USA > Massachusetts > Nantucket County > The history of Nantucket County, island, and town : including genealogies of first settlers > Part 37
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91
1
284
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
weave with is introduced among us, which is found to be a valuable improvement." A little further on he says that mechanics and laborers have gone away for work to Albany, Troy & Hudson.
There was no local use for workmen. The cooper, the black- smith, the sailmaker, the rigger and workers at the various trades, that in prosperous times made noisy but cheery music as they plied the tools used in their several vocations, were without em- ployment. Day after day witnessed the return from English pris- ons or prison-ships of seamen who had been captured by the Brit- ish and released to come to a home already in the grip of penury .*
In May, 1814, occurred a second tumultuous Town Meeting, even more disorderly than that of May 2, 1812, and arising appar- ently from precisely the same cause,-the failure to designate how many Representatives the Town would send to the General Court. The lines of cleavage, ostensibly between the Federalists and Democrats, seem to one who studies the situation quite as marked by the same accusers and accused as in the Bank robbery of nearly. 20 years before.
Like the meeting of 1812, above referred to, the Clerk's rec- ord is singularly reticent as to what actually occurred. The Town Record itself gives the following report of what took place:
"At a meeting of the Male Inhabitants of the Town of Nan- tucket qualified by law to vote, for Representatives. Met at the Town house in Nantucket on Saturday the seventh day of May 1814 at two o'clock in the afternoon for the Choice of one or more Representatives to Represent this Town in the general Court ap- pointed to be Convened and held at the State House in Boston on the last Wednesday of May Instant. The votes being brought in sorted and Counted The whole number of votes was two hundred and two votes.
There Appeared for Micajah Gardner two hundred and One votes.
There Appeared for Joseph Winslow one vote."
There is no hint of anything unusual having occurred at the meeting; nothing to make it in any way note worthy, unless one might, in the general condition of political affairs, wonder at the practical unanimity of the vote for Mr. Gardner.
The first intimation the general student would get of any- thing wrong would be through the Journal of the House of Repre- sentatives, where, under date of May 26, 1814, occurs this entry: Remonstrance of William Coffin and others of Nantucket read and committed to Committee on Contested Elections." That Committee consisted of Mr. Tillinghast of Taunton, Mr. Ware of Wrentham, Mr. Crosby of Brookfield, Mr. Davis of Boston, and Mr. Brown of Lex- ington.
*Mr. Macy writes under date of 5 mo., 1813 "The cry of the poor is daily increasing. Great numbers of poor children are begging from door to door."
285
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
The remonstrance was addressed "To the Hon'ble the House. of Representatives in General Court assembled," and was in form . as follows:
"The subscribers inhabitants and legal voters in the Town of Nantucket in the County of Nantucket & Commonwealth of Massa- chusetts, Respectfully represent that Micajah Gardner, returned a Representative for the Town of Nantucket to the General Court for the present year, has not been legally chosen, and believing that the purity of Elections is the chief pillar of freedom & that to detect errors & irregularities in our elections is not only a right but the duty of all good Citizens We take the liberty to remon- strate against the aforesaid Micajah Gardner holding a seat as a representative for the Town of Nantucket the present year for the following reason We state that immediately after the meeting was opened by the Chairman of the Selectmen by reading the War- rant a motion was regularly made and seconded, that the Town send no representative this year. The Chairman peremptorily re- fused to put the motion & to stop all debate called instantly on the people present to bring in their votes for one or more Representa- tives without making any statement of the number which they had a right to Vote for, so arbitrary did the proceedings of the Selectmen appear & so contrary to the long settled practice of this Town that a considerable proportion of the people then assembled, immediately left the meeting disgusted at the proceedings all of which is believed to be contrary to the Constitution & laws of this Commonwealth."
This was signed by the remonstrants*
The Journal of the House for May 31,1814, contains this en- try: "Memorial of the Selectmen of Nantucket with accompanying papers read and committed to the Committee on Contested Elec- tions." This Memorial is addressed "To the Honourable the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to be convened at Boston last Wednesday of May instant," and is as follows:t "The undersigned Selectmen of the town of Nantucket, in the County of Nantucket do hereby respectfully represent that a remonstrance from a number of inhabitants of this town, has been prepared to be sent to the House of Representatives with the avowed intention to set aside the selection of Micajah Gardner, our rep- resentative, and thereby to deprive us of our lawfull representative.
