Radio Script #235
Little Talks On Common Things
October 10, 1954
How often have you heard someone dep lore the number of our di Herent re I igious denominations! It is indeed regrettable that Christians must be divided into so many different sects, making the much needed common voice on behaH of Christianity si lent and ineffective. But I suggest, as perhaps a new idea to some of you, that a divided Christianity, deplorable as it is, is not the worst feature of the broad, nation-wide picture of religion in America.
The fact which ought to alarm us more than our division Into denominations Is the number of Americans who are completely unchurched. Fully half of our naTion’s population of 160 ml Ilion — one out of every two persons in the United States — is not affi liated with any church, Protestant, Catholic, Jewish or any other.
Why does such a s I tuati on preva i I? Because of pecu liar ci rcumstances in the development of our nation. It is popularly believed that in colonial days and in the early years of our republic, everyone went to church. That is simply not true. Large numbers of Americans have always been unchurched. Let us see how that came about.
In his record of the Plymouth Colony, Gov. Bradford has told us that, for their first two years in the New World, the Pi Igrims had no minister and no one rece i ved the sacraments. I. n the Dutch colony that I ater became New York no religious services were held for the first seven years. When the colonists began to spread out and settle in the back country, religion lapsed. Under difficult conditions of travel, people tended to lose at I touch with any church.
In New England there has come down a tradition that every settlement had a church almost as soon as the first cabins went up. That simply is not true. assure you the case of the Winslow-Watervi I Ie community in its early days was typical of al I new settlements in New England. What was the situation right he re I n these t o”””S 1 Before 1800 the town of Winslow, which then included Watervi lie, had been so neg I i gent about organi zed re I i gi on, in spite of the Massachusetts law requiring each town to provide preaching, that twice the town had been threatened wi th lega I prosecution. Severa I ti rnes in the records of town meeti ngs between 1771 and 1795 appear the words: “voted not to hire preach i ng” •
It is to the credit of the churches, especially the larger denominations, that they did the best they could to follow the people as the frontier moved west, and as the years went by they brought into re I igi ous organi zati on many persons whose parents had been quite unchurched. But by the ti me there was no longer any unoccupied frontier, mi Ilions of Americans had alnost traditionally come to accept life without church affi liation as the comnon norm.
In this land of the free itis everyone’s privi lege to join any denomination he pleases or to stay out of al I of them. In individual cases one can find just as upright and noble a person outside the church as he can find ins ide it. But, on the I aw of averages, across oOr who Ie great nati on, the record is clear. It is the committed religious people, the people who have cared enough to proclaim some sort of attachment, however loose and vague it might be, to some religiOUS faith — it is those church people who have set the moral standards and maintained the nora I stabi fity of our country.
How many unchurched peop Ie are there right here In the Kennebec Valley? hope the proportion of them is less than half of the Valley’s population. Whatever the number may be, some of us are strongly convinced that, good citizens as they doubTless are, they would be more useful and actually happier if they would link up with some organized church.
Now let’s geT to that annexation controversy which, as the program closed last week, I promised to tell you about tonight. You all knCH that Waterville was once a part of Winslow; but did you know that, a little more than 50 years ago, there was a serious attempt to annex a part of Winslow to Waterville?
As the vi lIage of Winslow grew, and especially as the village people came to demand such facilities as lights and water, there developed, as happened in almost every Maine town, some feeling between villagers and farmers. The latter were re I uctant to be taxed for vi Ilage improvements. As ti me went on, many towns solved the problem by having villages separately incorporated Inside the town. Thati s what my own town of Bridgton did, and the residents, merchants and manufacturers In the vi Ilage had to pay a corporation tax to pay for the vi lIage Improvements, wh I ch those I i vi ng outs I de the vi I lage di d not have to pay. But for a long tl me· I n many towns the town tax, levi ab Ie on a II estate owners, in the village or out of It, paid for the village improvements. That seems to have been the case in Winslow at the turn of the century, if we can trust the contemporary newspaper accounts of the annexati on controversy.
About the tl me that Waterville became a cl ty In 1888, a few Waterville polIticians thought it would be a good idea to begin the making of a Greater Watervi lIe along the lines of Boston’s annexation of Its suburbs. Nothing definite came of the talk untl I 1900, when promoters of the plan secured names to a petition — names which included several Winslow residents. The plan was to annex I nto an enlarged city of Watervi lie most of what is now the vi Ilage of Wins low I leavl ng on Iy the rura I areas to comprise that ancient town.
