Web
and Book design, Copyright, Kellscraft Studio 1999-2005 (Return to Web Text-ures) |
Click Here to return to Book of Boston Content Page Return to the Previous Chapter |
(HOME) |
CHAPTER
VII A
PICTURESQUE BOSTONIAN HE most prominent Bostonian
of Revolutionary days, the Boston man
who loomed the largest and still looms most important, was the
splendidly
dressed John Hancock and his home up near the summit of Beacon Hill,
was a
radiant center of wealth and society. But that home, so typical of the
finest
and choicest old-time life and architecture, has gone: some half
century ago,
in spite of the entreative protests of all lovers of the stately and
beautiful,
it was torn down for the sake of replacing it with a huge house that is
hopelessly humdrum. Even the fine old furniture, so representative of
the best
old-time life, and which had the additional value of being so
associated with
the man of mighty signature and Dorothy Q., was lost or scattered. Out
in
Worcester I saw a superb double-chair of Chippendale design, that had
stood in
the Hancock home; in Pilgrim Hall in Plymouth is a noble settee that
was of the
Hancock furnishings; in Marblehead, in the Jeremiah Lee mansion, I saw
six
mahogany chairs, Heppelwhites, beautiful in design and workmanship,
which, so
tradition tells, were purchased at a Hancock auction, and carried up to
Marblehead on a sloop, after John Hancock's death. The portraits, by
Copley, of
Hancock and his wife, are fittingly in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts.
Hancock was such a
big
figure in his time, and filled such a space in the public eye, that
here on
Beacon Hill, where his house stood, near the State House that has since
been
built upon his cow pasture, his presence still seems to be felt. Yet
not only
was his fine home destroyed and his fine furniture scattered, but
before these
things happened his widow had changed the name of Hancock for that of
one of
his own ship captains, and forever left the house where, with the
gorgeous
John, she had welcomed so great a number of personal guests and guests
of the
State or the Nation. When Lafayette visited Boston in 1824, he was
escorted, by
a great procession, through the streets, and passing along Tremont
Street,
beside the Common, thoughts came to him of the noble hospitality that
had long
ago been extended to him in the Hancock mansion, which was then still
standing,
on the other side of the great open space beside him. Full of such
thoughts he
lifted his eyes to a window – and there sat Mrs. James Scott, once Mrs.
Hancock! Many years had passed; but he recognized her, he stopped the
carriage,
he rose in his place and, hand on heart, bowed low; and as the carriage
resumed
its way she sank back, overpowered by the rush of memories. And such
things
make the past seem but yesterday, for the past still lives when one can
feel
its very life and watch its pulsing heartthrobs. But Boston never
really
liked Hancock. That, as a rich merchant, he was placed in great public
positions of a kind usually given to lawyers, roused the jealousy of
lawyers,
and every effort was made to ignore or belittle him. And he was an
aristocrat;
and revolutions always dislike aristocrats. He was the one conspicuous
aristocrat of Boston who sided against the King, the others refugeeing
to
Halifax, and when the war was over, and families came in from Salem and
Quincy
(Braintree) and other places to become the leading families of Boston
and make
themselves Boston ancestors, Hancock was the only prominent
representative of
the ancien regime. He was himself
born in what is now Quincy, but had come into Boston long before the
Revolution
to be associated with his wealthy uncle there. His position, his
wealth, his
fine mansion that stood so proudly on the hilltop, his lavish
hospitality, with
gayety and wines and dinners and music and dancing, made for jealousy
among
those who were invited, and for heart-burnings and backbiting among
those who
were not invited at all or not so often as they thought they ought to
be. On
the whole, he could not but make enemies, and the Boston of even to-day
is
still moved by their enmities. It was not until 1915
that
this, his own city, would even put up a memorial to him – yet this
belated
memorial, which is set just within the entrance of the State House,
shows by a
brief enumeration how great a man he was, for, beginning with the
admirable
phrasing, "John Hancock, a Patriot of the Revolution," it goes on to
enumerate, with dignified brevity, that he was President of the
Provincial
Congress of 1774, that he was President of the Continental Congress of
1775-1777, that he was the first signer of the Declaration of
Independence,
that he was the first Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
and was
again, afterwards, made governor, and that he was president of the
Convention
that adopted the Federal Constitution. An amazing list! A man who could
occupy
positions so dignified, so responsible, so honorable, not only among
his own
people but as a chosen leader of strong men gathered from all parts of
America,
