y., 1852, p. 55. Reverend Hugh

Smith Carpenter, Pastor of the Canal Street Presbyterian
Church, stated that it was "better to take the Papist by
the hand, and bring him to Jesus, than to ridicule the

poor, old Pope, or dissect the tenderest archbishop (see
Annual Report, N.Y. CityeTract Society, 1850, pp. 12-13).

6Thomas Hartwell Horne, "Romanism Contradictory
to the Bible," Tracts, VIII, No. 285; William Nevins,
Thoughts on Popery (New York: American Tract Society,
n.d.), pp. 7-17, 21-29, 42-56, 152-58 (hereinafter cited
as Nevins, Thoughts on POpery); Gardiner Spring, The Con-
trast Between Good and Bad Men, Illustrated by the Biog-
raphyand Truths of’the BibIe (2 voIs.; New York: M. W.
Wbod, 1855), II,i245'Thereinafter cited as Spring, Con-
trast); Apnual Report, N.Y., 1837, p. 127. '_——

57Annual Report, Boston, 1843, pp. 50-51; Nevins,

Thoughts on POpery, p. 132;_“Twenty-two Plain Reasons for
not Being a Roman Catholic," Tracts, II, No. 62.

58Annual Report, N.Y., 1846, p. 75.

59Annual Report, N.Y., 1831, pp. 43-44; Spring,

Contrast, II, 248, 279. For similar view see Robert
Baird, The Christian Retrospect and Register: A Summary
of the Scientific, Moral, and Religious Progress of the
First Half of the Nineteenth Century (New York: M. W.
Dodd, 1851), p. 199 (hereinafter cited as Baird, Christian
Retrospect and Register); Rev. Nathan S. S. Beeman,
"Collegiate and Theological Education in the West,"
National Preacher, XXI (March, 1847), 64-65 (Beeman was

a director fior life in the American Tract Society).

6OSpring, Contrast, p. 280.

 

61"Twenty-two Reasons for not Being a Roman Cath-
olic," Tracts, II, No. 62; "The Conversion of Peter Bays-
siere From the Roman Church to the Protestant Faith: In
a Letter to His Children," Tracts, VII, No. 251; Annual
Report, N.Y., 1845, pp. 15-I6.

62"Zwingle, The Swiss Reformer," Tracts, VII,
No. 248; J. H. Merle, D. 'Aubigne, History of the Refor-
mation; John M. Cramp, The Reformation in Europe; Annual
Report, N.Y., 1845, pp.’15, 4S.

 

250

63Annual Report, N.Y., 1845, p. 16; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1860, p. 22.

 

 

 

64Annual Report, N.Y., 1843, pp. 61-62, 64.

 

6SChase, Reminiscences, I, 108.

 

66Annual Report, N.Y., 1844, p. 50.

 

67Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 101.

 

68Annual Report, N.Y., 1851, p. 55; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1856' p. 39.

 

 

 

69Report from the Society's Agent in Louisiana and
Mississippi in Annual Repert, N.Y., 1830, p. 38.

 

7OWhitnev R. Cross, The Burned-over District: The
Social and Intellectual History of Enthusiastic Religion in
Western New York, 1800—50 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Uni-
versity Press, 1950), p. 76. (Hereinafter cited as Cross,
The Burned-over District.)

 

 

71Sidney Mead, "Denominationalism: The Shape of
Protestantism in America," Church History, XXIII (Decem-
ber, 1954), 295-96. (Hereinafter cited as Mead, "Denom-
inationalism.")

 

72Samuel Schmucker, The American Lutheran Church,
Historically, Doctrinally, and Practically Delineated in
SeveraI Occasional DiScourses (Philadelphia: E. W. Mil-
Ier, 1852), pp. 60-61. (Hereinafter cited as Schmucker,
Am. Luth. Church.) '

 

 

 

73"A Scripture Help," Tracts, VI, No. 201, p. 22.

74William A. Hallock, 'LighE and Love': A Sketch
of the Life and Labors of the Rev. Justin EdWards, D.D.,
phe Evangelical Pastor; The Advocate of Temperance,The
Sabbath, and the Bible (New York: American Tract Society,
, pp. , - . (Hereinafter cited as Hallock,
Justin Edwards.)

 

 

 

 

75The Tractarian Movement originated in England.
It was an attempt by some members of the Church of England
to establish closer ties with the Roman Catholic Church.

251

76Charles P. McIlvaine, "Sermon CCCVIII: By the
Rt. Rev. Charles P. McIlvaine, D.D., Bishop of the Dioceses
of Ohio. Delivered before the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity,
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of
America, at the Consecration of the Rev. Alfred Lee, D.D.,
To the Episcopate of the Diocese of Delaware, in St. Paul's
Chapel, New York, on Tuesday, October 12, A.D., 1841,"
National Preacher, XVI (February, 1842), 28-30.

 

77Lyman Beecher, The Bible, A Code of Laws: A

Sermon, Delivered in Park Street Church, Boston, Sept. 3,
1817 (Andover: Flagg and Gould, 1818), p. 25.

 

 

78"More than One Hundred Scriptural and Incontro-
vertible Arguments for Believing in the Supreme Divinity
of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ," Tracts, VI, No. 214.
Haroutunian points out that both the Orthodox and the Uni-
tarians claimed that their theology was rational. But the
former stressed first the authority of the Bible and then
tried to prove that it was rational to believe their "now
superrational doctrines" (see Haroutunian, Piety vs.
Moralism, pp. 201-04).

 

 

79"Address of the Executive Committee of the Amer-
ican Tract Society to the Christian Public," Tracts, I,
No. l, p. 3.

80Annual Repert, N.Y., 1826, p. 10. Robert Baird,
a nineteenthcentury Presbyterian, described the key doc-
trines of the evangelical churches in similar terms. He
included a belief in the Trinity, man's "depravity, guilt,
condemnation," the "all sufficient and only atonement" by
Christ who was both God and man, the "regeneration by the
Holy Ghost," the final judgment of all including eternal
"misery" for the wicked and eternal "blessedness" for the
righteous, and the importance of living an upright moral
life. Robert Baird, Religion in America; or an Account
of the Origin, Progress, Relation to the State, and
Present Condition of the EvangeliEal ChurEhes in the
United States: with Notices ofphe UneyepgelicaIDenom-
inations (New York: Harper and’Bros., 1844), p. 184 ‘
(hereinafter cited as Baird, Relig. in Am.).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

81"Address of the Executive Committee of the Amer-
ican Tract Society to the Christian Public," Tracts, I,
No. 1' p. 2.

82Ibid., p. 2.

252

83Perry Miller, The Life of the Mind in America,
fpom the Revolution to the Civil War (New YorEt Harcourt
Brace and WOrld, Inc., 1965), p. 93 (hereinafter cited as
Miller, The Life of the Mind in Am.). On the anti-
intellectual tendencies evident in Jacksonian America
see Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American
Life (New York: Alfred A. KnoffT'Inc., 1963), pp. 8I¥106,
145-71. In its stress in simplicity the Tract Society was
following a dominant trend in American preaching (see
Baird, Relig. in Am., p. 192).

 

 

 

 

 

84Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 36; Gardiner
Spring, Personal ReminiScences of the Life and Times of
Gardiner Spring, Pastor of the Brick Presbyterian Church,
in the City of New York (2 vols.; New York: Charles Scrib-
ner and Co., 1866), I, 109 (hereinafter cited as Spring,
Pers. Rem.).

 

 

85Richard Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nine-
teenth Century; William E. Dodge (New York: Columhia
University Press, 1954), p. 194 (hereinafter cited as
Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth Cent.). Another
example was Reverend Edward Kirk. According to his biog-
rapher, by 1831 Kirk had probably become "unconscious of any
conflict between God's eternal and sovereign providence and
the freedom of responsible creatures, or between the
ability of sinful men to repent and their dependence on
God to give them repentence" (see David O. Mears, Life of
Edward Norris Kirk, D.D. [Boston: Lockwood Brooks and
Co., 1877], p. 333 [hereinafter cited as Mears, Kirkl).

 

 

 

 

86Annual Report, N.Y., 1829, p. 32.

 

87Charles R. Keller, The SecondEpeat Awakenin in
Connecticut (New Haven: Yale UhiVersity Press, I942),
p. 224T' (Hereinafter cited as Keller, Sec. Great
Aw. in Conn.)

 

 

88"Danger of Delay," Tracts, III, No. 80, pp. 10-
11; ”The Misery of the Lost," Tracts, II, No. 51, pp. 5-10;
"It is the Last Time," Tracts, IX, No. 338; "Today,"
Tracts, III, No. 76.

89"The Young Cottager," Tracts, III, No. 79. See
also "The Village Funeral," Tracts, I, No. 36; "The Dairy-
man's Daughter," Tracts, I, No. 9; "Eliza Cunningham,"
Tracts, III, No. 83.

253

90"The Spirit Grieved: A Narrative of Facts,"
Tracts, X, No. 380; "Convictions Stifled: A Narrative of
Facts," Tracts, X, No. 384; "Examine Your Hopes for Eter-
nity," Tracts, V, No. 158; Eliakim Phelps, "Lydia Sturde-
vant; or the Fatal Resolution: An Authentic Narrative,"
Tracts, VIII, No. 284.

91"Don't Put it Off," Tracts, X, NO- 368: P- 2-

92"A Dying Mother's Counsel to Her Only Son,"
Tracts, II, No. 52.

93Annual Report, N.Y., 1836, pp. 7—8.

 

94Tracts, IV, No. 144, pp. 2-3.

95Evangelical Family Library (New York: American
Tract Society, n.d.i, III, Part 1, 52.

 

96The Consistent Calvinists or Hopkinsians con-
tinually emphasized man's depravity "which rendered him
unable even to desire to be saved. . . ." (see Mead,
Nathaniel William Taylor, pp. 118-19).

97John Flavel, "A Gift for Mourners," Tracts, II,
No. 59, pp. 39-40.

98"The Inquiring--Meetingp" TraCtSr XI! NO' 420'
pp. 12, 17.

99Somewhat similar to "The Inquiring Meeting" was
the tract, "The Moral Man Tried: In Three Diologues."
The penitent stated that he felt unworthy of Christ's
acceptance, but, nevertheless, he was determined to go to
Christ. If he should "perish," it would be "at the foot
of the cross calling for mercy." The minister did not
promise him that he would be accepted. Instead he exhorted
the penitent to let nothing divert his attention from the
things of God" (see Tracts, I, No. 19, p. 12). Another
example of this view was Archibald Alexander's tract, "Sin-
ners Welcome to come to Jesus Christ." He invited sinners
to "come to Jesus" while still holding on to his concept
of God's sovereignty. If one should ask how he was one
of the elect, Alexander responded that the best evidence
of one's election was his willingness to come. He pointed
out that "often, however, when Christ . . . sent forth his

254

gracious invitation to believe, he . . . enabled the soul
by the energy of his Spirit accompanying the call to come
and receive grace." But "often" was as far as Alexander
could go; he could not say "always" (see Tracts, XI,

No. 462, pp. 8-9, 14-15).

100Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor, pp. 16-17;
Foster, Genetic History of the New Eng. Theo., pp. 155-57.

101"The Life of Colonel James Gardiner," Tracts,
IV, No. 135, pp. 11—12; "Conversion of Abigail Hutchinson,"
Tracts, III, No. 175; "Conversion of Mrs. Eleanor Emerson:
From an Account Written by Herself," Tracts, IV, No. 133,
pp. 8—12.

102Gardiner Spring, Essays on the Distinguishipg
Tracts of Christian Character (New York: Jonathon Leavitt,
1829), pp. 38-40 (hereinafter cited as Spring, Essays);
"The Cottagers Wife," Tracts, II, No. 63; James Bennett,
Religion of the Closet," Tracts, II, No. 69, p. S.

 

103Edmund S. Morgan, The Puritan Family: Religion
and Domestic Relations in Seventeenth Centupy New England’
(New York: Harper and Row, 1966i, pp. 3-4, 87-108;
Edmund S. Morgan, The Puritan Dilemma: The Stogy of
John Winthrop (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1958),
p. 136; Perry Miller, "The Marrow of Puritan Divinity,"
in Errand into the Wilderness (New York: Harper and Row,
1964i} pp. 53-56, 60-68; Perry Miller, The New England
Mind: The Seventeenth Century (Boston: Beacon Press,
1939), I, 280-99.

 

 

 

 

 

 

104Gardiner Spring, Hints to Parents: A Sermon
on the Religious Education of ChiIdren (New York: Jona-
than Leavitt, 1833), pp. 50-52.

105Philip Doddridge, "Christ Formed in the Soul,
The Only Foundation of Hope for Eternity, Addressed to
the Young," Tracts, V, No. 149, p. 19.

106Robert Hall, "The Work of the Holy Spirit,"
Tracts, I, No. 2, p. 9. Other tracts which stressed the
use of means were: Daniel Tyerman, "The Life and Con-
version of the Dairyman," Tracts, III, No. 89, p. 6; "The
New Birth," Tracts, III, No. 98, pp. 7-9 (see also Annual
Reports, N.Y., 1840, p. 137; Joseph Alleine, An Alarm to
Unconverted Sinners, The Evangelical Family Library [New
York: American Tract Society, n.d.], III, Part 2, pp. 14-
15 [hereinafter cited as Alleine, Alarml).

 

 

255

107"The Importance of Salvation," Tracts, VI,
No. 215, pp. 6, 8. See also "Eliza, the Chippeway Indian,"
Tracts, VIII, No. 293, p. 5. Eliza, a converted Indian
mother, realized that her prayers did not, in themselves,
merit Christ's pity on her soul.

108"To the Neglector of Religion," Tracts, X,

No. 79, p. 5. See also Alleine, Alarm, pp. 18-19; "Aton-
ing Blood,” Tracts, X, No. 361, p. 10.

 

109Beecher, Lect. on Pol. Atheism, pp. 291-93.

 

110The Christian Almanac, 1835, p. 12.

 

111William Nevins, "The Great Alternative;
Repentance or Perdition," Tracts, IX, No. 303, pp. 8-9.

112"The Holy Ghost Resisted," Tracts, XI, No. 445,
p. 17. A similar idea is also expressed in Beecher, Lect.
on Pol. Atheism, pp. 247-51; J. Alleine, "Pause and
Think, Am I a Christian," Tracts, IV, No. 106, p. 28;
"Salvation to the Uttermost," Tracts, XII, No. 518, p. 9.

 

113"The Barren Fig Tree," Tracts, V, No. 148, p. 4.
Other tracts which suggested that salvation was available
for all who would accept it were: "Sixteen Short Sermons,
Tracts, II, No. 72, pp. 10-12; "The Way to be Saved,"
Tracts, V, No. 179, pp. 7-8; Charles P. McIlvaine, "The
Worth of the Soul," Tracts, VI, No. 186, p. 8; William
Nevins, "What Have I Done?" Tracts, VIII, No. 279, pp. 10-
12; "The Sinner's Friend," Tracts, IX, No. 349, p. 5;
"What is it to Believe on Christ?" Tracts, X, No. 357,
p. 4; "The Sinner and the Saviour," Tracts, XI, No. 452,
pp. 3-4; "Why Are You Not a Christian?" Tracts, XII,
No. 481, p. 1; "Why Will You Die?" Tracts, XII, No. 496,
p. 3.

114Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, II, 213; William G.
McLoughlin, Modern Revivalism: Charles Grandison Finney
to Billy Graham (New York: Ronald Press, 1959), pp. 81-

 

 

115Hall, ed., Forty Years, II, 7.

116Mead, Nathaniel William Taylor, p. 101 (see
also ibid., pp. 48, 99).

256

117On the impact of the Second Great Awakening
see Cross, The Burned-Over District, pp. 9-13; Keller,

Sec. Great Aw. in Conn., passim.

 

118Hallock, Justin Edwards, pp. 12-13.

 

119Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, pp. 15-16. Revivals
in Colleges—Became a common phenomenon. On the revival
at Princeton in 1815-1816 see Wertenbaker, Princeton,
pp. 154, 165-66. On the revival at Williams College see
Calvin Durfee, Williams Biogpaphical Annals: With an
Introduction inEEV° Irenaeus Prihce, D.D. (Boston: Lee
and Shepherd, 1871), p.I8.

 

 

 

 

120[Lewis Tappan], Memoir of Mrs. Sarah Teppan:
Taken in Part from the Home MissihnaryMagazine, of Novem-
berL1828, And Printed for Distribution Among Her Descen-
dants (New York: West and Trow, 1834), pp. 91, 93. (Here-
inafter cited as Memoir of Mrs. Sarah Tappan.)

 

 

 

 

121Spring, Pers. Rem., I, 161.

 

1220n the revivals of 1857 to 1858 see William c.
Conant, Narratives of Remarkable Conversions and Revival
Incidents . . . (New York: Derby and Jackson, 1858),
pp. 387, 410, 423, 425-26 (hereinafter cited as Conant,
Narratives); Hall, ed., Fortinears, II, 227; Timothy L.
Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform in Mid-Nineteenth
Century America (New York: Abingdon Press, 1957), passim
(hereinafter cited as Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform).

 

 

 

 

 

 

123Raymond W. Albright, A History of the Protestant
Episcopal Church (New York: Macmillan Co., 1964), p. 188;
John Johns, A Memoir of the Life of the Right Rey; William
Meade, D.D. . . . (Baitimore: Innes and Co., 1867), p. 83.

 

 

124Stone, Milnor, p. 207.

125Lewis Tappan, TheiLife of_Arthur Tappan (New
York: Hurd and Houghton, 1870), p. 388. (Hereinafter
cited as Tappan, Arthur Tappan.)

 

126Annual Repert, N.Y., 1841, p. 118; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1865, p. 89. Durin91857 and(1858 William E. Do ge
and Reverend Norton, a Tract Missionary in New York City's

Seventeenth Ward, were both active supporters of the revi-
vals (see Conant, Narratives, pp. 387, 401-02, 425-26).

 

 

 

257

 

 

 

127Spring, Pers. Rem., I, 221, 237.
128 . .
Carus, ed., Memorials of . . . McIlvaine, p. 93.
129Mears, Kirk, pp. 76-77.
1”mm.
131

Sidney Mead points out that the orthodox turned
their backs on the Enlightenment. Protestantism was
"moulded primarily by pietistic revivalism and scholastic
orthodoxy." The former emphasized the subjective exper-
ience, the latter defined the "content of theology." (In
the American Tract Society one finds a merging of these
two streams.) However, during this same period the evan-
gelical Protestants came to terms with the "emerging
capitalistic and individualistic ideals of the nineteenth
century. Its values were modern, but many of its beliefs
were medieval (see Mead, "Denominationalism," pp. 311-13).

132On the usefulness of revivals to promote evan-
gelical unity see Miller, The Life of the Mind in Am.,
pp. 43—48.

133Stone, Milnor, p. 621.

134The Christian Almanac, 1831, p. 3 (see also
Annual Report, N.Y.L1845, pp. 34-35).

 

 

135Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, p. 177.

 

136William A. Hallock, Memoir of Harlan Page, or
the Power of Prayer and Personal Effort for Souls of Indi-
viduals (New York: American Tract Society, 1835), pp. 9-
IO. (Hereinafter cited as Hallock, Harlan Page.)

 

137Tracts, XII, No. 475, p. 1. See also Gardiner
Spring, Influence: A Quarter-Century Sermon, Preached in
Behalf of the American Tract Society, in the Reformed
Dutch Church, Lafeyette Place, NeyYork, Mey 5, 1850 (New
York: American Tract Society, 1850), pp. 3-9 (hereinafter
cited as Spring, Influence).

 

138"Joy in Heaven over the Penitent," TractS. V:
NO. 178, p. 70

258

139Spring, Influence, pp. 9-10.

 

140Tracts, X, No. 401, p. 7.

141The Christian Almanac, 1831, p. 3.

 

142Beecher, A Sermon Delivered at Wolcott, p. 4.

According to Charles Keller, Beecher's public opposition
to disestablishment was the exception for Connecticut's
clergymen, and not the norm (see Keller, Sec. Great Aw.
in Conn., pp. 57-65). One reason for clefical opposition
to disestablishment was the identification of attacks on
established religion with infidelity (see Mead, Nathaniel
William Taylor, p. 44).

 

 

 

143Meade, Old Churches, I, 49.

 

144Schmucker, Am. Luth. Church, p. 235. Milnor
also endorsed the separation of church and state (see
James Milnor, Sermon, Occasioned by the Death of His
Excellency DeWitt Clinton, Late Governor of the State
eerew York. Preached in St. GeorgeTs Church, N.Y., on
Sunday,_Februapy 24, 1828 [New York: Gray and Bunce,
I828T, p. 22; Stone, Milnor, p. 436).

 

 

 

 

 

145Tracts, IV, No. 108, pp. 1-2.

146Annual ReportL N.Y., City Tract Society, 1838,

p. 11.

147Ebenezer Carter Tracy, Memeir of the Life of
Jeremiah Evarts, Esg_. . . (Boston: Crocker and Brewster,

IT“ 5 , pp. 641-65.

148Alan Heimart, Religion and the American Mind:
From the Great Awakening to the American Revolution (Cam-
bridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), pp. 311-15.

 

 

 

 

149The Christian Almanac, Sept., 1831.

 

150Alleine, Alarm, pp. 16-17.

151Tracts, III, No. 101.

 

 

259

152The Christian Almanac, April, 1821, and ibid.,
Oct. 1821; The Childe Paper, IV (June, 1855), p. 22.

 

 

153Annual Report, N.Y., 1831, p. 13.

 

154Ebenezer Porter, "Great Effects from Little

Causes," Tracts, III, No. 74, p. 14; John Harris, "Chris-
tian Liberality EXplained and Enforced," Tracts, X, No. 396,
p. 46.

155"Short Method with the Sceptic," Tracts, X,
No. 374; Archibald Alexander, "Objections ObVlated, and
God Glorified," The National Preacher, IV (October, 1829),
255-56.

 

156The Christian Almanac, 1833, p. 3 (see also

John Harris, "Christian Liberality Explained and Enforced,"
Tracts, X, No. 396.

157Child's Paper, III (August, 1854), p. 30.

 

 

 

158The Christian Almanac, 1833, p. 3.
159
Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 13. Few sur-
passed Harlan PageTs zeal in "soul winning." One of his

tactics was to contact each Sunday School teacher under
him and inquire whether he had a well-grounded hope in
Christ or not (see Hallock, Harlan Page, p. 196).

 

160"The Conversion of Sinners: A Common Christian
Duty," Tracts, VI, No. 206, p. 14 (see also Annual Repert,
N.Y., 1834, p. 30).

 

 

161The Christian A1menac,1833, p. 3. An Excellent
summary of whatfifidoing good" meant was included in the
tract "Live for the world."
I mean, that I will not be selfish, idle, taking
narrow views, and having narrow feelings. I mean,
that I will not live for pleasure, for gain, for
ease, for honor. I mean that I will not delude
myself by romantic notions of some good I may do, I
know not how. My charity shall begin at home--in my
family, and with my neighbors. . . . But my charity
shall not epg_at home. I will day and night seek the
salvation of others more remote. Yea, I will inquire
for avenues of sending light and love to the ends of
the earth. I will inform myself of the wants and

 

260

miseries of the world. I will cordially listen to
every appeal in behalf of every good object. I will
then do all I can, by money, time, influence, prayer,
example, and personal effort. This is what I mean by
my resolution (Tracts, X, No. 367, p. 8).

The Christian Almanac for Michigapy 1838, published six

1rhhles fOr doing Goodiw Of these, the third rule deserves

mention. The reader was instructed as follows:
Do something. If you cannot preach you can do some-
thing else. If you have not eloquence, you probably
have money! If you have not money, you probably have
influence. If you have not influence with the rich,
you probably have with the poor. If you have no
influence with man, you may have power with God and
prevail (p. 6).

162Lyman Beecher, Six Lectures on Intemperance in

Beecher's Works. Vol. I, Lectures on Political Atheism
and Kindred Subjects; Together with Six Lectures on Intem-
perance . . . (Boston: John P. Jewitt, 1852), p. 425.

 

 

 

163Their Brothers' Keepers, pp. ix-xv.

 

164Annual Repert, N.Y., 1836, p. 8.

 

165Spring, Pers. Rem., I, 71.

 

166Spring, Influence, p. 41. In his autobiography,
Spring contrasted the nineteenth century with the eighteenth
century; the former applied the scientific discoveries of
the latter. "Utility" had thus "marched hand in hand with
intellectual progress" (see Pers. Rem., II, 270-71).

 

 

167S. V. S. Wilder, Records from the Life of S. V.

S. Wilder (New York: American Tract Society, 1865),
p. 134. (Hereinafter cited as Wilder, Records.)

 

168Charles L. Sanford, The Quest for Paradise:

Eurgpe and the American Moral Imagination (Urbana:
Uhiversity of Illinois Press, 1961), pp. 88-89, 171-74.

 

169
II, 267.

Spring, Influence, p. 41; Spring, Pers. Rem.,

 

 

170Annual Report, Bost., 1826, pp. 13-14.

 

261

171On the impact that the millennial prophesies
had on the missionary Spirit see Oliver Wendell Elsbree,
"The Rise of the Missionary Spirit in New England, 1790-
1815," New England Quarterly, I (July, 1928), 295-322.

 

172Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, p. 7.

 

173Tracts, IV, No. 137, pp. 9-10.

174Wilder, Records, p. 243.

175Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, p. 184.

 

176Annual Report, Bost., 1842, p. 11.

 

177Annual Report, N.Y., 1838, p. 37.

 

178Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, p. 3.

 

179Wilder, Records, p. 276.

l . . . . .
80Timothy Smith, ReVlvallsm and Soc1al Reform,

p. 188.

CHAPTER V

ETHICAL IDEAS

On April 20, 1814, seventy male members of
Reverend Justin Edwards' congregation organized the
"Andover South Parish Society for the Reformation of
Morals." Its aim was to "discountenance immorality,
particularly Sabbath breaking, intemperance, and pro-
fanity and to promote industry, temperance, order, piety,

1 Men like Edwards were aware of the

and good morals."
fact that orthodox Protestantism could be challenged in
more ways than one. Traditional ethical views, as well
as Calvinist creedal or doctrinal statements, were under
attack.

The organizers of the American Tract Society
revered the "puritanical values" commonly associated
with the middle class. These "puritanical" attitudes
venerated simplicity, thrift, hard work, self-control,
piety, Sabbath observance, and education.2 Such views
were now being openly challenged. The forces of indus-

trialization, urbanization, immigration, and mobility

were breaking down the stable, homogeneous communities.

262

263

With this breakdown came an open challenge to the orthodox
Protestants' notion concerning correct conduct. To many
it seemed as if proper behaviour was especially lacking
in the Roman Catholic immigrant, the urban proletariat,
the "free thinker" and in the "un-churched" frontiersman.
For the Tract Society, religion and morality
could not be separated. Many of its supporters would
have agreed with Timothy Dwight's observation that "where
there is no religion, there is no morality."3 The Society
had little sympathy for a theology of grace which con-
fused freedom and liberty with license. Thus, it is not
surprising that many of the tracts and other writings of
the supporters of the Society contained ethical injunctions
which concerned various aspects of behavior.
One area of life which came under the scrutiny
of the Tract Society was the individual's general deport-
ment and outward appearance. The key words, when it
came to dress and mannerisms, were simplicity and

sobriety. This was aptly summarized in the Christian

 

Almanac in 1831.

Dress. Aim at great neatness and simplicity in
dress. Shun finery and show.

Be not in haste to follow new fashions. Remember
that with regard to dress, Christians ought to be
decidedly plainer, and less showy than the people
of the world.4

BishOp McIlvaine wrote that one of the most "unpromising
features" in the appearance of any people "was fondness

for the manners, luxuries, and pomp of the world."5

264

Since women were especially prone to dress extravagantly,
the Society specifically exhorted them to stress simplicity
in their "whole appearance."6

The managers of the Tract Society opposed extrava-
gant and "gay" fashions on several grounds. First of all,
an over emphasis upon fine clothing "seldom . . . [failed]
to mark the frivolous mind."7 One convert admitted that
prior to her conversion she had been a "proud, thoughtless
girl: fond of dress and finery." Her dress for church
had been "like that of too many gay, vain, and silly
girls."8

Extravagant dress and gay fashions not only
revealed a frivolous mind; they also betrayed a rebel-
lious nature. The Society pointed out that lack of sim-
plicity in dress, when attending church, was not becoming
of a "humble sinner" possessing a "modest sense of pro-
priety and decency."9 Perhaps it was no mere coincidence
that a young lady received God's grace while she was
appropriately dressed "in a plain, neat manner."10 Fur-
thermore, to dress beyond one's station in life was
evidence of the fact that one was unhappy in that level
in which God had placed him. One convert admitted that
her dress prior to her conversion, like that of many "gay,
vain, and silly girls, was much above . . . [her] station

in life."11

265

The rich, as well as the poor, were instructed to
emphasize simplicity in dress. The Tract Society venerated
neither lower-class nor aristocratic but rather middle-

class values. The Almanac for Michigan reminded its

 

readers that one of the major causes of "degradation"
of females was their "love of dress." The writer then
went on to enjoin the "educated," "reflecting," and
wealthy ladies to take the lead in promoting and prac-
ticing simplicity in dress. Otherwise, how could a lady
whose dresses . . . [were] teeming with French laces,
enjoin simplicity and economy to the domestics?"12
In criticizing the individual's dress, the Tract
Society may have also been registering its displeasure
with the egalitarian ideology prevalent in Jacksonian
America. This is especially evident in its exhortation
to dress in a manner becoming of a "humble sinner" and
according to one's station in life. During the Jack-
sonian era, Americans showed a dislike for all signs of
social inferiority. Men's and women's fashions were
evidence of this fact. It was not uncommon for middle—
and lower-class individuals to dress in the smartest
fashions. The change in clothing styles was also partly
due to the new looming and spinning machines which were
introduced into the textile industry in the early nine-
teenth century. Cheap and plentiful cloth and factory-

made clothing were available to the American consumer by

266

1830. The quality of clothing purchased by the lower
classes may not have been as good as that purchased by
the rich, but differences in quality were not as noticeable
as differences in style.13
In addition to simplicity in dress,the writers of
almanacs and tracts stressed cleanliness and neatness.
Nor was cleanliness and neatness restricted to dress and
personal appearance alone. One almanac exhorted its
readers to see that everything looked "neat about the
house." He impressed upon his readers the fact that a
"neat farm house, with a neat yard before it, and good
fences all around . . . [was] a pleasant sight."14 One
writer pointed out that it was not important for a home
to have eXpensive furnishings; what was important was
that the house be neat and clean and that its rooms be
arranged "with the most graceful propriety."15
Cleanliness, whiteness, and neatness took on
moral qualities. In 1860 a writer for the Child's Peper
made a prediction as to who would be president in 1900.
In all probability he would be ten or twelve years old
at the present time. His parents would probably be in
"humble circumstances but of sterling traits of charac-
ter." The lad would not be "one of those dirty, noisy
boys" who spend "their days and Sabbaths in idleness and

rowdyism." Rather, he would be "of a serious cast, . . .

very studious, and withall . . . well behaved."16 A poor

267

but neat shepherd informed one writer that he could not
endure to see his children go without shoes and stockings,
not only because of the "punishing cold" but also because
it degraded them. He noticed that poor people who were
unconcerned about their outward appearance seldom had

17 Reverend

"any great regard to honesty and goodness."
Samuel Miller, one of the Society's vice presidents,
informed his sons that it was no disgrace for a student

to wear "thread-bare" or patched garments, providing they
were not filthy. "Cleanliness and neatness," he observed,
"are among the moral virtues, and can never be neglected
by anyone with importunity." To enter into a prayer hall
or recitation room in a "slovenly and dirty" manner was
disrespectful to God and the instructors.18 The Society
honored "Poor Sarah," a pious Indian woman, who attended
church in a patched yet clean apparel. When she finally
stayed away from church in 1817, it was discovered that
she had done so only because her clothes had become "so
old and ragged that she could not come with comfort or
decency." Friends then provided her with two new garments
which she was hesitant to wear. "Oh, these just what I
pray for so long," she explained, "so to lay out my poor
old body clean and decent, like God's dear white people,
when I die."19

Cleanliness and neatness were associated with

purity, moral integrity, and godliness. The Society gave

268

the case history of a family where the children attended
the Sabbath school, the father was honest and sober, and
the whole family had about it a neat appearance. But
after the father began to drink, the family was "reduced
to wretchedness." After reading the tract, "The Rewards
of Drunkenness," the father gave up drinking and once
again "neatness and comfort characterized the dwelling,

20 The Society

and peace smiled on every countenance."
taught children to cherish, above all, a clean heart.

According to the Child's Paper, "good poor boys . . . were

 

as good boys to associate with as good rich boys"; it was
a "clean heart" that counted.21 Children in heaven also
had these qualities as the following lines from the Picture

Alphabet suggested:

 

Because the Saviour shed his blood

To wash away their sin:

Bathed in that pure and precious blood,
Behold them, white and clean. . . .22

The relationship between cleanliness and moral integrity

was also emphasized by the Christian Almanac. "Cleanli-

 

ness," it stated,

. . . is a mark of politeness, for no one unadorned
with this virtue can go into company without giving
a manifest offense. . . . Cleanliness is intimately
connected with purity of mind and naturally inspires
refined sentiments and passions.23

 

Since cleanliness and neatness were closely tied
to moral integrity, it is not surprising that some
observers assumed that these characteristics and virtues

were most likely to be found among the better elements

269

of the community; i.e., among those groups which were
intelligent and attended church. Public worship tended
to "humanize and refine men" because churches promoted
"neatness, cleanliness, frugality, good order, decency
and respectability of deportment."24 Furthermore, since
religion and intellectual progress were closely inter-
twined, it was not surprising that cleanliness and neatness
were prevalent in those areas where schools as well as
churches flourished. Participants in a colporteur con-
vention at Goldsboro, North Carolina, described the
effect of their visitations upon destitute areas. The
colporteurs taught several inhabitants the alphabet and

distributed Tract Primers. Sunday schools were established

 

and soon the "preacher and the church" followed. Conse-
quently,"ignorance and sin" receded, "neat cabins"
replaced "old dilapidated ones," and "cultivated gardens
and fields soon . . . [showed] the change."25
In associating neatness and cleanliness with edu-
cation and religion the Tract Society betrayed its
middle-class orientation. It is true that the Society
did not restrict these virtues to the middle class; it
provided examples of respectable but poor people who also
cherished neatness and cleanliness. However, the
respectable poor were not typical of their class. A

chimney sweeper and his family surprised their visitor

because, in spite of their poverty, they saw to it that

270

everything in the house was "so clean and neat." Fur-
thermore, the wife was busily sewing and the children
were studying their books for Sunday school.26 A woman,
formerly of good character and from a well-to-do back-
ground, lost most of her material possessions after her
husband's death. But "her person, her children, and her
room, were all clean and tidy," although "she had no

27 The

chair, no table, or bed, or stove, or food."
woman's middle-class background penetrated through her
deepest poverty.

It is obvious that cleanliness and neatness were
not merely desirable aesthetic qualities for the Tract
Society. They were also the distinguishing marks of the
orderly, law-abiding citizens. One's property was safe
in a "clean" community. The social implications of

cleanliness and filth were aptly summarized in the

Family Almanac as follows:

 

Cleanliness--A neat, clean, fresh-aired, sweet cheer-
ful, well arranged house, exerts a moral as well as
a h sical influence over its inmates, and makes the
memhers of a family peaceable, and considerate of
each others feelings and happiness. The connection
is obvious between the state of mind thus produced,
and habits of respect for others, and for those
higher duties and obligations which no law can
enforce. On the contrary, a filthy, squalid,

noxious dwelling, in which none of the decencies

of life can be observed, contributes to make its
inhabitants selfish, sensual, and regardless of the
feelings of others. And the constant indulgence of
such passions renders them reckless and brutal; and
the transition is natural to propensities and habits,
incompatible with a respect for the pr0perty of
others, or for the laws.2

271

Related to the Society's emphasis upon neatness
and cleanliness was its stress upon politeness, civility,
and refinement of character. As pointed out previously,
one tract writer promoted church attendance because it
tended to "humanize and refine men" by promoting "neat-
ness, cleanliness, frugality, good order, decency, and
respectability of deportment." One family, whose
daughter had been "tidy" and "industrious," whose
children were previously noted for their "civility and
good behaviour," and whose house had "appeared neat and
decent," soon declined after the father opened a grog
shop. The boys "learned rude and profane expressions"
while the oldest girl became "giddy, pert, and bold
in her manners."29 Reverend W. T. Dwight informed the
Boston audience which had gathered to commemorate the
forty-fifth anniversary of the Tract Society that the
non-church goers furnished the bulk of inmates for the
prisons. These individuals usually lacked refinement of
mannerisms. This was especially true of the females, who
were often "reduced to a coarse equality with that of
man."30

Proper deportment included one's speech, and
proper speech obviously excluded profanity. The Tract
Society was not left to fight this vice alone. Reviv-
alists, evangelical churches, and benevolent societies,

all joined in combatting this evil.31

272

Profanity was banned for several reasons. First
of all, it violated God's law.32 To break God's law was
to be guilty of rebellion against God. Samuel Miller
reminded his sons that profanity revealed "a spirit of
high-minded impiety" and tended "to excite and encourage

"33 Reverend Beecher was cer-

a similar Spirit in others.
tain that the impious individual would have a detrimental
effect upon the social order. A man who was emancipated
from "the restraints of the divine sanctions" was now

let "loose upon society to obey . . . the impulse of

passion and a depraved inclination.u34

Obviously, God
could not overlook such insubordination, and the popular
tract, "The Swearer's Prayer," recounted a series of
incidents where "swearers" were struck down and died
prematurely.35 Profanity also revealed a lack of moral
integrity. Hannah More, England's pioneer tract writer,
pointed out that one test of character was a person's
speech. If an individual's speech was "idle, dissolute,
vulgar, indecent, or profane," his character was usually

the same.36

(The fact that the Society saw fit to
publish this tract suggests that it agreed with the
sentiments expressed by the author.)

Profane speech was associated predominantly with
the lower classes. One writer admitted that although

some "gentlemen" swore, profanity could "never be deemed

the mark of a gentleman." Rather, it was a "vice common

273

to the vilest characters in the lowest ranks of society."
Furthermore, it produced "the most disgraceful equality,"
putting "the honored, the learned, the polished, and the
delicate, upon a level with the most ignorant and de-
praved."37 One father, after reading several of the
Society's volumes, declared that there would be hence-
forth "no drinking, no swearing, no Sabbath breaking" at
his house. Thereafter his home was characterized by "fru-
gality, sobriety, and reverence of God and his Sabbath."38
It had become a middle-class home.

In the war against profanity more was involved
than the honor of God. At stake was a whole way of life.
The value system of the Christian stewards had been
openly challenged. According to Lee Benson, the qual-
ities most venerated and functional along the frontier
and in "a relatively undeveloped, rapidly expanding
economy" were not the "puritanical qualities" which
emphasized "responsibilities to the community and con-
formity to 'respectable' values." The West favored the
bold and adventurous individuals, the men of muscle and
of courage. These men could drink, gamble--and one could
add, swear--with gusto.39 These individuals dared to
flout both the conventions of society and the laws of

God. And people who dared to defy God and use his name

in vain were not likely to honor God's stewards.

274

PrOper Christian deportment included not only
modesty in one's dress, neatness in one's appearance,
and civility in one's manner, but also self-control of
one's appetites and abstention from worldly pleasures.
This did not mean that the Society considered the
Christian life to be a drab and dreary affair. One
writer chided those Christians who appeared "taciturn,
unsocial, and even sad." Instead they "ought to appear
cheerful and happy" receiving "with pleasure and grati-
tude all the lawful enjoyments bestowed by their heavenly
Father."40 But appearing "cheerful and happy" were not
to be confused with frivolity and the right to pursue
vain pleasures. Reverend Ashbel Green also advised his
readers to be cheerful, but tempered this with a warning
that although "mirth and laughter" were "not always
sinful," one's indulgence in them should "be clearly
innocent, not very frequent, and never of long contin-
uance." Following Christ always meant the giving up of
"vain amusement" and the "indulgence" of one's "lusts."41

Several writers explicitly associated pleasures
with enmity to God. "The person that liveth in pleasure,"
wrote one, "is dead to God while he liveth, saith the

42 Reverend

Lord. This therefore is a very black mark."
Samuel Schmucker praised the German pietists movement,
led by August Hermann Francke and Philipp Jakob Spener

because it had been instrumental in exploding "the old

275

notion of adiaphoristic action or actions" which held
that acts, although not good per se, need not necessarily
be sinful. These acts included dancing, theater atten-
dance, and card playing. Spener and Francke realized

43 Fashionable

that every act was "either sinful or holy."
amusements were at enmity with God because they made
man's mind unfit for serious reflection; they banished
"religious thought and conversation." Consequently, it
was not surprising that those "bent on excelling" in
these things seldom possessed the "meek and prayerful
spirit of Christianity."44
The pleasure-seeker was not only an enemy of God,
he was also a potential enemy of the ordered society
which the American Tract Society hoped to create. The
ideal Christian was self-disciplined, serious minded,
and reverent, while the natural man was often "impatient
of restraint," self-willed, prone to pursue his own
desires, and inclined to "go to extremes, be it for

45 The self-

pleasures, study, or earthly pursuits."
disciplined Christians were orderly. A visiting minister
was surprised to find a frontier congregation "serious,

orderly, and prayerful" even though they had no minister.
The reason for such behaviour was obvious. A New Testa-
ment had been left in that village two years prior to the

arrival of the visiting minister.46

276

Pleasures and frivolity were also immoral because
they were a waste of time. One author warned that
"fashionable amusements" such as dancing, theater
attendance, and card playing kept one from acquiring
more of the valuable accomplishments such as "propriety
of manners, a well-cultivated taste and understanding,
the knowledge of business, habits of industry, etc."
Every individual was entitled to seek "relaxation from
business in the 'social circle'" but this should be done
"without wasting time."46 Another writer pointed out
that "recreations and pleasures" need not be evil pro-
viding one indulged in them only as long as they were
necessary "to relieve the fatigue of the spirits when
tired with business or labor and to prepare for new
employments." People, however, tended to misuse
pleasures and follow "them without due bounds," thus
using up time "which should have been laid out in pre-
paring for death and eternity."47

One of the amusements which was particularly
condemned by the evangelical clergy and the Tract Society
was the theater. This included all performances, even
the circus.48 (Acrobatic performers were popular in
many theaters; in fact the early circuses in America
actually began as specially written dramas for such
"equestrian troupes.")49 However, opposition to the

theater was not limited to the evangelical churches.

277

In 1774 the Continental Congress requested the suspension
of "horse-racing, gambling, cockfighting, exhibitions of
shows, plays, and other expensive diversions and enter-
tainments." After the Revolution some of the Opposition
to theaters dissipated; President George Washington's
love for the stage may have aided in stilling some of
the critics. However, it was not until after the War
of 1812 that the theater experienced a building boom;
New York's Bowery and Chatham, Boston's Tremont, and
Philadelphia's New Chestnut and Arch Street theaters
were all built between 1820 and 1830. But this theater
building boom did not mean that opposition to the stage
was virtually non-existent. Russel Nye's contention
that theological Opposition gradually disappeared after
the Revolution certainly seems open to question. Charles
Cole's study of the northern evangelists and David Grim-
sted's research on the ante-bellum theater show little
evidence of this. In fact, influential families opposed
any attempts by their sons to become actors.50
Play-acting and play-watching were both condemned
by the Tract Society. Reverend Milnor received a letter
from a British Officer whose prodigal son had fled mili-
tary duty and had taken up company with "play-actors and
leaders of orchestras." The son had "even so far degraded
himself as to appear as a hired actor at one of the

theaters, though, providentially, he received nothing

278

for his services." Milnor later discovered that this
errant son had taken up play-acting only out of neces-

51 One officer of a church recounted that while

sity.
working as a clerk in a store he came across some

Shakespearean plays and Philip Doddridge's Rise and

 

Progpess.52 He read from both and for days was sorely

 

tempted to see a Shakespearean play acted out. The
battle raged for three days and his soul "balanced
between heaven and hell" as he paced back and forth
in front of the Federal Street Theater. In the end
Doddridge won out over Shakespeare. "It was the bar,"
he stated, "which God threw across my pathway to per-
dition."53
The Tract Society Opposed the theater on various
grounds. As mentioned previously, all "fashionable
amusements" were ruled sinful if they involved a waste
of time. To sit for hours in a theater, "attending to
amusements" which were "perfectly vain and frivolous,"
it was argued, "was so contrary to the scriptural
injunction" to redeem the time "that either the scrip-
tural precepts had to be rejected" or theatrical per-
formances would have to be "pronounced criminal."54
Secondly, it was argued that the theater had a "direct
tendency to give the mind a vain and frivilous cast, to

make it familiar with licentious images and objects,

to inspire the mind with a "taste for the gay, the

279

romantic, the extravagent, the sensual, and the impure."
Consequently, the theater destroyed "all taste for
serious and spiritual employments."55 Furthermore,
viewers became so addicted to the theater that they
went to extreme lengths--including theft and prosti-
tution--to procure sufficient money to cover the cost
of admission fees.56 To clinch all arguments raised
against the theater the Society pointed out that one
need only look to France. During the French Revolution
the number of theaters in Paris had increased from six
to twenty-six.57

However the main criticism levelled against the
theater was the accusation that it taught an inverse
order of morality. Instead of venerating "piety and
virtue," the play houses made such vices as "pride,
revenge, false honor, dwelling, suicide, the indulgence
of unhallowed love," and "conjugal infidelity" seem

58 In order to still the criticisms of the

attractive.
clergy some theatrical managers attempted to portray
the stage as an excellent device for teaching morals.
Shakespearean plays were used partly as a "sop to puri-

tanical theater-haters."59

But this did not appease
the Christian stewards. (In fact,it is questionable
whether the theater did make "vice . . . [appear] as
virtue.") To the Tract Society the stage represented a

threat. It was a "rival institution competing for the

280

attention of the populace."60

And, although it may not
have venerated seduction, vice, and prodigality, it did
appeal to man's emotions and to his baser instincts. It
encouraged frivolity, mirth, and pleasure.

The Tract Society also had much to say concerning
the reading habits of the Americans. Not that the
Christian stewards venerated illiteracy. Unlike Cathol-
icism, Protestantism never assumed that ignorance was

"the mother of devotion."61

The Society agreed with the
New York Society for Prevention of Pauperism that poverty
and crime could not be solved without education and

religion.62 In 1852 the Family Almanac called upon

 

America to "Educate! Educate!" It pointed out that

27,949 persons were convicted of crimes in the State of
New York from 1840 to 1848. Of these 1,882 had received

a "common education"; 441 had a "tolerably good edu-
cation," and 128 could be classified as "well educated."
That left 26,225 of which about 50 per cent had learned

to merely read and write while "the residue were destitute

63

of any education, whatever." From 1824 to 1860 the

tract visitors in New York City rounded up nearly 10,000
youngsters for the day schools.64

The Christian stewards were concerned, however,
that America's reading public might be digesting the

wrong books and periodicals. The Society justified its

publication of volumes partly on the ground that it would

 

 

281

"supplant Novels, infidel, licentious, and other

"65 Mr. Shepherd Wells, agent for

injurious works.
Kentucky and Tennessee, wrote that the people "rejoiced

at the idea of getting the Family Christian Almanac

 

instead of the Comic and other pernicious publications

of this sort."66

One colporteur working in Canada
reported in 1856 that until two years ago the families
in his territory had no children's books except "Jack
and the Giant-killer, Jack and the Bean-stalk, and other
unworthy trash." Now they had access to the Society's
publications.67 One colporteur in Illinois "bartered
Dodderidge and Baxter for 'the Devil on two sticks' and
other trash, committing it to the flames."68 The
Society was careful not to publish any fiction,
religious or non-religious, lest it incite the passions
for "the mischievious and more exciting novels of the
day." When Milnor went to England in 1830, he visited
the Ilse of Wright, the setting for the Society's popu-
lar tract, "The Dairyman's Daughter," in order to see
whether the tract was historically accurate.69

In all fairness to the American Tract Society,
it should be pointed out that many of the novels and

dramas published during this period were Of poor quality.

In 1838 the New York Review complained that "'the Old,
70

 

genuine Drama' had given way to imprOper spectacles."

But this was not the only reason why the Tract Society

282

disliked the novels. The Society's supporters used many
of the same arguments against the novels which they had
used against the theater. Novels were a waste of time.71
Reading fiction deflected one's attention away from
eternity. One tract gave a case history of an indi-
vidual who had come under conviction but decided to
first finish reading a "worthless novel. . . . He
finished the book. He attended the concerns of his
soul--never!"72 Novels played upon the passions and
imagination of the individual. This weakened the "other
faculties of the mind" and destroyed "the beautiful
harmony of the intellectual powers." This "dispropor-
tionate exercise of the imagination" was detrimental to

the individual's health and tended "to shorten life."73

Authors, like actors, were often "bad men,‘ and bad men

did not usually "write good books."74
The Tract Society was convinced that reading
novels was not a healthy past-time for the poor. The
executive committee cited the criticisms which the London
Christian Guardian had levelled against Sir Walter Scott's
novels. Scott's books, it was argued, encouraged the
reader to live in an imaginary world "without sorrow
and without pain, where all . . . [was] happiness and
peace." When jolted back into reality by the misfortunes

of life the reader might be inclined to murmeragainst

God, express dissatisfaction over his station in life,

283

and neglect "the duties which he owed to his God, his

country, and to himself."75

The Society feared the man
of passions. He was much less likely than the man of
reason to accept his lot in life.

Another amusement on the Society's list of con-
traband pleasures was dancing. By attacking dancing,
as well as horse racing, gaming, and duelling, the
supporters of the American Tract Society were criticizing
vices associated with the upper classes.76 Prior to his
conversion, Milnor had "patronized by his presence . . .
dancing and gaming." However he, himself, had not actively
participated; in the "midst of gayeties" he had remained

"a sensible man."77

Milnor's biographer failed to point
out that dancing had not always been considered immoral
or sinful even by the orthodox Protestants. Yale's
President, Timothy Dwight, had maintained that balls could
be justified if they were "properly conducted" and if
they were restricted to a "select party."78 Gardiner
Spring attempted unsuccessfully to root out balls and
assemblies in his well-to-do congregation. Unfortunately,
it seemed to be a "foregone conclusion" that the young
people would dance. Yet he was pleased to note that

when God's Spirit was "poured out" balls and assemblies

ceased.79

Revivals were useful not only in bringing
persons to accept orthodox doctrines; they were also
useful in enforcing correct conduct, and this among the

rich as well as among the poor.

284

Dancing was contraband because, like the theater,
it contributed to immorality. Lest any use the Old Test-
ament to justify this form of pleasure and recreation,
one writer informed his readers that the Biblical dance
could not be equated with the social dance. The former

80 Should readers still

was performed only by maidens.
not be convinced that social dancing was immoral, they
need only look at France and Italy, two countries addicted
to the dance. "And as to morals and virtue, purity and
chastity, what are France and Italy?" one writer asked.81
What further evidence did one need?

The Tract Society joined the evangelical churches
in banning gambling as well as dancing.82 Youngsters
were warned that "gambling and drinking commonly . . .
[went] together" and led to the "temporal and eternal

"83 Gambling,

ruin of those who . . . [practiced] them.
it was argued, was the parent of all other vices; "blas-
phemy, falsehood, cheating, drunkenness, quarrel, and
murder" were all associated with it.84 William Meade,

an Episcopalian bishop from Virginia and a vice president
of the Tract Society, insisted that card playing in
itself, even if played without money, should be banned.
One reason was that it was a waste of time, and "a most
fascinating employment to the idle." The BishOp pointed

out that "to kill time" was to murder "the great gift of

God" granted to man in order "to gain eternal life."

 

285

Secondly, card players were perverting the use of the
"lot” which God had reserved for certain sacred questions.
Thirdly, even if one began to play solely for amusement,
he soon found himself fascinated with it and began to
gamble.85
Self-discipline, moderation, and simplicity also
included one's diet. 5. V. S. Wilder was noted for his
disciplined eating habits; he would often leave the
table even though he had a "disposition to go another

86

slice." Reverend Edwards advised his son to "avoid

soda, mead, confectionary, and everything which . . .

tended to generate an artificial appetite of any sort."87
One pleasure which the American Tract Society
even blushed to speak about was illicit sex. "It is not

easy to speak Of this subject," Samuel Miller wrote his
sons, "without such an Offense against delicacy as is
revolting to virtuous minds." Yet he would warn his sons
that there might possibly be no other sin which brought
with it "more multiform and deplorable evils."88 One
writer recounted the dismal story of a widow's son,
hovering near death, because of his past profligacy.

He had read novels, and frequented the theater, the
billiard room, and the house of "ill-fame." Conse-
quently, he "contacted many diseases, which afford the

reader no gratification."89

286

The Tract Society was not alone in its attempt to
regulate the sex life of the Americans. Moral and social
reforms often included sexual reform, especially as it
affected prostitution. The New York Magdalen Society,
the American Society for the Prevention of Licentious-
ness and Vice and the Promotion of Morality, the American
Society for promoting the Observance of the Seventh Com-
mandment, and the American Female Moral Reform Society,
were several of the societies organized during the 1830's
in order to rescue delinquent girls and stamp out
"licentiousness."90 However, sexual reform had broader
implications than eradicating prostitution. It could
also be aimed at the lower classes, and the immigrants,
especially those living in the cities whose sexual mores
and standards differed from those of the middle-class
reformers.

