THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ALCOHOL PROHIBITIONISTS FOR THE WASHINGTON TEMPERANCE SOCIETIES

JOURNAL OF STUDIES ON ALCOHOL, VOL. 41,(L), 1980.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ALCOHOL
PROHIBITIONISTS FOR THE WASHINGTON
TEMPERANCE SOCIETIES

With Special Reference to Paterson and Newark, New Jersey

Leonard U. Blumberg*

SUMMARY. The establishment and activities of the Washington Temperance societies in Paterson and Newark are described, and the role of the temperance-prohibitionists in their decline is analyzed.

THE WASHINGTON TEMPERANCE SOCIETIES of the 1840s used a self help conversion approach to drunkards and heavy drinkers, assuring them that they could once again become prosperous and respectable members of the community, reassume their socially mandated responsibilities for their wives and children, liberate themselves from their subservience to King Alcohol, relieve themselves from the terrible fate of eternal damnation and renew the prospect of heavenly salvation if they would only sign the pledge that, as gentlemen, they would no longer drink intoxicating beverages. Maxwell (1) and Blumberg (2) have noted the similarities between Alcoholics Anonymous and the Washingtonians. However, the fact that they developed in different societal contexts may explain the greater stability, success and significance of Alcoholics Anonymous compared with the Washingtonians. The Washingtonians were associated with the nineteenth-century moral reform movements, especially the temperance - prohibition movement,* while A.A. has articulated with the medical profession in its mental health and public health manifestations.

The present essay deals with the significance of the temperance - prohibitionist groups of the 1840s for the rise and decline of the Washingtonian societies. It is the thesis of this paper that, while a number of other elements were involved in the decline of the Washington temperance societies, a major factor was the relationship between the Washington temperance societies and the temperance - prohibitionists.**

* Usually referred to as the (alcohol) temperance movement, the movement by the 1840s had become committed to prohibition. The present paper emphasizes this prohibitionism rather than personal abstinence from alcohol.

** The thesis is similar to the conclusion of Tyler (3,pp. 338-346). Tyler's conclusion is undocumented, however, and must be regarded as hypothetical.

The advocates of temperance had already conducted a considerable agitation campaign by 1840, and the Washingtonians may be regarded as one of the major results of the efforts by the temperance advocates to define the consumption of alcohol in their own terms. Thus, the Baltimore Washingtonian Temperance Society developed after a discussion among six friends as Chasels Tavern about an announced temperance lecture; two of their number agreed to go and hear the speaker and to report back (4). They discussed the matter further and agreed that they would give sobriety and total abstinence a try - but on their own terms. In its organizational beginnings, therefore, the Washington Temperance Society of Baltimore was autonomous from the local temperance societies in Maryland; it was working-class oriented, while the temperance societies were middle-class in origin and predominantly in composition; it was dominated by artisans, while the temperance societies were dominated by ministers. Further, the Washingtonians pledged themselves to exclude politics and religion from their meetings (in order to minimize the sectarian divisiveness of the era and to keep attention focused on the enemy - alcohol), while the temperance societies made a considerable effort to create a link between their cause and religion. From the 1840s on, the temperance societies advocated governmental intervention in the sale of alcohol in order to protect the community and to preserve the family. The founders of the Washingtonian Temperance Society of Baltimore decided to use the practice of telling their "experiences" as the basic agenda (i.e., they witnessed to the destructive effects of alcohol and how abstinence had been beneficial both financially and in terms of respectability) and thereby provided a basis for the rapid spread of Washingtonianism among a population that was ready for it. This growth was facilitated by the recruitment procedures of the Washingtonians from the earliest meetings in Baltimore, it was agreed that members would seek out other drunkards and heavy drinkers and tell them about the society and how it had helped them. From this evolved a missionary or evangelistic style; delegations of at least two would go to other cities and towns to tell the story of how others could be saved from drunkenness and degradation. While a New Testament model is suggested by these practices, it is just as reasonable to suggest that the Washingtonians went in pairs as a way of helping each other over the rough spots of total abstinence. Further, traveling in pairs made it easier to certify that neither had been drinking privately (although it did not guarantee it); the temptation was overpowering at times and alcohol was omnipresent during the period.

Sometimes the Washingtonian missionaries operated as itinerant moral reformers who came into town and began telling their experiences to anyone who would listen; in the bigger towns and cities, however, they were usually invited by local residents who had heard them elsewhere or who had read about them in the local or temperance press. The audience was often sympathetic to begin with. In addition, a number of curious heavy drinkers and "rum sellers" would come, some to scoff and jeer and some hoping to be convinced and converted. The persons who invited the Washingtonian missionaries were deeply involved in the local temperance organizations - they were already committed to a moral cause, which, from their point of view, was of the first magnitude. As committed people they seized upon the Washingtonians as an opportunity to broaden their impact on the community. This was especially important because in the late 1830s the temperance movement was divided as the consequence of a rift between the relativists (who objected only to the use of distilled spirits) and the absolutists (who were against any use of alcohol.) Their network existed in the cities and towns, and they seized upon this chance to mobilize a population that they had been unable to reach - the drunkards and heavy drinkers. By the time the Washingtonian movement began to fade, the absolutists had captured the temperance movement (with the help of the Washingtonians) and had converted it into a prohibitionist movement.

An organizational approach is useful in the analysis not only of the diffusion of the Washington phenomenon, but also of its decline. Whatever their socioeconomic backgrounds, the heavy drinkers and drunkards who were recruited into the local Washingtonian total abstinence societies were not respectable, although they could gain or regain respectability, while the temperance - prohibition advocates who joined the Washingtonian societies were eminently so. That is, one way to view what happened after November 1840, when the Baltimore Washingtonians began to have meetings which were open to the general public, is that a substantial number of temperance - prohibitionists came to the meetings. The temperance - prohibitionists chose to define their activities with respect to the Washingtonians as "lending support;" in political language we might say that the respectables had "infiltrated" the Washingtonian societies. While in the early period it is clear that they did not "take over," the temperance prohibitionists did seek to influence the attitudes of the converted drunkards and heavy drinkers as well as the policies of the societies. I will examine the process as it took place in two north New Jersey societies, pointing out how the temperance prohibitionists sought to shift the emphasis of the Washingtonian temperance societies from "moral suasion" to "legal suasion.11. Further, when it became possible to do so, the temperance - prohibitionists bypassed the Washingtonians and thereby accelerated their decline.

While the discussion that follows will focus on Newark and Paterson, New Jersey, it is necessary to begin with some attention to the beginnings of the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of New York, for the origins of the Newark and Paterson societies were both related to the missionary activities of the New York society. As reported in the Journal of the American Temperance Union, we can trace the beginnings of the New York Washington Benevolent Society to news about events in Baltimore. In a letter to the editor in the January 1841 issue of the Journal of the American Temperance Union, John Zug reports that from 5 April to 12 December 1840 the membership of the Washington Temperance Society of Baltimore grew from the original 6 founding members to about 300 members, two-thirds of whom were said to have been "reformed drunkards." In the same issue of the Journal there is a report of a speech by a Mr. Pollard at a Maryland Temperance Convention held late in 1840. We know now that Pollard was a Washingtonian, but the editor of the Journal, apparently unaware of this fact, made no connection between the reference to Pollard and the letter by Zug, which was printed several pages later. In the February 1841 issue of the Journal of the American Temperance Union, an unsigned letter from Baltimore dated 19 January 1841 states that "Benevolence, philanthropy, patriotism and piety have united in the erection of the proudest monument which has ever graced the most favored city of Christendom. Men, women and children fired with a holy seal, are employed assiduously in collecting materials for this noble work, whose base shall rest upon the rock of truth and whose top, though not expected to 'reach to heaven, I shall be guided by the unclouded rays of truth, and glitter in the effulgence of a 'sun that shall go down no more.

The author of the letter adds that there had developed in Baltimore (by inference as a consequence of the Washingtonian activity) a network of "local and auxiliary associations...formed on the aggressive principle, and meet every, and some of them twice in each week, where crowded assemblies, with an enthusiasm rarely seen on any subject, listen to and applaud their deliberations and plans of operations, which hundreds are coming forward, anxious to participate in the honors of this bloodless triumph."

This, then was the dramatic news from Baltimore to New York where the Journal of the American Temperance Union was published. By late February or early March the Baltimore Washington Temperance Society had grown to 1200 members with several auxiliaries numbering about 1500 more. These data are taken from a circular letter of the Baltimore Washington Temperance Society that was published in the March 1841 issue of the Journal of the American Temperance Union Announcing plans for a grand temperance celebration on 5 April 1841, the first anniversary of the Baltimore society. Among the members were drunkards, habitual drinkers, moderate drinkers and those previously committed to total abstinence who were part of the organized temperance movement. Further, we know from the letter of 19 January 1841, cited above, that the membership included juveniles as well as adults. It seems evident, then, that once the Washington Temperance Society of Baltimore "went public" in November 1840 there were substantial numbers of persons involved in the society who were not drunkards or even heavy drinkers. We must, therefore, regard the report of the New York Herald of 1 February 19841 that the Washington Temperance Society of Baltimore had a thousand members "consisting entirely of reformed intemperate individuals" as an exaggeration, an exaggeration that was repeated in the Journal of the American Temperance Society in the report on events in New York City.

The reports of the activity in Baltimore excited the interest of the Executive Committee of the New York Temperance Society, and they invited the Washington Temperance Society of Baltimore to send a delegation of reformed men (5). The visit began on 26 March and continued for more than a week; more than 20 meetings were held in the largest churches in the city and in the park; nearly 2000 persons signed the total abstinence pledge for the first time, and on 29 March 1841 the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of New York City was formed. By 4 October 1841, it claimed to have 2263 members, 4 city auxiliaries with 600 members and 4 "country" auxiliaries with 1280 members; in that 6-month period it had sent out 62 speakers. Several of these speakers went to Paterson and Newark. Clearly, the New York City temperance society was able to mobilize energy and talent for its cause on a much greater scale than had ever been done before, and this activity was directed not only to the city but to the surrounding areas as well.

