Connecticut Courant

October 10

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

Who was the subject of an advertisement in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (October 10, 1774).

“A Negro answering the above Discription has let himself to Mr. Jesse Leavensworth of New-Haven.”

In the fall of 1774, Samuel Boardman of Wethersfield took to the pages of the Connecticut Courant and Hartford Weekly Intelligencer to offer a reward for the capture and return of a “New Negro Man” who liberated himself by running away.  Boardman did not give a name for this man, but instead stated that he “talks but a little English, calls himself a Portuguese, and talks a little of the Tongue.”  He offered a reward to “Whoever will take up said Negro and return him to his Master.”  Dated September 26, the advertisement first appeared in the October 3 edition of the Connecticut Courant.  It included a notation indicating that a “Negro answering the above Discription has let himself to Mr. Jesse Leavensworth of New-Haven.”  Boardman most likely did not include that information in the copy he submitted to the printing office.

Instead, Ebenezer Watson, the printer, likely supplied it upon reading an advertisement that Leavenworth placed in the September 30 edition of the Connecticut Journal and New-Haven Post-Boy.  After all, printers regularly exchanged newspapers in hopes of acquiring content for their own publications.  Leavenworth devoted most of that notice to giving instructions for hiring his ferry, but added a note that recently a “lusty negro man, about 23 or 24 years old, speaks the Portuguese language, but little English” had “let himself to me.”  Leavenworth hired the young man, but was suspicious that he was a fugitive seeking freedom and his enslaver was looking for him.  Just in case, he supplemented his advertisement for the ferry with the description of the Black man who spoke Portuguese.  Given the timing of the advertisements in the two newspapers, Boardman would not have seen Leavenworth’s notice when he drafted his own advertisement.  If he had that information, he could have dispensed with advertising at all.

What role did Watson play in keeping Boardman informed about this development?  He might have dispatched a message to the advertiser in Wethersfield, though he could have considered the note at the end of the advertisement sufficient to update Boardman, figuring that his customer would check the pages of the Connecticut Courant to confirm that his notice appeared.  Watson could have also sent a message to Thomas Green and Samuel Green, the printers of the Connecticut Journal, along with his exchange copy of the Connecticut Courant, expecting they might pass along the information to Leavenworth.  In addition, Leavenworth might have eventually encountered Boardman’s advertisement, depending on his reading habits, or otherwise heard about it.  That alternative seems most likely.  No matter what other action Watson took, inserting the note that connected the unnamed Black man in Boardman’s advertisement in the Connecticut Courant to the unnamed Black man in Leavenworth’s advertisement in the Connecticut Journal alerted readers that they could collect the reward if they decided to pursue the matter.  The power of the press, including a printer whose assistance extended beyond merely setting type and disseminating the advertisement, worked to the advantage of Boardman, the enslaver, against the interests of the unnamed Black man who spoke Portuguese.

September 12

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (September 12, 1774).

“A SERMON preached … after the Report arrived that People at Boston had destroyed a large Quantity of TEA.”

The September 12, 1774, edition of the Connecticut Courant carried relatively few advertisements.  News and editorials, especially concerning the imperial crisis that increasingly consumed public discourse, crowded out most of the notices that appeared the previous week.  Ebenezer Watson, the printer, however, did find space to include an advertisement for “A SERMON preached” by Israel Holly “at Suffield, Dec. 27, 1773, the next Sabbath after the Report arrived that the People at Boston had destroyed a large Quantity of TEA belonging to the East-India Company, rather than submit to Parliament Acts which they looked upon unconstitutional, tyrannical, and tending to enslave America.”  Watson proclaimed that he had “Just Published” the sermon and offered it for sale.

Even though Holly delivered the sermon eight months earlier, it was especially timely in September 1774 as colonizers received word of the Quebec Act.  Watson initially advertised the sermon in the September 6 edition, immediately below the notice for Considerations on the Measures Carrying On with Respect to the British Colonies in North-America.  He devoted most of the second and a portion of the third page to “an authentic Copy OF the ACT OF PARLIAMENT, For making more effectual Provision for the Government of the Province of QUEBEC, in NORTH-AMERICA.”  Colonizers found several aspects of that legislation troubling, including the free practice of Catholicism by the residents of the territory won from the French in the Seven Years War.  As relayed in the Connecticut Courant, the Quebec Act provided that “His Majesty’s Subject’s professing the Religion of the Church of Rome, of an in the said Province of Quebec, may have, hold and enjoy the free Exercise of the Religion of the Church of Rome … and that the Clergy of the said Church may hold, receive, and enjoy their accustomed Dues and Rights,” such as collecting tithes, “with respect to such Persons only as shall, profess the said Religion.”  Protestants in New England and elsewhere in the colonies did not appreciate those provisions.