Of all ethical issues discussed by the Tract
Society, probably none were emphasized more than Sabbat—
arianism and temperance. Slavery, which will be discussed
in a later chapter, elicited more controversy than these
two but was never accepted by the Tract Society as a
major ethical or moral issue. In the end, temperance
and the Sabbath served as spiritual barometers which
tested both the individual's and the nation's character

and prosperity.

287

The Sabbath movement was the first major attempt
of the Calvinist churches in the nineteenth century to
legislate morality. The Puritans had enacted strict
Sabbath laws during the colonial era. But these laws
were no longer being strictly enforced in the early
Republic. Even the Federal Government was violating
God's holy day. In 1810 Congress passed a law which
required post Offices to be open for one hour on Sunday
and mail to be transmitted seven days of the week. This
brought quick protests from several churches, espe—
cially the Presbyterians. In 1825 Congress went one step
further and required those post offices where mail was
delivered on Sunday to remain open the entire day. Con—
cerned clergymen and laymen sent more petitions and began
to organize. In 1828 the General Union for Promoting the
Observance of the Christian Sabbath was born. The Sabbath
Union included several Of the Tract Society's supporters
and officers. Stephen Van Rensselaer was chosen president,
Arthur Tappan was elected secretary, and Senator Theodore
Frelinghuysen was its chief spokesman in Congress. One
of its major aims was to pressure Congress into changing
its Sunday mail laws. By 1836 it was obvious that the
Sabbath Union's foray into politics was a failure. Seven
years later another attempt was made to rekindle the
flames of Sabbatarianism with the formation of a new

society, the American and Foreign Sabbath Union at Boston.

 

288

But, like the Sabbath Union, it was not able to resurrect
the Puritan Sabbath.91
The breakdown of the traditional Sabbath was per-
sonally experienced by Reverend Spring. When he first
came to New York City in l810,carriages and carts were
not permitted to "run wild" around the churches on Sunday.
An iron chain was placed across Nassau and Beekman street
in order to cut off all traffic around the Brick Pres-
byterian Church. Unfortunately, "men and times changed;
a stream of corruption set in." When Spring and another
minister attempted to hold a public meeting at City Hall
in 1837 in order to agitate for Sabbath reform, they
were sadly outnumbered. Even the Mayor, Stephen Allen,
deemed it wise not to attend. The status of the minister
and the proper observance of the Sabbath were both
declining.92
New York City and Congress were not alone in
profaning God's day of rest. A schoolmaster in New Jersey
began to distribute tracts after he discovered that many
"profaned the Sabbath by hunting and fishing."93 In an
address commemorating the forty-fifth anniversary of the
Tract Society, Reverend W. T. Dwight pointed to the
degeneracy of religion in New England. Two centuries
ago, he reported, only a small percentage of the popu-

lation absented themselves from public worship. Now

only one-quarter of the population attended an evangelical

 

 

289

church regularly, from Sabbath to Sabbath.94 In Gambier,

Ohio, the faithful were horrified to witness two "pleasure
carriages" driving through the park one Sunday evening.

The Western Episcopalian reported that this was

 

. . . a new sight in Gambier such as it hoped never
to see again. The thing would not be tolerated.
The quiet of a Gambier Sunday would not thus be
violated with impunity. Next thing, people would
be asking to see the libraries on Sunday!95
In Virginia some Christians did not hesitate to travel on
Sundays, "visit their friends, converse about horses,
cattle and farms, or merchandise, even going to and from

96

the house of God." Many Virginians even thought it

proper to cut their firewood "on that as on other days."97
Many members of the American Tract Society were
not prepared to stand idly by while the Sabbath was being
desecrated. One thing they could do was to form another
organization. As mentioned previously, several of the
Society's members were involved in founding the General
Union for Promoting the Observance of the Christian
Sabbath. Friends of the Tract Society in Massachusetts
were also active in the formation of the American and
Foreign Sabbath Union organized in Boston on April 4,
1843. Justin Edwards was appointed secretary and Chief
Justice Williams of Connecticut was elected president.98
Besides forming organizations, friends of the
Sabbath also resorted to the use of the printing press.

By 1831 the Tract Society was issuing several tracts

against "Sabbath-breakers," including one tract in the

 

 

290

99

German language. By the early 1850‘s the Society had

circulated 684,741 copies of Edwards' Sabbath Manual in

 

English, 8,277 copies in the German, 1,718 copies in
French, and 5,146 copies in Spanish. This vast circu-
lation, obviously intended in part for the immigrant,
was made possible partly through private gifts. Even
the Grand Jury of Clarke County, Georgia, donated money
to cover the cost of distributing 100 copies of the

Sabbath Manual in its own county.100

 

When it came to Sabbath observance the Tract
Society would tolerate no half-way measures. One obvious
duty incumbent upon all Christians was the regular

attendance of public worship.101

But proper Sabbath
observance included much more than this. All hours of

this day were to be revered. According to Bishop
McIlvaine, "all hours of the Sabbath . . . [were] precious"
to one who had "a truly spiritual mind." This meant that
a Christian need not only read a little more scripture

on this day than on weekdays and abstain from “worldly
business,” but also that he should not indulge in amuse-
ments, reading books, sharing conversation, and seeing
company which would distract the mind from "spiritual

102

pursuits." Edwards echoed a similar refrain in his

Sabbath Documents. To abstain from all secular pursuits

 

meant much more than mere abstention from work; it also

included abstention from "worldly, scientific, and

291

literary reading, conversation, visiting, and pleasure."103

One writer commended a poor watchmaker for putting down
his work precisely at 12 A.M. on Sunday, regardless whe-
ther or not his work was completed. "Surely, the writer
argued, "no man can be righteous over much while doing as
the Bible directs him."104
Even the children were not exempted when it came
to proper Sabbath observance. One writer admitted that
some parents and masters were "so stern, so awful, so
morose in their manner" that they made "the lovely Gospel
of Christ . . . really revolting to young persons."
Nevertheless, parents should be on guard against "an
ill-timed levity." Wit, levity and, above all, "foolish
talking or jesting" should never be introduced on a

105

Sunday evening. On this day children "should be

quiet, and think much of God, and pray to Him, and read
the Bible, and go to Church, and go to Sunday-School."106
The children were warned not to be so wicked as to indulge
in "idleness," "play," or even worse, in fishing and

107 Furthermore, the youngster was

hunting on Sunday.
advised that if he wished to spare himself "hours and
days of bitter sorrow and repentance," he should read
only the Bible and those books and papers on Sunday

which helped him to better understand the scriptures.

As for the newspaper, it "was not fit to be read on God's

Holy day." The Child's Paper sadly informed the children

 

292

that a well-dressed boy had purchased a paper on Sunday.

What was even more shocking was the fact that he "had

bought it for his mother--his mother."108

 

The American Tract Society was prepared to give
several reasons for promoting Sabbath Observance. First
of all, God had commanded it. Thus, to profane the Sab-
bath was to rebel against God. Beecher was convinced
that eradicating the Sabbath would lead to the "abolition
of the government of God." Persons who abolished God's
government were likely to do the same with man's laws.
According to Beecher the "atheistic levellers" hoped to
achieve their social and political goals by first tearing
down the Sabbath.109

The Sabbath was also of benefit to the individuals
who honored it. Edwards maintained that the Sabbath was
given to every individual or laborer and no government

110 It was conducive

could take this right away from him.
to enlightening the human mind. According to Beecher,
removing the Sabbath would be the first step in removing
the light of knowledge or "intellectual culture" from
the land.111
But to appeal solely to the reader's love for
"intellectual culture" during the Jacksonian era was not
enough; pocketbook issues were more important. In the

end the Tract Society defended its position by pointing

to the debit and credit columns in the business ledgers.

293

The most "filthy, starved, and wretched of the human
family" were not to be found among church-goers, but
among those who "habitually" disregarded the Sabbath.112
One almanac ran the story of fifteen young men who
resided in a boarding house in New York. Of these
only six appeared ready for church at the Sunday break-
fast table. These six all became "highly respected and
useful citizens." Only one out of the other nine was
later to be found in "respectable" business, while the
other eight had become "Openly vicious," and failed in
business. Several even had met an "untimely and awfully

tragic end."113

The same almanac also carried the story
of a Scottish immigrant who became wealthy in a few years.
His explanation was simple; he had "strictly" observed
the Sabbath.114 Thus, whereas some workingmen talked
in terms of unions when it came to improving their eco-
nomic lot, the Tract Society emphasized Sabbath-observance
along with temperance, thrift, and hard work. "Wait then
upon God," the reader was advised,
It is his blessing that maketh [sic] rich; he can
prosper the work of your hands, enable you to pro-
cure the comforts of life, or raise up charitable
friends to assist you; and nothing is more likely
to procure them, than your steady and serious
attention to public worship. Good men will
Observe, pity, and help you.115
The Society was quick to note that Sabbath obser-
vance was Of benefit to the nation as well as to the

individual. It promoted morality. Persons who met

 

294

weekly "to confess their sins" seldom went to "extreme
lengths in open iniquity." The atrocious and desperate
sinners were usually found among those who abandoned
"the worship of God altogether."116 One merchant stated
that he promptly fired any clerk of his caught out riding
on Sunday. "Such a one cannot be trusted," he explained.117
Bishop Chase discovered that in those western towns and
villages where "poverty, disunion, or other causes" had
made the establishment of regular church services impos-
sible, there "vice was always most vociferous, and infi—
delity most impudent, conceited and domineering."118
Besides vice, crime also flourished wherever the Sabbath
was not Observed. Reverend Schmucker went so far as to
state that 90 per cent of the men admitted to the Massa-
chusetts State prison in one year had been habitual vio-
lators of the Sabbath.119
Furthermore, the Sabbath promoted national welfare
by promoting industry, prosperity, and by safeguarding
the right of property. Spring was convinced that one
would scarcely find a "Sabbath-breaking community" which

"120 One of

was also "a prosperous and happy community.
the Society's vice presidents pointed out that since the

Sabbath promoted the "habits of integrity, industry, fru-
gality, and freethought," and the habit of providing for

one's own household, it "naturally . . . [secured] the

comfort of families and the prosperity of nations."121

295

The Sabbath also promoted the national welfare because
"property and life" were safer in the hands of those who
honored this day than in the hands of those who violated
it.122

Edwards' observation that property was safest in
the hands of those who kept the Sabbath reveals once again
the concern which the Tract Society had for national sta-
bility and security. Religion was not only useful for
promoting God's Kingdom in the next world, it was also
useful for building a Protestant Republic in this world.
According to one tract, to sustain God's institutions
which included "the sanctity of the holy sabbath," was
"one of the holiest and most solemn duties which a pat-

"123 As pointed out pre-

riot . . . [owed] his country.
viously, the Society assumed that there was a close cor-
relation between church attendance and law and order.
Secondly, it was assumed that a "Sabbath-keeping" nation
would most likely be a free nation. But freedom was not
to be equated with license. "Men have their rights
which God gave them," Spring explained, "but they have
no right to do wrong--no right to violate the fourth
commandment." Consequently, there was no contradiction
between liberty and the enforcement of Sabbath laws.124
The Sabbath also promoted stability by advancing

the cause of social harmony. In everyday life the various

classes of society were "apt to dislike each other."

296

Their "different situations" served to keep "them at a
distance." But in the church they all met, "uniting

in the same expressions of humility, prayer, praise, and
attention." The church served to promote "a union of
spirit and interest" and taught them "to care for each

other."125

All gained something from this experience.
The lower classes learned "diligence," "cleanliness," and
were motivated to "appear with decency before others"
in the church. The ruling classes were "taught to feel
an equality" with the governed by being reminded that
they too had a ruler over them.126
The American Tract Society also realized that God's
promises had two sides. If his blessings rested on the
individuals and nations who kept the Sabbath, did not
also his judgment or curse rest upon those who violated
it? The Society was convinced that it did, and was pre—
pared to back up this assumption with historical evidence.
One writer drew up a list of individuals who had drowned,
were thrown from a horse, or suffered injuries while
swimming, riding, working, or seeking pleasure on the

127

Sabbath. As for God's judgment upon a nation which

violated the Sabbath, the Society needed only to point
once again to France and the French Revolution.128 Even
ships built on Sunday might come under God's curse. The

Child's Paper informed its youthful readers that the ship,

 

The Great Eastern, had a rotten plank; i.e., the plank

 

297

which was nailed down on Sunday. Furthermore,this ship
had been launched on Sunday. But just prior to its
launching,one of its builders died. On its maiden
voyage an explosion occurred on board. Perhaps the
"rotten plank" had given way. Then the ship returned

to port and the captain ordered it cleaned on Sunday.

A few months later he died. "We may call these disasters
accidents," the writer stated, "but depend upon it, there
is a Power over and above all that we can see, whose laws
which he has made for our good, it is perilous to trifle
with."129

Despite its warning that God's laws were "perilous
to trifle with," the Tract Society was not able to resur-
rect the Puritan Sabbath. Edwards boasted in 1848 that
the Christian's opposition to Sabbath-trains was paying
Off; several railway corporations were suspending oper-
ations on this day. Consequently, there had been an
”increased attendance on the means of grace."130 Yet
history has not substantiated Edwards' claim.

There were certain forces at work in the nineteenth
century which made the traditional Sabbath difficult to
maintain after 1830. One of these was immigration. As
will be pointed out later, the Jacksonian era witnessed
a rapid increase in immigration. Many of these newcomers
were Roman Catholic immigrants who viewed the Sabbath as

a holiday as well as a holy day.131

 

298

Another force which undermined the Puritan Sabbath
was industrialization. One of the Society's vice presi-
dents, William E. Dodge, offered $500 to certain blast
furnace Operators if they could discover some method
whereby furnaces could be shut down on the Sabbath. In
the end he was forced to admit that it was not feasible.
Dodge also attempted to get the railways to obey the
fourth commandment. When the New York and Erie Railways
began to Operate Sunday-trains, he resigned from the board
of directors; when the Central Railroad Company of New
Jersey did likewise, he sold his stock. As late as 1871
he was still active in opposing trains which went "rush-
ing past . . . [the] cities and towns and peaceful vil-
lages, screaming . . . 'NO Sabbath! No Sabbathl'"132

In the end, the Society could not effectively
cope with the problem of Christianizing the industrial
revolution and the large corporations. Dodge's solution
was to call upon all Christian stockholders to use their
influence. Whenever they were prepared to purchase stock
they should ask, "Does this road run on Sunday?" rather
than only asking, "Does this road pay regular dividends?"133
Yet was this realistic? Men like Dodge were at home in
the business community characterized by partnerships or
sole ownerships. These required less capital and could
be regulated by Christian ethics. The partners were

responsible primarily to themselves, not to a large

299

number of stockholders. A partnership usually employed
fewer workers than a large corporation; consequently, the
owners could keep a close check on their employees' Sab-
bath practices. Industrialization and incorporation
changed this. Some machines, like the blast furnaces,
could not be shut down on Sundays. Furthermore, to
close down railways on Sundays affected not only a local
community but interstate traffic. Corporations were
designed to maximize profits for their owners and stock-
holders, not to observe the fourth commandment. Dodge
could call on Christian stockholders to ask first, "Does
this road run on Sunday?" but in the end the question
that carried the most weight was, "Does this road pay
dividends?" A partnership and a farm might be moral or
immoral; a corporation tended to be amoral.

In his study on temperance, Joseph H. Gusfield
has interpreted the temperance crusade not only as a
struggle for morality but also as a fight for prestige

134 A similar case can be made for the

and status.
Sabbath crusade. Intertwined midst the Tract Society's
emphasis upon Sabbath observance and church attendance
was a concern over the declining power and prestige of
the clergy in the community. Reverend Spring was brought
face to face with this face when he and another clergyman

were left to face the hostile crowd in front of the City

Hall in 1827, a crowd which had no intention of turning

300

the clock back when it came to Sunday laws. He realized
at this time that any organization, led solely by clergy-

men, had little likelihood of achieving its goals. Con-

sequently, when a new Sabbath committee was organized
in 1851,it was led by a layman.135 There were others
besides Spring who were aware of their declining status.
Reverend J. Scudder reminded the youth of the favors
Jesus had bestowed upon them by enabling them "to sit
under the stated ministry of the word." The minister
should not be taken lightly; he had been "set" as their
"overseer by the Holy Ghost." He was "a man from God"
sent to "warn" and instruct man, telling him not only
"what to do," but also teaching him "how to do it."136
Reverend Thomas H. Skinner reminded his readers that
one of the duties of church members was to respect their
minister. Unfortunately, the minister was not always
accorded this respect.137
The second major attempt of the evangelical com-
munity to legislate morality was the temperance crusade.
But whereas the Sabbath movement had failed in its attempt,
the temperance reformers were at least partially success-
ful. Evidence of this fact was the Maine law signed by
Governor John Hubbard on June 2, 1851.138
There was ample evidence to suggest that the

American nation had been over-indulging in ardent spirits

ever since the late eighteenth and early nineteenth

301

centuries.139 Reverend Beecher recalled that when Timothy
Dwight first became president of Yale College, all was

not well with that venerable institution. The majority

of the students were "skeptical and rowdies" were plenti-
ful. "Wine and liquors were kept in many rooms; intem-
perance, profanity, gambling, and licentiousness were

common."140

In 1815 Bishop Meade and the Evangelical
Churchmen of Virginia attempted to set up legislation
designed to curb various offences, including "drunken-

141 When

ness" and "sabbath-breaking," among the laity.
Bishop Chase began to build Kenyon College at Gambier,
Ohio, he realized that merely building a college outside
a settled area was no guarantee that it would be removed
from all sin. As early as 1812 settlers had come to
this area and had proceeded to erect a large distillery.
It seemed to some that "every path which led through
bushes pointed as directly towards this distillery as
the spokes of a wheel to the hub."142
Excessive drinking was prevalent in the Jacksonian
era as well as in the immediate post-Revolutionary period.
Foreign visitors criticized the tendency of Americans
to over-indulge in "ardent spirits."143 However, the
Tract Society was not dependent on foreign visitors for
its evidence; it had ample proof of its own.

According to statistics released by the New York

City Tract Society in 1834, the City of New York had a

302

licensed liquor store for every 1,000 persons, a ratio
which was 4 times greater than that of Europe's largest
city.144 A reporter from Southeastern Kentucky found 8
distilleries, several of which were owned by church mem-
bers, in a valley 8 miles long and 1 mile wide.145
Shortly before the Civil War a colporteur reported
that an Illinois town, boasting a population of only
150 families, had 5 grog shops.146 To make matters
worse, elections and votes in North Carolina were so
closely associated with liquor that a "few got drunk"
and "others were in a condition unfit to be seen by

"147 Furthermore, the use of ardent

their children.
spirits was not restricted to the laity; alcoholic
beverages were also consumed in generous portions by
the clergy at ministerial associations, ordinations,
christenings, weddings, and funerals.148
In order to combat the ever-increasing menace of
intemperance, concerned citizens began to act. At first
laymen like Dr. Benjamin Rush and Ben Franklin called

for moderation.149

Then New England's Federalists and
clergy went on the offensive. On February 5, 1813, the
Massachusetts Society for the Suppression of Intemperance
was organized. Its aim was not to promote abstinence but
"to discountenance and suppress the too frequent use of

Ardent Spirits, and its kindred vices, profaness and

gaming; and to encourage and promote temperance and

303

general morality."150 However, with the founding of the

American Temperance Society in 1826 and its successor,

the American Temperance Union in 1837, temperance came

to mean abstinence. Although the American Temperance

Society was predominantly a Massachusetts organization,

the South was not completely omitted when it came to

temperance. Virginia's Society for the Promotion of

Temperance was organized in 1826 and dominated the

temperance scene until the mid 1840's when the Sons of

Temperance took over the leadership and attempted to

make temperance synonymous with abstinence. This, how- ‘

ever, was not accomplished without stiff opposition from

some of the churches.151
The early publications of the tract societies

did not insist upon abstinence from all intoxicating

drinks. In 1821 the Christian Almanack warned its

 

readers not to drink cold water in summer. But this
need not be used as an excuse to resort to "ardent
spirits" which was only a "necessity of modern invention."
Instead, the Almanac recommended the use of beer--"a

152

drink wholesome, pleasant, and not expensive." As

late as l826,the Christian Almanack provided instructions
153

 

for making molasses beer. But by 1834 the Society's

agent in Virginia reported that Beecher's Sermons on

 

Intemperance had been "blessed . . . in convincing men

 

that they were sinning against God and the souls of their

 

304

154

fellow men by drinking moderately." It was during this

period that temperance in America came to mean abstinence
from wine and beer as well.155
The shift from moderation to abstinence is clearly
evident in the lives of several of the supporters of the
American Tract Society. S. V. S. Wilder recalled that
at his wedding he brought from his carriage "several
bottles of Old Madeira and claret wine"; something he
would not "presume to have at the present day."156
Theodore Frelinghuysen, chairman of the executive com-
mittee of the Congressional Temperance Society in 1833,
first banished "ardent spirits" and later, wine, from

his table.157

William E. Dodge recalled in 1876 that
his father had been a strict Presbyterian and a "strict
temperance man for his time," yet he always selected
the best of his apples for making cider. He never
asked guests "whether they would take something, but
what they would take--brandy, wine, or this sparkling
cider.”158
Although men like Beecher, Tappan, Dodge, and
Frelinghuysen advocated temperance, none of the American
Tract Society's early leaders were more intimately
associated with the temperance cause than Reverend
Edwards. In his early preaching Edwards had not con-

demned the use of all alcoholic beverages. In 1815 he

began to criticize the use of alcoholic beverages at

305

funerals. Next, he opposed the use of liquor, especially
by ministers, at entertainments. Finally, on April 4,
1816, at the annual state fast, Edwards publically advo-
cated abstinence for all temperate men. His theme for
the next eight years was: "Keep the temperate people
temperate; the drunkards will soon die, and the land be

free."159

By 1826 there were others who agreed with
Edwards that it was incumbent upon all temperate persons
to abstain not only from the "abuse, but from the use"

of liquor.160 These men joined together to form the

American Society for the Promotion of Temperance.161
Edwards was appointed to its executive committee, and in
1829 he resigned his pastorate in order to become the
Temperance Society's General Agent and Secretary.

In the main, the leaders of the American Tract
Society came out in favor of abstinence. There were a
few, however, who had reservations, especially when it
came to wine. One of these was Bishop Meade. In 1835 he
wrote to Reverend Alonzo Potter, later a Bishop of Penn-
sylvania, that he, himself, sometimes took "a glass, or
half a glass" of wine; not because he loved it but because
he had "never yet seen the propriety of passing such a

162

total condemnation of it." Reverend Leonard Bacon, a

director of the Tract Society, also supported temperance

but refused to go along with those who declared that all

163

drinking was necessarily sinful. Reverend James

306

Alexander was reluctant to commit himself to complete
abstinence from all fermented drinks. In 1830 he wrote
of his plans to preach a sermon not on the "cause, symp-
toms, and remedy" of temperance but on "total abstinence."
Yet this seemingly did not include wine. In 1841 he com-
plained that there had been a "great deal of wine-bibbing
and some brawling" among the students at Princeton. Con-
sequently, he was "now rapidly verging towards T--
Totality."164
According to Perry Miller, temperance was a pOpu-
lar issue among revivalists because this was a non-
controversial plank around which all advocates of reviv-

alism could unite.165

Although this was generally the
case, there were exceptions. Reverend Edward Kirk later
recalled that advocating "total abstinence from drinks"
during the early 1830's "was almost as unpOpular as to be
an abolitionist; and it . . . [was] a curious fact that
men who advocated the one were usually advocates of the

other."166

Obviously,the Tract Society did not see any
necessary correlation between the two, but others did.
Virginia's Methodists hesitated to condemn liquor out-
right. If they upheld Wesley's rule on liquor, would
they not also have to uphold his rule on slavery? Fur-
thermore, if the Methodist General Conference had a
right to forbid one, might it someday not attempt to

forbid the other as well?167

307

These reservations, notwithstanding, the American
Tract Society came out wholeheartedly in support of tem-
perance. This was evident first of all in its publi-
cations. In 1829 one almanac devoted four to five pages

168 The Society published

to the cause of temperance.
numerous tracts which emphasized the dangers of liquor.
During its fifth year of operation the Society circulated
122,000 copies of a temperance tract addressed to the
American youth. During the same year the Society circu-
lated 329,824 tracts on the subject of temperance and by

169

1831 this number had risen to 516,000. One of the

more pOpular temperance tracts was Edwards' "The Well
Conducted Farm." In this tract he described S. V. S.
Wilder's attempts to introduce temperance among the
workers on his homestead by offering them money in lieu

170

of their accustomed liquor allotment. In 1834 the

Tract Society published a special temperance volume com-

prising the tracts it had published on this subject.171

In 1847 it published Justin Edwards' Temperance Manual
172

 

as well as part of his Sabbath Manual. The Society

 

also published temperance materials in foreign languages.
By 1831 it had accepted a temperance tract in German and

173 Six years later the American

Spanish for publication.
Tract Society at Boston donated $200 to help defray the

cost of circulating a temperance document in Russia, $200

308

for circulating one in France and Sweden, and $75 for
circulating one in Hungary, Poland, and Hamburg.174
The Society's agents and colporteurs made it very
clear on whose side they were when it came to ardent
Spirits. One worker placed the tract, "Set Down that
Glass," in front of an individual who was just about to
drink. The recipient gave up his drink, organized a
temperance society, and the tavern was turned into a

.175 Reverend S. B. S. Bissel, the

"Temperance House.‘
Society's agent in Virginia, gave a COpy of the tem-
perance volume to a distiller, who likewise gave up his

176 A seller

business and formed a temperance society.
of rum was also persuaded to give up his business real-
izing that "the approbation Of his heavenly Father was

177 The Society was pleased

better than silver and gold."
to announce in 1844 that every colporteur was "in a
sense a Temperance Agent." A colporteur in the Kentucky
mountains had been instrumental in closing at least one
distillery while a colporteur in Ohio had influenced a
Universalist distiller to close down his business.178
The majority of the leading supporters of the
American Tract Society followed the Temperance Society
in shifting its emphasis during the 1830's from moral

179 James Alexander, as usual,

suasion to legal coercion.
was an exception. In 1852 he wrote that he Opposed the

Maine law; the "radical principles of the whole scheme"

309

seemed to him to be "rotten." Its principles were non-
Biblical, and the country was already saddled with too

180 O 0
His Views, however, were

many non-enforceable laws.
in the minority. Frelinghuysen endorsed the Maine Law

and other New England prohibitionary laws of the 1850's.181
Dodge felt that Christians had a right to enforce and
carry out prohibition, and that they should not vote

for any political party that favored the licensing of

182 In 1849 Edwards informed the friends of

liquor.
temperance that all people had

. . . a perfect right, through the legislature, that

right arm of the people which God . . . had pro-

vided for that purpose, to defend themselves

against the nuisance.
And this, he assured them, was not contrary to the Bible
or the Constitution.183

The Tract Society raised various arguments against
the sale and consumption of liquor. Since the American
Tract Society was a religious organization, it was to be
expected that its opposition to alcoholic beverages
would be based, at least in part, on religious or Bibli-
cal grounds. But before it could argue for abstinence
on these grounds it was forced to discount the assumption,
held over from Colonial America, that alcohol was a gift
of nature and thus a gift of God. Edwards attacked this
notion by arguing that alcohol did not exist in nature as
184

such but was artifically produced by fermentation.

(If this was the case, obviously one could not call it a

310

gift of God.) Secondly, alcohol was to be banned because
it was an obstacle to man's salvation. Liquor tended
"strongly to hinder the moral and spiritual illumination
and purification of men, and thus to prevent their sal-
vation." One glass per day was "enough to keep multi-
tudes of men under the full blaze of the gospel, from
ever experiencing its illuminating and purifying power."185
One colporteur in Virginia provided empirical evidence
to substantiate such a claim. After temperance tracts had
been distributed in an area, a division of the "Sons of
Temperance" had been chartered, and fifteen to twenty
persons had joined the church.186
Temperance was also related to the millennial
hopes of the Tract Society. As pointed previously, the
millennial fires burned brightly, especially during the
first twenty-five years of the Society's existence. Tem-
perance was one of the major reforms Protestants were

187 The

promoting in order to usher in the millennium.
relationship between temperance and the millennium was
vaguely explained by Edwards. "Sabbath-breakers" he
argued, were usually "rum-drinkers" and such persons
would never observe the Sabbath as long as they con-
tinued to use "distilled liquors." By promoting tem-
perance he was making it possible for the "General

Sabbath Union," the "Home and Foreign Missionary Socie-

ties, and every other benevolent institution" to

311

accomplish their objectives. "The millennium will never
come," he wrote in 1830, "so long as sober men continue
the use of ardent spirit."188 Beecher agreed. Commerce
in liquor postponed the fulfillment of that prOphecy
which promised the arrival of a time when "the knowledge
of the Lord . . . [should] cover the earth, and violence
and fraud . . . [would] cease."189
The Tract Society did not, however, fight for
temperance solely on religious grounds. Numerous health
and medical reasons were also presented in favor of
abstinence. In attacking liquor on medical grounds the
Society had to discount several supposed positive effects
of liquor. One almanac rejected the argument that the
more one worked in hot weather, the more it was necessary

"190 Another writer went even

for him to drink "spirits.
further; he pointed out that hot weather and alcohol

did not mix. Ninety per cent of those who died suddenly
after drinking cold water, he wrote, had been "addicted

"191

to the free use of ardent spirits. The Society also

discounted the theory that ardent spirits were necessary

for medicinal purposes.192
Besides the fact that alcoholic beverages had

no positive benefits, the Society advised its readers

that liquor brought with it manifold negative effects.

Edwards quoted one authority who listed a virtual catalogue

of diseases produced by ardent spirits. These included

the following:

 

 

_.

 

312

dispepsia, jaundice, emaciation, corpulence, dropsey,
ulcers, rheumatism, gout, tremors, palpitation,
hysteria, epilepsey, palsy, lethargy, apoplexy,
melancholy, madness, delirium, tremens, and
premature old age.

And this list included only a "small part of the catalogue

193 Cholera was more

194

of diseases "caused by liquor."
likely to claim the drinker than the non-drinker.
Certainly the waters used by brewers was not conducive
to health. Edwards pointed out that filthy water was
used because it made the best beer. According to a
reliable source, brewers in one town "were very careful
to have their pipes" for drawing water "come down into
the river just at the place which received the drainings
from the horse stables." And presumably there was "no
such beer in the world." The person who conveyed this
information erroneously assumed that fermentation

purified the water, "but he was grossly mistaken."195

 

Furthermore, alcohol was not only a health hazard, it
was also a fire hazard. Presumably bodies of several
drunkards had been "so thoroughly steeped in spirit as
literally to take fire and consume to ashes."196
Alcohol also had a negative effect upon the

drinker's mental health. The reason for this was ex-
plained by Beecher. A "powerful mind," he pointed out,
required a "vigorous muscular frame." The mind recoiled

on the body "like heavy ordinance" and would "soon shake

down a puny frame." Every mental action required an

313

equal physical reaction. Otherwise "finding her energies
unrestrainedfl'the mind would become "discouraged" and
sink "into despondency and imbecility." Thus it fol-
lowed that "general intemperance" would lead to a
decline in the national intellect.197
The American Toact Society warned that the
injurious effects of alcohol were not limited to the
drinker alone; they were passed on to his offspring as
well. Furthermore, both the moral and physical nature
of the offspring could be affected. The use of alcohol
by parents would lead to a "predisposition to intemperance,
insanity, and various diseases of both body and mind,"
which if continued would become hereditary and after a
number of generations cause the following:
. . . a demunition of size, strength, and energy,
a feebleness of vision, a feebleness and imbecility
of purpose, an obtuseness of intellect, a depravation
of moral taste, a premature old age, and a general
deterioration of the whole character.198
Edwards presented a case history to prove his contention
that the negative effects of alcohol were passed on to
the offspring. One family which had been temperate when
the first child was born later turned to drink. The
oldest child was "industrious, respectable, and . . .
[accumulated] property." The second child was inferior
and drank while the third was "dwarfish in both body and

mind."199

was
wit]
pas.
pre
cre
men
int
an
pro

for

liq
eXC
res-
his
li0:
be ;
he ¢
hat]
was

Wit]

Wisc
Was

tot

314

Another reason for rejecting the use of alcohol
was the fact that ardent spirits were closely associated
with artificial pleasures and the stimulation of one's
passions. By drinking, the individual revealed his
preference for "animal enjoyment" and his willingness to
create a "new appetite" in order to attain these enjoy-
ments.200 Edwards pointed out that when first "taken
into the stomach," alcohol caused an "irritation and
an increase of action, a quickening of the circulation
producing animation and excitement" which many mistook

for a "real good."201

(Since tobacco presumably created
a desire for strong drink, it also was banned. Like
liquor it drove its users from "small or moderate to

. n 202
exceSSive use. )

Any individual who was willing to
resort to artificial inducements in order to increase
his allotment of pleasures in life was guilty of rebel—
lion against God. Every individual was duty bound "to
be satisfied with the amount of animal enjoyment" which
he could procure from the "proper gratification of the
natural appetites and passions." To covet more than this
was a violation of "a moral law" and a dissatisfaction
with God's will.203
A person who was willing to acquiesce to God's
wisdom when it came to the allotment of one's pleasures

was also likely to acquiesce to God's wisdom when it came

to the proper allotment of one's economic and social

St

t1“.

pr
Gc
we
A]
tc
ar
sv
dr
FL

la

01
me
ll
ir
t}
lc

at

ti
Sc
0n

"b

315

status. After a shoemaker and his wife had been converted
they signed the temperance pledge, their family attended
Sabbath School, and they "cheerfully . . . [bore] their
privations."204 However, individuals who rebelled against
God were likely to reject man's ordinances as well. It
was no secret that criminals were usually drinkers.
Alcohol blinded the user's sense of values, causing him
to "call good evil, and evil good; put light for darkness
and darkness for light; sweet for bitter and bitter for
sweet." It decreased the "power of motives to do right,
and . . . [increased] the power of motives to do wrong."205
Furthermore, it made man "more and more adverse to honest
labor."206
The Tract Society also condemned alcohol because
of its association with poverty. It extolled the shoe-
maker and his wife for cheerfully bearing their lot in
life. Beecher maintained that temperance led to "better
industry, more peace, more health, and a better income to
the employers and employed." Furthermore, it caused the
lower classes to be "cheered with the full flow of social
affection" rather than to be filled with a feeling of
"distress and poverty, and disappointment and conten-
tion."207 But such statements did not mean that the Tract
Society preached only the virtue of passively accepting

one's lot in life. The temperate could bear his lot, and

"be cheered with the full flow of social affection"

uh
f0
as
up

whc

316

because his lot was likely to be far more enviable than
that of the intemperate. Proponents of temperance never
tired of marshalling statistics to show the close associ-

208

ation between poverty and drink. Edwards visited one

almshouse containing "1,138 inmates of whom 1,076 were

209 Beecher warned the

brought there by intemperance."
upright citizens that the poor tax was increasing in all
towns and cities primarily due to the effects of intem-
perance.210 In 1828 one almanac informed its readers
that in the state of New York alone there were approxi-
mately 8,000 paupers due to intemperance and these were
costing the state $5000,000.211 The fact that people
might turn to liquor due to poverty and frustration was
seldom mentioned or considered.

If intemperance led to poverty, it was only logi-
cal to assume that temperance lead to prosperity. Con-
sequently, temperance was placed beside Sabbath obser-
vance, thrift, and hard work as the key to success.
Wilder informed his neighbors who were in debt that they
"must expect hard times" as long as they "continued to
drink rum." He offered to loan them money with the
understanding that they would touch no "ardent" drink
for three months and that they need only pay the interest
as long as they remained temperate. The minute they took

up drinking, however, the note would fall due. Those

who agreed soon began to prosper. "The times with them

hay
res
otk

tat

crL
had

bee

mow
ten
bet
Alm
24
ove

Per.

Trd<
and
The
Jack
mill
prot
on t
Clas.

midd;

317

have altered," Wilder observed, "and they are now thriving,

respectable, and useful members of the community." But

others who rejected this prOposal lost their farms, repu-

tation, health, and lives.212
By mid-century it was evident that the temperance

crusade had not been in vain. Although all grog shops

had not disappeared from the land, the reformers had

been successful in associating temperance with middle-

class, native Americanism. During the 1850's the temperance

movement and the Know-Nothing Party often joined

together.213 The Tract Society also made a connection

between intemperance and immigration. The Family

Almanac pointed out that in 1849, Massachusetts had

24,892 paupers of whom 10,253 were "foreigners" and

over 90 per cent of the paupers were "made so by intem-

perance."214
Temperance reform suited the temper of the American

Tract Society. The Society was a religious organization

and temperance could be defended on religious grounds.

The Society was caught up in the millennial fever of the

Jacksonian period and temperance could be argued for on

millennial grounds. The Society was basically a nativist,

Protestant organization and temperance could be supported

on these grounds. The Tract Society espoused middle-

class ideals and certainly temperance fit in with the

middle-class emphasis upon self-discipline, thrift, and

ha:
Pr‘
ke‘
cl
so
1e
wa
1c
re
be
C1“
of
ir
bl

Sc

26
T}
he
be
C]
01
U.

th

318

hard work. It suited the temper Of a Society which
preached self-help rather than social welfare as the

215 Since alcohol was an obstacle to

key to success.
climbing the social and economic ladder, the obvious
solution was to remove it, voluntarily if possible,
legally if necessary. The reSponsibility of government
was not to change society so that the ladder was no
longer necessary. Rather its responsibility was to
remove the obstacle so that the ladder would once again
be open to all. Temperance suited the mood of the
Christian stewards who hoped to reform the American
character "through a revival of piety and morals in the
individual." This would hopefully eradicate sin and
bring about any needed reforms without disturbing the
social order.216
Jacksonian America spawned numerous reform organi-
zations bent on removing evil and perfecting society.
The American Tract Society was one of these. It also
had a blueprint for the good society; a blueprint which
began with the individual. Temperance, Sabbath reform,
cleanliness, sexual purity, and simplicity in dress--all
of these concerned first Of all the individual and not
the society. These reforms could all be classified under

the general heading of self-help; none fit into the con-

temporary concept of social welfare.

116

t}
81

th

319

Since self-help was inseparable from morality it
was necessary for the Society to define the good man.
The virtuous man, as envisioned by the American Tract
Society, was the self-disciplined man. The Christian
stewards feared the man of passion; consequently, they
banned the theater, the novel, and alcohol which played
upon man's emotions. Whereas the self-disciplined man
was orderly and law abiding, the man of passions was
more likely to be riotous and even rebellious. Further-
more, as will be shown in the next chapter, the self-
disciplined man, would most likely be an economically
successful man. Thus it would not be amiss to describe
the Society's ethic as "the doctrine of self-improvement
through the Lord."217

The Society's ethics had the advantage of neatly
dividing the world into two recognizable camps. Further-
more, they were the ethics around which the entire evan-
gelical community could rally. Temperance may have
proven somewhat divisive, but in the main, Perry Miller
was correct in emphasizing its non-controversial nature.
This is not to imply that the Tract Society manufactured
ethical issues in order to unite the evangelical denomi-
nations and to deflect their attention away from doctrinal
differences. But, as will be emphasized in Chapter VIII,
the Society stressed religious and national unity.
Slavery, a divisive issue, was conspicuously lacking in

the Society's list of do's and don'ts.

t_E_a_D. N.C.J. 8.6 T. Skid Wh.. p. «SGTS u

FOOTNOTES--CHAPTER V

1William A. Hallock, "Light and Love," A Sketch of
the Life and Labors of the Rev. Justin EdWards, D.Dey_the
Evapgeiical Pastor, The Advocate of Temperance, the Sabbath
and theihible (New York: AmericahiTract Society, 1855),
p. 44. (Hereinafter cited as Hallock, Justin Edwards.)

 

 

 

 

 

Lee Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy:
New York as a Test Case (New York: Atheneum, 1961),
p. 200. (Hereinafter cited as Benson, The Concept of
Jacksonian Dem.)

 

 

 

 

3Cited in Richard J. Purcell, Connecticut in Tran-
sition, 1775-1818 (New York: American Historical Associ-
atiOn, 1918), p. 340.

 

4The Christian Almanac, December, 1831.

 

5C. P. McIlvaine, "On Spiritual Declension,"

Tracts, II, No. 66, p. 5.

6"Simplicity in Dress," Tracts, V, No. 170, p. 2.
See also The Christian Almanac, Dec., 1831; The Christian
Almanac--Mich., 1839, p. 6. One writer pointed out that
a “mind enslaved by the fashions and extravagances of this
world," could not "daily hold exalted intercourse with
heaven" (see "Simplicity in Dress," Tracts, V, No. 170,

pp. 2-3).

 

7Samuel Miller, Letters from a Father t9 His Son
in College (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publi-
cation, 1852), p. 194. (Hereinafter cited as Miller,
Letters.)

 

8Legh Richmond, "The Dairyman's Daughter," Tracts,
I, No. 9, pp. 15-17.

320

IRO.G.Af S..Jdtf.rlrl atLNTEYC T:

321

91hid.. pp. 16-17.

loRichard Knill, "The Anxious Servant," Tracts,
IX, No. 343, p. l.

llLegh Richmond, "The Dairyman's Daughter," Tracts,
I, No. 9, pp. 16-17. It should be pointed out that Legh
Richmond was an English clergyman. The view that the
poor ought to be contented with that station in life where
God had placed them was more evident in English than in
American writers. However, the American Tract Society saw
fit to publish these tracts.

12The Christian Almanac--MicheL1830, p. 6. In its
stress upon simplicity, even for the rich, the Society
joined other Americans in contrasting American innocence
and simplicity with European “fashionable dress, intellec-
tualism," and leisure (see Charles L. Sanford, The Quest
for Paradise: Europe and the American Moral Imaginatihn
[Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1961], p. 161
[hereinafter cited as Sanford, The Quest for Paradise]).

 

 

 

 

13Douglas T. Miller, Jacksonian Aristocraey: Class
and Democracy in New York, 1830-1860 (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1967), pp. 7—8 (hereinafter cited as
Miller, Jacksonian Aristocraey); Russel B. Nye, The Cultural
Life of the New Nation,_l776-1830, Harper Torchbooks (New
York: Harper and Row, 1960), pp. 132-34 (hereinafter
cited as Nye, The Cultural Life of the New Nation).

14The Christian Almanac, May, 1821.

 

15The Family Almanao, 1852, p. 36.

 

l6Child's Paper, IX (May, 1860), 20.

 

l7Hannah More, "The Shepherd of Salisbury Plain,"
Tracts, I, No. 10, p. 8.

18Miller, Letters, pp. 193-94.

19"Poor Sarah," Tracts, IV, No. 128, p. 7.

20Annual Report, N.Y., 1829, p. 44.

 

YC

‘4

HI

pLitiC e T;

322

21Child's Paper, VIII (August, 1859), 32.

 

22The Picture Alphabet: In Prose and Verse (New

York: American Tract Society, n.d}), p. 32}

 

23Christian Almanac, Nov., 1831 (see also Hannah
More, "The Shepherd ofSalishury Plain," Tracts, I, No. 10,
p. 78; "Contentment in Humble Life: A MemOlr of Thomas
HOgg," Tracts, IV, No. 139, p. 8).

 

24"Fifty Reasons for Attending Worship," Tracts,
X, No. 377, p. 2.

25Annual Report, N.Y., 1857, p. 108 (see also

Henry Venn, “Mrs. Henry Venn,fiTracts, XII, No. 510, p. 3).

 

26

"The Chimney-Sweeper," Tracts, V, No. 184,
pp. 1-2.

27Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1850,
pp. 23-24 (See also John Hall, ed., Forty Years' Familiar
Letters of James W. Alexander, D.D., Contributing With
the Notes, A Memoir of His Life [2 vOls.; New York:
Charles Scribner, 1860], I, 20 [hereinafter cited as Hall,
ed., Forty Years]; Legh Richmond, "The Dairyman's Daughter,"
Tracts, I, No. 9, p. 21).

 

 

 

 

28The Family Almanac, 1844, p. 13.

 

29"We Must Live," Tracts, XII, No. 479, pp. 10-12.

30W. T. Dwight, Address Delivered at the Forty-
Fifth Anniversary of the American Tract Society,tin the
Tremont Temple, Boston, Wednesday Evening, May 25, 1859
(fibston: American Tract Society, 1839), pp. 10-11. (Here-
inafter cited as Dwight, Address . . . 1859.)

 

 

31Charles C. Cole, The Social Ideas of the Northern

Evangelists, 1826-1860 (Reprinted; New York: Octagon Books,
l966), p. 116: (Hereinafter cited as Cole, The Soc. Ideas
of the Northern Evangelists.)

 

 

 

 

32Annual§eporth.Y.y1827, p. 25; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1830, pp. 47, 50, 54, 55; Annual Report, N.Y., I831,
P. 36; MiIler, Letters, pp. 51-52.

 

 

 

 

v: uCL-C (-

I ~r\.\ svt (K

i ll IPJII {'11 ‘
I

323

33Miller, Letters, p. 51.

34Lyman Beecher, A Sermon Delivered . . . on the

Evening Subseguent to the Formation of the Connecticut
Society for the Promotion of Good Morals, (1831), cited in
Charles Roy KeIler, The Second Great Awakening in Connecti-
cut (New Haven: Yale Uhiversity Press, 1942), p. 149}
(Hareinafter cited as Keller, Sec. Great Aw. in Conn.)

 

 

 

35Tracts, II, No. 50, pp. 1-4.

36Hannah More, "The Shepherd of Salisbury Plain,"

Tracts, I, No. 10, p. 3.

"Profane Swearing," Tracts, I, No. 12, p. 3.

38Annual Report, N.Y., 1840, p. 139.

 

39Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Dem., pp. 198-

 

201.

40"To Those Commencing a Religious Life," Tracts,
VIII, NO. 262' pp. 4.5.

41"Questions and Counsel," Tracts, IV, No. 113,
pp. 1, 4 (see also "The Amiable Louisa," Tracts, VIII,
No. 225, pp. 3, 8; Hallock, Justin Edwards, pp. 538, 540).

42J. Alleine, "Pause and Think, Am I a Christian?":

Tracts, IV, No. 106, p. 17.

43Samuel Schmucker, The American Lutheran Church,

Historically, Doctrinally, andPractically Delineatedyfin
Several OccasiOnaI'DiSCourses (5th ed.; Philadelphia:

E. W. Miller, 1852), p. 95. (Hereinafter cited as
Schmucker, Am. Luth. Church.)

 

44

"Fashionable Amusements," Tracts, III, No. 73,
pp. 9-100

45"Friendly Hints to the Young," Tracts, VI,
No. 201, pp. 1, 5; Thomas Goodwin, "On the Purifying of
the Heart," Tracts, II, No. 61, pp. 9-10.

46

"Fashionable Amusements," Tracts, III, No. 73,
pp. 7-8-

H—‘l U) (4'0 Z

'fiAmm

II'"

324

47Isaac Watts, "The End of Time," Tracts, V,
No. 153, p. 8 (see also Gardiner Spring, Essays on the
Distinguishing Traits of Christian Character [New York:
Jonathan Leavitt, I829], pp. 8I-82 [hereinafter cited as
Spring, Essays]; Philip Doddridge, "The Well-Spent Day,"
Tracts, II, No. 55, pp. 4-5).

 

 

48Annual ReportLlN.Y., 1864, p. 48.

 

49David Grimsted, Melodrama Unveiled: American
Theater and Culture, 1800-50 (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1968), pp. I01-02. (Hereinafter cited as
Grimsted, Melodrama Unveiled.)

 

 

 

50Nye, The Cultural Life of the New Nation, pp.

262-67; Cole, The Soc. Ideas of Northern Evangelists,
pp. 112-15; Grimsted, Melodrama Unveiled, p. 85.

 

 

 

51John 8. Stone, A Memoir of the Life of James

Milnor, D.D., Late Rector of St. Georgers Church, New
York (New York: American Tract Society, 1848), pp. 529-
3I. (Hereinafter cited as Stone, Milnor.)

 

 

52Doddridge's Rise and Progress was published by

the American Tract Society.

 

53Annual Report, Bost., 1842, p. 53. On the oppo-
sition of the Society‘s members to the theater see also
Barbara M. Cross, ed., The Autobiogrephy of lyman Beecher
(2 vols.; Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University
Press, 1961), II, 66 (hereinafter cited as Cross, ed.,
Lyman Beecher); Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, p. 48.

 

 

 

 

54

"Theatrical Exhibitions," Tracts, IV, NO. 130,
pp. 2-30

551bid., p. 3.

56"To a Lady in Fashionable Life," Tracts, VIII,
No. 289, pp. 5-6. Actually this point is dehateable. One
historian of the theater points out that managers of
Southern theaters had to lower their rates and cater to
all classes if they hOped to survive (see James H. Dorman,
Theater in the Ante-Bellum South, 1815-61 [Chapel Hill:
University of NorthICarolina Press, 1967], pp. 231-32
[hereinafter cited as Dorman, Theater in the Ante-Bellum
Sguthl). Grimsted agreed with Dorman that prices were not

 

t2 e C; . l
1 \Ia villi 1!; 7L.£[.1 C. vii/K
D. . 0L"

325

prohibitive and did not lead people to theft or prosti-
tution. The cost of admission prior to 1840 ranged from

25 cents to $1. After 1840 even these prices were low-
ered. Cheap gallery seats were provided in the North for
poor whites and Negroes and special seating areas were set
aside for prostitutes or "single gentlewomen who had lodg-
ings to let" (see Grimsted, Melodrama Unveiled, pp. 51-52).

 

57"To a Lady in Fashionable Life," Tracts, VIII:

No. 289, p. 6.

58"Theatrical Exhibitions," Tracts, IV, No. 130,

pp. 46-47. Bernard Hewitt concludes that theaters like

New York's Bowery Theater attempted to cater to the masses
by emphasizing "blood and thunder" productions (Theatre
U.S.A.: 1668 to 1957 [New York: McGraw Hill, 1959],

pp. 110-16, 144 [hereinafter cited as Hewitt, Theatre
U.S.A.]). However Grimsted concludes that there was lit-
tle to substantiate the clerics' accusation that the dramas
sanctioned "prodigality, deceit, seduction, treachery, and
murder" and made "vice . . . appear as virtue" (see
Grimsted, Melodrama Unveiled, p. 27).

 

 

59Dorman, Theater in the Ante-Bellum South, p. 257;
Grimsted, Melodrama Unveiled, p. 33.

 

 

 

 

60Cole, The Soc. Ideas of Northern Evangelists,
p. 113.

61The Christian Almanac--Michigan, 1839, p. 36.

62

Raymond A. Mohl, "Humanitarianism in the Pre-
industrial City: The New York Society for the Prevention
of Pauperism, 1817-1823," Journal of American History,
LXVII (December, 1970), 593. (Hereinafter cited as Mohl,
"Humanitarianism in the Preindustrial City.")

 

63Family Almanac, 1852, p. 28.

 

64Annual Report, N.Y., 1860, pp. 18-19.

 

65Annual Report, N.Y., 1837, p. 37.

 

66Annual Repert, N.Y., 1842, p. 48.

67Child's Peper, II (October, 1856), 39.

 

' :—’II (I)
‘ /Y\ f'\

'U

326

68Annual Report, N.Y., 1844, p. 23.

698tone, Milnor, pp. 385-86, 611-12.

70Sidney L. Jackson, America's Streggle for Free
Schools: Social Tension and Education in New England and
New York, 1827-42 (Washington, D.C.: American Council on
Public Affairs, 1941), pp. 44-45.

71"Beware of Bad Books," Tracts, XII: NO- 493: Po 4-

72l§l§,. p. 2; Annual Report, N.Y., 1846, p. 89.

73"The Temptations to Young Men," Tracts, X,
No. 401, pp. 10-11; "Beware of Bad Books," Tracts, XII,
No. 493, p. 2; Family Almanac, 1853, p. 35.

74"Beware of Bad Books." Tracts, XII: NO- 493'

p0 20

75Annual Report, N. fiY., 1836, p. 41. A similar

argument was presentedin "The Temptations to Young Men,"
Tracts, X, No. 401, p. 11.

76Annual Report, N. Y., 1831, p. 6; Cross, ed.,

Lyman Beecher, I,(105.

77Stone, Milnor, p. 61.

78Ebenezer Carter Tracy, Memoir of the Life of

Jeremiah Evarts, Esq., Late Corresponding Secretary of
the American Commissioners for Foreign Missions (Boston:
Crocker and Brewster, 1845), pp. 13-14. (Hereinafter
cited as Tracy, Jeremiah Evarts.)

 

 

79Shephard Knapp, A History of Brick Prespyterian

Church in the City of New York (New York: Trustees of the
Brick Presbyterian Church, 1951), p. 195 (hereinafter

cited as Knapp, Hist. of the Brick Presbyterian Church);
Gardiner Spring, Personal Reminiscences of the Life and
Times of Gardiner Spring, Pastor of the Brick Presbyterian
Ehfirch in the City of New York (2 vols.; New York: Charles

Scribners and C6}, I866), I, I28 (hereinafter cited as
Spring, Pers. Rem.).

327

80"A Time to Dance," Tracts, V, No. 172, p. 4.

81"To a Lady in Fashionable Life," Tracts, VIII,
No. 209, p. 2. Other references concerning the dance
include: "Dancing as a Social Amusement," Tracts, XII,
No. 491, p. 13; Annual Report, N.Y., 1833, p. 65; Annual
Report, N.Y.,1843, p. 38.

