Note from the author: The purpose of posting this document is to offer a read to interested parties, and to offer ideas and starting points to those doing similar research. It is highly suggested that one not reference this document in their work. The historical, statistical and grammatical accuracy of this work should be considered unsatisfactory. The material here references original sources, which should be used instead (all of the original sources can be found in Special Collections Department of the University of Vermont Bailey-Howe Library).
By Aaron Hawley
aaron.hawley(at)uvm.edu
Wednesday, April 25, 2001
University of Vermont
Political Science (POLS) 123 - Vermont Politics
Taught by Professor Frank M. Bryan
The town of Proctor is an anomaly to the state of Vermont for a few fundamental reasons. Proctor, originally a village, successfully convinced the state to let it to secede from two towns, allowing it to scale down its local government. The town's predominate industry has never been agricultural. Rather, a single marble company has sustained the well-being of town citizens. Besides being home to one of the state's strongest companies, the town of Proctor has produced an abundance of residents who wielded immense power in state and national politics. The town was home to one of the strongest political dynasties the state of Vermont has ever seen. Analysis will show that these political personalities had a strong effect on the political orientation of local voters. Analysis will also show that this influence on the town voters was short lived soon after the town lost its political connections. These observations support the notion that voters are more likely to vote for "whom they know", and not what they know.
Besides imparting the magnificent history of Proctor, correlations will be made between the population's socio-economic status and political behavior. Proctor town government will then be analyzed by investigating patterns in quantitative data, including the size of the annual town report, the number of town officers, and the number of articles on the town meeting warning.
The town of Proctor is located in Rutland County in the Southwest Region of the state of Vermont. Proctor is nestled between the towns of Rutland, West Rutland, and Pittsford. The town lies in the narrow Otter Creek Valley, and sits on 2,200 acres of land, making it the third smallest town by land area in the state. (Swift, 416)
Proctor is known as the "Marble Capital of the United States." (Swift, 415) It is home to quarries and finishing plants, along with the corporate headquarters and visitors exhibit of the Vermont Marble Company. Otter Creek flows through the central village. The roaring 128-foot foaming waterfall formed by the Otter is called Sutherland Falls.
Before Europeans invaded the region, Coughnawaga Iroquois inhabited present-day Proctor. (French, 3) The original name of the roaring Sutherland Falls was “Great Falls,” said to have been named by Iroquois Chief Paddlequick. (Herbert, 29) In 1767, John Sutherland arrived at what was then Socialboro. At once, Sutherland harnessed the natural power of the Otter Creek falls. Sutherland constructed a grist mill, saw mill, carding mill, fulling mill and forge. His name was associated with the falls after owning and operating all the industry in the vicinity. The hamlet straddling the town borders of Pittsford and Rutland eventually also took the name Sutherland Falls (Johnson, 6) Marble was first quarried in the Sutherland Falls in 1836. (Bearse, 313) Willard-Moses Humphrey Marble Company accomplished the first cutting and quarrying of Proctor stone. (Johnson, 11)
Redfield Proctor, the eventual marble tycoon and architect of the town that bears his name, was born in 1831 in Cavendish, located in Windsor County. His grandfather, who was a lieutenant at the Battle of Lexington, created Proctorsville. Proctor graduated from Dartmouth College. Before practicing law in Rutland, he served in the Civil War as Colonel in the Vermont regiment. (Jennison, 183) He had his first taste of state politics when he was elected representative to the legislature for the town of Rutland in 1867 (Gale, 163) This initiated the extensive role the Proctor family would have in Vermont's political history.
