Although the first edition of the Concord Daily Monitor was published 150 years ago, the events that
laid the groundwork for the paper began in 1845 when a few brave politicians
could no longer abide the spread of slavery.
John Parker Hale |
This revolution took root in Concord and involved three
leading political figures, all Democrats: Franklin Pierce of Concord, John
Parker Hale of Dover and Amos Tuck of Exeter.
The storm began with Hale.
The state Democratic Party rammed a resolution through the
Legislature instructing the state’s members of Congress to vote for the
annexation of Texas. Because Texas would then enter the Union as a slave state,
the resolution was a favor to the South.
Hale, a U.S. representative, was fed up with appeasing the
South. He wrote a public letter making two points: The party had no right to
tell members of Congress how to vote, and he opposed the extension of slavery.
Pierce, the party chairman, struck back with fury. In the Patriot, the chief party organ, he accused
his friend Hale of seeking to split the party for selfish motives. He wrote to
Hale breaking off a personal friendship formed when they were students at
Bowdoin College in Maine. He demanded that local party organizations strike
Hale’s name from the ballot for re-election and nominate another Democrat. The
party complied.
But Hale had his supporters. Tuck, a prominent lawyer and
state representative, was one of them. He wrote the Democratic Portsmouth Mercury backing Hale’s
position. When the Mercury’s editor
refused to print his letter, two big ideas flashed in Tuck’s mind.
One was to call a meeting in Exeter of Democrats opposed to
the extension of slavery. The meeting, on Feb. 22, 1845, George Washington’s
birthday, resulted in the birth of a splinter party, the Independent Democrats.
The second idea was a weekly newspaper to push the new
party’s point of view. This notion bore immediate fruit, and 19 years later the
Concord Daily Monitor sprouted from the
same seed.
‘Shall we have a
paper?’
Amos Tuck |
Two weeks after the Exeter meeting, Tuck wrote Hale to ask, “Shall
we have a paper under our control?”
Their movement’s success so far boosted Tuck’s confidence. “There
is no danger of making our appeal in vain,” he wrote. “Heart answers to heart,
and deep cries unto deep. Our cause is just, and that accounts for the fact
that without any of the ordinary appliances or means of exercising power we
have accomplished more than the Conservatives could with a powerful press.”
On April 1, leaders of the movement circulated a prospectus
for their new “appliance,” a weekly to be published in Manchester as the Independent Democrat. The prospectus said the newspaper would oppose “all
dictation, monopoly and oppression.” It would look upon slavery “as a moral,
social and political evil, but yet such an one as our forefathers, in a spirit
of compromise, consented to recognize in the formation of our Constitution.”
This was a crucial distinction. While the Independent
Democrats considered slavery an evil, they were seeking to stop its spread, not
abolish it where the Constitution allowed it. Abolitionists were still viewed
as dangerous extremists, and the new party sought to avoid this taint.
The paper vowed to “oppose any further concessions to an
admitted evil than are required by the existing obligations imposed on us by
the Constitution.” The slavery issue “must be joined, and we have determined to
meet it.”
Several prominent men who opposed slavery’s extension balked
at the paper’s location. Dudley Palmer, a prominent Concord Whig, asked Hale why
Manchester, “the resort of speculators and manufacturers,” had been chosen over
Concord, “the place to do business with the political men of the State.”
“An editor here can do more for his paper in June while the
Legislature is in session than he can in Manchester the year round,” Palmer
wrote. He also wanted the paper published in the city where Pierce and the Patriot operated. “Virtue never looks
more lovely than when contrasted with vice,” Palmer wrote.
James Peverly, another supporter, sent Hale a list of people
who might be useful to the Independent
Democrat. George Gilman Fogg topped
his list. A lawyer from Gilmanton Iron Works with a sharp pen but little newspaper
experience, Fogg had been a loyal Democrat. But recent events had made him “an
uncompromising enemy of party dictation (who) sustains your course,” Peverly
wrote.
Fogg caught Hale’s eye through a few articles he wrote for
the paper, and Hale offered him the editorship. Fogg raised two issues. He
worried that the movement might fizzle out and expressed reluctance to give up a
promising legal career. But he also described how he would edit the paper and
keep it focused on the antislavery cause.
“I view it all important that no blunder be committed,” Fogg
wrote Hale, “that everything be done just in the right time and place – neither
too much or too little – the paper speak on the right subject in the right tone
– and that for the present it remain true and wholly devoted to the main object
for which it was started. While it may take advantage of collateral issues, it
should be subject to none of them.”
Quick success
The Independent
Democrat soon moved to Concord, and Fogg became its editor in January of
1846 at the age of 32. Isaac Hill, the former U.S. senator and governor, took
notice. In Hill’s Patriot, he accused
his new rival of “rank abolitionism.”