PATERSON

The response to the efforts of the New York Washingtonians was rapid. The "friends of temperance" in Paterson met in the Second Baptist Church on 16 April and that "The Committee appointed to wait on the Delegation from Baltimore," report that "they are now in Boston" (6). (1) Among these "friends of temperance" were Joseph Perry (Schoolteacher) and Alex H. Freeman (sheet metal and stoves), both of whom were later active in the organization of the Washingtonians in Paterson. (2) The senior partner and editor of the Paterson intelligencer, D.H. Day, who was sympathetic to the cause, seized the opportunity to keep interest alive by reprinting an article from the Boston Journal which described, in glowing terms, the visit of the Baltimore delegation (7): "Our friends in the country will be rejoiced to know that there never has existed so much healthy excitement on the subject of temperance, in our city, as at the present moment. - Meetings are held every evening and are crowded to overflowing," it reported. "The mass of people listen with breathless attention to the speakers, and every man goes away with a new zeal in the prosecution of the holy enterprise...Mr. Hawkins, at the Bethel [North Square, Boston] spoke for one hour with tremendous power, and carried his audience captive at his will. Now a deep and solemn silence pervaded the house; now was heard the hushed sob; and now again the outpouring of acclamation, like a cataract's roar. Mr. Wright spoke with more interest and power than he had yet done in our city; and this saying much. After his address four hundred and fifteen came forward and signed the pledge!” So it is no surprise that when Hawkins and Wright (2 of the original Baltimore delegation to New York City), along with several speakers from the New York Washington Temperance Benevolent Society, conducted a series of meetings in Paterson that May they were well received. The Paterson Intelligenc6r commented (8) the "the lectures had formerly been, according to their own statements, drunkards of the worst sort, and the accounts they gave of their own sufferings, and the sufferings of their families, were painful beyond description. Their lectures were strictly practical, and therefore had a greater effect upon the minds of the hearers than all the temperance addresses by persons who knew nothing of the subject from experience" As a consequence, 300 people signed the Washingtonian pledge; on 10 May the Paterson Washington Temperance Benevolent Society was formed by 30 of those who had signed the pledge, using both the name of the New York Society and its constitution (9). ("Temperance Benevolent" was the New York style, in contrast with Baltimore's "Temperance" and Boston's "Total Abstinence.") The Paterson Intelligencer (8), in its comments on the initial formative meetings in Paterson observed that "The ardor of the new fledged total abstinence is truly exhilarating; it seems to them that nothing has hitherto been done in the glorious cause; instead of opposing, as hitherto, they now will take the lead, and as old soldiers turn aside, as a relieved corps, they will go on to certain victory." Ultimately, the "old soldiers" found this enthusiasm a source of irritation as well as satisfaction, because the temperance-prohibitionists had been "labouring in the vineyard" for a long time and wanted what they regarded as their justly deserved reward of community recognition. At the time, however, all were caught up in a glowing and expansive enthusiasm that is evidenced in the report from Paterson printed in the Newark Daily Advertiser of 1 July 1841: "We have known many plans devised for the prosperity and improvement of our towns; laws enacted, companies formed, and new projects to facilitate business carried out - but they all sink into insignificance, both in moral and pecuniary point of view, by the side of the work we are now speaking of." Such dynamism and exaggerated expectations are not atypical of movements for social change in their early growth periods.

In its original form, the Baltimore Washingtonian pledge read as follows (4): "We, whose names are annexed, desirous of forming a society for our mutual benefit, and to guard against a pernicious practice, which is injurious to our health, standing and families we do pledge ourselves as gentlemen, not to drink any spirituous or malt liquors, wine or cider." The pledge used by the New York and Paterson societies reflected the influence of the temperance prohibitionists (10): "We, whose names are hereunto annexed, believing that the use of Intoxicating Liquors as a beverage, is not only needless, but hurtful to the social, civil and religious interests of men - that it tends to form intemperate habits - and that while it is continued, the evils of intemperance will never be done away - do, therefore , pledge ourselves that we will not drink any spirituous or malt liquor, wine or cider, and that in all suitable ways we will discountenance the use of them through the community." While this pledge seemed to support nonpolitical moral suasion (the Washingtonian position) its wording also provided the opening wedge for an explicit legal suasion - prohibitionist position.

The same dynamism that galvanized the Baltimoreans, the New Yorkers and the Bostonians was immediately evident in Paterson. During the first quarter-year, the Paterson Washingtonians conducted 9 mission meetings, which led to the formation of 3 new societies in nearby communities. We know the name of only 1 of these, the Manchester Washington Temperance Benevolent Society, which continued through the years to have a close relationship with the Paterson group. Their activity increased during the second quarter, when 39 mission meetings were held, and continued at least to the middle of June 1842, when delegates were sent to towns in Rockland County, New York, some 20 miles away. Street meetings were held from time to time in Paterson during the same period. A special delegation was even sent to "Cheap Josey's," a tavern "situated between Paterson and Bloomfield ... where shoemakers, tailors, pacemakers, cotton and woolen factory boys, and farmers, met together to drink, gamble and fight" (11,p.5).

This dynamism was also manifested in the personal lives of the artisans and workingmen who signed the pledge and joined the Washingtonians. For instance, John Broughton, a tailor, advertised that he had taken the pledge of "total abstinence from all that intoxicates and in consequence am restored to my sober senses again," and he appealed to his fellow townsmen to give him their "confidence and esteem as a consequence of his constant and sober application to his craft"(12).

The enthusiasm was also evidenced organizationally. By 23 June 1841, there was a [Boys] Juvenile Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of 50 members (13), who recited the following form of the pledge:

A pledge we make, by drinking gin; No wine to take, hard cider, too nor brandy, red, Will never do. To turn the head, nor brewer's beer, nor whiskey hot, Our hearts to cheer, That makes the sot, O quench our thirst, we always bring Nor fiery rum, Cold water, from the well or spring. That ruins home; so here we pledge perpetual hate. Nor will we sin, to all that can intoxicate.(3)

The junior society had about 130 members by the time of the Independence Day celebration. The Fourth of July was a time of special significance to the Washingtonians because in the past it had been the occasion for drunken sprees which disrupted the annual civic parades and embarrassed the respectable citizenry who saw it as a quasi-religious occasion for rededication to freedom and morality. Thus the Independence Day celebration in 1841 was different from previous ones; in the morning the town's Sunday school students paraded, and in the afternoon members of the Paterson Washington Temperance Benevolent Society marched in procession to the Congregational Methodist Church and were presented with a banner by the women church members which read "Total Abstinence from all that Intoxicates." They proceeded to what is now known as Totowa and then to an island in the Passaic River where they heard orations, most of which were by local ministers and ministers from New York (who, we may infer, were temperance-prohibitionists). The brass band of the Passaic Guards, a local voluntary militia group, played music. After a collation, the group met in the Second Presbyterian Church, where some Washingtonian experience speeches were given and some pledges were taken. The Washingtonians were, of course, celebrating their freedom from bondage to alcohol; the temperance-prohibitionist preachers were exhorting their listeners to free the country from its bondage to the rum sellers and rum makers; the contrast with past Independence Day celebrations was stark indeed!

Another sign of vitality was the existence of an active relief committee. The society's constitution provided that when they found a "poor drunkard in distress, from poverty, and unable to provide for his immediate necessities, to furnish him with food, raiment and shelter, or any of them, at his own discretion or if need be, with medicine and medical advice, provided always, that such relief shall in no case be granted unless there be reasonable grounds to believe that such poor drunkard will sign the pledge and reform...11 (10, Art.VI). The relief committee was active in the town although its actual cash resources were very limited. It's work was supplemented by that of the Martha Washington Temperance Benevolent Society, which in the quarter ending 3 August 1842 handed out $7.72 in cash, 23 articles of clothing and sundry provisions to families of reformed inebriates. The first directress at that time was the wife of Joseph Perry, the school-teacher who was also active as a temperance-prohibitionist.

By mid September 1841, the Paterson Washingtonians felt strong enough to call for a countrywide mass temperance meeting. The meeting was held on 19 November; had there not been a snowfall of several inches, the Martha Washingtonians of Paterson would have marched in the procession under their banner with a slogan that made their position quite clear: "Total abstinence or no husband! 11 Forty years later, the Woman's Christian Temperance Union used a similar slogan: "Lips that touch wine will never touch mine."

Finally, membership and financial data give us an additional assessment of the strength of the Paterson Washingtonian society in its formative period, although it is certainly not a clear one. By the end of the first quarter year of its existence, the Paterson society had 290 members and had gotten 1245 pledges, including 230 from the junior society. During the second quarter, the recording secretary claimed that 504 had joined the society, making a total of 1730 members. (4)These membership statistics must be viewed with caution because it seems probable that the distinction between members of the Paterson society and those who had signed the society's pledge had been obfuscated; it seems more likely that the 504 reported new members were those who had signed the pledge during the quarter and that 1730 was the total number of persons who had signed the pledge up to that time. Later data supported this interpretation: in March 1842 it was reported that the Paterson society had 2572 members; during the ensuing week 77 persons signed the pledge, and there was then a report of 2649 members. This confusion makes it impossible to assess the significance of membership statistics. Nevertheless, there is little doubt that through mid-1842 the Paterson society continued to grow; what is in doubt is the rate of growth and the numbers during this period of maximal growth.