82Cole, The Soc. Ideas of Northern Evangelists,

p. 115.

83Child's paper, VIII (August, 1859), 31.

84"The Ruinous Consequences of Gambling," TractS,

VI, No. 200, p. 5 (see also "A Friendly Word with a
Gamester," Tracts, XI, No. 428, pp. 1-4).

85William Meade, "Notes on Card Playing," in John

Johns' A Memoir of the Life of the Rt. Rev. William
Meade, D.D., Bishop of the Protestantgpiscopal Church

in the Diocese of Virginia. . . (Baltimore: Innes and
Co., Pub., 1867), pp. 94-98. (Hereinafter cited as Johns,
William Meade.)

 

868. V. S. Wilder, Records from the Life of S. V.

S. Wilder (New York: American Tract Society, 1865),
pp. 295-96. (Hereinafter cited as Wilder, Records.)

 

87Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 27.

 

88Miller, Letters, pp. 51-52.

89"The Widow's Son." Tracts, I. NO- 35: PP- 5. 8' 9°

90Cole, The Soc. Ideas of Northern Evangelists,
pp. 125-290

911bid., pp. 105-09; Clifford Griffin, Their
Brothers' Kee ers: Moral Stewardship in the United States,
I855-I863 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press,
I960), pp. 119-23 (hereinafter cited as Griffin, Their
Brothers' Keepers).

 

 

92Spring realized that any Sabbath Reform Movement
would have to be led by an interdenominational group of

328

laymen. In 1851 a Committee to promote the better
observance of the Sabbath was organized and the chair-
man was a layman, Norman White (see Spring, Pers. Rem.,
II, 142-44).

 

93Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 57.

 

94Dwight, "Address . . . 1859," pp. 6-8.

 

95George Franklin Smythe, Kenyon College: Its
First Century (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1924),
p. 175. (Hereinafter cited as Smythe, Kenypn College.)

 

 

 

96Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, p. 88.

 

97Annua1 Report, N.Y., 1853, p. 100.

 

98Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 452.

 

99Annual Report, N.Y., 1831, p. 6.

looAnnual Report, N,y,, 1848, p. 61; Hallock, Justin
Edwards, p. 496.

 

101"The New Birth," Tracts, III: NO- 98' P: 13'

102Charles P. McIlvaine, "On Spiritual Declension,"
Tracts, II, No. 66, p. 7 (see also "Institution and
Observance of the Sabbath," Tracts, V, No. 177, pp. 14-15).

103Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 467.

 

104C. Malan, "The Watchmaker and His Family,"
Tracts, III, No. 85, pp. 2-3 (see also Annual Report,
N.Y., 1827, pp. 26-27).

 

105"Parental Duties," Tracts, I, No. 27, pp. 18-19.

106T. H. Gallaudet, The Child's Book on the Soul
(Hartford, Conn.: Edwin Hunt, 1848), Part II, p. 72.
(The American Tract Society published a number of Gallau-
det's books.)

107The Child's paper. II (September: 1353): 33°

329

108Child's paper, I (August, 1852), 29.

 

109Lyman Beecher, Beecher's Works, V01- 1’ Lectures

 

 

on Political Atheism and Kindred Subjects, Together with
Six Sermons on Intemperance. Dedicated to the Workingmen
of the United States (Boston: John P. Jewett andiCo.,
1852i. p. 123. THereinafter cited as Beecher, Lect. on
Pol. Atheism.)

 

 

110Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 457.

 

111Lyman Beecher, A Plea for the West (3rd ed.;

Cincinnati: Truman and Smith, 1836), p. 20; Gardiner
Spring, "The Sabbath, A Blessing to Mankind," Tracts, I,
No. 37, pp. 2-5; Hallock, Justin Edwards, pp. 459-62.

 

 

112Gardiner Spring, "The Sabbath, A Blessing to
Mankind," Tracts, I, No. 37, p. 9.

113The Family Almanac, 1855, p. 34 (see also The

Christian Almanac, 1822, p. 29; Annual Report, N.Y., I827,
pp. 43-44; "The Lord's Day," Tracts, I, No. 8, p. 2;
"Remember the Sabbath Day to Keep it Holy," Tracts, I,

No. 20, pp. 3-4).

 

 

 

114Family Almanac, 1851, p. 32.

 

115George Burder, "A Persuasive to Public WorshiPr"

Tracts, II, No. 41, p. 7 (see also Gardiner Spring, "The
Sabbath, A Blessing to Mankind," Tracts, I, No. 37, p. 9;
The Christian A1manac--Western District, 1828, pp. 5-6).

116George Burder, "A Persuasive to Public Worship,"

Tracts, II, No. 41, p. 3.

117Family Almanac, 1852, p. 41.

 

118Philander Chase, Reminiscences: An Autobiogr
raphy, Second Edition, Comprisingpa History o§_the Prin-
cipal Events in the Author's Life to A. D. 1847 (Boston:
James B. Dow, 1848), p. 40.

 

1198. S. Schmucker, "Appeal in Behalf of the
Christian Sabbath," Tracts, XII, No. 502, p. 14 (see also
Child's Paper, V (ApriI, I856), 15; "True Prophecies,"
Tracts, IV, No. 108, p. 84).

 

330

120"The Sabbath: A Blessing to Mankind," Tracts,
I, NC. 37' pp. 7-80

1218. S. Schmucker, "Appeal in Behalf of the

Christian Sabbath," Tracts, XII, No. 502, p. 8.

122Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 454.

 

123Wm. C. Brownlee, "An Appeal to the Patriot."

Tracts, VII, No. 253, pp. 31-32.

124Pers. Rem., II, 146-47 (see also Gardiner

Spring, "The Sabbath, A Blessing to Mankind," Tracts,

I, No. 37, pp. 8-9, 15; Beecher, Lect. on Pol. Atheism,
p. 123; G. Adolf Koch, Republican Religion: The American
Revolution and the Cult of Reason [Gloucester, Mass.:
Peter Smith, 1964], p. 265 [hereinafter cited as Koch,
Republican Religion]).

 

 

 

 

125George Burder, "A Persuasive to Public Worship,"
Tracts, II, No. 41, p. 3.

126Ibid., p. 3; S. S. Schmucker, "Appeal in Behalf
of the Christian Sabbath," Tracts, XII, No. 502, p. 11;
wm. C. Brownlee, "An Appeal to the Patriot," Tracts, VII,
No. 253, p. 22.

127"Sabbath Occupations," Tracts, IV! No. 108'
pp. 6-10; "Institution and Observance of the Sabbath,"
Tracts, V, No. 177, p. 20.

128"Institution and Observance of the Sabbath,"
Tracts, V, No. 177, p. 20; Hallock, Justin Edwards,
pp. 455-87; Fred Somkin, Unquiet Eagle, Memopy and Desire
in the Idea of American Freedom (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell
University Press, 1967), p. 50 (hereinafter cited as
Somkin, Unquiet Eagle).

 

 

 

129Child's paper, II (July, 1860), 28.

 

130Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, p. 81.

 

131On the Roman Catholic immigrant and the Sabbath
see William Nevins, Thoughts on Po e (New York: American
Tract Society, n.d.), pp. iiii, 3 - ; Annual Report, N.Y.
gity Tract Society, 1840, pp. 98-99; Spring, Pers. Rem.,
II, 144.

 

 

 

331

132D. Stuart Dodge, compiler and ed., Memorials

of William E. Dodge (New York: Anson D. F. Randolph and
Co., 1887), pp. 62:68, 306. (Hereinafter cited as Dodge,
Memorials of wm. E. Dodge.)

 

 

133Ibid., pp. 62-68.

134Symbolic Crusade, Status Politics and the
American Temperance Movement (Urbana: University
of Illinois Press, 1963), pp. 13-60. (Hereinafter cited
as Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade.)

 

 

 

135Spring, Pers. Rem., II, 144.

 

136J. Scudder, "Knocking at the Door: An Appeal

to Youth," Tracts, I, No. 31, pp. 4-5; Child's Paper,
VIII (September, 1858), p. 38.

 

137Thomas H. Skinner, "Duties of Church Members,"

Tracts, VIII, No. 265, pp. 2-3.

138Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers, pp. 146-51.

 

139Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade, pp. 38-39. Gus-
field points out that liquor had not only become more
plentiful after the American Revolution; it also had
become more potent. Less high quality beer was being
imported from England after the Revolution and whiskey
was filling this vacuum. The latter also became impor-
tant in the economy since farmers found it more economical
to ship their grain in the form of whiskey than to ship
the grain itself. For a comprehensive study on the need
for temperance at this time,see John A. Krout, The Origins
of Prohibition (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1925), pp. 58-
160 (hereinafter cited as Krout, Origins of Prohibition).

 

 

140Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, I, 27.

 

141E. Clowes Chorley, Men and Movements in the

American Episcopal Church (New York: Charles Shribners'
Sons, I950T) p. 109} (Hereinafter cited as Chorley, Men
and Movements in the Am. Episc. Church.)

 

142Smythe, Kepyon College, p. 70.

332

143Edward Pessen, Jacksonian America: Society
Personality and Politics (Homewood, 111.: DorseyiPress,
1969i, pp. 23- ~24*(hereinafter cited as Pessen, Jacksonian
America). Robert Baird estimated that 60,000,000 gaIlons
of whiskey were manufactured and consumed annually in the
United States, and this did not include the imported
brandies (see Robert Baird, Religion in America; . .
[New York: Harper and Bros., 1844T, pp. 173- 74 Therein-
after cited as Baird, Religion in Am. ]).

 

 

 

 

 

144Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1839:

 

p. 17.

145Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 102.

 

146Annual Report, N.Y., 1857, p. 131.

 

147Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 112.

 

148Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade, p. 39; Cross, ed.,

Lyman Beecher, I, 22.

 

 

149The early call for temperance came, often as
not, from the non-clergy, from concerned laymen like
Dr. Benjamin Rush and Ben Franklin (see Krout, Origins
of Prohibition, pp. 12).

 

150Lyman Beecher, A Reformation of Morals, Prac-
ticable and Indi_pensible: A Sermon Delivered at New
Haven on the Evening of Octoher 27, 1812 (Andover: Flagg
and Gould, 1814), p. 29n. See aISO Robert Baird, The
Christian Retrospect and Register: A Summary of the—
Scientific, Moral and Religious Progress of the First
Half of the Nineteenth Century (New York: M. W. Dodd,
1851), p. 280 (hereinafter cited as Baird, Christian
Retroppect and Register). On the early hist tory of the
I5cal temperance societies see Krout, Origins of Prohi-
bition, pp. 83—100.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

151Krout, Origins of Prohibition, pp. 101- -12, 155-
68; Baird, Relig. in Am., pp.173- 74; Baird, The Christian
Retroppect and Register, p. 281. On the temperance move-
ment in the South see 5. C. Pearson and J. Edwin Hendricks,
Liquor and Anti—Liquor in Virginia, 1619-1919 (Durham,
N.C.: Duke University Press, 1967), pp. 55, 73, 93 (here-
inafter cited as Pearson and Hendricks, Liquor and Anti-
Liquor in Virginia). Some churches expeIledmémbers who

 

 

 

 

 

333

joined the temperance societies arguing that "God gave the
spirit in the fruit of the grain." Thus "to oppose the
full use of liquor, one of God's rich mercies," was sin-
ful (see Pearson and Hendricks, Liquor and Anti-Liquor

in Virginia, p. 69, 50-54). On the close relationihetween
the Sons of Temperance and the American Tract Society see
Annual Rgport, N.Y., 1849, p. 74.

 

 

 

152Christian Almanac, July, 1821.

 

153Ibid., August, 1826.

154Annual Report, N.Y., 1834, p. 18.

 

lSSKrout. Origins of Prohibition, pp. 155-68.

 

156Wilder, Records, p. 66.

157Talbot W. Chambers, Memoir of the Life and
Character of the Late Hon. Theodore Frelinghpysen, LL.D.
(New York: Harper and Bros., 1863), pp. 244446. (Herein-
after cited as Chambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen.)

 

 

158Dodge, Memorials of Wm. E. Dodge, pp. 149-50.

 

159Hallock, Justin Edwards, pp. 62-65, 105.

 

160Justin Edwards, The Temperance Manual (New
York: American Tract Society, [1847?]), pp. i4415.
(Hereinafter cited as Edwards, Temp, Manual.)

 

 

161The stated aim of the Temperance Society was
"Total Abstinence From Intoxicating Drinks, and thus the
removal of one of the most terrific obstacles to the
spread of the gospel" (see Hallock, Justin Edwggds,
p. 312). Other members of the American Tract Society
who were also supporters of the American Temperance
Society included Samuel Hubbard, S. V. S. Wilder, William
Reid, Reverend Francis wayland, Reverend Warren Fay and
Reverend Leonard Wbods (see ibid., p. 319).

 

162Johns, William Meade, pp. 249-56.

 

163Theodore Davenport Bacon, Leonard Bacon, A
§tatesman in the Church (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1931), pp. 82-84.

 

 

334

164Hall, Forty Years, I, 150, 335.

 

165Perry Miller, The Life of the Mind in America:

From the Revolution to the CiVil War (New York: Harcourt,
Brace anthofId, Inc., 1965). P. 85. (Hereinafter cited
as Miller, The Life of the Mind in Am.)

 

 

166David O. Mears, Life of Edward Norris Kirk,
D.D. (Boston: Lockwood, Brooks and Co., 1877), p. 79.
(Hereinafter cited as Mears, Kirk.)

 

167Pearson and Hendricks, Liquor and Anti-Liquor

in Virginia, pp. 88, 119; Gusfield, gymbolic Crusade,
p. 52.

 

 

168
pp. 30-34.

The Christian Almanac-Western District, 1829,

169Annual Report, N.Y., 1830, p. 12; Annual

Report, N.Y., 1831, p. 6.

 

 

170Tracts, V, No. 176; Wilder, Records, p. 18.

171The title of this volume was The Temperance
Volume; Embracing,the Temperance Tracts of the American
Tract Sociepy (New York: American Tract Society, 1834)
(Eee Annual Report, N.Y., 1834, p. 9).

 

172Annual Repgrt, N.Y., 1847, p. 6.

173Annual Report, N.Y., 1831, pp. 7-8.

174Annual Report, N.Y., 1837, p. 27.

175Annual Rgport,,N.Y., 1836, p. 110.

 

176Annual Rgport, N.Y., 1843, p. 55.

 

177Annual Report, N.Y.,p1836, p. 105.

 

178Annual Report, N.Y., 1835, p. 23, 57, 64;
Annual Rgport, §,Y., 1830, pp. 55-56; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1843, p. 50; Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, p. 79.

 

 

 

 

335

1790n the shift from moral suasion to legal

coercion during the 18305 see Krout, Origins of Prohi-
bition, pp. 168-73, 262-96. According to Krout the

earIy temperance leaders had faith in the perfectibility
of man. All that was necessary to bring about reform was
moral suasion. This faith decreased after 1835 (see ibid.,
p. 171; see also Cole, The Soc. Ideas of Northern Evan-

gelists, p. 121).

180Halll Forty Years, II, 170.

 

 

 

l8lchambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen, p. 248.

182Dodge, Memorials of WM. E. DOdQQI p. 162‘

 

183Ha11ock, Justin Edwards, pp. 497-99 (see also

Child's Paper, I [June, 1852], 24).

 

 

184Edwards, Temp, Manual, pp. 7-9.

 

185"On the Traffic in Ardent SpiritSr" TraCEEJ IV'

NO. 125' pp. 17-18.

186Annual Report. N'Y'I 1853: P- 99-

1 . . . . .
87Krout, Origins of Prohibition, p. 123.

188Hallock, Justin Edwards, pp. 305—06. 324-25-

 

189Lyman Beecher, Six Sermons on Intemperance con-

tained in Beecher's WOrks, Vol.~i] iectures on Pgiitical
Atheism and Kihdred Subjects; Together with Sii Lectures
on Intemperance, Dedicatgd to‘the Workingmen of the
United States (Boston: John Jewett and Co., 1852),

p. 404. (Hereinafter cited as Beecher, Six Sermons on
Intemperance.)

 

 

 

 

190The Christian Almanac--Western District,
August, 1829.

 

191"On the Traffic in Ardent Spirits," Tracts,
IV, No. 125. p- 11-

192The Christian Almanac-~Western Distrigp.
1830, p. 23.

336

193Edwards, Temp. Manual, p. 43 (see also "On the
Traffic in Ardent Spirits, Tracts, IV, No. 125, p. 10;

—

Krout, Origins of Prohibition, p. 142).

 

194Edwards, Temp. Manual, pp. 60-63.

 

195Justin Edwards, Letter to the Friends of Tem-

perance in Massachusetts (Boston: Seth and BliSs, 1836),
pp. IO-]-—I.

 

 

196The Christian Almapgg--Western District, 1830,
p. 23 (see also Benjamin Rush, "Effects of Ardent Spirits,"
Tracts, II, No. 25, p. 4; Krout, Origins of Prohibition,
pp. 230-31).

 

 

197Beecher, Six Sermons on Intempprance, p. 381.

 

198"On the Traffic in Ardent Spirits," Tracts, IV:
No. 125, p. 7.

199Edwards, Temp. Manual, pp. 38-39.

 

200"On the Traffic in Ardent spirits," EEEEEE' IV,
NO. 125: pp' 2_3'

201Edwards, Temp. Manual, p. 25.

 

202Miller, Letters, pp. 105, 108-09; The Christian
A1manac--Western Distric§,1§§3, pp. 26-27; The Chiidrs
Paper, IV (February, 1855), 7; Child's Paper, X (January,
1861), 4; Lewis Tappan, The Life of A. Tappan (New York:
Hurd and Houghton, 1870), pp.i106-09.

 

 

 

 

203Edwards, Temp. Manual, p. 30; "On the Traffic
in Ardent Spirits," Tracts, IV, No. 125, pp. 2-3.

 

204Annual Report, N.Y., 1838, p. 30.

 

205Edwards, Tem . Manual, pp. 69-70 (see also
Krout, Origins of Prohibition, pp. 234-35).

 

 

 

206"True Prophecies," Tracts, IV, No. 108, p. 203.

207Beecher, Six Sermons on Intemperance, p. 311.

337

208Krout, Origins of Prohibition, pp. 234-35.

 

209Hallock, Justin Edwards, p. 337.

 

210Beecher, Six Sermons on Intemperance, pp. 384-85.

 

211The Christian Almanac--Western District, 1823:

212wilder, Records, pp. 298-300. One tract writer

gave the case history of a former drunkard and his poverty-
stricken family. After the drunkard reformed and took the
temperance p1edge,his circumstances changed (see "The Poor
Man's House Repaired; or The Wretched Made Happy: A
Narrative of Facts," Tracts, IX, No. 313).

213Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade, pp. 44-57 (see
especially pp. 55-57).

 

214The Family Almanac, 1851, p. 45.

215On the relationship between temperance and

middle-class ideals see Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade,
pp. 44-47.

 

216John L. Thomas, "Reform in the Romantic Era," in
Intellectual History in America: Contemporary Essays on
Puritanism, The Enlightenment, and Romanticism, ed. by
Cushing Strout (New York: Harper and Row, Pub., 1968), I,
193-95.

217Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade, p. 45.

 

CHAPTER VI

WORK, LEISURE TIME, AND PROPERTY

In his Notes on Virginia, Thomas Jefferson provided

 

Americans a yardstick for measuring the decline of any

nation. "Generally speaking," he wrote,

the proportion which the aggregate of other classes

of citizens bears in any State to that of its husband-

men, is the prOportion of its unsound to its healthy

parts, and is a good enough barometer whereby to

measure its degree of corruption. . . . Carpenters,

masons, smiths, are wanting in husbandry; but, for

the general Operations of manufacture, let our work-

shops remain in Europe. . . . The mobs of great cities

add just so much to the support of pure governments,

as sores do to the strength of the human body.1
By 1860 it was evident that Americans had not paid suf-
ficient heed to Jefferson's warning. A transportation and
industrial revolution was rapidly changing America's pas-
toral country-side into urban workshOps.

Industrialization brought with it both increased

‘Nealth and poverty. In his study of ante-bellum New York,
IDouglas Miller has pointed out that stratification increased
1rather than decreased after 1830. The number of New York's

‘Vealthy citizens increased dramatically, but so did the

338

339

number of the urban poor. Displaced craftsmen and unskilled
immigrants swelled the ranks of the labor force.2

One of the by-products of urbanization, industri-
alization,and immigration was an increase in pauperism.
And as the number of unemployed increased so did the size
of the welfare rolls. Poverty was not absent in Colonial
America. Poverty or near poverty was a common phenomenon
during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. However,
extreme cases of wealth were not common. During the early
1800's the Republic had fewer than six millionaires.
Consequently, poverty was not as noticeable in the pre-
industrial society. But even aside from the fact that
near poverty was a common phenomena in Colonial America,
urbanization brought with it an alarming increase of resi-
dents who were dependent, at least temporarily, upon public
charity.3

The American Tract Society was convinced that
Christianity had relevance for this world as well as for
the next. True religion had something to say regarding
economic as well as spiritual matters. Consequently, it
is not surprising that the Tract Society also addressed
itself to the problem of growing poverty midst increasing
wealth.

In its search for economic principles the Tract
Society needed only to turn to its religious and ethical

views. Although the Christian stewards assumed man's

340

depravity and God's sovereignty, they also emphasized the
doctrine of "whosoever will" or "self help." Revivalism,
Sabbatarianism, temperance, and abstinence from worldly
pleasures, these all assumed human ability and individual
responsibility.

The ethical views of the Society as presented in
the preceding chapter were largely negative. They
instructed the reader on what to avoid-—a1coholic bever-
ages, theaters, novels, and eXpensive clothing. However,
the Tract Society also knew what the moral man ought to
do. He should work.

The American Tract Society joined the evan-
gelical Christian community in glorifying work.4 Each
individual was encouraged to make the following resolution:

I will no longer put off, or leave the business of
the present day or hour to some future time, but
will apply myself to it, deny the love of ease,
and exercise a constant and self-denying atten-
tion to what is my prOper work.

The proper utilization of time was of utmost
importance to various groups or types of persons. It was
of special importance to the new convert. "One thing
ought to be strictly regulated by principle," the new
convert was informed, "and that is the employment of time.
Always feel that you are doing wrong when your time is
passing unprofitably."6 Time was also a precious com—

modity worth of the parent's attention. ReVerend James

Bean's "Advice to a Married Couple" omitted all discussion

341

of sex but not of time. The couple was advised that "among
the points to which order should extend“ none was more
important "than the prOper distribution of time." This
should include a "fixed hour for rising, for devotion, and
for meals," and this order of time should extend to every
member of the family.7 Time should also be utilized wisely
by the farmer. One almanac reminded him that he ought to
rise early and to see to it that others in his household
followed his example. It also reminded the readers that
"money at 6 per cent . . . (would) double in sixteen years
and two thirds." It then went on to state: "Remember

8 To "kill time" was never a Chris-

that 'time is money."'
tian attribute; instead it was a hallmark of some of the
unregenerate.9

Closely related to the American Tract Society's
emphasis upon conserving time was its stress upon work.
Every individual should have a "particular employment"
and "be diligent in his business"; but without "making
haste to be rich."10 In reviewing his own life, Gardiner
Spring could say with pride, "In whatever else I have been
wanting, my habits have been habits of industriousness."11
The FamilypAlmanac warned the young men not to trust solely
in their own genius. If they would rise in life, then they
should "work! work!"12

Industriousness was a virtue which the Society

recommended not only for adults but also for children.

342

Reverend John Stone, a member of the publishing committee,
observed in his 1844 biography of BishOp Alexander Viets
Griswold that there was a growing tendency to be lax in
discipline. Children were being permitted too much time
for idleness and sports. Meanwhile not enough emphasis
was placed upon developing "abiding habits of industry."13
Gardiner Spring advised parents to see that their children
learned "habits of industry" at an early age. He realized
that this was a special problem for urban families since
work Opportunities for youngsters were not always available.
Consequently, the peOple who rose to the tOp in the cities
had usually not been born there. The city born were often
"educated . . . in the habits of idleness." He advised
parents to educate their children, "not for enjoyment, but
for usefulness; not for this world, but for the next; not
for the earth, but for heaven."l4 Another writer endorsed
play for children, providing the children played hard.
"I like to see the children at their play," he wrote. Then
he continued:

Play at the right time and of the right kind helps

to educate them; and, children, whatever play you

engage in, play well. . . . Do not play in a

slovenly manner; do not be satisfied with an "any-

how." Be thorough, persevering, and orderly in

everything you undertake. Carry these habits into

your play as well as your work, then you will be

likely to have them in your work as well as your

play.15

The American Tract Society defended the careful

use of time and the development of habits of industry on

343

various grounds. Work was conducive to order in the home
and the society. James Bean advised married couples to
establish a well ordered home by which he meant a well
established schedule for all activities.16 Samuel Miller
was convinced that "the bonds of society" would dissolve
if people were to eat and drink without exerting either
physical or mental labor.l7 Furthermore, industriousness
was somehow linked to Christianity. Reverend Erskine
Mason, a member of the publishing committee from 1845 to
1851, pointed out that wherever the Christian ministry was
lacking, there one did

not eXpect to find . . . the elements of success,

the marks of industry and thrift, nor any of those

virtues which shed a beauty over the domestic circle

and . . . [gave] its greatest ornaments to society."i8
Obviously, the American Tract Society was performing a
patriotic act; it disseminated Christianity, which was
closely linked to work and industry. Without work and
industry the "bonds of society" would dissolve.

Diligence in labor had value for the individual as
well as for society. First of all, it was conducive to
physical and mental health. Miller maintained that the
law of labor, be it physical or mental, tended to promote
men's

health, both of body and mind; to excite, invigorate
and expand the faculties; to preserve them from the
rust of inaction, and the snares of idleness; to

discipline and elevate both the intellectual and
moral character.19

344

Since industriousness was conducive to health, it was
reasonable to assume that it promoted long life. "Rise

early, if you would live long,‘ one almanac informed its
readers. All old men, it stated, were united in only two
points, "their parents were of good stamina, and they them-
selves were early risers." The writer then concluded,
"Early rising helps us in two ways--it adds life to our
days, and days to our life."20

According to the Tract Society, there was also a
close correlation between work and individual morality.

"The devil tempts all other men,‘ one writer pointed out,

"but the idle man tempts the devil."21 The Family Almanac

 

agreed with the statement that the Devil had "more work
done for him on the holiday than in many working days."
PeOple who did "nothing" were on their "way to do worse
than nothing."22 Nor was this view restricted to the
managers of the Tract Society alone. Many merchants
opposed labor's demands for a ten-hour day presumably on
the ground that it would lead to too much leisure time.
And leisure time, they argued, would promote drunkeness.23
Habits of industriousness were also conducive to
prOper employer--employee relations. Obviously, a man
who begrudged every fleeting moment would make a better
worker than one who was not adverse to "killing" time.
The Society advised the Christian that he should never

"plead Spirituality for being an idler or a sloven. If

345

he . . . [were] but a shoeblack, he should be the best in
the parish."24 It is not surprising that employers encour-
aged the sale of the American Tract Society's publications
among their workers. One factory agent in Rhode Island
"greatly assisted" the Society's agent in supplying books
to his firm's employees, explaining "that such books would
make better workmen."25 However, it should be pointed out
that the Tract Society was not atypical in its attempt to
evangelize the worker and Christianize the factory system.
Northern evangelists like Charles Finney saw the factory
as a potential field for converts. They conducted reli-
gious services in several manufacturing plants, sometimes
at the invitation of the owner.26

If an individual accepted the work ethic of the
Tract Society, there was a distinct possibility that he
would accumulate prOperty or wealth. Did Christianity
have anything to say regarding private property? The
Christian stewards were convinced that it did. Any reli-
gion which affected a person's whole life would certainly
effect his pocketbook as well. One of those who agreed
with this view was Lewis Tappan, a member for life in the
Tract Society and a brother of Arthur Tappan.

In 1869, Lewis Tappan published a brief treatise

entitled, Is It Right to be Rich?, in which he took a dim

 

view of wealth. He admitted that it was the striving after

wealth rather than wealth itself which was wrong. He

346

observed that men who were eager to amass prOperty were
"seldom, if ever, spiritual Christians," regardless how
conversant they might be "on the subject of religion," or
how lavish they might be "in occasional charities."27
Furthermore, he rejected the view expressed in some of the
pulpits and the religious press that a Christian could
"pursue wealth in the same way" as the non-Christian pro-
viding he was more liberal in his donations to charities
and bequeathed large amounts to benevolent societies in
his will.28 According to Lewis Tappan, a Christian was
entitled to look after his family's basic needs including
such items as "clothing, food, help, recreations, etc."
However, in all his expenditures he must be "diligent,
unwasteful, hospitable, and ready to distribute." Nor
must he forget that he was duty bound to give to the poor
and to support civil and religious institutions including
such benevolent organizations as the Tract and Bible
Societies.29 Tappan also rejected the "supposed gains" of
the credit system because it was conducive to a "feverish
and almost insane spirit of speculation," and it led to
uncertainty in ones income, thereby tending to decrease
the amount individuals were prepared to give to God.30

No Christian was "permitted to amass and hoard prOperty
with the view of becoming or being esteemed rich."31 Was
it right to be rich? Tappan's answer, was at best, an

extremely qualified yes.

347

Tappan was not the only one who viewed riches
critically. A widespread uneasiness was evident in Jack-
sonian America, an uneasiness caused by the fear that the
Republic's material success "had poisoned the springs of
the national spirit."32 Not all Americans were convinced
that industrialism and wealth could be adapted to the
"paradasic" image of the Republic. Americans never tired
of contrasting the republican virtues of simplicity, sobri-
ety,and industriousness with the EurOpean vices of leisure,
artificiality, and decadence. The image of the garden
ruled out not only destitution but also extreme prosperity.
European cities and industry, on the other hand, were
associated with degrading poverty and arrogant wealth. The
problem Americans had to face was whether industry and
prOSperity led necessarily to moral corruption. Once indus-
trialization became a reality in the New World in the nine-
teenth century, Americans suffered "a national sense of
guilt" generated by the fear that progress might be a sign
of "corruption" rather than a "reward for virtue."33

The Tract Society published several tracts which
suggested that prosperity brought with it more liabilities
than assets. One writer reminded his readers that both
the young man in Matthew 19, Mark 10, and Luke 18, and the
rich man, Dives, had loved riches more than God. "Let the
rich and respectable fear then," he concluded, "lest they

receive their portion in this world. Better to be poor

348

as Lazarus here, if, when we die, angels shall convey our
departing spirits to the paradise of God."34 The same
theme was made even more eXplicit by Reverend Legh Richmond,
an English clergyman and author of one of the Tract Soci-
ety's most pOpular tracts, "The Dairyman's Daughter."
Richmond observed that "in general . . . religion in its
purest character" was to be found "among the poor of this
world, who . . . [were] rich in faith." Riches tended to
hinder the deveIOpment of "sincerity and simplicity of
Christian character." He concluded that riches, polished
society, worldly importance, and high connections" threw
many obstacles "in the way of religious profession."3S

And yet, as the subsequent section will demonstrate,
Lewis Tappan and Legh Richmond did not represent the major-
ity view in the American Tract Society when it came to
wealth. Tappan was a member for life, but never played a
prominent role within the Society. Richmond was an English
clergyman. The tracts written by the English tended to
portray much more of a gulf between the rich and the poor
than did those written by Americans. Furthermore, the
English emphasized more the virtue of passive acceptance
of one's lot in life than did the Americans. Not only was
this true of Richmond's tract, but also of Hannah More's.36
The Tract Society published several tracts written by
English authors. It basically agreed with the sentiments

expressed by the English writers. As will be pointed out

349

later in this chapter, the managers of the Tract Society
saw much merit in tracts which instructed the poor to bear
their lot with contentment. Nevertheless, American writers
did not emphasize the inevitability and virtues of pov-
erty.

The majority of the members of the Tract Society
were not opposed to wealth per se. This is seen in their
defense of prOperty rights. Edward Pessen has pointed
out that the labor leaders of the 1820's viewed the sys—
tem of private prOperty as one of the fundamental causes
of poverty and social inequality. Many of labor's spokes-
men attempted to mask their radical ideas concerning prop-
erty rights because of the adverse publicity associated
with such views. But in the main their views in this
respect were usually "toward the dark side."37 As far as
the worker was concerned, private property had more lia-
bilities than assets.

Needless to say, the anti-property View was rejected
by the orthodox economists of the nineteenth century, be
they protectionists or free traders. And when it came to
private prOperty,the Tract Society was orthodox. It was

in basic agreement with the Encyclopedia Americana which

 

stated:

All writers agree in the doctrine that security of
prOperty is essential to the accumulation of the
products of labour--that is, wealth, for no one
will save what he has no reasonable assurance that
he shall enjoy. . . .38

350

One of the staunchest defenders Of the right of
private property was Justin Edwards. In his address at the
first anniversary of the American Tract Society,he spoke
with confidence concerning the future of the American
Nation. "We are a great people," he reminded his audience,

and if not blasted by our sins, shall become greater
and greater, till the light of revealed truth, and
the light of human science, and the light of true
religion, and the light of civil and religious free-
dom, shall blaze from one end of the continent to the

other, and with a brightness that shall illumine the
world.39

America's greatness, according to Edwards, was based partly
upon the fact that its citizens held "prOperty of every
description, and to any amount, in pure fee-simple."4O

Two years later Edwards again had the opportunity to defend
the right of private property. In 1828 he advised his
brother-in-law not to give up his calling as a merchant.

To accumulate property solely for oneself would impede
one's salvation. But if he were "active" and accumulated
property "for the sake of honoring God and doing good his
every activity . . . (would) tend to promote his salva—
tion." Furthermore, he would "enjoy vastly greater com-
fort in the acquisition of property itself" since he would
be "acquiring it for a nobler purpose," and this would have
"a more elevating, purifying, and benevolent influence

upon his whole character."41 In 1859 the FamilyAlmanac

 

carried an almost identical quotation. The reader was

warned that the selfish pursuit of business would "stand

 

351

in the way" of one's salvation. However, if the same
pursuit was "for the sake of honoring God and doing good,"
it would "promote" one's salvation. This man, "while dili-

gent in business,’ would be "fervent in spirit, serving
the Lord."42

Gardiner Spring eXpressed similar sentiments.
Like the writer of the tract, "An Amiable Youth Falling
Short of Heaven," he also used the Biblical example of the
rich man and Lazarus. But the lessons which Spring derived
from the parable were somewhat different. First of all,
Spring learned from this example that in this world mercies
and judgments were not always based on a reward for good
or evil. Such judgments took place in the next world.
(Was this perhaps aimed at the social reformers?) Secondly,
he learned that this parable was not an indictment on
riches themselves. "It was no crime in Dives to be rich,"
he concluded. "It was no virtue in Lazarus to be poor;
but the one was the friend, the other the enemy of God."43
In other words there was no relationship between friend-
ship with God and poverty, or enmity with God and pros—
perity. In the same book Spring expounded on the life of
Judas who had betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver.
But once again the author pointed out that money was not
the cause of Judas' downfall. Money was "God's gift to

men to be enjoyed in subordination to his will, and to be

devoted to good ends." Men were permitted to "seek to

352

attain it" provided they did not love money more than God.
According to the scriptures, it was the "supreme love of
money" which was "the root of all evil," and this was
Judas' problem.44 In his autobiography, published at the
end of the Civil War, Spring drew up a list of New York
capitalists who had been active in business between 1810
and 1860. The list included Jacob Leroy, Cornelius Ray,
Robert Lenox, William Bayard, Archibald Gracie, Matthew
Clarkson, William Edgar, Henry Rutgers, Henry Remsen,
Richard Varick, and Henry 8. Carter. These, he pointed
out, were "honest" men and the merchant princes of our
metropolis."45

Another defense of wealth and property was made
by Reverend Henry Ward Beecher, the son of Lyman Beecher,
in his address at the twenty-first anniversary of the New
York City Tract Society. He criticized the practice of
those city congregations who built grand edifices and
installed fine organs but did nothing for the poor. How-
ever, his solution for poverty was not the expropriation
of private property and the elimination of all gradations
in society. Discord within society was obvious. "The
poor," he stated, "are envious of the rich--the rich are
misunderstood." The solution to this problem was benevo—
lent or paternalistic stewardship. Henry Ward Beecher
emphasized the fact that he had come "to speak in defense

of the rich." It was the "duty" of all who could "to be

353

rich--to add dollar to dollar, and house to house, and
stock to stock." For what purpose? The answer was found
in the following Biblical injunction: "We then that are
strong ought to bear the informities of the weak, and not
to please ourselves." He then exhorted his audience, "Let
everyone become as strong as he can, each in his own way
(including the amassing of money) but let him help the
weak." In society it was imperative that those who were
"on an eminence should help those beneath." The best way
"to elevate society" was not to eliminate "social grada-
tions" but to infuse it with "genuine Christianity."46
Reverend William Adams was in basic agreement with these
views. In his 1849 address to the New York City Tract
Society he pointed out that the way to meet the cries of
"Down with the rich" was to raise a counter-cry, "Up with
the poor." The poor should be made to feel that even if
his rich neighbor did "not live with him, at least . . .
[he lived] for him."47 The Tract Society's solution for
poverty was not the abolition of private prOperty, but
rather to infuse it with "genuine Christianity."

The Society's endorsement of prOperty and wealth
was not without qualifications. Edwards, Spring, and
Beecher had all emphasized the fact that wealth must not
be pursued solely for greed, personal status, or selfish
consumption. Along with the endorsement of prOperty went

the warnings against a "haste to be rich." The tract

354

"Samuel Barstow, or, The Consistent Christian" was written
in honor of a prosperous and Christian businessman. After
making a public profession of his faith Samuel Barstow did
not give up his occupation. His life exemplified the slo-
gen, "Not slothful in business, fervent in Spirit, serving
the Lord." He provided for his family but "spent little
for ornament and equipage." His faith in God "delivered
him from the bondage that attends upon haste to be rich."
He gave liberally from his wealth to aid religious socie-
ties and to help the poor.48 Here was a man whom Edwards
could admire.

The Tract Society was concerned over the many who,
unlike Samuel Barstow, did not escape the "bondage that
attends upon haste to be rich." One writer informed the
young men that the present era provided many opportunities
to accumulate wealth. Wealth in itself was not evil pro-
viding it was not hoarded.49 Another writer warned that
to be more bent on being rich than holy was a sure sign

of "religious declension."50 The Family Almanac was con-

 

vinced that the "leading cause" of business failures was
"an ambition to be rich--by grasping too much, it . . .

defeated itself."51 The Family Almanac was disturbed over

 

the fact that there were individuals like a certain Farmer
Nelson who left their farms, good schools, and churches in
order to go West. The reader was warned that "trying to

do better for this world may cost too much."52 Bishop

355

McIlvaine's eXperiences in Ohio led him to a similar con-
clusion. The entire population seemed to be "hasting to
be rich." Even Christians and men of "regular-business
habits" were falling prey to this craze.53 Nor was this
hustle and bustle restricted to the frontier alone. James
Alexander noticed this in New York's business community as
well. "Men of Business," he wrote, "live in a perpetual
hurry, scarcely taking time to refresh nature. This keeps
out thoughts of God."54

Another prerequisite for the accumulation of wealth
was that it must be gained without sacrificing Christian
ethics. The young men were warned not to accept a prevail-
ing view which sanctioned the abandonment of honesty in
the pursuit of wealth. Such practices as concealing defects
in articles for sale, over pricing, under paying when it
came to wages, unjust weights, attempting to pay too little
for ones purchases, and selling harmful goods including
liquor were to be avoided.55 One individual who attempted
to follow this advice was Arthur Tappan. In 1827 he
founded the New York Journal of Commerce which would hope-
fully exert a "wholesome moral influence" by its refusal
to carry any advertisements of lotteries, liquor, circuses,
and theaters, and would not be printed during Sabbath hours.
Tappan invested nearly $30,000 in this venture of "moral"
publishing; the paper, however, did not turn out to be a

financial success.56 S. V. S. Wilder also was noted for

356

his honesty in business. His biographer noted that Wilder
refused to sell his stock in a Virginia gold mining enter-

prise while the stocks still commanded a good price because
he was afraid that others might suffer a 1055.57

Not only should wealth be honest, it should also

be authentic. William E. Dodge preferred wealth which was

accumulated gradually and conscientiously. He interpreted
the 1837 depression as a judgment from God. "The fact is,"
he wrote his wife, "the peOple of the whole United States

have been acting under a delusion. The unnatural pros-

 

perity resulting from the credit system has been taken for

real."58 James Alexander agreed. In 1839 he indicted the

 

whole credit system and the large number of bank failures.
"The morals influence of the Credit System" seemed to him
to be "one of the most maligned influences" to which the
Republic had been subjected.59 Even Spring, the defender
of prOperty, preferred wealth which was accumulated by
"contrivance, by toil, and by economy." Such wealth was
"indicative of those intellectual faculties, and that
strength of character which, if devoted to other pursuits,
would have rendered their possessor eminent." Such wealth
was an indicator that its possessors were "men of mind,
men of freethought, men of great practical wisdom, men of
energy, and with--rare exceptions . . . men of integrity

and moral virtue."50

357

One problem with the American Tract Society's
business philOSOphy was that it was fast becoming an anach-
ronism in the commercial arena of speculation, competition,
and corporations. The transportation revolution brought
with it an ever widening market and increased competition.
Nathan Trotter, a Philadelphia merchant specializing in
imported metals, faced the increasing competition of the
Phelps-Dodge firm of New York, a firm which dominated this
trade throughout the country by 1860.61 Yet as late as
1880,Dodge's ideal was still the business world of the
1820's. "I sometimes almost desire those days back again,"
he stated. Those were the days when young men of "moder-
ate capital" and "undoubted character" could establish a
business.62 He found the "great variety of incorporated
companies . . . pressing their stocks on the market" and

"the immense power of capital" invested in railways and
the reckless mode of manipulating shares" stimulating a
Spirit of Speculation most dangerous to regular business.63
And as pointed out in the previous chapter, his attempts
to Christianize the industrial and transportation revolu-
tion ended in failure.

Dodge was typical of many Americans during the
Jacksonian era. He praised the virtues of thriftiness,
hard work, and simplicity. These ideals were presumably

exemplified in the craftsman, the small-time merchant,

and the yoeman farmer who accumulated their property

358

through honest toil. But as Marvin Meyers points out,
many Americans were violating these ideals which they
claimed to venerate.64 The Phelps-Dodge firm was making
it difficult for a competitor with "moderate capital" to
survive. Even the farmer of the Jacksonian era was not
adverse to Speculation. According to Richard Hofstadter,
a transformation took place in the nature of American
agriculture between 1815 and 1860. The "real attachment"
of many farmers "was not to the land but to land values."
They relied "more on the process of appreciation than on
the sale of crops" for their profits.65

If property was to be accumulated honestly and
gradually, and if it was not to be hoarded, what Should
men do with it once they had acquired it? The answer of
the American Tract Society can be summed up in two words--
Christian stewardship. In this respect the Tract Society
agreed with evangelists like Charles Finney who continu-
ally reminded the rich that God demanded faithfulness when
it came to stewardship of prOperty.66 This ruled out all
conspicuous waste.67 One area where extravagence was
permitted was in one's support of evangelical churches
and religious societies. Spring endorsed the principle
of private prOperty providing one was willing to give not
only his time but also his prOperty to God.68 The Soci-
ety published Joel Hawes' biography of a Christian busi-

nessman who exemplified the

359

usefulness of an intelligent Christian serving God

in his business consecrating his substance, from

principle, to the Spread of the GOSpel; and at the

same time bearing the fruits of piety in a devout,

prayerful life of useful effort for the souls of

men.
Dodge did not forget his Obligations to support the efforts
of others in promoting God's kingdom; whenever he bought
up timber lands and mills he was careful to provide church
privileges and Sabbath schools in these areas.70 The
farmer, as well as the businessman, was duty bound to
practice stewardship. One almanac advised him to plan
ahead in March and to decide "how large a piece of ground
to set apart for Missionary, Education, Bible, and Tract
Societies."71 Even children were advised to become junior
stewards. They should always "earn or save their mission-
ary money" so that they might "early learn to work and
practice self-denial for the Lord's sake."72

Stewardship should continue even if depressions
set it. In 1837 Reverend McAuley disagreed with those
who called upon the Society to cut back its spending.
"But who says stop?" he asked. Those who suffered temporal
loss should remember that "manna" would supply their needs,
"if all else failed." He then continued, "The church's
rule is, do what is possible. If you possibly can give,
it is your duty."73
Stewardship also meant remembering the poor.

Bish0p Griswold endorsed the principle of frugality so

360

that one might have more to give to the poor.74 The
Christian Almanac advised the farmer not to leave the
cutting of his wood supply until the last minute. If he
began early he would have time to leave some wood at the
home of a poor widow and the minister.75 The New York City
Tract Society did its best "to investigate and relieve the
wants of the really necessitous families."76

Christian benevolence, however, meant discrimi-
nating benevolence. One commonly held explanation for
poverty in the nineteenth century was indiscriminate
charity. Both the "New York Society for the Prevention of
Pauperism" (organized in 1817) and the "Baltimore Society
for the Prevention of Pauperism" (organized in 1820) empha-
sized this fact. The "New York Association for Improving

the Condition of the Poor,' New York City's dominant relief
society during the 1840's and 1850's, warned its supporters
that indiscriminate charity only "intensified" rather than
solved the ”poverty" problem. The organizers of these
societies were concerned over the rapid increase in wel-
fare costs. Rapid industrialization, urbanization, immi—
gration, and the depressions of 1817 and 1837 all brought
with them a rapid rise in pauperism.77

The American Tract Society agreed with the "Pre-
vention of Pauperism" societies that charity must not be

based on sentimentality. The New York City Tract Society

sought to relieve the wants of the "really necessitous

361

families" and discouraged "indiscriminate" donations which
would be "injurious, alms giving."78 One tract writer
pointed out that one Sign of growing in grace was learning
"to do all things with wisdom." He remarked that the man
who gave the most was not necessarily the most liberal.
The wise Christian would carefully seek out such "sufferers"
as would "be most benefitted by his charity."79

PrOper Christian stewardship was not without its
rewards. First of all, it brought with it spiritual bless-
ings. The American Tract Society even insisted that its
agents were actually doing the rich a favor by soliciting
for funds. There was the ever present danger that "money-
getting and money-keeping" would absorb all of one's time.
This is where the agents came in; they opened a new door
for the prosperous Christian farmer and businessman. By
exposing the man of wealth to the "principles" of "system-

atic, scriptural charity,‘ the agent turned this temptation

into "a means of grace."80 The Family Almanac reminded its

 

readers that "a symmetrical growth of Christian character
without sympathy and intercourse with the poor, especially
the poorer brethren," was impossible.81 This was not only
true of individuals; it was true of the Church as well.
According to Reverend Thomas DeWitt, one of the pastors

of the wealthy Collegiate Dutch Church, the Church could
not remain spiritually healthy if it would ignore the

city's poor and destitute population.82

362

Stewardship also aided the wealthy in that it
helped to mitigate tensions arising between the rich and
the poor. One writer warned those who grumbled when called
upon to aid the poor that they were insulting their crea—
tor. God had "meant to employ the rich as his agents for
the poor, to bind them to each other by the constant inter-
change of gratitude and benevolence, and to illustrate and
honor his providential government." In its 1854 Annual
Report the Tract Society was even more explicit in its
appeal to the economic self interests of the wealthy. The
donations, it argued, were necessary for the "diffusion
of the gospel for the poor without which worldly pros-
perity . . . [was] as insecure as it . . . [was] selfish."
Consequently, the solicitation for money by the Society's
agents was "both kind and needful to the rich, and those
on the road to wealth."83 Diffusion of the gospel and
discriminating charity were God's and the Tract Society's
method of mitigating class differences and safeguarding
property.

The Society did not limit its discussion to the
wealthy; it also had something to say to the poor. There
were two possible exPlanations for poverty. According to
the Workingmen's Parties of the 1820's, poverty was attri-
buted largely to environmental factors.84 The upper-
and middle-class organizers of the relief agencies dis—

agreed. They usually assumed that poverty was attributable

363

to moral defects within the individual rather than to mal-
functions in the social and economic institutions.

There were occasions where the Tract Society
implied that poverty was attributable to environmental
factors. This was eSpecially true of the New York City

Tract Society's Annual Report of 1856. There were few

 

organizations that had a better first—hand acquaintance

of the problems of New York than the City Tract Society.
Its tract visitors and missionaries visited every ward
and, if possible, every house and tenement building of

the growing metropolis. In fact, Robert Hartley, one of
the organizers of the "New York Association for Improving
the Condition of the Poor," recommended that the welfare
society employ Tract missionaries "whose discretion, zeal,
and mature experience, preeminently . . . [qualified]

them for the duties required. . . ."85

Because of the 1856 Annual Rgport's perceptive

 

appraisal of the conditions and problems of New York City's
large poverty striken pOpulation, a somewhat lenghty
excerpt will be included here.

The Poor-~Who has written their history, or can do
it? The tax-payer thinks the poor are an eXpen-
sive burthen; [gig] many of the wealthy regard
the numerous applications for aid as great annoy-
ances; and not a few, imagining that the penniless
ones are reaping the fruits of indolence or
insobriety, cry out, "Make them work!" True, the
taxes are heavy, and relieving the poor forms a
large item in our city expenditure; the applica—
tions to the wealthy for aid are very numerous

and far from pleasant; and many of the poor have

364

formed vicious habits and become disgusted with
work; but why so? One reason is, honest labor in
former days received an honest renumeration; but
it does not now. Machinery of various kinds has
greatly reduced the demand for manual labor, and
employers, availing themselves of the necessities
of those who are made competitors for employment,
give out their work to the lowest bidder, without
considering whether or not the wages they pay are
sufficient to provide for the necessaries of life.
The price of food and lodgings a few years ago was
half what it is now; yet then a seamstress could
earn more by working ten hours a day than she can
now by adding to that time half the hours of night.
We ought not, therefore, to be surprised when we
see that the poor are discouraged, and vice and
pauperism increase.86
There was ample evidence that many were forced to
live on an inadequate income. One tract visitor in New
York City redeemed the Shawl a mother had pawned for
fifteen cents so that she could get something for her
eighteen year old son, far gone in consumption. In all
probability this woman attempted to make a living by
taking in washing, but she had to walk two-thirds of a
block in order to procure her water. Nevertheless, she
still paid $54 a year for the two rooms which she
rented.87 In 1830 an almanac warned its readers that
no individual had the right to drive a "good bargain" if
others suffered because of it. This was also true when
it came to paying wages. The same writer then used
Philadelphia as an case in point. Apparently some seam-
stresses there received only $58 per year of which $32

went for rent, leaving only $16 for clothing, food, and

other expenses. The result was that a number of "these

365

forlorn beings" became "abettors of a vice which annu—
ally . . . [ruined] thousands of . . . [their] youth."88

The complaint of the New York City Tract Society
that many people were no longer receiving an honest wage
was certainly true of the Jacksonian period. If one com-
pares the American worker with his European counterpart,
then one could conclude that the American worker was
relatively well off deSpite the influx of immigrants.89
Nevertheless, it is true that labor's economic position
was declining during the Jacksonian era. Many workers
were fighting a losing battle in their attempt to main-
tain their standard of living. Inflation rose more rapidly
than wages. During the depression of 1837,wages were
Often cut, sometimes as much as 30 to 50 per cent. During
the early 1850's the average income of factory operatives
and common laborers was less than $5 per week while the
average wage of craftsmen and skilled mechanics amounted
to $1.25 to $2.00 per day. However, these wage rates do
not take into account the seasonal unemployment which
numerous laborers experienced. The income of many women
fell far below the $5 mark. Female needleworkers, for
instance, usually earned less than $2 per week.90

Such pictures of gloom did not mean that the sup-
porters Of the Tract Society were in basic agreement with
the leaders of the Workingmen's Parties. The 1856 Report

of the New York City Tract Society tended to blame the

366

poverty of the workers on the environment. There were,
however, many other statements published by the Society
or its supporters which gave ample evidence of the fact
that the Society attributed poverty to other causes than

the environment. One problem of the 1856 Report, as far

 

as the Tract Society was concerned, was its conclusion
that machines were partly to blame for the plight of the
workingmen. Yet men like Gardiner Spring were overtly
optimistic when it came to industrialization. As pointed
out previously, industrialization was associated with
millennialism, and children were encouraged to emulate the
age of iron or industry.91 Furthermore,the Tract Society
could never reach the conclusion arrived at by some of
the leaders of the workingmen that the system of private
property, itself, should be abolished.92

During the nineteenth century poverty was often
eXplained by linking it to immorality or moral deficiency.
Consequently, the relief organizations were often heavy
on moral instruction and light on material aid. The
"Baltimore Society for the Prevention of Pauperism"
devoted much of its time and energy to gathering statis-
tics on liquor stores, prostitution, and lotteries and
concluded that these three, along with indiscriminate
charity, were "four 'most obstrusive causes' of pauper-
ism."93 If this was the case, then being poor was

obviously a negative mark.

367

The American Tract Society also assumed that much
poverty was due to some defect, eSpecially a moral defect,

inherent in the destitute. In his Lectures on Political

 

Atheism, Lyman Beecher attempted to convince the working-
men that the best solution for their economic problems

was to rally around the banner of Christianity. His
reasoning was obvious; "poverty, and crime, and licentious-
ness, and loathsome disease, and unutterable woe" were

most likely to be found "under the auspices of infidelity,
and in the haunts of inebriation and impurity, and cursing,
and blaSphemy, and murder" and not "under the auspices of
the Bible and Christian institutions."94 Poverty, it
would seem, was a trademark of the immoral and the non-
Christian. The New York City Tract Society seemed to

agree with this, at least in part, in its 1847 Report.

