Dealings With The Dead Volume II Part 20

The original building was but half the width of the present, and but two stories high. The hall could contain but 1000 persons. In the memorable fire of Tuesday, Jan. 13, 1761, Faneuil Hall was destroyed, and nothing left standing but the walls. On the 23d of the following March, the town voted to rebuild, and the State authorized a lottery, to meet the expense.

There were several cla.s.ses. A ticket, of the seventh cla.s.s, lies before me, bearing date March, 1767, with the s.p.a.cious autograph of John Hanc.o.c.k, at the bottom.

The building retained its primitive proportions, till 1806, when, the occasions of the public requiring its enlargement, its width was increased, from 40 to 80 feet, and a third story added. A very simple rule may be furnished, for those, who would compare the size of the present building, with that of the genuine Peter Faneuil Hall. Take a northeast view of the Hall--there are seven windows before you, in each story--run a perpendicular line, from the ground, through the centre of the middle window to the top of the belt, at the bottom of the third story--carry a straight line from that point nearly to the top of the second window, on the right, in the third story. That point is the apex of the old pediment.

From that point, draw the corresponding roof line down to the belt, at the corner; and you have a profile of the ancient structure; all which is well exhibited by Dr. Snow, on the plan, in his History of Boston.

Small as the original structure may appear, when compared with the present, it was a magnificent donation, for the times. It may well be considered a munificent gift, from a single individual, in 1742, when we consider, that its repairs, in 1761, were accomplished, by the aid of the Commonwealth, and the creation of a lottery, which continued to curse the community, for several years.

Peter Faneuil was then in all his glory. How readily, by the power of Imagination, I raise him from the dead, bolt upright; with his over portly form, and features full of _bon homie_; speaking volumes, about those five pipes of amber-colored Madeira, such as his friend Delancey had; and that best book of all sorts of cookery, of a large character, for the maid's reading! There he is, at the door of his English chariot, "handsome, but nothing gaudy," with his arms thereon, and his English coachman, and his English horses, and that "strait negro lad" perched behind. I see him now, helping in Miss Mary Anne, his youngest maiden sister; and, as he ascends the steps, wrapping his cloak around him, trimmed with that identical "_scarlet cloth of the very best quality_."

The vanity of man's antic.i.p.ations, the occasional suddenness of his summons away--seldom find a more graphic ill.u.s.tration, than in the case of this n.o.ble hearted, and most hospitable gentleman. When he received the grateful salutations of the magnates of the town, who came to thank him, for his munificence, what could have been so little in his thoughts, or in theirs, as the idea, that he was so soon to die!

In about five years--five, short, luxurious years--after the death of Andrew Faneuil, Peter, his favorite nephew, was committed to the ground, March 10, 1742, old style. The event, from its suddenness, and from the amiable and benevolent character of the individual, produced a deep sensation, in the _village_, for Boston was nothing but a seash.o.r.e village then. In 1728, some fourteen years before, we learn from Dougla.s.s, i. 531, that there were but 3000 rateable polls, on the peninsula. This event was unexpected, by the living, and had been equally unexpected, by the dead.

Death came to Peter, like a thief in the stilly night. He had not looked for this unwelcome visitor. He had made no will. By this event, Benjamin came into possession; and old Andrew is supposed to have turned over, indignantly, in his coffin.

No. Cx.x.xI.

To such of my readers, as the Lord has abundantly blessed, in their basket and their store, and who have loaned him very little, on his simple promise, to be repaid, in Paradise; and who are, peradventure, at this very moment, excogitating revengeful wills; the issue of uncle Andrew's vindictive, posthumous arrangements may prove a profitable lesson, for their learning. Verily, G.o.d's ways are not as our ways, nor G.o.d's will as Uncle Andrew's.

It may be remembered, that, in the devise of his warehouse, in trust, for the benefit of the French Church, Andrew Faneuil provided, that, in the event of the extinction of that church, the estate should revert to his _right heirs--excluding Benjamin Faneuil, of Boston, and the heirs of his body forever_, whom he cuts off, as the popular phrase runs, with "_five shillings, and no more_." In pa.s.sing along, it may not be amiss to notice this popular error. The law has, at no time, required the bequest of a farthing, to one, near of kin, whom the testator intends to cut off. It is enough, if it be manifest, that the testator has _not forgotten him_; and, to leave no possible doubt upon the subject, a churlish curmudgeon, as in the present case, will transmit, in this offensive manner, the record of his vindictiveness and folly, to future generations.