The financial data also gives us a mixed picture of the vitality of the Paterson Washingtonians. In the first quarter, the society had a cash income of $28.35 and an expenditure of $19.56 for the use of a local Presbyterian church as a meeting place and for the relief of "poor drunkards." But, with a cash balance of $8.69, the society also had "accounts receivable" (my term) of $54, some of which was due from members and the balance of which had probably been given as loans rather than as cash grants to drunkards. The financial problem continued into the second quarter when the recording secretary commented in his report that the society was having problems collecting fees and dues owed to it; he recommended the formation of a special committee and also that a collection be taken at each meeting. By November 1842, a resolution was adopted "that some means may be devised to liquidate the debt of the Society, and report some plan to keep out of debt in the future..." (15). The procedure apparently adopted was one common for the period, subscriptions (regular contributions) were solicited among the citizens of Paterson.

The Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of Paterson continued to have considerable vitality at least through Independence Day. In May, the first anniversary of the society was celebrated with a public parade attended by delegates from Manchester, Aquackanonk, Hackensack, Godwinville, New Prospect, Jersey City, Newark, Boonton, Morristown and Mattewan. A company of Washington Temperance Guards with its own band came from New York City. Several weeks later, a group from New York City Hose Company Number 33 came to Paterson "with a view of giving our citizens a Specimen of Temperance song singing," and there was "an overflowing meeting assembled to hear this celebrated company exercise their vocal powers. Their performance was received with great éclat by the audience and gave universal satisfaction. One of them related his experience of the sad effects of drunkenness, and several of our cold water army made short addresses..."(16). They also successfully persuaded the members of the Paterson Company Number 3 to sign the pledge as a group. Sometime in April a group of Temperance Guards, including a choral group that sang regularly at the meetings of the society, was formed in Paterson. The combined Independence Day celebration of the Paterson and Manchester societies went well and was the major celebration in the town. The Washingtonians apparently continued to perceive themselves as the leaders of the temperance movement, judging by the toast to "Reformed Drunkards" (17), which went as follows: "The great Pioneers, who in front of the army of truth, are now successfully cutting the way through the Alcoholic wilderness of inequity and crime ..." The last pledge of the celebration, however, reflected both the continued concern for heavy drinkers and a recognition that the bloom had begun to fade: "To Backsliders - We pity them - May they again sign the pledge, and 'beware of the first glass."' This note of realism contrasts with the congratulatory tone of the recording secretary's comments at the close of the second quarterly report of the Paterson society (18): "Before closing this Report, it seems proper to notice the fidelity and perseverance with which the reformed have kept their pledge, and the blessed results to which this conduct has led, whether considered in reference to their own characters, the comfort and well being of their families, their influence in society, or their business affairs; also to invite the temperate and moderate drinker to cooperate with us in the endeavor to put an end to drunkenness." At this time Nathaniel Lane (sheet metal worker and stove merchant) was president of the society and his partner, Alex H. Freeman, was a member of the standing (executive) committee. (Lane was elected town tax collector on the Whig ticket in 1844. Joseph Perry was treasurer and John K. Flood, a storekeeper who short became town clerk, had been recording secretary and was now corresponding secretary. In addition, the arrangements committee included David H. Day, publisher of the Paterson Intelligencer, Abraham Van Blarcom, a temperance-prohibitionist, and John Avison, shoemaker, who was an activist in antislavery politics, a temperance-prohibitionist, and the town post-master. There can be no doubt that the temperance-prohibitionists were in positions of dominance in the society at this time.

By that summer, however, the new recording secretary commented in the quarterly report (19) that "There has been for a short time past, at least it seemed to me, a suppression of spirits among our veteran troops of this town; nor indeed with a reflecting mind is this to [be] wondered at, for preparatory to the great and glorious battles of the 10th of May and the 4th of July last, both resulting in signal victory over the enemy, their exertions, both physically and mentally, was excessive from exercise; marching, countermarching, raising and manning batteries, with a thousand or more etceteras, together with pains of scars (for their were no lives lost on the side of the Temperance Army) which are consequent to the battlefield." He continued, "Our spirits and wounds now healed up, let the victories of the past encourage to redouble our exertions, in not only guarding against the insidious movements of the deadly foe, but in making secure preparations for the next pitched battle, which will be fought on May 10th, 1843." Still using military language, he urged the society, "not to retire to our camps in the flush of victory... 11 and to "stand aloof from all political manoeuvring" for he observed that the society was being wooed by "wiley politicians" whom he called "wolves in sheep's clothing." The latter history of the society suggests that he was referring to the "respectables" who had joined the society. Civic life during this period was intensely political, and there can be little doubt that efforts were made to manoeuvre what seemed to be a strong and vital group to express positions favourable to the election of Whig, Anti-Slavery or Loco-foco (Democrat) candidates. The recording secretary had pointed to what proved to be a recurring problem for the society. In contrast to his predecessor in the post, the recording secretary, who warned his fellow Washingtonians of the dangers of alcohol and the need to continue to fight, apparently had an alcohol problem of his own; he was unceremoniously dropped from office on 28 October 1842 because he had broken his pledge, a fact that he acknowledged in a written communication that he requested be placed in the minutes of the society. Other incidents of recidivism began to receive attention, and there was an occasional report in the Paterson Intelligencer. Such a case was that of a 33-year-old man who after 18 months of abstinence, went on a spree and, despite the best efforts of a representative of the society (similar to Twelfth-Stepping in Alcoholics Anonymous), finally drowned himself in the Passaic River.

The annual report of the Manchester Washington Temperance Benevolent Society (20), published just before Christmas, 1842, indicated that the falling off of interest and "backsliding" were not unique to Paterson. The Manchester Society claimed 102 members when it was organized, some having dual membership in the Paterson society. Participation apparently had never been heavy, even among those who signed the pledge and were considered members, but with the help of the Paterson society, the total number had grown to 642. Two of the three taverns in Manchester had closed down, all 4 of the town's grocery stores had stopped selling spirits, and reclaimed members were now observing the Sabbath in church. Notwithstanding this, Benjamin Geroe, the recording secretary and an active temperance-prohibitionist, commented that some of the officers as well as some of the members "have not paid that attention to so good a cause as they might have done, and probably through their inattention in a measure, may be ascribed the cause of some falling away or returning to their cups." He concludes, nonetheless, with the hopeful statement that "of late a new impulse appears to be given to the standard of Teetotalism, as if they were determined on nothing less than complete victory."

Meanwhile the society rapidly became routinized; its meetings apparently were about the same week after week and much of the early excitement dissipated. Some of the extra-organizational efforts of the society were given up. Both the Junior Washington Temperance Benevolent Society and the Temperance Guards projects were abandoned sometime after the Independence Day celebration. Appeals were made to "make some extra efforts to produce a more lively interest in the cause of Temperance"(15), and a week-long series of meetings, similar to those held in the formative period of the society, was organized. Prominent speakers from New York and Philadelphia were "engaged" for these meetings; special meetings were held as often as possible to hear popular "Washingtonian lectures," for a degree of specialization had begun to emerge. That comment that "If the above named gentlemen do not draw full houses, we don't know who can" (21), makes clear that recruitment was uppermost in the minds of the sponsors. A drift away from Washingtonian practices appears to have begun; at the last meeting in November 1842, a motion was passed that thereafter the pledge would not be circulated at meetings but would be available for those who wished to sign. Evidently most of those who now came to the meetings had signed the pledge; for all practical purposes, the membership recruitment process had reached its peak and only a few who were eligible to sign the pledge were now coming to the meetings. Further, "experience meetings," which were a central feature of Washingtonian practice, had apparently fallen off during mid-1842, because a motion was passed to hold experience meetings "in order to bring out new speakers to keep up the interest of the meetings" (22). But these experience meetings were to be held on Thursday nights while the regular meetings were held on Friday nights (both were held in the basement of the Methodist Episcopal Church). A trial of King Alcohol was scheduled for February 1843 in order to pique the interest of persons who might not otherwise be attracted to the meetings. For a time the weekly meetings were dropped, but they were begun again in the hope that they would attract more members and greater participation.

The second anniversary celebration of the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of Paterson, on 10 May 1843, was a more subdued affair than the previous one, although there was a procession through Paterson and Manchester. The Independence Day celebration that year included the Washingtonians, but they did not dominate it as they had in the two previous years. The incoming president, Samuel A. Van Saun, was a grocery store keeper, a member of the Township Poor Committee, and a warden of the Paterson Fire Association; the incoming recording secretary was Dr. J. Nightingale; the treasurer was William Moyle, a public accountant and bill collector, who was also an active antislavery advocate; and John Avison was on the standing committee. Given this kind of top leadership in the Paterson society, it is not surprising to find that on 18 June 1843 there was a lecture by Reverend Warren, agent of the New Jersey State Temperance Society, and that on the next day Warren suggested organizing a juvenile band to be coordinated with the activities of the Washington Society. That is, the temperance-prohibitionists now proposed to pick up the juvenile program that the Washingtonians had abandoned.