 

It pointed out that the Asylum for Destitute Immigrants in
Ward's Island was filled mostly with Roman Catholics, as
well as with some hardened infidels and a few Protestants.95
Samuel Miller was also convinced that poverty was the fault
of the individual. He basically agreed with the statement
of the late Robert Lenox from New York who rejected the
idea that an individual's failure could be called bad luck
or unfortunate. "Unfortunate! Don't tell me," Lenox had
stated,

when I hear of such an event I set it down to the

score of want of industry, or of discretion, or

both. No industrious, prudent man need be in want
or in difficulty in this country.

368

And this, Miller stated, held true 99 per cent of the
time.96 In 1864 this idea crOpped up again in Reverend
Lowery's address to the annual meeting of the American
Tract Society. He maintained that "filthy" words, "dirty"
streets, "dilapidated" and "forbidding" houses were "but
an outward expression of the true condition" of the inhabit-
tants.97 Obviously, the poor peOple living in these con-
ditions were morally deficient.

If poverty was often caused by a moral deficiency,
it was only logical to assume that poverty was not desir-
able. There were some like the English writer, Hannah
More, who saw poverty as being desirable for the poor. In
one of her well known tracts she had a rich man state,
after visiting a poor but contended Shepherd, that even
if he could he would not make the shepherd rich. He
realized that persons who were suddenly raised above the
"station in which Divine Providence had placed them
seldom . . . [turned] out good or very happy."98 This
was not, however, the dominant theme of the American
writers. One writer maintained that a minister Should
have a higher salary than a mechanic. He defended this on
two grounds. First, a clergyman had to have a liberal
and generous spirit. Secondly, he reminded the reader
that "poverty shrivels the soul."99 According to one
almanac, poverty was "a great enemy to human happiness,

it . . . [destroyed] liberty, and . . . [made] some

369

virtues extremely difficult."100 This did not mean that
an individual was not duty bound to be contended with that
station in life in which God had placed him. But each
one should use "the lawful means of procuring and further-
ing" his own "wealth and outward estate," as well as those
Of others.101

Although poverty was not seen as desirable, many
Americans realized that not all poverty was avoidable. It
is true that the call for discriminating charity could be
used as an excuse for little or no charity. The organizers
Of the relief organizations were usually drawn from the
middle and upper classes who, undoubtedly, were concerned
over the rising welfare costs. During the early national
period these costs made up the largest single expenditure
for New York City.102 But allowance was made for aid,
albeit meager aid, for the worthy poor. This was especially
true of New York's "Association for Improving the Condi—
tion of the Poor."103

The Tract Society also recognized the plight of
the worthy poor. DeSpite the fact that the Society often
blamed the poor for their plight, it did, nevertheless,
recognize respectable poverty in certain cases. The mis-
sionaries of the New York City Tract Society came in
contact with many individuals whose poverty was brought
on by circumstances beyond their control. One of the

Society's representatives reported visiting a widow and

370

her daughter who were living in a small damp cellar in
the Seventeenth Ward, yet even here the rent ate up two
days of every week's earnings. Another missionary in the
First and Second Wards had to climb up a ladder to visit
a Sick woman living in a garret, but when he entered her
home,he discovered that there were six families with many
children living there.104 In 1850 the City Tract Society
reported the case of a young machinist who had emigrated
with his wife and six children from Liverpool. Soon after
his arrival in New York City, the husband was striken with
a disease and died. The landlord of "one of those places
called immigrant boarding houses" fleeced the family of
nearly all of its possessions and then turned out the
widow and her children. Here, according to the Society,
was "respectable poverty."105

Several of the writers also saw God's chastening
hand in poverty. In this case it was the duty of the
smitten individual to submit to God's wisdom. According
to Reverend Thomas Goodwin, God utilized affliction to
purify the Christians' heart. He would dash their "worldly

prOSpectS,' or use the death of a loved one to "wean them
from the world."106 When the husband of an immigrant
Irish family died, the widow grumbled and "almost accused

him [God] of injustice in thus afflicting her." The

tract visitor reminded her, however, that such afflictions

 

 

371

were used by God "to call off her thoughts from this
world."107

The cures for poverty, providing it was God's will
that one should be placed in more "advantageous situations

for doing good,‘ were manifold. One obvious solution was
to find work for the unemployed. The New York City Tract
Society COOperated with the "Association for Improving the
Condition of the Poor" in its attempt to provide work
facilities for some of the unemployed. It provided a
"washing establishment" for women who were willing to take
in washing but lacked the proper laundry facilities in

their homes.108 Whether this solved the poverty problem,

however, is doubtful. As the writer of the 1856 Report

 

of the New York City Tract Society had pointed out, wages
were just too low. (Even supplying work for the willing
but unemployed was questioned by some Americans. In 1821
the Society for the Prevention of Pauperism decided that
procuring work for indigent women might have negative
results. Might not the poor be less inclined to go out
and look for their own jobs?)109

The Tract Society also recommended thrift and the
avoidance of all unnecessary debts as possible solutions
for poverty. One historian has pointed out that one of
the suggested remedies for destition in the nineteenth
century was stricter economy and not higher wages.110

The Tract Society was in basic agreement with this view.

372

One almanac pointed out that the way to wealth was to be
frugal and industrious, wasting neither time nor money.
"To be truly rich," it stated, "you must not increase your
fortune, but retrench your appetites."lll S. V. S. Wilder
agreed. "The true way of enriching ourselves," he observed,

"is by cutting off our wants."112 The Child's Paper used

 

the account of Jesus feeding the five thousand to impress
upon the youngsters the need for economy. After all,
Jesus had instructed disciples to pick up the fragments
after the people had eaten. Thus "the most bountiful
Giver in the Universe would teach his followers a lesson
of economy." It was by "littles that men became rich,
and great, and good. The wealthiest men in America
became so by taking care of the pennies." The child
should realize that it was "right to be economical and
saving."113

In order to aid persons in saving their pennies,
institutions like the Savings Bank were established. In
1849 James Alexander became a trustee for certain indi—
viduals in one of these banks. One servant deposited $200
and a chambermaid, $500. But this was not all, a "known
prostitute" deposited $1,600,and many "strange women"
were making deposits there.114 These institutions were
closely linked to charitable organizations. The Society
for Prevention of Pauperism was organized in 1817, in

part, to prod a reluctant New York State Legislature into

373

incorporating a savings bank. Such an institution would
hopefully inculcate habits of economy and thrift in the
laboring population by safeguarding the workers' meager
savings and paying interest on them. At first the payment
of interest was viewed as a philanthrOpic gesture on the
part of the bank directors. Their aim was to convince

the poor that thrift was both moral and rewarding. In
1827 the New York Bank of Savings distributed not only

interest but 1,000 COpies of Poor Richard's Almanac.115

 

Whether Benjamin Franklin had the prostitute and the
"strange women" in mind when he emphasized industriousness
and thrift in his almanac is, however, Open to question.
Closely related to the subject of thrift was the
tOpic of debts. The best remedy to avoid debts and poverty
was to live within one's income. Bishop Griswold con-
cluded that to live beyond one's means was "a deep sin in

any man,‘ above all in a minister.116 Debts should never
be treated with "lively" and should never be contracted
without a "reasonable probability" of repayment. Even
Jesus "in his poverty, wrought a miracle in order to pay
his dues."ll7 Furthermore, most debts were unnecessary
since many of one's "wants" were only "fancied wants."1l8
What constituted "fancied wants"? One tract answered this
question by giving a case history. When an individual com-

plained about the increase in the cost Of coal, a certain

William Kelly answered, "Coal sir, are as cheap to me now,

374

as they were fortypyears ago." He never had the luxury of

 

a fire in his room yet Spoke of his apartment "with seeming
rapture." Here was not only a demonstration of "the power
of real religion to give solid rest and peace to the soul
in all circumstances"; here was also an example of the
power of religion to overcome inflation.119

Along with work and thrift the Tract Society also
recommended orthodox morality and stewardship as cures for
poverty. As mentioned previously, temperance and Sabbath
observance were both proclaimed as means whereby one could
improve his lot in life. Besides being moral, the poor
were also exhorted to practice consistent giving. Reverend
John Harris, the author of a tract, pointed out that the
poor man often considered himself exempt from the duty of
giving, but as soon as he was "made the partaker of grace,"
he attempted to work in order that he might also have some-
thing to give.120 The Tract Society was convinced that
those who sought to work in order that they might have
something to give would probably escape from poverty. The
Society eulogized Edward Lee because his life demonstrated
what the "humblest private Christian" could accomplish.
After his conversion, when he was already past thirty years
of age, he began giving one-eighth of his "little income"
to charity, yet he managed to save enough to supply his
wife's needs who outlived him by twenty years.121 The

Society published the account of Amelia Gale who gave up

375

sugar in her tea so that she could save one penny per week
to give to God. From that time on her economic Situation
improved; "the more She gave, the more she prospered."122
One of the Society's agents in Northern Ohio reported that
a pastor and a railroad man both began to prOSper after
they started giving. "Such men's words are worth heed-

' he concluded, "when they say that 'systematic bene-
123
I"

ing,’
ficence is the secret of temporal prosperity. One
problem, however, with suggesting stewardship as a solution
to poverty was that it implied that the poor had the where-
withall to give.

The Society also recommended education as a pos-
sible cure for poverty. It was in full agreement with the
diagnosis of New York's Society for Prevention of Pauperism
that ignorance was one of the major causes of poverty.

Thus education and job training, along with a strong dose

of moral instruction, were seen as the key to eradicating

pauperism.124 In 1856 the Child's Paper pointed out that

 

of the 600 convicts in the Ohio Penitentiary, 400 were
without any trade and 250 were illiterate. The lesson to
be learned from this was that "education and regular occu-
pation . . . [were] two great elements of success."125

The next year the same magazine encouraged clerks and
apprentices to set aside one hour per day for reading.126
The city tract societies instructed their visitors and mis-

sionaries not only to bring children into Sunday schools

376

but also, "when necessary," into the day schools.127 And
even if education would not remove all poverty it would

still serve a useful function. According to the Christian

 

Almanac,education had always "had an effect of rendering
the poor content." The educated poor were less prone than
the uneducated to "consider wealth and happiness as syn-
onymous." Consequently, "education . . . [increased] the
happiness of the rich and . . . [gave] happiness to the
poor."128

In the solutions which it suggested for poverty,
the American Tract Society gave ample evidence that a
deep gulf existed between itself and the labor unions.
Higher wages was one obvious remedy for destitution. The
Tract Society endorsed the principle of a just wage. One
almanac criticized those who would drive an unjust bargain
when it came to paying wages.129 But how to enforce the
paying of just wages? One answer of the workingmen was
to form workers associations or unions and to strike. In
fact,the 1830's witnessed the high point of labor activity
in the ante-bellum period.130 This the Tract Society
could not endorse. One writer informed the worker that
he should give fair labor if he wanted a fair wage.131
What if he still did not receive a fair wage, what then?
According to one of T. H. Gallaudet's Biblical biographies,
published by the Society, the worker had no alternative

but to be faithful regardless whether or not his employer

377

was just. He concluded from the story of Jacob, serving an
extra seven years for Rachel after Laban had tricked him
into taking Leah instead, that deceitful action by the
employer did not exempt the employee from the reSponSi-
bility of providing diligent labor.132 For James Alexander,
labor unions were definitely out of the question. In 1836
he came to the conclusion that it might be beneficial to
write a tract in "dialogue form . . . against the trade
unions." The only problem was how to have it circulated.

Three years later he published his own American Mechanic,

 

made up of a series of newspaper articles which he had
written in order to ward off the prOpaganda of the "infi-
dels, socialists, agrarians, Owenites, Wrightites, and
diabolians generally."133 What the labor unions failed
to realize was the fact that low wages, although making
the worker's lot in life more difficult, could have a
positive effect. After all, "poverty, pain, bereavement,
and other worldly sorrows" were Often sent by God to con-
vict sinners.l34

It is true that the labor unions, especially the
craftsmen, would have agreed with some of the statements

made by the writer of the 1856 Report of the New York City

 

Tract Society. It is doubtful, however, whether the writer
of this report fully accepted all of the implications which
are evident in his own account. Obviously, he hOped to

encourage his readers to make more funds available for

 

cha
mor
if
bet
exa
The
tic
eve

"t‘r

Upc
ful
any

p81

wi1
p0.
te:
th
pr
th
Ch
th:
Cle

all

378

charity. His report was not designed to radicalize the
more militant elements of society. This becomes evident
if one reads beyond his analysis of the relationship
between machines and low wages. The writer provided an
example of how a tract visitor dealt with one poverty case.
The visitor was able to get some relief from the "Associa-
tion for the Poor" for a dying mother and her family. But
even this case had one bright side; the dying widow,
"though poor to this world, was enriched with a title to
a heavenly inheritance." After asking God's blessing
upon this family, the tract visitor returned home "thank-
ful for the privilege of having been enabled to abate in
any measure the sorrows of some who were ready to
perish."135

In the end, the Tract Society contented itself
with being thankful for the Opportunity of being able to
"abate in any measure" the sorrows and hardships of the
poor. It exhorted the worker to be diligent, to be
temperate, and to observe the Sabbath. It called upon
the employer to give a just wage and upon the wealthy to
provide relief and work wherever possible. Furthermore,
the Society could pray that the dying widow and her
children would be left in the hands of Providence. Beyond
this it could not go. This might seem reasonable to
clergymen like James Alexander whose annual salary eventu-

ally reached $5,000 per year. But whether it seemed

379

reasonable to a seamstress making $56 per year was
another question. In this respect the supporters of the
American Tract Society reflected the dominant view of the
upper class during the nineteenth century. Poverty and
slums were not viewed in terms of a class struggle. The
solution to these problems was benevolent paternalism.
Employers were exhorted to deal kindly with their workers,
the latter were expected to render faithful and loyal
service. In this view, "capital as befitting its superior
position, would act as the guardian of the interests of
labor."136

Such a view of poverty gave the poor little reason
for grumbling. Although the Society encouraged each indi-
vidual to escape poverty if possible, it also reminded him

that he had no reason to grumble. "Whatever your condi-

 

tion," the reader was instructed, "that is the post of
duty assigned you by God, and ip_i£ he calls upon you now
to serve and glorify him; if in poverty, by content-
ment. . . ."137 One New York City tract visitor encoun-
tered a female who was "extremely dissatisfied with the
situation in which Providence had placed her." Despite
his attempts to Show her the error of her ways, she sul-
lenly remarked, "I do well to be angry."133 A Christian
chimney sweeper, however, knew better. He realized that
"godliness with contentment . . . was great gain," and

that "true happiness" was dependent more upon one's frame

380

of mind that upon one's "outward circumstance." He had
learned that God's grace and the Christian hOpe were suf-
ficient to "cheer and support the heart in every situa-
tion."139

Although the Tract Society might conclude that
poverty did make certain virtues "extremely difficult," it
did not assume that it made them impossible. As long as
God's word was received in love, be it in a "palace or a

poor house,‘ it would "uniformly produce the same gracious
fruits; a humble and contented mind--a kind and forgiv-
ing disposition--a tender conscience--a holy life-—and,
usually, a happy death."140 Even if poverty should come,
as it occasionally did, "upon the prudent, the industrious,
and the well informed," it would not crush the pious.
"A mind full of piety and knowledge," stated the Family
Almanac, "is always rich: it is a bank that never fails;
it yields a perpetual dividend of happiness."141 What
the Tract Society feared was not the poor, but the poor
without religion. These might not only rebel against
God's sovereignty, but also against man's government.
Only religion enabled man "to bear" all present evils
"with resignation."142

And yet, along with the emphasis upon contentment
the Tract Society held out to the poor the hope that they

too might walk down the road that led from rags to riches.

However, the road which the Society stressed was from rags

381

to gradual riches. The Child's nger pointed out that men

 

became "rich, and great, and good" by "littles." America's
wealthiest men "became so by taking care of the pennies."143
Furthermore, this road was marked by faith in God, hard
work, honesty, frugality, temperance, and stewardship.144
The Society was convinced that there was ample room at the
top for "first class farmers, mechanics, physicians, law-
yers, ministers." But the individual Should not "try to
rise by a leap or jerk"; he should "begin at the bottom,
and patiently and manfully ascend step by step, stair by
stair."l45

Whose fault was it if the poor failed to climb the
steps? Some might place the blame upon the environment.
There were members in the Tract Society, like the writer

of the 1856 Repprt, who realized that the social and

 

economic institutions were not perfect. In the main, how-
ever, the Society believed that the key to reform lay not
in altering the environment but in changing the individual.
"Man's constant prescription for the elevation of man, is
to alter his circumstances," one almanac informed its
readers:
God's grand prescription for the improvement of man is
to change his heart. . . . Man's plan is to give us
something that we have not; God's plan is to make us
something that we are not.146

The Society had begun its work with the firm con-

viction that men were not saved by works. They also had

382

the firm conviction that a man of faith would strive to
do good and to abhor evil. Its concept of a faith that

works was aptly summarized in the tract, "The One Thing

Needful."
Yes, a true Christian is holy; "for without holiness
no man can see the Lord." He cannot be a drunkard,

but will wholly avoid strong drink for fear of temp-
tation. He cannot be a swearer, for he now loves
and fears God. He cannot be dishonest, for he now
loves his neighbor as himself. He cannot be
unchaste, for God has given him a clean heart. He
cannot be a Sabbath-breaker, for the delight Of his
soul is to employ the Sabbath wholly in reli ion.
Thus you see that faith produces good works. 47
The author could have added: he cannot be a Spendthrift,
because his property is consecrated to God; he cannot be
a Shirker and a waster of time because his days belong to
God. These "holy" Christians were the citizens who would
best fit into a stable, Protestant society.

The Tract Society had been organized not only to
save souls but to build an ordered and unified society.
In its attempt to build this society it had to face the
economic and social implications of industrialization,
urbanization, and immigration. It had to deal with a
society in which poverty and wealth were both increasing
and disrupting the "relatively homogeneous, middle-class
society" of the early Republic.148 Its solution was basi-
cally twofold. It preached consecration and compassion

to the rich, and self-held and submission to the workers

and the poor. This ruled out all visionary schemes of

 

383

reordering society. The key to all reform was sanctified,
individual effort.

And yet, it would be misleading to interpret the
Society's effort solely as self interest. Roy Lubove
pointed out that the managers of the A.I.C.P. often "loved
the poor less than they feared and even despised them."149

Such fear was evident in the Tract Society. It eSpecially

feared the poor man who lacked "real religion." But this
does not rule out the fact that midst their fears one can
also find compassion. Ralph E. Pumphrey has pointed out
that compassion and protection were often dual motivations
in social welfare. He defines the former as "the effort to
alleviate present suffering, deprivation, or other undesira-
ble conditions to which a segment of the population, but
not the benefactor, is exposed."150 Protection, on the
other hand, is an endeavor to shield the whole community,
including the protector, from "unwanted developments."
According to this definition the efforts of the Tract Soci-
ety must be classified primarily as protection. However,
one cannot read the reports of the New York City Tract
Society without concluding that compassion as well as pro-
tection motivated many of the tract visitors and mission-

aries.

III I IIII i [I EI‘II I ‘1' ‘I‘ ' I'l ‘ l '[ Ill-j

FOOTNOTES--CHAPTER VI

lSaul R. Padover, ed., Thomas Jefferson on Democ-
racy, Mentor Books (New York: New American Library, 1939),
p. 70. (Hereinafter cited as Padover, ed., Thomas Jeff.
on Dem.)

 

 

2Douglas T. Miller, Jacksonian Aristocracy: Class
and Democracy in New York, 1830-1860 (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1967), p. x*(hereinafter cited as Miller,
Jacksonian Aristocrapy.); See also Edward Pessen, Jack—
sonian America: Society, Personality, and Politics
(Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press, 1969), pp. 47-58, 114-
21 (hereinafter cited as Pessen, Jacksonian America).

 

 

3Raymond A. Mohl, "Humanitarianism in the Pre-
industrial City: The New York Society for the Prevention
of Pauperism, 1817-1823," Journal of American History,
LXVII (December, 1970), 577 (hereinafter cited as MEHl,
"Humanitarianism in the Preindustrial City"); Stuart
Bruchey, The Roots of American Economic Growth, 1607—1861:
An Essay in Social Causation (New York: Harper and Row,
1965), pp. 90-91 (hereinafter cited as Bruchey, The '
Roots of Am. Ec. Growth); Robert R. Bremner, From the
Depths: ‘The Discoveryyof Poverty in the United States
(New York: New York University Press, 1956), p. 3 (herein-
after cited as Bremner, From the Depths).

 

 

4On the glorification of work by the evangelical
community see Charles C. Cole, The Social Ideas of the
Northern Evangeligts, 1826-1860 (New York: Octagon Books,
Inc., 1966), pp. 76. (Hereinafter cited as Cole, $22
Soc. Ideas of Northern Evangelists.)

 

5"Pious Resolutions,“ Tracts, I, No. 16, p. 2.

6"To those Commencing a Religious Life," Tracts,
VIII, No. 262, p. 6.

384

385

7James Bean, "Advice to a Married Couple," Tracts,

II, No. 67, p. 22.

8The Christian Almanac--Western District, 1828,

p. 20.

9"Serious Thoughts on Eternity," Tracts, IV, No. 114,
p. 3; Isaac Watts, "The End of Time," Tracts, V, No. 153,
pp. 7-9; The Christian Almanac--Western District, February
to April, 1829.

lo"Redeeming the Time," Tracts, X: N0. 350: PP- 4'5-

llGardiner Spring, Personal Reminiscences of the

Life and Times of Gardiner Spring, Pastor of the Brick
Presbyterian ChurCh in the City of New York (2 vols.;
New York: Charles Scribner's and Co., 1866), I, p. 106.
(Hereinafter cited as Spring, PerS. Rem.)

 

 

12The Family Almanac, 1852, p. 27 (see also James

Bean, "Advice to a Married Couple," Tracts, II, No. 67,
p. 13; The Family Almanac, 1859, p. 24; Philip Doddridge,
"The Well-Spent Day," Tracts, II, No. 55, p. 14).

 

 

13John S. Stone, Memoir of the Life of the Rt. Rev.

Alexander Viets Griswold, D.DLJ BiShop Of theygrot. Episc.
Church in the Eastern Diocese (Philadelphia: Stavely and
McCalla, 1855), p. 31. (Hereinafter cited as Stone,
Alexander Viets Griswold.)

 

 

 

l4Gardiner Spring, Hints to Parents: A Sermon on

the Religious Education of Children (New York: Jonathan
Leavitt, 1833), pp. 6-7, 11. (Hereinafter cited as
Spring, Hints to Parents.)

 

 

 

15The Child's Paper, I (June, 1852), 23. Another
writer in the Child's Paper informed the children of the
importance of iron‘in an industrialized country. He con-
cluded, "This is indeed an iron age. Are the children
keeping pace with it, growing up iron-handed, and iron-
minded, strong, steadfast, industrious, useful, enterpris-
ing?" (see Child's Paper, I [April, 1852], 16).

 

 

 

16

"Advice to a Married Couple," Tracts, II, No. 67,
p. 22. “'_——'

386

7Samuel Miller, Letters from a Father to His Son
in College (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board Of Publi-
cation,il852), pp. 166-67. (Hereinafter cited as Miller,
Letters.)

 

 

18Erskine Mason, An Evangelical Ministry, The
Security of a Nation: A Sermon Preached in Behalf of the
American Home Missionary Society, in the Bleecker Street
Church, New York, January 2, 1848 (New York: wm. Oxborn,
1848), p. 18 (hereinafter cited as Mason, An Evangelical
Ministry). The relationship between Christianity and
industry was also expressed by other writers (see Egg
Child's Paper, VIII, [August, 1858], 32; "Little Henry
and His Bearer," Tracts, IV, No. 107, p. 19).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19Miller, Letters, pp. 166-67.

20The Christian Almanac--Western District, March,

 

1829.

21The Christian Almanac--Western District,
February, 1829.

 

22Family Almanac, 1845, p. 23.

 

23Edward Pessen, Most Uncommon Jacksonians: The
Radical Leaders of the Early LaBOr Movement (Albany, N.Y.:
State University of New York Press, 1967), pp. 39-40.
(Hereinafter cited as Pessen, Most Uncommon Jacksonians.)

 

 

24The Family Almanac, 1853, p. 20.

 

25Annual Rpport, Bost., 1841, p. 33.

 

26Cole, The Soc. Ideas of Northern Evangelists,
pp. 184-86.

27Lewis Tappan, Is it Right to be Rich? (New
York: Anson D. Randolph and Co., 1869), pp. 5-6, 14.
(Hereinafter cited as Tappan, Is it Right to be Rich?).

 

28Ibid., p. 7.

ngbid., p. 4.

387

3OIbid., p. 13n.

311bid., p. 4.

32Fred Somkin, The Unquiet Eagley_Memory and Desire
in the Idea of American Freedomy_l8lS-60 (Ithaca, N.Y.:
Cornell University Press, 1967), pp. 33-34. (Hereinafter
cited as Somkin, The Unquiet Eagle.)

 

 

 

33Charles L. Sanford, The Quest for Paradise:

Eurgpe and the American Moral Imagination (Urbana, Ill.:
University of IllifiOis Press, 1961), pp. 154-75.' See
especially pp. 156-57, 160-61, 167, 173-75. (Hereinafter
cited as Sanford, The Quest for Paradise.)

 

 

 

34"An Amiable Youth Falling Short of Heaven,"
Tracts, II, No. 65, pp. 1-4.

35Legh Richmond, "The Dairyman's Daughter,"

Tracts, I, No. 9, p. 21.

36See for e.g., Hannah More, "The Shepherd of

Salisbury Plain," Tracts, I, No. 10; Hannah More, "Tis
All for the Best," Tracts, I, No. 11.

37Pessen, Most Uncommon Jacksonians, pp. 145-55.

 

38Cited in Joseph Dorfman, The Economic Mind in
American Civilization, 1606-1865, II (New York: The
Viking Press, 1946), 709. (Hereinafter cited as Dorfman,
The Econ. Mind in Am.)

 

 

 

39Annual Report, N.Y., 1826, p. 30.

 

4orbid.

 

41Letter of Justin Edwards, New York, April 21,
1828, cited in William A. Hallock, "Light angyLove":
A Sketch of the Life and Labors of the Rev. Justin Edwards,
575., the Evapgelical Pastor; The Advocate of Temperance,
The Sabbath, and the—Bible (New York} AmeriCan Tract
Society, 1855), p. 306. (Hereinafter cited as Hallock,
Justin Edwards.)

 

 

 

 

 

42Family Almanac, 1859, p. 49.

 

1 b.
JMeWa
e f 8%»
AW; 0A1
M

NO

NO

Eng
0?
mg
Disc
ulat
Pers
m

l
p p
- . e p
.l. t
mmw...“
B

388

43Gardiner Spring, The Contrast Between Good and
Bad Men, Illustrated by the Biography andiTruths of the
BiBIe (2 vols.; New York: M. W. Wood—Pub., 1855), II,
385-413. See especially pp. 386-88, 412. (Hereinafter
cited as Spring, Contrast.)

 

 

 

441239,, pp. 129 (see also ibid., pp. 123-36).

45Spring, Pers. Rem., II, 276.

 

46
pp. 16-18.

Annual Reporty N.Y. City Tract Societyy 1847,

 

47Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1849,

 

48Tracts, IV, No. 112, pp. 216.

49"The Temptations to Young Men," ZEEEEE' X,
NO. 401. pp- 14-15-

50"Marks of Religious Declension," TraCtSr X:
NO. 353, p. 20

51Family Almanac, 1850, p. 45 (see also Family
Almanac, 1843, p. 29).

 

 

52Family Almanac, 1860, p. 20.

 

53Charles P. McIlvaine, A Series of Evangelical
Discourses, Selected for the Use of Families and Destitute
Congregations—T2 vols.; Columbus Ohio: Isaac N. Whiting,
1848), I, 4-6 (hereinafter cited as McIlvaine, Evangelical
Discourses). On the American's uneasiness over the accum-
ulation Of wealth see Marvin J. Meyers, The Jacksonian
Persuasion: Politics and Belief (Palo Aito: Stanford
University Press, 1957), pp. ler4l (hereinafter cited as
Meyers, The Jacksonian Persuasion).

 

 

 

 

 

 

54John Hall, ed., Forty Years' Familiar Letters
of James W. Alexander, D.D., Contributing with the Notes,
A Memoip of His Life (2 vOIs.; New York: Charles Scribner,
1860), I, 240. (Hereinafter cited as Hall, ed., Forty
Years.)

 

 

389

55"Counsels to Young Men," Tracts, X: NO- 402!

pp. 12-13.

S6Lewis Tappan, The Life of Arthur Tappan (New
York: Hurd and Houghton,ii870), pp. 91-93, 415. (Herein-
after cited as Tappan, Arthur Tappan.)

 

 

57S. V. S. Wilder, Records from the Life of S. V.

S. Wilder (New York: American Tract Society, 1865),
p. 314. (Hereinafter cited as Wilder, Records.)

 

58D. Stuart Dodge, compiler and ed., Memorials
of William E. Dodge (New York: Anson D. F. Randolph & Co.,
1887), p. 33 (hereinafter cited as Dodge, Memorials of
Wm. E. Dodge). Here Dodge agrees with the—ieaders of the
workingmen's parties in opposing speculation. (On the
opposition of the latter to speculation see Pessen, Most
Uncommon Jacksonians, pp. 47-49, 167-70.)

 

 

 

 

59Hall, ed., Forty Years, I, 288-89.

 

60Gardiner Spring, Influence: A Quarter-Century
Sermon, Preached in Behalf of the American Tract Society,
in the Reformed Dutch Church, Lafayetter Place, New York,
May 5) 1850 (New York: American Tract Society,1850),
p. 15. iHereinafter cited as Spring, Influence.)

 

 

 

 

. 61Sam Warner, Jr., The Private Cipy: Philadelphia
in Three Periods of its Growth (Philadelphia: University
of Pennsylvania Press, 1968), p. 6ln. (Hereinafter cited
as Warner, The Private City.)

 

 

62William E. Dodge, Old New Yogk: A Lecture,
Delivered at Association Hall, April 27, 1880y Upon the
Invitation of Merchants and Other Citizens of New York
INew York: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1880), p. 41. (Hereinafter
cited as Dodge, Old New York.)

 

 

 

63Dodge, Memorials of wm. E. Dodge, p. 60; Richard
Lowitt, A Merchant Prince ofyphe Nineteenth Centp£y:
William E. Dodge (New York: COiumbia University Press,
I954), pp. 189-90. (Hereinafter cited as Lowitt, A_
Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth Cent.)

 

 

 

64Meyers, The Jacksonian Persuasion, pp. 121-41.

 

390

65Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform: From
B an to F. D. R., Vintage Books (New York: Random House,
1555), pp. 38, 41. (Hereinafter cited as Hofstadter, The
Age of Reform.) __—

66Cole, The Soc. Ideas of Northern Evapgelists,

pp. 167-69.

 

67Both Arthur Tappan and Theodore Frelinghuysen
were opposed to waste and extravagence (see Tappan, Arthur
Ta an, p. 62; Talbot A. Chambers, Memoir of the Life and
Character of the Late Hon. Theodore Fréiinghuysen, L.L.D.
[New York: Harper and Bros., 1863], p. 117 [hereinafter
cited as Chambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen]).

 

68Gardiner Spring, Essays on the Distinguishing
Traits of Christigp Character (New York: Jonathan Leavitt,
), pp. 82-84. (Hereinafter cited as Spring, Essays.)

69Annual Report, N.Y., 1841, p. 13.

70Dodge, Memorials of Wm. E. Dogge, p. 211.

71The Christian Almanac, March, 1822.

72Child's paper, I (February, 1852). 7.

73Annual Report, N.Y., 1837, p. 12.

74Stone, Alexander Viets Griswold, pp. 531-32.

75Christian Almanac, February, 1821.

76Our Cit Mission (New York: New York City Tract
Society, 1862), p. 2 (Hereinafter cited as Our City
Mission). See also Apnual Report, N.Y. City Tract
Society, 1837, pp. 164-65, 174; Annual Rgport, N.Y. City
Tract Sociepy, 1839, p. 26; Annual Report, N.Y. City
Tract Society, 1847, pp. 22-23} Annual Report, N.Y. City
Tract Society, 1860, p. 14; Annual Report, N.Y. Cipy
Tract Sociepy, 1864, p. 21.

 

77Blanche D. Coll, "The Baltimore Society for the

Prevention of Pauperism, 1820-1822," American Historical
Review, LXI (October, 1955), 83 (hereinafter cited as

 

Colll
Mohl.
78, !
Imprc
New 7
767?
York

NO.

New 1
XXXV
H The

P. 31.
a cont
Stress

391

Coll, ”The Salt. Soc. for the Prevention of Pauperism");
Mohl, "Humanitarianism in the Preindustrial City," pp. 577-
78, 584, 586; Roy Lubove, "The New York Association for
Improving the Condition of the Poor: The Formative Years,"
New York Historical Society Quarterly, XLIII (July, 1954),
307-308, 316-17*(heréinaffer cited as Lubove, "The New
York A.I.C.P.").

78Our City Mission, p. 2.

 

79Thomas Goodwin, "Growth in Grace," Tracts, II,

NO. 60, pp. 11-12.

80Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 40.

 

81Family Almanac, 1860, p. 31.

 

82Thomas DeWitt, A Discourse Delivered in the

North Reformed Church, in the City of New Yorkyyon the
Last Sabbath in August, 1856 (New York: Board of Publi-
catiOn of the Reformed Dutch Church, 1857), pp. 56-58,
60-61. (Hereinafter cited as DeWitt, Discourse.)

 

 

83John Harris, "Christian Liberality Explained and
Enforced: Extractions from 'Mammon, or Coveteousness the
Sin of the Christian Church'" Tracts, X, No. 394, p. 34;
Annual Report, N.Y.L 1854, p. 40.

84Pessen, Most Uncommon Jacksonians, pp. 106-10,

 

129.

85Cited in Dorothy G. Becker, "The Visitor to the

New York City Poor, 1843-1920," SocialServices Review,
XXXV (December, 1961), 385. (Hereinafter cited as Becker,
"The Visitor to the N.Y. City Poor.")

 

86Annual Rgport, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1856,

p. 20.

87Annual Reporp, N.Y. CitypTract Societyy 1846,

pp. 36-37.

88The Christian Almanac--Western District, 1830,
p. 31. This is even somewhat higher than the estimate of
a contemporary historian who estimates that the seam-
stresses, during the 1830's averaged 54 to 90 cents per

 

week
while
week.
the c.
this

versi
cited

Philfi
Unite
the 1
P711?
as F
etg
NEW
afte

Pau;

%,

392

week (Miller, Jacksonian Aristocracy, pp. 52-53). Mean-
while men's wages averagedi75_Cents per day or $4.50 per
week. The unskilled and the Irish peasants working on

the canals, turnpikes, and railways often earned less than
this (see ibid., p. 51).

 

89Henry Pelling, American Labor (Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, 1960), pp. 46-47. (Hereinafter
cited as Pelling, American Labor.)

 

 

90Miller, Jacksonian Aristocragy, pp. 131-33;

Philip S. Foner, HiStory of the Labor Movement in the
United States: From Colonial Times to the Founding of

the American Federation of Labor (New York: International
PfibliShers, 1947), pp. 168, 219-20 (hereinafter cited

as Foner, Hist. of the Labor Movement); John R. Commons,
SE 11. , Hfitory of Labour in the United States (4 vols.;
New York: MacMillan Co., 1918-1936), I, 487-92 (herein-
after cited as Commons, Hist. of Labour in the U.S.).

 

 

 

 

91Chapter 4 and Chapter 6, n 15.

92Pessen, Most Uncommon Jacksonians, pp. 173-74.

93Coll, "The Balt. Soc. for the Prevention of
Pauperism," pp. 82-84 (see also Mohl, "Humanitarianism
in the Preindustrial City," pp. 583—85, 598; Lubove,
"New York A.I.C.P.," pp. 318-19, 325.

94Lyman Beecher, Beecher's Works, Vol. I, Lectures

 

 

on Political Atheism and Kindred Subjects; Together With
Six Sermons on Intemperance, Dedicated to the Workingmen
of the United States (Boston: John Jewett & Co., 1852),
p. 173. (Hereinafter cited as Beecher, Lect. on Pol.

Atheism.)

 

 

95Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1847,

pp. 17-18.

96Miller, Letters, p. 168.

97Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, p. 178.

 

98Hannah More, "The Shepherd of Salisbury Plain,"

Tracts, I, No. 10, p. 25.

393

99James Bennett, "The Gospel Ministry Entitled to
a Support," Tracts, V, No. 147, pp. 10, 13, 18.

100The Christian Almanac--Western District, 1830:

 

p. 27.

101"The Closet Companion or Helps to Self-Exami-
nation," Tracts, I, No. 21, pp. 7-8.

102Mohl, "Humanitarianism in the Preindustrial City,"
p. 578; Coll, "The Balt. Soc. for the Prevention of Pau-
perism," p. 81.

103Lubove, "New York A.I.C.P.," p. 317; Becker,
"The Visitor to the N.Y. City Poor," pp. 391-92.

104Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1839,
pp. 25, 62.

 

105Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1850:

pp. 20-21. On i'respectable povertyisee also Child's
Paper, VI (February, 1857), 6. The New York City Tract
Society was often critical of the emigrant houses which
exploited the immigrants.

 

106Thomas Goodwin, "On the Purifying of the Heart,"
Tracts, II, No. 61, pp. 1-2, 6-8.

107"The Weaver's Daughter: A Narrative of Facts,"
Tracts, XI, No. 438, p. 4.

lOBAnnual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1854:

 

p. 17.

109Mohl, "Humanitarianism in the Preindustrial
City," pp. 586-87.

110Bremner, From the Depths, p. 3.

 

111The Christian Almanac-~Western District, 1829,
pp. 21-22 and May, 1829.

 

112Wilder, Records, p. 379.

394

113Child's nger, I (March, 1852), ll.

 

114Hall, ed., Forty Years, II, 96-97.

 

115Lance Edwin Davis and Peter Lester Payne, "From

Benevolence to Business: The Story of Two Savings Banks,"
Business History Review, XXXII (Winter, 1958), 391 (herein-
after cited as Davis and Payne, "From Benevolence to Busi-
ness"); Fritz Redlich, The Molding of American Banking:

Men and Ideas, 1781-1840, Part I (New York: Johnsen
Reprint Corp., 1968), pp. 210-12 (hereinafter cited as
Redlich, The Moldingof Am. Banking).

 

 

 

 

116Stone, Alexander Viets Griswold, pp. 111-12.

 

117The Christian Almanac-—Western District,
December, 1830; FamilygAlmanac, 1860, p. 49.

 

 

118Child's paper, x (March, 1861), 10. On the
Opposition of the Tract Society towards debts see also
Stone, Milnor, pp. 31-32; Hugh Stowell, "William Kelly,
or The Happy Christian," Tracts, III, NO. 75, p. 6.

 

llgHugh Stowell, "William Kelly, or The Happy

Christian," Tracts, III, No. 75, pp. 12, 19.

120John Harris, "Christian Liberality Explained
and Enforced," Tracts, X, No. 379, p. 11.

121"Some Memorials of Edward Lee: An Authentic
Record," Tracts, X, No. 379, p. 5.

122"The History of Amelia Gale," Tracts, V,
NO. 217' p. 3.

123Annual Rpport, N.Y., 1855, pp. 134-35 (see
also Annual Reporty Bost., 1843, p. 13).

 

 

124Mohl, "Humanitarianism in the Pre-Industrial
City," pp. 593-95.

125Vol. V (August, 1856), 32.

126Vol. VI (November, 1857), 43.

 

ii ’llulil‘l ll] I xi]

395

127Annual Report, N.Y., 1837! P- 12-

 

128The Christian Almanac, April: 1831-

 

129The Christian Almanac--Western District: 1830:

 

130Foster Rhea Dulles, Labor in America: A History

 

(New York: Thomas Y. Cromwell Co., 1949), p. 59 (herein?
after cited as Dulles, Labor in America); Miller, Jack-
sonian Aristocracy, pp. 45-50; Pessen, Most Uncommon chk-
sonians, pp. 39, 43-44; Warner, The Private City, pp. 74;
75__——-

 

 

 

 

131

"Helps to Self Examination," Tracts, V, No. 146,
pp. 6-7.

132T. H. Gallaudet, Scripture Biography for the
Young, with Critical Illustrations and Practical Remarks:
Adam to Jospph, XXV (New York: American Tract Society,
n.d.), 185.

 

 

 

133Hall, ed., Forty Years, I, 283n.

 

134Annual Report, N.Y., 1858: Po 29-

 

135Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1856,

 

136Bremner, From the Depths, p. 11; Samuel Mencher,
Poor Law to Poverty Program: Economic Security Policy in
Britain andithe United States (Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh
University Press, 1967), pp. 142-43.

 

 

 

137"The Time Not Come," Tracts, X: NO- 369' P° 5'

138Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract SOCietYJ 1829'

 

139"The Chimney-Sweep," Tracts, V, No. 184, Po 3-

140"A Word for the Bible:" Tractsr VII No; 203'

396

141The Family_Almanac, 1849, p. 49.

142The Christian Almanac--Western District:

September, 1929.

143vO1. I (March, 1852), 11.

144Child's Paper. V (January, 1856): 2‘33 Wilder'

Records, p. 28; Dodge, Memorials of wm. E. Dodge, p. 25.

 

 

145Child's Paper, X (March, 1861), 12.

 

146Family Almanac, 1853, p. 32.

147"The One Thing Needful," Tracts, I, No. 6, p. 4.

148Miller, Jacksonian Aristocracy, p. x.

 

149Lubove, "New York A.I.C.P.," p. 326.

lsoRalph E. Pumphrey, "Compassion and Protection:
Dual Motivations in Social Welfare," Social Services
Review, XXXIII (March, 1959), 21-22.

 

CHAPTER VII

SOCIAL VIEWS

The American Tract Society had not been organized
in 1825 merely to save souls from the "wrath to come."
Although the salvation of individual souls was an important
objective of the Society, there were other objectives as
well. The founders of the Tract Society hoped to mould
American society into their own image. This was especially
important in the Republic where "public sentiment" rather
than arbitrary law reigned supreme. This was also impor-
tant in a Republic which was discarding previously held
notions of society, especially notions concerning social
distinctions and class differences.

One commonly held view of Jacksonian society is
that it was basically egalitarian.1 It assumes that
"broadly egalitarian economic opportunity" resulted in
"a fluid social order."2 It is argued that urbanization
and industrialization created more openings in the service
occupations. This view is also reinforced by reports from
foreign travelers like Alexis De Tocqueville who were

either laudatory or critical of American egalitarianism.3

397

398

This egalitarian thesis has been challenged
recently by several historians. As pointed out in the
previous chapter, industrialization brought with it not
only increased wealth but also increased poverty. Immi-
gration served to further intensify the gulf between the
rich and the poor.4 Nor was this true only of the eastern
Seaboard. Richard Wade's study of western cities rein-
forces this view. The rapid growth of the cities during
the 1820's brought with it increased stratification.
Residential patterns reflected this; "by 1830 social lines
could be plotted on the map of the city." Furthermore, the
distance between the rungs on the social ladder were
increasing rather than decreasing.5

Alexis De Tocqueville, who is often cited by his-
torians to substantiate the egalitarian thesis, warned
that the rise of manufacturing or industry would pose a
threat to the egalitarian ideal. According to this French
observer, manufacturing brought with it division and spe-
cialization of labor, a specialization which ultimately
dehumanized the workingman. After all, how could one
expect a breadth of vision in a worker who "Spent twenty
years of his life in making heads for pins?" His very work
would ultimately assign the pin-maker "to a certain place
in society, beyond which he . . . [could not] go: in the
midst of universal movement, it . . . [would have] ren—

dered him stationary."6 Manufacturing was on the increase

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

399

after 1830. And available evidence suggests that Tocque-
ville's predictions were becoming a reality.7

Nevertheless, Jacksonian America did pay lip serv-
ice to the concept of equality. Compared to European
aristocratic societies, American society seemed strikingly
egalitarian. The emphasis by European travelers on this
aspect of American society is evidence of this fact. The
egalitarian ideology was not all encompassing. It did
not include the female, the Negro, and at times the immi-
grant. However, aside from these exceptions, a democratic
spirit did prevail in the society. Americans rejected the
notion of special privileges for a select few. Instead
they venerated the ideal of equal opportunity for all.

The managers of the Tract Society also had some—
thing to say concerning equality in society. Reverend
Edward Payson pointed out that the Bible prepared man for
living in this world as well as in the next. It instructed
both ruler and subject, husband and wife, parent and child,
and master and servant in their respective duties.8 Conse-
quently, it was the Society's task to interpret the Bibli-
cal meaning of equality when applied to the home and to
society at large.

The managers of the Tract Society never assumed
that democracy should mean the abolition of all class dis-
tinctions. Reverend Thomas Skinner pointed out in his

tract that church attendance was conducive to social

400

harmony because rich and poor met here. But, he also
reminded his readers that this did not wipe out class dis-
tinctions between the "low and rich." Furthermore, simi-
larity of condition, education, cast of mind, habits . . .
[prescribed] rules for classification and intercourse, not

less among Christians than others,‘ and "utility as well
as propriety" demanded that these rules of conduct be
observed. Therefore, "different degrees of acquaintance-
ship in the same church" should be respected.9 Lyman
Beecher came to a similar conclusion. He feared the propa-
ganda of atheistic levellers. Beecher reminded the workers
that distinctions were inseparable from the "diverse capa-
cities, characters, habits, and employments of men," and
that "different departments of labor" were essential to

the progress of any society. This was a law of the uni-
verse, yet a law against which "rebellion . . . [had]

rolled its most furious tide,‘ and was "looking up with
green-eyed envy upon all the happy fruits of virtue, and
knowledge, and industry, in the orders of society above."10
Obviously, equality in Christ did not mean the removal of
all gradations.

Along with distinctions went submission and obedi-
ence. Gardiner Spring used an analogy from the celestial
beings to prove this point. He maintained that the "har-

mony, beauty, and happiness," of the "social relations"

among these celestial creatures depended "upon their due

401

and cheerful subordination." The same was true of human
society, "running through all the gradations of its social
existence, from the family to the village, from the village
to the state."11 Recognizing and respecting these distinc-
tions was a mark of true Christianity. The reader was
faced with the following aid to self examination:

Do I endeavor to preserve the honor, and perform

all the duties, which I owe to my superiors,

inferiors, or equals? remembering that true

religion makes good husbands, wives, children,

masters, and servants. If I am really holy, I

am relatively holy.12

There were occasions when the Society de-emphasized
inequality. Spring attacked the Roman Catholic Church
because it kept the Bible from the masses. Spring found
Catholicism's assumption that the Bible was intended for a
privileged "order" to be a most "arrogant and preposterous
claim."13 A visitor at an "inquiry-meeting" observed how
God's spirit cut across all social lines. "Here were the
old and the young, the rich and the poor, the ignorant
and the learned, the mother and the daughter, together
inquiring what they should do to be saved."14 But these
proclamations concerning equality in Christ meant only
that, equality in Christ.
The managers of the Tract Society not only accepted

distinctions in society, they also evaluated the relative
worth of the upper and lower classes. One tract writer

lauded the poor widow who had given her two "mites," but

in practice the Society venerated the upper classes and

III III I l l' I II I I. I [lit l A .I ll \ ll

402

the rich.15 When BishOp Philander Chase had the oppor-
tunity to have tea with several English clergymen he was
overjoyed. "Here everything was as it should be," he
remarked.

A room full of the intelligent and good, enjoying

the bounties of heaven, while mindful of him that

blesseth; all conversing with mutual kindness and

delight; yet every remark seasoned with piety

towards God and good-will towards men. Surely,

thought I, this is some resemblance to the happy

society in heaven.16
Archibald Alexander had fond memories of his early ministry
in Charlotte County, Virginia, a county noted for its
plantations, slaves, "hospitality, and genial warmth." No-
where else in the South had the Presbyterian Church received
such strong support from the "wealthy and cultivated
classes."l7 His son, James, complained that the high pew
rents and magnificent church edifices were driving New
York City's lower classes away from the church. And yet,
in his social life James Alexander preferred to associate
with the privileged classes. He admired the aristocratic
circle in which England's tract writer, Hannah More, was
able to move, but realized that this same group would
always exclude him. "And therefore," he informed his
friend, "I should prefer the upper circle here, to the
English middlings, who cringe and truckle with a servility
which no American could endure."18

Further evidence of the Tract Society's bias when

it came to the relative merits of the various classes was

403

its emphasis upon evangelizing the poor. There were
occasions where it reminded its supporters that tracts
were not intended only for the lower classes, but were
"adapted to the spiritual wants of old and young, the rich
and the poor, the learned and the unlearned."19 It cate-
gorically rejected the assumption "that the virtues of
the higher orders of society needed no assistance from
religion, and that it [religion] was only designed as a
curb and a muzzle for the brute."20 Despite these procla-
mations, however, the Society did not pay equal attention
to all classes. The economic, social, and political
leaders were called upon to give financial and moral sup-
port to the Society, the poor were expected to receive
religious instruction from tract distributors and colpor-
teurs. Jonathan Cross, the Society's agent in Virginia,
reported that colporteurs were "missionary angels, running
to and fro to save the poor especially. . . ."21 A col-
porteur from Mississippi reported that whenever there were
two families to be visited, one rich and one poor, and he
could only visit one, he always chose the latter.22 This
was in keeping with the original purpose of colportage.
The Tract Society began hiring colporteurs in 1841 in
order to reach primarily the "destitute, unevangelized
classes."23

When the American Tract Society spoke of different

degrees or orders in life, it was not only referring to the

404

society at large; it was also thinking of husband-wife,
parent-child, and master-servant relationships. The
latter has already been discussed in the section dealing
with the employer-employee relationship.24 Consequently,
this chapter will concern itself only with the Tract
Society's view of the family.

The Tract Society accepted the dominant nine-
teenth—century vieWpoint regarding the inequality of the
sexes. Ante-bellum American women were discriminated
against economically, politically, and socially. Grammar
schools and colleges were usually closed to them. Female
teachers received lower salaries than male teachers. By
1844 all states had followed New York's example of writing
the word "male" into its constitution when it came to suf-
frage. At social gatherings the females were often for-
bidden to mix with the males. If a woman owned property
prior to marriage, she lost the legal right to dispose of
it once she entered the blissful estate. However, this
law was being changed in various states prior to the Civil
War.25

The "cult of womanhood" which prevailed in Jackso-
nian America emphasized the feminine virtues of "piety,
purity, submissiveness, and domesticity." Submissiveness
was the most feminine virtue and, consequently, "all the
good qualities of a wife" were concentrated into this vir—

tue.26 The American Tract Society was in basic agreement

 

_- _ _ u
g I

n

.

—-—

 

——n-— h -—-
——
- h..—

 

__
‘-

-—.

4‘

___- ‘A‘W‘

with t
aspect
paring
"deSp
the m
quest
from
he .
and
side
all
real
of t
a wc
if c

"deg

Of a
was 1
With

husba

that V
Accord
the Cu.

VentUrE

405

with this vieWpoint. There were occasions where this
aspect was de-emphasized, especially when it came to com-
paring the exalted position of Christian women with the
"despised" condition of "Hindoo" and Muslim women.27 But
the man's right and duty to rule in the house was never
questioned. The husband's right to demand submission
from his wife was based on the superiority "with which

he . . . [was] invested"; a superiority "founded in reason,
and maintained by love." Unfortunately, some women con-
sidered "everything of this kind as the relinquishing of
all self defense. Mistaken creatures!" They failed to
realize that it was "their best security, as well as one
of their loveliest ornaments. I Pet. 3:4." Even though
a woman were "frugal, industrious, cleanly, and chaste,"
if she refused to submit herself to her husband, she was
"destitute of that virtue in which the Holy Scriptures

. . . [seemed] to have concentrated all the good qualities
of a wife."28 The woman could be assured that her status
was not to be equated with that of a slave because along
with the wife's injunction to obey her husband went the
husband's injunction to love his wife.

The Tract Society also accepted the dominant view
that women and men had different roles to fill in society.
According to Barbara Welter, one of the four virtues of
the cult of womanhood was domesticity; if a woman would

venture to step out of the domestic circle the very order

g.—
._
.—_~fi,,_
“fig—M“

 

_’
“\.-—'\_ M Q

of soci
"women
Sphere
mother
a timx
the d
eult‘
iacu
Imave
of .
be
and
hLu
prc
to
813
lNe]

Whj

SEX
Whi
mini
wOme
n

mar}

aPPer

406

of society would break up and chaos would reign.29 The

Family Almanac agreed with this View. It admitted that

 

"women peculiarly endowed" could "find happiness in other
spheres" than in the domestic circle. A "future wife and
mother" might find a "healthful and useful occupation for
a time as a teacher." But, in the main, it was "only in
the diversified eXperience of a Christian home, that a
cultivated woman . . . [could] find exercise for all her
faculties and all her affections." Any women's reform
movement which failed to realize this would "fall short
of its prOper end."30 James Bean exhorted the woman to
be diligent in those duties which were "peculiar to her,"
and not concern herself with those duties peculiar to the
husband. "The disposal of his time," he wrote, "or his
property, his journeys, his connections, etc., are things
to be regulated by the circumstances of his calling; a
subject which probably he best understands." Her duties
were "to soften, to cheer, and to refresh the mind" on
which the heaviest burdens of the family pressed.31

A similar demarcation between the role of the
sexes was drawn by James Milnor in his Oration on Masonry,
which he delivered several years prior to entering the
ministry. Milnor defended the Mason's policy of excluding
women from their meetings on the grounds that society had
"marked out with a convenient discrimination, the offices

appertaining to either sex." To infringe on the "proper

 

 

line of
employm
and the
cal c0‘
turmoi
03:- the
Pursu
tic j
suit
and
eng.

