A Discovery in the Digital Archives

1787 Massachusetts Disqualification Act.

by Tabetha Judy

Originally, my online trip to the archives was pretty overwhelming. Each site that I checked out was packed with information and I had no idea where to begin. But I decided to stick with the Digital Public Library of America and found an easier way to sort through all of the information. On the website, they had sets of primary sources. So I headed there and found that there was an entire collection of primary texts from 1754 to the 1820s. I immediately noticed that there was a set dedicated to Shay’s Rebellion that caught my eye.

This is where I found out that Massachusetts passed a disqualification act in 1787. The act states that anyone who participated in Shay’s Rebellion could not serve as a juror. But through more research on this act, I learned that this went beyond not allowing participants in the Rebellion to be jurors. I learned that participants in the rebellion also lost their ability to vote, were not allowed to serve in town or state government, and were not allowed to go into certain professions for three years. Interestingly, a conditional agreement was created that if any participants pledged allegiance to the state after May 1,1788 then each disqualification in the act would be pardoned.

I did not find the actual text too difficult to read, with the exception of a few oddly spelled words (by our modern standards of course). But it was somewhat clear what the text was stating. I did find the layout of the text to be interesting, as it follows a column newspaper-like pattern. Originally, I found this layout to be a bit odd as from the image I saw, this did not appear to be clipped from a newspaper. But through some more online research, I found out that this did appear in the Daily Hampshire Gazette. It is still unclear if the layout of this act was purposely done for a newspaper, but this helped provide a possible explanation. I was unable to find the conditional agreement that would pardon each disqualification from the act. Which caused me to wonder if there was a separate act passed and how that information was communicated to the public.

This item felt like a perfect match as we just discussed the allusion to Shay’s Rebellion in The Contrast. I also remember us discussing in class how the population of those who were eligible to vote was incredibly small. This act provides even more context to that idea as virtually any government position was unattainable for rebellion participants or anyone who was not wealthy. As well as how voting was so exclusive at this time. I also found it interesting that pledging allegiance would pardon participants from these disqualifications. Since those involved in the rebellion were angry at the government and felt corruption was present in politics, I feel there were probably very few who agreed to those terms. I was unable to find how long this act was in effect or how many participants did agree to the conditions for a pardon which I feel would have made this even more interesting.

While I had some previous experience with digital archives, it was for an education course. So this experience was out of my wheel house and it took me a good bit to get the hang of looking for possible items on the suggested archive websites. The section dedicated to items from the time period for this course was very helpful and I feel I’ve gained a much better understanding of the implications of Shay’s Rebellion. This is a period of history that was often quickly passed over in my previous history courses so I enjoyed exploring the archives and learning more about this interesting act!

The Legacy of Christopher Gadsden

By Tabetha Judy

Portrait of Christopher Gadsden painted by Swiss painter, Jeremiah Theus between 1760-1770. The portrait is currently on display in the Charleston Museum.

Who was Christopher Gadsden?

 Within the Charleston Museum is a magnificent portrait of Christopher Gadsden. Born in 1724 in Charleston, Gadsden has remained a prominent figure for his role in both South Carolina history, and the Revolutionary War. Gadsden is most famous for being the original creator of the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag. But Gadsden also help found the Charleston Sons of Liberty and joined the Continental Army, where he rose to the rank of colonel. As the war progressed, he become the commander of the 1st South Carolina Regiment. However, when the British took over Charleston in 1780, Gadsden was taken as a prisoner of war by General Charles Cornwallis. Gadsden was sent and confined to a solitary prison room within an old Spanish fortress located in St. Augustine Florida. Upon his release in 1781, Gadsden learned of the Cornwallis’s defeat and rushed back to South Carolina in hopes of restoring its civil government. Gadsden served as lieutenant governor under Governor Rutledge from 1780-1782. Although Gadsden had the opportunity to serve as governor of South Carolina, he ultimately refused. However, he remained active in politics and voted for the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1788. In 1805, Gadsden died in his Charleston home and is buried in the St. Phillip’s Churchyard.

Why is Gadsden important and what does his life tell us about 18th century Charleston? 

From his portrait alone, we can already gain a sense that Gadsden was a wealthy man. As he wears fine clothing, his hair is tied back, and he is holding a cane and a hat under his arm. Gadsden’s early life also gives us more insight into life in 18th century Charleston. Gadsden father was a member of the Royal Navy and became a customs collector when he moved to Charleston. Gadsden was able to travel, he went to school in England, served as an apprentice in Philadelphia and served in the King George’s War. He also inherited a large sum of money after the death of his parents in 1741. With that inheritance, he built the Beneventum Plantation House, and owned several slaves. Gadsden even built the “Gadsden Wharf” in Charleston which was the first destination for over 100,000 slaves. Prior to the Revolutionary War, he also worked as a merchant and began getting involved in politics with his election into the Common House of Assembly in 1757. Gadsden’s life shows us Charleston was designed for the wealthy and the powerful. For Gadsden, he was born into a rich household that helped him advance in life, his wealth also helped propel him into positions of power. He also was able to profit off of slavery and contributed to the continuation of slavery with his wharf. However, Gadsden’s service in the Revolutionary War, his dedication and commitment to both our independence and to South Carolina’s government shows his patriotic attitude never faltered.

Why did I choose this portrait? 

In the 18th century section of the Charleston museum there were weapons, uniforms, coins and other items from the period. But the portraits from this time period where few and far between. The only ones on display was a 1791 George Washington portrait, a 1788-1780 Captain William Hall portrait, and of course, Christopher Gadsden. Initially, I found this portrait interesting because there was such little information about him available at the museum. But with some Internet research, I realized he was actually pretty important during this time period. His creation of the Gadsden flag was also a ‘ah-ha’ moment for me because it immediately reminded me of when we discussed it in class. Despite being a Charleston native, when it comes to the Revolutionary War it was always a pretty short lesson in my previous history classes. So it surprised me that I hadn’t heard of Gadsden before and learning about him gave me insight into both life in Charleston during that time, and what the city went through during the war. The most interesting part about my research was learning about his experience as a prisoner of war in St. Augustine, Florida. Gadsden life also showed me that Charleston was a city for the wealthy, and although he served in the Revolutionary War, he also contributed and profited tremendously off of the enslavement of African Americans.