The liaison with the temperance-prohibitionists intensified in 1844. Until this time, the Paterson Washingtonians had largely ignored the meetings of the county and state temperance societies, but now a delegation was appointed to attend the State Temperance Convention to be held in Trenton on 17 January 1844. Among the delegates were Benjamin Geroe the longtime recording secretary of the Manchester society (which was now an auxiliary of the Paterson society), Nathaniel Lane, Samuel A. Van Saun and Horatio Moses, the incoming president of the Paterson society. The third anniversary celebration of the Paterson Washingtonians on 10 May 1844 was a relatively subdued evening service held in the Methodist Episcopal Church. "The audience was large and respectable, "said the Paterson Intelligencer, (23), "principally ladies, whose presence and strict attention, enlivens and cheers a meeting of any description.', One of the principal speakers was the Reverend E. Cheever, of Newark, secretary of the Essex County Temperance Society, who gave an address "well calculated to invigorate teetotalers with new life and to reward action." Horatio Moses was the new president; Samuel A. Van Saun was now treasurer, John Avison and Benjamin Crane, an antislavery activist, were members of the executive committee and Wright Flavell, also an antislavery activist, was on the relief committee. The speaker at the 9 August 1844 meeting was the Reverend Mr. Wise, agent of the New England Temperance Society, whose subject was "the moral character of the traffic in intoxicating liquors; in which he showed by convincing arguments, that it could not be carried on in obedience to the divine commandments, but was productive of much injury to mankind, producing crime, disease, degradation, and death to a great extent" (24). This was followed by a speech on 30 August 1844 at which a Mr. Root spoke "of the necessity of Christians aiding the Temperance Cause" (25). Root also discussed his theory that evil spirits exert influence over men suffering from delirium tremens (26), which is referred to as a "disease" in the newspaper report. All of this built to a meeting on 15 November at which the members of the society were asked to circulate a petition to the legislature calling for prohibition of the sale of alcoholic drinks on the Christian Sabbath; the members of the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of Paterson had now been brought around to political activism contrary to the original Washington stance and in line with the temperance-prohibitionist political strategy of incrementalism. The principal speaker, the Reverend Mr. Russell, further "spoke of the influence of Public Sentiment in Republican governments, and showed that in order to sustain good laws we must continue to sow the seeds of truth and thus get public sentiment right in regard to the subject of Temperance, that it will sustain good laws" (27). His speech, in conjunction with those of other recent speakers, provided the basis for a justification of political temperance activity-prohibitionism.

From this point on, reports of the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society become more and more sketchy. The affiliation with the state temperance society had become regularized is suggested by the fact that three of the four delegates sent to the January 1845 convention had also been to the 1844 convention. Informal ties were developed with the Ancient Order of Rechabites, a temperance fraternal order. In March 1846 the Paterson Washingtonians moved another step, toward the temperance- prohibitionist approach with the passage of a resolution stating "That in the opinion of this Society, the Court of Common Pleas, at its present session in granting licenses, have not only violated the strict letter and spirit of the law, but have shown themselves destitute of common morality" (26). This resolution, ostensibly a commentary on who should or should not receive licenses, moves close to prohibitionism when it denounces the members of the court as "destitute of common morality"; only by a refusal of all licenses would the court have been in accordance with the concept of "common morality," which the group now seemed to espouse. The Paterson Washington society was almost moribund by 1846, but there was still enough life in it for a major controversy, one which illustrates that, for all practical purposes, it had been absorbed into the temperance-prohibitionist camp. This was so, despite the fact that on 18 March 1846 it published a resolution to the effect that it was neutral with respect to moral, political or religious questions and that it did not attempt to control the individual acts of its members in any respect outside of its business in the Temperance Hall. This was obviously in anticipation of a letter printed in the Paterson Intelligencer of 25 March 1846 by S. Tutle, a member of the executive committee of the society, in which he tendered his resignation from the committee on the grounds that the society had become political. "There were some," he wrote, "who were slow to embrace the principles of Total Abstinence, and Washingtonians, forgetting the secret of their success (moral suasion), resorted to political action, to force those men into compliance with their principles. From that time to the present, a shameful course of hypocrisy and double-dealing has been pursued by many of the professed friends of Temperance. They care no more for the progress of Temperance principles than they do for the religion of Mohamet; and they only mount the Temperance hobby, hoping to ride over the ruins of the Whig party." Tuttle went on to point out that at a recent county temperance meeting called at the behest of the Paterson Washington society a resolution was adopted that "we, as lovers of the principles set forth in the previous address [i.e., temperance-prohibitionist principles], will not give our suffrage to any persons who is not pledged to Total Abstinence," thereby proscribing every unpledged candidate and raising up a powerful opposition to the temperance cause. Tuttle argued that the Paterson Washington society had called the meeting and that the resolution had been passed unanimously, and so the Paterson Society, was inconsistent in now claiming that it had not taken a political position. Tuttle further claimed that one of the objects of the meeting was to take action to support the formation of a temperance ticket for town officers at the ensuing town meeting. Tuttle argued that such a ticket could not win but could only lead to the defeat of the Whigs. To which some participants of the convention reportedly replied "God speed" before Tuttle could point out that the major consequence of the plan would be the election of the Democratic slate. When he did point that out and offered a counterrevolution, he was voted down by those who were committed to political action. He charged that "The Society has now sanctioned the political juggling of its members, by telling them in effect, that it will have nothing to do with politics, and that they may come into their Hall and hold a Temperance Benevolent meeting, and then go right into the next room, or any other place and hold a Temperance Political meeting, and it will be all right; and if any man charges the Society with political movements, then he is an artful and designing man! I think, sir that the Temperance Society, as a body, is secretly in favour of these political movements, and therefore I have declined acting as one of its Business Committee." He goes on to say that after the meeting one member admitted that he wanted the Whig party to lose at the next election and that he was a Loco-foco (Democrat). An unsigned reply the following week argued that Mr. Tuttle had intruded into a private meeting called expressly to form a caucus (and, by inference that was not a Washingtonian meeting) and so he was out of order. Efforts were made to resolve the serious disagreement that had arisen within the Paterson Washington Temperance Benevolent Society but they were not very successful. The society went on with its annual meeting and the Independence Day celebration was conducted in conjunction with the Rechabites and the Sons of Temperance. At one meeting in June not enough members were present to provide a quorum. The struggle came to a head when, at the mid-August meeting, Abraham Van Blarcom, a temperance-prohibitionist, offered a resolution that the society support a local option license law similar to the one in New York State and that the members of the society would not support anyone who was "not known as the open and decided friend of such a law" (29). The motion was tabled, to be brought up at the mid-September meeting. Tuttle offered an amendment to strike out the clause about withholding the vote, and the support of local option licensing passed. There ensued an indecisive struggle between the advocates of withholding the vote and those opposed. The resolution of this struggle was not publicly reported, but it is clear that the temperance-prohibitionist position in favour of legal suasion had been accepted even by those who were opposed to withholding the vote; the struggle was over the next steps of political activity rather than the principle that Washingtonians would refrain from efforts to prevent the consumption or sale of alcoholic beverages through legislation.

That the Paterson Washington Temperance Benevolent Society was now largely irrelevant to the temperance movement in Paterson is evidenced by the fact that in early November 1847 a series of temperance meetings were announced in the various churches in town - the Methodist Episcopal, Baptist and Free Presbyterian. The meetings were strongly legalistic and linked morality to a legislative approach. The Washingtonian society was not a sponsor of these meetings; it had been bypassed. There is even some question as to whether the organization any longer existed except in a nominal sense, for reports of its activities were no longer published in the Paterson Intelligencer, which had been strongly supportive from its very inception.

NEWARK

On 21 July 1841 the Paterson Intelligencer made the following proud commentary on the effect of the Washington temperance reform, which was then in its triumphant first flush in Paterson (30): "We question whether there is now a town in the state which can boast of a more sober, quiet and industrious population than our own. Nearly all who but a short time since spent most of their time in idleness about taverns and other places of resort, have become steady industrious citizens, and are busily employed in their daily vocations, while their families, who formerly suffered for the want of the necessaries of life, are now made comfortable and happy." Paterson was a rapidly growing industrial town, and this was a frank statement of the values of its dominant manufacturing and merchant class of this period. These were also values of the temperance-prohibitionists, who used the Washingtonian phenomenon for their own purposes.

This statement of civic pride implied that Paterson was the moral leader of the State, that it was ahead of Newark. This contrast to Newark was made explicit by the editor, who went on to say that "In Newark the subject of Temperance has been permitted to sleep, until within a week or two back, when a deputation from New York held a meeting in one of the churches in the city, at which one hundred and sixty attached their names to the pledge." On 12 July 1841, A Washingtonian Temperance Benevolent Society was founded with 119 members.

While the Washingtonian missionaries came to Newark about 2 months later than to Paterson, the editor of the Newark Daily Advertiser, who was also a "friend of temperance," was already mobilizing his readers for the temperance reform. And, while he gave little attention to it during the Washingtonian period, the editor was prepared to accept the fact that the substantial Catholic Total Abstinence Movement, which was also growing during that period, was another valid approach to temperance. For the period, this was surprisingly broad-minded, but a perusal of the Journal of the American Temperance Union in the early 1840s will show that the temperance-prohibitionist leadership highly esteemed and fully reported the work of Father Theobald Matthew in Ireland, England and (later) in the United States. "I had heard much during the week of the triumphs of the Temperance cause, or rather total abstinence, among the people who "worship" at an unnamed local Roman Catholic Church, he wrote (31). "I confess that owing either to my Protestant prejudices or some other cause, I previously felt misgivings as to any permanent good likely to result from the pushing of the multitude under what I supposed a mere temporary excitement to 'take the pledge.' But the scene I there witnessed entirely dissipated all my fears ... The clergyman officiating ... preached of Temperance and Righteousness, and Judgments to come. I have heard many temperance addresses, but none I think that could exceed the impressive, fervid, and thrillingly eloquent appeals to his auditory, in the strength of God, to fly the destroying angel - Intemperance. 11 He continued, "The effect was powerful. Upon countenances could be traced sore indications of judgments convinced; and the calm and deliberate manner in which they surrounded the alter, and there solemnly pledged themselves to Total Abstinence from all that intoxicates, gave pleasing proof of the deep and sincere convictions that they would be kept faithful to their high resolve..."