must have possessed remarkable qualities of leadership. More than anything
else,
Hancock's clothes and his ideas of personal consequence made him
enemies! He
bought costly material. He wore his clothes with an air. He was a Beau
Brummel
of public life; he was more than that, for he also lived in state and
with
stateliness. All this was more noticeable in New England than it would
have
been farther south, and his colleagues either hated or disparaged him
for it. In the old State House, now maintained as a museum, not this new State House, there are preserved some of his clothes, and I noticed in. particular a superb coat of crimson velvet and a, splendid gold-embroidered waistcoat of blue silk: there are, too, some dainty slippers of white satin and blue kid, with roses of silk brocade, that his wife had worn. These things were, from their somewhat sober coloring, belongings of advancing years, but I remember a description of Hancock as a leader of fashion when a young man, and even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed more splendidly, for there was a coat of scarlet, lined with silk and embroidered with gold, and there was a waistcoat embroidered on white satin, and there were white satin smallclothes and white silk stockings and silver-buckled shoes and three-cornered gold-laced hat! He was often called "King Hancock" from the ostentation of his appearance and equipage, and a contemporary description declared that he appeared in public with "all the pageantry and state of an oriental prince," attended by servants in superb livery and escorted by half a hundred horsemen. And another account tells of his loving to drive in a great coach drawn by six blooded bays. Hancock's gorgeous clothes and gorgeous ostentation were too much for Boston, and many years after his death even the genial Holmes took a humorous fling at him:
From all that one
reads of
Hancock's manner and appearance, and from the size of the signature
that he so
conspicuously and bravely set down, first of the Signers of the
Declaration of
Independence as he was, one would gather the impression of a big
consequential
man, overbearing and pompous; but fortunately there is Copley's
portrait to be
seen, and Copley did not thus picture him. Mrs. Hancock,
"Dorothy
Q.," Copley pictures as a slender lady in a pink silk gown with tight
sleeves, and a tambour muslin apron, and a tiny black velvet band
around the
neck, and if her forehead is a trifle too high and bare and her lips a
little
too suggestive of selfishness, why, on the whole it is an attractive
face; and
John Hancock himself is shown as a slight and slender man, without
pomposity of
expression or bearing: just a quiet, agreeable-looking man, handsome
and
intelligent, dressed without ostentation and with extreme neatness, in
a plain
gold-braided coat, with simple white ruffles at the wrists, and white
silk
stockings, sitting at a desk, pen in hand, turning the pages of a
ledger. There
is no better way of coming to a judgment regarding the character of the
old-time leaders than by studying their portraits, when they were
painted by
such masters as Copley, Trumbull and Stuart, and such paintings give at
the
same time a feeling of intimate personal acquaintance with the men
portrayed. Hancock must have
been a
most unusual man, to win leadership as he did in the face of
depreciation and
criticism. His great conspicuous signature alone would mark him as
unusual; and
when he signed, it was with full knowledge that he was taking greater
risks than
most of the other signers, not only because of his prominence as the
first of
the list but because he knew from personal observation the strength of
England,
having been one of the few who in those early days had crossed the
Atlantic. It
is curious to know that Hancock, the First Signer, was present at the
coronation of George the Third! At the time of the Declaration, he had
been
proscribed for more than a year, on account of Revolutionary
activities, and
when he set down his bold signature he exclaimed: "There, John Bull can
read that without spectacles! Now let him double his reward!" That he risked so
great a
stake as he did, that he risked great wealth and high social position
as well
as life-few in the North or the South risked so much – ought to have
gone far
toward endearing him to his contemporaries; and, indeed, it was all
this,
combined with qualities of leadership, that gave him such successive
posts of
importance. But doubtless there was. something in his personality to
arouse
dislike, more than can now be seen. That he was, in present-day phrase,
his own
press-agent, quite capable of writing ahead to announce the time of his
intended arrival at some place, and deprecating the idea of popular
enthusiasm
being shown by taking the horses out of his carriage – his own idea,
thus put
into the heads of others! – gives some intimation of how he won
disfavor. The tablet set into
the
fence in front of the house that has replaced his, seems in itself to
bring his
figure to mind, with all his picturesqueness of dressing and dining and
living