In 1870, Proctor took over the Sutherland Falls Marble Company. (Jennison, 314) He took up residence, in present-day Proctor, by the following year. (French, 4) After earning experience in local politics as a Rutland county representative in 1874, and lieutenant governor in 1776, he ran for governor and elevated to the office in 1978. (Gale, 163) He won, but only served one two-year term. He instituted the nearest thing to a capitalistic dynasty that the state has ever known. (Bearse, 314) In 1880, he became president of the Rutland Marble Company. In the same year, he merged both firms into a New York corporation, the Vermont Marble Company. (French, 4) (Johnson, 18)
Particularly in the last half of the nineteenth century, the marble industry, operating in Sutherland Falls, was in high gear. Governor Proctor employed young men and immigrants, facilitating the villages growth. (French, 6) The city of Barre claims they had the predominant immigration of Italians. However, the first Italians came to what is now present-day Proctor. (Tomasi, 73) The area also accommodated a communal first generation of Swedes who struggled with an unfamiliar language and suffered the difficulties of representing the ethnic minority. They took pleasure in their "Midsummer Festivals" in June, which staged national folk dances on a circular outdoor platform to the tunes of traditional accordion. (Harvey, 48)
In November 25, 1884, the community was officially incorporated into a village and given the name Proctor. By 1885, it had established a post office. (Swift, 416) In 1886, Governor Proctor used his political influence to have a legislative bill written to incorporate a town from parts of Pittsford and Rutland, and partition Rutland into two towns. The bill argued the proposed town-formed from Proctor village-would be larger in land area than Burlington, Montpelier, Vergennes and Landgrove municipalities. The town would have a population larger than 190 other towns. Annual tax revenues would gross 10,000 dollars, a figure larger than 200 other Vermont towns. (French, 5) Citizens were also tired of petitioning two boards of selectmen for roads found in their village. Additionally, two school districts served one community of students and taxpayers. (Partridge, 1)
There was heated debate over the formation of the town. Public opinion from Rutland was against the change. Opponents argued that the Proctor family owned 97 percent of the property found in the proposed municipality. (Bearse, 334) Regardless, on November 18, 1886, Governor Proctor was given his town, and it was appropriately named after him. The town limits were fixed by natural boundaries (Partridge, 1) and by property owners who requested to fall within the town borders. (Bearse, 89) The first town meeting was held on March 1, 1887. A narration of the first meeting by Frank C. Partridge, Vermont Marble Vice President, follows:
At this town meeting, Senator Proctor was elected moderator and I was elected town clerk The selectmen were Senator Proctor, Tom Capron, a farmer on the west road beyond the Double Road Crossing, and Mike O'Rourke, an employee of the Company Mr. Spencer, the manager of the Company's store, was elected town treasurer ..
.. Fletcher D. Proctor was the first superintendent of schools.
The remaining list of officers was divided equally between Company employees and Non Company employees, chiefly farmers. On the only ballot taken, 121 votes were cast. The number of voters could not have been in excess of the last figure.
This was the closest thing to a feudal system the state has probably ever seen. Senator Proctor owned a large majority of the property and commerce in the town, and now he had supreme executive power in the local government encompassing it.
In 1889, not long after Governor Proctor settled a single town government around his estate, he accepted an appointment by President Benjamin Harrison as Secretary of War. Before heading to Washington, Proctor withdrew himself from the marble company he helped create (French, 6) In 1891, the former governor successfully ran for the United States Senate. He would hold the seat until he passed away in 1908.
Senator Proctor's appointment to Secretary of War proved appropriate. President Theodore Roosevelt cited Proctor responsible for inspiring the Spanish-American war. (Bearse, 56) He is the reason some Vermonters know the war as the "Vermont-Spanish" war. In addition to Senator Proctor, the reigning United States Vice President, and the Naval Commodore and Captain involved in the skirmish were Vermonters. (Bearse, 55)
The emphasis on militarism by Senator Proctor had lasting effects on his town's future activities. During the first two World Wars, the citizens wrote and published a town newsletter and sent it abroad to the town's enlisted.
During World War II, the town organized its own Civil Defense Council. The town report of 1942 states its mission:
The Proctor Defense Council was organized March 25, 1941 for the purpose of studying defense problems and training a group of men to assist the local authorities in preserving law and order in the event of an emergency caused by sabotage or war.