[de

let
Mi:
tO
to

C81

407

line of demarcation between their respective duties and
employments" would only injure "the dignity of the one,
and the amiableness of the other." The "broils of politi-
cal controversy, the agitations of a military life, the
turmoil of professional competition, the severer labours
of the field and of the workshop," and most of the "active
pursuits" which drew one away from the "privacy of domes—
tic life" were occupations entrusted to men. Such pur-
suits would "mar the delicacy, offend the retiring modesty,
and interfere with the milder, though not less interesting
engagements in which the virtuous woman so much . . .
[delighted]."32

The Tract Society, however, permitted several out-
lets for the "domestic" woman. One such outlet was charity.
Milnor assured the women that the Masons were often willing
to accept their help when it came to distributing charity
to "worthy sufferers of their own sex." Kindness and con-
cern for the suffering was an office which "nature" had
"so admirably adapted" to "the female disposition."33
Another acceptable outlet for the female was participation
in religious services. Here the Tract Society accepted
the view of American society which considered piety
to be one of the virtues of womanhood. A woman could
participate in religious services without sacrificing her
submissive or domestic attributes. In his 1853 address to

the New York City Tract Society, Reverend Theodore Cuyler

 

 

main
ful

to s
to i

to c

EVE]

pro]

man
was
EVe
mes
Wor
On‘
Ne!
ex
So
99
as
de
Ca
re

te

408

maintained that the American Tract Society had been "use-
ful in settling the question of women's right-—her right
to seek out and save the lost. . . ." Cuyler then went on
to inform his audience that he also "stood up for her right
to do good and save souls."34

The managers of the American Tract Society, how-
ever, saw to it that women did not slip out of their
prOper role even when participating in religious services
or philanthropic activities. The Tract and Bible Societies
employed over 100 young women by 1820. Some of these
women worked in the Tract Society House. The Society's
managers saw to it that part of the females' lunch break
was devoted to "prayer and praise" and that their Thursday
evenings were set aside for prayer and conference. These
meetings were conducted by three or four "brethren."35
Women were encouraged to form auxiliary female societies;
one of the most prominent of these auxiliaries being the
New York City Female Tract Society. But no woman was
expected to read the annual report of a female tract
society to a mixed audience.36 In 1860 the Baltimore
agency reported that it had hired two "pious poor women"
as colporteurs to work among the "abjectly poor and
degraded families" of the city. Their task would be to
care "for the wretched hopeless mothers and ragged child-
ren," not for the men.37 When it came to the Grimké sis-

ters lecturing before mixed audiences, or the role of

 

 

 

wom
lik
the

Set

Soc
Jus
wif
to
501‘.
in
dic'
Yea
But
PM
the
re]
Ia.
Is
It
Do
0h
00
Arm
bu:

tr~

C

409

women in William Lloyd Garrison's Antislavery society, men
like Nehemiah Adams, Leonard Bacon, and Arthur Tappan drew
the line.38 Obviously, the Women's Rights Convention at
Seneca Falls in 1848 was beyond the pale of acceptability.
The second order in the home to which the Tract
Society addressed itself was the parent-child relationship.
Just as the husband was considered to be superior to the
wife, so also the parents were considered to be superior
to the children. Children were one commodity which Jack-
sonian America did not lack. Girls married young, often
in their teens, sometimes in their early teens. If they
did not die in childbirth,they could look forward to many
years of childbearing. Large families were common.39
But although parents were not laggard when it came to
producing offspring, there was evidence to suggest that
they were laggard when it came to disciplining the child-
ren. Emphasis was still placed upon the importance of
raising an obedient child, but there was a noticeable
relaxation of the stern stress of "breaking the will."
It seemed that the hickory stick had lost its exalted
position in the home. People were still using it, but
only as a last resort. Perhaps this was partly due to
occupational or economic changes in nineteenth-century
America. There were numerous complaints that the father's
business was taking him away from the family, leaving the

training and the disciplining of children solely up to the

410

mother. However, there is evidence to suggest that parents
were deliberately Spoiling the child and were proud of it.
They were raising youngsters for a Republic, although
European observers felt that they were raising "spoiled
brats."4O

The American Tract Society addressed itself to
both the parents and the children. It exhorted parents
not only to instruct but also to discipline their children.
Bishop McIlvaine complained that parents failed to teach
their children the principle of complete obedience, especi-
ally in America "where the pride of independence . . .
[was] so nourished and pampered by everything around." He
warned that the "principle of entire subjection and implicit
obedience" had to be "fixed in the children, by all means,
or the nurture of the Lord . . . [would be] denied." Until
children had learned to be obedient, they had "not learned
the first letter of obedience to God. . . ."41

The Tract Society realized that some parents might
err in over emphasizing obedience and submission. They
might become "household tyrants," and through their sever-
ity, petulence, and ill humor," drive their children away
from home.42 Children required "sympathy, warm and tender"

as well as "government."43 But this did not mean sympathy

 

without government. Parents should teach their youngsters

to obey. One author suggested that a child of fifteen to

 

 

 

tv.

of

WI

re

p;

t.

f .

m

rn

411

twenty-four months was not too young to learn the meaning
of obedience. Gardiner Spring was in full agreement. He
wrote:

When I say, therefore, that parental authority
should be established early, I mean very early.
By the time a child can walk, and often before
it leaves the breast of its mother, it should be
taught implicitly to obey.44

 

A child should be taught obedience for several
reasons. First of all, children who disobeyed their
parents would "more readily disobey their consciences,
and resist the Holy Ghost." Thus it was of utmost impor-
tance that parents use "judicious" authority, including
force, in prohibiting questionable amusements and in
enforcing proper observance of the Sabbath.45 Spring
insisted that a "dutiful child" was much more likely to
become pious than one which had "an obstinate, unbending
temper."46 Secondly, disobedient children were likely to
grow up to become unruly citizens. Disrespect for parents
led to disobedience to parents which in turn led to a
"contempt of public Opinion, and contempt of the magistracy,
and a proud defiance of laws."47 Samuel Miller agreed.
Such children would in later life reveal traits of "self
will, turbulence, and every revolting insubordination."48

The Tract Society also addressed itself to the
children as well as to the parents. Children were called
upon to obey and respect their parents and this included

also the willingness to seek counsel from one's elders.

 

 

 

Acc'
con
the
em:
lon
Soc
con
owr.
cor

de

to
of
Whg
Th1
itj
li:

th

ta
in
th

80

CO]

an

412

According to Richard L. Rapson, the nineteenth-century
concept that America was the land of the future affected
the traditional parent-child relationship. Children were
expected to leave old standards behind. The parent no
longer knew what was best for his child. This, the Tract
Society could not accept. It advised children to seek
counsel from their parents in all matters involving "their

own and their parents' interests,‘ especially in matters
concerning "business or marriage."49 In the home the
parent was not only superior but also wiser.

The female was not the only exception when it came
to equality in ante-bellum America. Many of the defenders
of the egalitarian ideology also had serious questions
whenever this concept was applied to immigrants and Negroes.
Thus racism and nativism set boundaries beyond which equal-
ity could not go. For some the boundary was the color
line, for others it was the ethnic or national as well as
the color line.

Neither the immigrant nor the Negro was an impor-
tant factor in the organization of the national Society
in 1825, yet both would become increasingly important in
the next decades. Both were a threat to the ordered
society which the Tract Society hOped to build. The immi-
grant posed a direct threat because of his false notions

concerning liberty, order, and religion. The Negro posed

an indirect threat because the white community's inability

413

to resolve the racial and slavery problems would bring
about disunity and secession. In the end it was these
factors rather than racism which determined the attitude
of the Tract Society towards these two groups. Equality
in Christ did not mean that all distinctions in society
should be removed. But it did place limitations upon
racial theories.

During the 1830's the Christian stewards in America
were becoming increasingly fearful that the American
Republic would be undermined by the influx of Roman Catho—
lic immigrants. In 1835, the year the Tract Society cele-
brated its tenth anniversary, over 50,000 European emigrants
landed in America. This surpassed the total immigration
of the decade from 1790 to 1800. But 1835 was only a
fraction of what was still to come. In 1845 over 119,000
immigrants arrived; in 1852 this number jumped to nearly
400,000. One authority has estimated that net immigra-
tion for the period 1820 to 1860 amounted to 4,900,000 of
which 4,200,000 came in the last two decades. Here was
a mass of people which the Society could not ignore.50

The American Tract Society found much to complain
about when it came to the immigrant. Like many nativitsts,
it viewed the immigrant as a threat to the American soci-
ety. But although it opposed the religion, values, and
ethics of many of the immigrants, the Tract Society did

not, necessarily, oppose the immigrant himself.

 

 

st
ti
tc
be

WE

fa
re
wk
Tl

ti

i1

S.

le
de
EL

414

According to John Higham, nativism in its early
stages after the American Revolution was primarily nega-
tive; it defined what America was not. One of these fac—
tors was Roman Catholicism. However, anti-Catholic feelings
became nativistic only when the fear arose that Catholics
were foreign agents or tools of foreign powers and thus
a threat to the survival of the Republic. The other
factor which early American nativism ruled out was EurOpean
radicalism. This was especially true of the Federalists
who equated French radical thought with un-Americanism.51
The American Tract Society was in basic agreement with
this definition of Americanism.

Since the Tract Society viewed the American Repub-
lic as a Protestant nation, and since a large number of
immigrants were Roman Catholics, it is not surprising that
the Tract Society would raise the anti-Catholic flag. The
Society's opposition to Roman Catholicism has already been
discussed in chapter four. One point, however, should
also be included when discussing the Tract Society's view
of the Roman Catholic immigrant, namely its fear that
Roman Catholicism was often linked to unfriendly foreign
powers. This was emphasized by Lyman Beecher. The immi-
grants, he claimed, were dominated by their ecclesiastical
leaders who were dependent upon Rome, which in turn was
dependent upon Austria. This offered "to the powers of

EurOpe, easy and effectual means of disturbing the

415

healthful action" of the American institutions. Beecher
maintained that the "march of liberal Opinions" in America
was disturbing to the European powers. Consequently, they
had conspired to subvert the Republican institutions by
emptying the "contents of the poor houses and the sweep-
ings of the street" upon American soil.52 The American
Tract Society concurred with this Opinion. In 1845 it
warned that already one—sixth of the total American pOpu-
lation were immigrants. If the gOSpel "with its sustain-
ing, elevating power" could be "diffused" among them, the
nation had nothing to fear. But "if a souless, formal
faith, and a loose morality, added to imperfect views of
the nature of . . . [the American] government, and a
diversity of languages" should gain an ascendancm,there

would be "ground of [s_i_g] apprehension,‘ especially since
"probably one-half" of this group was under the influence
of priests who owed their "allegiance to a foreign spirit-
ual and civil despotism."53 Patriotism demanded the
evangelization of the immigrant. Therefore, the Tract
Society concluded that "the watchword of liberty must be
universal evangelization."54

America's liberal voting laws served to intensity
the Tract Society's fear of the immigrant. Beecher warned
that unscrupulous politicians would court the "large

foreign influence in "national councils."55 In 1853 the

executive committee of the New York City Tract Society

416

warned that among the City's 600,000 population there were
many immigrants who would soon have the vote. Furthermore,
their number was increasing rapidly and this was bound to
have a "very detrimental" influence and could very likely
undermine "those free institutions in which Americans . . .
[gloried], unless some adequate preventive [would] be inter-
posed. . . ."56 The voting habits of the immigrant was of
special concern to the Whig Party. Frustrated Whigs were
instrumental in the formation of the short lived Native
American Democratic Association of 1835-36 in New York
City.57 Theodore Frelinghuysen blamed the defeat of the
Whigs in 1844 on the "alliance of the foreign votes and
the most impracticable of all organizations, the Aboli-
tionists."58

The Tract Society also linked poverty and crime to
the immigrant. In doing so the Society reflected a domi-
nant nineteenth—century assumption, namely that slums were
largely created by immigrants.59 According to one tract
writer, some foreigners arrived without a "trade," "money,"

"profession," or "habits of industry,‘ and relied upon
charity and almshouses for support. Not surprisingly, the
taxpayers resented this.60 Not only was the immigrant
associated with welfare, he was also linked to violence
and crime. In 1852 James Alexander wrote that New York

City's crimes were "horridfl but they were "committed

chiefly by foreigners." The worst of the immigrants never

417

got beyond New York City "except to go to the State's
prison."61

Nativist feelings, however, were partly kept in
check by several factors. One was the American notion
that the Republic should serve as a haven for oppressed
groups from the old world. In 1856 Reverend F. Y. Vail,
the Society's agent in Connecticut, New Jersey, and
eastern New York, attributed the influx of immigrants to
the "oppressed conditions of the masses in the old world"
and "the bright prospects" in America.62 Related to this
was the Tract Society's belief that it must help people
emerge from their spiritual as well as from their political
Oppression. The Society's aim was not only to provide
"free institutions for portions of Europe" but also to
furnish "a pure religion for her millions who had come to

America, and thereby "exert an influence to people heaven
with ransomed souls from all nations, and kindreds, and
tongues."63 It informed the Christian public in 1848 that
the "tide of emigration" would increase rather than abate
in the next years. However they "ought not, even if . . .
[they] could," close the door on the immigrants. The
Christian's duty was summed up in the following statement:

Remembering that our fathers were foreigners, let

us have a heart to feel for strangers, and instead

of meeting them, as has too often been done, with

coldness and distrust, let us meet them with the

warm heart and the genuine benevolence of the

Christian——invite them to evangelical churches,
furnish them with Bibles and religious books,

418

gather their children into the Sabbath-school,

preach Christ and him crucified to them, and may

we not confidently hope that the Gospel will become

the power of God and the wisdom of God to their

salvation?64
Consequently, it seemed that the Tract Society's attitude
towards the immigrant was one of ambivalence, vacilating
between rejection and acceptance. But the Society's View
is consistent when one remembers that it did not reject
the immigrant per se. Its opposition to the immigrant was
based more on religious and moral rather than on ethnic
grounds.

Although all immigrants were often lumped together
when the Tract Society voiced its fears of the new arrivals,
some ethnic groups inspired more fear than others. Of all
the groups the German immigrant was often rated the most
positively, both by the American nation as a whole and by
the Tract Society. "What a blessing it is to belong to
the Teutonic race!" James Alexander wrote in 1840. "The
more I see of the black-eyed races of the South of Europe,
the less I respect them. Next to Britain I would live in
Prussia."65

The Tract Society praised the German for several
reasons. First of all, many German immigrants settled on
farms in Pennsylvania and in the West, instead of congre—
gating in urban slums. Secondly, they had a reputation

66

for being industrious and economical. Furthermore, the

419

German population respected education. Many were not only
literate, but also "avid" readers.67

The Society did have reservations when it came to
the German immigrants' concept of liberty. It was con-
cerned over the tendency of some Germans to equate liberty
with "unrestrained license" and the "perfect freedom from
all restraint, both of government and public Opinion."68
A number of Germans were "Infidels, Disorganizers, or
Socialists." The New York City Tract Society complained
that the "bulk of the German population" violated the
Sabbath, visited taverns or other "kindred institutions."69
But there were also other reports suggesting that, on the
whole, German communities were stable and orderly. Accord-
ing to the Tract Society, the Germans were a "reliable
people . . . less volatile than the French."70 Their
religious views also caused concern. Many were either
"rationalists or infidels" and equated religious liberty
with freedom from all formal religion. But the Society
was also pleased to note that some Germans were "enlight-
ened Protestants.“ In fact, one could often find "eminent

and devotedly pious men, like the Pilgrim fathers,‘ among
them.71

The French immigrant received a mixed report.
Paris and revolutionary France were synonymous with evil,

decadance, atheism, and political radicalism. When Bishop

McIlvaine visited Paris in 1830, he was shocked at the

420

violation of the Sabbath and found the worship in the
churches to be "nothing better than baptized heathenism."
Paris, he concluded, was "no city for a Christian to

remain inf and Bishop McIlvaine resolved to "get out of
Paris and of France speedily."72 Obviously one could not
expect too much from France's emigrants. According to the
Tract Society they were "nominal Romanists, but real
infidels." However, they were also characterized as being
"active, brave, and ingenious." If one could only inspire

them "with a higher motive of life than the pleasures of

the table or the ball—room, and the glory of la belle

 

France, they would be a noble people." The French had

such versatility and such readiness of adaptation

to new circumstances, that if infidel France could

become missionary France, they might do more good

than almost any other people in the world.73

Of all the European immigrants prior to the Civil

War, native Americans generally rated the Irish the lowest.
Their vast number and their tendency to congregate in
Irish ghettoes or Irish shanty-towns along the outskirts
of the cities made them highly conspicuous. By 1850 they
comprised just under 43 per cent of America's foreign
born population. From 1841-1855 over 1,600,000 Irish came
to the United States. In 1852 alone 157,548 Irish pas—
sengers arrived in the Republic. In their home country
the Irish had been predominantly farmers; in America they

had to adjust to city life. Many also worked on the canals

and railways, work which required much muscle but little

421

or no education. Americans considered the Irish to be

"jolly," "reckless,' and "good-natured," but also "priest-

ridden," "brawling,' and "whiskey lovers."74
The attitude of the Tract Society towards the Irish
was somewhat more favorable than that of the American
society as a whole. There were occasions, however, when
members of the Tract Society dealt harshly with the Irish.
One reporter stated that "the fable of purgatory" could
only "have originated and received pOpular credence" in
Ireland. He concluded that the Irish were "priest-ridden
and deluded, and what . . . [was] worse . . . [loved] to
have it so. The Irishman . . . [was] all feeling." Conse-
quently,he would have to be won over "not with the cool
logic of the Yankee, but with the heart of an Irishman."
(Persuading the Irish "with the heart of an Irishman"
referred to the commissioning of Mr. Watson Haynes, a
converted "Irish Papist/'to work among his own people.)75
Sometimes the Society reports on the Irish contained a
note of condescension and pity. In 1851 the Society
lamented the fact that "so few visible evidences of good
. . . [had] rewarded the toils and sacrifices in their
behalf." But then it might be "unreasonable to look for
speedy results among a peOple so long trodden under the
iron heel of oppression, and so abject in their servitude
to a corrupt priesthood, and in their adherance to super-

stitious forms." The Society would continue, however, to

422

"indulge the hOpe that a brighter day . . . [was] drawing
nigh. . . ."75 Sometimes there were even positive reports
concerning the Irish. One writer reported that those Irish
who were literate often purchased Bibles and Testaments;
only a few were "too bigoted to receive a Protestant
book."77 According to Reverend J. W. Osborne, a colporteur
in Illinois, there were always some Irish present at his
meetings and they were "very respectful and attentive."

One colporteur was pleased to note that the Irish revealed
"a desire to become more American in their manner, dress,
husbandry, and regard for the Bible and other books."78
Perhaps these reports were thrown in to open the purse
strings of the Society's supporters. One could do this by
mixing gloomy reports showing the tremendous need with
Optimistic progress reports showing that God's work was
progressing. But it also revealed the attitude of the
Tract Society toward foreigners. As long as the Irish
would be immersed into the melting pot and emerge as sober,
thrifty, industrious, and orderly Protestants, the Tract
Society asked nothing more. Their Opposition to the immi-
grant was not based primarily on ethnic grounds.

A question could also be raised concerning Lyman
Beecher's and the American Tract Society's motives in wav-
ing the nativistic, anti-Catholic flag. Beecher had begun
a series of anti-Catholic sermons in 1830 prior to his

removal to Cincinnati and Lane Seminary. However his

423

Plea for the West was not published until after he had

 

left the Eastern Seaboard. Thus although many of the
immigrants were settling in the eastern cities, his fear
of Catholicism reached its greatest intensity when he sur-
veyed the West. It is true that the German immigrants and
not the Irish were pre-dominant at this time and that many
Germans did find their way inland.79 It is also true that
Americans expressed fear that the foreign conSpiracy was
directed by the Austrian Emperor. But was Beecher moti-
vated by other factors than the fear of a foreign con-
spiracy? Higham pointed out that nativism became a
national force in the decade of the 1850's when the country
faced the sectional crisis.80 Nativism offered a platform

for maintaining the union. Perhaps Beecher's Plea for the

 

West was intended also for the purpose of maintaining unity,
in this case unity among the evangelical Protestants in
general and in the Presbyterian Church in particular. If
this was his aim, he failed. The Presbyterian Synod tried
Beecher and advocates of the new theology for heresy; the
result was the Presbyterian Schism of 1837.

The American Tract Society as well as Beecher,
emphasized unity. As will be discussed in a later chap-
ter, the Society emphasized few political ideals more than
national unity. Temperance, Sabbath reform, and anti-
immigration were safe issues. HOpefully they would solve

the country's social problems while at the same time

424

unite the country and the Protestants. Like the Second
American Party system, the American Tract Society also
attempted to evade divisive matters--in the Tract Society's
case these were slavery and doctrinal niceties--and focus
on those issues which would unite. The Catholic menace
was one such issue; it was a plank around which all evan-
gelical Protestants could rally. This is not to suggest
that the managers of the Tract Society did not fear the
influx of Catholics and were using the anti-Catholic flag
only as a facade. But it may have entered their mind that
a plank could serve more than one purpose.

The issue which caused the Tract Society its
greatest difficulty in the end was the Negro and slavery.
In examining the Tract Society's racial attitudes one
faces several problems. First of all, since slavery was
controversial and potentially divisive, the Tract Society
published relatively little material on this topic. The
Tract Society had not been in existence as a national
organization for ten years before abolitionist forces
began to stir in the North and in the West. The managers
Of the Tract Society found it expedient to take the middle
r0ad--support the African Colonization Society and say
little as possible on the topic. Furthermore, the Tract

S°C=iety did not present a united front when it came to
slEivery. There was a minority consisting of men like

Ar‘thur Tappan, Reverend Norris Kirk, and later the

425

American Tract Society at Boston who did not go along with
the dominant view expressed by the Society's supporters in
New York City. Finally, the Society's attitude towards
the freedman seemed to be radically different than its
former attitude towards the slave. Nevertheless, it is
possible to make several generalizations concerning the
policies and attitudes of the men who dominated the New
York Office.

In the publications of the Tract Society and in
the writings of its managers, the Negro slave was usually
characterized as contented, longsuffering, and religious.
James Alexander was convinced that as long as slaves had
"ordinary masters/'they were a "happy peOple," devoted to
their owners.81 The religious bent of the Negro was
emphasized, especially after slavery had become a contro-
versial issue within the Society. Reverend E. Christian,
a colporteur who worked among the "colored" congregations
in Virginia, reported that his audiences loved to hear
him "tell about Jesus, and read tracts which so . . .
[consoled] their minds. . . ." He found "much practical
piety" among them.82 Much was made of the Negro's for-
giving spirit. These tracts were published during the
first years of the Society's existence. They were designed
not to condemn or excuse slavery but to demonstrate the
power which Christianity gave one in bearing his lot in

life. Probably they were also intended as a reminder to

426

the lower classes to bear their lot without grumbling.
For example, one tract portrayed a Negro woman praying for
her master who had beaten her. This same Negro woman felt
that she had erred "by not submitting with more resignation
to her unhappy lot."83 (Had the Society published this
tract during the 1850's, it would have brought an uproar
from its Southern supporters because of the image it
created of the master.)

In its racial attitudes the Tract Society attempted
to steer a middle road between abolitionists who argued
in favor of racial equality and pro-slavery advocates who
assumed the inherant inferiority of the Negro race.
Archibald Alexander used the approach of the African Coloni—
zation Society in arguing that racial prejudice in the
country made peaceful coexistence of free whites and free
blacks impossible. "It is in vain to declaim about the
prejudice of color," he argued; "however unreasonable it
will long continue to exist, and will prove an effective
bar to the possession and enjoyment of the same privileges
and advantages which the white people enjoy."84 Nehemiah
Adams concurred with this Opinion. Two free races could
never coexist. As slaves, the Negroes were at least a
"protected class." Adams insisted that he was speaking as
a friend of the Negroes when he concluded that their
"subordination in some form to a stronger race . . . [was]

absolutely necessary for their protection and best welfare.‘

427

If Southern whites were willing to "protect and provide"
for the Negro, both "for this world and the next," then
the North owed them "a debt of gratitude."85
Adams' statement carried two implications. First,
slavery was a blessing; secondly, the Negro, was unable to
compete with the white. Actually the first assumption
was based on the second; slavery was a blessing because
the Negro was inferior to the white. He could not compete
with the white and, consequently, should either be sent
elsewhere or remain as a "protected class." A similar view
was expressed by James Alexander. In 1847 he wrote that
he found "no trace of the modern dogmas about absolute
freedom in the Bible." He felt that the Negro was "much
better off . . . physically and morally, than the Irish."
But this did not include the free Negroes. He found New
York's free Negroes to be the "wretchest portion, by far,"
and "lower than savages in many respects." Alexander was
convinced that immediate emmancipation would prove to be
"disastrous" for the slaves.86
Yet the Tract Society could never accept the views
of extreme racists, eSpecially when these views discredited
the Genesis record. Several attempts were made in ante-
bellum America to base the assumption of the inequality of
the races on the theory of separate creations. This was
not accepted by many because it offended their religious

"sensibilities."87 Such a view also offended members of

428

the Tract Society. In his address at the confirmation of

a number of "servants"--probably slaves--Bishop Meade spoke
out against those who would deny an Adamic ancestry to

some of the races.88 The Tract Society had no option but
to accept the unity of the human race. To reject it would
have jeopardized the "salvation scheme" since Adam's sin
and Christ's death had application only for Adam's descend-
ants. If the Negro was not of Adam's race, then the mis-
sion to the slaves was in vain.

In order to sanction slavery which suggested, or
even assumed, racial inequality, the Tract Society fell
back on a dualistic world view. In the secular world man
was unequal, in the spiritual world he was equal. Since
the spiritual realm was the most important of the two, then
obviously it was more important to be equal in this realm.
Such a dualistic world view had an added attraction; it
upset society less to implement equality in the spiritual,
or the abstract, rather than in the secular, or the con-
crete. It enabled the Society to sanction inequality in
practice while being for equality in principle.

Since the religious or spiritual realm was of
utmost importance, the mission to save souls took preced-
ence over any mission to free bodies. In 1858 Reverend
(George?) Bethune, a Dutch Reformed minister, defended the
American Tract Society's refusal to take a stand against

slavery. He argued that saving souls took first priority,

429

and that it did not matter whether "black or white persons
. . . [had] these souls." The freedom that really mattered
was the "freedom of the Lord." He assured the audience
that he recognized no difference between the "black brother"
and himself. The Negro, he exclaimed, was his "brother."
But the greatest gift he could give anyone was summed up
in the phrase: "Give me Christ, give me Christ."89 Nehe—
miah Adams maintained that God saw the Negroes in a "worse
bondage than slavery" and wanted to "bring them into his
family."90 The Tract Society agreed. It pointed out to
both its supporters and critics that its colporteurs had
been blessed in bringing "many a slave . . . into that
liberty wherewith Christ . . . [made] his peOple free."91
Thus the mission to evangelize the slave became
the only acceptable solution that the Tract Society had
for slavery prior to the Civil War. It was even suggested
that more slaves had "secured eternal life, than would have
been the case in any freedom conceivable."92 South Carolina
came in for special praise; in no other part of the country
was "more attention paid to the religious instruction of
the slaves, nor more interest felt therein. . . ."93
Consequently,it was incumbent upon the Society not to pub-
lish any inflammatory material which might jeOpardize its
Inission. In its policy the Tract Society was following a

'Path trod by the Methodists before them. The Methodists,

430

however, had discovered by 1844 that this path could lead
to schism.94

In his 1858 address in which he justified the
Tract Society's stand on slavery, Bethune maintained that
he recognized no difference between his "black brother"
and himself. Yet for at least some of the supporters of
the Tract Society, brotherhood had its limits, even in the
churches. Archibald Alexander promoted the cause of evan-
gelizing Philadelphia's Negro population as long as it
meant erecting an "African Church."95 His son's views
were similar. In 1837 James Alexander wrote that his con-
gregation had just built a "new and handsome church edi-
fice." While the church was being built, the Negroes had
worshipped separately in a little building. The majority
of the white pew holders did not want the Negroes in the
new church, not even in the gallery. James Alexander
admitted that the church of Jesus Christ was color-blind,
and that the congregation had "no right to consider the
accident of colour in any degree." Yet he thought the
blacks were "very unwise" to insist "on such a privilege"
at this time. Due to the abolitionists,"the prejudice of
the lower classes of whites against the blacks . . . [had]
become exorbitant and inhuman." Nine years later James
Alexander joined with another clergyman in New York City

in establishing an "Old School coloured church."95

431

The evidence presented thus far indicates that
there were members within the American Tract Society who
believed that the Negro was inferior to the white man even
though both whites and blacks were descendants of Adam.
Yet once the Civil War broke out, the attitude of the

Tract Society changed. Its Annual Reports began to sound

 

similar to abolitionists' reports, especially when it came
to freedman's education.97

Prior to the Civil War many abolitionists had not
only attacked slavery but also the theory of racial inequal-
ity which sanctioned it. With the Civil War and emanci-
pation,the abolitionists had the opportunity to prove
their point. One method of demonstrating the Negro's
ability was by education. The intellect was considered to
be superior to the muscle,and any group which could excel
intellectually and culturally obviously was not an infer-
ior group. By the end of the Civil War various secular
and religious freedmen's aid societies had over 900
teachers in the South. Some of these were abolitionists.
Experiments such as educating the 8,000 former slaves at
Port Royal, off the coast of South Carolina, and trans-
forming the Negro population into a self sufficient com-
munity became the abolitionists' answer to the conserva-
tives who opposed emancipation. Their reports were often
biased and exaggerated, emphasizing the speed with which

the Negro learned. Prior to the war the abolitionists

432

had pointed to environment in order to explain the apparent
inferiority of the Negro. Now they were in danger of mini-
mizing the detrimental impact of slavery. If the scars of
slavery could be erased as quickly and as easily as some
of the glowing reports suggested, then slavery could not
have been so detrimental after all.98

The American Tract Society was also involved in
educating the freedman. It cooperated with the North-West
Freedman's Aid Association in getting out printed material

to the former slaves. It issued 500 Tract Primers for

 

"colored schools" during the 1863-1864 year. It opened
schools for freedmen in Duff Greene's Row, Washington,

and aided in the erection of buildings at several Negro
camps.99 Progress reports on the education of the freed-
men in these camps were extremely optimistic. The Negroes
revealed "a surprising aptness in acquiring knowledge."
Furthermore, there were no indications to suggest that
they had reached their maximum educational or intellectual
level.100 The latter point was important because some
whites had argued that although a Negro youngster might
learn easily at first, he would inevitably fall behind the
white child.101 Mr. J. F. Mallet, a native of the South,
observed a village of over 5,000 freedmen for fifteen days.
After careful observation and "sincere prayer to God for
light," he concluded that the Negroes were "as capable of

culture and civilization as any other class." They were

433

"thirsting for knowledge, and ready to sacrifice all for
religion and education."102 Some reports were less opti-
mistic. One reporter warned that a few years or even a
generation of freedom would not bring the Negroes to their
maximum level. But "faithful labor and patient waiting
. . . [would] be abundantly rewarded."103

J. F. Mallet's observations had not been restricted
to education. The racists had argued that the Negro was
deficient in morals and industry as well as in education.104
Mallet's observations diSproved this. He found the freed-
men living in "neat and comfortable homes, surrounded by
flourishing gardens." He wrote that the Negroes were
"industrious and patient, neat and cleanly, economical,
charitable, and free from malice, excelling in this the
white man, honest, and delighting in providing for them-

selves,‘ wherever possible. Mr. Mallet also noticed
another commendable Negro trait, namely the exalted posi-
tion of the Negro female. This he thought raised them
"above savages."105 (What he failed to see here was the
effect of slavery on the Negro male.)

The Tract Society had also changed its publishing
policy during the Civil War. Prior to the war it had
circulated the tract "Sambo and Tony" in which the duties
of the slaves to their masters were discussed. But the

Society refused to publish the sequel to this tract con-

cerning the responsibilities of masters to their slaves.106

434

The Society's New England branch became so exasperated
over New York's publishing policy concerning slavery that
it finally scceded.107 But by 1865 things had changed.
In 1863 the national Society announced the publication

of William R. William's book, God Timing All National

 

Changes in the Interest of His Christ, in which the author

 

argued that it was contrary to the teachings of scripture
to reject emancipation now that God had provided the pos-
sibility for it. The same year the Society announced the

publication of The Enormity of the Slave Trade and The

 

Duty of Seeking the Moral and Spiritual Elevation of the

Colored Races.108 The Society also published a sixteen-

 

page tract for soldiers entitled "Uncle Johnson, a slave
over 100 Years." Another tract venerated a former slave
who had become an "esteemed member of the venerable
Reverend Dr. Baldwin's Church in Boston."109

How can one account for such a reversal in the
Society's publication policy? One obvious answer, which
will be discussed in a later chapter, was the Society's
emphasis upon national unity. If necessary, it was willing
to sacrifice the Negro on the alter of national and reli—
gious unity. It had found slavery disagreeable and dis-
tasteful but not sinful. Once the Civil War broke out.the
Tract Society found it possible to support both unity and

emancipation.

435

Some, like William E. Dodge, accepted freedman's
citizenship and education only as a second choice. Even
after 1865 he still preferred colonization but realized
that it was impractical.110 The passing of the Fourteenth
Amendment in 1866 dashed all hOpes for the coloniza-
tionists. It meant that American citizenship would be
granted to the blacks as well as the whites. It even
made Negro suffrage a distinct possibility.lll Education
was essential in order to socialize the freedman. The
Negro, just like the immigrant, had to be taught the vir-
tues of sobriety, frugality, diligence, and self help.

One might also suspect that the Tract Society was
attempting to mend some of its fences which had been broken
during the late 1850's. In 1859 the American Tract Society
at Boston had seceded and had begun to publish its own
tracts on slavery. Seemingly the South outweighed New
England in New York's eyes. But once secession became a
reality in l86l,there was little or nothing left to salvage
in the South. Whether it liked it or not, the Tract
Society had become a northern society.

However, the American Tract Society's policies
can also be explained in terms of its emphasis on liberty
and equality in Christ. This liberty, which was worth more
than social or political liberty, was available to the
Negro as well as to the white. The tracts, referred to

previously, which emphasized the contented, forgiving

436

slave fit the popular stereotype of the docile and reli-
giously inclined Negro. But to the Society they meant
something else. They were evidence of the fact that
Christianity gave one the power to rise above his environ-
ment and to bear his lot in life, whatever it might be.

In Christ one was free.

Its emphasis upon the liberating power of Christi-
anity also enabled the Tract Society to disprove the argu-
ments of the environmentalists. The abolitionists had
attributed the Negroes' apparent vices to the environmental
factors of slavery and racism. In 1864 Edward Norris Kirk
also used environmentalism to explain the condition the
Negro. "Trained in the school of slavery," the Negroes
had "brought into freedom its great vices." Consequently,
the nation was obligated to "educate and train them in
the principles of purity and truth."112 The American
Tract Society could argue that its faith in the gospel was
greater than that of Kirk and the abolitionists. It
believed that Christianity lessened the damaging effect of
all destitution, be it poverty or slavery. God had even
overruled some of the negative effects of slavery and
turned the curse of servitude into a blessing by exposing
the African to the elevating and illuminating power of
Christianity.

The elevating power of Christianity also had impli-

cations for social reform. In one of its tracts published

437

prior to the rise of abolitionism, the Society printed Mrs.
Eleanor Emerson's account of her own conversion. In her
unconverted state she had resented the presence of a young
mulatto man in her church. But on her day of baptism,she
had been so filled with God's love that she "could most
cheerfully receive him as a dear brother in Christ, and
rejoice in the impartiality of God. . . ."113 This was the
Society's and God's way of bringing about change. The New
York office could have reminded its New England critics
that the Boston Society, itself, had stated in 1826 that
the diffusion of religion was an "efficient system of
means, designed to elevate and reform man." Cabinets,
legislatures, and police could "regulate and control
within some tolerable limits" the problems of "ignorance,"

"misery,' and "crimes." But religion, on the other hand,
struck a "radical blow"; it transformed man into a "patri-
otic ruler, an honest neighbor, a faithful servant."114
Man's solution was to bring about reform by force; God's
solution was to bring about reform through the "universal
diffusion of the principles of benevolence." Man's solu-
tion was to reform in haste, God's solution was to work
slowly.115 According to William Adams, Christianity taught
man "how to reform without destroying."116

Glifford Griffin concluded that one reason for

the Society's refusal to take a stand on slavery was its

reluctance to lose a field for work.117 To an extent this

(‘llll-llll‘l

 

 

 

 

438

is true. The Society's work in the southeast and south-
west had eXpanded considerably in the 1840's and 1850's.
But its emphasis on having a field was not only motivated
by sales. Its southern agencies were usually in debt.

Mr. Jonathan Cross reported in 1856 that the Virginia and
North Carolina Agencies had drawn on the parent society
for nearly half its costs. In 1857 the Southwestern
Agency, which included Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, Western
Florida, Mississippi, Arkansas, and the Cherokee Nation,
reported a deficit of nearly $10,000.118 Its emphasis
upon a field was in keeping with its concept of social
reform. John L. Thomas has pointed out that the conserva-
tive clergy viewed reform more in moral than in social
terms. They hoped to "engineer a Christian revolution"

by convicting men of sin and exhorting them to act cor-
rectly. Such a revolution would "leave the foundations of
the social order undisturbed."119 This certainly was true
of the Tract Society as well. In 1856 the American Tract
Society attempted to placate its critics by pointing out
that religion was the key to changing man.120 Diffusion
of religion was the only answer the Society could find
which would preserve a united nation and a stable society
while solving the social ills. Perhaps it might even
eventually transform the South and slavery would vanish

of its own accord.

439

The reversal of the Society's policy after 1860
also indicates that its pre-Civil War stance on slavery
was not based solely on racist arguments. It is true that
there were members like the Alexanders who considered the
Negro to be incapable of fending for himself in a white
community. But the Society's emphasis on the Negro's
ability to learn would suggest that factors other than
racism may have determined, at least in part, its pre-

War policy. Furthermore, the Adamic ancestry of all man-
kind and the brotherhood of all Christians placed a limit
on racism.

In analyzing the Tract Society's social views,one
can detect that its concept of equality had both a nega-
tive and a positive aSpect. The Tract Society had taken
pains to define what equality--at least equality in Christ-—
did not mean. For the Tract Society "Republicanism" and
"equality in Christ" did not mean the elimination of all
gradations or distinctions in society. Some like sexual
distinctions were set by Providence, others like economic
distinctions were earned, but both were real and ought to
be respected in the church, the home, and in the community.

However, its view of equality also had a posi-
tive aspect. It cut across ethnic lines as long as the
immigrant was willing to accept the Society's definition
of Americanism. James Alexander's dislike for the black—

eyed Europeans bordered on racism. But, in the main, the

440

Society was willing to accept all immigrants as long as
they accepted the right religion and the correct values.
Furthermore, equality in Christ cut across color lines.
There were some who saw the Negro as inferior and unable
to compete equally with the whites. Yet the Society did
not accept extreme racist views. Its emphasis on freed~
men's education during the Civil War is evidence of this
fact. In order to salvage equality in Christ while main—
taining order and unity in the nation,the Tract Society
had resorted to a dualistic world view. At least in the
spiritual all were equal, male and female, native born

and immigrant, black and white.

FOOTNOTES--CHAPTER VII

1Titles used in studies emphasizing the egalitarian
nature of the Jacksonians are suggestive. See for example,
Carl R. Fish, The Rise of the Common Man, 1830-50 (New
York: MacMillan Co., 1927), and chapter 12 entitled "Tom,
Dick and Harry take a Hand," of Dixon Ryan Fox's The Decline

 

 

of Aristocracy in the Politics of New York, 1801-40 (New
York: Columbia University Press, 1919). More recent
studies are Arthur Schlessinger, The Age of Jackson (Boston:
Little Brown and Co., 1945). Schlessinger sees Jacksonian
strength to lie especially in the worker's parties of the
eastern urban centers. Recent studies which do not see the
Democratic Party as the party of the lower classes but
emphasize, nevertheless, the egalitarian nature of this
time period are Stuart Bruchey, The Roots of American Eco-
nomic Growth, 1607-1861: An Essaykin Social Causation

(New York: Harper and Row, 1965), pp. 178-207 (herein-
after cited as Bruchey, The Roots of Am. Ec. Growth);

Lee Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy: New

York as a Test Case (New York: Athenium BoOks, 1966),

pp. 329—38 (hereinafter cited as Benson, The Concept of
Jacksonian Dem.).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2Bruchey, The Roots of Am. Ec. Growth, p. 207.

 

3Edward Pessen has pointed out that foreign
travelers, whether friendly or hostile to America,
tended to exaggerate American equality. They came with
a political axe to grind either for or against American
democracy. Secondly, they understandably emphasized those
aspects of American society which differed with theirs.
Yet historians have often used these reports to substan-
tiate their thesis that Jacksonian America was the age of
the common man (see Edward Pessen, Jacksonian America:
Society,Personality,and Politics (Homewood, IIl.: Dorsey
Press, 1969), pp. 358-59. (Hereinafter cited as Pessen,
Jacksonian America.)

 

 

441

442

4Douglas T. Miller, Jacksonian Aristocracy: Class
and Democracy in New York, 1830-60 (New York: OxfOrdi
University Press, 1967), pp. 128454 (hereinafter cited as
Miller, Jacksonian Aristocragy): Douglas T. Miller, ”Immi—
gration and Social Stratification in Pre-Civil War New
York," New York History, LIV (April, 1968), 157-68 (herein-
after cited as Miller, "Immig. and Soc. Stratification
in Pre-Civil War N.Y.").

 

 

 

 

5Richard C. Wade, The Urban Frontier, Pioneer
Life in Early Pittsburg, CihcinnatiLLexington, Louis-
ville, and St. Louis (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1959), pp. 204-10. For similar conclusion see
Pessen, Jacksonian America, pp. 47-49, 51-54.

 

 

 

 

6Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America,
Mentor Books, ed. by Richard D. Heffner (New York: Amer-
ican Library, 1956), p. 190.

 

7Miller, Jacksonian Aristocracy, pp. 3-25.

8"The Bible Above all Price,” Tracts, II, No. 71,
pp. 13-14 (see also S. V. S. Wilder, Records from the
Life of S. V. S. Wilder [New York: American Tract Society,
1868], p. 20 [hereinafter cited as-Wilder, Recordsl).

 

 

9Thomas H. Skinner, "Duties of Church Members,"
Tracts, VIII, No. 265, pp. 4-5.

0Lyman Beecher, Beecher's Works, Vol. I, Lectures

on Political Atheism and Kindred Subjects; Together with
Six Sermons on Intemperance; Dedicated to the Workingmen
of the United States (Boston: John P. Jewett and Co.,
1852), pp. 117-18 (hereinafter cited as Beecher, Lect.
on Pol. Atheism). In 1852 the FamilyAlmanac came out
withiits concept of "universal equalityf“ ii? stated:

There is but one way of securing universal equality

to man--and that is, to regard every honest employ-

ment as honorable, and then for every man to learn

in whatever state he may be, therewith to be con-

tent, and to fulfill with strict fidelity the

duties of his station, and to make every condition

a post of honor (1852, p. 9).

 

 

 

 

 

11Gardiner Spring, The Danger and Hope of the
American People: A Diggourse on the Day of Annual Thanks-
giving, in the State of New York (New York: JShn F. Trow,
1843)] p. 15. (Hereinafter cited as Spring, Danger and

Hope.)

 

 

443

12"Closest Companion," Tracts, I, N°° 21' p. 7'

13Gardiner Spring, The Contrast Between Good and
Bad Men, Illustrated by the BiOgraphyand Truths of the
Bible (2’vols.; New York: M. W. Wood, 1855f, II, 217.
(Hereinafter cited as Spring, Contrast.)

 

 

 

l4"The Inquiry-~Meeting," Tracts, XI, No. 420,
p. 31; George Taylor, "An Authentic Narrative," Tracts,
XII, No. 508, p. 31.

15"Why God Employs Feeble Means to Produce Great

Effects," Tracts, VI, No. 209, p. 6. For the reference
to the poor widow's mites see Mark 12:42.

l6Philander Chase, Bishop Chase's Reminiscences:
An Autobiography, Second edition: Comprisinga HiStory
of the Principal Events in the Authoris Life to A;E'
1847 (2 vols.; Boston: James and Dow, 1898), I, 270.
(Hereinafter cited as Chase, Reminiscences.)

 

 

 

 

17James W. Alexander, The Life of Archibald Alex—
ander, First Professor in the Theological Seminary in
Princeton, New Jersey (New York: Charles Scribner, 1856),
pp. 156-57. (Hereinafter cited as Alexander, A. Alex-
ander.)

 

 

 

18John Hall, ed., Potty Years' Familiar Letters
of James W. Alexander, D.D., Containing with the Notes a
Memoir of His Life (2 vols.; New York: Charles Scribner,
1860), I, 240. (Hereinafter cited as Hall, Forty Years.)

 

 

 

19Annual Report, N.Y., 1826, p. 12.

 

20Annual Report, N.Y., 1836, p. 40.

 

21Annual Report, N.Y.,_1856, p. 87 (see also ibid.,
p. 96; Annual Report, N.Y., 1853, p. 55).

 

 

22Annual Report! N.Y., 1853, p. 80.

 

23Annual Report, N.Y., 1852, p. 4; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1860, pp. 39, 108; Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract
Society! I853, p. 15.

 

 

 

 

 

444

24See Chapter VI.

5Pessen, Jacksonian America, pp. 86-87; Arthur W.
Calhoun, A Social History ofithe American Family, Vol. II,
From Independence Thropgh'the CiVil Wa£_(New York: Barnes
and—Noble Inc., 19l8), 794l0l (hereinafter cited as Ca1-
houn, Am. Family); S. Alexander Rippa, Education in a
Free Society: An American History (New York: David
McKay Co., Inc., 1967i, pp. 250-53.

 

 

 

 

26Barbara Welter, "The Cult of True WOmanhood:

1820-60," American Quarterly, XVIII (Summer, 1966), 151-52,
158-62. (Hereinafter cited as Welter, "The Cult of True
Womanhood.")

 

27"Condition and Character of Females in Pagan and

Mohammedan Countries," Tracts, I, No. 13, pp. 2-4.

28James Bean, "Advice to a Married Couple," Tracts,

II, NO. 67' pp. 16-190

29Welter, "The Cult of True WOmanhood," pp. 151-

52, 162-64, 173; Pessen, Jacksonian America, p. 85. Walter
Bridges has pointed out that the virtue of domesticity
became even more important once industry and commerce

drew the father away more and more from the family. To

be successful one had to be mobile. The home and the
mother, however, were to reject mobility and the success
ethic (see Walter E. Bridges, "Family Patterns and Social
Values in America, 1825-75," American Quarterly, XVII
[Spring, 1965], pp. 10-12 [hereinafter cited as Bridges,
"Family Patterns and Soc. Values in Am."]).

 

3OFamily Almanac, 1853, p. 30.

31"Advice to a Married Couple," Tracts, 11: No. 67'

p. 6.

32James Milnor, Oration on Masonry! Delivered at
St. John's ChurchLyin the City of Philadelphia, at the
Regpest of the Right Worshipful Grand Lodge of Pennsyl-
vania, On7§t. JOhn's Day,_Jfihe 24,41811 (New York: Brad-
ford andInskeep and—Inskeep andBradfOrd, 1811), pp. 33-
35. (Hereinafter cited as Milnor, Oration on Masongy.)

 

 

33Ihid.

445

34Welter, "The Cult of True WOmanhood,“ pp. 752-53;
Annual Report, New York City Tract Society, 1853, pp. 10-
11. On the—“right" of women to participate in religious
activities see Daniel Clark, "The Church Safe," Tracts,
IV, No. 37, p. 8.

35William A. Hallock, Memoir of Harlan Page; or
The Power of Prayer and Personal EffOrt for the Souls of
Individuals (New York: AmeriCan Tract Society, 1835),
pp. 151-52. By employing women the Society seemed to be
encouraging them to break out of the domestic circle.
Whether these women were predominantly single or widows
is not known. However, as mentioned previously, one
acceptable outlet for a female was participation in
religious and benevolent activities. The Tract Society
claimed to be engaged in such activities.

 

 

36Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1846,
p. 9.

37Annual Report, N.Y., 1860, pp. 96-97.

38Alice Felt Tyler, Freedom's Ferment: Phases of

American Social History from the ColonialiPeriod to the
Outbreak of the Civil War, Harper Torchbooks (New York:
Harper and Row, Pub., 1962), p. 444; Benjamin P. Thomas,
Theodore Weld: Crusader for Freedom (New Brunswick, N.J.:
Rutgers University Press, 1950i, p. 141.

 

39Calhoun, Am. Family, II, ll-l4; Pessen, Jack-

sonian America, p. 85.

 

 

4OCalhoun, Am. Family, II, 53-54, 63-68; Richard

L. Rapson, "The American Child as Seen by British Trav-
elers, 1845-1935," American Quarterly, XVII (Fall, 1965),
520-34 (hereinafter cited as Rapson, "Am. Child"); Bernard
Wishy, The Child and the Republic: The Dawn of Modern
American Child Nurture (Philadelphia: University of Penn-
sylvania Press, 19687: p. 44 (hereinafter cited as Wishy,
Child and the Republic).

 

 

41Charles P. McIlvaine, A Series of Evangelical

Discourses, Selected for the Use of Families and Destitute
Con re ations (2 vols.; Columbus, Ohio: Isaac N. Whiting,
1848), I, 42-43 (hereinafter cited as McIlvaine, Evan-
gelical Discourses). On the emphasis upon discipline,
see also Family Almanac, 1852, p. 22; Gardiner Spring,

446

Hints to Parents: A Sermon on the Religious Education of
Children (New York: Jonathan Leavitt, 1833), pp. 455
(hereinafter cited as Spring, Hints to Parents).

 

 

 

42The Christian Almanac--Mich., 1838, p. 6.

 

43Family Almanac, 1849, p. 11; Child's Paper,
VI (November, 1857), 43.

 

 

44Spring, Hints to Parents, p. 30; John S. C.
Abbott, The Mother at Home; or The Principles of Maternal
Duty; Familiarily Illustrated (New York: American Tract
Society, [l855?]), p. 59.

 

 

 

45"A11 in the Ark, A Family Tract." 33%: XI
No. 387, pp. 8‘11-

6Spring, Hints to Parents, p. 5.

 

47William C. Brownlee, "An Appeal to the Patriot,"
Tracts, VII, No. 253, p. 14.

48Samuel Miller, Letters from a Father to His Son
in College (Reprinted; Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board
of Publication, 1852), pp. 219-20. (Hereinafter cited as
Miller, Letters.)

 

 

49"Duties of Children," Tracts, II, No. 39,
pp. 5-6; Rapson, "Am. Child," p. 532.

50J. D. B. DeBow, Statistigal View of the United
States . . . Being a Compenduim of the Seventh Census . . .
(Washington: A. O. P. Nicholson, Government Printer,
1854), pp. 122-23; The Seventh Census of the United
States: 1850 (Washington: Robert Armstrong, Government
Printer, 1853), pp. XC-XCl (hereinafter cited as The_
Seventh Census of the Upited States); Bruchey, The Roots
of Am. Ec. Growth, p. 75; Pessen, Jacksonian America, p. 60.

 

 

 

 

 

 

51John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of
American Nativism, 1860¥l925 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers
University Press, 1955), pp. 3-11, 21. (Hereinafter cited
as Higham, Strangers in the Land.)

 

52Lyman Beecher, A Plea for the West (3rd ed.,
Cincinnati: Truman and Smith, 1836), pp. 43, 45, 92-93,
102-03. (Hereinafter cited as Beecher, Plea for the West.)

 

447

53Annual Report, N.Y., 1845, p. 103.

 

54Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, pp. 38-39; Annual

Report, N.Y.,_185l, pp. 68-69; Annual Report, N.Y., I854,
p. 4; JOE R. Bodo, The Protestant Clergy andiPublic
Issues, 1812—1848 (Princeton: Princeton UniVersity
Press, I954Y, pp. 61-84.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

55Beecher, Plea for the West, p. 45.
56 . .
Annual Report, N.Y. Citnyract SOCIEty! 1853,
pp. 13-14.
57

Leo Hershkowitz, "The Native American Democratic
Association in New York City, 1835-36," The New York
Historical Society Quarterly, XLVI (January, 1962),

41-59. On the tendency of the Catholic Irish, German,

and Catholic French to vote for the Democratic ticket

in New York see Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Dem.,
pp. 166, 171-77.

 

 

 

58Letter of Theodore Frelinghuysen to Mr. Clay,
N.Y., Nov. 9, 1844, cited in Talbot Chambers, Memoir of
the Life and Character of the Late Hon. Theodore Fre-
linghuysen, LL.D. (New York: Harper and Bros., l863),
p. 177. (Hereinafter cited as Chambers, Theo. Fre-
linghuysen.)

