USA > New Hampshire > Sullivan County > Charlestown > History of Charlestown, New-Hampshire, the old No. 4 > Part 13
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
At the special session of the New-Hampshire Assembly, on the 19th of July, a committee had been appointed, on account of the dangers which threatened, to take into consideration a proper day to be appoint- ed for a day of Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer, to be observed throughout the State, and to form a proclamation to that end. The day appointed was the 8th of August, the very day that General Stark arrived in camp at Manchester. After the happy issue of affairs through the capitulation of Burgoyne, the Assembly saw fit also, to set apart a day for "Publick Thanksgiving." Thursday, the 4th of De- cember, was the day appointed. Congress also, with a becoming spirit, appointed a National Thanksgiving on the 18th of the same month, as will be seen by the following communication :
GENERAL THANKSGIVING.
"YORKTOWN, Penn. 1st November, 1777.
SIR :
The arms of the United States of America having been blessed, in the present campaign, with remarkable success, Congress have resolved to recommend that one day, Thursday, the 18th of December next, be set apart to be observed by all the inhabitants throughout these United States, for a General Thanksgiving to Almighty God: And I have it in command to transmit to you, the inclosed extract from the Minutes of Congress for that purpose.
Your Honor will be pleased to take the necessary measures for car- rying the Resolve into effect in the State in which you preside.
You will likewise find inclosed a certified copy of a minute, which will shew your Honor the authority under which I address you.
I am, with great esteem and regard,
Sir, your Honor's most ob't and most humbl' serv't,
HENRY LAURENS, Pres't in Congress.
The Hon'ble Meshech Weare.
New-Hampshire."
120
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
" In Congress, Nov. 1st, 1777.
Congress proceeded to the choice of a President, and the ballots be- ing taken, Mr Henry Laurens was elected.
Extract from the minutes.
CHARLES THOMSON, Sec'y."
The inhabitants of Charlestown were not only characterized by a spirit of patriotism during the preceding exciting events, but during the whole period of the continuance of the war, as we have reason to believe, acted well and faithfully their part in the great struggle. Charlestown continued to be a military post and a depository for sup- plies for the army to the close of the war, in which a commendable part was taken by a large number of her citizens, whose names will be found recorded in the Historical Miscellany, in this work. Some no- tices of many of them will also be found in the department of this work, entitled " Genealogics and Brief Historical sketches of Charles- town Families."
THE VERMONT CONTROVERSY.
CHAPTER VIII.
ORIGIN OF NEW-HAMPSHIRE GRANTS .- TERRITORY CLAIMED BOTH BY NEW-YORK AND NEW-HAMPSHIRE-APPEAL TO TIIE KING-DECISION IN FAVOR OF NEW-YORK-NEW-YORK LEGISLATION EXCITES TIIE SET- TLERS, WHO TAKE MEASURES TO FORM A NEW STATE-LEGISLATURE MEETS AT WINDSOR-SIXTEEN TOWNS FROM EAST SIDE OF THE CON- NECTICUT RIVER PETITION TO UNITE WITH THE NEW STATE-UNION FORMED-DISSOLVED-VARIOUS COMPLICATIONS-CONGRESS TAKES UP THIE CONTROVERSY.
HE State of Vermont, originally the New-Hampshire grants, adopted its Constitution, and set up an independent govern -; ment in 1778. Previous to 1749 no township had been char- tered in the territory which it embraced. In that year Governor Ben- ning Wentworth, having received a royal commission to make grants of unimproved lands within his government, gave a charter to sundry indi- viduals of the township of Bennington, which he named from himself. Having done this, he addressed a letter to Lieutenant Governor Colden, acting chief magistrate of the Province of New-York, in the absence of General Monkton, in which he informs him in respect to the nature of the commission which he had received ; and gives a description of New- Hampshire, as the King, in his commission, had determined it; and then invites Governor Colden, after he had considered the matter, to give him his sentiments in relation to the manner in which it would affect the grants made by him and preceding Governors ; it being his inten- tion to avoid interference with the government of the Province of New- York, as much as might be consistent with His Majesty's instructions.
To this, on the 9th of April, 1750, he received a reply from Gover- nor George Clinton, contained in a resolve of the Council of New-York, as follows :- " That this Province is bounded eastward by Connecticut river, the letters patent from King Charles Second to the Duke of York expressly granting all lands from the west side of the Connecticut river to the east side of Delaware Bay."