That there are few if any reports in the Newark Daily Advertiser in subsequent years, given the fact that the editor had abandoned his prejudices with respect to Catholics (in this respect, in any case), suggests that local parish priests did not seek publicity. Perhaps the rising controversy over public education, religious education, Catholic education and the use of public funds soured the situation. In any case, the editor had come around to the view that taking pledges of total abstinence was perhaps not as useless as he had believed and he was, therefore, prepared to receive the Washingtonians in a positive manner. There is good reason to believe that he was aware of the Washingtonians by mid-May, for on 12 May there was a report about the meeting of the American Temperance Union which was held in Newark that year (32). Theodore Frelinghuysen, lawyer, former U.S. senator, chancellor of the University of New York, soon to be nominated for vice president of the American Temperance Union, gave the major speech. In it, Frelinghuysen not only mentioned the total abstinence movement in Ireland and in Europe, but the "strong, and in good degree, successful efforts of the drunkards themselves in various cities of the U. States to emancipate themselves of intemperance." He also reported that 15,000 drunkards had been reformed in the country within the last 6 months - probably an exaggeration.

The following week there was a favourable review of a pamphlet by Dr. David Reese entitled "Plea for the Intemperate," which argued that intemperance is a disease" and that the subject should be treated, not harshly, but medically and with great kindness" (33). (This was not an uncommon medical view during the period.) The reviewer went on to say that "Mr. Hawkins confirms this view of the matter in his effective practical addresses, and in the plea of Dr. Reese we find a medical man of large experience sustaining the same position, and arguing the question like a man of sense as well as a physician." The reviewer also remarked on the number "reclaimed" in Baltimore, New York, Boston and "cities farther east" due to the efforts of drunkards, along with "friends of the cause," who were encouraged "to extend an encouraging voice and benevolent hand to the reclaimed." He contrasted this with the past when drunkards were simply given up as lost. "Now they are becoming not only temperate, but the preachers and ministering agents of the cause." On 5 June 1941 reports from the Baltimore Transcript summarized in the Newark Daily Advertiser (34) noted that "no idea can be formed of the enthusiasm which pervades that city on the subject of Temperance. It is the all-pervading topic, and the moral revolution which has been effected mainly by the drunkards themselves, is almost past belief."

So it came as no surprise to the readers of the paper when it was announced that there would be a meeting to promote the temperance cause on Friday evening, 9 July 1841, in the Free (Second) Presbyterian Church, and that a delegation of reformed drunkards from the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of New York would attend: "Friends of Temperance and persons addicted to drinking habits and the drunkard, dealers and vendors of liquor, are respectfully invited to attend" (35).

The New York Washingtonians continued to have a close relationship with the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of Newark after it was formed on 12 July 1841; speakers from New York frequently came to Newark. Wright, Pollard and Hawkins of the Baltimore society also visited Newark when they were in New York. When the Newark society called a convention of Washington temperance societies for 17 September 1841, speakers from Paterson, New York and Brooklyn came; the Newark society reciprocated when it attended en masse a Washingtonian convention in New York City on 13 October 1841. When the Newark society dedicated its own hall on 9 December 1841, a speaker from the New York City society was among those who addressed the meeting. When a banner was presented to the North Ward Washingtonians on 28 July 1842, the presentation speech was made by Dr. Reese of New York and the acceptance speech for the Washingtonians of Newark was made by Reverend E. Cheever, of Newark, who was Secretary of the Essex County Temperance Society and pastor of the Free (or second) Presbyterian Church.

Information about the Newark Washington Temperance Benevolent Society and its auxiliaries is Sketchy and sporadically available because there evidently was an editorial policy against reporting the activities of local groups. There seemed to be such a policy in Paterson also, but the owners apparently contributed space in the announcement section and also published an occasional article of interest; the Newark Daily Advertiser was less generous. What we have then, are bits and pieces that are suggestive but often not definitive.

Available evidence suggests that the Newark Washingtonians quickly evidenced the same kind of organizational activity that developed elsewhere. We have substantial information on the Martha Washington Temperance Union which was formed on 14 August 1841. In addition to an address by a missionary from the Baltimore society, speeches and prayers were offered by the minister of the Newark Mariners' Bethel, Reverend Pilch, and the minister of the First Presbyterian Church, Reverend Ansel D. Eddy. From the very beginning, the society had close ties to the churches; the board of managers was composed of members of 11 different churches. This was done, said the report of the meeting (36), in order to be "empathically a UNION of all classes and denominations throughout the city. Its object is two-fold. By pledging its members to abstain from using, as a beverage, aught that can intoxicate, it gives the weight of its example; by procuring and making up clothing for the families of reformed inebriates, it extends to them the hand of sympathy and encouragement. 'In union is strength.' The Board respectfully invite the cooperation of every lady in this city who has a heart to pity or hand to relieve. 11 Plans were also made for the organization of a Junior Martha Washington Society. In the first quarter-year of activity, the Martha Washington Temperance Union had completed 89 articles of clothing, including 6 bed quilts; in addition, 70 articles had been repaired, 80 garments had been given out and 106 had been handed over to the president of the Washington temperance society for distribution. The society had gotten 156 persons to sign their pledge and, with an income of about $56.81, had paid out about $37.17. Clearly their money-raising efforts had been more successful than those in Paterson. By the time the second annual report was made in 1843, there were 4 women's temperance societies in the City of Newark - The Martha Washington Temperance Union, the Junior Martha Washington Society, the Lady Warren and the Relief. In the past year, the Martha Washington Union had assisted 44 families, made 160 garments and repaired 107; 375 items had been distributed by the members and 108 had been presented to the president of the men's group for distribution among needy men. The union had received about $51.87 and disbursed about $52.62, so that there was now a slight deficit. (Later reports seem not to be available.)

Another sign of organizational vitality was the participation of the Newark society in a convention of delegates from all Washington Temperance Benevolent societies in Essex County that was originally scheduled to be held on 25 December 1841. Since there was an Essex County temperance-prohibition meeting on 22 December, this suggests that the two groups had little to do with each other and perhaps were in competition. The selection of Christmas Day for the meeting can be considered nothing less than a flouting of the religious proprieties of the period, and it is little wonder that the convention actually took place on 25 January 1842. There were 54 delegates from societies in Newark, Elizabeth, Springfield, North Belleville, Westfield, Orange, Union, Belleville and West Bloomfield. An Essex County Washington Temperance Benevolent Society was formed, with Abner Campbell of Newark, a manufacturer of looking glass (mirrors), as interim president, Wickliffe Woodruff, also of Newark, a coach smith, was one of the interim secretaries of the county society. The Reverend Mr. Pilch, pastor of the Newark Mariners I Bethel, addressed the group. When the Essex County group met again in February, one of the Newark leaders, J.P. Joralemon (locksmith), was on the nominating committee, and Jacob Johnson (coffee and spice dealer), also of Newark, was elected corresponding secretary of the Essex County society.

Interest in Washingtonianism continued unabated in 1842. A "great temperance meeting" was held on 2 February in the Third Presbyterian Church. "No falling off - no lack of interest was perceptible on this occasion - the work goes bravely on. A more crowded house has seldom been convened on any occasion. The addresses were listened to with deep interest, and the intelligence of the progress of the good cause in other places was hailed with thrilling delight. At the close of the meeting great numbers of both sexes, who had hitherto kept aloof, gave their names to the pledge. There were also some pretty hard customers came up to the scratch. Indeed the influence is like a mighty current - it carries every thing before it" (37). It seems reasonable to conclude that while some of those who signed the pledge were drunkards, a substantial proportion of the signers were moderate-to-light drinkers or were already total abstainers.

By Independence Day, 1842 there were three Washingtonian societies in Newark; in addition to the original (or "parent" society) there was also a North Ward society and a Bethel society. The three societies agreed to plan a celebration based on temperance principles. The planning committee included John P. Joralemon (locksmith), Joseph Burr (painter and glazier), John C. Howell (shoe manufacturer), William B. Donninqton (grocer), Isaac Dennison (car man) and Abner C. Campbell (looking-glass manufacturer) from the parent society, John Rutan (blacksmith), John Scofield (caster) and William Smith (blacksmith and hatter) from the North Ward society, and Garret Ketcham (shoemaker) and Benjamin N. Van Sickell (blacksmith) from the Bethel society. There were, then, a few middle-class persons in this group which was made up mostly of artisans. A conflict between the Washingtonian committee and the self-appointed General Community Committee immediately arose. Three Washingtonian representatives J.P. Joralemon, W.B. Donnington and William L. Meeker (carpenter) met with the General Community Committee, and a compromise was finally reached in a controversy viewed as unseemly by some elements of the population; the compromise was for everyone to march in the same procession and for the two elements of the parade then to go to different churches for the balance of the ceremonies. The nontemperance orator was Senator William L. Dayton; on the Washingtonian side, Thomas M. Woodruff, of New York, gave the oration. "The oration was pronounced with great propr3ety, deliberation, and force, and a better address it has seldom or never been my lot to listen to," wrote the editor of the Newark Daily Advertiser. "The allusions to former and even present habits - the practice of drinking and enticing others, were kind but perfectly withering to the guilty" (38). In another comment on the celebration, it was noted that there was "less vice and fewer cases of injury... than on previous anniversaries. There was certainly less drunkenness - a gratifying proof of the progress of the Temperance enterprise"(38).

The Independence Day celebration was shortly followed by a "Grand Temperance Celebration" of the first anniversary of the Washington Temperance Benevolent Societies in Newark on 12 July. Again there were quite a few delegates from New York, and the main speaker was Joseph Perry (school teacher and antislavery activist in Paterson). The evening concert in the Free (Second Presbyterian Church was given by members of Hose Company No. 33 of New York City. We also have a report of a series of meetings for the promotion of "Humanity and Temperance" held in Newark late in November of 1842. Again there were speeches by representatives from New York City as well as by F.L. Beers, the local Washingtonian who apparently was regarded as particularly effective. The Liberty Fire Engine Company No. I appeared in uniform, several members of Relief Fire Company No.2 signed the pledge, and there was a brass band recital. As a result an additional 24 constitutional members and 55 pledged members joined.