 

 

 

 

59Robert H. Bremner, From the Depths: The Dis-
covery of Poverty in the Unitéd'States (New York: New
York University Press, 1956), pp. 7-9.

 

60"Friendly Suggestions to an Emigrant," Tracts,
XI, No. 465, p. 2; Beecher, Plea for the west, pp. 134-35.

 

61Hall, ed., Forty Years, II, 203.

 

62Higham, Strangers in the Land, pp. 22-23;
Annual Report, N.Ypi 1856, pp. 67-68.

 

 

63Annual Repert, N.Y., 1848, pp. 38-39.

 

64To the Evapgelical Ministers and Churches in the
United States, Cooperating with the American Tract Society
(New York: American Tract Society, 1848), pp. 10-11.

 

 

448

6SHigham, Strangers in the Lane, p. 24; Pessen,
Jacksonian America, p. 60; Hall, ed., Forty Years, II,
307.

 

 

 

66Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, p. 93; Annual Report,
N.Y., 1855, p. 55; Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, p.190.

 

 

 

 

67Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, pp. 93-94; Annual
Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 65.

 

 

68Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, pp. 93-94; Pessen,
Jacksonian America, p. 60.

 

 

69Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1840,
pp. 75-76; Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1850,
pp. 15-16.

 

 

70Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, pp. 93-94; Annual
Report, N.Y., 1853, p. 82; Annual ReportyiN.Y., 1854,
p. 55; Pessen, Jacksonian America, p. 60.

 

 

 

 

71Annual Report, N.Y., 1843, pp. 18, 66; Annual
ReportL_N.Y., 1845, p. 104; Annual Report, N.Yt, I848,
pp. 93-94, 98; Albert Post, Pepular Freethought in America,
1825-50 (New York: Columbia Uhiversity Press, 19 3 ,
pp. 118—21.

 

 

 

 

72William Carus, ed., Memorials of the Right Rev-
erend Charles Pettit McIlvaine,tD.D., D.C.L., Late Bishop
of Ohio in the Protestant Episcppal Church of the United
States (London: Elliot Stock, 1882), pp._50-52. (Herein-
after cited as Carus, ed., Memorials of . . . McIlvaine.)

 

 

 

73Annual Repert, N.Y., 1845, pp. 114-16.

 

74The Seventh Census of the United States, p. xc;
Higham, Strangers in the—land, p. 26; Pessen, Jacksonian
America, p. 61; Carl Wittke, The Irish in America (Baton
Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1956), pp. 24-
26, 40-51 (hereinafter cited as Wittke, Irish in Am.);
William V. Shannon, ThetAmerican Irtep_(New York: Mac-
millan Co., 1963), pp. 27, 28, 34‘35.

 

 

 

 

75Annual Report, N.Y., 1845, pp. 116-18.

 

76Annual Report, N.Y., 1846, pp. 96-97.

 

449

77Annual Report, N.Y., 1846, pp. 96-97.

 

78Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, pp. 126-27; Annual
Report, N.Y., 1846, p. 98.

 

 

79The biggest influx of Irish immigrants came after
the potato famines of 1845 and 1846. In 1845 the number
of Irish immigrants surpassed the 8,600 mark but the number
of German immigrants surpassed the 32,700 mark. However,
in 1847 just under 30,000 Irish arrived in America. In
1852 this number had risen to over 157,000 (The Seventh
Census of the United States, p. xci; Wittke, Irish in
Am., p. 23).

 

 

80Higham, Strangers in the Land, pp. 6-7.

 

81Hall, ed., Forty Yeate, I, 353 (see also Ambrose
Serle, Esq., "The Happy Negro," Tracts, I, No. 7, p. 2)-

 

82Annual ReportytN.Y., 1856, p. 91.

 

83"The Forgiving African: An Authentic Narrative,"
Tracts, III, No. 92, pp. 1-2 (see also "A WOrd for the
Bible," Tracts, VI, No. 203, pp. 3-4).

84Alexander, A. Alexander, p. 397. A similar
view was expressed by Bishop William Meade (see
Early Fox, The American Colonization Society, 1817-1840,
Series XXXVII, JohnTs HOpkins University Studies ih His-
torical and Political Science, No. 3 [Baltimore: John's
Hopkins, 1919], p. 34 [hereinafter cited as Fox, The Am.
Colonization Soc.]). Speakers in behalf of the African
Colonization Society continually emphasized the fact that
racial prejudice would make peaceful coexistence between
two free races impossible. But in so doing they played
on the fears and prejudices of their audience (see P. J.
Staudenraus, The African Colonization Movement, 1816-1865
[New York: COIumbia University Press, I961], pp. 12042l
[hereinafter cited as Studenraus, The Afr. Colonization
Movement]).

 

 

 

85Nehemiah Adams, A South-Side View of Slavety;
or Three Months at the South (3rd ed};iRichmond, Va.: A.
Morris, 1855), pp. 118-19, 121-22. (Hereinafter cited as
Adams, A South-Side View of Slavety.)

 

 

86Hall, ed., Forty Years, II, 65.

 

450

87William Stanton, The Leopards Spots: Scientific
Attitudes Towards Race in AmeriCa, 1815459 (Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, 1960), pp. 89, l12, 192-96.
Related to racial theories was the fear of racial assimil-
ation (see Leonard Richards, "Gentlemen of Property and
Standing": Anti-Abolition Mobs in Jacksonian Ameriée
[New York: Oxford University Press, 1970], pp. 31-36,
150-55).

 

 

 

 

88John Johns, A Memoir of the Life of the Rt. Rev.
William Meade, D.D., Bishop of the Protestant Episcepal
Church in the Dibcese of Virginia . . . (Baltimore: Innes
and Co., 1867), pp. 473-75. (Hereinafter cited as Johns,
William Meade.)

 

 

 

 

89Annual Report, N.Y., 1858, p. 203.

 

90Adams, A South-Side View of Slavery, p. 127.
In his pastoral letter Bishop Meade stated that slavery
could only be justified as long as it worked to the bene-
fit of both Negro and white. The slave would supply the
whites materially; the whites would in turn supply the
Negro spiritually. He also stated that God could bring
"some good out of all this evil" by converting the Negroes
from pagan darkness to Christian light ("Pastoral Letter
of the Right Rev. William Meade" in To All Evangelical
Christians: The Sgppressed Tract: and the RejECted
Tract: Given Word for WOrd as Submitted to the Publish-
ing Committee of the Am. Tract Society. . ._T55hn A.
Gray, 1858], pp. 12, 26-27 [hereinafter cited as Egg
Spppressed Tract]).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

91Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, pp. 41-42.

 

92Hall, ed., Forty Years, II, p. 19, 65; Johns,
William Meade, p. 76; Annual Report, N.Y., 1855, pp. 48-49.

 

 

 

93Annual Report, N.Y., 1855, p. 91.

 

94The Methodist mission to the slave and the
eventual schism in the church is discussed in Donald G.
Mathews, Slavery and Methodism: A Chepter in American
Morality, 1780-1845 (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1967). See also Robert Baird, Religion in America;
gr an Account of the Origin, ProgreseLRelatiOn to the
State, and Present ConditiOn of the Evangelical Churches
ip_the United States: With NotiCes of the Unevapgelical
genominatiOns (New York: Harper andIBEOS., 1844), pp. 144-
45.

 

 

 

 

 

 

451

95Alexander, A. Alexander, p. 281.

 

96Hall, ed., Forterears, II, 54. One notable
exception was Bishop Charles McIlvaine. He also defended
the Tract Society's publication policy when it came to
slavery. But he did not endorse racial discrimination
in the church. When he heard that a Negro divinity stu-
dent at Gambier College had not been permitted to receive
communion with the rest of the divinity students but had
to wait until the white population had received theirs,
Bishop McIlvaine went to the chapel, sat with the Negro
student and received communion with him (see Carus, ed.,
Memorials of . . . McIlvaine, pp. 257-58).

 

97Clifford Griffin asserts that the leaders of the
Tract Society were somewhat reluctant to take a sectional
stand and concludes that they accepted emancipation with-
out much enthusiasm. Although this is certainly true for
some of the members,it is not true for all. Griffin
fails to emphasize the glowing reports concerning the
Negroes published in 1864 and 1865 (see Clifford Griffin.
Their Brothers' Keepers: Moral Stewardship in the United
States, 1800-65 [New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University
Press, 1960], pp. 258-59. [Hereinafter cited as Griffin,
Their Brothers' Keepers]).

 

 

 

98James M. McPherson, The Struggle for Equality:

Abolitionists and the Negro in the Civil War and Recon-
struction (Princeton: Princeton UniVersity Press, 1964),
pp.154-77 (hereinafter cited as McPherson, Struggle

for Equality); Willie Lee Rose, "Iconoclasimihasihad its
Day: Abolitionists and Freedmen in South Carolina," in
The AntislaveryVapguard, ed. by Martin Duberman (Prince-
ton: Princeton University Press, 1965), pp. 202-03.

 

 

 

 

 

 

99Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, pp. 26, 68-69, 128.

 

100Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, pp. 66-67.

 

101McPherson, Struggle for Equality, p. 146.

 

102Annual Reporty N.Y., 1865, p. 54.

103Annual Report, N.Y., 1864, p. 50 (see also
Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, pp. 65-68).

 

 

104McPherson, Struggle for Eqpality, pp. 136-43.

 

452

105Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, p. 54. In 1864 a
less optimistic report had comeiin. The Negroes had
advanced in their views concerning "sobriety" and in
their manner of worshipping God, but there was still
much room left for improvement (Annual Report, N.Y.,
1864, p. 69).

 

 

106"The American Tract Society," New Englander,
XVI (August, 1858), 614; Annual Report, N.Y., 1858, p. 5.
The slave had been instructed to be 1[attentive'rto his
master and to "obey him in all things" (see The Suppressed
Tract, p. iv).

 

 

 

107Annual Report, N.Y., 1860, pp. 351-55; David
O. Mears, Life of Edward Norris Kirk, D.D. (Boston:
Lockwood, Brooks and Co., 1877), p. 301. (Hereinafter
cited as Mears, Kirk.)

 

 

108Annual Repert, N.Y., 1863, pp. 8, 27-28.

 

109Annual Report, N.Y., 1865, pp. 26-27, 29.

 

110Richard Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nine-
teenth Century: William E. Dodge (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1954), p. 343.

 

 

111Staudenraus, The African Colonization Movement,

p. 248.

112McPherson, Struggle for Equality, pp. 150-53;
Mears, Kirk, p. 324.

 

113"The Conversion of Mrs. Eleanor Emerson: From
an Account Written by Herself," Tracts, IV, NO. 133, p. 22.

114Annual Report, Bost., 1826, pp. 11-12.

 

115Francis Wayland, "Moral Dignity of the Mis-
sionary Enterprise," Tracts, VII, No. 228, pp. 17-18;
Annual Report, N.Y., 1860, . 349.

 

116William Adams, Christianity and Civil Govern-
ment: A Discourse Delivered on Sabbath Evenipg, Novem—
berilo, 1850 (New York: Charles Scribner, 1851), p. 27.

 

 

453

117Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers, p. 178.

118Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, p. 86; Annual

Report, N.Y., 1857, pp. 126-27. According to William

Jay, the Tract Society itself had used the argument of

sales (see Letter of William Jay to Rev. R. S. Cook,
Corresponding Secretary of the American Tract Society,
February 14, 1853, in William Jay, Miscellaneous Writings

en Slavery [Boston: John P. Jewett and Co., 1853], p. 657]).

 

lngohn L. Thomas, "Reform in the Romantic Era,"

in Intellectual History‘in America: Contemporary Essays
on Puritanism, The Enlightenment,_and Romanticism, ed. hy
Cushing Strout (New York: Harper & Row, 1968), p. 194.
In a recent publication Clifford Griffin questions the
value of attempting to distinguish between "moral" and
"social" reform when discussing the ante-bellum period.
However, Thomas' point is well taken. Although the
clergy and the Tract Society hoped to reform society,
they attempted to do it by changing man rather than by
altering the social, economic and political institutions
(see Clifford S. Griffin, The Ferment of Reform, 1830-
1860 [New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1967], pp. 51-57).

120Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, p. 86.

CHAPTER VIII

LIBERTY AND ORDER, THE CITY AND THE WEST

In 1835 the American Tract Magazine was pleased
to publish a letter from Honorable Benjamin F. Butler,
the Attorney General of the United States. In this letter
the Attorney General merely confirmed something which the
Society already knew. He wrote that tracts and volumes
served "the interests of pietyf'and that "true patriotism"
was interested in the promotion of piety.1 The Christian
stewards were convinced that the nation they hoped to
build—-a nation which venerated liberty and order--could
never be realized without religious, moral, and intel-
lectual enlightenment.

Intellectual and religious enlightenment were
eSpecially necessary in a Republic where "public senti-
ment" ruled. By 1825 nearly all the northern states had
lowered the suffrage requirement to the point where virtu-
ally all white, male adults were eligible to vote.2 Since
"public sentiment" ruled,it was essential that it be

enlightened so as "to create and perpetuate a predominant

454

455

and efficacious public sentiment in favOr of a correct
morality, and efficient law for the protection of virtue
and the punishment of crime."3 Without Christianity "free
institutions" would prove to be "nothing but a curse."4

The managers of the Tract Society were convinced
that Christianity was not only applicable to Christ's
spiritual kingdom. Even though the Bible was not pri-
marily intended to be a treatise on political behaviour,
it did contain precepts which regulated the conduct of
both the governor and the governed. According to Rever—
end Edward Payson the scriptures instructed "rulers to
'be just, ruling in the fear of God'; and subjects to
'lead quiet and peaceable lives in all godliness and
honesty.'"5 What these precepts meant in the day to day
life of the American nation would be the Tract Society's
task to explain.

The Tract Society found various occasions or
reasons for interpreting the scriptural teachings on the
duties of both governors and the governed. First of all,
it had to correct erroneous theories of republicanism,
anarchy, freedom and liberty, theories which tended to
flourish especially in the cities and in the West.
Secondly, as will be pointed out in the next chapter, it
had to guard against divisive forces in the nation which
might destroy the Union. And as the Tract Society inter-

jpreted the scriptural precepts explaining the just duties

456

of the ruler and the subjects, it also painted its pic-
ture of the ideal American Republic.

The form of government which the Society raised
up above all others was "republicanism." However, when
the Society used the term "republicanism," it did not
relate it to any extreme ideas of liberty or anarchy.
According to one writer, the Bible did not Specify the
particular form of government; it endorsed that govern-
ment which promoted "in the highest degree, a nation's
prOSperity and happiness. . . ." This ruled out both
tyranny or rule by arbitrary force on the one hand and
anarchy on the other. Despotism made no provision for an
"intelligent and active population," and for "pure religion
and sound morals." Without an "intelligent and a moral

peOple,' it would be impossible to sustain a "pure repub-
lic and free institutions."6
James Milnor lauded the American system of govern-

ment. He realized that since the legislators were respon-
sible to the people, there was a tendency for some to be
motivated by "caprice, rather than exact wisdom. . . ."
This was to be expected if one kept the "weakness and
fallibility of man" in mind. "But," he continued,

with all its unavoidable defects, never was there a

plan promising a greater measure of the blessings of

a good government, than under which a gracious
Providence has cast our lot.7

457

The American system was the best form of government to
restrain the desires and ambitions of "arbitrary govern-
ments" and to preserve the "civil and religious" liberties
of the citizens.8
Lyman Beecher even found the "republican" form of
government in the Bible. His source was the Old Testa-
ment. Here every Israelite was a landowner. This pre-
vented the rise of either "an aristocracy of wealth" or
"a solid vicious poverty." Thus,
the single principle of universal ownership, in
fee simple, of the soil, secured at once intense
and universal patriotism, indomitable courage,
untiring industry, and purity of morals; neither
an hereditary nobility, nor a dependent peasantry,
nor object poverty, could eXist.
It guaranteed both "liberty and equality."10
The American Tract Society venerated liberty but
not license. One critic has pointed out that the American
clergy during the Jacksonian period valued "liberty as the
highest goal to fight for, but they were harshly critical
of revolutionary movements."11 The same generalization
often holds true for leading members in the Tract Society.
Was this a contradiction? Not if one defines liberty as
they did.
Throughout the first half of the nineteenth century,
the concept of American freedom" was a recurring theme in

July Fourth orations."12 The American Tract Society was

also faced with the problem of defining true liberty,

458

especially as this liberty was threatened by "atheistic
levellers," German rationalists, disruptive abolitionists,
and finally southern secessionists. According to Gardiner
Spring, God was calling Americans through the Civil War,
to "solve the problem whether or not liberty . . . [was]
consistent with law/'whether or not they could "be a
free, and yet a governed, people. . . ."13

The Society defined liberty negatively as well as
positively. It emphasized the fact that liberty was not
to be equated with anarchy. Christianity taught man to
deplore both "anarchy and licentiousness." The worst
possible tyranny would result if all "ruling and restrain-
ing power" were destroyed and man's passions would be
unleashed. The concept that each individual should be
"a law unto himself" was both "utOpian and unchristian."l4
The tract writer, William C. Brownlee agreed; anything which
promoted anarchy was a "curse to a nation."15

In order to prevent anarchy and to promote true
freedom, some form of government was essential. Beecher
informed the working classes that governments originated
"in the necessities of self-defense against the violent
evil propensities of man."16 Man could discuss the "form"
in which government should be administered, "but not the
need of government." To talk of Rousseau's social con-
tract was nonsense. "Talk of the state of nature!" William

Adams argued. "When, where was there ever a tribe of

459

uncivilized savages who did not recognize the necessity of
some form of law among themselves?" The creator, himself,
instilled within man "the necessity of law and government."
The gospel spoke of "liberty" but not of "lawlessness."l7
William C. Brownlee agreed; "the reign of the law and the
just power of the magistracy" had to be maintained. Other-
wise the result would be anarchy and eventual despotism.l8
Furthermore, liberty was not to be equated with

freedom from formal religion. The "reign of the law and

the just power of the magistracy,’ which were necessary in
order to prevent anarchy and procure true liberty, could
only be "sustained by an enlightened and virtuous com-
munity." Such a community could never be produced without
the aid of religious and moral instruction. Free govern-
ments required "intelligence, civic, and moral virtues"
which flourished only in those areas where true Christian
principle was "cherished." This principle could only be
"produced" by God's appointed means--"the Gospel, the
ministry, the holy Sabbath and its institutions."19

There was also a positive aspect to liberty. A
free individual was one who acted "according to his pleas—
ure" provided his actions did not "violate the laws which
. . . [governed] his welfare."20 Such actions did not
necessarily rule out civil disobedience or revolution.

According to William Adams, a rebellion could have divine

sanction whenever the legally constituted government acted

460

in such a way as to diminish public happiness, and whenever
resistance would increase public happiness. The test was
whether or not the revolution would "involve the greater
good."21 Although James Alexander associated the "revolu-
tionary spirit" in mid-century Germany "with a hideous

levelling jacobinism,‘ many of the Society's supporters
viewed the French Revolution of 1830 and the European
Revolutions of 1848 as legitimate "struggles for liberty."
However,the Society felt that the gospel was necessary to
truly free these peOple by "sweeping away superstitions and

resisting oppressions,’ and by "associating just ideas of
duties with newly acquired rights."22

America, however, was a different story. William
Adams endorsed revolutions if they would increase national
happiness. He did not believe that "passive obedience to
odious tyranny, when a better administration . . . [was]
perfectly feasible . . . [was] the only Christian virtue."23
However, he did warn that revolutions must only be employed
as a last resort. A Christian was obligated to obey every
law unless he was convinced that compliance would bring
much more evil than non-compliance. Were slavery and the
slave code such evils? Could one "soberly, intelligently,
and religiously decide" that slavery was such an evil that
he was "justified in defying law, tearing the constitution,
revolutionizing the government," risking all its advantages

"for the sake of its removal?" For Adams the answer was

461

obvious. "I cannot, I dare not, I will not take the torch
of Erostratus and apply it to a temple which is the wonder
of the world, and a glory unto God," he concluded. "I will
hope. I will pray."24 Whether this smacked of "passive
obedience to odious tyranny" to the slave was another
question.

The Tract Society's definition of liberty had
several implications for the American nation. First of
all, it would be an ordered society, one in which the laws
and the magistrates were reSpected. Secondly, it would be
a Republic which ruled out the tyranny of deSpotism as
well as the tyranny of anarchy. Thirdly, it would be a
Protestant nation. The Society had maintained that free
institutions could not survive without Christianity, and
Christianity meant Protestantism. Erskine Mason maintained
that Protestantism had made the American nation what it
was. He admitted that the country's forefathers may have
been partly influenced by avarice, but in the main it was
"piety" which had "shaped" the nation's course.25 Accord-
ing to one of the Society's tracts, no nation or tribe had
ever been discovered in which "science, social happiness,
and civil freedom were enjoyed by the mass of citizens,
except where the Bible was read and reverenced."26

There were several areas where religious and intel-
lectual enlightenment, order, and a prOper understanding

(of liberty were especially lacking. One was the city.

462

The transportation and industrial revolutions and immigra-
tion had brought with them a rapid growth of urban areas
during the first half of the nineteenth century. In 1800
farmers outnumbered town and city dwellers by a ratio of
fifteen to one; by 1850 this had declined to five and one—
half to one. Leading all cities was New York. By 1820 it
had a population of over 120,000, by 1840, over 300,000,
and by 1850, over 500,000. By this time Boston's popula—
tion reached 137,000 while out in the West, Cincinnati's
had reached 115,000. Whereas there had been only six
cities with a population in excess of 20,000 in 1820, there
were twenty-six by mid-century.27

A pro-rural bias had been strongly ingrained into
the American character. As pointed out previously, one
of the greatest defenders of the agrarian or pastoral myths
in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries had
been Thomas Jefferson. He was Optimistic concerning the
future of the American Republic provided it would be
peOpled by independent yoemen farmers.28 Although Hamil-
ton's program envisioned a growth of industry and urbanism,
many of the Federalists soon discovered that their politi-
cal strength lay in the rural areas of Maryland, New York,
and Connecticut rather than in the cities.29

A pro-rural bias was also evident at times within

the American Tract Society. In 1826, The Christian

 

{Elmanack praised agriculture in Jeffersonian terms. "We

 

 

~_

463

consider agriculture as the glory of our country," the

Almanack informed its readers. It then continued:

 

Commerce we may pursue; but still, commerce is only

the younger sister of agriculture. . . . Commerce

too depends upon the fashions of the times, and

upon the dispositions of other nations. Not so with

agriculture, we may be sovereign in this, and shall

ever find it the most sure source of strength, of

wealth, and civil liberty. . . . As long as our

nation are an agricultural people, we are free; for

the farmer is robust in body, enlightened in mind,

and it is not the forces of the world that could

conquer the soil which we cultivate.3O
The Federalist clergyman, Lyman Beecher, feared the effect
that atheistic levellers would have in the cities, espe-
cially since the cities had the votes.31 James Milnor
also seemed to have trouble coming to terms with urban
America. As pointed out in chapter two, while still a
Congressman and prior to entering the ministry, he had
looked forward to retiring from politics, buying a "small
farm for some bodily exercise, and a library for the
employment of the mind."32

Urbanization brought with it various problems which

could not be solved by traditional methods. One such prob-
lem was crime. In the early nineteenth century, police
protection was almost non-existent. The anti-Irish riots
in 1844 and the anti-Negro riot in 1849 finally persuaded
Philadelphians to consolidate the twenty-nine jurisdictions
of Philadelphia county. One of the first tasks of the new,

consolidated government was to set up a police force which

inas able to maintain order in the city.33 Louisville and

464

Kentucky led the West in establishing salaried police
forces during the 1820's. However, in 1817 Pittsburg dis-
banded its patrol system for economy reasons and did not
see fit to establish a “full-time, paid watch" until 1831.
As late as 1830 St. Louis had no regular police and, like
Cincinnati, was noted for "violence and lawlessness."34
Fire was even a greater hazard than crime. Cities relied
on inefficient fire companies or on "mutual" companies
which only looked after buildings of its own members. Suf-
ficient water supply was often lacking, especially in areas
removed from natural water supplies such as lakes and

rivers.35 The lack of proper sanitation standards and

sewage disposal were additional problems confronting city

dwellers. ImprOper sewage disposal created health hazards,

especially since sewage wastes might contaminate the wells
from which the city drew its water supply.36

The Tract Society found other urban problems besides
fire protection and garbage collection to worry about. One
of these was the religious make—up of much of the city's
pOpulation. One tract distributor in New York City came
across an alley, one block long, containing thirty-nine
families which included twelve Irish Catholics, two Ger-
mans, one French, one Welsh, and not one which attended a
Protestant church. Not 50 per cent of the adults living
in this alley could "read intelligently." Many of the

homes were dirty and the stench was "very offensive." The

465

"Romanists" were not above insulting the Protestant tract
distributors, telling them that they had "no business" in
the alley. Yet these same individuals were "amongst the
most clamorous for public and private alms."37

According to several reports, the cities abounded
in wickedness and were filled with snares of the devil.
In 1839 the New York City Tract Society explained what it
meant by snares of the devil. There were 2,671 liquor
outlets, and numerous theaters in the City. Gambling
places were located in nearly all porter-houses. The
Sabbath was being violated by newsboys, rail cars, steam
and ferry boats. In all there were 3,953 places open for
business or traffic on Sunday,and of these 1,952 sold
liquor.38 Licentiousness, drunkeness, and profanity were
prevalent. Many immigrants congregated in the cities and
brought "with them peculiar knowledge and arts in wicked-
ness."39 The lack of church attendance was especially
evident in the city. In 1846 the female branch of the
New York City Tract Society estimated that almost 50 per
cent of the city's near 400,000 pOpulation were "neither

habitual attenders at the Sanctuary, nor under any evan-

gelical influence. . . ."40 Nor was New York City atypical

as far as vice and infidelity were concerned. When Harlan
Page first came to Boston in 1818, he was astounded at
the "wickedness" of the place. PeOple lived "like the

heathen, profaning and blaspheming the name of God."41

466

To many it seemed that the city was a "deep, a vast, a
raging whirlpool of iniquity."42

Sin was prevalent in the cities because their very
size made social control difficult, if not impossible. The
executive committee of the New York City Tract Society
pointed out that people who lived in areas where the popu-
lation was small tended to "watch over one another."

Furthermore, the "frown of the virtuous" had a restraining

influence upon the "immoral and irreligious." But in New
York things were different. "Here there are neighborhoods,"
the committee explained, "in which the wicked join hand in

hand, encourage each other, and frown upon and oppose those
who would act more correctly."43 In many cases the young
boys of the city grew up without the restraining influence
of the "frown of the virtuous." Instead they were eXposed
to the "rascally street education" of "smoking, swearing,
lounging, idling, betting, drinking, gambling, pelfering,
fighting." No wonder they tended to be more "artificial"
and "frivolous" than their country counterparts.44

Once the Christian stewards perceived the need to
combat "ignorance, vice, and irreligion" in the urban
centers, the city tract societies went to work. In 1829
New York implemented its city campaign, described pre—
viously in chapter one, whereby the city was divided into
wards, the wards into districts, and a tract distributor

was instructed to distribute the tract of the month to

467

each family residing in his district. The tract distribu-
tors also ascertained the material needs of the families
and rounded up children for day and Sabbath schools. The
city campaign was expanded to include other cities such as
Boston, Philadelphia, Brooklyn, and Troy, New York. During
the 1850's the urban tract distribution involved close to
10,000 tract distributors and superintendents.45

There were indications, however, that the Tract
Society saw the city in a positive as well as in a negative

light. The Child's Paper admitted that there was "a great

 

deal of vice, of sin, and of misery in New York." But
there were also "a great many noble Christian institutions"
which attempted to combat sin and provide men "with helps
and aids in the path of well-doing. The Tract Society . . .
was one of these."46 It was true that the city often had

a detrimental effect on a boy's character. But this need
not be the case. "For a young man of fixed religious

principles and industrious habits," the Child's Paper

 

stated,
there is no place where he can learn so much within
so short a time as in New York. But for a young
man of unstable habits and without religious princi-
ples, there is no place where he will be so soon
ruined.47
There were others besides the editor of the Child's
Paper who saw the city in a positive as well as in a nega-

tive light. When James Alexander took up his New York pas-

torate, he was pleasantly surprised by the "under-current

468

of religious activity" which he found there.48 In 1836 the
New York City Tract Society emphasized the importance of
its work from a positive, rather than from a negative stand-
point. Distributing tracts in New York would not only aid
in correcting the evils of the city, it would also aid in
influencing the whole country for the good. According to
the Society, the "moral renovation and prosperity" of the
city would be felt in "every vein, and artery, and nerve"
of the Continent, be it Texas, Missouri, or even the Paci-
fic Coast.49 In 1841 the City Tract Society warned its
supporters that New York City was the lungs of the nation.

If it became a "whirlpool of iniquity,‘ it would pollute
the moral atmOSphere of the whole Republic.50 But if the
City were purified, the breath of purification would be
felt across the Continent.

Marvin Meyers has emphasized a contradiction inher-
ent in the Jacksonians; they condemned the very processes
in which they participated. Their materialistic strivings
were at variance with the Jeffersonian ideals which they
venerated.51 To an extent this is also true of the Tract
Society. It venerated the countryside but was heavily
indebted to the city. Much of its needed finances came
from the cities. The Tract Society commissioned Reverend
F. Y. Vail to devote most of his time to raising money in

the urban centers.52 Furthermore, most of the managers of

the Tract Society--both lay and clergy-—had risen to

 

(61' E.‘

 

469

positions of prominence in the city. It was in the urban
centers where merchants like Arthur Tappan and William E.
Dodge made their money; it was in the city pastorates where
men like Gardiner Spring, James Milnor, and Nehemiah Adams
gained their status in the religious community.

The urban center was not the only area of concern
for the Christian stewards. In 1826 the American Tract
Society at Boston pointed out two areas of special concern.
One was the city with its "degraded population in the lanes
and the suburbs" and with its "haunts of vice and misery";
the other was the "wide vallies of the West."53 The
Society found the city often lacking in moral enlighten-
ment and in a proper understanding of order and liberty.
But this was certainly true of the Western wilderness as
well.

The rapid expansion of the West, along with
urbanism and immigration, were the three most noticeable
demographic features of the Jacksonian era. In 1827 the
Society drew its supporters' attention to the dramatic
increase of pOpulation in the north- and south-western
states. In 1810 this territory had a population of over
1,000,000, in 1820 over 2,000,000,and in 1827 close to
4,000,000.54 The 1850 Census showed that Ohio's popula-
tion of close to 2,000,000 surpassed that of every other
state except New York and Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, Indi-

ana's pOpulation had jumped from from less than 5,000 in

470

1800 to nearly 1,000,000 in 1850. In the South-West,
Tennessee's population had already surpassed the 1,000,000
mark by 1850 while Kentucky's fell short of this mark by
less than 20,000. In 1800 the population of the New England
States was five times greater than that of the seven west-
ern states including Missouri, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana,
Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa. By 1830 the popu-
lation of these seven states had already surpassed that
of New England, and by 1850 more than doubled it.55

The American Tract Society was not atypical in its
rejection of the wilderness. Henry Nash Smith has pointed
out that it was not the "picturesque Wild West beyond the
agricultural frontier" which Americans idolized, but
rather the "domesticated West that lay behind it."56 Once
rapid westward eXpansion became a reality, the vast wilder-
ness had to be incorporated into the image of a domesti—
cated garden. The pastoral image which became prevalent
in Jeffersonian America was that of a "well-ordered green
garden magnified to continental size."57 This dual image
is also evident in the Tract Society. Although it feared
the consequences of a rapidly growing wilderness, it found
the image of a vast, potentially ordered garden attractive.

The wilderness was at best a geographic obstacle
to be overcome. Despite the rapid increase of population
in the West, one colporteur from Indiana reported that

many townships were sparsely settled, roads were often

471

lacking or were mere "briddle paths" through the woods.58
Some two decades later William E. Dodge viewed the far
West in similar terms. It would become valuable once it
was "recovered from the wild prairie and from the
Indian. . . ."59

For the Tract Society the West was much more than
a geographic wilderness; it was also a moral wilderness.
In 1828 the Society issued a number of distressing reports
from concerned individuals in Ohio. "The region all around

us is a moral wilderness,’ one wrote. "I could sit down
and weep over these moral desolations" reported another.
"There is a great destitution of the means of grace, and
profaness and intemperance, Sabbath-breaking, and other
vices, prevail to a lamentable extent" wrote a third.60

In 1823 a missionary in Illinois sent a disturbing report:
"settled ministers and pastors of churches, there are pepe.
No, in all the state of Illinois, there is not a settled
minister, having a pastoral charge, of any denomination."61
Even as late as the 1850's, one could find areas in the
West which were still morally destitute. One county-seat
in Illinois, boasting a pOpulation of over 300, had only
four male residents who made "any profession of religion."
A colporteur reported that there was a lack of preaching
in Hillsdale and Jackson, Michigan. Sabbaths were spent

in "fishing, hunting, gambling, and various kinds of

amusements."62

472

Members of the Society also portrayed the West as
an intellectual wilderness. In 1823 BishOp Philander Chase
justified the building of Kenyon College in Ohio on the
grounds that the western community was "sinking fast in
ignorance, and its never-failing attendants, vice and
fanaticism."63 One worker found a small settlement of
over sixty individuals living in a "cave" in the Kentucky
mountains in which no "Bible, Spelling book, nor the first
page of reading" was to be found.64 (In a similar settle—
ment, some twenty miles distant, the reporter discovered
that a large number of young people had managed to learn
to read but with little aid from the schools.)65 In 1850
the Society's agent in Indiana estimated that there were
40,000 to 50,000 illiterate adults in his state. Even
some of the preachers belonged to this category.66

To many it seemed as if the West was also a social
wilderness. One historian of the West has pointed out that

. . . a rapidly changing social order, lack of respect
for tradition, the variety of economic activity, and
for absence of hereditary restrictions on freedom
of enterprise all spelled opportunity to the
ambitious.67
But for the Tract Society it spelled something else--
chaotic, disordered and non-stable communities. Bishop
McIlvaine felt that religious education was especially nec-

essary in Ohio. Settlers often moved from stable communi-

ties, which enjoyed the regular administration of the means

A.

 

0t grac
plined

many 5

 

the fi
ued tc
until
local
Yeas
exei
‘hot
‘Nel
‘Ni

cl

RC

473

of grace, to areas where "all things . . . [were] undisci-
plined and at random. . . ."68 The Society feared that for
many settlers, the move from the East to the West was only
the first of many moves. Many never found a home but contin-
ued to "rove from village to village, or county to county"

until they had "lost all power of becoming attached to any

locality, and hence the purifying influences of home . . .

 

[was] lost." Consequently, it seemed as if a "fever of
excitement, or the ague" was shaking Western Society.69
Not all villages were still unsettled by 1856, but there
were some in which everything was "chaotic and changing,
with no well established principles to mark the type of
character of the community."70

One of the difficulties in building stable, social
communities was the diversity of population in the West.
One could encounter persons "Speaking all the languages
of EurOpe" in only one day's travel. Coupled to this was
the diversity of religions represented in western com-
munities, ranging all the way from "exclusive bigoted
Romanist" to the "high-toned and liberty-loving Protestant,"
and including "errorists and unbelievers of every possible
sect and school. . . ." One colporteur found Methodist,
United Brethren, Baptist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian,
Lutheran, Campbellite, Tunker, Amish, Swedenborgian, and

Roman Catholic churches as well as a deist lecturer, all

474

in one Indiana county.71 And yet midst all this chaos,
"a nation . . . [was] being 'born in a day.”72

The effect of this wilderness on man's character
could be devastating. Thomas Jefferson had warned that if
EurOpe could ever undermine the American Republic, it would
be through the Eastern cities. Thus for him the city
became the ground on which the battle of Armageddon would
be fought.73 The Tract Society also feared the city—-only
it feared the unchurched worker more than Jefferson's
indolent aristocracy. But it feared the western wilderness
every bit as much, if not more.

The Western wilderness brought out the worst, as
well as the best, in man. One of the vices which seemed

to flourish here was an undue emphasis on "wordly increase,"

74 There was "such a rush after

a "hasting to be rich."
wealth" in the West "that it was hardly thought possible for
a man or a society to be actuated by any other principle.

. . ."75 That the economic motive took root and flourished
in the West is not surprising. Many moved there in order to
improve their economic lot. But moving also meant sacri-
ficing. It meant cutting old social ties for future econo-
mic gains. Once a person made sacrifices, the goals for
Which he had given up so much took on added importance.76

Secondly, the West could create the unpolished,

rUgged individual, impatient of all restraints. The notion

that the American Republic was directly related to spa-

Ciousness and that the free man had to be an "uncramped"

475

man gained precedence in America.77 But the Tract Society
feared the "uncramped" man whenever this meant the throw—
ing off of all restraints. Reverend Glen Wood, the Socie-
ty's agent in Illinois and Iowa, reported that a number

of New York's and New England's children came to the West
in order to find complete political and religious free-
dom.78 Some "upstate Yankees" threw "off all restraint,

even the garb of religion,’ soon after coming to districts
where religion was unpOpular.79 Furthermore, people who
put up a "reputable demeanor" in the East discarded this
in the wilderness. As a result "the polish . . . [dimmed],
the culture . . . [roughened], the seeming rectitude . . .
[vanished]."80 To Reverend Wood it seemed as if the
"energy and recklessness of human nature" were released on
the "boundless western fields."81

But the West need not remain a wilderness; it
could also be transformed into a garden. The Christian
stewards began their Mississippi Valley Campaign in the
late 1820's in order to mould the West into a geographic,
moral, social, and cultural garden. The Tract Society
joined forces with the American Home Missionary Society
and the American Sunday School Union in this campaign.82
In a special meeting in 1828, the Tract Society raised
$3,500 for this destitute area. The next year Reverend

Orman Eastman was appointed General Agent for the West.

By May, 1830, the Society employed nine traveling agents

476

in the Mississippi Valley. Colportage was begun in 1841
primarily to evangelize the immigrant and the West.83

Rush Welter has pointed out that the eastern con-
servatives viewed the West in a positive as well as in a
negative light. In the early years of the Republic, when
the future of the new nation seemed uncertain, the West
accentuated the worst of their fears. But once the future
of the Republic appeared more promising,the West took on
a new light providing it could be transformed into the
conservatives' own image. In seeking to transform the
wilderness into their own image, the eastern conservatives
also gave a "vivid statement of commitment to the status
quo" in the midst of a period "marked by drastic social
change."84 For the American Tract Society,the West also
took on a new light providing it could be transformed into
its own image.

If some viewed the West as a geographic wilderness,
others viewed it as a potentially rich,domesticated gar-
den. In his tract, "Moral Dignity of the Missionary Enter-
prise," Francis Wayland maintained that the cause of
missions would not be completed until the "tomahawk"

would be "buried for ever,‘ peace would reign from the
Atlantic to the Pacific, a "thousand smiling villages . . .
[would] be reflected from the waves of the Missouri, . . .

the distant valleys of the West [would] echo with the song

477

of the reaper,‘ and the desert would have "rejoiced and
blossomed as the rose."85
The introduction of the reaper into the garden

typified the American attitude concerning the place of
technology in the pastoral image. It was technology which
enabled man to realize the dream of abundance for all.86
Reverend Charles Peabody, one of the Society's agents in
the West, emphasized the relationship between the abun-
dant garden and the machine. In 1853 he exhorted the
Society not to be discouraged by the present difficulties
nor to lose sight of "the prospective and greatness of
this fertile valley." Peabody then continued:

Here lies underdeveloped in the soil the bread

that is to sustain millions of the human family.

Railroads are now projected and being built in

all directions. In a short time, the broad

expanse of western solitude will be crossed by

the flying train, and we Shall meet the commerce

of the Pacific on the banks of the Mississippi.

Then Bibles and missionaries and colporteurs,

as well as the bales of commerce, can be carried

directly into the camp of Asiatic Paganism.

Then from these wonderful prairies we can feed

the starving millions of China and the Orient

with bread, and if we can but now plant and nur—

ture here the seeds of a living Christianity,

and bring it to a mature and healthy growth, we

can send to those perishing multitudes the bread

of life.87
The following year he returned to the same theme. West-
erners, he wrote, were now "beginning to see in what a
glorious garden the providence of God . . . [had] placed
them," especially now that railways could be laid "over

their fertile heritage in all directions so easily. . . ."88

478

During the Civil War William E. Dodge viewed Ameri-
can expansion in similar terms. He foresaw the march of
"an intelligent and enterprising people" recovering "state
after state . . . from the wild prairie and from the
Indian“ until they had reached the Pacific Ocean. The
West Coast would then tap the trade of such Asian countries
as Japan, China, and India.89 For Dodge the "wonderful
prairies" and the garden of abundance also meant railways,
reapers, trade, and commerce. The influence of this
industrialized garden would spill over the boundaries of
the American nation to supply Asians with both physical
and Spiritual bread.

The image of the West feeding not only Americans
but also Asians demonstrates the grandiose nature of
reports concerning the West. Nothing about the West was
small, be it present vice, or potential goodness; be it
the wilderness, or a flourishing garden. First there was
the population. Its rapid increase so impressed Reverend
Sylvester Woodbridge of New York that he forecast a future
population of 200,000,000 or 300,000,000 for the Missis—
sippi Valley. "What will the City of New Orleans then
be?" he asked.

Even now, when the Valley contains but six millions,
that city presents a scene of commercial activity
scarcely paralleled on the continent or on the
earth. We must do for the West, or the West will

do for us. . . . The West—-the West!--Save the
West, or we are lost.90

479

Nor should one measure the Westerners themselves,
in average terms. "A vast and swelling tide of human
intellect is rolling into the boundless West," warned
Honorable Simon Greenleaf. If this intellect were not
purified it would become "a fearfully dangerous mass of

intellect withoutprinciple."91 But if it were "purified,"

 

it could be a potent force for good. According to Reverend
Nathan S. S. Beaman, a director for life in the Society,
the "Western mind, like the country itself . . . [had] the
element of greatness"; only "like the same country" it
required "cultivation." The West was spread out before
them like an "embryo world," a world which would be
"peOpled by a race of giants. . . ." However, whether they
would become "giant-angels or giant-demons" would of
necessity "depend on the beneficence of the Eastern Churches
and the grace of God."92 Lyman Beecher Spoke in similar
terms. The West, he maintained, possessed the potential to
produce a brand of preachers who would "combine a power of
intellect, an ardor of piety, a power of eloquence, and
energy of action such as the world had not seen. . . ."93
The key to transforming the West into a flourish—
ing garden was to transplant eastern religious and educa-
tional institutions in the West. The various religious
societies had begun their Mississippi Valley Campaign in
the late 1820's in order to tame the wilderness by Spread-

ing the conserving influence of religion throughout the

480

territory. In 1829 the executive committee informed its
supporters that the "growing importance" of the West war—
ranted "the serious attention of every philanthropist and
patriot, and especially of every Christian." Every indi-
vidual who was concerned over the "welfare of his country,
of his children and his children's children" and was
unwilling to see the light of her [the nation's] free
institutions and civil privileges be put out in darkness"
would "pray and labor, that a knowledge of the Gospel"
would be diffused throughout the "destitute population."
The Society then warned in capital letters,

WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE, AND WITHOUT CHRISTIAN

INTEGRITY AND VIRTUE, FREE INSTITUTIONS
CAN NEVER BE SUSTAINED.94

In order to Christianize the West, concerted
action by all Protestants was necessary. "Intense indi-
vidualism, and rampant radicalism, and violent sectari-
anism" were all too common on the frontier.95 What the
West needed was "cementing soothing influences"; something
which would "demonstrate the unity of Protestantism."
Then order and social stability would replace the rugged
individualism of the frontier.96

The Tract Society continually emphasized the need
for promoting education in the Mississippi Valley. The
lack of schools and colleges on the frontier was bad

enough, but making the situation even more critical was

481

the establishment of several Jesuit schools in the West.97
For men like BishOp Chase and Lyman Beecher, the key to
domesticating the wilderness was to build Protestant semi-
naries and colleges in the West.98 Few surpassed Beecher
when it came to painting horrid pictures of a libertine
West swamping the gallant East. He wrote to a friend,

Albert Barnes, and stated:

Blow the trumpet around you. . . . The Battle is
begun. We give notice of it to our fathers, and
mothers, and brothers, and sisters, and children at
the East and call for help. Who is on the Lord's
side--Who?99
If the West should remain uneducated, it would "fall back
into a dark minded, vicious pOpulace--a poor uneducated

"100 But there

reckless mass of infuriated animalism.
was hope, the preaching of the gOSpel and the erection
of schools could turn the tide. The West had a great

potential for greatness and creativity as well as for

meanness and destructiveness. In the same booklet in

which Beecher showed the potential evil of the West he
could also write about "cords in the heart of the West
which vibrate to the touch of genius and to the power of
argumentative eloquence, with a sensibility and enthusiasm
no where surpassed."101 The Tract Society warned its sup-
porters that they must save the West or all would be lost.
But if men would do their part in transplanting Eastern

religious and educational institutions in the West, God

482

would redeem it. Then "the shout . . . [would] ascend to
heaven, Jesus reigns, the West is saved."102

Education and religion were two bulwarks which the
Tract Society erected against the onslought of radicalism,
anarchy, and despotism. This obviously had special rele—
vance to the city and the West since these were two areas
which lacked a prOper appreciation for the true concept of
republicanism. People in these areas failed to understand
the delicate relationship between liberty and order,
between freedom and restraint. The Tract Society's solu-
tion was not to reject the West and the city outright. It
could not, even if it wished to do so, since these areas
had the vote. Midst the Society's fears, however, were
rays of hope and Optimism. If the conserving influence of
Christianity could be spread to these regions,all would be
well in Zion.

Christianity, along with education, was the key to
creating responsible voters and a stable society. Religion
taught man to fear both despotism and anarchy. It
instructed the citizen to venerate freedom but to abhor
license. Without Christianity there was "no true domestic
happiness," "security," or "political freedom, that . . .
[was] worthy of the name. . . ."103 But freedom and
security were guaranteed in a nation which feared the Tract

Society's God.

FOOTNOTES--CHAPTER VIII

lAmerican Tract Magazine, X (July, 1835), 106-07.

2Douglas Miller, Jacksonian Aristocracy: Class

and Democracy in New York, 1830-60 (New York: OxtOrd
University Press, 1967). p. 11 (hereinafter cited as
Miller, Jacksonian AristocraCY); Chilton Williamson,
American Suffrage: From Propertypto Democracy, 1760-
1860 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960),

pp. 158-207 (hereinafter cited as Williamson, Am. Suf-
frage).

3Lyman Beecher, Beecher's Works, Vol. I: Lectures

on Political Atheism and Kindred Subjects; Together with
Six Sermons on Intemperance, Dedicated to the WOrkingmep'
of the United States (Boston: John P. Jewett & Co., 1852),

pp. 96, 116. (Hereinafter cited as Beecher, Lect. on
Pol. Atheism.)

 

 

 

4Gardiner Spring, The Danger and Hope of the
American Peeple: A Discourse on the Day of the Annual
Thanksgivingin the State of New York (New York: JOhn F.

Trow, 1843), pp. 4, 31-32. (Hereinafter cited as Spring,
Danger and Hope.)

5Edward Payson, "The Bible Above all Price,"

Tracts, II, No. 71, p. 12 (see also James Milnor, Sermon
OccaSioned by the Death of His Excellency DeWitt Clinton,
Late Governor of the State of New York, Preached in St.
Geotgeis ChurchLN.Y.y on SundayyAFehruary 24, 1828 TNew
York: Gray and Bunce, 1828], pp. 4-5 [hereinafter cited
as Milnor, Sermon . . . DeWitt Clinton]).

6William C. Brownlee, "An Appeal to the Patriot,"
Tracts, VII, No. 253, p. 133.

7Milnor, Sermon . . . DeWitt Clinton, p. 7; David
O. Mears, Life of Edward Norris Kirk, D.D. (Boston:

483

484

Lockwood Brooks and Co., 1877), p. 204 (hereinafter cited
as Mears, Kirk); FamilyAlmanac, 1853, p. 23.

 

8Milnor, Sermon . . . DeWitt Clinton, pp. 7-8.
James Alexander, hOwever, had seriOus misgiVings when it
came to some of the by-products of democracy. He found
the disorders in Congress and the lack of a "noblessé, or
a literary caste" distressing. "Democracy and I are less
and less friends every day I live," he confided. How-
ever, he realized that nothing else would do for the
United States (see John Hall, ed., Forty Years' Familiar
Letters of James W. Alexander, D.D., Containing with the
Notes a Memoir of His Life [2 vols.; New York: Charles
Scribner, 1860TTII, 239 [hereinafter cited as Hall, ed.,
Forty Years]).

 

 

 

 

 

9Beecher, Lect. on Pol. Atheism, pp. 180-81.

 

lOIhid., p. 181.

11John R. Bodo, The Protestant Cletgy and Public
Issues, 1812-48 (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1954), pp. 236-37. (Hereinafter cited as Bodo, Prot.
Clergy and Public Issues.)

 

 

 

12Fred Somkin, Unquiet Eagle, Memory and Desire
in the Idea of American Freedom, 1815-60 (Ithaca, N.Y.:
Cornell University Press, 1967), p. 9. (Hereinafter
cited as Somkin, Upguiet Eagle.)

 

 

 

l3Gardiner Spring, Personal Reminiscences of the
Life and Times of Gardiner SpringLPastor of the'Brick
Prespyterian Church in the City of New York (2 vols.;
New York: Charles Scribner and Co., l866l, II, 201.
(Hereinafter cited as Spring, Pers. Rem.)

 

 

 

 

14William Adams, Christianity and Civil Government:
A Discourse Delivered on Sabhéth Evening, November 10,
l850v(New York: Charles Scribner, 1851), pp. 14-16.
(Hereinafter cited as Adams, Christianity and Civil Gov't.)

 

 

15"An Appeal to the Patriot," Tracts, VII: NO- 253!

p. 1.

16Lect. on Pol. Atheism, p. 96.

 

17Christianitytand Civil Gov't., pp. 12-14.

485

18"An Appeal to the Patriot," Tracts, VII, No. 253,

l9Ihid., pp. 4, 11-12; Beecher, Lect. on Pol.
Atheism, p. 128; "The Sabbath," Tracts, X, No. 352,

pp. 3-4; Talbot Chambers, Memoir of the Life and Char-
acter of the Late Hon. Theodore Frelinghuysen, D.D.

(New York: Harper and Bros., 1863), p. 238 (hereinafter

cited as Chambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen).

 

 

 

20Joseph T. Duryea, Civil Liberty: A Sermon

Preached on the National Thanksgivihg_Day, August 6,
I836 (New York: John A. Gray and Green, 1863), p. 6.
(Hereinafter cited as Duryea, Civil Liberty.)

 

 

21Christianity and Civil Gov't., pp. 29, 43.

22Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, p. 84; Annual Report,

N.Y., 1849, pp. 136-37; Hall, ed., Forty Years, II, 150;
William C. Brownlee, "An Appeal to a Patriot,“ Tracts,
VII, No. 253, p. 8.

 

 

23Christianity and Civil Gov't., pp. 24, 30.

24Ibid., pp. 44, 46, 48.

25Erskine Mason, An Evangelical Ministry, The
Security_of a Nation: A Sermon Preached in Behalf of
the American Home MissionarySociety, in the Bleeéker
Street Church, New York, January 2, 1848 (New York: Wm.
OSborne, 1848), pp. 6-8. (Hereinafter cited as Mason,
An Evangelical Ministry.)

 

26"Short Method with a scepticr" Tracts' X'

No. 374, p. 4. The Child's Papep informed its readers

that the Bible was responsible for both the technological
improvements and liberties in America (see Child's Paper,
III [December, 1854], 45).

 

 

27Glyndon G. Van Deusen, The Jacksonian Era:

1828-48, Harper Torchbooks (New York: Harper and(ROW,
1959), . 28 (hereinafter cited as Van Deusen, The Jack-
sonian Era); The Seventh Census of the United States,
l850 (Washington: Rdbert Armstrong,§Overnment Printer,

1853), p. lii (hereinafter cited as The fieyenth Census
of the United States); Michael Katz, The Irony of Bar y

 

 

486

School Reform: Educational Innovation in Mid-Nineteenth
Century Massachusetts (Cambridge: Harvard UniverSity
Pressfil968TT Appendix A, p. 22 (hereinafter cited as
Katz, Irony of Early School Reform).

28Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Query 19,
in Thomas Jefferson on Democracy, ed. by Saul K. Paudover,
Mentor BOOkSITNew York: New American Library, 1939),
pp. 69-70 (hereinafter cited as Paudover, ed., Thomas
Jeff. on Dem.); John C. Miller, The Federalist Era, I789-
I801 (New York: Harper and Bro., 1960l, pp. 70-83_(herein-
after cited as Miller, The Fed. Era); Leo Marx, The Machine
in the Garden, Technology and the Pastoral Ideal in America,
Galaxy Bocks (New York: OiiOrd University Press,(l964),
pp. 116—44 (hereinafter cited as Marx, Machine in the
Garden). Marx argues that Jefferson was motivatedby a
pastoral rather than an agrarian image. Like the old
pastoral ideal, his aim was economic sufficiency but not
economic growth (see pp. 126-27).

 

 

 

29Shaw Livermore, The Twilight of Federalism:
The Disintegtation of the FederaliSt Party, 1816-30 (Prince-
ton: Princeton University Press, 1962), p. 84. (Herein-
after cited as Livermore, The Twilight of Federalism.)