When Andrew Faneuil makes Peter his residuary legatee, there is no provision, for the exclusion of Benjamin, in the event of Peter's death, without heirs of his body. Prepared, as this amiable, old gentleman was, to believe, in the possible extinction of the French Church, he seems to have looked upon Peter, an inveterate old bachelor, as immortal. Yet, in regard to Peter, the issue hung, by a single hair. There was no child, with the cup in his hand, to catch the ball, and prevent it from lapsing directly into Benjamin's sack, who, with his sisters, stood close at hand, the next of kin to Peter, and heirs at law.

Well: as I have said, G.o.d's will was not as Uncle Andrew's. After a few flying years, during which Peter executed the intentions of the testator, with remarkable fidelity; and lived, as magnificently, as a n.o.bleman, and as hospitably, as a bishop, and, as charitably, as an apostle--suddenly, the silver cord was loosed, and the golden bowl was broken, and Peter dropped into the grave. The t.i.tle of Benjamin and his sisters to all Peter's estate, and to all Andrew's estate, that remained, as the heirs at law of Peter, pa.s.sed into them, through the atmosphere, at once; and Andrew's will, by the act of G.o.d, was set aside, in the _upper_ Court.

Administration was granted to Benjamin, March 18, 1742, O. S., who returned an inventory, April 21, 1744. The appraisers of the estate were William Price, Joseph Dowse, and Peter Chardon; and the sum total of their valuation was 44,451.15.7. This, certainly, will incline the reader to Master Lovell's idea, of "_a large and plentiful estate_," until I add those words of withering import--_Old Tenor_. Sterling decimates old tenor with a vengeance--_ten_ pounds, old tenor, were but _one_ pound, sterling.

The valuation, therefore, amounted to about 4,445 sterling, or, in dollars, at five to the pound, to $22,225. It may seem rather surprising, that the balance, which fell to Peter, from his uncle, under the will, and his own acc.u.mulations, should amount to no more. But a few reflections may tend to moderate our surprise.

The estate of his uncle had been seriously diminished, by the payment of legacies, 2,000 stg. to each of his three nieces, $30,000--more than $8,000 to his niece, Marie Phillips; and about $2,000, in smaller legacies, raising the amount of legacies to $40,000. He had also given his warehouse, in King Street, to the French Church. These legacies Peter had paid. He had also built and presented the Market-house and the Hall to the town. But there is another important consideration. Funds still remained, in other countries, part and parcel of Andrew's property. This is evident, from an original doc.u.ment before me, the marriage settlement of Peter's sister, Mary Anne with John Jones, bearing date March 15, 1742, the very month of Peter's death. This doc.u.ment recites, that one part of her estate, as one of the heirs of Peter Faneuil, "_is in Public Funds, such as the Bank of England_." As this does not figure in Benjamin's inventory here, it is impossible to say what was the amount of foreign funds, which Peter owned, at the time of his death. For some five years, while he had been living, in a style of unbounded hospitality, he had also enjoyed the luxury of doing good, and paid, most liberally, for that enjoyment. From his commercial correspondence, I infer, that his enterprise suffered no material abatement, after his uncle's decease.

I cannot doubt, that his free expenditure of money, for his personal enjoyment, the gratification of his pride, and the pleasure of ministering to the wants of the poor and needy, had lessened, and was lessening, from month to month, the amount of his estate. There is yet another consideration, which belongs to this account, the great disparity, between the value of money, then, and at the present day.

The items, or particular heads, of the inventory, are one hundred and fifty-eight; and cover near four folio pages of the record. Some of them may not be wholly uninteresting to the reader. The mansion-house, the same, as I have stated, in which Lieutenant Governor Billy Phillips lived and died, and Isaiah Doane before him, the extensive garden, outhouses and yard were appraised, one hundred and eight years ago, at 12,375, or 1,237 stg., about $6,185, at five dollars to the pound. Fourteen hundred ounces of plate, at 2,122 10. This plate was divided into five parts, for the brother, and four sisters of the deceased. A memorandum lies upon my table, labelled, in the original hand of Gillam Phillips--"An account of my proportion of plate, belonging to the estate of Peter Faneuil, Esq., deceased." This doc.u.ment contains a list of "_Gillam Phillips' Lot_," and side by side--"_a coffee pot_--_a large, handsome chamber pot_." They made a free use of the precious metals, in those days.