So 1842 in Newark must be considered a highly successful year for the Washingtonians. The Fifth Annual Report of the Essex County Temperance Society, the principal agency of the temperance-prohibitionists in the Newark area, noted that "No year of our history has ever been so propitious for this cause as the last. Every thing which has been attempted has been successful and secured to the cause new advantages. The movements of the Army of Washington men have been steady, and they are now gaining ground. Tis true, like the Army of the Father of his country as it marched across our soil, there may have been a few unhappy occurrences. But it would have required a miracle to have prevented them. And it is almost a miracle that there have been so few desertions and mutinies. Upon this Army very much (under the guardianship of Heaven) may yet depend"(39). The report then goes on to say that public sentiment is now stronger against making, vending or using intoxicating beverages and that the public is now beginning to treat such making, vending or using as an immoral act. It states, too, that a proposal had been made to prohibit the sale of "strong drink" in public houses on Sunday, but that a favourable report was not expected out of committee this year. The executive committee of the Essex County Temperance Society also reported that the county had been divided into districts with a committee assigned to each. "The object of this movement has been to collect more accurate accounts of the condition of this enterprise, and to convince the members of the Washington societies everywhere, that we are seeking their benefit and success, and as their prosperity did from the beginning depend upon the strong healthful pulse which beat in the public body, so their future prosperity will depend upon the aid and control of the intelligent in the old ranks. We can help one another. And no class can injure either of us, as we can ourselves." The report cautioned that "No youth or reformed man is safe if he withhold his foot from...the benign influence of religion... Let it be the controlling power and we have nothing to fear. Omit or despite this, and we have every thing to fear, even from our success. This is the cause of humanity, of morals, of common safety, of our country, of the world, and of God." This statement cannot be called conspiratorial because it was presented to the public, but it does lay out the claims to dominance and leadership of the temperance-prohibitionists, the middle-class respectables, especially the ministers, who were the most influential element of the Essex County Temperance Society. It also makes it clear that the temperance-prohibitionists had organized throughout the country to develop more effective controls over the Washingtonian societies. That the temperance-prohibitionists were now rejuvenated and were looking forward beyond the Washingtonians to the future id further evidenced by the call in January from the executive committee of the state temperance society to form juvenile temperance societies in the public schools to supplement the existing plans and activities in the Sunday schools. The temperance-prohibitionists clearly sought to capture the entire younger generation, a project that would occupy them in one way or another for many years to come.

But if 1842 was a triumphant year for the Washingtonians, 1843 gave evidence that the perfervid atmosphere had begun to cool. The New Jersey Eagle commented on the fact that the Washington's Birthday celebration had been widely observed but "by more simple methods, better corresponding with the times on which we have fallen"(40). The Independence Day celebration in 1843 was not disrupted by the insistence on a temperance emphasis; the community group had it all to themselves. However, the Washingtonians held a very well-received celebration of their anniversary on 13 July. The planning committee included among others Hiram McCormick (shoemaker(, Jacob May (hatter), Caleb Thayer (painter), Thomas Corey (coach lace maker), Joseph Burr (painter and glazier), J.P. Joralemon (locksmith), David G. Doremus (grocer), John H. Landell (rigger), Jacob Johnson (coffee and spice dealer), James B. Hay (foundry operator), Wickliffe Woodruff (coach smith) and James Cox (book and job printer). While artisans predominated, some middle class persons were also involved in planning the program, especially in raising funds for the event. Among the groups participating in the celebration were Fire Engine Company No. 1, the Lafayette Guards, the clergy of the city and the members of the Essex County Juvenile Temperance Band, who attended at the request of their chief director, Reverend Ebenezer Cheever, despite the fact that his chief aids publicly advised against it because, they said, it was too hot for the children. The children were mainly from Bloomfield, Orange and Newark. The oration was by the Honorable Aaron Clark, ex-mayor of New York City.

The fraternal ties of the Newark Washingtonians with nearby groups continued. Thus, when the Bloomfield Washington Temperance Society celebrated its first anniversary on 22 August 1843, the various Newark societies were represented and George Dunn of Newark (railing and dash manufacturer) read the Drunkards Declaration of Independence. The principal speaker was the Honorable William Halstead, ex-congressman from New Jersey, who took a forthright stand for legal prohibition of alcohol sales on Sundays.

But these brave celebrations could not obscure the fact that a decline had set in. In September, the Newark Washington Temperance Benevolent Society made the following announcement (41): "TO THE PUBLIC: The glaring increase of intemperance within the last few months makes it imperative that the friends of temperance, more particularly the Washingtonians, should do all in their power to eradicate the growing evil. Grog shops are multiplying in all parts of the city, and drunkards and drunkenness increase in the same ratio. And unless something be done to check its onward march, the same dreadfully heart-rendering scenes which formerly disgraced our city must again be witnessed among us," it warned. "This being the case, it becomes the friends of Temperance to be energetic in their efforts to destroy the pestiferous influence of the already annihilated millions of the human family. In order to accomplish this object, the members of the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society at their last meeting, came to the determination to hold a public meeting on Friday evening next, Sept. 15th..." At that meeting a speaker from Jersey City "made some excellent remarks, in which he attributed the ill success of Washingtonianism to an apathetic feeling on the part of Temperance men. He said that the best way to bring grog sellers to their senses, when moral persuasion fails, is to apply the strong arm of the law; this method had been adopted in Jersey City, and had received the sanction of all right minded men. He advised the Washingtonians of Newark to pursue a similar plan" (42). A resolution was then passed stating that the City council should deny licenses for the sale of intoxicating liquors. A second resolution was passed that called for visiting all persons selling alcohol and trying to persuade them to abandon its sale. Some of the members of the committees of visitation were William T. Meeker (shoemaker), H.T. McCormick (shoemaker), Charles Prout (coach maker), James B. Hay (foundry operator), John C. Howell (shoe manufacturer), William Backus (tin ware and stove dealer), Abner Campbell (looking-glass manufacturer), David Pierson (coach lace weaver), John P. Joralemon (locksmith), Jacob Johnson (coffee and spice dealer), and the Reverend Mr. Warren. Another large public meeting was held in November 1843 at which the principal speaker was the Honorable George S. Catlin, member of congress from Connecticut, a reformed man and a Washingtonian. He attacked, among other things, "Rum drinking and rum drinkers of every grade from the fashionable wine drinker to the degraded gutter-drunkard; and proved that the former although now perhaps boasting of his ability to take care of himself, was on the downward road, and would ere long, unless he changed his vicious course, sink to the miserable condition of the latter"(43). He also attacked rum sellers: "Avarice," he said, "drove men to offer to their fellows, this liquid damnation, though they Knew at the same time that they were carrying ruin and death to their neighbour's dwellings." Catlin then went on to say that "it was the duty of all to endeavor to roll back the tide of intemperance and make our country what in truth she professed to be the "land of the free, and the home of the brave'; then might we enjoy all those blessings and comforts which it was man's inherent right to enjoy, unalloyed, and should become a happy, benevolent and prosperous people." This was typical Washingtonian fare, for the most part. But then a circular which included an appeal to the legislature to forbid the sale of intoxicating liquors on Sunday was read by Jacob May from the executive committee of the Temperance Society of the Sate of New Jersey. James Cox (book and job printer), corresponding secretary of the Newark Washingtonians commented that "The memorial is a well written document, and cannot fail to convince those who are willing to be convinced of the enormity of trafficking in ardent spirits at any time, and more particularly on the Sabbath!" It is clear from the records of these meetings that the Newark Washingtonians, while still committed in some measure to a moral suasion approach, had also begun to subscribe to the legal suasion stance of the temperance-prohibitionists.

By October 1843 signs began to appear that the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of Newark was having difficulties. The recording secretary, John H. Landell (rigger), complained that the committee appointed to visit the various parts of the city in an effort both to persuade and to collect statistics had been negligent, though another committee had gathered the information anyway. Landell voiced his complaint in strong language: "I will here state that the progress of the Society is somewhat dampened by some of our members, who, not content with being idlers themselves, seem to delight in finding fault with every one who refuses to be as idle, and is well-known that there is an immense deal of labor necessary to the success of an association of this kind, and where this labor falls upon a few, as is often the case, they must neglect other duties or let the Society suffer; therefore idlers should not find fault"(44). He added, "There is yet another subject which I wish to direct your attention to. It appears there is yet a disposition shown by a great number of our constitutional members not to pay their regular monthly dues, which are the main support of the Society, and now that the inclement season is approaching, it is their especial duty to be more punctual. There is yet a great number of poor inebriates to be looked after, and perhaps many of our own members may need assistance, and if the regular dues are paid we will be able to meet any emergency..." Landell continued, "The operations of this Society are confined to the reformation of the drunkard, and as far as its influence has extended, it has answered the purpose intended." Apparently, he believed that members had kept the pledge even though they had not been attending the business meetings. His remarks make clear that certain classical organizational problems had begun to emerge - failure of members to pay their dues, failure of members to attend the meetings, failure of committees to complete their assigned tasks, a perception by those who continued to be active in the organization that other less active members were carping and criticizing and not "pulling their weight." Landell was one of those who was still committed to the original Washingtonian concern for drunkards rather than to the emergent interest in governmental intervention.