122
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
On this, other letters passed between them, giving the reasons of their respective claims. But Governor Wentworth, nothing deterred by any representations adverse to his commission, commenced that series of char- ters, which was only terminated in 1764; in which year His Majesty, to whom the two Provinces had appealed to decide the matter of juris- diction in dispute between them, made his decision in favor of New- York; from which time New-Hampshire withdrew her claims, till led by circumstances which will hereafter be narrated again to revive them.
This decision of His Majesty would have forever settled all matters in dispute, had the Legislation of New-York possessed that conciliatory element which it would have been natural to anticipate under the cir- cumstances. Governor Wentworth had chartered a large number of towns, amounting in all to 138. Fourteen thousand acres of land, also, agreea- bly to His Majesty's proclamation, had been given to certain of the King's officers, in compensation for faithful service. But New-York, greedy of gain, and eager to make what she could, instead of allowing the grant- ees any rights, construed the King's decision, as an annihilation of the New-Hampshire charters, and a retroversion of all the lands, as in a state of nature, to herself; and, with this view, commenced to enact laws, and extend her jurisdiction. But this course, so contrary to the expectations of the inhabitants and grantees, excited at once both their indignation and opposition ; an opposition which led to combinations for the defense of their rights, which their assumed rulers found it impossi- ble to control or resist : which not only rendered the laws of New-York nugatory, but were the means of ultimately establishing the territory over which it was sought to extend them as an independent State.
As early as 1776, at the Dorset Convention, the representatives of the New-Hampshire . grants took measures which very clearly indicated their determination to govern themselves; and, in 1778, a Constitution having been formed and adopted, their representatives assembled for the first time, at Windsor, to enact laws for the new government, which had been organized under the name of "The State of Vermont." On their assembling at Windsor, a committee from sixteen towns on the east side of the Connecticut River, in New-Hampshire, immediately waited on the Legislature and presented a petition, representing "That their towns were not connected with any State in respect to their internal po- lice " and praying that they might be admitted to constitute a part of the new State. These towns were Cornish, Lebanon, Dresden (a name given at that time to the district belonging to Dartmouth College) Lyme, Orford, Piermont, Haverhill, Bath, Lyman, Apthorp, (now di-
123
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
vided into Littleton and Dalton), Enfield, Canaan, Cardigan, (now Orange) Landaff, Gunthwaite, (now Lisbon), and Morristown (now Franconia). These towns had no complaints to make of grievances re- ceived from the government of New-Hampshire, nor was it pretended that they anticipated any. The argument they employed to show some reasonable ground for their proceedings was this " That New-Hamp- shire had originally been granted as a province to John Mason, and, by his grant, had only extended sixty miles inland from the sea; that all the territory westward of the sixty mile line, had been annexed to the State by virtue of royal commissions, which had been given the governors of the Province; and that, the royal authority having been overthrown, the people of the territory, which had been in that manner annexed, were released from all obligation to continue under the New- Hampshire government. They were therefore at perfect liberty to do as they pleased, and determine for themselves what jurisdiction they would be under."
The Legislature was at first inclined to reject the petition, not be- ing without apprehensions that a union with these towns might be fraught in some way with undesirable results. But the subject, by those who had it in charge, being pressed with great earnestness, and threats being put forth by members from towns in Vermont, adjoining and near the Connecticut River, that they would withdraw from the new State, provided the petition was rejected, and unite with the peo- ple in forming a State on the east side of the river, the following measure was at length adopted.
It was resolved to refer the consideration of the petition to the free- men of the several towns, to be decided by the instructions which they should give their representatives, at the next meeting of the assembly.
During the period intervening before the meeting of the next leg- islature the party in favor of the petition omitted no efforts by which they might secure the necessary majority of the members. And when, in June, the assembly met again, it was found that thirty-seven out of the forty-nine towns represented, had voted in favor of a union with the New-Hampshire towns. An act was accordingly passed, not only authorizing the sixteen petitioning towns to elect and send rep- resentatives to the assembly, but it was also resolved that other towns on the same side of the river might, on producing a vote of the majori- ty of the inhabitants, or on sending representatives to the assembly, be admitted to the union.
