Massachusetts 1789 U.S. House of Representatives, District 4, Ballot 4
- Office:
- U.S. House of Representatives (Federal)
- Title:
- U.S. Congressman
- Jurisdiction:
- Federal
- Label:
- Massachusetts 1789 U.S. House of Representatives, District 4, Ballot 4
- Date:
- 1789
- State:
- Massachusetts
- Type:
- General
- Iteration:
- Fourth Ballot
- Office/Role:
- U.S. House of Representatives/U.S. Congressman
- Candidates:
- Theodore Sedgwick, Samuel Lyman, William Whiting, Samuel Fowler, William Williams, Thompson J. Skinner, William Lyman, John Bacon
| Candidates: | Theodore Sedgwick | Samuel Lyman | William Whiting | Samuel Fowler | William Williams | Thompson J. Skinner | William Lyman | John Bacon |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Affiliation: | Federalist | Federalist | Anti-Federalist | |||||
| Final Result: [1][2][3][4][5] | 1649 | 1382 | 468 | 31 | 16 | 13 | 3 | 1 |
| District of Four | 1649 | 1382 | 468 | 31 | 16 | 13 | 3 | 1 |
| Berkshire County | 740 | 36 | 443 | - | 11 | 10 | - | 1 |
| Town of Adams[6] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Alford | 18 | - | 34 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Becket | 27 | 2 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Dalton | 16 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Egremont | 2 | - | 43 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Great Barrington | 49 | - | 35 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Hancock[7] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Lanesborough | 127 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Lee | 25 | - | 37 | - | - | - | - | 1 |
| Town of Lenox | 29 | 7 | 23 | - | - | 10 | - | - |
| Town of Louden | 3 | 1 | 12 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Mount Washington | 2 | - | 17 | - | - | - | - | - |
| District of New Ashford | 6 | - | 18 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of New Marlborough | 31 | 1 | 9 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Partridgefield | 19 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Pittsfield | 55 | - | - | - | 11 | - | - | - |
| Town of Richmond | 65 | 20 | 1 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Sandisfield[8] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Sheffield | 62 | 2 | 59 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Stockbridge | 88 | 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Tyringham | 23 | - | 61 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Washington | 11 | - | 14 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of West Stockbridge | 17 | - | 21 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Williamstown | 35 | - | 47 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Windsor | 30 | - | 12 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Hampshire County | 909 | 1346 | 25 | 31 | 5 | 3 | 3 | - |
| Town of Amherst | 13 | 30 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Ashfield | 2 | 24 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Belchertown | 49 | 25 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Bernardston | 9 | 29 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Blandford | 25 | 15 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Brimfield | 37 | 7 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Buckland[9] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Charlemont[10] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Chester | 5 | 7 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Chesterfield | 30 | - | - | - | 3 | - | - | - |
| Town of Colrain | 3 | 20 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Conway | 7 | 42 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Cummington | 9 | - | - | - | - | 2 | - | - |
| Town of Deerfield | 38 | 2 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| District of Easthampton | 24 | 6 | 1 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Goshen | 14 | 4 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Granby | 2 | 32 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Granville | 3 | 61 | 15 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Greenfield | 13 | 19 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Greenwich[11] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Hadley | 42 | 13 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Hatfield | 46 | 13 | - | - | 2 | 1 | - | - |
| Town of Heath[12] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Holland | 5 | 16 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Leverett[13] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| District of Leyden | - | 12 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Longmeadow | 12 | 55 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Ludlow | - | 62 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Middlefield[14] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Monson | 19 | 70 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Montague | 21 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Montgomery[15] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of New Salem[16] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Northampton | 142 | 13 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Northfield | 29 | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Norwich | 14 | 5 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| District of Orange | 9 | 2 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Palmer | 2 | 52 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Pelham | 1 | 55 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| District of Plainfield[17] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Rowe[18] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Shelburne | 6 | 55 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Shutesbury[19] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of South Brimfield | 8 | 42 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of South Hadley | 7 | 45 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Southampton | 61 | 10 | 1 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Southwick | 15 | 10 | 8 | - | - | - | 3 | - |
| Town of Springfield | 21 | 127 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Sunderland | 16 | 5 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Ware | 1 | 44 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Warwick | 2 | 14 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Wendell | 20 | 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of West Springfield | 13 | 147 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Westfield | 66 | 15 | - | 31 | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Westhampton | 26 | 4 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Whately | 4 | 12 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Wilbraham | 9 | 97 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Williamsburg | 9 | 24 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Town of Worthington[20] | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Notes:
[1]Massachusetts law required a majority to elect for the U.S. House of Representatives. The original election was held on December 18, 1788, with a 2nd Trial on January 29, 1789 and a 3rd Trial on March 2, 1789. A 5th Trial would follow on May 11, 1789.