Landell complained again about lack of membership activity in his next quarterly report in January 1844 (45): "It appears that many who were most active in our meeting but a short time since have now lost all their activity and are generally the first to complain of the Society's proceedings." He went on to say that "there appears to be a retrograde movement with some of our pledged members who, I am sorry to say, have broken the pledge, and again sunk into their old habits. I would urge upon all the members to take the old path, and visit such as have been unfortunate." Finally, Landell commented that "There is, Sir, another evil to which I wish to direct your attention: that is, to the low, disgusting, Jim-along-Josey songs, which are occasionally sung at our public meetings, to the no small annoyance of the respectable part of the audience," calling attention to the fact that some of the members of the society were repelled by the lack of respectability of the behavior of the rest. (There is little doubt that the "Jim-along-Josey" songs came out of the popular drinking culture of the day.)

We have a few useful membership statistics for this period. The Newark society distinguished between persons who merely signed the pledge and those who signed the society's constitution and committed themselves to paying dues. Landell (45) struck out at the constitutional members for not fulfilling their obligation to participate and at the pledged members for their tendency to "backslide" into drinking. There 3657 pledged male and female members of the Newark Washingtonian Society in mid-October 1843 and 3849 pledged members in mid-January 1844 - a growth of 192 persons. There were 356 constitutional members in mid-October 1843 and 366 constitutional members in mid-January 1844, a growth of 10. Statistics on the Washingtonian conversion of drunkards, however, must be regarded as grossly exaggerated and should be viewed in part as propaganda tools; in societies that did not differentiate between pledged and constitutional members probably about 10 could be regarded as constitutional members and not all these were ex-drunkards or heavy drinkers.

It seems likely that some of the failure in participation by the members may have been due to the fact that temperance fraternal orders had become organized in Newark. In July 1843 the Independent Order of Rechabites announced the existence of a chapter in Newark and invited participation by all those of "good moral character" between the ages of 18 and 50. The Rechabites were a beneficial as well as a benevolent society. "The benefits accruing to persons who belong to this order are not confined to sickness - they are more extensive. If a brother be unfortunate, and at the same time deserving, his necessities will be relieved; and if he come from a distance, or be traveling, like assistance is afforded him should he need it"(46). The order was open to total abstainers only. The notice was signed by Abner Campbell and James Cox, both of whom had been active in the Newark Washingtonians.

The Sons of Temperance had also been active among the Newark Washingtonians. The sons of Temperance had begun to organize in September 1842 in New York City, and in November, 20 persons from Newark joined the New York Division Number 1 on the understanding that as soon as feasible they would organize Division Number 1 of New Jersey. The final organizational meeting of the Sons of Temperance took place in New York City on 10 December 1842, and at that meeting the charter of Newark Division Number 1 of New Jersey was confirmed. The Sons of Temperance was formed expressly to recruit Washingtonians, and so there can be little doubt that most, if not all, of its early Newark members were Washingtonians. Among those I have been able to identify were James Cox, William L. Meeker (carpenter), William B. Donnington (grocer) and James B. Hay (foundry operator). The Sons of Temperance, a beneficial and fraternal society which required total abstinence of its members, quickly became a much larger order than the Rethabites. One of the appeals of the Sons of Temperance undoubtedly was the fact that at the local or division level, new officers were elected every 3 months, giving everyone an opportunity to participate. By 21 November 1843, when Newark Division Number 1 of New Jersey celebrated its first anniversary, it had 90 members. Though there can be little doubt that the fraternal orders absorbed the energies of many members of the Newark Washington society, some persons were active in several organizations. James Cox, for instance, was active in the leadership of the Washingtonians, the Sons of Temperance and the Independent Order of Rechabites.

By then end of the year, the Washingtonians of Newark were clearly on a downward slide. In addition to the dynamics of membership participation and the diversion of members into fraternal orders, there was also a theory offered by the temperance-prohibitionists to account for this decline. The Sixth Annual Report of the Essex County Temperance Society (47) commented that "The movement of the Washington Associations are less active than last year. Those among them, who from the beginning were opposed to religious addresses being made in their meetings, begin sadly to experience the unhappy effects of such opposition, and the friends of Religion and Temperance are more than ever convinced that we have no perfect security for a reformed or pledged man, or youth, but in deep implantations of religious principles." While cast in terms of religious belief, the temperance-prohibitionist clergymen argued that only if the Washingtonians provided the temperance-prohibitionist leadership easy access to their meetings could drunkard reform be successful. But we know that the temperance-prohibitionist leadership advocated not only religious faith (and the Protestant variety, at that), but also political policies which were directly at variance with the original Washingtonian principles of strict moral suasion.

The downward slide of the Newark Washingtonians was hastened by an internal power struggle (48-51). The immediate focus of attention was on accusations that Joseph Burr, then president of the society, had abused his position and either taken advantage of or absconded with some of the money of the young ladies, of the Lady Warren Society which was engaged in a fund-raising project for the Washingtonians. There was a nasty charge that Burr had manipulates the situation so that the money was to be given to him "as a token of appreciation for his work as president of the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society" rather than dedicated to charitable purposes as advertised. Burr attested that both charges were incorrect. At the next meeting of the Washingtonians in February 1844, despite objections, Burr was again declared president. Whereupon the following members offered their resignations as officers of the society: C. Thayer (painter), Jacob May (hatter), Hiram McCormick (shoemaker) and J.H. Landell (rigger). The faction also included Thomas Corey (coach lace weaver), J.R. Jilson (hatter), James Cox, J.P. Joralemon, Reverend James Gallagher (pastor, Universalist Church), David Pierson (coach lace maker) and F.L. Rogers (printer). Apparently in anger, Burr then resigned and new officers were elected. These included Angus Campbell, D.G.

Doremus, W.H. Backus (tin dealer), John C. Howell (shoe manufacturer, Nelson Prout (coach maker), Philo Sample (harness maker), Henry Force (saddler) and John Roff (shoemaker). Campbell was an opposition sympathizer but did not yet play his hand. On 25 April there was a rump meeting of the dissident faction at the house of Caleb Thayer, at which a resolution was passed. "That the members of the Washington T.B. Society proceed to the Temperance Hall (formerly occupied by them) tomorrow evening and reassert their rights, and henceforth endeavor, by all honorable means, to re-establish the society on a pure "Washingtonian basis"(52). The next night the group proceeded to the hall where Campbell took the chair and called the meeting to order; then there was a resolution that the proper officers of the society take their seats, whereupon Campbell stepped down and Caleb Thayer took the chair as first vice president, there being at the moment no person whom the Washingtonian strict constructionists recognized. John P. Joralemon was then elected president of the society. In their published statement (signed by James Cox, David Pierson, F.L. Rogers and J.H. Landell) the group summed their grievances as follows (52):

"It is unnecessary to recur to the causes which have been the means of impeding the progress of the Washingtonian reform, as they are too well known to need repetition here. Suffice it to say that the Washingtonians, who formerly carried on the work, were unceremoniously driven from their hall by overpowering numbers, by men who seldom or never lent them their aid, and whose views in reference to the true Washingtonian spirit were in direct opposition to their own. The Washingtonians left the society entirely free from debt, and also with a surplus of 30 or 40 dollars in the treasury. They gave their opponents a fair chance to try the experiment, that the public might be enabled to see how the thing would work in their hands; and the result has been (as we knew it would be) an entire failure. They have left the society in debt and in a measure broken up. Consequently, at the earnest solicitations of the friends of Temperance, (and more particularly of the ladies) the Washingtonians have determined to rally in their strength; and they do so with the conscientious belief that the Glorious Cause which they advocate cannot possibly prosper in any other hands; and also with a full knowledge that the public will not give their countenance and support to any fictitious abortion which may raise its head under the honored garb of Temperance. Relying then, on the benevolence of the public, together with their own exertions, they have, as will be seen by the above proceedings, come to the determination of pushing forward the work to perfection. It is time something was done, for during the late season of inactivity, drunkenness has been alarmingly on the increase, and many who might have been saved by timely assistance, have probably sunk so low in degradation that it will need desperate effort to redeem them."

For all practical purposes, the activities of January through April 1844 were the signal for the abandonment of the Washingtonians as a significant force in Newark. The notice of the May meeting, signed by James Cox, does not mention the name of the society (it is incorrectly referred to as the "annual meeting"); the third anniversary celebration in July was apparently conducted with its usual procession and oratory, but it must have been a hollow shell - the society simply dropped from sight and there are no further reports of it.

Meanwhile, we have some evidence that the Washingtonians had been bypassed. In the spring of 1844 a general temperance meeting was announced (53) at which there would be a lecture displaying Dr. Sewall's plates, drawings much used by the temperance-prohibitionists showing the effects of alcohol on the internal organs of the body. The sponsors of the lecture included the following: E. Cheever, A.D. Eddy, John S. Porter )pastor, Reformed Church), William R. Weeks (pastor, Fourth Presbyterian Church), William Bradley (pastor, Central Presbyterian Church), H.H. Brinsmade (pastor, Third Presbyterian Church), James Scott (pastor, Reformed Church), William Roberts (builder), Lyndon Smith (physician), Asa Whitehead (attorney and counselor), Fred T. Frelinghuysen (attorney and counselor-nephew and adopted son of Theodore Frelinghuysen), William B. Kinney (editor, Daily Advertiser), William Penrrington (Governor of the State of New Jersey), Silas Condit (president of a local bank) and the Honorable Joseph C. Hornblower (Chief Justice of New Jersey). Clearly, the temperance-prohibitionists respectables were pushing ahead with their own program and no longer needed the Washingtonians; the disappearance of occasional mention of the society may be specifically related to the fact that the editor of one of Newark's principal papers at the time was a temperance-prohibitionist.

