(I do hope you will consider becoming a member\u00ac\u2020of the Hunterdon County Historical Society, which includes a subscription to the newsletter. It\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s a great way to support the preservation of Hunterdon County history. Here\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s their website: Hunterdon History<\/a>.)<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n What a find, I thought. But, as I started reading, my eyes widened. Statements in the resolutions showed that club members saw nothing wrong with slavery, and wanted to end the Civil War by making a compromise with the southern states. Perhaps I should not have been surprised. I knew that the Democratic Party was very strong in Hunterdon County ever since Andrew Jackson ran for president in 1824, and that Abraham Lincoln was not very popular here. I also knew that Locktown was known for its \u201a\u00c4\u00faCopperheadism.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 It is a subject I\u201a\u00c4\u00f4ve been wanting to write about for some time. What held me back was a clear understanding of what New Jersey Democrats stood for. This booklet spells that out in no uncertain terms. If we judge these people by today\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s standards, we must call them racists. But in 1863 such a term did not even exist.1<\/a><\/sup> Is it fair to judge them by our standards?<\/p>\n The booklet began with a preamble, which read in part:<\/p>\n Whereas, The sad history of our beloved country during the administration of Abraham Lincoln proves that the fallacious political dogmas of the so-called Republican party are entirely adverse to, and in direct violation of, the principles upon which the Federal Republic of the United States was established ; . . . .<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Then followed the Constitution setting up the workings of the club\u201a\u00c4\u00eemeetings, officers, etc.\u201a\u00c4\u00eethe usual. There is nothing unusual about the By-Laws either, except perhaps for Article III, Section 1:<\/p>\n Any white male inhabitant of the township of Delaware, above the age of eighteen years, may become a member of this Club, by signing the Constitution, and paying the sum of ten cents into the Treasury, upon which he shall receive the badge of the Club ; provided, that where an objection is urged against the applicant for membership, a vote shall be taken to decide the question.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n A hint of things to come. The By-Laws were followed by this statement:<\/p>\n On motion of General Sergeant the Preamble and Resolutions adopted March 3d last were re-endorsed, and ordered to be attached to the Constitution and By-Laws as part of the platform of the Club.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u201a\u00c4\u00faGeneral Sergeant\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 was not a duplication of titles. John T. Sergeant of Sand Brook was General of the Hunterdon Brigade of militia and of the Delaware Guards.<\/p>\n The Preamble to the Resolutions, adopted on March 3, 1863, and \u201a\u00c4\u00fare-endorsed\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 on July 4th<\/sup>, read:<\/p>\n Whereas, the right peaceably to assemble to discuss the acts of public men, and to express our opinions in regard to their measures, is guaranteed to us by the first article to the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, and believing that a failure to do so, in the present crisis of our country\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s history, would be criminal on our part ;<\/p>\n And Whereas, we believe that the rapidly developing plot of Black Republican usurpation (as developed in the unconstitutional and revolutionary scheme of centralizing the powers of the government in the hands of a President who, by his arbitrary and tyrannical assumptions of authority, has already forfeited our confidence,) is a start[l]ing admonition to all true patriots that the liberties secured by our fathers are in danger . . .<\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u201a\u00c4\u00faBlack Republican\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 was a term used by Democrats to besmirch the newly-created Republican Party with the notion that they intended not only to free the slaves, but to allow unheard of civil liberties to black Americans, even to the extent of promoting intermarriage. Another derogatory term used by Democrats for the Republican Party was \u201a\u00c4\u00fathe Abolition Party.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 Such an attitude would carry no weight today, but was a very effective argument back in 1863. Recall that on January 1, 1863 the Emancipation Proclamation was signed. For us today, it was a great moment in American history, but many of the Democrats of 1863 thought it was a disaster.<\/p>\n The preamble was followed by nine resolutions.<\/p>\n 1. Resolved, That while we will, as heretofore, give our cheerful aid and support to the Government of the United States in all its constitutional and legal acts, at the same time we enter our most solemn protest against those unconstitutional and destructive measures instituted by the present Administration, which, while they have divided the people of the North, have united all classes at the South ; and believing that \u201a\u00c4\u00faresistance to tyrants is obedience to God,\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 we will use all proper means which he has given us to oppose their execution.<\/p>\n 2. Resolved, That among these unconstitutional acts we recognize : arrests of our citizens without legal process ; the suspension of the write of habeas corpus ; the emancipation proclamation ; the appropriation of the money belonging to the people of one State to pay for slaves emancipated in another ; and last, though not least, that abominable and tyrannical conscription act recently passed by Congress, which places the life and liberty of every man, woman and child at the caprice of a set of contemptible pimps and spies, called provost marshals, and their deputies ; and that we cannot permit our most sacred rights, as citizens of a sovereign State, to be thus trampled in the dust without an entire repudiation of our manhood.