The Defense Council began as a group of a few dozen legionnaires. It grew to over 300 members after the Vermont Council on Safety issued a Civil Defense plan to all Vermont towns in 1942. There were weekly drillings and trainings in medicine, firearms and air raid response procedures. Control centers were located at the Legion Room in the Proctor Municipal Building and Vermont Marble Company 17 building, two locations connected to the Proctor family. The same town report also lists Governor Mortimer Proctor as one of the council officers, continuing the pattern of the Proctor family's fixation on war.
Since the 1870s, other members of the Proctor family assumed leadership roles that allowed it to run the state, with few interruptions, for some eighty years. Redfield Proctor, as mentioned, was governor in 1878; his son Fletcher in 1878; Redfield, Jr., in 1922; and Fletcher's son, Mortimer, in 1945. (Graff, Page 79) For years, Proctor marble fueled and sought representation in the Republican party. The Proctor family members were said to have composed the conservative wing of the party, in opposition to the progressive Aiken-Gibson wing of the party (Bryan: 1974, 91)
For years, the town marble industry provided an economic backbone for the town. The town of Proctor held its course while the rest of the state was having trouble sustaining their selves on Vermont farming. The town annual report of 1951 opened with the following statement:
The economy of Vermont, during the last several decades, has undergone a decided change. No longer is Agriculture the dominating income producing factor it was for many years. More than three times as much income is currently derived from the products of Industry as from the products of Agriculture. As this trend continues it becomes more and more important to Vermont towns to have industries within their boundaries.
Proctor is fortunate in this respect. Here are the headquarters of one of the largest businesses of the state. ..
.. This business - [Mortimer] Proctor's business - pays over 64% of the property taxes of the town and village. It furnishes, through its payroll, the livelihood of most of our people. In turn, these payrolls flow into and support community enterprises...
Proctor residents take pride in their local marble industry. Without the Vermont Marble Company and the Proctor family, the town would no doubt not be what it is today. For the most part, conflict between town residents and the Proctor family and their marble company were few. There are records of stone laborers revolting against the area marble conglomerates. In 1859, 400 quarrymen went on strike for two months for a pay raise from 90 cents to 1 dollar for a summer days work, and to 75 cents from 50 cents for winter. (Hannon, 69) In 1868, Rutland Marble ended a four-day strike by threatening to vacate workers from company-owned housing. (Hannon, 75). The workers persistent objection to dangerous working conditions and low wages clarifies Redfield Proctor's motives to recruit foreign labor during this period.
A prominent account of a strike by local workers occurred during the 1930s, and even involved state resident and Nobel Prize winner Sinclair "Red" Lewis. The student newspaper at Dartmouth College, a beneficiary of the Proctor family, pledged solidarity with the striking workers. Truckloads of food and clothing were sent to Proctor from the New Hampshire town. However, police forces, likely influenced by the Proctor political dynasty, turned the donations around. (Schulberg, 50). In February of 1934, West Rutland marble workers organized into a Quarry Workers Union. (Graffagnino, 306) Vermont Marble was spreading labor thin and suppressing wages to keep revenues up during the depression years. (Graffagnino, 285) After two years of striking, a United Committee to Aid Vermont Marble Workers was organized out of New York City. Its mission was to support the striking workers and put pressure on the company to negotiate. The strike concluded with no gains by the union demands and a violent riot at the picket line with deputy sheriffs. (Graffagnino, 285) (Graffagnino, 308)
The population growth of Proctor was not as sizeable as its industrial base should have hypothetically allowed. After incorporation, the town experienced immigration until the turn of the century. The town increased by almost 35 percent in its second decade. The Vermont Marble Company must have not been capable of supporting the continued growth. The town population decreased the most it ever has. (Arnold, 25) The entire state was experiencing immigration during the latter half of Vermont "Dark Ages". (Bryan: 1981, 36)