It soon became apparent that the leading men of Winslow were’ hotly opposed to the plan. Winslow’s dynamic leader, Josiah Bassett, was then living, and he sent a long letter to the Kennebec Journal, which was pub I ished on December 24, 1900. Squi re Bassett den ied that there was bad fee ling between farmers and vi I lagers. He wrote: “There are no two factions In our town. Instead of the i nhab i tants of the southern and less th i ck Iy settled sect I on oppos i ng I mprove- ments, they have been interested in and will I ng to vote for what was needed.
Proponents of division say that there is much feeling about additional bridges.
That is not true. The matter has never come up in Wins low town meeting. Watervi lie has long been anxi ous for the large patronage of the H&W Co. A charter was therefore obtai ned by Watervl I Ie citi zens from the legis lature two years ago for a tol I bridge. The H&W Co. did not ask for It; the town of Winslow did not oppose it. It What especially aroused Squi re Bassett’s wrath was the contention that the H&W Co. had always been looked upon as a Watervi lie institution. Admitting that Watervi I Ie rece! ved benefi ts from the exi stence of H&W across the ri ver, the squi re wrote: ”The company OIIns no property in Watervi I Ie, but is situated entirely in Winslow. There would be much more ground for saying that the Lockwood Co. is a Wi ns low i nst! tutl on, for it owns more I and In Wi ns low than it does in Waterville. Mr. Bassett then went on to point out the difference in the tax rate, Winslow’s 14.8 mills compared with Watervi lie’s 23.5. He was sure that Wins low taxpayers would not take kindly to such an increase. He added:
“If the citizens of the section of our town that is proposed for annexation by the schemers would submit to a rate of taxation as high as Waterville’s is now, Wi ns low Itse I f cou I d and wou Id be g I ad to gi ve them sewers, po lice .and fi re protection, and a II the advantages of a city, and st! II have enough money left to pi I e up a surp I us ~, ”We are told”, said Squire Bassett, “that Winslow has much to gain. She has noth i ng to ga in, but everyth I ng to lose by the proposed change. She I s satIsfied and proud of her present condition and out:fook.1!
The proponents of annexati on managed, however, to ca II a speci a I town ~etIng in Winslow on January 5, 1901. When the meeting assembled, it was difficult to find any Winslow resident ready to express himself in favor of the plan.
But what soundly turned the scales against annexation was a letter dramatically introduced by one of the selectmen — a letter signed by F. E. Boston on behalf of the H&W Co. That letter said:
1’1 am authorized by the president and directors of the H&W Co. to say that they are opposed to the petition for annexing any part of the town of Winslow to the city of Watervi lie, and shall oppose such a plan in every way they possibly can. They a Iso wish me to say that they are sati sf ied with the treatment they have recei ved from the town of Wins low, and if any inducements were he Id out to them to make a change, they wou I d not cons i der them. They be I ieve that what is good for the town of Winslow is good forH&W.1I
The Kennebec Journal, which at that time delighted in taking digs at Watervii Ie, got extreme delight out of reporting that January town meeting. This is what the Journal said: “Every section of the town was represented in a crowd so large that there was no chance to make a division count in the hall. There was no sign at all of any factional feeling. The to>ln house was literally surrounded by teams of all descriptions. The H&W Co., which is opposed to the plan, furnished two double teams to transport employees who would vote against the petit i on.
”When the petition was read, it was shown that only four Wins low names were on it. One of those four men announced that he had not read the petition, but signed it at the request of a friend. He now wanted to withdraw his support. Another of the four said the petition had been misrepresented to him and, with blood in his eye, he was now looking for the man who had asked him to sign it. A third man said he had signed to get rid of the pleader and now sincerely wished he had taken some other means to get rid of him. The excuses of the fourth man have not yet been heard, but they wi II doubt less be good.
“When Josiah Bassett called the meeting to order at 2 P.M., there was not room for another person to squeeze into the hall. Mr. Bassett read the warrant and C. H. Drummond was chosen moderator. Then the petition was read in full. When Mr. Garland said he might be thick-headed( but he coul{in’t see what Winslow had to gain by the plan, somebody in the rear of the hall contributed the information thaT Winslow would get a 23.5 mi” Tax rate in exchange for one of 14.8 mi 115 — that was what she wou I d ga in.
“Mr. BasseTt proposed that the house be pol led on the peti ti on. The house was so crowded that a division was impossible. One fellow suggested that all in favor go out doors, but nobody went. Finally a sma II corner was cleared and everyone craned their necks to see who would be brave enough to walk into It. It’was shunned as if it contained a case of sma I Ipox. At length the moderator announced that he would declare the vote unanimous in opposition. The announcement was received with enthusiastic cheers. If any man ha{i dared step foot into that affirmative corner, he would never have heard the last of it ti II his dying day.”
Thus ended the only serious aTtempt to annex a part of Winslow to the big sister across the ri ver.
Year: 1954