JAMES WETMORE, second and eldest surviving son and child of Izrahiah Wetmore, of Middletown, Connecticut, was born there, December 25, 1695. His mother was Rachel, daughter of the Rev. Samuel Stow (Harv. 1645), the first minister of Middletown.
He studied theology, and in October, 1716, was desired by the town of Northfield, Massachusetts, to carry on the work of the ministry among them for half a year. In February, 1717, the society in the northeast part of the town of New Haven (since 1786 the town of North Haven), which had been constituted by the General Assembly in the previous May, and in November had voted to apply to Deputy Governor Gold and Rector Andrew for advice in obtaining a minister, agreed “to send a person to Northfield to make application to Mr. Wetmore in order to his coming and supplying the place of the ministry among them." April 11, 1717, it was further “agreed on to give Mr. Wetmore the sum of sixty pound by the year, if he come and carry on the work of the ministry among them, to be paid in money or provisions at the prices following:—wheat at 4", 6", for bushel; rye 2", 6", for bushel; Indian corn, 2" for bushel.” Soon after this date he removed from Northfield to North Haven, and on August 19 the society in the latter place voted “that they sit very easy under Mr. Wetmore's ministry, and do desire his further continuance.” In November they voted him £150 in money or grain, to secure his settlement, to be paid in three installments, and December 3, agreed to add £20 to his salary when the settlement money shall have been paid up and the meeting-house built; he was also to have his firewood furnished him. August 5, 1718, the society agreed to confer with Mr. Wetmore concerning his ordination, “supposing he desires to lead them on in the method that New Haven church have or doth now practice.” This vote may imply that he already showed some signs of not cordially accepting the established order. However, a committee was appointed by the society, September 30, 1718, to provide for the ordination, which took place apparently in November, the church being at the same time gathered, in accordance with the liberty given by the Assembly the preceding May. (Dr. Stiles, however, says that Mr. Wetmore was not ordained by Consociation. MS. Itinerary, ii, 423.)
In September, 1722, Mr. Wetmore united with his classmates, Johnson and Browne, in the declaration for Episcopacy, but family reasons prevented his throwing up his pastoral charge at once. A letter addressed to him by his society, November 9, 1722, and preserved in their records, shows that he still retained his office, and that the society, though the Reverend Trustees of the College “did send their advice to receive our pastor into our love and charity again," would not run the risk of proselytism. On December 4 the society voted to call a council, “to hear, consider, and determine the difference between our pastor and ourselves,” meaning, I suppose, not merely the difference about doctrine, but also the adjustment of the pecuniary relations involved. When a parish had invested so much money in a minister, who was expected to last for a lifetime, it was a matter of real sacrifice to part with him. On January 16, 1723, the society agreed that, “provided he desists his office among them,” they will take up with Mr. Wetmore's refunding £45 of the £150 received as a life-settlement.
Meantime, he had applied to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel for an appointment, and had removed his residence to New York City. The position of assistant to the Rev. William Vesey, Rector of the Church of England in New York City, was at this time vacant, as well as the position of catechist and schoolmaster. The vestry of the church sent a letter (December 18, 1722) to the Venerable Society, asking that these offices might be united in a presbyter of the church (the last incumbent, Elias Neau, had been a layman), and on March 2, 1723, a reply was made that this would be done, and that Mr. Wetmore was appointed, at a salary of £50 a year, besides what the vestry might do for him.
He accordingly sailed for England, arriving in London, July 4, and receiving ordination from Bishop Gibson, of London, in the Chapel Royal, St. James's, July 25. He landed in New York on his return, September 24, and at once began his work. His duties as catechist lay largely among the negro slaves, from one to two hundred of whom he met for religious instruction three evenings in the week.
In May, 1726, the Rev. Robert Jenney, Rector of the Church in Rye, Westchester County, informed the vestry of his appointment to another mission, and on June 7, the vestry gave a formal call to Mr. Wetmore to be their rector. The vestry of Trinity Church in letters to the Venerable Society expressed their great regard for him, but intimated that the substitute whom he furnished was more acceptable as having a more loud and distinct voice, and so being better “heard and understood in our large church.” The Society ratified the choice by notifying him (December 30, 1726) of his appointment as missionary to Rye, and in this charge, which included the villages of White Plains, Mamaroneck, North Castle, and Bedford, besides missionary labors in Connecticut, he remained until his death, of the small-pox, May 15, 1760, aged 64.
He married in 1718 Anna, the eldest child of the Rev. Josiah Dwight (Harv. 1687), pastor of the Congregational church in Woodstock, Windham County, Connecticut. She was born October 10, 1697, and died February 28, 1771, aged 73.
Their children were two sons and four daughters, all of whom survived their father. The eldest daughter married the Rev. Joseph Lamson, (Y. C. 1741), Mr. Wetmore's assistant for a few years. A letter from the Rev. Mr. Winslow, Missionary of the Venerable Society at Stratford, Connecticut, written in the July after Mr. Wetmore's decease, speaks of him “as a gentleman of extensive usefulness, a father and exemplary pattern to the clergy in those parts.”
One of his successors in the North Haven pulpit, the Rev. Benjamin Trumbull (Y. C. 1759), states, in 1801, that he “was greatly esteemed and beloved by his people.” He was by temperament a zealous partisan, and his controversial writings show his extreme advocacy of church principles. He was not, according to tradition, an eloquent or even a tolerably interesting speaker.
He published:— ...
