THE DORR REBELLION.
We have seen that the relation of the citizen to the State became
the subject of attention and experiment at an early period in the
history of Rhode Island. Although an avowed democracy, she regarded
suffrage not as an inherent right, but as a privilege dependent
upon the fulfillment of certain specified conditions. Inequality of
representation was a natural consequence of the unequally increased
population; some towns growing faster than others, but having no
more voice in legislation than they had had at the beginning of
their civil existence. The right to vote was held to be an important
right, and great pains were taken to secure purity at the polls. But
it was evident that all the tax-payers would sooner or later claim
to be voters. This question recurs from time to time in all its
ramifications, and though long deferred, became at last the chief
question of Rhode Island politics.
For more than two-thirds of a century she had lived under the Charter
of Charles II., first as a Colony and lastly as a State. This Charter
was framed in the broad and liberal spirit of Roger Williams and John
Clarke, and left room for large developments in every department of
legitimate thought and action.
Unfortunately what might have been brought about by peaceful discussion
was gradually fanned into the fiercest flame. Providence had entirely
outgrown her old rival, Newport, and yet Newport had a representation
of six in the Assembly, and Providence of only four. In other towns
the disproportion was equally great. The property qualification also,
a freehold of a hundred and thirty-four dollars, was bitterly opposed
by those who had no freehold. In 1840 seventy-two representatives were
chosen. Thirty-eight were chosen from towns having only twenty-nine
thousand and twenty inhabitants and two thousand eight hundred and
forty-six voters, and the remaining thirty-four came from towns which
had only seventy-nine thousand eight hundred and four inhabitants, and
five thousand seven hundred and seventy-six voters.
Equally irritating to those who had no share in it was the right
conferred by primogeniture.
For many years these questions were prominent subjects of discussion,
and were even brought forward as the most important objects of
legislative action. But no relief could be obtained from the Assembly,
for the Assembly itself was chiefly composed of the privileged classes.
From the Assembly there was but one appeal--the appeal to the people,
and upon the form of this appeal lay the choice between reform and
revolution. This is the event known in Rhode Island history as the
Dorr Rebellion.
The first step towards action was the formation of suffrage
associations, by which the public mind was excited and the popular will
roused to exertion. All through the last weeks of 1840 and the first
weeks of 1841, these associations were busy in guiding, kindling and
stimulating the popular mind, and preparing it for decisive action.
All classes were roused, for the contest was at every door, and every
citizen was equally interested in the result.
The suffrage associations did their work actively and well. By the 5th
of July, 1841, a mass convention was held in Providence, and the State
Committee was authorized to call a convention for the formation of a
Constitution. Confident of their strength the committee set themselves
to their task. On the 28th of August delegates were chosen, and on the
4th of October the convention met. In this convention a Constitution
was framed, and in December sent out to the people as the People's
Constitution. Fourteen thousand voters, a majority, it was claimed, of
all the male adult voters in the State, cast their votes for it. It
claimed to be the will of the people authoritatively expressed. There
was one more step to take, the consequence and complement of all that
had hitherto been done, to complete the organization by the election
of officers. The 18th of April, 1842, was fixed upon for this gravest
function of freemen, and Thomas Wilson Dorr, of Providence, was chosen
Governor.
Votes had done all that the mere expression of opinion could do. But
underlying every lawful vote was the law which gave it validity, and
this law had prescribed the form and manner in which these votes became
effective. It had said that while the source of all power was in the
people, the people themselves in order to secure progress and guard
against revolution had set limits to their authority, and told when,
where and for what it should be employed.
And now it was seen that there was another government which claimed
to be in sole possession of this power, and the moment that the new
government attempted to perform its executive functions it found itself
face to face with the old. It was evident that one of the two parties
must give way or there must be a collision and bloodshed.
The first attempt of the Suffragists to organize was made at Providence
on the 3d of May, and was repelled. The moral strength was with the
charter government which had the chartered companies, the organized
militia and a strong body of volunteers at its control. It had also
the strong moral support of that clause in the Constitution of the
United States which guarantees to every state a republican government
and protection against internal violence. Should Federal intervention
become necessary, the time and the form of it had been provided
for. But it was not needed. We have seen that on the 3d of May the
government of Governor, Dorr had attempted to displace the government
of Governor King, and failed. On the 18th an attempt was made to seize
the Arsenal, which also failed. Men who had grown up side by side in
peaceful intimacy, had seized their arms under a strong political
excitement, but when the moment for using them came, shrank from the
fearful responsibility. Hundreds would have fought gallantly, but no
one was prepared to begin. And thus when on the 25th of June an attempt
was made to make a stand at Chepachet, the Suffragists gave way at
the approach of the State troops, and returned to their homes without
shedding a drop of blood. By the 28th of June all was over. The great
body of the insurgents went quietly back to their stores and their
farms. Their leader was tried for treason and condemned to imprisonment
for life. But Rhode Island was not a place where so severe a punishment
could be meted out to such an offence. In 1847 an act of general
amnesty set him free, and in 1851 he was restored to his political
and civil rights. Forgiveness went still further, and his sentence
was reversed as illegal and unjust. But the Supreme Court refused to
sustain this reversal as an assumption of judicial authority by the
Legislature. Dorr's early death left him no time for new aspirations.
Meanwhile a new convention for the framing of a new Constitution had
been called by the regularly constituted authorities, and a new draft
submitted to the people. But this also was rejected. Another attempt
was made, another convention called. Argument and discussion were
exhausted. The popular mind was prepared for decision. The popular
will called for it. The last day of the old Charter was come. At an
adjourned meeting of the convention, held at East Greenwich on the
5th of November, a final decision was reached and a Constitution
unanimously agreed upon. On the first Tuesday in May, 1843, it went
into operation.
And thus Rhode Island, while she adhered firmly to the principle of
freedom of opinion, adhered no less firmly to the principle of law and
order. The Dorr Rebellion was the resistance of law to revolution, of
order to the arbitrary assumption of power. Rhode Island had begun her
career by a practical profession of freedom of thought and freedom
of speech. She had struggled long and hard to secure them both, and
now the day of reward was at hand. Henceforth the industries of peace
will bring her wealth from the land and the sea, the salubrity of her
climate will raise up on her inland and on her shores a thriving and
vigorous population, and while in some things she will take the lead of
her sister states, in no thing will she fall far behind.