A parcel of jewels are appraised, at 1,490--1 white horse, 15--2 Albany horses, 100--2 English horses, 250--2 other English horses, 300--4 old and 4 new harnesses, 120--2 pairs runners, 15--1 four-wheel chaise, 150--1 two-wheel chaise, 50--a coach, 100--1 chariot, 400--5 negroes, 150--130--120--120--100. Then follows a variety of articles--fowling pieces--fishing tackle--silver-hilted sword--pistols--china, gla.s.s, hangings, carpets, and culinary articles, in profusion--lignum vitae coffee cups, lined with silver--silver snuff-boxes--gold sleeve-b.u.t.tons and rings--195 dozen of wine--arrack--beer--Cheshire and Gloucester cheeses.

Indeed, Peter's establishment appears to have been a variorum edition of all manner of elegancies, luxuries, and creature comforts. The inventory comprehends eight tenements, in Cornhill, and King Street; a number of vessels, and parts of vessels; and various other items of property.

The remains of this n.o.ble-spirited descendant of the Huguenots of Roch.e.l.le were deposited, in the Faneuil tomb, in the westerly corner of the Granary Ground. This tomb is of dark freestone, with a freestone slab. Upon the easterly end of the tomb, there is a tablet of slate, upon which are sculptured, with manifest care and skill, the family arms; while, upon the freestone slab, are inscribed, at the top, M. M.--_memento mori_, of course,--and, at the bottom of the slab--a cruel apology for the old Huguenot patronymic--"PETER FUNEL. 1742," and nothing more.

The explanation, which arises, in my mind, of this striking inconsistency, is this: I believe this tomb, whose aspect is simple, solid, and antique, to have been built by Andrew Faneuil, who was a wealthy merchant here as early as 1709: and I think it is quite certain, that the lady, whom he married, in Holland, and whose beauty is traditional, among her descendants, made the great exchange--beauty for ashes--in this very sepulchre. In this tomb, Andrew was buried, by Peter, Feb. 20, 1737, and Peter, by his brother, Benjamin, March 10, 1742, old style, and here Benjamin himself, was laid, after an interval of two-and-forty years, where there is neither work, nor device, nor will, nor codicil.

The arms of Peter Faneuil--I have them before me, at this moment, on his ma.s.sive, silver pepper-pot--he found a place for them, on many of his possessions, though I cannot say, if on all the articles which came into the possession of Gillam Phillips,--were a field argent--no chevron--a large heart, truly a suitable emblem, in the centre, gules--seven stars equidistant from each other, and from the margin of the escutcheon, extending from the sinister chief to the dexter base--in the sinister base a cross molin, within an annulet--no scroll--no supporters; crest, a martlet.

The arms upon the tomb, though generally like these, and like the arms, on other articles, once Peter's, and still extant, differ in some important particulars; and seem to have been quartered with those of another family, as the arms of Andrew, being a collateral, might have been. A helmet, beneath the martlet, especially, is wholly different from Peter's crest.

Such precisely are the arms, on the seal of wax, upon Andrew's will, in the Registry. Hence I infer, that Uncle Andrew built this ancient sepulchre. Arms, in days of old, and still, where a t.i.tled n.o.bility exists, are deemed, for the popular eye, sufficient evidence of ownership, without a name. So thought Uncle Andrew; and he left the freestone tablet, without any inscription.

Some five years after the testator's burial, the tomb was again opened, to let in the residuary legatee. Peter's was a grand funeral. The Evening Post, of March 3, 1742-3, foretold, that it would be such; but the papers, which, doubtless, gave an account of it, are lost--the files are imperfect, of all those primitive journals. At first, and for years, the resting place of Peter's remains was well enough known. But the rust of time began to gather upon men's memories. The Faneuil arms, ere long, became unintelligible, to such, as strolled among the tombs. That "_handsome chariot, but nothing gaudy_," with Peter's armorial bearings upon its panels, no longer rolled along Treamount, and Queen Streets, and Cornhill, and drew up, of a Sabbath morning, before Trinity Church, that brother Peter and the ladies might sit upon their cushions, in No. 40, while brother Addington Davenport gave them a sermon, upon the Apostolical succession. The good people had therefore forgotten all about the Faneuil arms; and, before a great many years had rolled away, the inquiry naturally arose, in popular phraseology--"_Whereabouts was it, that Peter Faneuil was buried?_"

Some worthy old citizen--G.o.d bless him--who knew rather more of this matter than his neighbors, and was well aware, that the arms would be but a dead letter to posterity, resolved to serve the public, and remedy the defect. Up he goes into the Granary Ground, in the very spirit of Old Mortality, and, with all his orthography in his ear, inscribes P. FUNEL upon the tablet!