[2]"The first election in the district was in part a reflection of the rivalry between Hampshire and Berkshire counties. Berkshire was the less populous county, but four of the six candidates who received the most votes - Theodore Sedgwick, William Whiting, Thompson J. Skinner, and William Williams - were residents of the county. The two Hampshire candidates were Samuel Lyman and John Worthington. The first election did not reflect the fact that the two counties were centers of agrarian discontent and of support for Shays's Rebellion. Nor did it reflect the fact that in the state Convention the Hampshire delegates voted 32 to 19 and the Berkshire delegates voted 16 to 6 against ratification of the Constitution. Only Whiting was regarded as a Shaysite and an Antifederalist, while the other five men were Federalists - and two of these - Worthington and Williams - had been virtual if not actual Loyalists during the Revolution. The issue of amendments to the Constitution was not raised during the first election in the district, but it became so important in the ensuing elections that Theodore Sedgwick, who opposed amendments, publicly promised to support them before the fifth election, which he won." The Documentary History of the First Federal Elections: 1788-1790, Vol. I. p 603.
[3]"No precept for the fourth election has been located, but since Governor Hancock had usually issued precepts for the next election on the same day that the votes of the previous election were recorded, he probably issued the precept for the fourth election on 16 March. In any case, the election was called for 30 March, with the votes to be returned to the Secretary of the Commonwealth by 9 April. If the precept was issued on 16 March, this left only two weeks between that date and the election, an unusually short time as compared to the other elections, and the precept did not reach Northampton in Hampshire County until 25 March, only five days before the election. Sedgwick's supporters charged that the Governor had deliberately allowed so little time in order to aid Samuel Lyman. However, Samuel Henshaw assured Sedgwick that Sheriff Elisha Porter of Hampshire County would see to it that the precepts would be rushed 'to such towns as will vote like rational beings.' Presumably, this precluded delivery to towns which had voted for Samuel Lyman in previous elections. In the case of the town of Greenwich, which voted overwhelmingly for Lyman in the second and fifth elections, a newspaper reported that the precept for the fourth election had been left three miles from town by 'a stranger' and that the town had not held an election because it did not know one had been called. Shortly after the results of the election were recorded on 9 April, the Northampton and Springfield newspapers reported that the votes for twenty-one towns had been either detained or had not been returned in time to be counted. The supporters of both Sedgwick and Lyman charged that their candidates had been cheated out of the election." The Documentary History of the First Federal Elections: 1788-1790, Vol. I. p 695.
[4]A gentleman of veracity, directly from Boston, assures us, that twenty towns in this district made no seasonable returns to the secretary's office, of the state of their votes which were given in on the 30th of last month, for the choice of a federal Representative. The names of the towns are Conway, New Salem, Chester, Charlemont, Ashfield, Worthington, Shutesbury, Leverett, Montgomery, Buckland, Middlefield, Rowe, Heath, Greenwich, No. 7, Williamstown, Adams, Windsor, Sandisfield and New Ashford - fifteen in this county and five in Berkshire. Returns from sundry of the above towns were lodged in the secretary's office some days after the return day; and the gentleman observes, that the Secretary informed him that Mr. Lyman had the greatest number of votes, but that they unfortunately came in too late." The Hampshire Chronicle (Springfield, MA). April 22, 1789.
[5]"Unfortunately, on the return day for the election of a Representative in this district, the towns of Conway, Greenwich, New Salem, Chester, Charlemont, Ashfield, Worthington, Shutesbury, Leverett, Montgomery, Buckland, Middlefield, Rowe, Heath, Williamstown, Adams, New Ashford, Windsor, Hancock and Sandisfield sent in no votes; otherwise, we should, most probably, have been rescued from the inconvenience of another meeting; as we may most reasonably presume that the votes of the aforesaid towns would have decided the election in favor of Samuel Lyman." The Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, MA). April 22, 1789.
[6]There were no votes recorded in Adams.
[7]There were no votes recorded in Hancock.
[8]There were no votes recorded in Sandisfield.
[9]There were no votes recorded in Buckland.
[10]There were no votes recorded in Charlemont.
[11]There were no votes recorded in Greenwich.
[12]There were no votes recorded in Heath.
[13]There were no votes recorded in Leverett.
[14]There were no votes recorded in Middlefield.
[15]There were no votes recorded in Montgomery.
[16]There were no votes recorded in New Salem.
[17]Plainfield was not listed in the Original Election Returns.
[18]There were no votes recorded in Rowe.
[19]There were no votes recorded in Shutesbury.
[20]There were no votes recorded in Worthington.
References:
Original Election Returns. Massachusetts State Archives, Boston.
The Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, MA). April 1, 1789.
The Berkshire Chronicle, and the Massachusetts Intelligencer (Pittsfield, MA). April 3, 1789.
The Hampshire Chronicle (Springfield, MA). April 8, 1789.
The Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, MA). April 8, 1789.
The Berkshire Chronicle, and the Massachusetts Intelligencer (Pittsfield, MA). April 10, 1789.
The Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, MA). April 10, 1789.
The Massachusetts Centinel (Boston, MA). April 11, 1789.
The Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, MA). April 15, 1789.
The Hampshire Chronicle (Springfield, MA). April 22, 1789.
The Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, MA). April 22, 1789.
Jensen, Merrill and Robert A. Becker, ed. The Documentary History of the First Federal Elections: 1788-1790. Vol. I. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1976. 694-711.
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.