But the union of these towns on the east side of the Connecticut
124
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
with the State of Vermont had scarcely been secured, before appre- hensions began to arise of unpleasant results. It had been represented to the people of Vermont, that the inhabitants of the petitioning towns were unanimous in favor of the movement, and, in addition to this, that New-Hampshire as a State would not object to the connection. But the facts very soon came out, that neither of these representations were correct ; for there was not only a considerable minority, in all the towns, who were opposed to the union with Vermont, but an indig- nant protest in the following August by Meshech Weare, the Pres- ident of New-Hampshire, as the Chief Magistrate of the State was then called, was addressed to Governor Chittenden, against the course pursued by Vermont, in admitting these towns under its ju- risdiction. He averred that the towns had been settled and cultiva- ted under grants from the New-Hampshire government; that they were within the boundaries of the State prior to the opening of the Revolution ; that most of them had sent delegates to the State in 1775, and moreover that they had applied to the State for assistance and protection, and had received it at very great expense; that the state- ment that the sixteen towns were not connected with any State, in re- spect to their interual police, was a mere chimera, without the least shadow of reason for its support ; and avowed that Boston in Massa- chusetts, and Hartford in Connecticut might as rationally declare themselves unconnected with their respective States as those sixteen towns disown their connection with New-Hampshire.
When the assembly met, only a part of the sixteen towns were rep- resented. Those represented, however, insisted that, in order to have the benefit of the laws and the protection of the State, it would be nec- essary that they should be erected into a new county, or at least an- nexed to the contiguous counties west of them. And this, if they were to remain under the jurisdiction of Vermont, could not rationally be denied them. But the majority of the Legislature, having become ap- prehensive that their proceedings in relation to these New-Hampshire towns might not improbably have an effect adverse to the admission of their State to the American Union, as their course was to be laid, by President Weare, before Congress, began to plot a way of divorce from their new friends on the east side of the Connecticut, as soon as possi- ble. The way they took to accomplish their object was this ; feeling a little delicate about telling them that, under the circumstances, their company had ceased to be wanted, they adopted a course of strategy indirectly to inform them of the fact. The subject of providing for
125
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
the townships in a county by themselves, or annexing them to other already existing counties, having been brought before the assembly, was most earnestly debated. At length three questions were proposed to the assembly on which they voted with the given results.
Question " 1st. Shall the counties in this State remain as they were established by this assembly at their session in March last ? This was decided in the affirmative ; yeas 35; nays 26."
The following were given as the reasons of those who voted on the negative of this question for their votes.
" 1st. Because the whole state of Vermont was, (by the establishment referred to in the question) in March last, divided into two counties only ; which was previous to the union of the towns east of Connecti- cut river with this State ; and therefore they will thereby be put out of any protection or privileges of said State; which we conceive to be inconsistent with the 6th section of the bill of rights, established as part of the constitution.
2d. Because the affirmative of the question is in direct opposition to the report of the committee of both houses on the subject.
Question 2d : Shall the towns east of the Connecticut River, includ- ed in the union with this state, be included in the County of Cumberland ? This was decided in the negative ; nays, 33; ayes, 28.
Question 3d : Shall the towns on the east side of the Connecticut, which are included by union within this state, be erected into a distinct county by themselves ? Nays, as before, 33; yeas, 28."
Those who voted in the affirmative of the last two questions, gave their reasons as follows : " Because the negative being passed, the towns on the east side of the Connecticut river, which are included by union with this state, are thereby effectually debarred from all benefit, protec- tion and security of the commonwealth of Vermont, in violation of the 6th article of the bill of rights, which is established as part of the Con- stitution of said state, and in violation of the public faith of said state, pledged by their General Assembly at Bennington, June 11th, 1778 ; and also a resolve of the Assembly passed yesterday, whereby the towns east of the river, which were received into union with said state, were entitled to all the privileges and immunities vested in any town in said state."
The next day the minority of the legislature made a written protest against the manner in which these questions had been decided; stating more fully their unconstitutionality and injustice, and the consequences to which their action led, than they had done in the reasons for voting
126
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
as they did on the day previous. They then closed their protest, which was followed by their names, in the following language :-
"We do, therefore, publicly declare and make known, that we cannot, consistent with our oaths and engagements to the state (so long as said votes stand and continue in force) exercise any office or place, either leg- islative, executive or judicial, in this state ; but look upon ourselves, as being thereby discharged from any and every former confederation and association with the state."