How was the Quebec Act connected to a minister preaching in support of the Boston Tea Party?  In a review of James P. Byrd’s Sacred Scripture, Sacred War: The Bible and the American Revolution, Mark A. Noll explains that Holly’s “word of warning to New England reflected the deeply engrained anti-Catholic biblicism that had become standard in the British Empire over the course of previous decades.”  According to the minister’s line of reasoning, “[i]f New England did not repent of its own tyrannies … the expansion of British despotism could soon lead to more ‘arbitrary government’ and even ‘popery.’”[1]  The Quebec Act seemed to fulfill the prediction that Holly made in December 1773, helping to explain why the minister and the printer took the sermon to press when they did.

**********

[1] Mark A. Noll, “The Holy Book in a Holy War,” Reviews in American History 42, no. 2 (December 2014): 612.

September 6

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (September 6, 1774).

“This celebrated Performance … had a wonderful Operation on the Minds of that People.”

A popular political pamphlet originally printed in London and reprinted in four towns in the colonies made another appearance among the advertisements in the September 6, 1774, edition of the Connecticut Courant.  In this instance, Ebenezer Watson, the printer of that newspaper, promoted his own edition of Considerations on the Measures Carrying On with Respect to the British Colonies in North-America produced at his printing office in Hartford.  By that time, John Holt, printer of the New-York Journal, and Benjamin Edes and John Gill, printers of the Boston-Gazette, had already advertised their own editions of the tract.  In New Haven, David Atwater advertised and sold Holt’s New York edition.

Those advertisers replicated the copy from one notice to another.  For his part, however Watson devised his own copy, though he had likely seen at least some of the other advertisements as he scoured other newspapers for content to reprint in the Connecticut Courant.  Watson even offered a variant title in his advertisement, “CONSIDERATIONS On the Measures carrying on by GREAT-BRITAIN, Against the Colonies in NORTH-AMERICA,” though the title on the title page of the pamphlet itself was consistent with the original London edition and the others reprinted in the colonies.  Although Watson did not directly borrow copy from the other advertisements circulating at the time, he seems to have been inspired by them enough to paraphrase from them.  “This celebrated performance” (rather than a “most masterly performance”), he proclaimed, “was first published in England, and had a wonderful Operation on the Minds of that People, in eradicating their Prejudices against the Inhabitants of America.”  In comparison, the other advertisements declared that the tract “had a wonderful effect in removing the prejudices and convincing the people of England.”  Other advertisers commented on the price of American editions compared to the London edition.  Watson did so more elaborately, stating that a “Book so highly admired, and so wonderfully calculated to open blind Eyes, ought to be in the hands” of colonizers throughout America.  That convinced him “to sell it as cheap as he can possibly afford it” without losing money on it.

To disseminate the pamphlet widely, Watson enlisted the aid of local agents in several towns, including Canaan, Farmington, Great Barrington, Litchfield, Middletown, Norfolk, Sheffield, Simsbury, and Torringford.  In addition, readers could acquire copies from two post riders, Joseph Knight and Amos Alden.  As printers in New England marketed a variety of books and pamphlets related to the imperial crisis in the mid 1770s, some of them integrated post riders into their distribution networks in new ways.  They made a point of naming post riders as agents who sold these publications, entrusting them with responsibilities beyond delivering items that buyers ordered from a local dignitary or directly from the printer.  This made post riders’ role in keeping colonizers informed about arguments critiquing Parliament even more visible as they became active proponents rather than mere messengers.

August 16

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (August 16, 1774).

“His Abilities in his Profession of Physic, Surgery and Midwifry, he flatters himself, gave Satisfaction.”

Richard Tidmarsh, a physician and apothecary, often did not remain long in the communities he served, though in an advertisement he placed in the Connecticut Courant in August 1774 he suggested that he would settle in Hartford “probably, for Life” if he managed to cultivate a clientele that would allow him to remain there.  In January 1771, he liquidated the contents of his apothecary shop in Philadelphia (and sold an enslaved man).  Tidmarsh relocated to Hartford before arriving in New Haven in May 1773.  A little over a year later, he “returned to Hartford, where his Abilities in his Profession of Physic, Surgery and Midwifry, he flatters himself, gave Satisfaction.”  He felt confident enough in his reputation for the services he rendered to that community that he encouraged the public to recall the time he spent there.  Furthermore, he expected that his “long practical Experience, will render him a useful and acceptable Member of Society.”