Interestingly, the town of Proctor did not experience emigration like the rest of the state did in the latter part of the twentieth century. While the entire state was experiencing population increases of 10 to 15 percent, Proctor was having marginal decreases in population (Arnold, 25) Population in the town has not changed substantially in the latter half of the century. Population projections predict Proctor populations will continue to decrease. (Vermont Health Care Authority, 89-91)
Present-day Proctor is predominantly home to blue-collar working class men and women, and retired seniors. The town of Proctor has a low level of income in comparison to the rest of the state. In 1995, 17 percent of citizens were over the age of 65, far above the state average. Sixteen percent of the town's income is from Social Security, also higher than the state average. Household incomes are predominantly in the middle to low-income ranges. (Bensen, 3.160)
Private enterprise manufacturing still predominates the labor market, making up a quarter of all the town's industry as of 1995. Farmers made up only 1.8 percent of workers in 1995, far below the state average. Typical commuting time is extremely short, with over 80 percent of workers commuting less than half-an-hour. Jobs are likely located in town, in surrounding towns, or nearby Rutland City. (Bensen, 3.160)
Socio-Economic Status (SES) indicators compare education, occupation, income and home values for the town and compare them with state averages A town with a 100 percent indicator value means that a Socio-Economic category is equal to the statewide value. All of Proctor's SES values are below the average for the state The average of all the indicators is 61 percent. (Bensen, 3.160)
The above figure compares the statewide vote percentage for a Democratic governor with the vote percentage from Proctor. Recently, Proctor voters have not deviated substantially from the voting pattern of the rest of the state. In the last two decades, there is a subtle pattern for Proctor to vote more forcefully for the winning candidate than the rest of the state. In the year of a Republican President being elected, Proctor voted stronger for a non-Democratic governor. When the Clinton administration was placed in the White House, Proctor voted more Democratic than the rest of the state. Accordingly, the Proctor vote for a Democratic candidate went below the state average at the same time Republicans gained the White House in 2000.
The support for Bernard Sanders by Proctor voters is an interesting phenomenon. This is a strong test of the strength of traditional conservative political values. In Proctor's case, voters were willing to vote for the independent socialist candidate. This could be explained by Sanders support of issues that benefit the working-class and their families. Except for the last two elections, Proctor has voted equal to or been a stronger supporter for the Congressperson than the rest of the state's support. In the last two elections, Proctor had a weaker vote for Sanders than the state. This could correlate with conservative Republicans successfully rallying conservative voters around issues like the Equal Education Opportunity Act (Act 60) and the gay marriage law (Civil Unions).
The figure above clearly shows the allegiance Proctor voters had to Proctor family candidates. Proctor citizens and marble workers had the chance to disapprove of their employer by secret ballot when products of the Proctor dynasty ran in state elections. However, vote counts failed to show any considerable voter discontent with the Proctor family. Proctor town Republicans were loyal to the Proctor-wing of the Republican Primaries. In 1946, Proctor Republicans voted twice the state average for Lieutenant Governor Mortimer Proctor in the primary he would lose to progressive Republican and war veteran Ernest Gibson. This election was the last blip of the Proctor family on the state political radar screen. A few decades later, the family would sell the marble business to the Swiss (Doyle, 150)
Over the course of Proctor town history, the greater involvement of the Proctor family in politics, the greater proportion of conservative votes were cast by the town. This is partly explained by having at certain times Proctor family members running for the highest office in the state. Town voters could arguably favor having local representation elected to higher state offices to voting for political issues or registering their favor or disfavor of the town's ruling family. After the Proctor family left state politics and the marble industry, in the 1970s, the more town votes fell in line with the rest of the state. As early as 1962, Proctor voters were hardly opposed to the groundbreaking Democratic win in the gubernatorial election. It was an off-year election a large reason for the Hoff win, but this election also occurred when the effects of the Proctor family influence had withdrawn.