In reply to which we beg leave to observe, that the Inhabitants of this Town were legally convened on the 7th by virtue of a war- rant issued in the usual manner on the 2d Inst. After the meeting was opened and the chairman of the Selectmen had read the war- rant it was proposed to send no representative after which a mo- tion to that effect was made & seconded and the principle strenuous- ly supported for a considerable time, and untill the Selectmen, by their chairman, declared the present was not a meeting for debate, neither was discussion of the proposed Question contemplated by the warrant or by the law. they then refused to adhere to the motion and immediately proclaimed their readiness to receive the
*The originals of some of these documents do not seem to be on file at the State House. Those used here were taken from copies of the originals made by one of the remonstrants. The names are not appended to the copy.
This was not a document ordered by the Town Meeting but the act of the Selectmen.
286
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
votes of the people, for one or more Representatives and a number . of votes were then presented and accepted.
When the advocates of no representatives discovered the ques- tion would not be taken, they became tumultuous and riotous, several of which then and there denounced the Selectmen as rascals and Tyrants, and made a proposition forcibly to take the Box from them into which the votes were put as they were received-they Continued in a Riotous manner to disturb and embarrass the meet- ing, untill the chairman found it Necessary to order the Sheriff to read the riot act-which was accordingly done, after which the greater number of the rioters dispersed and the Selectmen contin- ued to receive all the legal votes that were presented, untill the poll was closed, when it appeared all the votes excepting one were given for Micajah Gardner, who was then and there declared to be duly elected.
DAN'L COFFIN JOSEPH CHASE ISAAC COFFIN FRAN'S MACY GEORGE GARDNER 2d GIDEON · FOLGER Selectmen of Nantucket."
The statement of the Selectmen was duly affirmed to by the Selectmen May 19, before Charles Folger, Justice of the Peace .* The contestants filed depositions to prove their case. The depositions were signed by William Coffin, Griffin Barney, Robert Barker, Daniel Barney and others. t One, quite numerously signed, says of the meeting-
"The warrant for the above purpose was posted up in several public parts of the Town on tuesday the 3d of May which expressly said all legal voters were warned to vote for one or more Repre- sentative or Representatives.
After the meeting was opened by the Chairman of the Select- men the warrant was read. Mr. Wm. Coffin first addressed the Chair & observed in his opinion it would from the situation of this place be best not to send any Representative for this year, and was in favor of taking the question by vote, whether the Town would send any Representative or not, in some of his speeches, & also observed that the meeting was illegal as it was not conformable
* As they were Friend they affirmed instead of making oath.
tOn May 11, 1814, four days after the Town Meeting was held, a gathering of the dissatisfied citizens was held in Washington Hall in response to the following notice: "The Federal Republicans and friends of Peace (who find themselves dissatisfied with the conduct of the Selectmen at the last Town meeting) are requested to meet at Wash- ington Hall this evening at 7 o'clock, then & there to adopt such measures as shall be consistent with the Constitution and laws of this Commonwealth for the due investigation of our Corporate Rights- Wednesday May 11, 1814." At the meeting Timothy G. Coffin made an address, for which the thanks of the meeting were tendered him through a committee, and the acts of the Town Meeting recently held under the warrant were considered. It was also voted to choose a committee of seven to contest the election of Micajah Gardner in such a manner as seemed to them advisable. The committee chosen were: William Coffin, Jethro Mitchell Jr., Albert Gardner, Aaron Mitchell, Josiah Hussey Peter Hussey and Thaddeus Joy. Those doubtless were the names signed to the protest sent to the General Court.
.
