this more manly, more American, more in the spirit of true liberty, than the slavish doctrine which holds every man to be a traitor who does not support the administration-good or bad, wise or unwise-even against his honest convictions?*

If, then, the people of New England had a right to follow their convictions, what was their actual conduct? Look closely into the history of the times-peruse the acts of legislatures, the doings of authorized public assemblies--and you will find a uniform, unswerving loyalty to the Constitution, the country, and the laws. The federalists of New England did not-like Albert Gallatin and other democrats, afterward supporters of the war, and believers in the doctrine that opposition is treason-rise in rebellion, and seek to overthrow the government. They did not-like Calhoun, another democrat, and one of the chief authors of the war, as well as one of the promoters of this gag-law of conscience-array the States in arms, and cry out for a dissolution of the Union! They did not-as is now the fashion, even with certain democrats in full communion with the party-claim that the Union shall be

If we admit this doctrine, that opposition to an administration in time of war is treason, then Chatham, who advocated the cause of America in the British Parliament, during the Revolution, was a traitor; Lamartine, Cavaignac, and Victor Hugo, who opposed Louis Napoleon's war for the suppression of the Roman Republic, were traitors; all the friends of liberty, who, from time immemorial, have opposed the wars of their respective governments for the perpetuation of tyranny, are to be inscribed in the list of traitors. Certainly democracy errs in employing despotism and injustice, under the pretense of propagating liberty. There is no surer way to make liberty itself feared and hated.

torn asunder, whenever the administration of the government does not altogether please them. No: their standard of duty was higher than that-resistance and insurrection formed no part of their creed or their conduct: they were taxed, and they paid; their personal services were required, and they rendered them to the extent of their constitutional liability; they defended the country, and even the property of the United States, when the general government was powerless to protect them; they stood by the Constitution, as a thing too sacred to be violated, even under the extremest oppression of what they deemed an unwise and unpatriotic government!

Who, then, has a right to accuse them of treason? Not the Nullifier, nor the Disunionist, nor the Secessionist all clamorous for the destruction of the Union, whenever, in their opinion, the government is not properly administered; surely no member of a party, who holds in its bosom, and cherishes as in full fellowship, individuals who are chiefly distinguished for bearing these names, and for asserting and propagating these doctrines! Strange is itpassing strange-that from the beginning-in peace or war-New England Federalism should have furnished a steady example of loyalty to the Constitution, and that-springing from her bosom, and expressive of her spirit-she should have given to this country the acknowledged Champion of the Constitution and the Union; that at the same time, South

514

LETTERS-BIOGRAPHICAL, HISTORICAL, ETC.

ern Democracy should have been the breeder of secession and, disunion; that it should have furnished to the country the Arch Nullifier himself; and yet that this same Democracy presumes to point its finger at New England, and cry-" Treason, treason to the Union!" Certainly a democrat may steal a horse, but a federalist may not look over a hedge!

Let us, my dear C........., be just-just in the sight of God and man; let us render homage to the patriotism of the great body of the people of the United States-democrats and federalists-during the war of 1812-14. We may sincerely admire that cheerful, gallant, devoted spirit, which sustained the struggle without inquiring as to its justice or its prudence; at the same time, we are bound equally to respect that calmness and equanimity with which a people, deeply conscious of injury and injustice, observed the laws, and, within their limits, defied alike the aggressions of a partisan government and a foreign enemy. Doing this justice to the people, on both sides and of both parties, let history hold to a stern reckoning the selfishness of those men who declared or promoted the war, merely or mainly to subserve the interests of party!

THIS town lies about sixty miles northeast of New York, and forty northwest of New Haven. There is, as I have elsewhere stated, in the Library of the Atheneum at Hartford, Conn., a manuscript work, entitled "A Statistical Account of Ridgefield, in the county of Fairfield, drawn up by Rev. Samuel Goodrich, from minutes furnished by a number of his parishioners, A. D. 1800.” From this account I give the following extracts:

"Ridgefield was located to twenty-nine of the inhabitants of the towns of Milford and Norwich, by the General Assembly of the State of Connecticut, on the 13th of May, 1708. Various patents were granted, and the soil rights of these were purchased of the Indians at different times. The first was made of Catoonah, the sachem, and others, the condition being one hundred pounds. The boundaries of the town, fixed about the year 1733, left it of an oblong shape, about fifteen miles long and three to five miles wide: including the two parishes of Ridgebury and Ridgefield proper.

"There is the appearance of several Indian graves at a place called Norron's Ridge; and one elevation retains its Indian name of Arproone -high or lofty. Several ponds also retain their Indian designations, as Umpewauge, Mammemusquah, Nisopach, &c. There is but one Indian man in the town. One died here two years ago, aged about 96. In 1799, there were ten common schools and four hundred and thirty-three scholars. There are three foreigners-all paupers: Jagger, an Englishman, ninety-five years old, who served under the Duke of Cumberland in the battle of Culloden, 1746, and was in Flanders, in the same regiment, previous to this battle.

"The general form of the land is in gently swelling ridges, extending from north to south. High Ridge, in the central part, called Candito by the Indians, is very elevated; from this the mountains west of

the Hudson, and West Rock, near New Haven-a view eighty miles in diameter-are to be seen in fair weather; Long Island Sound also, from fifty to sixty miles, is visible. The waters flowing from this hill, flow some southeasterly into the Sound, and some southwesterly into the Hudson, by the rivers Titicus and Croton. The latter, in fact, has its source here.

"The soil is generally fertile, though many parts are stony; the climate, owing to the elevation of the place, is somewhat severe, but it is salubrious. Formerly there were bear, deer, and wolves, but these have disappeared. Racoons, various kinds of squirrels, rabbits, &c., are plentiful, as also quails, partridges, &c. The flocks of wild-pigeons, formerly very abundant, now make their migrations more to the west than formerly."

Partly from this document, and partly from notes furnished me by Mr. A. Ressequie, of Ridgefield, I take the following memoranda :

Ministers of the First Congregational Church in Ridgefield.

Rev. Thomas Hawley, of Northampton, the first minister, and one of the first settlers, installed in 1714, and died 1739.

Rev. Jonathan Ingersoll, installed 1740, died 1778.

Rev. Samuel Goodrich, ordained 1786, dismissed 1811.

Some of the Inhabitants of Ridgefield, noticed in the preceding

pages.

REV. JONATHAN INGERSOLL was a native of Milford, graduated at Yale College in 1736, and died 1778, while in the ministry at Ridgefield. He joined the colonial troops as chaplain, on Lake Champlain, in 1758; he was much respected in the army, and exerted an excellent influence on the soldiers. He left behind him a name honored for purity, learning, eloquence, and devotion to his duty, in the village where the greater part of his life was spent. From an elec tion sermon, which I find in the Library of the Hartford Atheneum, it would appear that he was master of a very felicitous style of writing.*

The following letter, addressed to his brother, noted in the history of Connectient for accepting the office of stamp-master under the obnoxious stamp-set of 1764,