.
Feedback

Ten Connecticut Men Helped Lincoln Pass the 13th Amendment (Part 2)

Passage was difficult in the House, where many representatives with Connecticut ties played a key role in putting a legal end to slavery.

Steven Spielberg's movie Lincoln focuses on how our 16th President was able to garner the votes necessary in the U.S. House of Representatives to achieve the two-thirds majority needed for the 13th Amendment to be approved by Congress.

The vote there was 119-56, just meeting the necessary standard for adopting an amendment with two-thirds of the vote. The entire Connecticut Congressional delegation — 3 Republicans and 1 Democrat — all voted for the amendment; in fact, all Congressmen from New England, except for Democratic Congressman Lorenzo Sweat from Maine, voted in favor of it.

One of the Connecticut Congressmen who voted for the amendment was Henry Champion Deming. He, like Sen. Lyman Trumbull, was born and raised in Colchester and was also a graduate of Bacon Academy!

Deming pursued classical studies at Yale University, where he was an 1836 graduate. Additionally, he received a law degreee from Yale. Deming served in both the Connecticut House of Representatives and the state Senate before becoming mayor of Hartford for about six years.

Following his mayoral service, he enlisted as a colonel in the Connecticut 12th Regiment during the early years of the Civil War. His Hartford mayoral experience came in handy when he was appointed mayor of New Orleans during the war under martial law from October of 1862 until February of 1863. In March of 1863, Deming began his first of two terms in Congress as a member of the House of Representatives. It was during his first term that he voted in favor of the 13th Amendment.

Another Congressman from Connecticut with a New Orleans connection was Augustus Brandegee of New London. The son of a New Orleans cotton dealer, Brandegee, like Deming, attended Yale and practiced law before entering politics. Brandegee served as judge of the criminal court in New Haven before being elected to the Connecticut State House of Representatives. He then was elected as a Congressman in Washington from Connecticut’s 3rd District.

A friend of Abraham Lincoln, Brandegee was a passionate abolitionist. He, too, cast an important vote in favor of the 13th Amendment. Later, he served as mayor of New London for a single term. A widely respected man, Brandegee died in 1904 at age 76.

Unlike Brandegee and Deming, Congressman James E. English of New Haven did not pursue academics; instead, English was involved in the lumber business and worked as a carpenter as a young man. He, too, began his career in the Connecticut legislature, serving terms in both the House and the Senate before being elected to the national Congress as Connecticut’s only Democrat in its delegation. Nevertheless, English voted in favor of the 13th Amendment, reportedly leaving the side of his ill wife to cast a critical "yes" vote for the abolition of slavery.

Later, English was elected governor of Connecticut and also served an interim appointment in Washington as a Senator for just under a year. English died in 1890 just two days shy of his 78th birthday.

The least known and oldest member of the four-man Connecticut Congressional delegation was Rep. John Henry Hubbard of Litchfield County. Born in Salisbury in 1804, Hubbard studied law and was admitted to the bar in 1828. He also began his political career in the Connecticut legislature, serving as a Senator from 1847-49. He then was elected to the national Congress in 1863 as a Republican and served for two terms. He also cast an important vote for the 13th Amendment. Following his two terms, Hubbard resumed his practice of law. He died in 1872 at the age of 68.

Another Republican Congressman and Connecticut native named Hubbard came from Iowa's newly formed 6th District. Rep. Asahel W. Hubbard also voted in favor of the amendment. Hubbard was born and raised in Haddam, CT. His parents, Asahel Hubbard and Susannah Hubbard, lie buried in the New Ponsett Cemetery on Rt. 81 in Higganum.

Asehel was born on Jan. 19, 1819. Educated in Middletown, Asahel became a stonecutter; at 19, he moved to Rushville, Indiana. By 1841, Asahel Hubbard began to practice law in Rushville and soon was elected to the state house in Indiana from 1847-1849. He then moved to Sioux City, Iowa, in 1857, where he dabbled in real estate and the railroads before becoming a judge from 1859-1862. Hubbard then was elected from Iowa's newly formed 6th District to the House of Representatives, serving as a Congressman for 3 terms from 1863-1869. A Nebraska town — Hubbard, Nebraska — was named after him in 1880.

A Michigan Congressman named Charles Upson — born and raised in Southington, CT —a lso voted to end slavery. A Yale grad, Upson also taught school in Farmington before settling in Michigan. Upson practiced law in Kalamazoo before entering the political arena in Michigan. He was elected as a Republican to serve three terms in Congress from 1863-69. He then served in various political capacities in Michigan before his death in 1885 at age 64.

In addition to the six Connecticut natives above who voted for the 13th Amendment, seven other Congressmen from five other states with strong Connecticut connections voted for the 13th Amendment:

  • Rep. John Denison Baldwin from Massachusetts was born in North Stonington.
  • Rep. Cornelius Cole from California was a graduate of Wesleyan University.
  • Rep. Henry L. Dames of Massachusetts was educated at Yale.
  • Rep. Calvin T. Hulburd of New York attended Yale Law School.
  • Rep. James Willis Patterson of New Hampshire was a principal of Woodstock Academy and studied theology in New Haven. Patterson was also a Dartmouth professor.
  • Rep. Rufus Paine Spalding of Ohio attended Yale.
  • Rep. William B. Washburn of Massachusetts also attended Yale.

Racism both in Connecticut and elsewhere in the nation did not end with the passage of the 13th Amendment; however, the role played by the entire Connecticut Congressional delegation in the passage of the 13th Amendment was noble and should be defended, as it moved the country further down the path toward addressing the persistent and vexing issue of racial discrimination.