287
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
to a Vote of this Town passed in 1724 which was that the warrant should be put up at the two meeting houses & stand over one sab- bath* & spoke some minutes in favor of not sending any Repre- sentative. Gideon Gardner answered Wm. Coffin that in all cases a Town could only act upon what was expressed in the Warrant, and as the words of the Warrant were to vote for one or more Representative or Representatives & the warrant was legal, no question could be legally taken in this meeting. Wm Coffin an- swered Gideon Gardner the Warrant was correct, & that a Town could not Act upon anything that was not expressed in the War- rant. Walter Folger Jun explained upon the Constitution & the Law of this State which the Warrant was conformable to and that no other question could be legally taken that was not contained in the Warrant & spoke some minutes against the legality of any other question about this time Mr Micajah Coffin observed he came to the meeting to act agreeable to the Warrant & offered his Vote. the Chairman of the Selectmen informed him the votes were not called for & that he should not receive any votes before they were called for. Wm. Coffin spoke against receiving any Votes before the question was taken whether the Town would send any Represent- ative or not & observed (the exact words are not recollected but so far as memory serves) that if the votes were received before the question was taken, whether the Town would send any Repre- sentative or not it would be a Rehoboth meeting. several spoke in favor of taking the question & several spoke against it. a motion was made by some person, not recollected, that the Question should be taken whether this Town would send any Representative or not, which was seconded by several & many called the question the question. the Chairman of the Selectmen proclaimed they were ready to receive the votes. several votes were immediately re- ceived & put into the Box. many continued calling very loud, the question the question. I demand my rights, my rights are taken away. Tyranny, rascallity & one called take away the Box and such kind of language which made much confusion. about this time the Chairman of the Selectmen ordered the Riot act to be read & handed it to the sheriff, who read the Act & called on the people to disperse. Wm Coffin observed that as the sheriff had read the Riot act and commanded the people to disperse he was of the opinion it was best to go & went out of the meeting & many others who were for the question to be taken whether this Town would send any Representative or not followed Wm Coffin & left the meeting after which it became very quiet, those who had not given in their votes proceeded to give them in to the Selectmen they re- ceived them & put them into the Box the poll was closed the votes were counted & proclaimed by the Chairman of the Selectmen to be. 201 for Micajah Gardner & one for Joe Winslow & that the meeting was dissolved."
This deposition was signed by Gideon Gardner, Geo. Bunker Jr., Seth Coffin, Robt Barker, Charles Folger, Reuben R. Bunker, Freeman Gardner, Shub'l Coffin, Trist'm Barnard, Geo. Clark, Dan'l Barney, Jonathan Morris Jr., Jacob Barney, Coffin Whippey,
*The vote as recorded on the 18th, 11 mo. 1725-6, was: "Voted yt ye method for ye future to warne ye Town Meetings shall be to set up notifications at ye two meeting houses and ye town house setting forth ye occasion of ye meeting unless in such case that a meeting must be before any first day of ye week happenes then to be warned after ye former usage."
288
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
Gardner Coffin, Robert Hussey, and was sworn to before different Justices of the Peace.
Other depositions signed by Griffin Barney and Robert Barker, recited substantially the same facts giving them an individual tinge, and agreeing that it was a very turbulent meeting up to the time of the reading of the Riot Act .* According to one affidavit the most boisterous one there appeared to be the High Sheriff until directed by Walter Folger Jr to sit down "which he did." Others called the Selectmen "Rascals and Scoundrels and tyrants."