No. Cx.x.xII.

"_But Simon's wife's mother lay sick of a fever._" Mark i. 30. From this text, a clergyman--_of the old school_--had preached just as many, consecutive sermons, as I have already published articles, concerning Peter Faneuil and his family. A day or two after the last discourse, the bell of the village church was tolled, for a funeral; and a long-suffering parishioner, being asked, whose funeral it was, replied, that he had no doubt it was Simon's wife's mother's; for she had been sick of a fever, for nine weeks, to his certain knowledge. Let the reader possess himself in patience--our dealings with the Faneuils cannot last forever.

We have stated, that Peter's death was sudden, the very death, from which, as a churchman, he had prayed to be delivered. But let us not forget, that no death is sudden, in the sense of the good man's prayers, however instantaneously the golden bowl may be broken, to him, whose life has been well spent, and who is prepared to die.

In this connection, two interesting questions arise--how Peter Faneuil came to be a churchman--and if his life was a well-spent life, affording him reasonable a.s.surance of admission into Paradise.

The old Huguenots styled themselves "THE REFORMERS," and embraced the doctrines of Calvin, in full. Oppression commonly teaches even intolerant men the value of toleration. Our Puritan fathers, it is true, who fled from Episcopal, as the Huguenots from Roman Catholic tyranny, profited very little, by the lesson they had learned; and turned upon the Catholics and Quakers, in the spirit of preposterous cruelty. The government of Ma.s.sachusetts, according to Hazard, received a profitable lesson of moderation, from that of Rhode Island.

The Huguenots soon began to abate somewhat of that exorbitant severity and punctiliousness, in their religion, which, in no slight degree, had brought upon them that persecution, which was gathering, and impending over them, in 1684, a twelvemonth before the revocation of the edict of Nantes; compelling many of them, thus early, to fly from their homes, into other lands. The teachings of James Saurin, the great Huguenot preacher of the refugees, at the Hague, in 1705, and in subsequent years, were of a milder type. He was "_a moderate Calvinist_." Such, also, were Daille and Le Mercier, the ministers of the French Church, in Boston.

Peter Faneuil, undoubtedly, worshipped in this church, during a certain period. We have seen the liberal arrangement of his uncle, in 1734, for the support of its minister, and the testator's provision for its poor.

Even then, he evidently antic.i.p.ated, that it might cease to be; and shaped his testamentary provisions accordingly. Natural causes were in operation; I have referred to them--intermarriage, with our English people--merging the language of the few, in that of the many--juxtaposition--all tending to diminish the necessity for maintaining a separate church.

There was no dissolution of the society, at first, by any formal vote. The attendance became irregular and scanty--the members went elsewhere--Le Mercier, "a worthy character," says the Rev. Dr. Holmes, ceased to officiate, and the church broke up. For years, there were no services, within the little temple; and, in 1748, it was sold, as I have stated, to the members of another denomination.

It became a question with these Huguenots, the Faneuils, the Boutineaus, the Johonnots, the Oliviers, the Sigourneys, and their a.s.sociates, where they should worship G.o.d. In 1740-41, the preachers, in Boston, were Charles Chauncey, at the Old Brick--at the Old North, Increase Mather, supplying the place of his brother Samuel, who, though ordained, in 1732, preached but one winter, and parted--at the Old South, Joseph Sewall, and Thomas Prince--at the Baptist, in Back Street, Jeremy Condy--at King's Chapel, Stephen Roe--at Brattle Street, William Cooper--at the Quaker meeting-house, in Leverett's Lane, whoever was moved by the Spirit--at the New North, John Webb--at the New South, Samuel Checkley--at the New Brick, Ellis Gray--at Christ Church, Timothy Cutler--at Long Lane, Jonny Moorhead--at Hollis Street, Mather Byles--at Trinity, Addington Davenport--at Lynde Street, William Hooper.