Near the beginning of his notice, Tidmarsh promoted an “Assortment of fresh, genuine DRUGS & MEDICINES” that he sold for even lower prices than in the past.  He listed many of them, including popular patent medicines, at the end of his advertisement.  He also noted that he “faithfully prepared” both “Physician’s Prescriptions, and family Recipe’s,” compounding them in his shop formerly occupied by Dr. Jepson on Queen Street.  Yet Tidmarsh did not limit his endeavors to providing medical care and selling medicines.  He devoted a significant portion of his advertisement to proposals for “instruct[ing] young Gentlemen whose Education and Genius seem adapted to Study, modern Theory and practical System of Physic, Surgery and Midwifry.”  Tidmarsh envisioned a thorough education for his students.  Rather than “the customary Time of a few Months” to two years that allowed for “but a very superficial Knowledge of the Materia Medica, and bare Idea of Diseases,” even under the tutelage of “the most accurate and extensive Practitioner.”  The physician and apothecary implied that he would work with his students over longer periods, pledging that “Young Men, desirous of enlarging their Opportunities in the medical Branches” could learn from him “on reasonable Terms.”  Such an education need not be expensive while extending it over several years would help support Tidmarsh in his intention to permanently settle in Hartford.

The enterprising physician and apothecary made yet another appeal to justify public support for his return to Hartford.  “Poor Persons, unable to see a Physician for Advice,” he proclaimed, “may have the Subscriber’s Opinion gratis,” an act of philanthropy designed to enhance his standing in the community and worthy of “encouragement” from clients who could afford to pay for his services.  In addition, Tidmarsh stood to profit from his “Poor” clients who purchased “Medicines adapted for their Disorders” from him.  He did not gouge them on the prices to balance the free consultations, instead preparing prescriptions “as cheap as any Apothecary.”  All in all, Tidmarsh sought to give “the Inhabitants of HARTFORD, and the Public in General” all sorts of reasons to welcome him back to town and support his various enterprises so he could remain there to provide services “of public Utility to Posterity.”

August 2

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (August 2, 1774).

“Opportunity to express the grateful Sense he retains, of the Favors of his Customers in Time past.”

In the summer of 1774, Seth Lee of Farmington ran an advertisement for a “neat and general Assortment of Drugs and Medicines” in the Connecticut Courant.  He advised prospective customers that he sold his wares “ON THE MOST REASONABLE TERMS,” hoping that the promise of bargains would entice them to shop at his store.  His merchandise included a variety of patent medicines, each of them so familiar that Lee merely listed a dozen of them without indicating which symptoms they alleviated or maladies they supposedly cured.  He also called attention to alcohol, groceries, paint, and other items that supplemented his inventory.  Lee peddled two popular beverages, coffee and chocolate, but did not mention tea, an increasingly problematic commodity following the Boston Tea Party the previous December and the Coercive Acts passed by Parliament in response.  Elsewhere in the August 2 edition, Amos Wadsworth and Fenn Wadsworth continued hawking “BOHEA TEA, (not infected with a duty),” while Samuel Wescote advertised “good TEA” without further explanation.

Rather than wade into consumer politics, Lee appended a note to his former customers and prospective new customers.  He declared that he wished “to express the grateful Sense he retains, of the Favors of his Customers in Time past.”  In addition to demonstrating his appreciation for their business, such sentiments also testified to his experience providing satisfactory service, an implicit appeal to new customers as Lee attempted to buttress his reputation.  As he continued, Lee included prospective customers in the invitation he extended to readers to shop at his store.  He addressed “all who will be kind enough to afford him their Custom,” pledging that “it shall be his constant Endeavour to supply them … with any of the above Articles, very cheap.”  Furthermore, they would receive exemplary customer service, with “the least Favorgratefully acknowledged.”  Lee highlighted prices at the beginning and end of his advertisement, but he did not make those “REASONABLE TERMS” the focus of his notice.  Instead, he emphasized the relationships he cultivated with customers in the past and would endeavor to continue providing as “their Humble Servant.”  Lee listed goods to attract attention, then sought to hold it by wooing readers with his devotion to customer service.

July 19

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (July 19, 1774).

“BOHEA TEA, (not infected with a duty).”

Advertisements for tea did not disappear from American newspapers following the Boston Tea Party in December 1773, nor after the Boston Port Act closed that city’s harbor as punishment in June 1774.  Some merchants and shopkeepers made a point of announcing that they no longer stocked such a controversial commodity.  Others did not include tea alongside coffee and chocolate, an omission that likely did not escape notice since shopkeepers so often marketed those three beverages together.  A few continued with business as usual.  William Beadle, for instance, advertised “GOOD TEA” in the Connecticut Courant in the summer of 1774.