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Here I must say they had a point. Some fundamental rights had been abridged by President Lincoln in response to the pressures of war, like suspension of habeas corpus. And they were probably right in stating that the North was divided while the South was united by not only the actions of President Lincoln, but also by his very election. In the 1860 Democratic Convention, the party was split on the issues of slavery and states\u201a\u00c4\u00f4 rights. Many (but certainly not all) Northern Democrats opposed expansion of slavery into the western states. Southern Democrats were united in demanding it.<\/p>\n In last week\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s post, Benjamin H. Ellicott wrote about the Civil War in his diary of 1862. In his opinion, the Emancipation Proclamation would permit \u201a\u00c4\u00fathe U. S. Government to enter into the wholesale Negro trade,\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 in which the government would purchase the freedom of slaves from their masters in the secession states. He thought the Proclamation gave comfort to Lincoln\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s opponents, rather than helped to end the war. As these resolutions show, he was not alone in thinking that.<\/p>\n Concerning \u201a\u00c4\u00fathe appropriation of the money belonging to the people of one State to pay for slaves emancipated in another,\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 President Lincoln had asked Congress to pass a law allowing for gradual and compensated emancipation in four border states. When slavery was abolished in the District of Columbia, the slaveholders were compensated, with federal tax dollars, of course.<\/p>\n Concerning those \u201a\u00c4\u00facontemptible pimps and spies, called provost marshals<\/em>, and their deputies<\/em>,\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 these were officials created by \u201a\u00c4\u00fathe Enrollment Act\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 of March 1863, also known as \u201a\u00c4\u00faThe Civil War Military Draft Act.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 It required that every adult male citizen between the ages of 20 and 45 be enrolled for the draft. The provost marshals and their deputies were responsible for identifying these men and making sure they were enrolled.<\/p>\n 3. Resolved, That the present unhappy and sanguinary war (commenced ostensibly for the restoration of the Union, the support of the Constitution, and the maintenance of the integrity of the Government established under it) is manifestly a contest for the emancipation of the so-called \u201a\u00c4\u00faslave,\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 and the equalization of the black with the white race, and in our opinion, ought to cease, and that negotiation should be entered into for the restoration of the Union upon such principles as would be alike honorable to all sections.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n That reference to the \u201a\u00c4\u00faso-called \u201a\u00c4\u00f2slave\u201a\u00c4\u00f4\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 is odd. How could a slave be so-called? A slave was a slave. But, the words \u201a\u00c4\u00faslave\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 and \u201a\u00c4\u00faslavery\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 never appear in the Constitution, even though there are several provisions concerning that subject. It apparently was an uncomfortable word to use, even for those who supported slavery.<\/p>\n The real concern of these club members was \u201a\u00c4\u00fathe equalization of the black with the white race.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 That being the case, how could there be any principles that \u201a\u00c4\u00fawould be alike honorable to all sections\u201a\u00c4\u00f9?<\/p>\n 4. Resolved, That to our gallant sons and brothers in the field we tender our hearty thanks for the brave manner in which they have performed their duties, and our sympathy for the sufferings they have endured, and that we will welcome their speedy return to our midst with heartfelt joy and gratitude.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Here we have the traditional American attitude toward the men who wear their country\u201a\u00c4\u00f4s uniform. No matter what the purpose of the war they were sent to fight, admiration and gratitude for their service was the one thing New Jerseyans could agree on.<\/p>\n 5. Resolved, That the principles and views enunciated by our Governor, Joel Parker, in his inaugural address, have inspired us with confidence in our Chief Magistrate, and we hereby pledge him our continued and earnest support, so long as he adheres to the course therein marked out.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Gov. Parker was a unifier of the Democratic Party. He won his election in 1862 by taking the middle road between the radicals known as Copperheads or Peace Democrats, and the regular or \u201a\u00c4\u00faWar\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 Democrats. The radicals thought the South was entitled to secede, and therefore all attempts to stop it were unconstitutional. They claimed the North was entirely responsible for the war. Regular Democrats, including Gov. Parker, supported a legitimate war effort, but condemned \u201a\u00c4\u00f2unconstitutional\u201a\u00c4\u00f4 acts of government. They opposed secession as much as they opposed abolition. This was the larger group to which the Delaware Township Democrats seem to have belonged.<\/p>\n![\"1863Club\"](\"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/06\/1863Club-334x535.jpg\")
<\/a>Recently I discovered in the files of the Hunterdon County Historical Society a small booklet entitled \u201a\u00c4\u00faConstitution and By-Laws of the Democratic Club of Delaware Township, Hunterdon County, N. J., Adopted July 4, 1863.\u201a\u00c4\u00f9 It was published at the office of the True American newspaper in Trenton.<\/p>\n![\"Gov.](\"https:\/\/goodspeedhistories.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/06\/Gov-Parker.png\")
<\/a>