It is evident that after studying the evidence the Committee agreed with the remonstrants for the Journal of the House for June 8, 1814, contains the following entry :
"The Committee on Contested Elections in the case of the Remonstrance of Wm Coffin & others against the election of Nan- tucket Reported that the supposed election of Micajah Gardner as a Representative from the Town of Nantucket to this House on the 7th day of May now last past was utterly void and of no effect and that his seat be declared vacated. Read and accepted 96 to 60."*
There was an aftermath. Under date of June 25, William Coffin, Peter Hussey and Aaron Mitchell addressed a letter to the Selectmen in which they said-"we feel disposed, however, cooly to consider the aggressions we have suffered & to assertain from you whether the late proceedings in Town meeting were the result of a settled plan to deprive the Corporation of its rights,-or whether a misconception of principles led to the result we have experienced -if the former we expect no concession on your part you was wrong, & no disposition to repair the injury by a pecuniary in-
*By the statute of 1638, it was "ordered that every towne shall beare the parts of their own magistrates and deputies, and to allow for a magistrate 3 shillings 6 pence a day and for a deputy 2 s. 6d. a day from the time of their going to the Court until their return for their diet and lodging." It is uncertain just how long this continued to be the law, and whether it did not survive many years after the es- tablishment of the Constitution. The pay for Representatives varied with the fluctuations in the value of Paper money. In 1780 it was 12s per day; in 1781 it varied, running from 15s. to 30s. per day and run- ning down to 9s. In 1782 it was 8s. In 1800 to 1804 it was $2.00 per day. What leads one to believe that the towns paid the expenses is the fact that an act was passed Feb. 3, 1812 which provided: "That in the future, the members of the House of Representatives shall be paid for their travel and attendance to and during the session of Legisla- ture, in the same manner as the Council and Senate of this Common- wealth are paid, any law, usage or custom to the contrary notwith- standing, and that the said pay shall not be chargeable to their several towns." As this Act was repealed June 14, 1813, the inference is that the towns paid the bills and with finances in a poor condition it made an important difference whether Nantucket sent one Representative, nine or none. Undoubtedly the necessity of avoiding active participation in politics because of their defenceless situation was an important factor.
¡The New Bedford Mercury somewhat elaborates the Committees' report, on what authority does not appear. It says the action of the Selectmen in refusing to entertain motions and leaving their places caused all the trouble. Votes given in "a most singular manner being handed from one to another." The action of the Selectmen was "un- constitutional and illegal." There was "no justifiable cause for read- ing the Riot Act. No riot existed at the time nor any disorder except what was produced by the Selectmen themselves.' The action of the Selectmen in refusing the right to vote on sending a Representative was a surprise to the Committee.
289
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
demnification of the expences we have necessarily incurred-If the latter we expect, that a disposition to repair the injury so far as is in your power, will become apperant by accepting a proposition which we shall now make you-which is-that if the necessary & reasonable expences we have been at, in bringing the question of the constitutionality of the late Representative meeting before the Legislature for their decision are paid, we shall be disposed to bury in oblivion all that has passed, & impute the error to mistake, more than design, but should this proposition meet your refusal or contempt & the proceedings of the meeting be further justified -we shall consider ourselves not only injured but insulted, & shall accept the invitation that was given us that day, to repair to the judiciary, where you are amenable for your proceedings."*
It would appear that the Selectmen ignored this communi- cation, as it is recorded under date of July 5, 1814, that no answer had been received, and that the return of the letter had been requested. It does not appear that any further action was taken.
One would think that the experience of the Town had been such as to lead to some display of caution but the Town Records of May 6, 1815, announce a Town Meeting called for the choice of one or more Representatives to Represent the Town of Nantucket in the General Court that is to be Convened and held in Boston on the last Wednesday of May, 1815.
The votes being brought in Sorted and Counted they Appeared as follows:
Micajah Gardner had one hundred & thirty one votes Aaron Mitchell had one."
That is absolutely all there is to the record. There is the same suspicious unanimity that attached to the announcement of the result in 1814, especially suspicious when we consider that at that time Nantucket must have had about 2,000 ratable polls to entitle it to nine Representatives and that party spirit ran high and the parties were fairly evenly divided.
The Journal of the House of Representatives for June 1, 1815, shows that a "Remonstrance of Wm, Coffin and others against the Election in Nantucket" was Read and committed to the Committee on Contested Elections."
According to the Remonstrance, which is signed by William Coffin, Peter Chase, Josiah Barker, George Myrick, Richard Mitchell Jr., and Thaddeus Joy, and dated May 18th., 1815, the proceedings at the meeting followed with singular fidelity those which described the troubles in 1812 and 1814, excepting that it does not appear that the Riot Act was read.
It would appear that the question was raised whether a Town could decline to send a Representative. The case was put to the Supreme Judicial Court for a decision, whether a town having a right to send a Representative to the General Court could legally vote not to send any.
*Unpublished M. S.