Amos Wadsworth and Fenn Wadsworth also advertised tea in the Connecticut Courant, but they took a more careful approach in marketing it to the public.  They included “BOHEA TEA” among a list of groceries that included coffee and chocolate, though they clarified that their tea was “not infected with a duty.”  The Wadsworths did not explain how they had managed to acquire tea without paying a duty; perhaps they acknowledged with a wink and a nod that they sold smuggled tea, thus enhancing its value to consumers who would derive pleasure from the part they would play in putting one over on Parliament when they purchased the tea.

Realizing how much consumers enjoyed tea despite the political problems associated with it, the Wadsworths highlighted that item in their advertisement.  They stocked “a genuine assortment of DRUGS, MEDICINS” and “an assortment of European and India GOODS” as well as the groceries that they listed in their advertisement.  Among the groceries, only “BOHEA TEA” appeared in capital letters, drawing attention to that item over others.  With capital letters used sparingly in throughout the advertisement, the Wadsworths seemingly made a deliberate decision to accentuate tea while simultaneously affirming that it was acceptable for supporters of the American cause to purchase and drink this tea “not infected with a duty.”  That made their marketing strategy consistent with the principles expressed in editorials that lamented the “oppressive and unconstitutional Acts of the British Parliament.”  The July 19, 1774, edition of the Connecticut Courant also included the text of the Massachusetts Government Act and a poem, “HAIL LIBERTY!”  In that context, the Wadsworths provided a means for consumers to enjoy their favorite beverage in good conscience.

June 28

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (June 28, 1774).

“GOOD TEA, To be Sold.”

William Beadle was at it again.  He advertised “GOOD TEA, To be Sold by WILLIAM BEADLE, At Wethersfield” in the June 28, 1774, edition of the Connecticut Courant and Hartford Weekly Intelligencer.  Unlike many other merchants and shopkeepers, Beadle had not refrained from advertising tea after colonizers disguised as Indians dumped tea into Boston Harbor on December 16, 1773.  In March 1774, he advertised “Best Bohea TEA, Such as Fishes never drink!!”  In April, he opened a new advertisement with a headline promoting “A New Supply of TEA, Extraordinary good.”  Perhaps Beadle sold smuggled tea that evaded the duties imposed by Parliament but could not state that was the case in the public prints … or his politics did not align with the patriots who objected to Parliament regulating trade in the colonies … or he realized that many consumers still wished to drink tea even with the controversy swirling around that commodity.

Still, his latest advertisement hawking tea and only tea seemed especially bold.  It was the first one he published after the Boston Port Act closed and blockaded the harbor until residents of that town paid for the tea that some of them destroyed.  Word of that punishment arrived in the colonies in May, before the legislation went into effect on June 1.  Newspapers throughout the colonies carried coverage of the Boston Port Act and reactions in Boston and other towns.  Many people called for a new round of boycotts on goods imported from England, including tea.  Further coverage focused on other measures meant to bring Boston in line, the series of Coercive Acts that included an Act for the Impartial Administration of Justice and a Quartering Act.  The issue of the Connecticut Courant that ran Beadle’s advertisement featured “AnAUTHENTIC ACCOUNT” from London “of Friday’s DEBATE on the second Reading of the Bill regulating the civil government of the Massachusetts-Bay.”  Known as the Massachusetts Government Act, that legislation abrogated the colony’s charter from 1691 and gave new powers to the royal governor.  That same issue included updates from Boston and, on the same page as Beadle’s advertisement for tea, a “Copy of a Letter from the Committee of Correspondence in New-York, to the Committee in Boston.”  Yet not everyone held what seemed to be the prevailing political sentiments captured in the public prints.  Even as John Holt swapped out the British coat of arms for the severed snake representing American unity in the masthead of the New-York Journal, some merchants and shopkeepers, such as William Beadle, continued advertising tea rather than making pronouncements about abstaining from the beverage due to political principles.

May 24

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , ,

Who was the subject of an advertisement in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (May 24, 1774).

“RUN away … a negro man about 27 years of age.”

An advertisement in the May 24, 1774, edition of the Connecticut Courant offered a reward for the capture and return of an unnamed “negro man about 27 years of age” who liberated himself by running away from Thomas Moses, his enslaver.  Moses provided a description, declaring that the “negro man … lisps in his speech” and wore “a brown coat and red waistcoat, a white holland shirt, a new castor hat, a new pair of leather breeches, [and] a pair of blue stockings.”  He also took other clothing with him, items that he could use to vary his appearance or sell in his efforts to make good on his escape.  Moses stated that he would present ten dollars to “Whoever shall take up said negro and return him to me” or five dollars to whoever would “secure him in any of his majesty’s goals [jails] and send me word so that I may have him again.”  In a nota bene, he warned, “All persons are hereby forbid to harbour said negro on penalty of law.”