After having presented their protest, the protesting members immedi- ately withdrew from the legislature, leaving in the Assembly a number barely sufficient to constitute a quorum, who, having finished the nec- essary business of the session, and provided, by the following resolutions, for ascertaining the sense of the people on the subject of the union, ad- journed on the 24th of October.
"In General Assembly, Windsor, October 23d, 1778, Resolved- That the members of the Assembly, lay before their constituents, the sit- uation of the union subsisting between this state and sixteen towns east of Connecticut river ; and be instructed how to proceed relative to said union at the next session of this assembly." Measures were also taken for supplying the places of those members who had withdrawn, from the Vermont towns, provided that, on the meeting of the Assembly, they should refuse to take their seats.
The members from the Vermont towns, west of the Connecticut River, who, on the 22nd of October, signed the protest, were as follows :- J. Marsh, Lieutenant Governor ; Peter Olcott, of Norwich, Assistant ; Thom- as Moredock, Assistant. The above were members of the council. Others were Alexander Harvey, of Barnet; Benjamin Spaulding, of Sharon ; Stephen Tilden, of Hartford; Joseph Hatch, of Norwich ; Abel Curtis, of Norwich ; Ichabod Ormsbee, of Fairlee ; Benjamin Baldwin, of Brad- ford; Frederick Smith, of Strafford; Joseph 'Parkhurst, of Royalton and Elijah Alvord, of Wilmington. The names of Reuben Foster, of Newbury, and Joshua Nutting, of Corinth, are also attached to the protest.
Five other members, from the west side of the river, voted in the mi- nority, with the New-Hampshire towns, and recorded with them also, on the 21st of October, the reason of their votes, whose names are not found on the final protest. These were Abraham Jackson, of Walling- ford; Lieutenant Abner Lewis, of Clarendon ; Edward Aiken, of Lon- donderry ; Timothy Bartholomew, of Thetford, and Colonel Ebenezer Walbridge, of Bennington.
127
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
The names of the members of the New-Hampshire towns who signed the protest were as follows :- Thomas Baldwin, of Canaan ; Major Jas. Bailey, of Haverhill ; Bela Turner, of Enfield ; Bezaleel Woodard, of Dresden, Clerk of the House; David Woodard, of Hanover; Jonathan Freeman, of Hanover ; Joshua Wheatley, of Lebanon ; Nehemiah Es- tabrook, of Lebanon; Colonel Elisha Payne, of Cardigan ; Colonel Is- rael Morey, of Orford ; John Young, of Gunthwaite ; Nathaniel Rogers, of Landaff, and Abner Chandler, of Piermont.
The proceedings of the Assembly created, in the minds of the mi- nority, the most intense excitement. They considered the New-Hamp- shire towns as not only deprived of their constitutional rights, but that the action of the majority of the legislature was, in other respects, ob- jectionable. It was not only wanting in justice, but was deficient in courtesy. It was wholly irreconcilable with the oaths they had taken, at least, as the minority viewed it; and those who were aggrieved felt it would be wrong to submit to it without an indignant protest. This pro- test, as has been seen, was accordingly made; nor did they feel inclin- ed to let the matter rest here. Not a few of them were men of most determined purpose, who were not to be tricked out of their rights without, at least, an endeavor to maintain them. The withdrawing members, therefore, met to see what they would do ; and, on earnest con- sultation, it was unanimously determined, that a convention should be called, to which all the towns in the vicinity of the Connecticut River should be invited to send delegates. Cornish, New-Hampshire, was the place agreed upon for holding it, and the time designated was the 9th day of December. Vermont was only represented by eight towns. But, the number of New-Hampshire towns sending delegates was twelve. Charlestown was represented by Captain Samuel Wether- be, who was elected at a legally called town meeting. The following is the report of the proceedings of this convention :
" RESOLVES
OF A CONVENTION HELD ON THE NEW-HAMPSHIRE GRANTS.
At a Convention of Delegates from twenty-two towns on the New-Hamp- shire Grants from both sides of Connecticut River, held at Cornish, Decem- ber 9th, 1778.
