We frequently hear protests against continued financial aid to foreign countries. Certain Iy we have every rl ght to demand that such al d sha II be expended carefully and wisely, not recklessly given with the hand of a spend'” thrift Santa Claus. Many people think that the nation’s business interests are isolationist and opposed to foreign economic aid. Such is far f~ the case. A potent spokesman for big business in America is the McGraw Hi II Publishing Company. A few weeks ago they issued a bulletin entitled “Contrasts in Prosperity Endanger the Free World”. Pointing out that per capita real income (that is, actual purchasing power of income) in the United States is three times as great as that in all Europe exclusive of the U.S.S.R., for which there are no obtainable figures, that it is nine times as great as in Latin America, and 40 times that of ASia, the bulleti n goes on to show that, since 1939, we have forged so far ahead of the rest of the worl d that our present 3 to 1 lead over Europe was on Iy 2 to 1 fi fteen years ago. During that period European and Latin American per capita incomes have both increased, but our increase has been so much greater that the others have been left far behind.<\/p>\n
Then the bulletin proceeds to show why this is dangerous. “Something must be done to narrow the gap in prosperity between America and other parts of the free world, if that world is to be united successfully in the struggle against Communism. The crux of the problem is how to raise the three-quarters of the world that live on a low level to the high level of the other quarter. AmericanRussian relations are complicated almost unbearably by the fact that each power is competi n9 for the support of the vast frl nge of underdeve loped countri es. These countries, dissatisfied with their present state, are hovering between the two cultures, wondering which offers them the best chanee of shifting from their present low-level to a high.;.level economy. Very real danger threatens from any feeling which may develop in the less fortunate free nations, that our envi ab Ie economi c progress has been made at the i r expense. If Commun i st propaganda can persuade these people that their alliance with the free world will only result in their dropping farther and farther behind an increasingly prosperous United States, they wi II be driven to the side of Communism. It Is not an easy problem. It calls for the best of leadership. But it must be solved. It is our solemn task, in the name of al I we hold dear in America, to do our utmost to raise the general standards of human we II-being throughout the free world.”<\/p>\n
More than once we have mentioned the number of sailing vessels which were bui It in Kennebec yards. Of course, through all the years, Gardiner and Richmond and Bowdoi nham were far surpassed by the ports nearer the sea, such as Bath, Wiscasset and Thomaston, and an amazing number of large vessels were bui It at Brunswick. It was there that the famous Skolfield ships were construc'” ted and slid down the ways into lower Androscoggin waters. There were the ship Lydia Skolfield, bui It In 1860; the George Skolfield, a 1,300 ton square-rigger, .in 1870; the Samuel Skolfield in 1875; and the I. L. Skolfield, a 1,400 ton bark, in 1879. Those ships carried Maine goods to the far corners of the earth.<\/p>\n
It is interesting to learn how ships were bui It in Maine in the early part of the nineteenth century. I n those days it usua Ily requi red a year to comp lete a Ship. All materials were prepared by hand with the broad-axe, whipsaw, adz and pod auger. The timbers, planks and eei lings were carried’to place on the shoulders of workmen. Instead of being sawed in the mi II yard, the planking was sawed by wh i psaw ina sawp it ri ght on the site. I ron was Ii tt Ie used for fastenings, the treenai I <called “trunnel II) replacing it wherever possib Ie. Treenai Is were made with the broad-axe from pieces rifted from white oak blocks –‘ work usually done under cover on stormy days. Such bolts and spikes as were absolutely necessary were forged by hand in the blacksmith shop, and all threading of bolt screws was also done by hand. I n “the earl y days vesse Is were bui It from tl mber cut in the forest near the ship yard. When that supply began to fal I, ship timber was hauled by OX teams from a distance. It was that hauling of timber to Freeport yardS which caused the peculiarly shaped public square in Freeport village, making it possible for the loads of long lumber to take the turn into the road down to the yards. Sh I P carpenters worked from sunrl se to sunset, going into the yard before breakfast during the long summer days and knocking off at night for a late suppe r. High wage was $1 .50 a day; common I abor got 50 cents.<\/p>\n
Launchings were festive occasions. The practice of having women christen ships was not then common. A man would si”t astride the bCMsprit and, as the vesse I began to move down the ways, he wou I d ca II out her name and break a bottle of rum over the bowsprit after fi rst “tak ing a good sw I g from the bottle.<\/p>\n
This year when the Waterville Methodist Church will open its splendid new sanctuary as evi dence of the progress and the strength of Methodi sm in th i s vicinity’ i”t is a good time to refer to early Methodists in Central Maine.Through the courtesy of Miss Harriet Nye of Oakland, I have seen an old record book which contains lists of members, minu”tes of quarterly conferences, disciplinary actions, and financial solicitations of what was once knOfn as the Sid”‘T.< ney circui”t, which later was reunited with the older Fairfield circuit, so that this old book contains minutes from both Sidney and Fairfield. The record begins in 1831 with a list of names of members included in the Sidney circuit. The pages are divided into five columns, headed respectively, “Names”, “When Rece i ved into Fu II Covenant”, ”When Expe lied”, “When Removed” and “When Deceased”. The th i rd col urm, headed ”When Expe lIed’!, shows that the church intended to enforce its discipline; and, sure enough, the colurm is not empty. Some of the misbehaving brothers and sisters were indeed shut out.<\/p>\n
On March 5. 1836, for Instance, the conference voted to expe I a member. The wording of the record sounds quaintly humorous to us today, but there was nothing funny about it to those concerned in the affair 118 years ago. Here’s the way it reads:
\n“Considared for final action the case of XV. After a course of labor and long forbearance, he having shown no sign of humi liation or penitence, he was called before a convnittee. Brother AB appeared as complainant. After a long and patient hearing of the parties, the committee think Br. Y gui Ity of impudent conduct and of indulging sinful words and temper; but think if he manifest humi Ilation and make confession to Sr. B and to the class, he may yet be covenanted with. Br. Y stiffly maintaining that he had not been out of the way at all, was admonished and entreated to reflect, and three weeks from the next class meeting was afforded him to make up his mind, at which time he came forward and fully justified himself, and there being no sign of real humi IIty, he was accordingly cut off.”<\/p>\n
Two months I ate r, in May, 1836, it was a woman membe r who had to be dea It with. The elder who ministered to this flock entered the following record in his own hand: III called on Sister A after her confinement, stated to her the nature of her crime and the course I must pursue. I told her that she could be heard in her own defense by herse I f or counci I, and have the privi lege of appea I if requested. She di d not wish to make any defense. brought her case before the class and there being no difference of opinion in reference to her gu i It, she was accord i ng Iy expe lied.”<\/p>\n
As one reads these harsh records of long ago, one might at first think these church peop Ie had never heard the story of the founder of thei r re Ii gi on who said of jusT such a woman as this Sister A, “let him who is without sin among you cast the first stone.” They were indeed harsh and unyielding, these church fol k of a hundred years ago. For some offenses they had no forgi veness; repen1ance made no difference. But in case after case — as the Methodist and Baptist and Congregationalist records make clear — they bore patiently month after month with an erring brother or sister trying to bring them into the fold.<\/p>\n
On the Sidney Methodist circuit in the 1830’s the principal preachers were Ezekiel Robinson and Sullivan Bray. The earliest baptismal record is that of Elkenah Dudley by Elder Bray on May 28, 1830. <\/em>In 1839 appeared the name of Stephen Howard, son of Dr. Amb rose Howard, the same young man whose long letter from New Orleans we once read on this program. After the Sidney conference had voted, in April, 1837, to reunite with the Fairfield conference, the name of Nye frequently appears, because that name had been prominent in Method ism from Its fi rst appearance in Fa i rf Ie Id. I n November, 1837 Stephen Nye was elected collector to receive money to pay for the parsonage in Fairfield. In 1839 four members of the Nye Fami Iy were baptized, and by 1840 no less than 14 persons named Nye were members of the church.<\/p>\n A hundred years ago Methodism was propagated and’ sustained by what were called classes. The reunited ci rcult in 1838 had eleven classes: three in Si dney, two in Waterville, one in Augusta, and one each at Fairfield Center, Nye’s Corner, Kenadlls Mills, Ten lots and the Ridge. Each class contained comparatively few families. In the Ridge Class, for Instance, were four NOttiells, four Atwoods, three Tuttles, two Eilises, two Giffords, a Davis, a Burrill and a Hub\u00b7;.bard. Methodists admitted new members by either sprinkling or immersion. It is interesting to note how prevalent was immersion among our early Methodists. Of the 23 persons baptized by the Fairfield-Sidney Conference in 1838, only five chose sprinkling; the other 18 were immersed. The Bryant twins, Susan and Cyrus, though they later became Universalists, were recorded as members of the Fairfield seventh class of Methodists in 1838, as were also Betsy Pishon and Mary Connor.<\/p>\n Before 1850 the Lawrences and the Totmans joined the Nyes in Fairfield Methodi sm. In 1853 the membersh i p list shOlis such we II known names as Charles and Hannah Lawrence, Caroline Totman, Wi Iliam Burgess, Andrew Archer, and War””ren Wing. But that 1853 list has neither Cyrus Bryant nor his sister Susan. Pe rhaps by that ti me both had become Un i ve rsa Ii s ts \u2022 Yet among the 1853 probationers’ as the Methodists called those awaiting full membersh Ip, we find Olive Bryant, Lucy and Erastus Connor, as well as Barnabas and Desire Howard. Since Watervi lie was included in the Fairfield-Sidney circuit in 1838, the old record book contains the names of some early Watervi lie Methodists. Eben Freeman led one of the Watervi I Ie cl asses and Char les I nga 115 led the other. Other members were John and Betsy Moore, Mary Ann Bowman, John and Ame1 ia Lewis, David and Nancy Shorey, Eben and Sarah Davis, James and Deborah Reed and Sarah Bates.<\/p>\n What did they pay a preacher in those days? In August, 1849 the Fairfield and Sidney Quarterly Conference set out to co Ilect $344 for one of the I r preachers for the ensu Ing year. He was to have $232 as sa lary, house rent va I ued at $30, table expenses of $55, fuel set at $12, and $15 for travel. He wouldn’t get rich. but he could certainly keep alive, provided he got that $232 in cash. which we must admit a minister seldom did. He usually had to take his pay in every possible kind of commodity and service. The conference usually required more than one preacher. By 1840 it had become so large that no one man could serve it satisfactorily. In 1843 the Conference voted “that we request three preachers to be appointed for the next year, one to labor and be supported in Fairfl\u00b7eld and Bloomfield, one in Sidney and one In Watervi lie Village.”<\/p>\n The close fellowship of the class system and the employment of several preachers made Methodism strong in thi s reg I on, and was eventually he Ipfu I In making the Watervi lie Methodist church one of the strongest of all Protestant communions in Central Maine.<\/p>\n Year: 1954<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Read the script for “Little Talks” program #219, broadcast on March 21, 1954<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":405,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[749,35296],"tags":[],"builder_content":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7395"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/405"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7395"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7395\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7395"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7395"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7395"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}