The first half of that advertisement appeared at the bottom of a column that featured an editorial with a headline that proclaimed, “JOIN OR DIE!!!”  A more extensive version first ran in the May 16 edition of the Newport Mercury as a combination of news and opinion.  An abbreviated version, the first paragraph, then circulated in other newspapers as printers followed the common practice of reprinting items from one publication to another.  The shorter version featured an additional exclamation mark for emphasis.  The editorial commented on the Boston Port Act and Parliament’s intention “to reduce its spirited inhabitants to the most servile and mean compliance ever attempted to be imposed on a free people.”  This new legislation was “infinitely more alarming and dangerous to our common liberties, than even that hydra the Stamp Act.”  While directed at Boston in retaliation for the destruction of tea the previous December, the Boston Port Act, according to the anonymous author, was also “a direct hostile invasion of every province on the continent.”  The people of Boston “nobly stood as a barrier against slavery.”  Now residents of other towns needed to do the same “to stand … for the relief, support, and animation of our brethren in the insulted, besieged capital of Massachusetts-Bay” because “nothing but unity, resolution, and perseverance, can save ourselves and posterity from what is worse than death — SLAVERY.”

Connecticut Courant (May 24, 1774).

Twice in a single paragraph, the author of the editorial invoked slavery as the consequence of Parliament’s treatment of the colonies.  Ebenezer Watson, the printer of the Connecticut Courant, selected that piece to feature in his newspaper and placed it in proximity to an advertisement that offered a reward for capturing an enslaved man who liberated himself.  A single advertisement, a probate notice, separated the editorial from the “RUN away” advertisement.  Perhaps even as he generated revenue from publishing the latter, Watson recognized the juxtaposition of very different concepts of slavery and could not position one item right after the other.  Just as likely, however, that juxtaposition did not register.  After all, Moses’s advertisement was one of at least eighty-five advertisements about enslaved people that ran in nineteen newspapers, including nine published in New England, that week.  Even as many printers advocated for liberty for colonizers who faced the prospect of figurative enslavement by Parliament, the early American press participated in perpetuating the literal enslavement of Africans, African Americans, and Indigenous Americans with advertisements for buying and selling enslaved people and notices calling on colonizers to capture enslaved people who liberated themselves by running away from their enslavers.  The proximity of such advertisements to content similar to the “JOIN OR DIE!!!” editorial was a common feature of newspapers published during the era of the American Revolution.

May 10

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Connecticut Courant (May 10, 1774).

“Come see for love, and then if you please may buy of me.”

In the spring of 1774, Samuel Wescote inserted a lengthy advertisement in the Connecticut Courant.  The shopkeeper informed the public that he had “just received a new and fresh Supply of Goods which are now ready for Sale at his Store … in Hartford.”  To demonstrate the choices that he presented to consumers, he provided an extensive list that included “a very neat and fashionable assortment of dark and light Chintzes and Callicoes,” “Women’s leather worsted & silk, black & colour’d Mitts,” “Men’s worsted black colour’d & mix’d Hose,” “black Umbrelloes,” and “Cutlery and Crockery Ware.”  In addition, he stocked “many other articles too tedious to name.”  Prospective customers would have to visit his shop to discover those other wonders for themselves.

To further entice them, Wescote promised good deals, stating that he set his prices “as cheap as is sold in Hartford.”  That being the case, the price was the price.  Wescote had no intention of haggling, not with new customers nor with loyal customers.  He planned to treat “all my customers alike,” according to the principle he set forth in a rhyming couplet that concluded his advertisement.  “Come see for love, and then if you please may buy of me / But for dispatch have set my Goods so low that no abatement will there be.”  In other words, the shopkeeper saved time for everyone by setting the lowest possible price from the start.  Customers did not need to wonder if they could have gotten an even better bargain if they dickered with Wescote a bit more.  Set in italics to increase its visibility, the couplet encapsulated the consumer experience that Wescote developed throughout his advertisement.  He encouraged browsing, believing that colonizers already immersed in a transatlantic consumer revolution would “see for love” the many kinds of merchandise he carried and select items to purchase that “please[d]” them.  His pricing scheme, offering “Goods so low” to give his customers the best value, streamlined final transactions.  He made shopping rather than paying the focal point of the consumer experience for his customers, the couplet distinguishing his advertisement from others.