Voted unanimously: 1. THAT the members of the Convention will unite together for the purpose of pursuing such legal and regular meas- ures, as may have a tendency to secure to these Grants the benefits of
128
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
good government, without any regard to the distinction made by the arbitrary line drawn on the western bank of Connecticut river by the King in Council in 1764.
2. A pamphlet entitled " A public defense of the right of the New- Hampshire Grants, &c." compiled by a major part of the Committee ap- pointed by the Assembly of Vermont for that purpose, was repeatedly read, and unanimously approved.
3. Whereas, notwithstanding the request for this Convention, but few of those towns whose members continued to act with said Assembly after the protesting members had withdrawn, have sent members to this Convention ; and the conduct of the Assembly in passing the votes and resolves contained in their printed Journals, the protest, remarks, &c., have rendered it impracticable for said Assembly to carry into ex- ecution said resolves as therein proposed, which difficulty will continue so long as said votes stand in force; and as the people in these towns by justifying the conduct of the Assembly in violating the Constitu- tion, will, on their part, dissolve the solemn compact which they enter- ed into by the confederation, and the people consequently become dis- charged from their allegiance and obligations to the State, therefore, Voted : that the proposals contained in the before mentioned address, be made to New-Hampshire, viz.
1. To agree upon and settle a dividing line between New-Hamp- shire and the Grants, by committees from each party, or otherwise, as they may mutually agree.
Or, 2. That the Parties mutually agree in the appointment of a Court of Commissioners of disinterested, judicious men of the three other New-England States to hear and determine the dispute.
Or, 3. That the whole dispute with New-Hampshire be submitted to the decision of Congress in such way and manner as Congress in their wisdom shall prescribe.
Provided always : That the Grants be allowed equal privileges with the other party, in espousing and conducting their cause.
Or, 4. If the controversy cannot be settled on either of the forego- ing articles, and in case we can agree with New-Hampshire upon a plan of government, inclusive of extent of territory, that we unite with them, and become with them one entire State, rejecting the arbitrary line drawn on the western bank of Connecticut river, by the King of Great Britain, in 1764.
4. Voted, That the inhabitants of those towns on the Grants, in the State of Vermont, who have not sent a representative to this Convention
129
HISTORY OF CHARLESTOWN.
and whose members joined with the majority of said Assembly, in pass- ing the vote on account of which the protesting members withdrew, be requested to direct their respective members to rescind said votes, and join us in making said proposals to New-Hampshire.
5. That in case those towns, whose members continued to act with the Assembly of Vermont, still remain firm and stedfast in support- ing and continuing said votes of Assembly, and neglect to join in car- rying into execution said report of their committee, we will make overtures to join with New-Hampshire on the last article in said pro- posals.
6. That all the other towns in said Grants, be requested to join us in making proposals to New-Hampshire as before mentioned-and that those towns which agree to join therein, be requested to transmit cop- ies of their votes relative thereto, to Governor Marsh, Mr. Woodard, Colonel Morey, Major Child, Colonel Payne, Colonel Olcott, or Gener- al Bailey, who are hereby appointed a committee for receiving them, and carrying the foregoing votes and proposals into execution, so soon as the towns on the Grants can have reasonable opportunity to join us therein.
7. Voted, That said Committee be impowered to call a Convention from the towns on the Grants, whenever any thing shall appear, which shall, in their opinion, render one necessary.
J. MARSH, Chairman.
Extracted from the votes of said Convention.
B. WOODARD, Clerk.'
See Volume VIII, Documents and Records, relating to State of New-Hampshire. Edited by Nathaniel Bouton, D. D. pages 817-18.
The people of Vermont, now began to see how they stood, and de- termined instead of continuing their union with the towns east of the Connecticut River, to take every measure to conciliate New- Hampshire which was in their power. They, therefore, determined on embracing the first opportunity that was presented for dissolving a connection which they felt never ought to have been formed, and the results of which had already caused them no little trouble. Accordingly on the second day of the following session, which was the 12th of Febru- ary, 1779, the subject of the Union was resumed, and the instructions of the freemen of the state to their representatives were examined ; on which it was found that there was a majority for receding from their connection with the sixteen towns. Whereupon, Mr. Ithamir Hib-
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.