Several of the descendants of the Huguenots, not at all deterred, by the resemblance, whatever that might be, between the forms of Episcopalian worship, and those of their religious persecutors, the Roman Catholics, mingled with the Episcopalians. Thus they clung to the common element, the doctrine of the Trinity; and escaped, like Saurin, from the super-sulphuretted vapors of primitive Calvinism.

It is not very surprising, that the Faneuils should have settled down, upon the new and fashionable temple--Trinity had been erected but a few years before; and the new rector was Peter's brother-in-law, Mr. Addington Davenport.

Peter therefore became, _pro tanto_, an Episcopalian--a liberal subscriber to the Charitable, Episcopal fund, and to the fund for the rebuilding of King's Chapel; and identified himself with the Episcopal interest.

The religious character of Peter Faneuil, and the present whereabouts of this public benefactor, will be determined, by different individuals, according to the respective indications of their spiritual thermometers.

I have already ventured an opinion, that the mantle of charity, which covereth a mult.i.tude of sins, should be extended, for Peter's behoof, over that little affair with Peter Baynton, touching the duties, on those four hogsheads of brandy. But there is another matter, over which, I am aware, that some very worthy people will doubt, if the mantle of charity, can be stretched, without serious danger of lesion--I refer to the importation, about the same time with the prayer books, of that enormous quant.i.ty--six gross--of "the very best King Henry's cards." I have often marvelled, how the name of the Defender of the Faith ever came to be connected, with such pestilent things.

I am well aware, how closely, in the opinions of some learned divines, cards are a.s.sociated with the idea of eternal d.a.m.nation. If it be so; and a single pack is enough to send the proprietor to the bottomless pit, it is truly grievous to reflect how much deeper Peter, our great public benefactor, has gone, with the oppressive weight of six gross of the very best, upon his soul. Now-a-days, there seem to be very few, the Romanists excepted, who believe in purgatory; and it is pretty generally agreed, that all, who attempt the bridge of _Al Sirat_, will surely arrive, either at Paradise, or Pandemonium.

How delightful it would be, to have the opinion of good old Andre Le Mercier, in a case like this. Though Peter no longer waited upon Le Mercier's ministrations; but, for several years, before the dissolution of the French Church, had settled down, under brother Addington Davenport, first, as the a.s.sistant at King's Chapel, and, afterwards, as the Rector of Trinity; yet Le Mercier could not forget the nephew of his benefactor, Andrew Faneuil. He was, doubtless, at Peter's funeral, who died one and twenty years, before the holy man was summoned to his account, in 1764.

Yes, he was there.

I have heard of a man, who accounted, for the dryness of his eyes, when all around him wept, at a pathetic discourse, on the ground, that he belonged to another parish. I have known Christian ministers--_very_--not many, thank heaven--who were influenced, to such a degree, by that spirit, which may be supposed to govern the proprietors of opposition omnibuses, as to consider the chord of human sympathy cut, through and through, and forever, between themselves, and a parishioner, who, for any cause, elected to receive his spiritual treasures out of some other earthen vessel, albeit of the very same denomination of crockery ware.

Poverty, and disease, and death, and misery, in every type, might stalk in, and upon, and over that homestead, and hearth, where these Christian ministers had been warmed, and refreshed, and fostered--but it was no longer a concern of theirs. No visit of condolence--no kind inquiry--not one, cheap word of consolation had they, for such, as had ceased to receive their ideas of d.a.m.nation from them--enough--these individuals had sold their pews--"_crimen difficile expiandum_"--they belonged to another parish!

Andre Le Mercier, was not a man of this description. He was not a holy huckster of spiritual things, having not one crumb of comfort, for any, but his regular customers. Andre was a man, whose neighbor's ubiquity was a proverb.

But what he would say, about these six gross of King Henry's cards, I am by no means, certain. He was a man of a tolerant spirit; but on certain points, the most tolerant are, occasionally, found to be imbued, with unalterable prejudices. On page 85, of his Church History of Geneva, which I have read with pleasure, he quotes approvingly, the maxim of "a doctor of the church." "_In necessariis rebus sit unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus charitas._" This breathes the spirit of toleration:--what are _dubia_, what _necessaria_ are not quite so readily settled, however.