Connecticut 1818 Constitutional Convention, Hartford, First Delegate, Ballot 3
- Office:
- Constitutional Convention (State)
- Title:
- Convention Delegate
- Jurisdiction:
- State
- Label:
- Connecticut 1818 Constitutional Convention, Hartford, First Delegate, Ballot 3
- Date:
- 1818
- State:
- Connecticut
- Type:
- General
- Iteration:
- Third Ballot
- Office/Role:
- Constitutional Convention/Convention Delegate
- Candidates:
- Sylvester Wells, Nathaniel Terry, scattering
| Candidates: | Sylvester Wells | Nathaniel Terry | scattering |
|---|---|---|---|
| Affiliation: | Republican | Federalist | |
| Final Result: [1][2][3][4] | 499 | 480 | 3 |
| Hartford County | - | - | - |
| City of Hartford | 499 | 480 | 3 |
Notes:
[1]The Connecticut Courant (Hartford, CT) and Connecticut Mirror (Hartford, CT) list Nathaniel Terry with 477 votes.
[2]"As it was well known that the democrats had early mustered all or nearly all their troops, as on the second ballot there were few scattering votes, and as there was no defection from the federal vote, this wonderful increase of above thirty democratic votes was considered very suspicious." Connecticut Courant (Hartford, CT). July 7, 1818.
[3]"The impression was almost universal, that foul means, or some gross mistake, had given success to the democratic ticket. At this moment a large number of persons, and among them some of the most respectable gentlemen in this City, without concert, but urged by the same irresistible suspicions, determined to ascertain the truth. At the third ballot, about twenty persons were seen to put in votes a second time; but such was the confusion of the house, the prostration of authority and the clamout of certain democrats, because some of their men were detected in voting twice, that only about twelve out of the twenty were rejected by the authority. But among these twelve only one was a federalist." Connecticut Mirror (Hartford, CT). July 13, 1818.
[4]"In the article in the Courant it is insinuated that Doct. Wells was not duly elected; there being an increase of about 30 votes, at the third over the second ballot, it is inimated that these votes could not have been fairly obtained - it is asked, how these additional votes could have been obtained? This enquiry is readily answered. After the first ballot both parties were active in bringing on absent freemen, and few or none arrived until the third ballot, and hence at that ballot both parties had a considerable increase of votes; but it may be said that we never gave as large a vote afterwards. This is true, but it is equally true that the republicans gave about 50 less votes the next ballot, which was about 20 less than the second ballot - it is also true that on the second ballot for the second Delegate we gave but 444, and on the third ballot 485, being an increase of 41 votes, and only 14 less than the ballot at which Dr. Wells was chosen. These facts shew (sic) that the votes were very fluctuating, and that it is uncertain whether all the freemen voted at any ballot. But if the increase of republican votes is 'very suspicious,' is not the increase of federal votes equally suspicious. The ballot at which Mr. Terry was declared elected, the federalists gave 495 votes, and the ballot preceding but 465, being a gain of 30 votes. As it respects increase of votes, therefore, the Delegates are equally situated; but how is it in other respects - one had 15 majority, the other ONE majority. There is something more than 'suspicion,' cast upon the election of Mr. Terry. ONE solitary vote opposed to him, would have defeated his election - and to say nothing of numerous other cases - of the disfranchisement of one freeman - of the more than 'suspicions' of several persons voting twice - of the acknowledgment of a certain federalist that he procured a vote to be given by a person who was not a freeman - to say nothing of Gen. Terry's own vote, which he insisted upon giving in, after the ballot had been closed, there was one vote which we observed ourselves with a number of others given in for Mr. Huntington that was rejected upon the ground that the ballot was closed, but it was decided afterwards that it was not closed and votes were receiv'd yet this vote having been pushed aside, was refused to be counted. Under these circumstances it is unnecessary to enquire, whether Mr. Terry was, or was not duly elected. We trust this question will be settled by the proper tribunal.'" The Times (Hartford, CT). July 14, 1818.
References:
American Mercury (Hartford, CT). July 7, 1818.
Connecticut Courant (Hartford, CT). July 7, 1818.
Connecticut Mirror (Hartford, CT). July 13, 1818.
The Times (Hartford, CT). July 14, 1818.
These election records were released on 11 January 2012. Versions numbers are assigned by state. Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia are complete and are in Version 1.0. All other states are in a Beta version. For more information go to the about page.