Two notable constitutional referenda given to Vermont voters were the proposal to build the Green Mountain Parkway in 1936, and the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) of 1986. Both amendments were eventually defeated. Proctor voters were against the ERA more than the rest of the state, indicating a relatively conservative ideology. Alternatively, the town was strongly opposed to the construction of a highway traveling along the state's mountain tops. The freeway plans may have included traveling through Proctor. However, this vote result is ideologically counter to their votes for pro-industry Proctor family candidates.
Voting behavior of Proctor residents will probably continue to behave like the rest of the state. Any allegiance to the Proctor family or the Vermont Marble Company has dissolved. With blue-collar workers and low-income senior citizens forming a dominant proportion of the population, these are potential votes for candidates who support their issues.
The analysis of the town reports included counting the number of pages in each report, counting the number of officers, and counting the number of articles found in the town meeting warning. The page heights of the reports were recorded. However, the report size was relatively constant, thus variability of the page height was not substantial enough to warrant analysis. The tally of elected officials was also divided by the perceived gender of the individual based on their first name. The articles of the school meeting were counted separately from general town business articles. Names with initials for first names were assumed to be male individuals. Otherwise, officers with gender-neutral first names were not found. Consequently, a count of officers of unknown gender was not necessary.
Officers consist of any individual elected by the town populous. Justices of the Peace were not included in the count. Each Vermont town elects a set of Justices of the Peace, but they are technically county officials. (Markowitz, #history {web page anchor}) Furthermore, the names of the Justices of the Peace were not consistently reported in the Proctor town reports.
For the town of Proctor's first 75 years, women were rarely represented on the board of officers. There was little change during and shortly after the peak of the women's social movement of the 1960s and 70s. In the 1980s and 90s the number of women in Proctor town government increased. In this same period, the total number of elected officials for town government was on a decrease. Meaning the proportion of women town officers was making even greater gains.
As the total number of officers decreased, the number of pages in the annual report increased. In the mid 1960s, the number of town officers and pages in the town report reached a relative maximum. However, in the 1990s, the town reports were still increasing in length while the number of town office positions was decreasing. Increases in report size could be caused by better prices at the press, resulting in a more informed citizen. Town report length could also be an indicator for the size of the government bureaucracy. A growing Proctor town government would be counter to the decreasing town population, and a decreasing number of elected official positions.
The Proctor school budget was the business of the village meeting, from the village's incorporation until it merged with the Proctor town in 1966. (Herbert, 29) After the village and town merged, the school received a separate meeting. School business was never a part of the general town meeting. After 1970, the number of items on the Proctor town meeting increased. In the late 1990s, the number of articles discussed at the town meeting increased, creating a chance for greater citizen participation. This pattern correlates with the decrease in government officials. Therefore, government affairs are possibly being handed back to the citizens. Interestingly, the town report size is increasing, meaning the officials in power are arguably dealing with a growing amount of town affairs.
Frank C. Pertridge, Proctor's first town clerk and Vice President of Vermont Marble, offers comments on Proctor's independence:
The town of Proctor is perhaps the most irregularly shaped town in the State, which comes from the fact that its limits were fixed by actual conditions. Original town lines were run arbitrarily through the wilderness without any regard, and often without any knowledge, of actual conditions. The justice and advantage of the incorporation of the town of Proctor has long since been recognized by all - no one would undo it if he could. It was due to the farsighted action of Senator Proctor and from it dates the civic growth and public enterprise of the village. That we now have so beautiful and attractive a village with so many public improvements is largely due to the incorporation of the village and town as an independent municipality.
This passage briefly shows that Proctor residents had the desire to have their own town, but that it was accomplished through the accomplishments of Redfield Proctor. For years, the town strongly supported Proctor family candidates in state elections. They likely felt the need to show appreciation for the improvements the Proctor family made to their lives and their community over the years.