290
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
The opinion of the Supreme Court as. delivered by Justices Isaac Parker, George Thatcher, Charles Jackson, Samuel Putnam and Samuel S. Wilde, was in substance, that while it is a corporate duty as well as a corporate right for a town to send a Representa- tive, for the neglect of which the House may impose a fine, but which neglect they are under no obligation under the Constitution to punish, a town might legally refuse to be represented and the House could impose a fine for neglect of duty. The Court pointed out as an extreme case that under a compulsion to send Representa- tives, such officials might be chosen by a minority less. in. number than themselves. The report, which was presented to the House January 24, 1816, was received, read and ordered committed to the Committee on Contested Elections. That Committee on February 3, 1816, made a report declaring Micajah Gardner "not duly elected and not entitled to a seat in this House" The report was read and accepted.
In the meantime the question of subsistence became more and more pressing .* Small predatory armed vessels tenders of the large English craft were very active near the Island. A chebacco boat, reported to be a tender from the English frigate Nymph, in June and July, 1814, cruised between Tuckanuck Shoals and Great Point, overhauling every passing vessel and either plundering them of any articles of value they carried or exacting a ransom from the unfortunate victims. There was much indignation among the Islanders because of what she did, so much so that a party was as- sembled to capture her, regardless of the reprisals such an act might and probably would entail. The Selectmen, however, dis- suaded the men from the attempt. Two of the Selectmen, Daniel Coffin and Isaac Coffin, were sent to endeavor to persuade the pri- vateersmen to seek some other field but they were unsuccessful.
"On one occasion," says Macy, ; "an officer was sent on shore to receive ransom-money, which added to the agitation already heightened by repeated losses. The streets were immediately throng- ed with a large concourse of people, who feeling themselves so in- jured by so insignificant a force as a small Chebacco boat with only ten men, could no longer restrain their feelings, and publicly ut- tered threats of hostility. The persons foremost in this proceeding were principally strangers, who had been plundered of provisions and fuel which they were bringing to the Island. It was deemed advisable to persuade them to be quiet, and consider that the use of force by the people of the Island would only invite a greater force in return, and one which nothing but madness could prompt them to resist. Under these considerations, the Selectmen and others interfered and were successful in their attempts to quiet the crowd. The officer was permitted to depart with his booty.}
*Hist. Nantucket p. 179. Josiah Barker, Zaccheus Hussey, Benja- min Coffin, Samuel Bigelow and Josiah Hussey, Justices of the Peace, sent to the English Commander urging the need of relief and praying, that the Recovery, of which Christopher B. Hussey is Master, and George Myrick, William Coffin, Peter Chase and Obed Mitchell are owners, be permitted to go to Matomkin and return to Nantucket with a load of corn for the needy inhabitants. (Unpublished M. S.) TIb. p. 181.
įHe carried away several thousands of dollars in specie, besides sundry other articles.
291
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
The affair, however, occasioned increased distress to the inhabitants, for many of the coasters determined not to come again to the Island, until there should appear a fairer prospect of avoiding the grasp of the enemy."
On the 15th of September, the privateer returned and the Captain had a plainly visible chip on his shoulder. He had seen a letter from Nantucket in the Boston Daily Advertiser* and it vexed him exceedingly. It was not a letter that was complimentary to him. He demanded that the author recant his disturbing statements or that the Town should send him a memorial to the effect that the obnoxious letter was not an authorized document. If consolatory action was not taken by three p.m., he promised to come into the harbor and rectify matters by burning the principal houses. The people in general were not alarmed by his bluster but a memorial, signed by about 50 of the people, stating that the letter was un- authorized and that the writer was unknown to them, was sent. It is said, nevertheless, that the statements made in the letter were true. ; He sailed away, but he was not fully mollified and threatened to come again.
He did return again as he promised and continued to threaten, but no attention was paid to his bluster and he was given no op- portunity or excuse for active hostilities.
The time came when the situation was not endurable. The harbor had long been blockaded by British armed vessels. The lights in the light-houses were discontinued when it seemed neces- sary, and the buoys on the shoals and bars taken up, but the re- ceipt of supplies was effectually blocked. There was no wood for the winter's necessities, and the stock of provisions was seriously reduced. The United States Government seemed utterly power- less to afford any relief. It appeared to be a question of starvation, or of making some terms with the English commanders.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.