George Gilman Fogg |
Apostasy from the party in power in New Hampshire might have
doomed Hale, Tuck and Fogg, but the opposite happened. That very year, over the
yelps of Pierce and Hill, Hale won a U.S. Senate seat as a Free Soil candidate
and Tuck was elected to the U.S. House. In the pages of the Independent Democrat, Fogg became an
articulate and powerful voice for the antislavery movement.
In coming years, the old party system disintegrated as Whigs
and Independent Democrats, though wary of each other, formed the core of the Republican
Party. Fogg rose in the new party, attending its 1856 and ’60 national
nominating conventions and serving as secretary of a congressional mission to
investigate violence in Kansas.
Although he attended the 1860 Chicago convention as a
journalist rather than a delegate, Fogg joined Tuck in the official party that
went to Springfield, Ill., to inform Abraham Lincoln of his nomination. He was
tapped to be secretary of Lincoln’s national campaign. Then, in the months
leading to the inauguration, he lobbied Lincoln on Cabinet choices and other
matters.
Lincoln rewarded Fogg with appointment as minister to
Switzerland. Fogg left the Independent
Democrat in the capable hands of his partner, Amos Hadley. Hadley
occasionally printed a letter from Fogg in Europe, but his main task was to defend
the war despite Union army reverses and defend Lincoln come what may. Although
he lacked Fogg’s gift for incisive language and instinct for the jugular,
Hadley did the job in reliable, solid prose.
A tie to bind
In 1863 and ’64, the Independent
Democrat supported Republican Gov.
Joseph A. Gilmore, as did the Whig weekly, the Statesman. The continued existence of the two papers hinted at the lingering
distrust between former Democrats and former Whigs. A daily newspaper in New
Hampshire’s capital might close this rift while creating a more powerful voice
for the party.
Gilmore set out to make this happen. Almost every specific
of his plan for the Concord Daily Monitor
went awry. A promised written contract with the two publishers, P. Brainard Cogswell
and George H. Sturtevant, never materialized. Costs for paper, supplies and
print-work exceeded estimates. The men hired from Boston for the editorial work
headed home.
The editor, William S. Robinson, was gone after a month.
“Massachusetts is the place for ideas, and the place to which men look for
ideas,” he explained when he reached home. “The men of ideas ought to stay
here, I think; and I, as one of the men who write, ought to stay here also and
express their ideas.”
J. Henry Gilmore, the governor's son |
After the Monitor’s
debut on May 23, 1864, the content remained strong, but advertising limped
along. Investors who promised money for the daily reneged. And Gilmore couldn’t
pay Cogswell and Sturtevant what he owed them for the printing. In August of
1865, he gave them the paper as partial payment. His son, J. Henry Gilmore,
became the editor but lasted only a year. Cogswell took on the local editing
chores.
But the two publishers persevered, and salvation, or at
least a foothold, came in 1867. The Monitor
merged with the Independent Democrat
that year. Home from Switzerland, Fogg came back as political editor, joining Cogswell,
Sturtevant and Hadley as principals of the company.
The Statesman came
into the fold in 1871 under the auspices of the Republican Press Association. The
Monitor, which had bounced around
among downtown buildings before then, found a home in the Statesman Building at
18 N. Main St.
One by one during the next half-century, Concord’s other newspapers
faded away. The Union victory in the Civil War had made New Hampshire a
Republican state for generations to come. In a world of partisan journalism,
the Monitor rose and prospered with
its party. By the mid-1920s, it was the only game in town.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHere's a comment from reader CWMoss on the Concord Monitor website, where this series on the 150th anniversary of the Monitor also appears:
Deletere: "Lincoln rewarded Fogg with appointment as minister to Switzerland.". Did he? Or was he shuffling Fogg off to Buffalo? This appointment is somewhat perplexing. Wouldn't Fogg have done Lincoln much better service as editor of the CDM, defending early Union losses on the battlefield? Then again, the war was supposed to be a brief one-sided affair, the Union suppressing the rebellion in short order. Still, it seems to me Fogg would want to be where the action is, not in some distant foreign country, way across the pond. Very interesting move on both sides, that of Lincoln and Fogg.
My thoughts on this: I think Fogg wanted this appointment and viewed it as a plum. His letters from his journey and his time in Switzerland reflect great pleasure in being there. A recent post on this blog -- 'Is God trying our nation, or destroying it?' includes one letter from spring 1863. Fogg's outlook on Union generalship and battlefield reverses is dark, but he clearly loves his life in Switzerland. -- Mike Pride.