30Jan., 1826.

31Beecher, Lect. on Pol. Atheism, pp. 129-30.

32John 8. Stone, A Memoir‘of the Life of James
Milnor, D.D.,_Late Rectoref Sttheorgers Church, New
York (New York: American Tract Society, 1838), pp._ll4,
132. (Hereinafter cited as Stone, Milnor.)

33Sam Bass Warner, Jr., The Privete City: Phila-
delphia in Three Periods of Its Growth (Philadelphia:
Uhiversity ofPennsylvania Press, 1968), pp. 152-57.
(Hereinafter cited as Warner, The Private City.)

34Richard C. Wade, The Urban Frontier, Pioneer
Life in Early Pittsburgh,Cincinnati,1Lexington, Louis-
ville, and St. Louis, Phoenix BoOks (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1959), pp. 287-92 (hereinafter cited
as Wade, Urban Frontier); Russel B. Nye, The Cultural
.ggfe of the New Nation, 1776-1830, Harper TordthOR (New
‘York: Harper and Row,Rub.,_l960), p. 125 (hereinafter
cited as Nye, The Cultural Life of the New Nation); Leonard
.L. Richards, "Géhtlemen of Property and Standing":

 

 

487

Anti-Abolition Mobe_in Jacksonian America (New York:
OxiOrd University Press, 1970), pp. 1l23l3 (hereinafter
cited as Richard, "Gentlemen of PrOperty and Standing").

 

35Nye, The Cultural Life of the New Nation,
p. 125; Wade, The urban Frontier, pp.29l-99.

 

36Nye, The Cultural Life of the New Nation,
pp. 125-26; Wade,The Urban Frontier, pp. 97-98; Warner,
The Private City, pp.l6,102-ll.

 

 

37Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1846,
p. 43; Annual Repert, N.Y. CitytTract Society,_l84l,
pp. 9-10.

 

 

38Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1839,
pp. 15-16, 62.

 

39Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1841,
pp. 9-10.

 

40Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1846,
p. 56; gpnual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1829, p. 20.

 

 

41William A. Hallock, Memoir of Harlan Page; or
the Power of Preyer and Personal Effort for the Souls of
Indiyiduals (New York: American Tract Society, 1835),
p.55. (Hereinafter cited as Hallock, Harlan Page.)

 

 

 

 

42Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1841,
pp. 9-10.

 

43Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1847,

 

p. 20.

44Child's Paper, VIII (August, 1859), 25.

 

4
5Annual Report, N.Y., 1829, pp. 28-30; Annual

Report, N.Y., 1838, pp.lSl-52; Annual Report, N.Y., l831,
pp. 26T27; American Tract Maj. (Edhruary,—18J§l) , pp. 21-23;
Principles and—Feets pt:the American Tract Society (New
York: American Tract Society, n.di), p. 4 (hereinafter
cited as Principles and Facts of the Am. Tract Soc.).

 

 

 

 

 

46Child's Peper, IV (November, 1859), 41.

 

488

47Child's Paper, VI (March, 1857), 12.

48Hall, ed., Forty Years, II, 9.

 

49Annual Report, N.Y. CityTract Society, 1836,
pp. 21-22.

50Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1841,
Pp. 9-10.

51Marvin Meyers, The Jacksonian Persuasion:

Politics and Belief (Palo Alto: StanfOrd University
Press, 1957), pp. 106-07.

52Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, pp. 40-41.

53Annual Report, Bost., 1826, p. 12.

54Annual Report, N.Y., 1827, p. 21.

SSThe Seventh Census of the United States,

p. lxxxviii.

56Henry Nash Smith, Vitgin Land: The Americap
West as Symbol and Myth, VintageiEOOks (New York: Random
House, 1950), p. 138. (Hereinafter cited as Smith,
Virgin Land.)

 

 

 

57Marx, Machine in the Garden, pp. 73-142 (see
especially pp. 12l:42).

 

58Annual Report, Bost., 1843, p. 34.

 

59William E. Dodge, Influence of thetWar on Our
National Prosperity: A LecturéiDelivered in Baltimore,
Md,, on Monday Evenih , March 13th, 1865 (New York: Wm.
C: Marten, 1869), p. 87. (Hereinafter cited as Dodge,
Influence of the War.)

 

 

 

 

60Annual Report, N.Y., 1828, pp. 24-25.

 

61Annual Report, Bost., 1823, p. 51.

 

62Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 108; Annual
Report, N.Y., I857, p. 163.

 

 

489

63Philander Chase, Bishop Chase's Reminiscences:
An Autobiography: Second edition: Comprising a History
of the PrincipaliEvents of the Author's Life to A.D.i1847
(2*vas.; Boston: James B.ifiow, 1848), I, 186. (Herein-
after cited as Chase, Reminiscences.)

 

 

64Annual Report, N.Y., 1847, p. 68.

 

6SIbid.

 

66Annual Report, N.Y., 1850, p. 106.

 

67Ray Billington, America's Frontier Heritage
(New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1963), p. lIl.
(Hereinafter cited as Billington, Am. Frontier Heritage.)

 

 

68Charles McIlvaine, A Series of Evangelical Dis-
courses Selected for the Use of Families and Destitute
Congregations (2 vols.; ColumBus, Ohio: Isaac N. Whiting,
1848), I, 3. (Hereinafter cited as McIlvaine, Evangelical
Discourses.)

 

 

69Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, p. 182; Annual Re ort,
N.Y., 1848, p. 72; Annual Report! N.Y., 1855, p. 135.

70Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, p. 106.

 

 

 

 

71£§id., p. 181; Annual Report, N.Y., 1845, p. 80.

 

72Lyman Beecher, A Plea for the West (3rd ed.; Cin-
cinnati: Truman and Smithfi1836i, pp. 14-15. (Hereinafter
cited as Beecher, Plea for the west.)

 

73Charles L. Sanford, The Quest for Paradise:
Europe and the Amerigan Moral Imagination (Urbana: Uni-
versity of Illinois Press, 1961), pp. 128-30. (Hereinafter
cited as Sanford, The Quest for Paradise.)

 

 

74McIlvaine, Evangelical Discourses, I, 3-4.

75Annual Report, N.Y., 1852, p. 103.

 

76Billington, Am. Frontier Heritage, p. 190;
George W. Pierson, "The M. Factor in American History,"

 

490

America Quarterly, Summer Supplement, XIV (Summer, 1962),
279,7283-84 (hereinafter cited as Pierson, "The M. Factor
in Am. Hist.").

 

77Somkin, Unguiet Eagle, pp. 93-96.

 

78Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 6.

 

79Annual Report, N.Y., 1853, p. 7.

 

80Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, p. 181.

 

81Ibid., p. 7. For a similar description of the
Kentucky Frontiersman see Arthur K. Moore, The Frontier
Mind: A Cultural Analysis of the Kentucky Frontiersman
(Lexington: University of KentuckyPress,‘I937), p. 67
(hereinafter cited as Moore, The Frontier Mind).

 

 

 

82Charles I. Foster, An Errand of Merc : The
Evangelical United Front,l]90—I837 (CEapeI H1¥I3 Uni-
versity of NorthiCaroIina Press, 1960), p. 192. (Herein-

after cited as Foster, Errand of Mercy); Chambers, Theo.
Frelinghuysen, p. 233.

 

 

83Dr. Hallogk's Golden Wedding: Fifty Years in
the Tract Society! September:26, l82§--September26, 1872
(New York: AmeriCan Tract Society, n.d.), p. 16 (Herein—
after cited as Hallock's Golden Wedding); Annual Re ort,
N.Y.i_l830, p. 33} Annual Report, N.Y., 18§I, p. 37. In
January, 1850, the Society‘s first colporteur arrived in
California (Annual Report, N.Y., 1851, p. 51).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

84Rush Welter, "The Frontier West as Image of
American Society: Conservative Attitudes Before the Civil
War,” Mississippi Valley Hisggrical Review, XLVI (March,
1960), pp. 612-14. (Hereinafter cited as welter, "The
Frontier West as Image of Am. Soc.")

 

85"Moral Dignity of the Missionary Enterprise,"
Tracts, VII, No. 228, p. 9.

86Marx, Machine in the Garden, pp. 145-226 (see
especially pp. 1953756).

 

87Annual Report, N.Y., 1853, p. 84.

491

88Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, pp. 53-54.

 

89Dodge, Influence of the War, pp. 27-28.

 

90Annual Report, Bost., 1837, pp. 5-6.

 

91Annual Report, Bost., 1843, p. S.

 

92Nathan S. S. Beman, "Collegiate and Theological
Education at the West," American National Preacher, XVI
(March, 1847), 55-56. (Hereinafter cited as Beman, "Col.
and Theo. Educ. at the West.")

93Barbara M. Cross, ed., The Autobio ra h of
Lyman Beecher (2 vols.; Cambridge: Belknap Press of
Harvard University Press, 1961), II, 192. (Hereinafter
cited as Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher.)

 

 

 

94Annual Report, N.Y., 1829, pp. 20-21 (see also
Chambers, Theo. Frelinghuysen, p. 233).

 

 

95Annual Report, N.Y., 1855, p. 150.

 

96lpgg, (see also Annual Report, N.Y.Ly1846, p. 5).

97Annual Report, N.Y.Ly183l, p. 21.

 

98Beecher, Plea for the West, pp. 22-24, 32-34;
Philander Chase, The Star in the WestLor Kepyon Collegg
([Columbus?] Ohio: 1828): Philander Chase, Defense of
Kenyon College (Columbus, Ohio: Omstead and Bailhacks,
1831), assim; Welter, "The Frontier West as Image of
Am. Soc., pp. 612-14.

 

 

 

 

99Letter of Lyman Beecher to Albert Barnes,
June 11. 1842, in Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher, II, 343.

 

100Beecher, Plea for the West, pp. 32-33.

 

l“Ibid., pp. 22-24.

102Annual Report, N.Y., 1846, p. 5.

 

103Family Almanac, 1853, p. 26.

CHAPTER IX

NATIONAL UNITY

The American Tract Society was confident that its
"union . . . [formed] a new era in the history of the
American churches. . . ."1 One reason for this optimism
was the fact that Christians from various denominations
were joining together not only to circulate the Bible
itself but also an "identical interpretation" of the scrip—
tures. Charles McIlvaine thought this to be without pre-
cedent "since the time when a difference of opinion occa-
sioning a difference of denomination, was first known among
the disciples of Christ."2 The existence of the Tract
Society would force enemies of true religion to take note
and say, "See how these Christians love one another. . . ."
It gave the evangelical Protestants an opportunity to sing,
"Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to
dwell together in unity!"3

Unity--here was a word which the Tract Society
venerated as highly as any other word in the English lan-

guage. It prized unity not only within the church but also

492

493

within the nation. For men like Gardiner Spring, national
unity was interpreted to be a sign of divine favor.4 Yet
evangelical and national unity was in danger of being
shattered by divisive forces such as antagonism between
classes, sectarianism in religion, party spirit in govern-
ment, and sectionalism within the nation.

National unity took on added importance when it was
realized that America was to have a special place in God's
millennial timetable. In appealing to the Christian public
for support,the Tract Society reminded the Christians that
theirs was an "eventful period" in history. The giant
enterprise before them was the conversion of the world,
and in this "vast and ardorous enterprise no portion of
mankind . . . was bound to feel deeper interest than the
peOple of the United States."5 Some seven years later the
Society defended its goal of distributing at least one
tract to every American by alluding to "the influence"
the Republic "should exert in the conversion of the world."6
This American mission was not to be taken lightly. "What
this world shall be," Reverend Erskine Mason stated (a
member of the publishing committee from 1845 to 1851),

ere the present century shall have completed its
cycle, depends very much on us. . . . We are
acting, therefore, now, not for ourselves alone,
nor yet for our immediate posterity, but for the
world, and for the general interest of the

Redeemer's kingdom. If we act well our part, all
is safe, but if not, all is lost."7

494

Since the future of the West would determine the character
of the American people, and since the American peOple were
to play a key role in the conversion of the world and the
events leading up to the millennium, the struggle in the
West between "Christ and Antichrist," between Evangelical
Protestism and "Popery" had implications for all of man-
kind.

The American mission was also expressed in more
secular terms. According to Justin Edwards, the mission
of the Republic was not to illumine the world only with
its "light of true religion" but also with its "light of
civil and religious freedom." He enumerated his country's
assets which included a "peOple of invincible energy,"
and their enjoyment of "civil and religious liberty" and
the right of holding property of "every description, and
to any amount, in pure fee simple." Consequently, the
Americans were obligated to "make a development of charac-
ter, such as creation never witnessed." Furthermore,
"they were to become the benefactors of the world, and
instruments in bearing its millions to glory." Should
America fail to live up to her high calling, she would
"sink, under a load of guilt such as the earth never bore,
to endless perdition."8

Edwards' speech reflected a view held by many
.Americans in the Jefferson-Jacksonian era, namely that

they were performing an experiment which had world wide

495

ramifications.9 According to Beecher the world needed to
see a nation actually instituting political and economic
reforms. A concrete example was required.10 America thus
became a laboratory which the whole world was watching.
The fact that God had chosen America as the labora-
tory implied that the Republic was superior to Europe.11
This superiority was partly due to Europe's moral depravity.
One Speaker informed the Society's supporters at the 1831
annual meeting that there was "a general wreck of all
religious principles" on the European shores.12 Further-
more, most EurOpean countries lacked civil and religious
liberties. Thus it was not surprising that the "eyes of
the Oppressed" in Europe were turning "wistfully to the
land of freedom."13 Even EurOpe's literature did not
measure up to American standards. Although the Society
found much to complain about when it came to the popular
literature in America, it, nevertheless, found it to be
"purer and safer than that of any other nation." The
most widely circulated journals in America were either
"decidely evangelical" or at least sympathetic to the
cause of religion. In England the opposite was true. In
America "the prevalent tone of the secular press . . .
[was] Protestant and healthful," while in EurOpe the press
either aided the cause of "spiritual or civil deSpotism,
or . . . [advocated] systems of error in theology and

ethics."14

496

The American mission also extended to Asia. As
mentioned previously, Americans were called upon to
Christianize and tame the West from where they would, in
turn, be able to tap the Asiatic trade. But this was to
be trade with a purpose. The colporteur and missionary
would follow American commerce "to assist, under God, in
tearing off the fetters of idolatry. . . ."15

The Tract Society also reminded its readers of
their mission to Central and South America. In 1826 an
American gentleman in England exhorted the American
Christians to look to the South. "Millions of human beings,
through thousands of years," he wrote, "are to be influ-
enced by the conduct and efforts of American Christians
now living." The territories of Mexico and the Southern
Republics at present contained seventeen to twenty-two
million inhabitants; they could easily support three
hundred million. "Have our American churches awakened to
the destiny which awaits our American continent!" he
asked.16

The annexation of Texas and the Mexican War once
again reminded the Tract Society of its mission to the
South. The war, itself, was not glorified. The lggg
Annual Report informed its readers that the "unhappy war
with Mexico . . . [had] opened new fields for evangelical
labors."17 Reverend James Alexander opposed both the

annexation of Texas and the Mexican War. He maintained

497

that Americans should have sent the Mexicans the Gospel;
instead they would now probably "rob and invade them."18
But the Tract Society was hOpeful that as Central and South
America would be influenced by American commerce and
civilization,they would also be exposed to the influence
of the Protestant religion.19

The American mission, thus, made national unity
all the more important. Members of the Tract Society were
fearful that national unity might succumb to divisive
forces. The "different and conflicting interests" of a
vast nation presented a danger to the Republic. How to
prevent "different parts from flying off under the action
of their own uncontrolled force" was a real problem.20
Antagonism between classes, religious sectarianism, party
spirit, and above all sectionalism were divisive forces
which could bring about the disintegration of the nation.

The attitude of the American Tract Society towards
inequality or class differences has already been discussed
in previous chapters. One additional point which should
be made here, however, is that class antagonisms endan—
gered national unity. In 1836 Edward Norris Kirk was
called upon to address the annual meeting of the New York
City Tract Society. He warned that "infidelity" had
attempted to "excite the poor against the rich." The
rich in turn added fuel to the fire by their "haughtiness

and selfishness." The more the rich separated themselves

498

from the poor the "more deeply and dangerously . . . [would]
the destructive current of animosity run."21 The solution,
as mentioned previously, was for employers to treat their
employees justly and for employees to be sober, frugal,
and industrious. Labor unions which assumed an inevitable
conflict between various orders in society were rejected.

Another factor which could disrupt national unity
was the Spirit of sectarianism in religion. The benevolent
societies, like the revivalists, emphasized Christian
unity. The latter maintained that only religion could
forge and maintain a truly national and lasting union.22
But religion could be a disruptive as well as a unifying
force. The Tract Society never permitted the public to
forget that it was above sectarianism. It was even above
denominationalism. When a national tract society had
first been in the planning stage,it was suggested that it
be described as a union of "evangelical Christians of all
denominations." But this was altered to read a union of
"all evangelical Christians" to emphasize the fact that
it was a union of Christians and not a union of denomi-
nations.23

Undoubtedly, the Tract Society found it convenient
to raise the banner of Christian unity whenever it was
attacked by abolitionists for its refusal to censure
slavery. The members of the publishing committee repre-

sented denominations, and not Christians at large.

499

Nevertheless, the relationship between non-sectarianism
and national unity was continually emphasized. In its
statement to the Christian public the Tract Society argued
that its organization demonstrated the "feasibility of
united feeling and action among the followers of a common
Saviour. A11 its tendencies . . . [were] to union. All
its influences . . . [were] cementing." Through the
"embodiment of a real, vital unity in the Protestant faith,"
it could disprove the "boast of the papist" that Protes-
tantism inevitably led to disunity.24 Gardiner Spring
maintained that religion was necessary to bind the Ameri-
can peOple together. Unless they would be "bound together
into one great brotherhood by the cords of heaven descended
truth and a heaven-imparted love," the Republic was "fit-
test for revolutions of no common kind." The Tract Soci-
ety was an institution which served to unite people "into
one great brotherhood." Its members were Christians
"without being sectarian."25 William R. Williams likewise
lauded the New York City Tract Society because it promoted
the cause of Christian unity. The formula for such a
unity, he explained, was as follows: "In necessary things,
unity at all hazards; in things indifferent, liberty--and
in all, charity."26

The Tract Society was also concerned over the dis-
ruptive tendencies of party spirit. The first twenty-five

years of the Society's existence coincided with the rise

500

and decline of the Second American Party system. The
First American Party system had virtually disintegrated
by 1820. By 1824 the Second Party System was evident in
the Middle Atlantic States and by 1828, in New England.
The South's vague one-party system ended in the early
1830's when it became evident that Martin Van Buren might
succeed the South's favorite son, Andrew Jackson, as the
Democratic Party's candidate for president. Shortly there-
after the West moved towards a two-party system. In 1840
William Henry Harrison was the first president to be
elected in a campaign fought out between two truly national
parties.27 Evidence suggests that throughout the 1840's
party, and not section, usually determined the voting
policies of Congress.28
The Tract Society was not alone in its opposition
to party spirit. In his study on the idea of "Party" in
America, Richard C. Hofstadter has pointed out that Ameri-
cans inherited the seventeenth and eighteenth century
English concept that "party loyalty" was invidious. What
was demanded of the true patriot was a "disinterested good
judgment on behalf of the public welfare."29 The found-
ing fathers of the American nation did not believe in
political parties. Both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas
Jefferson engaged in vigorous partisan politics, yet

neither one accepted partisanship as a positive good.3o

501

The modern concept that party politics was not
merely a necessary evil but a positive good was first
formulated during the Second American Party System by
Martin Van Buren. Van Buren maintained that the man above
party, and not the man of party, was a potential despot.
The existence of parties was a good indicator that freedom
of dissent was permitted in the nation. The real danger
to the country was not discord but apathy.31

The Tract Society did not follow Van Buren in his
defense of partisan politics. James Milnor had been dis-
illusioned over the sight of "strife, intrigue, and party
bitterness" in the 1812 Congress. In 1828 he eulogized
DeWitt Clinton, the man who rejected the view of politics
as espoused by the regency politicians.32 Fifteen years
later Spring was still warning the country that one danger
which the nation faced was "the violence and rancour of
the Spirit of party." Differences based upon principles
were good, but not party spirit which sought only to
further the cause of the party. Partisan politics was
characterized by "blind passion, hurried and fiery zeal,
unhallowed combinations, false representations, and a
proselytizing spirit" lusting after power. The golden era
for Spring was the first eight years of the Republic's
existence. During these years party politics had had
little influence.33 James Alexander was not elated over

the election of William Henry Harrison and the Whigs in

502

1840. As far as he was concerned, the Whigs were as "party—
bound as other folks."34
The Tract Society was Opposed to party politics for

several reasons. It viewed partisianship as a threat to
national unity. Party politics enabled an unscrupulous
demagogue to appeal to the ignorant and immoral voters and
pit them against the magistrates and courts of the land
thereby unleashing "anarchy and civil war."35 Secondly,
party politics could destroy a nation by unleashing the
forces of immorality. The Tract Society feared that
demagogues would not be inclined to enforce those moral
laws which the masses found distasteful. After all, what
could one eXpect from politicians who tried to win votes
by distributing liquor on election day?36 Some of the
politicians violated the moral laws themselves. Lyman
Beecher exhorted the people not to elect the "duellist,"
the "Sabbath-breaker," the "drunkard," the "licentious,"
and the "enemy of the Bible."37 A tract writer warned
the people that if they would elect candidates only on the
basis of party feeling rather than on the basis of their
ability to fill the office,

liberty would be converted into licentiousness, the

sanctity of . . . [the] courts profaned; justice

expelled from her awful throne; the sacredness of

an oath treated with scorn; perjury and suborna-

tion of perjury would be prevalent to a revolting

degree; the laws would, by degrees be Openly
condemned and trampled upon. . . .58

503

One could substantiate these charges by merely reading the
publications of the political presses. All too often they
demoralized the community and ridiculed the Bible and the
Sabbath laws.39

In their attitude towards political parties, the
organizers of the Tract Society reflected the views of the
Federalists. The Federalists accused their opponents of

"demagoguery,' of "pandering to the low born." The Federa-
list politicians usually came from "mature, static, homo-
geneous, and ingrown" communities. They usually came from
families of prominence and power--often inherited power--
in these communities. They were well educated and included
many lawyers, parsons, physicians, and merchants in their
groups. They emphasized character, ability, and status
when it came to public office. They claimed to be guided
by national rather than party interests.40
The new political style is evidence of the fact

that a status revolution was taking place. Milnor had
encountered this over a decade before the Second American
Party System was born. Already in 1812 he had written:

I am haunted by a perpetual feeling of disgust at

the prospect of reentering the scene of contention

and of enduring the pertness of that tribe of young

competitors, every day increasing in number and

diminishing in respectability and worth.41

More was at stake than the patrician's right to lead. His

values were being openly challenged. The magistrate with

504

the "wrong" moral values would be elected. Attacking a
group's moral value also constituted an attack on its
status.

The Tract Society failed to realize that parties
need not only divide; they could also unite. The Second
American Party System was able to accomplish this feat
during the 1840's as long as the issue of slavery did not .
become political. By deflecting the Americans' attention
away from potentially sectional and divisive issues,it
actually served to unite the country.42 Although the mana-
gers of the Tract Society could not endorse party spirit,
their own Society resembled the Second American Party Sys-
tem in that it also sought to divert peOple's attention
away from the Slave. It emphasized safe issues, the West,
the city, the drunkard, the infidel, and the Catholic
immigrant. However, in the end both the Tract Society and
the political parties were forced to realize that the prob—
lem of slavery was not solved by ignoring it.

The disruptive force of sectionalism and slavery
was felt in the religious circles even before the demise
of the Second American Party System. In 1837 the Presby-
terian Synod split. Although doctrinal differences were
at stake, evidence suggests that Slavery and abolitionism
were major factors in the schism.43 Seven years later the
Methodist Episcopal Church split because of its leaders'

inability to solve the slavery problem to the satisfaction

505

of both the South and the North.44 With the formation of
the Southern Baptist Convention and the American Baptist
Missionary Union in 1845,the Northern and Southern Baptists
had, in effect, declared their intentions of going their
separate ways.45 If slavery could disrupt Christian unity,
it could obviously disrupt national unity as well.

The decade of the 1850's witnessed a series of
events which were filled with evil forebodings for men who
prized unity above all else. First there was the Com-
promise of 1850, drawn up to settle issues raised by Ameri-
can eXpanSionist fever, the Mexican War, and the Wilmot
Proviso. It was a compromise drawn up by elder statesmen
who shared the conviction of the Tract Society that the
union must be preserved at all costs.46 Included in this
Compromise was a fugative slave bill, which did much to
stir up anti-slavery feelings in the North during the next
decade. In 1854 Stephen A. Douglas guided the Kansas-
Nebraska Bill through Congress. This Bill repealed that
clause of the Missouri Compromise which had closed all
territory north of 36° 30', to slavery and replaced it
with the concept of popular sovereignty. In the end
"popular-sovereignty" did not bring peace. It led to
"bleeding Kansas" which, in turn, gave added impetus
to the rise of the Republican Party. To further com-
plicate matters, the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott
decision decided that popular sovereignty and the

Missouri Compromise both violated the constitutional

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

506

rights of slave owners in the territories. Finally, there
was the election of a sectional candidate in 1860 followed
by the secession of several Southern states.47

The benevolent societies also had attempted to
reach across sectional lines. In doing so they too felt
the divisive power of slavery and abolitionism. In 1856
the American Home Missionary Society succumbed to aboli-
tionist pressure and refused to subsidize any more churches
which admitted slaveowners to membership. The Bible Soci-
ety, on the other hand, resisted all attempts by anti-
slavery forces to turn it into an antislavery organization.
(It did, however, consent to house the New York branch
office of the American Tract Society, Boston, after its
break with the national Society in the late 1850's.) The
Bible Society attempted to evade the issue by arguing that
its function was to distribute Bibles "as far as practic-
able, among all classes" and not to work for the correction
of civil laws. Throughout the Civil War it attempted to
remain neutral and retain its connections both in the Union
and in the Confederacy.48

After 1850 the Tract Society found itself increas—
ingly embroiled in the Slavery controversy. Antislavery
individuals and churches demanded that the Society publish
material on the moral evils arising out of slavery.
Several critics demanded that the Society treat slavery as

a sin just as it had treated alcohol, dancing, profanity,

507

and Sabbath-breaking as sins. When the critics failed to
change the Society's publishing policy, they attacked the
Society's organizational set-up and election procedures.
There were two major charges levelled against the
Society's publishing policy. The Society was charged with
the sin of omission. This dealt with its refusal to pub-
lish antislavery material and has already been discussed
in the previous chapter.49 The Tract Society was also
charged with the sin of suppression. One reason for this
accusation was the Society's refusal to print the small

volume, Duties of the Masters. In 1856 William Hallock

 

had defended the Society's refusal to publish material on
slavery on the grounds that there was no available material
which dealt with the ”duties and evils" but not with the
political aspects of slavery. In 1856 a committee of
fifteen, led by Theodore Frelinghuysen, was appointed to
investigate the Society's publishing policies. The com-
mittee concluded that although the Society could not pub-
lish material on the political aspects of slavery,it could
publish material on the moral aspects. The volume, Duties

pf Masters, written primarily by Southerners, was compiled

 

and presented to this committee for examination. It was
endorsed by this group, and subsequently printed. But
just before the volume was ready to be bound, the executive

committee changed its mind and refused to publish it.50

508

This "suppressed tract" contained no radical state-
ments on freedom and equality. There was only one tract,
written by a Scotsman, Charles K. Whipple, which was anti-
slavery. In his tract, "The Family Relation as Affected

by Slavery, Whipple included a number of examples of vice
and immorality to prove his point that slavery was detri-
mental to the white man as well as to the slave since it
provided him with easy access to Negro women. Whether this
tract belonged to the original volume is not known to this

writer. Critics of the Society may have inserted it into

the volume, The Suppressed Tract. The other tracts

 

exhorted the masters to provide religious instruction for
their slaves or "servants."51 Obviously the South must
have viewed any publication, regardless how mild or
inoffensive, as a victory for the antislavery forces. At
least this was the assumption of the executive committee
which feared that publishing this tract would dismember the
Society.52

The Society's editing and revising policy also
left it Open to the charge of suppression. The Society was
charged with deleting from three of its volumes certain
negative references to slavery. One critic of the Society
compared its abridging policy to "the Indian's way of
abridging a certain animal that was troublesome,--by
cutting off his tail just behind his ears."53 One of these

volumes was J. J. Gurney's Habitual Exercise of Love to God.

509

In 1842 a donor offered the stereotype plates of Gurney's
book to the Society. Before publishing it,the Society
advised the donor to receive the author's permission to
revise one paragraph. This permission was subsequently
granted. The original edition read as follows:

If this love had always prevailed among professing

Christians, where would have been the sword of the

crusader? Where the African Slave-trade? Where

the odious system which permits to man a property

in his fellow-men, and converts rational beings

into marketable chattles?
The revised Tract Society version read:

If this love had always prevailed among professing

Christians, where would have been the sword of the

crusader? Where the tortures of the Inquisition?

Where every system of oppression and wrong by which

he who has the power revels in luxury and ease at

the expense of his fellow-men?54
Obviously Lyman Beecher was not the only one who discovered
that the anti-Catholic plank could serve more than one pur-
pose. Theodore Frelinghuysen's committee recommended that
such revisions be discontinued, and that the Society
should not publish any volumes which necessitated an
"impartial abridgement."55

With the refusal of the Tract Society to publish

Duties of the Masters, the antislavery forces attempted
to seize control of the Society at the 1858 annual meeting.
However, the critics soon discovered that they were not
nearly as successful in packing an annual meeting in New

York as William Lloyd Garrison had been in 1840. The

Society's critics were vastly outnumbered. Leonard Bacon

510

complained that residents of New York City, although a
minority in the Society, were able to dominate the pro-
ceedings and bring out a voting majority since the annual
meetings were always held there.56 John Jay finally
attempted to break the City's domination by proposing a
bill in the 1859 New York State Legislature which would
permit vote by proxy in all benevolent societies incor-
porated under New York's 1848 law.57

Antislavery forces must have realized by 1858 that
the key to controlling the Tract Society was to vote in a
"friendly" executive committee. When William Jay made a
formal motion that the annual meeting instruct the publish-
ing committee to publish Duties of the Masters, Daniel
Lord, a New York lawyer and an anti-abolitionist, retorted
that the Society had no such power. Members could elect
officers but had "no powers reserved to control those whom
they . . . [had] elected." But to change the executive
committee was next to impossible. As pointed out in chap-
ter one, the annual meeting only elected the directors.
The outgoing executive committee drew up the list of nomina-
tions--which usually looked like last year's list--, and
the directors rubber stamped it. Furthermore, the anti-
abolitionists were in the majority in the New York meet—
ings.58

The refusal of the Tract Society to publish

Duties of the Masters was a setback for the New England

 

 

L‘f

511

Congregationalists as well as to the antislavery forces.
Schism became inevitable. The Congregational Church,
situated predominantly north of the Mason and Dixon line,
could take an antislavery stand without having to worry
about schism in its denomination. By 1855 Congregational
Associations in Illinois, Iowa, New York, and Michigan had
publically censored the Society but to no avail.59 However,
the New England Congregationalists and the American Tract
Society at Boston had always held an exalted place in the
national Society. If they demanded a change in the Soci-
ety's policy, would their voice carry more weight?

New England's favored position in the national
Tract Society was evident in the executive committee. The
Congregationalist seat in the publishing committee was
always held by a representative from New England. All the
other positions in the executive committee were usually
filled by New York residents. But now the Congregationalist

seat was filled by Nehemiah Adams, author of A South—Side

 

View of Slavegy. According to John Jay, the Boston Soci-
ety desired Adams' dismissal. In the past New York had
always listened to Boston's wishes when it came to appoint-
ing New England's representatives.60 Two issues were now
at stake. If the Society replaced Adams, it would have
been interpreted in the South as a victory for the anti-
slavery forces. People were not drOpped from the committee

unless they moved, went bankrupt, died, or requested a

512

release because of other pressing duties. At stake was
also the declining status of New England. New York could
snub either the South or New England. When it chose the
latter, New England seceded. In 1857 the Boston Society
began to accept donations from territories outside of New
England and instructed its own executive committee to
publish tracts on the "moral duties" arising out of
slavery. Two years later it severed its final ties with
New York.61 No longer need the enemies of true religion
say, “See how these Christians love one another."

The antislavery forces were convinced that the
Tract Society's stance could not be justified on moral
grounds. Reference was continually made to the domination
of the New York office by the City's mercantile community.
Presumably New York merchants and financeers feared that
an antislavery stance would jeopardize their commercial
interests in the South. This thesis was presented by Lewis
Tappan in his brother's biography. John Jay defended his
Proxy Bill--designed to let non-residents of New York City
vote by Proxy--on the grounds that the Tract Society would
continue to ignore slavery as long as the Society was con-
trolled by the City's "mercantile interests." According
to Leonard Bacon the mercantile community was especially
sensitive to any potentially disruptive forces after the

1857 depression.62

513

The thesis that the actions of anti-abolitionists
can be explained primarily on economic grounds has been
challenged by Leonard Richards. Although his study dealt
primarily with the decade of the 1830's, his conclusions
may have relevance also for the Tract Society's schism of
1859. According to Richards, leaders of the anti-
abolitionist mobs were

"gentlemen of property and standing"--1awyers,

politicians, merchants, shopkeepers, and bankers

whose careers were identified not only with the

mercantile economy of preindustrial America, but

also with the local political establishment.
Arthur Tappan and the Antislavery Society "represented a
major threat to their elite status" in the local communi-
ties.63 In the case of the Tract Society the shoe was on
the other foot. The antislavery forces in New England and
up-state New York were being threatened by a centralized
organization in New York City. If Jay's statement is
reliable, New England felt that it could no longer even
control the appointment of the Congregationalist repre-
sentative on the publishing committee.64

The Tract Society had its own arguments to justify
its stand. It maintained that the Society's constitution
permitted it to publish only such material which received
the "approbation of all evangelical Christians," and that

it was not up to the Society to determine what Christians

"ought to agree in."55 Secondly, it maintained that pub-

lishing Duties of the Masters would have accomplished

 

514

nothing except the dismemberment of the Society. In the
South the volume would not have circulated, in the North
it was not needed.66

With the exception of Nehemiah Adams, most members
of the Tract Society did not attempt to portray slavery
in a positive light.67 James Alexander loved the South
but was reluctant to accept a pastorate there because of
his dislike for slavery.68 William E. Dodge disliked what
he saw of Slavery on a business trip to the South in 1840.
He looked upon it "as an evil at some time and in some way
to be peaceably removed. . . ."69 Virginia's Episcopalian
Bishop, William Meade, likewise found slavery distasteful
and hOped that it would eventually be "happily terminated."70

The Society's stand on slavery was in keeping with
its view of an ordered society. Abolitionism was associated
with fanaticism and "reckless" reform.71 Garrison's ultra
position on social issues such as slavery and women's
rights envisioned a reordering of society.72 Furthermore,
in order to maintain a stable and ordered community, the
rule of law was essential. The African Colonization Soci-
ety had been careful to obey all laws and never encouraged
slaves to seek freedom by illegal measures.73 The managers
of the Tract Society were in basic agreement with this
View. They respected the constitutional right of the
Southern states and of slave-holders. Adams called upon

the North to "prevent and punish all attempts to decoy

515

slaves from their masters,‘ and to "submit" to the consti-
tution. If people felt the law was unjust they should use
"suitable means" to change it. But as long as the law
remained "all . . . appeals to a 'Higher Law' . . . [were]
fanaticism."74

Several members of the Tract Society viewed the
Civil War as a war to preserve the cause of order and the
principle of government. In this respect these members
resembled other conservative intellectuals in the North who
favored coercion by a strong central government to put
down secession since secession was viewed as a threat to
order in society.75 In 1865 the Tract Society reviewed the
lessons which America had learned from the conflict. Among
other things, the War had reminded them of the "sacredness
of human government." Government was ordained of God; to
declare war upon government was to declare war upon God.
Americans had over-reacted against European despotism. They
had misinterpreted the right of the people "to choose their
form of government" to mean that anyone had a "right to
rebel against government." Rebellion was justified only
when oppression became intolerable and there was a "fair
prospect" of removing it. But the notion that "a dis-
affected people" could rebel against a government ordained

by God and beneficial to the "great majority of the people

. . . [was] a fatal error."76

516

The Society's publishing policy was also in keeping
with its emphasis upon unity. It feared that publishing
tracts on slavery would endanger the unity of the Christian
and the political community. Like the African Colonization
Society, it attempted to solve the slavery problem without
sacrificing the Union. William Lloyd Garrison, on the
other hand, had been unwilling to sacrifice the Negro on
the altar of unity. He had sounded a secessionist note
when he called upon the North to leave the Union. As long
as it remained in the Union it was bound by the constitu-
tion to uphold slavery.77 Such a call was anathema to the
Tract Society. The Union was sacred. But the Union could
not be maintained without "heavenly and Spiritual" bonds.
The Society would hopefully aid in forming and preserving
such bonds.'78

The Tract Society's emphasis upon unity was espe-
cially evident in the days preceding the outbreak of hos-
tilities. In December, 1860, Bishop Meade of Virginia
wrote a letter to BishOp McIlvaine in which he expressed
his opposition to secession. He criticized an article

published in the Southern Episcopalian which talked

 

favorably of disunion and of South Carolina's preparedness
to secede. "Would that I could hope she would go alone,
and not be followed," he wrote. Yet when the Federal
Government took up arms to coerce the South, Bishop Meade

took a pro-Southern stance.79 Both Gardiner Spring and

517

William E. Dodge defended the South's constitutional rights
until it took up arms. In 1860 Dodge supported the Consti-
tutional Union Party led by Senator John Bell of Tennessee
and Senator Edward Everett of Massachusetts. He presided
over a meeting held in the Cooper Institute and called
for an end to the "spirit of crimination and recrimination"
in order to prevent the "fearful catastrOphe," the "severing
of the Union of these United States." But once the South
seceded, his obligation to protect the Constitution was
"dissolved."80

The emphasis upon unity was also evident in the
Tract Society's attitude towards the Civil War. Once the
South seceded most of the members supported the Union
cause. Even the eradication of slavery was now endorsed
by several members on the grounds of unity. This was not
true of all members; as late as 1864 Dodge recommended that
the abolition of slavery should not be made a prerequisite
for peace.81 But for men like Reverend Joseph Duryea and
Bishop McIlvaine, the Civil War made a more lasting Union
possible by eradicating slavery. When Congress abolished
slavery, McIlvaine was overjoyed. "We shall be an united
people again stronger than ever," he wrote; "because the
only element that ever divided us will be destroyed."82

The Society's views on order, liberty, andunity
were the views of those individuals who were basically

satisfied with the existing social system. They feared

518

atheistic levellers, false notions of liberty, and politi-
cal demagoguery. But they feared disruption of the Union
even more. Hopefully slavery would somehow and at some-
time be removed. Their view was more in keeping with the
Enlightenment tradition which viewed progress in terms of
gradualism. It relied "on indirect and slow-working means
to achieve a desired social objective."83 Such a View was
basically optimistic. It assumed that the South could be
won by moderate appeals. But this was an assumption which,
as Howard Zinn points out, was not founded in fact.84

Part of this optimism was related to the millennial
hopes of the Tract Society. The Society had caught the
millennial fever. America, God's chosen nation, would
have a special place in the millennium. The struggle
against Roman Catholicism and the papacy was often por—
trayed as a struggle with the anti-Christ. But it was a
struggle which the evangelicals could win. Furthermore,
America was morally superior to Europe. Consequently, it
was assumed that America would not have to enter the
period of tribulation. The advent of the Civil War dashed
this hope. This was brought out by McIlvaine in 1860.
He wrote his friend that they would probably not see each
other "in this life, or this side the second advent of our
Lord!" Then he continued:

But what, you will say, brings me so directly to

tha;? I answer, the sad prospect of the cup of
tribulation being soon passed to this country;

519

in other words, "the distress of nations with
perplexity! the sea and waves roaring, men's
hearts failing them for fear; is to all appearance
now being fulfilled here, where we have supposed
it least likely to come."35

 

 

 

The Society's emphasis upon unity had reflected an
optimistic and a conservative View of American society.
The Christian stewards were confident that America had a
mission to perform for all mankind, and that it would play
a special role in God's Kingdom. But the Republic could
only fulfill her destiny if it would once again become a
stable, unified Protestant nation. Religious sectarianism,
immigration, political partisanship, and sectionalism
posed a threat to order and unity. Furthermore, order and
unity appealed to those individuals who were basically
satisfied with the existing social and economic institu-
tions. The managers of the Tract Society were not blind
to existing evils such as slavery. But whatever the
imperfection, it should be ameliorated gradually and
peacefully. Above all, its eradication should not be at
the expense of order and unity. In the end, the Christian
stewards went to war to preserve national unity. The
slave was not worth fighting over, the preservation of

the Union was.

FOOTNOTES-"CHAPTER IX

1"The Address of the Executive Committee of the
American Tract Society to the Christian Public, at Its
Organization in 1825," Tracts, I, No. l, p. 94.

2Annual Report, N.Y., 1826, p. 36.

 

3"The Address of the Executive Committee . . . ,
Tracts, I, No. 1, p. 9.

4Gardiner Spring, Personal Reminiscences of the
Life and Times of Gardiner Spring, Pastor oftheififick
Presbyterian Church, in the City of New York (2*v6IS.;
New York: Charles Scribner and Co., 1866), I, 274-7S.
(Hereinafter cited as Spring, Pers. Rem.)

 

 

5"The Address of the Executive Committee . . . ,
Tracts, I, No. l, p. 15 (see also Lyman Beecher, Beecher's
Works, Vol. I: Lectures on Political Atheism and Kindred
Subjects; ngether with Six Sermons on Intemperance; Dedi-
cated to the workingmen of the United States [Boston:
John P. Jewett and—Co., 1852], pp. 326-27 Ihereinafter
cited as Beecher, Lect. on Pol. Atheist).

6Annual Report, N.Y., 1832, p. 23.

7Erskine Mason, An Evangelical Ministry, The
Security of a Nation: A Sermon Preached in Behalfiof
the American Home MissionggySociety, in the Bleecker
Street Church, New York, January 2, 1848 (New York: Wm.
OSborne, 1848i) p. 24. (Hereinafter cited as Mason, An
Evangelical Ministry.) -_'

 

8Agnual Report, N.Y., 1826, p. 305 (see also
.Mason, An Evangelical MiniStry, pp. 22-23).

 

 

520

521

9Fred Somkin, Unquiet Eagle, Memory and Desire in
the Idea of American Freedom, 1815-1860 (Ithaca, N.Y}:
Cornell University Press, 1967), pp. 77-78. (Hereinafter
cited as Somkin, Unquiet Eagle.)

 

 

 

loBeecher, Lect. on Pol. Atheism, pp. 321—28.

 

11On the comparison between American innocence and
European depravity, see Charles L. Sanford, The Quest for
Paradise: Europe and the American Moral Imagination
(Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1961), pp. 157-58,
161, 164, 168—69. (Hereinafter cited as Sanford, The
Quest for Paradise.) _——

 

 

 

12Annual Report, N.Y., 1831, p. 15.

 

l3Christian Almanac, 1831, p. 28.

 

14Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 57. Gardiner
Spring concludediafter visiting England in 1835 that
the British clergy could also learn much from the American
churches (see Spring, Pers. Rem., II, 130).

 

 

15Annual Report, N.Y., 1849, p. 46.

 

l6Annual Rgport, N.Y., 1826, p. 21.

 

17Annual Report, N.Y., 1848, p. 102.

 

18John Hall, ed., Forty Years' Familiar Letters of
James W. Alexander, D. D., Contribut1ng with the Notes, A
Memo1r of His Life (2 vols.; New York: Charles SCribner,
I860), II, 51, 74 (see also ibid., I, 385-86 [hereinafter
cited as Hall, ed., Forty Yearsl).

 

 

 

19Annual Report, 1851, p. 51.

 

20Mason, An Evangelical Ministry, p. 9.

 

21Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1836,

p. 11.

22Perry Miller, The Life of the Mind in America,
From the Revolution to the Civil War (New York: Harcourt,

Brace and WOrld, 1965), p. 72 (Hereinafter cited as

 

522

Miller, The Life of the Mind in Am.); Charles I. Foster,
An Errand of'Mercy: The Evangelical United Front, 1790-
1837 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press,
I960), p. 72 (hereinafter cited as Foster, Errand of

Mercy).

23Annua1 Report, N.Y., 1856, p. 194.

 

 

 

4Principles and Facts of the American Tract

Societ (New York: American Tract Society, n.d.), p. 12
here1nafter cited as Principles and Facts of the Am.
Tract Soc.). Anti-Catholicism was one catalyst wHiCh
could unite various Protestant groups. According to
Whitney Cross, antipathies between Protestant sects in
Western New York gave way when it came to battling
Catholics (see Whitney Cross, The Burned-Over District:
The Social and Intellectual History of Enthusiastic
Religion in Western New York, 1800-1850, Harper Torchbooks
[New York: Harper and Row, Pub., l9SOT, p. 43 [hereinafter
cited as Cross, Burned-Over Districtl).

 

 

 

 

 

 

25Gardiner Spring, The Danger and Hope of the
American People: A Discourse on the Day of the Annual
Thanksgiving, in the State of New YorkiTNew York: *Eofih F.
Trow, 1843), pp. 33, 35. lTHereinafter cited as Spring,
Dagger and Hope.)

 

 

26
pp. 7-80

Annual Report, N.Y. City Tract Society, 1836,

 

27Richard P. McCormick, The Second American Party
System: Parpy Formation in the Jacksonian Era (Ohapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1966), pp. 330-
41. (Hereinafter cited as McCormick, The Sec. Am. Party

System.)

28Joel H. Silbey, The Shrine of Party: Congres-

sional Voting Behavior, l84lL1852 (Pittsburgh: University
of Pittsburgh Press,ll967), pp. 49-97 (hereinafter cited
as Silbey, The Shrine of Party); Charles Sellers, "Who
were the Southern Whigs?“American Historical Review, LI
(January, 1954), 335-45 (here1nafter cited as Sellers,
"Who were the S. Whigs?").

 

 

 

 

 

29Richard C. Hofstadter, The Idea of a Party Sys-
pem: The Rise of ngitimate Opposition ii the United—
States (Befkeley and Los Angeles: University of California
Press, 1969), pp. 9-13. (Hereinafter cited as Hofstadter,
The Idea of a Party§ystem.)

 

523

30Ibid., pp. 16-29. Unlike Jefferson, President
James Monroe did not even view partisanship as a necessary
evil. He assumed that party divisions resulted from
defective EurOpean governments built upon privileged
orders and classes. Since the American Republic,in the
New World,was not defective, party politics was unneces-
sary (see ibid., pp. 196-203).

31Ibid., pp. 11, 212-52 (see especially pp. 212-
l9);MichaeI Wallace, "Changing Concepts of Party in the
United States: New York, 1815-28," American Historical
Review, LXXXIV (December, 1968), 453:91, especially'
pp. 453-59, 484-88 (hereinafter cited as Wallace, "Chang-
ing Concepts of Party").

32Wallace, "Changing Concepts of Party," pp. 479-
81; James Milnor, Sermon Occasioned by the Death of His
ExcellencyDeWitt Clinton, Late Governor of the State of
New York. Preachediin St. George’s Ohurch, N.Y., On
Sunday, February 24)51828 TNew York: Giay and Bunce,
IBZ8), assim (hereinafter cited as Milnor, Sermon . . .
DeWitt Cl1nton).

 

 

 

33Spring, Danger and Hopg, pp. 5-6.

34Hall, ed., Forty Years, II, 326.

 

35William C. Brownlee, "An Appeal to the Patriot,"
Tracts, VII, No. 253, p. 11.

36Annual Report, N.Y., 1854, p. 112.

 

37Beecher, Lect. on Pol. Atheism, p. 340.

38William C. Brownlee, "An Appeal to the Patriot,"
Tracts, VII, No. 253, p. 11.

39Spring, Danger and Hopg, pp. 12-13.

40Shaw Livermore, The Typlight of Federalism: The
Qisintegration of the Federalist Part , 1816- 835 (Prince-
ton: Princeton University Press, 1962 , p. 42 (hereinafter
cited as Livermore, The Twilight of Federalism): Hofstad-
ter, The Idea of a Party System, pp.24l¥42; David Hackett
Fischer, The RevolutiEn of American Conservativism: The
Federalist Party in the Era of Jeffersonian Democracy

 

 

 

524

(New York: Harper and Row, 1965), pp. 203-15 (hereinafter
cited as Fischer, The Rev. of Am. C0ns.).

 

41John S. Stone, A Memoir of the Life of James
Milnor, D.D., Late Rector of St. Georgprs Church, New
York (New York: AmeriCan Tracti§5ciety, 1848), p.5ll4.
(Hereinafter cited as Stone, Milnor.)

 

 

42Silbey, The Shrine of Parpy, pp. 3-44, 85-97;
McCormick, The Sec. Am. Part 8 stem, p. 353; Sellers,
"Who were the S. Whigs?" pp. 33E-46.

43C. Bruce Steiger, "Abolitionism and the Presby-
terian Schism of 1837-48," Mississippi Valley Historical
Review, XXXVI (December, 1949), 39l¥4l4. (Hereinafter
c1ted as Steiger, "Abol. and the Presb. Schism.")

 

 

 

44Donald G. Mathews, Slaveryyand Methodism: A
Chapter in American Morality, 1780-1845 (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1967), pp. 246-90 (hereinafter
cited as Matthews, Slavery and Meth.); Donald G. Mathews,
"Orange Scott, the MethodiSt Evangelist as Revolutionary,"
in The Antislavery Vanguard: New Essgys on the Aboli-
tioniSts, edl by Martin Duberman (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1965), pp. 71-101.

 

 

 

 

 

45Louis Filler, The Crusade Against Slave , 1830-
60, Harper Torchbooks (New Yofk} Harper and Row, Pfih.,
I960), pp. 124-25. (Hereinafter cited as Filler, Crusade
Against Slavery.)

 

46John L. Thomas, The Liberator: William Lloyd
Garrison, A Biography (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.,
1963), pp. 328-37 (hereinafter cited as Thomas, The
Liberator); Filler, Crusade Against Slavery, pp.—l99-207.

 

 

 

 

47Roy F. Nichols, The Stakes of Power 1845-77
(New York: Hill and Wang, 1961), pp. 53-54, 57-64, 67-69,
84-88 (hereinafter cited as Nichols, The Stakes of Power);
Filler, Crusade Against Slavegy, pp. l99-207, 25l-53;
Clifford Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers: Moral Steward-
ship in the United States, 1800-60 (Newfirunswick, N.J.:
Rutgers University Press, 1960l] pp. 125-26 (hereinafter
cited as Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers).

 

 

 

 

48Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers, pp. 258, 280-
91; Annual Report, Bost., l860, p.l53.

 

 

525

49Letter of Lewis Tappan to L. A. Chameroozev,
Sec. of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society,
Oct. 29, 1854, in A Side-Light on Anglo-American Relations,
1839-58: Furnished 5 Correspondence ofiewis_Tappan and
Others with the British and Forei n Anti-Slavery Society,
ed. by Annie Heloise Abel and Franh J. Klingberg (Lan-
caster, Pa.: The Association for the Study of Negro Life
and History, Inc., Lancaster Press, Inc., 1927). p. 344
(hereinafter cited as Abel and Klingberg, eds., A Side-
Li ht on An .-Am. Rel.); Letter of William Jay to Rev.
R. S. CooE, Corresp. Sec. of Am. Tract Soc., February 14,
1853, in William Jay, Miscellaneous Writings on Slavegy
(Boston: John P. Jewett and Co., I853 , p. 632 (herein-
after cited as Jay, Misc. Writin 8); Annual Report, Bost.,
1860, pp. 149, 157-5 ; Gr1f an, T eir Brothersr Keepers,
pp. 91 ,97.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SOTO all Evangelical Christians: The Suppressed
Tract! and the RpjectedTractIGiven WOfd for WOrd as
Submittedto the PublishingCommittee oflthe Am. Trgpf:
Sociepyp» Read andJudgpy_Shall Ehe Societyor the Com-
mittee Rule (New York: John A. Gray, 1858), p. iii (here-
ihafter cited as The Suppressed Tract); "The American
Tract Society," New En lander, XVI (August, 1858), 634-35;
Report of the Spec1a Comm1ttee, Appointed at the Annual
Meetih of the American Tractޤociety, May77ll856. . .
pp. 3- (hereinafter cited as Report oflthe Sp. Com).
This report was also inserted into the Annual Report,
N.Y., 1857, pp. 225-44. The other men on this committee
includedlfiev. Thomas DeWitt, N.Y., Hon. William Jessup,
Montrose, Pa., Rev. Albert Barnes, Phil., Rev. Francis
Wayland, Providence, R.I., Rev. M. B. Anderson, Pres.
of the Univ. of Rochester, Rev. Gregory T. Bedell, N.Y.,
Rev. John S. Stone, Brookline, Mass., Rev. John N. McLeod,
N.Y., James Donaldson, N.Y., George H. Stuart, Phil.,
Rev. Joel Hawes, Hartford, Conn., Rev. Mark Hopkins,
Williamstown, Mass., Rev. Ray Palmer, Albany, and Rev.
S. S. Schmucker, Gettysburg, Pa. (see Annual Report, N.Y.,
1856, pp. 5-6).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

51The main tract was William Meade's "Scriptural
Duties of Masters: Comprising a Pastoral Address of the
Rt. Rev. William Meade, D.D., of Virginia." Although no
lover of slavery, Bishop Meade argued that there would
always be "much poverty, ignorance, suffering, and sin"
in this world. Furthermore, he did not expect to see "all
men free and equal in his day." He called upon the masters
to provide religious instruction for their slaves (see 3Eg_
Suppressed Tract, pp. 4-35, especially pp. 10, 27-28).
Jo n C. Young's tract, "The Duty of Masters: A Sermon
. . . ," was more comprehensive. He did not only call

526

upon the masters to provide religious instruction but
also to be kind, patient, and to enforce marriage vows
among the slaves (see The Suppressed Tract, pp. 39-60,
eSpecially pp. 46-48).