The incorporation of the town of Proctor was clearly motivated to serve the needs of the Proctor family and their enterprise, the Vermont Marble Company. However, it was not done against the will of the citizens. There was almost a consensus by the citizens for their own town government. (Gale, 160) Proctor citizens should feel fortunate about having their town government. They should also recognize what conditions were present for the town's incorporation. Common townspeople were not the moving force directly responsible for liberating the town from one of the state's largest and economically strongest towns.
After one hundred years of operation, the state should recognize that villages like Proctor deserve independence. Scaling down local government should not require pressure from a town representative with vast political influence or an impressive corporation to generate a majority of the funds for the town Grand List.
Proctor voters show the result of being influenced by prominent political figures on their vote. However, the effects of these prominent figures seemed temporary, and did not instill an ideological revolution.
Arnold, Thomas W. Two Hundred Years and Counting: Vermont Community Census Totals 1791 to 1990. Burlington; University of Vermont, 1991.
Bearse, Ray ed. Vermont : A Guide to the Green Mountain State. Houghton Mifflin: Boston, 1968.
Bensen, Clark H. Demographic and Political Guide to Vermont: Towns, Cities and Places. Lake Ridge: Polidata, 1995.
Bryan, Frank M. Yankee Politics in Rural Vermont. Hanover: University Press of New England, 1974.
Bryan, Frank M. Politics in the Rural State: People, Parties, and Processes. Boulder: Westview, 1981.
Doyle, William. Vermont Political Tradition: And Those Who Helped Make It. Barre: Northlight Studio, 1992.
French, Ruth E. Proctor: The Way it Was. Poultney: Journal Press, 1975.
Gale, David C. Proctor: The Story of a Marble Town. Brattleboro: Vermont Printing, 1922.
Graff, Christopher. "Parties and Politics." Vermont State Government Since 1965 .
Graffagnino, J. Kevin, Hand, Samuel B., and Sessions, Gene. "Strike by Vermont Marble Workers." Vermont Voices, 1609 through the 1990s: A documentary history of the Green Mountain State. Montpelier: Vermont Historical Society, 1999.
Hannon, Rev. Patrick T. Historical Sketches on West Rutland. Rutland: Academy Books: 1986.
Harvey, Dorothy Mayo. "The Swedes in Vermont." Vermont History. Volume 28. Montpelier: Vermont Historical Society, 1960.
Jennison, Peter S. The Roadside History of Vermont. Missoula: Mountain Press Publishing, 1989.
Johnson, Herbert W. Proctor: My Home Town. Proctor: Proctor Historical Society, 1983.
Markowitz, Deborah L. "The J.P. Guide." Vermont Secretary of State's Office. Last Revision: October 10, 2000. [http://www.sec.state.vt.us/pubs/JPGuide2000.htm], (Accessed: May 21, 2001).
Partridge, Frank C. Fifty-Fourth Proctor Town Report. January 27, 1941. Pages 1-2. Proctor: The Oak Royal Press, Vermont.
Secretary of State. Vermont Legislative Directory. Montpelier: Secretary of State Office, 1900-1959.
Secretary of State. Primary and General Elections. Montpelier: Secretary of State Office, 1960-1998.
Schulberg, Budd. Writers in America: Four Seasons of Success. New York: Stein and Day, 1993.
Swift, Ester Munroe. Vermont Place-Names: Footprints of History. Montpelier: Vermont Historical Society, 1977.
Tomas, Mari. "The Italian Story in Vermont." Vermont History. Vol 28. Montpelier: Vermont Historical Society, 1960.
United States Census Bureau. American FactFinder. [http://factfinder.census.gov]. (Acessed: May 17, 2001).
Vermont Health Care Authority. Vermont Population Projections: 1990-2015. Montpelier: Vermont Health Care Authority, June 1993.
![[PNG (apps) now!]](pngnow.png){kind=small}
Page last modified: April, 25 2004