Finally, we have one last sign that the Washingtonians had lost their ability to influence events in Newark. On 4 June 1844 a temporary planning committee was announced for the upcoming Independence Day celebration. For the first time that decade, the names of the committee members were appended-presumably to demonstrate that it had the overwhelming support of the citizenry and perhaps as a kind of defiant statement directed to the temperance-prohibitionists. (The planning meeting was held in Stewart's saloon.) As the following list of committee members, representing 20 of the total, makes clear, the opposition included a goodly number of the middle-class persons as well as some artisans: James Miller (carpenter), D.P. Woodruff (clerk), E.T. Hillyer (attorney and counselor), Stephen G. Sturges (slater), O.S. Boyden (machinist), E.G. Faitout (grocer), Robert Trippe (druggist), Joel W. Condit (grocer), Horace E. Baldwin (jeweller), Ira Merchant (sash and blind), Isaac Baldwin (builder, Ebenezer Francis (currier), Charles Spinning (carpenter), John C. Little (merchant tailor, Stephen Conger (physician), Henry Duryea (hatter), A.0. Boylan (attorney-at-law), Stephen K. Ford (coal dealer), Theodore S. Jacobs (clerk), William A Baldwin (sheriff), Charles T. Day (clothier), Edwin Ross (baker), Timothy B. Crowell (editor, New Jersey Eagle), James Tucker (currier), Alexander Dougherty (leather), Stephen G. Crowell (dry goods), William S. Pennington (attorney-at-law, not the Governor), and David D. Dodd (cap manufacturer). (It seems likely that the sides taken by the editors of the two newspapers reflect their politics - the Daily Advertiser was a Whig paper and the Eagle was probably a Democratic paper. ) Thus, some respectable citizens opposed the temperance-prohibitionists in this matter; whether the basic difference between the two sets of antagonists is interpretable in terms of "status politics" as Gusfield (54) and Donald (55) argue is beyond the scope of this paper.

DISCUSSION

As a therapeutic social movement, the Washingtonian Movement originally focused its attention on drunkards themselves rather than on changing the sociopolitical situation; this was in contradistinction to the emergent temperance-prohibitionist movement which became strongly politicized. The Washingtonians placed strong emphasis on the acceptance of social practices that had previously been rejected by the drunkards and heavy drinkers. While it is true that if all drunkards had been convinced and converted there would have been a major shift in the social practices of the period, effecting such a major social change was not the manifest intent of the Washingtonians when the movement began. This major shift in social practices was more or less latent in the beginning and only became evident during the course of a close association with the temperance-prohibitionists.

One of the striking characteristics of therapeutic social movements is that the demand for change is focused on the individual, who must reform if he is to be "cured." Thus, the Washingtonians were inner-directed, while the temperance-prohibitionists were outer-directed. If the term "discontent" is used in a general way, it could be said that in a therapeutic social movement the person is discontented with himself rather than society and accepts the blame or responsibility as his own. Put another way, the person "protests" his own behavior, his own inner condition, the way that he perceives that he is perceived by others and, if there is to be a change, adopts a method for securing satisfaction of his protests about himself. Clearly, one of the elements of the "cure" is his awareness of how others perceive him, his acceptance of others' perception of him as his own perception of himself and his awareness that there is a way to bring himself into conformity with the norms that he has accepted. However, many persons are unable to choose the therapeutic strategy which logically best fits their own situations and, consequently, never do achieve a "cure" or a satisfactory solution to their protest about themselves. The case of alcoholism is notorious in this respect, and the core element of self-help cures (such as Washingtonianism) rests on persuading the alcoholic that he can alleviate the symptoms and arrest the alcoholic condition. The key lies in persuasion, and the drunkards and heavy drinkers of the time of the Washingtonian movement more readily accepted the argument of the Washingtonians that "it works for me and it should work for you" than the exhortations of the temperance-prohibitionists.

That this self-help approach can be the basis of a successful therapeutic social movement is evidenced by the wide acceptance and influence of Alcoholics Anonymous. But the Washingtonian Movement, a therapeutic social movement based on essentially the same principles, "failed" in the 19th century, and I have attempted to explore the significance of the temperance-prohibitionists in the "failure" in Paterson and Newark, New Jersey. This is not to suggest that there were not other factors that contributed to the decline of the Washington temperance societies. In large measure, the Washingtonians and the temperance-prohibitionists agreed on the importance of self-help in the "cure" of alcoholism, although they did differ in ways that will not be discussed in the present essay. Where they were in conflict was on the issue of reliance on moral suasion as opposed to political (or state) intervention. The consequence of these different commitments was that the Washingtonians were concerned about drunkards for their own sake they were therapeutic - while the temperance-prohibitionists wanted to change the political system - they were a political reform movement, although they had a strong concern for the destructive effects of alcohol on individuals and their families.

In recent years there has developed what may be called the "organizational approach" to the analysis of social movements. Those who advocate this approach suggest that we abandon any special consideration of social movements, that there is simply organizational behavior. As McCarthy and Zald (56) point out, the organizational approach to the study of social movements emphasizes both the societal support and constraint of social movement phenomena. It examines the resources that must be mobilized, the links between social-movement organizations and other groups, the dependence of social-movement organizations on external support for success and the tactics used to control or influence social movement organizations by those external to it. The present study of the Washingtonian temperance societies of Paterson and Newark has used an organizational approach. While from time to time it has been necessary to engage in the analysis of the ideologies of Washingtonianism and prohibitionism, this has been incidental to what happened to the Washington Temperance Benevolent Societies themselves. I do not suggest that the case studies of two societies in two communities are definitive; rather they should provide scholars with the basis for future research. They should also provide the basis for additional research into a central issue in the study of social movements - the study of the opposition; sometimes the sponsors and friends of the nascent movement also turn out to be a part of the opposition.

REFERENCES

1. Maxwell, M. A. The Washingtonian movement. Q. J. Stud. Alcohol 11: 410- 451, 1950.

2. BLUMBERG, L. [U.] The ideology of a therapeutic social movement; Alcoholics Anonymous. J. Stud. Alcohol 38; 2122-2143, 1977.

3. TYLER, A. F. Freedom's ferment. New York; Arno Press;1944.

4. [Zug J.] The foundation, progress and principles of the Washington temperance Society of Baltimore, and the influence it has bid on the temperance movements in the United States. Baltimore; Toy; 1842.

5. AMERICAN TEMPERANCE UNION. Permanent temperance documents. Vol. 2.New York; American Temperance Union; 1852.

6. Paterson Intelligencer, 21 April 1841.

7. Paterson Intelligencer, 28 April 1841.

8. Paterson Intelligencer, 12 May 1841.

9. Paterson Intelligencer, 18 August 1841.

10. Constitution and by-laws of the Washington Temperance Benevolent Society of the town of Paterson. Paterson Day and Waaen; 1843.

11. (HAYDOCK, C.] Incidents in the life of George Haydock, ex-professional wood sawyer, of Hudson. 4th ed. Hudson [N.Y.]; Stoddard; 1847.

12. Petersen Intelligencer, 21 June 1841.

13. Paterson Intelligencer, 23 June 1841.

14. WINSKILL, P. T. The temperance movement and its workers., Vol. 2. London; Blackie; 1891.

15. Paterson Intelligencer, 16 November 1842.

16. Paterson Intelligencer, 25 May 1842.

17. Paterson Intelligencer, 6 July 1842,

18. Paterson Intelligencer, 1 December 1842.

19. Paterson Intelligencer, 17 March 1842.

20. Paterson Intelligencer, 21 December 1842.

21. Paterson Intelligencer, 14 December 1842.

22. Paterson Intelligencer, 28 December 1842.

23. Paterson Intelligencer, 15 May 1844.

24. Paterson Intelligencer, 14 August 1844.

25. Paterson Intelligencer, 4 September 1844.

26. RWT, J. The honors of delirium tremens. New York; Adams; 1844.

27. Paterson Intelligencer, 20 November 1844.

28. Paterson Intelligencer, 11 March 1846.

29. Paterson Intelligencer, 19 August 1846.

30. Paterson Intelligencer, 21 July 1841.

31. Newark Daily Advertiser, 8 March 1841.

32. Newark Daily Advertiser, 12 May 1841.

33. Newark Daily Advertiser, 24 May 1841.

34. Newark, Daily Advertiser, 5 June 1841.

35. Newark Daily Advertiser, 8 July 1841.

36. Newark Daily Advertiser, 17 August 1841.

37. New Jersey Eagle, 8 February 1842.

38. Newark Daily Advertiser, 7 July 1842.

39. Newark Daily Advertiser, 29 December 1842.

40. New Jersey Eagle, 28 February 1843.

41. Newark Daily Advertiser, 14 September 1843.

42. Newark Daily Advertiser, 16 September 1843.

43. Newark Daily Advertiser, 30 November 1843.

44. Newark Daily Advertiser, 14 October 1843.

45. Newark Daily Advertiser, 13 January 1844.

46. New Jersey Eagle, 11 July 1843.

47. Newark Daily Advertiser, 23 December 1843.

48. Newark Daily Advertiser, 24 January 1844.

49. Newark Daily Advertiser, 26 January 1844.

50. Newark Daily Advertiser, I February 1944.

51. Newark Daily Advertiser, 24 February 1844.

52. Newark Daily Advertiser, 29 April 1844.

53. Newark Daily Advertiser, 22 March 1844.

54. CUSFIELD, J. R. Symbolic status politics and the American temperance movement. Urbana, III.; University of Illinois Press; 1966.

55. DONALD, D. Toward a reconsideration abolitionists. Pp. 13-23. In; Gusfield, J.R. Protest, reform, and revolt. New York; Wiley; 1970.

56. McCarthy, J. D. and ZA@, M. N. Resource mobilization and social movements; partial theory. Am. J. Sec. 82: 1212-1241, 1977.