 

52Annual Report, N.Y., 1858, p. 5.

 

53Annual Report, Bost., 1860, p. 150.

 

S4Anti- -Slavery Tract, No. 16: The Unanimous
Remonstrance of the Fourth Congregational Church, Hart-
ford, Conn., against the Policy othhe Amer1can Tract
Sociepy on‘the Suhject ofSlavery([New York?] American
Antislavery Society,1855), p. l3 (hereinafter cited as
Unan. Remon. of the Fourth Cong. Church); The Tables
Turned: A Letter to the Congregational Assoc1ation or"
New Yofk . . . (Boston: Crocker and’Brewer, [1855?I),
pp. lO-ll (hereinafter cited as Tables Turned);

Letter of William Jay to Rev. R.-§. Cooke, February 14,
1853, in Jay, Misc. Writings, pp. 644-45. The other

two volumes included’Cotton Mather's Essays to Do Good,
and the memoirs of Mary Lundie Duncan. T e Society
defended its publication of Mather's Essays on the grounds
that it had followed a later translation. It defended its
revisions of Mary Lundie Duncan's memoirs on the grounds
that deleting the author's eulogistic remarks on the
British abolitionist, George Thompson, needed no apology
in the religious community, and that her description of
slavery in the West Indies was not true to fact. It fit
neither the West Indies nor the United States. Further-
more, the author, Mary Duncan's mother, had given her
consent. The consent, however, was given after the author
was informed that the biography might otherwise be with-

drawn (see Tables Turned, pp. 3-10, 11-14; Unan.
Remon. of the Fourth Con . Church, pp. 9-13).

55

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Report of the Sp; Com., p. 5.

 

56Theodore Davenport Bacon, Leonard Bacon, A
Statesman in the Church, ed. by Benjamin W. hacon (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1931), p. 446 (hereinafter
cited as Bacon, Leonard Bacon); Annual Report, N. Y., 1858,
p. 4; Griffin, Their Brothers Keepers, pp. 195F96.

 

 

 

 

57John Jay, The Proxy Bill and the Tract Society
. . (New York: Roe Lockwood andlSon, l859), pp.‘3¥4, 9.
(Hereinafter cited as Jay, The Proxy Bill and the Tract
Soc.)

 

 

527

58Bacon, Leonard Bacon, pp. 437-38; "Mr. Daniel

Lord and the Am. Tract Soc.,fl_New Englander, VII (August,
1859), 619, 623-24; "Responsibility in the Management of
Societies," New Englander, V (January, 1847), 28-40;
Griffin, Their BrothersTKeepers, p. 64.

 

 

 

 

59Unan. Remon. of the Fourth Cong. Church,
pp. 7-8; Jay, The Proxy Bill and the Tract Soc., pp. 19-20.

 

 

60Jay, The Proxy Bill and the Tract Soc., p. 29.

 

61Address of the Executive Committee of the Ameri-
can Tract SocietyL_BostonL_to the Friends pf the Societ
. . . TBoston: AmeriCan Tract Sociéty,l858), pp. 1- ;
Griffin, Their Brothers' Keepers, pp. 196-97.

 

 

 

62Lewis Tappan, The Life of Arthur Tappan (New
York: Hurd and Houghton, 1870), pp. 264e69 (hereinafter
cited as Tappan, Arthur Ta an); Jay, The Proxy Bill and
the Tract Soc., p. ; Bacon, Leonard Bacon, p. 446}
This thesis has been studied in depth by Philip S. Foner,
Business and Slavery: The New York Merchants and the
Irrepressible ConfliCt (Ohapel Hill: University cf'
North Carolina Press, 1941), passim (hereinafter cited
as Foner, Bus. and Slavery).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

63Leonard L. Richards, “Gentlemen of Property and
Standing," Anti-Abolition Mobs in JaEksonian America (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1970), pp. 144, 169.
(Hereinafter cited as Richards, "Gentlemen of Property and
Standing.")

 

 

 

 

64There is ample evidence to suggest that New
England was upset over its inability to control the Con-
gregationalist seat on the publishing committee. In 1856
the Boston group passed a resolution that the New York
Society annually elect one member from Boston's executive
committee to its own executive committee. This was not
acceptable to New York. New York maintained that as
long as a member's "christian character and ecclesiastical
standing were good among his own brethren," he remained
until he resigned or died (see [Seth Bliss], Letters to
the Members, Patrons and Friendsypf the Branch American
Tract Sociepy in Boston, . . . [3rd ed.; Boston: American
Tract Society, 1858], pp. l06409 [hereinafter cited as
[Bliss], Lettersl).

 

 

 

 

528

65Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, pp. 194-95, 197.

 

66Annual Report, N.Y., 1858, p. 5. The Fourth
Congregational Ehfirch had rejected this argument in 1855.
"Let us do evil that good may come," was a "Jesuitical
practice." Why not be silent on polygamy and marriage
so that tracts could circulate freely in Utah? (Unan.
Remon. of the Fourth Cong. Church, pp. 28-30).

 

 

 

67Adams had been impressed by the "absence of
mobs" in the South. Furthermore, he found fewer members
of that "irresponsible and low class" which were attracted
to "spiritual rappings, biology, second-adventism, Mor-
monism, and the whole span of errors" in the South than
in the North. The Southern planters were basically good
people who deSpised the slave trader. Furthermore, they
were on the verge of abolishing slavery when the mad
invectives of the abolishionists "put it back within its
innermost intrenchments" (Nehemiah Adams, A South-Side
View of Slavery; or Three Months at the South I3rd ed.;
RiChmond, Va.: A. Morris, 1855], pp. 44, 77-78, 115, 129
[hereinafter cited as Adams, A South-Side View Of Slaveryl).
On the pro-slavery argument in America see William S.
Jenkins, Pro-Slavery Thought in the Old South (Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1935); and
Erick McKitrick, Slavery Defended: The Views of the
Old South (EnglewoodlCliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall Inc.,
1963).

 

 

 

 

 

68Hall, ed., Forty Years, I, 37, 93.

 

69D. Stuart Dodge, compiler and ed., Memorials of
William E. Dodge (New York: Anson D. F. Randolph & Co.,
1887), p. 173 (hereinafter cited as Dodge, Memorials of
Wm. E. Dodge); Richard Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the
Nineteenth Century: _William E. Dod e (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1954), p. 198 hereinafter cited as
Lowitt, A Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth Cent.).

 

 

 

 

 

70John Johns, A Memoir of the Life ofthe Rt.
Rev. William Meade, D.D. . . . Tialtimore: Innes and Co.,
I8677. pp. 476-77 (hereinafter cited as Johns, William
Meade). On James Milnor's dislike for slavery see Stone,
Milnor, 191-93. On Bishop Alexander Viets Griswold's,
see Stone, Alexander Viets Griswold, p. 495.

 

 

 

529

71Tappan, Arthur Tappan, p. 219-20; .
Johns, William Meade, p. 203; Bar ara Cross, ed., Th
Autobiography ofLyman Beecher (2 vols.; Cambridge?_-’
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1961), II, 260
(hereinafter cited as Cross, ed., Lyman Beecher).

 

 

 

 

72Aileen S. Kraditor, Means and Ends in American
Abolitionism: iGarrison and His Critics on Strategy and’
Tactics, 1834-50 (New York: Pantheon Bks., 1969): PP. 39-
77.

 

 

 

73Early Fox, The American Colonization Society,
1817-1845, Series XXXVII, Johns Hopkins studies in His-
torical and Political Science, No. 3 (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins Press, 1919), p. 182. (Hereinafter cited as Fox,
The Am. Col. Soc.)

 

 

 

74Adams, A South-Side View of Slavepy, p. 128;
Spring, Pers. Rem., II, I78.

 

 

 

5George M. Fredericksen, The Inner Civil War:
Northern Intellectuals and the Critis of the Union (New
York: Harper anleow, 1965), p. 56.

 

 

76Annual ReporE, N.Y., 1865, p. 64. A similar
view was expressedby Joseph’T. Duryea, pastor of the
Collegiate Reformed Dutch Church and a supporter of the
Tract Society. He concluded that the War had taught
Americans to "understand and appreciate . . . the sanctity
of government. . . . Obedience to its laws . . . was con-
formity to the will of God, disobedience . . . was rebel-
lion" (Joseph T. Duryea, An Oration Commemorative of the
Restoration of the Union . . . [Philadelphiaz McCalla
andStavely, Printers, 1866l) p. 35 [hereinafter cited as
Duryea, An OrationJL. Duryea was one of the speakers at
the 1863 annual meeting of the Tract Society (Annual
Report, N.Y., 1863, pp. 161-63).

 

 

 

 

 

77On the African Colonization Society's emphasis
upon preserving the Union see Fox, The Am. Col. Soc.,
p. 127. On Garrison's secessionism see Thomas,The
Liberator, pp. 328-37, and Walter M. Merrill, AgEihSt
Wihd and Tide: A Biography of William Llo d Garrison
(Cambridge: Harvard UniversityPress, 196%), pp. 255L07
(hereinafter cited as Merrill, Against Wind and Tide).

 

 

530

78Annual Report, N.Y., 1856, p. 8; Annual Report,
N.Y.L 1854, p. 60? Annual Report, N.Y., 1855, p. 42;
Annual Report, N.Y.,_1857, pp. 35lO;IBliSQ, Letters, p. 5.

 

 

 

 

79Johns, William Meade, pp. 490-92.

 

80William E. Dodge, Influence of the War on Our
Natural Prosperity . . . (New York: Wm. C. Marten, 1869),
p. 4 (see also Spring, Pers. Rem., II, 178).

 

 

 

811n 1864 Dodge suggested to Justice David Davis,
Abraham Lincoln's unofficial campaign manager, that slaves
who had been freed by Union Armies or who escaped to
freedom prior to the signing of a peace treaty should
retain their freedom. But the abolition of slavery should
not be made a prerequisite for peace (see Lowitt, A
Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth Century, p. 222).

 

82William Carus, ed., Memorials of phe Right

Reverend Charles Pettit McIlvaine, D. D., D. C. L., Late
Blshop of Ohio in the Protestant Episcopal Church ot_the
United States (London: Elliott Stock, 18827, p. 251
(hereinafter cited as Carus, ed., Memorials of . .
McIlvaine). Duryea argued that the North had fought

solely to preserve the Government supreme in its
unity. . . ." He also went on to explain that slavery
had been a major factor in the disruption of the union.
A unified country needed homogeneous institutions. How-
ever, two different civilizations had developed. The
"principle" of the Northern government was "democratic,"
while that of the slave states was "autocratic." The
method of the former system was "republican"; the method
of the latter was "despotic" (Duryea, An Oration, pp. 31-
33).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

83David Brion Davis, "The Emergence of Immediatism
in British and American Antislavery Thought," Mississippi
Valley Historical Review, LIX (September, 1962), 213 (See
also Martin Dfiberman, 1"The Northern Response to Slavery,"
in The Antislavery Vanguard: New Essays on the Aboli-
tionists, ed. by Martin Duberman [Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1965], pp. 395, 402).

 

 

 

84Howard Zinn, "Abolitionists, Freedom-Riders, and
the Tactics of Agitation," in The Antislavery Vanguard,
ed. by Duberman, pp. 434-37.

85Letter to Rev. W. Carus, Cinci., Christmas Eve,
1860, in Carus, ed., Memorials of . . . McIlvaine,
pp. 210-11.

CHAPTER X

CONCLUSION

The Civil War serves as a convenient point for
terminating this study on the American Tract Society.
Many of the problems which had brought the Society into
existence in 1825 and which had received the Society's
attention during the Jacksonian era were no longer issues
after Appomatox. The Christian stewards had endeavored
to preserve an evangelical, Protestant republic; by 1865
America was well on its way to becoming a pluralistic
nation. The Society had been organized, in part, to save
the West; by the outbreak of the Civil War it was obvious
that the Mississippi Valley had been tamed. The Christian
stewards had worked tirelessly to stave off the forces of
sectionalism caused by Slavery; by 1865 these had been
settled on the battle field and by the Emancipation
Proclamation.

The managers of the Tract Society had been faced
with the problem of coping with forces which were altering
American religious, economic, social, and political insti-

tutions. One possible solution would have been to reject

531

532

all changes outright. This the Society refused to do.
This is evident in its religious views. The managers of
the Tract Society rejected the notion that America Should
become a pluralistic nation. They made no provision for
infidelity, deism, or Roman Catholicism within the Repub-
lic. Nevertheless, the Tract Society was not content
merely to turn the clock back when it came to religion.
They accepted voluntarism--a1though often reluctantly--,
and they replaced God's sovereignty with human ability.
Nor were the Christian stewards completely opposed
to all of the demographic and economic changes taking place
in Jacksonian America. When it came to urbanization,
industrialization, and the expansion of the West, the
Tract Society accepted them, providing they could be
recreated into its own image. Technology and the cities
were to be Christianized; the West was to be domesticated.
Despite the fact that the Tract Society did not
oppose all change, many of its views were noticeably out
of date. This was true of its economic policies. The
Christian stewards were enamored with technology; several
linked it to Protestantism and the millennium. But they
failed to understand the implications of industrialization
for American society. The transportation and industrial
revolutions led to the growth of the factory system and
large corporations. These corporations were difficult to

control, especially when it came to the Sabbath laws.

533

Industrialization and big business also had implications
for the workingman. They threatened the status and inde-
pendence of the craftsman and placed the employee in an
impossible situation when it came to individual bargaining
between himself and his employer.

The Tract Society's solution for the worker and
the pauper was self-help. This was consistent with its
philosophy of "whosoever will." It was also in keeping
with its assumption that the key to social reform was to
transform the individual. Such a view did not envision a
drastic reordering of society. Instead of forming unions,
the workers Should be diligent, sober, and thrifty.
Furthermore, they should be faithful in stewardship,
abstain from liquor, and honor the Sabbath. These instruc-
tions were preached to the destitute as well. Only in
their case the Tract Society added discriminating charity
and prayer. And yet, as the 1856 Report of the New York
City Tract Society suggested, this did not solve the prob-
lem of low wages.

When it came to the slave the Society's philOSOphy
of self—help was a complete failure. At best it could
offer the Negro liberty and equality in Christ along with
the hope that somehow, someday, slavery might be "happily
terminated." But such a termination should be achieved
without severing the Union. Once Secession became a

reality the Tract Society was forced to realize that this

534

was impossible. Ironically for the Tract Society, the
reformer's most striking victory by 1865 was the emancipa-
tion of the slave. Yet the Tract Society had done its
utmost to avoid the divisive topic of slavery. As far as
the Tract Society was concerned, the greatest moral issue
facing ante—bellum America had been won by default.

Nevertheless, despite these criticisms, it would
be erroneous to classify the American Tract Society as a
total failure. The Society was first and foremost a
religious organization; and it was in the religious realm
that the Society achieved its greatest successes. It had
been born in a period when many Protestants were pessimis—
tic over the future of organized Christianity in America.
The Congregational, Presbyterian, and Episcopalian churches
faced disestablishment with apprehension. The Sabbath
laws were no longer being enforced. The frontier and the
cities seemed to teem with individuals bent on throwing off
all religious restraints. But by mid-century it had become
obvious that the benevolent societies, revivalists, and
churches had done their job. The future of organized
Christianity was assured.

The Tract Society's stress upon unity also left
its imprint on the American religious scene. The managers
of the benevolent societies, like the revivalists, were
practical men. They placed little emphasis on theological

niceties which could prove divisive. Consequently,

535

Christian unity was often achieved at the expense of
theology. The Christian stewards utilized doctrinal state-
ments simply stated or defined as points around which all
evangelical Protestants could rally. The benevolent
societies did much to foster a climate in which inter-
denominationalism could flourish in the United States.

It would be incorrect to interpret the managers
of the Tract Society as a tiny minority of outdated
Federalists bent on turning the clock back. Many Americans
viewed with apprehension the widespread religious, social,
and political changes. The Christian stewards shared a
commonly held concern that industrialization, wealth,
immigration, and population migration might undermine the
foundations of the Republic. The Society's fears that
excessive individualism, political partisanship, and
geographical sectionalism would destroy the Union were
not atypical for its day. Its uneasiness over an
increasing urban working force, often uneducated, unchurched
and dissatisfied, was understood by many. And certainly,
its solutions for poverty--sobriety, thrift, and indus-
triousness-—were also advocated by many middle-class and
rural Americans during this time period.

The members of the Tract Society were also
influenced by the Spirit of Optimism prevalent in nine-
teenth-century America. Several recent studies have

demonstrated that optimism and pessimism were both

536

prevalent in Jacksonian America.1 The Society's optimism

was especially evident in its millennial and nationalistic
views. Its members were confident that the Republic had

a unique mission to perform for all mankind. They were
convinced that America's experiment in republicanism had
world-wide ramifications. They believed that the Repub-
lic had been accorded a special place in God's millennial
timetable. In all probability, the Civil War did much to
shatter these hopes. As Bishop McIlvaine pointed out,
their millennial views made no provision for "the cup of
tribulation being soon passed" to America.

The Tract Society's millennial hopes made national
unity imperative. In order for the Republic to fulfill
its destiny, the Union had to be preserved. Religious
sectarianism, political partisanship, and sectionalism
could hamper the nation in carrying out its mission.

Even the Slave had to be sacrificed on the altar of unity.

The Tract Society not only reflected but also
moulded public opinion. Its tracts, almanacs, magazines,

Tract Primers, and volumes circulated in areas where

 

churches, schools, libraries, and newspapers were either
scarce or non-existent. Its tract visitors, agents, and
colporteurs were instrumental in establishing Sunday
schools and in promoting public schools. The Christian
stewards shared the Puritans' aversion for ignorance and

illiteracy.

 

 

537

The Society did its utmost to advance the cause of
education, be it at the elementary or college level.2 Its
members recruited urban children for the day schools.

Many of its clerical supporters had had the benefit of a
college education. Several college presidents and seminary
professors actively supported the Tract Society. This
emphasis upon a college education was not in keeping with
the anti-intellectual tendencies of the Jacksonian era.3

And yet, despite its support for educational
institutions at all levels, the managers of the Tract
Society shared many of the anti-intellectual tendencies of
its day. This was evident in its wholesale condemnation
of novels and the theater. It was especially evident in
the Society's publications. The tracts and magazines
stressed simplicity and action instead of theological
profundity and reflection. The organizers of the Society
were practical men who looked first and foremost for
results. Consequently, their publications were addressed
to the reader's heart and will rather than to his intel-
lect.

The importance of the American Tract Society for
the historian lies not in its novel phiIOSOphies, radical
blue-prints for reforms, or in its profound theology.

Nor is the Society important for its astute criticisms of

the culture of its day. The importance of the Tract

Society is found in the fact that it reflected the fears

538

and aspirations of a large segment of Americans in Jackso-
nian America. Its solutions for social and economic
problems may have been somewhat on the conservative side
even for its day. And yet its very conservativism
reflected a note of optimism. Man could usher in the

millennium without drastically reordering society.

FOOTNOTES--CHAPTER X

lMarvin Meyers, The Jacksonian Persuasion Polipics
and Belief (Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 1957);
Fred Somkin, Unquiet Eagle, Memory and Desire in the Idea
of American Freedom, 1815-1860—XIthaca, N.Y.: Cornell
University Press, 1967).

 

2One commonly held assumption is that the Common
School Movement in ante-bellum America was often Opposed
by the clergy. This is emphasized by Rush Welter (see
Popular Education and Democratic Thought in America [New
York: Columbia University Press, 1962], pp. 103-09).
Clifford Griffin's study also leaves the reader with the
impression that the Sunday School Union's Opposition to
Horace Mann was typical of the Christian Stewards (see
Their Brothers' Keepers, Moral Stewardship in the United
States, 1800-1865 [New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers Univer-
sity Press,ll960], pp. 136-39). This was not true, how-
ever, of all the managers of the Tract Society. Reverend
Warren Fay, a member of the Society's publishing committee,
was one of Horace Mann's most ardent supporters (see
Raymond B. Culver, Horace Mann and Religion in the Massa-
chusetts Public Schools [New Haven, Conn.: Yale University
Press, 1919], pp. 65-66, 104).

 

 

3On the anti-intellectual tendencies of the
Jacksonian period see Richard Hofstadter, Anti-
Intellectualism in American Life, Vintage Book (New York:
Random House, 1962), pp. 81-106, 145-71.

 

539

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

I. Publications of the Tract Societies

American Tract Society (Boston). Address of the Executive
Committee of the American Tract SOEiety, Boston,
to the Friends of the Society: With the Re ort
of the DiStribution Committee. Boston: Amer1can
Tract Society,1858.

 

. American Tract Magazine, III (September, 1821);
VI (February, l83l); X (July, 1835); XI (February,
1836); XII (September ,1837).

. Annual Report of the American Tract Society
Presented at Boston. Vols. IX, XII, II-XXI I,
XXVII-XXIX, xxxx-XXXV, XXXVII-XL, XLII, XLVI-LI.

Andover and Boston, 1823, 1826, 1836-1837, 1841-
1843, 1845-1849, 1851-1854, 1856, 1860-1865.

 

 

 

 

. A Brief Histopy of the American Tract Society,
Instituted at BostonLy1814, and its Relations to
the American TractJ Sociepy at New York, Inst1tuted
1825. Boston: T. R. Marvin, 1857.

 

. The Christian Almanac(k). Vols. I-II. [Boston]:
Lincoln and Edmands, 1821-1824, 1826, 1831, 1833-
1835.

 

American Tract Society (New York). Annual Report Of the
American Tract Society, Instituted at New York,
1825. Vols. I-XIII, XV-XVIIII, XX-XXXIII, XXXV,
XXXVIII-XL. New York: American Tract Society,
1826-1838, 1840-1843, 1845-1858, 1860, 1863-1865.

 

. Child's Peper. Vols. I-II (1852-1856).

 

 

 

. The Christian Almanac for Michi an, For the
Year of Our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Vol. II.Betroit, 1838-l840.

540

541

American Tract Society (New York). The Christian Almanac

 

for the Westepp District, For the_zear of our Lord
and SaviOur, Jesus Christ. Vol. II. Utica,
1828-1830, 1832.

. The (Illustrated) Family Christian Almanac for

 

the United States. New York: AmericaniTract
Society,l842-1843, 1845-1846, 1849-1853, 1855-
1856, 1859-1861.

 

. A Letter to the Congregational Association of

 

 

New York} [New York]: American Tract Society,
I855.

 

. The Picture Alphabet: In Prose and Verse.

 

New York: American Tract Society, n.d.

. Principles and Facts of the American Tract

 

Society. n.p., n.d.
. Report of the Special Committee, A ointed at

 

the AnnualMeeting of the American Tract SOO1ety,
May 7, 1857, to Inguire Inpo and Review the Pro-
ceedings oflthe Society's Executive Committee.
n.p., n.d.

. To the Evangelical Ministers and Churches in

 

the United States, COOperating With the American
Tract SoOiety. New York: American Tract SoOiety,
1848.

 

Abbott,

Edwards,

. Tracts of the American Tract SocietyeeGeneral
Series. l2ivols. New York: American Tract
Society, n.d.

John, S.C. The Mother at Homeior the_§rinciples
of Maternal Dut . New York: American Tract
Society, [1855?i.

 

Jonathan. The Treatise on Religious Affections,
by the Late Rev. OOhathan EdWards, A.M. (Somewhat
Abridged) and Joseph Alleine, Alarm to Unconverted
Sinners. EvangelicalPamily Library, VOl. III.
New York: American Tract Society, n.d.

 

Gallaudet, T. H. Scripture Biograppy for the Young with

Critical Illustratiens and Practical Remarks.
Vol. XXV: Adam to Joseph. New York: American
Tract Society, n.d.

542

New York City Tract Society. Annual Report of the New
York City Tract Society. VOls. I-IV, VII, X-XV,
XX-XXI, XXIII-XXIV, XXVII-XXX, XXXII, XXXIV-XXXIX.
New York, 1828-1831, 1834, 1836-1841, 1846-1847,
1849-1850, 1853-1856, 1858, 1860-1865.

 

II. Publications of Society Members and Supporters

Abel, Annie Heloise, and Klingberg, Frank J., eds. A Side-
Light on Anglo-American Relations, 1839-1858:
FurniShedhythe Correspondence of Lewis Tappan
and Others with the British and Foreign Anti-
Slavery Society. Lancaster, Pa.: The Associ-
ation for the Study of Negro Life and History
Inc., Lancaster Press, Inc., 1927.

 

Adams, Nehemiah. Our Family of States: Oration Delivered
before the Phi Beta Kappa Societyyin Amherst Col-
lege. Boston: James Monroe and Co.,—1861.

. A Sermon Preached to the Congre ation at the
Essex Street Church, October 31, l 52, the
Sabbath after theilnterment of Hon. Daniel Web-
ster. Boston: George CI Rand, I852.

 

. A South-Side View of§lavery; Or, Three Months
at the South. 3rd ed} RiEhmond, Va.: A. Morris,
1855.

 

 

Adams, William. Christianity and Civil Government: A
Discourse Delivered on Sabpath Evenin , November 10,
1850. New York: Charles Scribner,ll

 

Anti Slavery Tract No. 16: The Unanimous Remonstrance of
the Fourth Congregational Church, Hartford: Conn.,
Against the Policy of the American Tract Society
on the Subject ofSlavery. n. p.: American Anti-
slavery Society, 1855.

 

[Bacon, Leonard]. "Responsibility in the Management of
Societies." New Englander, V (January, 1847),
28-40.

Beecher, Lyman. Beecher' 5 Works. Vol. I: Lectures on
Political Atheism andlKindred Subjects; Togethe er
With Six Sermons on Intemperance. Dedicated to
the Workingmen of the United States. Boston:
John P. Jewett and Co., 1852..

 

 

543

Beecher, Lyman. The Bible a Code of Laws; A Sermon,
Delivered in Park Street Church, haston, Sept. 3,
18l7, at the Ordination ofer. Sereno EdWards
Dwight, As Pastor of Their ChurCh; andlof Messrs.
EliSha P. Swift, Allen Graves, John NiChols,
Levi Parsons, and Daniel Buttrick, as Miséibnaries
to the Heathen. Boston: Flagg andahuld, 1818.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. A Plea for the West. 3rd ed. Cincinnati:
Truman ahd Swift, 1836.

 

 

. A Reformation of Morals Practicable and Indis-
pensible: A Sermon Delivered at New Haven on the
Evening of October 27, 1812. 2nd ed. hhhdover:
Flagg ahthould, 1811.

 

 

 

 

. A Sermon, Delivered at Wolcott, Sept. 21, 1814,
at the Installation of the Rev. John Keyes, To the
Pastoral Care of the Church in that ilhce. Andove :
Flagg and Gould, 1815.

 

 

 

 

Beeman, Nathan 8. "Collegiate and Theological Education
at the West." The American National Preacher,
XXI (March, 1847i} 53-72.

 

[Bliss, Seth]. Letters to the Members, Patronsggnd Friends
of the Branch American Tract Society in Boston,
Instituted 18l4; andhto those of the Natibnal
Societyithew York, Instituted l825,by the
Secretary of the Boston Societ . 3rd ed.
Boston:’hAmerican Tract Soc1ety, 1858.

 

 

 

 

Chase, Philander. Defense of Kenyon College. Columbus,
Ohio: Olmstead and Bailhacke, 1831.

. Star in the West, or Kenyon College.
[Columhus§l, Ohio: n.p.,'1828.

 

 

DeWitt, Thomas. A Discourse Delivered in the North
Reformed Church, in the City of New York, on
the Last Sahbath in Au ust, 1856. New York:
Board of’PubliCation 0% the Reformed Protestant
Dutch Church, 1857.

Dodge, William E. Influence oftthe War on Qgr National
Prosperity: A Lecture Delivered in Baltimore,
Md. on Monday Evening, March 13th, 1835. New
York: William C: Marten, 1869.

. Old New York: A Lecture, Delivered at Associ-
ation Hall, April 27th,ll886, upon the InvitatiOn
of Merchants and Other Citizens of New YorK}
New York: ’fiodd and Mead andCo., 188UT—__—

 

544

Duryea, Joseph T. Civil Liberty: A Sermon Preached on
the National Thanksgiving DayLAugust 6 1836.
New York: Jehn A. Gray and Green{—l .

Dwight, W. T. Address Delivered at the Forty-fifth Anni-
yersary of the American Tract Society, in the
Tremont Temple, Boston, Wednesday Evening,
May 25,*1859. Boston: American Tract
Society, 1859.

 

Edwards, Justin. The Temperance Manual. New York:
American Tract Society, [1847?].

 

Jay, John. Miscellaneous Writings on Slavery. Boston:
John P. Jewett and Co., 1853.

 

Jay, John. The ProxyBill and the Tract Societ : A
Reply to the Attacks of the Christian Intelli-
gencer and the Journal of'Commerce, uppn the
Bill Passedlby the Assembly Giving to Life Mem-
bers of Chafitable Societies the Right to Vote
by Proxy. New York: Roe Lockwood and Son, I859.

 

 

McIlvaine, Charles P. A Series of Evangelical Discourses,
Selected for the Use of Families andihestitute
Congregations. 2 vols. Columhus, Ohio: Isaac
N. Whiting,—1848.

 

. "Sermon CCCXVII. By the Right Rev. Charles P.
McIlvaine, D.D., Bishop of the Diocese of Ohio:
Delivered before the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity,

of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United
States of America in General Convention, at the
Consecration of the Rev. Alfred Lee, D.D., to

the Eipiscopate of the Diocese of Delaware, in

St. Paul's Chapel, New York, on Tuesday, October 12,
A.D. 1841." The American National Preacher, XVI
(February, 1842T, 28-40.

 

 

. The Work of Preaching Christ. A Char e:
Deliveredlto the Clergy of theifiiocese 0 Ohio,
at Its Forty:§ixth Annual Convention, in St.
Paul‘s Church, Akron, on the 3rd of June, I863.
New Yofk: Anson D. F. Randolph,186l.

 

 

 

 

 

Mason, Erskine. An Evangelical Ministry, the Securityof
a Nation: A Sermon Preached inCBehalf of the
American Home Missionary SoEiety, in the Bleecker
Street Church, New York,—35nuary2, l848. New
York: Wm. Osborne,il848.

 

 

Meade, William. 01d Churches, Ministers and Families of
Virginia. 2 vOls. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippin-
cott, I861.

 

 

Miller,

Milnor,

545

Samuel. Letters from a Father to His Son in C01-
le e. Repr. Philadelphia: Preshyterian Bd. of
Pu ., 1852.

 

James. Oration on Masonry, Delivered at St.
John's Church,iin the City ofiPhiladelphia, at
the—Reguest of the Right WorshipfulGrand Lodge
of Pennsylvania, on St. thnis Day, June 24,*1811.
New York: Bradford andlhskeep, andlnskeep and
Bradford, 1811.

 

 

 

. Plea for the American Colonization Society: A

 

SermonT—Preachedin Stl Ghorge's Church, New York,
on Sundaynyuly9, 1826} New York: John P. Haven,
1826.

 

 

. Sermon, Occasioned by the Death of His Excel-

 

lengy DeWitt Clinton, Late Governor of the~State
of New York. Preached in St. George'siChuréh,
N.Y. on Sunday, Fehruary24, 1828. New York:
Gray and—Bunce,l828.

 

"Mr. Daniel Lord and the American Tract Society." New

Englander, XVII (August, 1859), 618-31.

 

Schmucker, Samuel. The American Lutheran Church, His-

Spring,

 

torically, Doctrinally, and Practically Delin-
eated, in Severgl Occasional Discourses. 5th ed.
Philadelphia: E. W. Miller, 1852.

 

 

Gardiner. The Contrast Between Good and Bad Men,
Illustratedhythe Biogrgphy and Truths of the
Bible. 2 vols. New Yor : M. W. Wbod (Publisher),
I855.

 

. The Danger and Hope of the American People:

 

A DiScourse on the Day of the Annual Thanksgiving,
in the State oleew York. New York: John F.
Trow, l843.

 

. Essays on the Distinguishing Traits of Christian

 

Character. New York: Jonathan iéavitt, 1829.

 

. Hints to Parents: A Sermon on the Religious

 

Education ofiChildren. New York: iJEnathan
LeaVitt, 1§§3.

 

 

. Influence: A Quarter-Century Sermon, Preached

 

 

in_Behalf:of the American Tract Society, in the
Reformedifiutch Church, Lafayette Place, New
York, Mayi5, 1850. New York} American Tract
Society, 1850.

 

 

546

The Tables Turned: A Letter to the Congregational Associ-
ation of New York, Reviewing the Report onTheir
Committee 05:“The Relation of'the American Tract
Society to the Subject ofSlavery“"hya Congre-
gationalist Director. —Boston: Crodker and
Brewster, n.d.

Tappan, Lewis. Is it Right to be Rich? n.p.: Anson D.
Randolph and—Co., 1869.

To all Evangelical Christians: The Suppressed Tract! and
the Rejected Tract! Given Word for Word as Suh-
mitted to the Publishing Committee of theyAm.
Tract Society. Read and Judge, Shall the Sgciety
or the Committee Rule? New York: John A. Gray,
1858.

III. Autobiographies and Biogrgphies

Alexander, James W. The Life of Archibald Alexander, '“
First Professor in the TheologicaliCeminary at
Princeton, New Jersey. New York: iCharles
Scrihner, 1856.

American Tract Society. Dr. Hallock's Golgen Weddipg:
Fifty Years in the Tract Society, Septemher 26,
1822--September 26,*l87?. New York: American
Tract Soéiety, n.dl

 

Bacon, Theodore Davenport. Leopard Bacon,A Statesman in
the Church. Edited by Benjamin W. Bacon. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1931.

 

 

Biographical Directory of the American Congress, 1774-
1961: The Continental Congress, September 5,
1774Lto October 21, 1778land the Congress 9: the
UnitedCStateshhrom the First to the Eighty-Sixth
Congress, March 4, 1789, to January 3,4l96l,
Inclusive. Washington, D.C.: Governmenthrinter's
Office,’l961.

 

 

Carus, William, ed. Memorials of the Right Reverend
Charles Pettit McIlvaine, D.fi., D.C.L., Late
Bishop o§;Ohio in the_Protestapt Epi§Copa1
Church of the United States. London: E iot
Stock, 1882.

 

Chambers, Talbot W. Memoir of the Life and Character of
the Late Hon. Theodore Frelipghuysen, LL.D. New
York: Harper and Bros., 1863.

 

 

547

Chase, Philander. Bishop Chase's Reminiscences: An Auto-
biography: Second Edition: Comprising a Histppy
of the Principal Events in the AuthorisiLife to
A.D. 1847. 2 vdls.liBost5n: James B.iDow, 1848.

 

Cross, Barbara M., ed. The Autobiography of Lyman Beecher.
2 vols. Cambridge: Belknap Press of the Harvard
University Press, 1961.

 

Dexter, Franklin Bowditch. Biographical Sketches of the
Graduates of Yale College, with Annals of the
College History, l70l:l815. 6 vols. New York:
Henry Holt and Co., 188541919.

 

 

Dictionary of American Biogrgphy, under the Auspices of
the American Counéil’of Learned Soéieties.
2O vols. New York: C. Scribner, 1928-1936.

Dodge, D. Stuart, compiler and ed. Memorials of William
E. Dodge. New York: Anson D. F. Randolph and*
Co., 1887.

 

 

 

Durfee, Calvin. Williams Biogrgphical Annals: With an
Introductionby Rev. Genaeus Prince, D.D.
Boston: Lee and Shepherdjil87l.

Gammell, William. "Nicholas Brown." Barnard's Journal
of Education, III (June, 1857), 291-307.

 

 

Hall, John, ed. Forty_Years' Familiar Letters of James
W. Alexander, D.D.,Eentributing, with the Notes,
A Memoir of His Life. 2 vols. New York: iCharles
Scribner,’l86U.

 

 

 

Hallock, William A. "Light and Love": A Sketch of the
Life and Labors of the Rev. JGStin Edwapgs, D.D.,
the Evangelical Pastor; the AdVOcate of Tem erance,
The Sabbath, and theihible. New York: American
Tract Society, 1855.

 

 

 

 

. Memoir ofHarlan Page; or_the Powe£_of Prayer
and Personal Effort fit the Souls of Individuals.
New York: AmeriCan Tract Society, 1835.

 

 

 

 

548

Hedges, James B. The Browns of Providence Plantations:
The Nineteenth Centugy. Providence, R. .:
Brown University Press, 1968.

 

 

Johns, John. A Memoir of the Life of the Right Rev.
William Meade, D.D., BiShOpof the Protestant
Episc. Church in the Diocese ofIVirginia. ‘With
a MemorialSermon’by the Rev. WilliamSparrow,
212' Baltimore: ’Ihnes and Co., Pub., 1867.

 

 

 

 

Knight, H. C. Memorial of Rev. Wm. A. Hallock, D.D.,
First Secretary of the AmeriCan Tract Society.
New York: AmeriCan Tract Society, n.d.

 

 

Lowitt, Richard. A Merchant Prince of the Nineteenth
Century: William E. Dodge. New York: COlumbia
University Press, 1954.

 

 

 

 

Lynd, S. W. Memoir of the Rev. William Stau hton, D.D.
Boston: Lincoln Edmands and Co., I834.

Mead, Sidney E. Nathaniel William Taylor, 1786-1858:
A Connecticut Liberal. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, I942.

 

 

Mears, David 0. Life of Edward Norris Kirk, D.D. Boston:
Lockwood Brooks and Co., 1877.

 

Morse, James King. Jedidiah Morse: A_Qhampion of New
England Orthodoxy. New York: Columhia University
Press, 1939.

 

 

The National Cyclopedia of American Biography, Being the
History of the United Ctates as Illustrated in
the Lives of Founders, Builders, and Defenders
of the Republic and Men and Women Who are Doin
the Work’and'Moulding the—Thought of the Present
Time. 40 vols. New York: idames and White Co.,
I§§§L1955.

 

 

 

 

Prentiss, George L. A Sermon, Preached in the Mercer
Street Church, on the Occasion of the Death of
Anson G. Phelps, oni§abbath Morning,fiecember 11,
I883, with Some Extracts from His Journal. New
York: Cdehn A. Cray, 1853.

 

 

 

Purple, Samuel. "Biographical Sketch of the Life of Dr.
John Stearns." n.p., n.d.

Sketch of the_Life and Character of George N. Briggs,
Late Governor of Massachusetts. New York:
Ameriean Tract Society, n.d.

 

 

549

Sommers, Charles G. Memoir of the Rev. John Stanford,
D.D., Late Chaplain to Humane and Criminal
Institutions in the City of New York. New
York: Swords, Stanford and Co., 1835.

 

Sprague, William B. Annals of the American Pulpit; or
Commemorative Notices of VariousiDenominations,
from the Eerly Settlement of the Country to the
CldSe of the Year, 1850, with Historical Ihtro-
ductidns. 6 vols. New York: thert Carter and
Brothers, 1857-1861.

 

 

 

 

Spring, Gardiner. Personal Reminiscences of the Life and
Times of Gardiner Spring, Pastor of the Brick
Presbyterian Church,_in the City of New Yggk.

2 vOls. New York: Charles Scribner and Co.,
1866.

 

 

Stone, John S. A Memoir of the Life of James Milnor,
D.D., Late Rector of St. GeorgersJChurch, New
York. New York: American Tract Society, 1848.

 

. Memoir of the Life of the Rt. Rev. Alexander
Viets Griswold, D.D.,iBishep of the Prot. Episc.
Church in the Eastern Diocese. Philadelphia:
Stavely and McCalla,l1844.

 

 

 

Tappan, Lewis. The Life of Arthur Tappan. New York:
Hurd and Houghton, 1878.

 

[Tappan, Lewis]. Memoir of Mrs. Sarah Tappan: Taken in
Part from the Home Missionary Magazine, of
November, 1828, and Printed for DistributiOn
among Her Descendants. New York: West andi
Trow,i8rinters, 1834.

 

 

 

Van Santvoord, C. Memoirs of Eliphalet Nott, D.D., LL.D.,

For Sixty-Two Years President of Union College.
New York: d§heldon and Co., I878.

 

Wilder, S. V. S. Records from the Life of S. V. S. Wilder.
New York: American Tract Society, 1865.

 

Wyatt-Brown, Bertram. Lewis Tappan and theEvangelical
War against Slavery. Cleveland: Case Western
Reserve University Press, 1969.

 

 

550

IV. Selected List of Secondary Sources

 

Albion, Robert G. The Rise of New York Pgrt, 1815-1860.
New York: Charles Scribners and Sons, 1939.

 

Baird, Robert. The Christian RetrOSpect and Register:
A Summary of the Scientific, MoralandRéligious
Proggess oflthe First Half of the Nineteenth
Century. New York: M. W. Dodd, 1851.

 

 

 

. Religion in America; or an Account of the
Origin, Progress, Relation to the State, and
Present Condition of the Evangelical Churches
in the United States: With Notices of the
Unevangelical Denominations. New York: Harper
and Bros., I844.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Becker, Dorothy G. "The Visitor to the New York City
Poor, 1843-1920." Social Services Review,
XXXV (December, 1961), 382-96.

 

Benson, Lee. The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy: New
York as a Test Case. New York: Atheneum, 1966.

 

 

Berthoff, Rowland. "The American Social Order: A Con-
servative Hypothesis." American Historical
Review, LXV (April, 1960), 485-514.

 

Billington, Ray Allen. The Protestant Crusade, 1800-1860:
A Study of the Origins of American NativiSm.
Quadrangle Papeibacks. Chicago: Quadrangle
Books, 1938.

 

 

Bodo, John R. The Protestant Clemgy and Public Issues,
1812-1848. Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1954.

Bremner, Robert H. American Philanthrop . Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, I968.
. From the Depths: The Discovery of Poverty in

the United States. New York: New York University
Press, 1956.

 

 

 

Bridges, William B. "Family Patterns and Social Values in
America, 1825-1875." American Quarteriy, XVII
(September, 1965), 3-11.

 

Bruchey, Stuart. The Roots of American Economic Growth,
1607-1861: An Essayin Social Causation. New
York: Harper andRow, I968.

 

 

 

551

Calhoun, Arthur W. A Social History of the American

Family. 3 vols. New York: Barnes andidble,
- 9190

 

Calhoun, Daniel H. Professional Lives in Ameriee:
Structure and Aspirationsye1750-1850. Cam-
bridge: Harvard University Press, 1965.

 

 

Cole, Charles C. The Social Ideas of the Northern Evan-
gelists, 1826-1860. New York: Columbia Uni-
versity Press, 1954.

 

 

Coll, Blanchard D. "The Baltimore Society for the Pre-
vention of Pauperism." Social Services Review,
XXXV (December, 1961), 382—96.

 

Commons, John R., et a1. History of Labor in the United
States. 4 vols. New York: MacMillan Co., 1918-
1935.

 

Cross ,Whitney R. The Burned-Oveeristrict: The Social
and Intellectual Historyof_§nthusiastic Religion
in Western New York, 1800-1850. Ithaca, N.Y.:
Cornell University Press, 1950.

 

Crouthamel, James L. "The Newspaper Revolution in New
York, 1830-1846." New York Histomy, LXIV

 

Davis, Lance Edwin, and Payne, Peter Lester. "From
Benevolence to Business: The Story of Two Sav-
ings Banks." Business HistoryReview, XXXII
(Winter, 1958), 386-406.

 

Ellis, David Maldwyn. "The Yankee Invasion of New York,
1783-1850." New York History, XXII (January,
1951), 3-17.

 

Elsbree, Oliver W. "The Rise of the Missionary Spirit in
New England, 1790-1815." New England Quarterly,
I (July, 1928), 295-322.

Fischer, David Hackett. The Revolution of American Con—
servativism: The-FederalistParty in the Era of
Jeffersonian Democracy. New York: Harper and
Row, 1965.

 

Foner, Philip S. Business and Slavery: The New York
Merchants and the Irrepressible Conflict. Chapel
Hill: University ofiNorth Carolina Press, 1941.

 

 

552

Foster, Charles I. An Errand of Mercyj The Evangelical
United Front, 1790-1837. Chapel Hill} Uni-
versity of North CarOlina Press, 1960.

 

 

Fox, Dixon Ryan. "The Protestant Counter-Reformation in
America." New York History, XVI (1935), 19-35.

 

Fox, Early Lee. The American Colonization Society, 1817-
1840. Series XXXVII: Johns Hopkins University
Studies in Historical and Political Science,
No. 3. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1919.

 

Gatell, Frank Otto. "Money and Party in Jacksonian
America: A Quantitative Look at New York City's
Men of Quality." Political Science Quarterly,
LXXXII (June, 1967), 235-52.

 

Griffin, Clifford S. The Ferment of Reform, 1830-1860.
New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co.,ll967.

 

. Their Brothers' Keepers: Moral Stewardship
in the Unitethtates, 1800-1865. New BrunsWiCk,
N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1960.

 

 

 

Grimsted, David. Melodrama Unveiled: American Theater
and Culture, l800-1850. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1968.

 

 

Gusfield, Joseph R. Symbolic Crusade: Status, Politics
and the American Temperance Movement. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, 1963.

 

Higham, John. Strangers in the Lamd: Patterns_pf American
Nativism, 1860:1925. New BrunSWiEk, N.J.: Rutgers
University Press, 1955.

 

Hofstadter, Richard. Anti-Intellectualism in American Life.
New York: Alfred A. Knopf,l962.

 

. The Idea of a Party System: The Rise of Le iti-
mate Opposition in the United States, 1780-1840.

Los Angeles andiBerkeley: University of California
Press, 1969.

Hunt, Freeman, ed. The Merchant Magazine and Commercial
Review. 63 vols. New York,1839-I890.

 

Keller, Charles Roy. The Second Great Awakening in Con-
necticut. New Haven: Yale University Press, l942.

 

Knapp, Shepherd. A History of Brick Presbyterian Church
in the City of New York. New York: Trustees of
the Brick Preshyterian Church, 1901.

553

Koch, G. Adolf. Repgblican Religion: Tme American Revo-
lution and the Cult of Reason. Gloucester, Mass.:
Peter Smith, 1964.

 

 

Krout, John A. The Origins of Prohibition. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1925.

 

Litwack, Leon F. North of Slavery: The Negro in the
United States, l790-1860. Chicago: University
ofChicago Press, 1961.

 

Livermore, Shaw. The Twilight of Federalism: The Dis- -
integration of the Federalist Party, 1816:1830. !
Princeton: Princeton University Press,ll962. j

Lubove, Roy. "The New York Association for Improving
the Condition of the Poor: The Formative Years."
New York Historical Society Quarterly, XLIII
(July, 1959), 307-87:

 

Ludlum, David M. Social Ferment in Vermont, 1791-1850.
New York: Columbia University Press,l939.

McCormick, Richard P. The Second American Party System:
Party Formation in the Jackepnian Eme. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1966.

McLoughlin, William G. Modern Revivalism: Charles
Grandison Finney to Billy Graham. New York:
Ronald Press, 1959.

 

McPherson, James M. The Struggle for Equality: Aboli-
tionists and the Negro in the Civil War and
Reconstruction. Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1964.

 

Marx, Leo. TheMechine in the Garden: Teemnology and the
Pastoral Ideal in America. Galaxy Books. New
York: Oxfbrd University Press, 1964.

Mathews, Donald G. Slavery and Methodism: A Chapter in
American Mora ity, 7 - . Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1967.

 

 

Mead, Sidney E. "Denominationalism: The Shape of Protes-
tantism in America." Church Histomy, XXIII
(December, 1954), 291-320.

554

Meyers, Marvin. The Jacksonian Persuasion: Politics and

Belief. Palo Alto, Calif.: Stanford University
Press, 1957.

Miller, Douglas T. "Immigration and Social Stratification
in Pre-Civil War New York." New York Histomy,
XLIX (April, 1968), 156-68.

 

. Jacksonian Aristocracy: Class and Democracy
in New York, 1830-1860. New York: OxfordlUni:
versity Press,’l967.

 

Miller, Perry. The Life of the Mind in America from the
Revolution to the Civil War. New York: Harcourt,
Brace and WorldeI965.

Mohl, Raymond A. "Humanitarianism in the Preindustrial
City: The New York Society for the Prevention of

Pauperism, 1817-1823." Journal of American History,
LXVII (December, 1970), 576-99.

Mott, Frank Luther. American Journalism: A Histor of
Newspapers in the United States Through 258 Years,
1690 to 1940. New York: MacMillan, 1941.

. A History of American Magazines. 5 vols.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1938-1968.

 

Nye, Russel Blaine. The Cultural Life of the New Nation,

1776-1830. Harper Torchbooks. New York: Harper
and Row, Pub., 1960.

Pessen, Edward. Jacksonian America: Society, Personality,
and Politics. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press, 1969.

. Most Uncommon Jacksonians: The Radical Leaders
of the Early Labor Movement. Albany: State Uni-
versity ofiNew York Press, 1967.

 

. "The Wealthiest New Yorkers of the Jacksonian
Era: A New List." The New York Historical
Society Quarterly, LIX (April,il9705, I45—72.

 

 

Post, Albert. Popular Freethought inemerica, 1825-1850.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1943.

Prentiss, George Lewis. The Union Theological Seminary
in the Cit of New York: HiStorical and Bio-
graphical S etches of Its First Fifty Years.
New York: Anson D. F. Randolph and Co., 889.

555

Pumphrey, Ralph E. "Compassion and Protection: Dual
Motivations in Social Welfare." Social Services
Review, XXXIII (March, 1959), 21-29.

 

Purcell, Richard J. Connecticut in Transition, 1775-1818.
Washington, D.C.: Ameriean Historical Associe
ation, 1919.

 

Rapson, Richard L. "The American Child as Seen by British
Travelers, 1845-1935." American Quarterly, XVII
(February, 1965), 520-34.

 

Redlich, Fritz. The Molding of American Banking:1Men and
Ideas: In Two Parts. New York: Johnsen Reprint
Corporation, 1968.

 

 

Richards, Leonard L. "Gentlemem of Property and Standing"
Anti-Abolition Mobs in Jacksonian America. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1970.

 

 

Sanford, Charles L. The Quest for Paradise: EurOpe and
the AmericaniMoral Imeginatidh. Urbana: Uni-
versity of Illihois Press, 1961.

 

 

Silby, Joel H. The Shrine of Party: Congressional Voting
Behavior, 1841-1852. Pittsburgh: University of
Pittsburgh Press,’l967.

 

 

Smith, Henry Nash. Virgin Land: The American West as
Symbol and Myth. Vintage Books. New York:
Random House, 1950.

 

 

Smith, Timothy L. Revivalism and Social Reform in Mid-
Nineteenth;Century America. New York: Abingdon
Press, 1957.

 

 

Somkin, Fred. Unquiet Eagie: Memory and Desire in the
Idea of American Freedom, 1815-1860. Ithaca,
N.Y.: Cornell University Press,51967.

 

 

Stanton, William. The Leopard's §potsz Scientific Atti-
tudes Towards Race inAmerica, 1815-59. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1960.

 

Staudenraus, P. J. The African Colonization Movement,
1816—1865. New York: Columbia University Press,
I961.

 

 

Steiger, C. Bruce. "Abolitionism and the Presbyterian
Schism of 1837-1838." Mississippi Valle His-
torical Review, XXXVI (December, I949), - l4.

 

 

 

556

Thomas, John L. "Reform in the Romantic Era." Intel-
lectual History in America, Vol. I: Contemporary
Essays on Puritanism, The Enlightenment, and
Romanticism. Edited‘by Cushing Strout. New
York: Harper and Row, 1968.

 

 

 

 

Thompson, Lawrence. "The Printing and Publishing Activi-
ties of the American Tract Society from 1825 to
1850." Bibliographic Society of American Papers,
XXXV (Second Quarter, 1941), 81-ll4.

 

Van Deusen, Glyndon G. The Jacksonian Era, 1828-1848.
Harper Torchbooks. New York: Harper and Row,
Pub., 1959.

 

Wade, Richard C. The Urban Frontier: Pioneer Life in
Early Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Iexipgton, Louis-
ville, andISt. Louis. Phoenix Bodks. Chicago:
University ofiChicago Press, 1959.

 

 

 

Weisberger, Bernard A. The American Newspaperman.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

 

Welter, Barbara. "The Cult of True WOmanhood, 1820-1860."
American Qparterly, XVIII (Summer, 1966), 151-74.

 

Welter, Rush. "The Frontier West as Image of American
Society: Conservative Attitudes Before the Civil
War." Mississippi Valley Historical Review,
XLVI (March, 1960), 593-614}

Wertenbaker, Thomas Jefferson. Princeton, 1746-1896.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1946.

Williamson, Chilton. American Suffrage: Fiom Property to

 

Democracy, 1760-1860. Princeton: Princeton Uni-
versity Press, 1960.

 

Wishy, Bernard. The Child and the Repehiic: The Dawn of
Modern American ChildNurtuie. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1968.