Additionally, the role played by two other Connecticut natives — one a Congressman from Michigan and the other a Congressman from Iowa — should not be forgotten either, nor should we forget the role played by seven other Congressmen with strong Connecticut ties from five other states who voted for the end of slavery.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from South Windsor Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Don't we deserve better?
Susan May 23, 2013 at 06:42 am
Mr. Riley your arrogance will be your downfall as well. You elitists do not get it. Jobs may haveRead More been created in the state but folks are still losing their homes.
Matt Riley May 22, 2013 at 07:49 pm
Sorry, "Steve" and "Susan" - I have to admit that I had the same thought thatRead More "Johnny" did. This is what happens when you are unwilling to publicly standup for what you believe in - for your ideas. Suggest you show up at a TC meeting and share your thoughts - just remember that you will have to state your name and address! "Johnny" - you need to come clean too - if you want to be taken seriously.
Susan May 22, 2013 at 03:41 pm
@Johnny, I don't know who you are but I know who I am and I am not Steve's wife. It appears howeverRead More we have the same philosophy. See what Mr. McCann does not understand that his arrogance will be his downfall. Why should someone identify themselves when his comment above sounds very threatening. Everyone who comes in contact with Mr. McCann better not disagree with him to his face as he will rip you apart. Proof of that is at council meetings. Good day Johnny.
"Visionaries" of South Windsor lead by McCann and Daugherty hard at work...
Steve Phillips May 18, 2013 at 08:55 am
Mr. McCann arrogantly conducts himself on the Town Council and here as if he is above criticism,Read More forgetting (or simply not caring) about the privilege and responsibility serving elected office holds. A privilege and responsibility granted by the very same constituents McCann insults with comments above. Lacking empathy and humility are never traits respected leaders aspire, and sadly what McCann has disrespectfully expressed here.
Susan May 17, 2013 at 06:18 pm
Totally agree with you Mr. Sullivan. There are some who cannot use their real name or only a firstRead More name at fear of being attacked. Being a politician Mr. McCann has no problem speaking out. If you disagree with him you get ripped apart. I have witnessed it first hand by watching the council meetings on TV.
Michael Sullivan May 17, 2013 at 04:00 pm
Some folks choose not to use their real or full names on public bulletin boards and blogs…Read More Welcome to the 21st century Mr. McCann! Indeed the terms of use for Patch say quite clearly: "We encourage, but do not require, that the user name you provide be your real name." Mr. McCann you have chosen to be a public figure and politician. Others who may only wish to participate anonymously on blogs and postings such as these are not required to participate at whatever _you_ may deem to be an acceptable level.
Larry Torff May 17, 2013 at 10:29 pm
If tax, spend, borrow and figure out how to pay for it later is the way to budget for the future,Read More I'll take the old guard, thank you.
Michael Sullivan May 16, 2013 at 01:08 pm
I believe there's a misprint - the title should have been "BORROWING for the future"?
keith yagaloff May 14, 2013 at 06:07 pm
Darren, I've said many times that a small scale fields project could have been approved as early asRead More last summer. There are opportunities to fund the project from within the existing budget. Tom and I both offered to use money from the contingency account to get the planning studies completed. The hockey rink proponents never brought any actual data to the council. The town manager and our financial consultant gathered financial data and notified the council that the project was not viable. A political fight over funding the pension using 7.75% versus 8% as the discount rate was unnecessary. The pension was funded in accordance with the ARC, as town councils have done virtually every year since the pension was in place. Fluctuations due to market conditions far exceed the differences in proposed funding. We have had positive town audits with no indication that the town's financial rating is at risk. The town is financially very healthy.
Darren DeMartino May 14, 2013 at 05:13 pm
Keith I think Buford makes a lot of sense. The large majority of this tax increase was caused by theRead More past council members for years more worried about getting reelected than the current council. This increase was fueled by years of cutting to the bone, pushing things off when they should have been dealt with in a timely fashion. Mayor Delnicki (not Delnickie) who you have praised so much over the past day or so himself warned numerous times that this increase was coming. He stated numerous times on camera and in the press that there would be a day of reckoning in the future due to the cuts we had made over the years and now that it is here no one wants to face it. Now that you and Tom are on the same side it is interesting how much your perspective has changed? It is interesting in your article that you reference how certain councilors have embrace the borrow and spend mentality yet you and your cohorts voted against amendments to fund the pension based upon a more realistic 7.75% discount rate in comparison to 8% as well as an amendment that would have prevented us from taking $800,000 out of found account(savings account) which could negatively impact our future ratings. In regards to the fields you have stated you are in favor of them so if so why not take advantage of low construction costs and historically low interest rates to invest in something that will make our town a more desirable place to live? In regards to the hockey rink why is it that we never even got the facts about what the financial impact would be to the town. We both know it was because somehow egos got in the way of exploring what would be best for our town. Our town is a great place to live but if we continue down this past that wont be the case in a very short time.
keith yagaloff May 14, 2013 at 03:22 pm
Dear Buford, thank you for your comments. You more than adequately describe your views when youRead More write "Unfortunately for you, you live in a 1%er town in a 1%er state." All that my wife and I possess was earned through honest hard work and we take no shame in that. Never once, however, did it cross my mind to use taxpayer money to fund projects for myself and my friends. I feel sorry for other hard working people living in South Windsor who find their tax dollars have been co-opted by elected officials who think they are running Apple or Walmart.