and driving and posing; for he was certainly much of a poseur. But he
was
romantic, too. He married Dorothy Quincy early in the war, at
Fairfield,
Connecticut, while he was still a proscribed man, unable to return to
Massachusetts
under forfeiture of his life; and, the house being afterwards wantonly
burned
in one of the barbarous burning coast-wise raids of the British, he
sent down
material for a new house from Boston, when the war was over, for its
rebuilding, with the understanding that it should be rebuilt as a copy
of his
own house in Boston. It is worth while adding to this romance in
house-building, that the Fairfield house, rebuilt so largely at
Hancock's
expense in memory of the happy event there, was completely altered in
appearance, by a new owner who did not care for beauty, about the same
time
that Hancock's house on Beacon Hill was torn down by an owner similarly
iconoclastic. But the story of the romantic marriage at Thaddeus Burr's
house
in Fairfield is still remembered in the old Connecticut village, and
the little
Fairfield girls are still named Dorothy in a sort of romantic memory. One thing is hard to
forgive
him, and that is his flight from Lexington, though. that is something
that
Boston itself seems not to question. He had left Boston with Samuel
Adams, as
the first clash of the Revolution approached, they two being
specifically cut
off from mercy by the English Governor Is proclamation which was at the
same
time offering mercy to any others who should seek it. The two men had
taken
shelter at Lexington; they had been wakened by Paul Revere at two
o'clock in
the morning of the great 19th of April; they thought that the British
would
like to capture them even more than to destroy the military supplies in
Concord; and they deemed discretion better than valor, and fled. It is
true
that they were proscribed, and it is possible that they did not expect
actual
deadly shooting to take place that morning, but they also knew that
British
soldiers were out from Boston on grim duty and that the minute-men were
gathering. As they fled they heard the bells of village after village
solemnly
sounding across the dark countryside. But they did not turn back and
stand with
the farmers whom their own leadership had taken into rebellion. What an
opportunity they had! What an opportunity they missed! How gallantly
they would
forever have figured in history had they even, after running away from
Lexington, joined the minute-men at Concord or on the glorious running
fight to
Boston! It was an opportunity such as comes to few – and instead of
accepting
it Hancock was sending word to his fiancée, Dorothy Quincy, who was at
the home
in Lexington where he had found shelter, telling her to what house he
was
fleeing and asking her to follow and to take the salmon ! – a
particularly fine
specimen that he had hoped to eat at breakfast. And Dorothy Quincy
followed and
actually took it, and it was cooked – and then came poetic justice, in
the
shape of a man wild with the this-time-mistaken news that the British
again
were near, whereupon Hancock and Adams once more fled, salmonless, and
when
breakfast was at length eaten there was only cold pork. No wonder,
years
afterward, Mrs. Hancock wrote, "The Governor's hobby is his
dinner-table,
and I suppose it is mine." Neither Hancock nor
Samuel
Adams had the two o'clock in the morning courage that makes a man brave
when
confronted with swift physical emergency: but they both possessed in a
high
degree the courage that makes well-dressed men, when combined with
other
well-dressed men, risk resolutely their lives and property and honor.
But the
lack of physical courage did not prevent either Hancock or Samuel Adams
from
being given lofty positions of trust and from being, in turn, governors
of Massachusetts. In general, the site
of a
vanished building is not particularly interesting, but the simple
tablet on the
iron fence, showing where stood the picturesque house of the
picturesque
Hancock, and the belated memorial in the State House, which was built
upon his
own grounds – he had intended presenting the land to the State for the
purpose,
and the memorandum for the deed of gift was under his pillow when he
died –
sum-mon up, as of the moment, the remembrance of this man of the past.
The
land, the hill – the Bostonian disparagement! – all are still here, and
here is
the very Common across which he loved to look and along the side of
which, in
front of his mansion, he loved to pace, with stately dignity and in
stately
clothes! But it was against the sternness of Puritan law for any one to stroll, no matter how sedately, on the Common on Sundays, and the story is told that even Hancock, at the height of his power, when taking the air one pleasant Sunday afternoon in front of his house on the Common, which he doubtless looked upon, almost as his own front yard, was incontinently pounced upon by a constable and, in spite of his choleric protestations, triumphantly led away! The story may be apocryphal, but it bears all the marks of truth, in the desire to humble Hancock, and at the same time to stand for the sanctity of the Sabbath. |