History of Cheshire and Sullivan counties, New Hampshire, Part 75

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton)
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Philadelphia : J. W. Lewis
Number of Pages: 1200

USA > New Hampshire > Sullivan County > History of Cheshire and Sullivan counties, New Hampshire > Part 75
USA > New Hampshire > Cheshire County > History of Cheshire and Sullivan counties, New Hampshire > Part 75

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).

"Neither petetion we for the additional grant of any other land particularly the farm formerly granted to Lieutenant Gov' Taylor but only for the bair Lines which wee Enjoyd until the late Lines were Ran by the fore mentioned Gentlemen-

"We would further Certifie Your Excelency and the Honble Counsil that we ware the first petetioners

466

HISTORY OF CHESHIRE COUNTY, NEW HAMPSHIRE.

for land on this River, and have suffer'd the greatest Losses from the enemy by fire and Sword, and have hitherto stood the Heat and burthen of the day, and at last to be undone without the knowledge of Your Excellency together with the honble Counsil, who if truly knowing and fully understanding the same, wee hope from your now Goodness and Clemency will re- dress these our present difficulties which wee groan under and which is submitted By Your Excellencys humble Petitioners, who as in duty bound will ever Continue to pray for you .-

" In the name and by the

Consent of the Inhabitants

DANIEL HOW

& propriators on the Spot,

JETHRO WHEELER

"Benjamin Aldridge Joshua Chamberlin

Amos Davis

Jebediah Chamberlin

Thomas Chamberlin Caleb How

Daniel How Jun'

Samuel How

John Warner Edward How

Jethro Wheeler Jur Abner How

Herrodiam Wheeler Simcon Alexander

Isaac Chamberlin Phillip Alexander

"P, S, M' Bellows hath Layd out his Town about Nine Milles long on the River but four milles wide at the Lower end, and but three milles wide at the upper end-

"And the four milles wide, & Two Milles in length is run down in to our town that is the Occasion of our Grief-

" Westmoreland April the 29th 1752."

However favorable the conditions of the grant may have been, still, owing to the un- settled condition of the times, the depredations of the Indians, and other causes, the grantees were unable to fulfill the conditions of the charter, and, upon petition, the grant was ex- tended June 11, 1760.

The survey of the town was made by Caleb Willard under the supervision of Joseph Bel- lows, of Walpole, and Josiah Willard, of Win- chester, and a plan of the same drawn and com- pleted March 18, 1752. By referring to the each; but this did not take all the land fronting plan, the reader will observe that the out- line of the town is about the same to-day as when first surveyed. The town, as first sur- veved, extended from the Connecticut to, and even across, the Ashuelot River.

In compliance with the conditions of the charter, the proprietors of the town laid out the

" town lots" cast of the house where formerly Captain Prentiss Daggett lived, now owned by

Divididing Line Between Westmoreland & Walpole 5 Miles & 10 Rods

5,78" E. 7 Miles & 90 Rods.

con

Plan of Westmoreland 1200 Rods to an inch

4 Miles

5.78" E By Chesterfield

Divididing Line Between Chesterfield & Westmoreland

211 Rods.

I MilE & 300 Rods.

Northerly by Ashuelot]

4 Miles & 121 Rods

3 Miles & 216 Rods. About 225 Rods.

Albert Chickering. It is now a pasture and is known as the seventy-acre lot. Tradition speaks of only one house having been built up- on it. This lay-out, however, was simply to make their title good by fulfilling the condi- tions of the charter. The proprietors of the town had their own views as to the proper lo- cation of the town lots, and proceeded to carry them out by laying out an eight-rod road or street, extending from Partridge Brook to Wal- pole town line. This street was narrowed to four rods in 1786. Its general course was nearly on the line of the present highway run- ning over Park Hill ; thence north of the house of Clarissa Chiekering, east of the present high- way, by the house formerly occupied by D. Livingstone and by the house of R. T. Aldrich.

As first laid out, the lots contained ten acres upon the street, so, at a proprietors' meeting, March 31, 1752, it was voted to double these lots, making twenty aeres in each. A few house lots were laid out in other portions of the town. The tier of north lots extended to the meadow lots. In the subdivision of the town each pro- prietor, there being seventy-two, had a pitch lot

WESTMORELAND.

467

of one hundred acres, a meadow lot and a house lot, both of twenty acres each, and one hundred and fifty acres of common land. After making the seventy-two divisions, even with the gener- ous extras for roads and waste lands, it was found that there were some surplus lands left ; these were sold at " vendue." As settlement preceded the survey, the town was very irregu- larly subdivided. It was not deemed best to interfere with pitches already made.1 The proprietors chose a committee, consisting of Daniel How, Jethro Wheeler, Thomas Cham- berlain, Benjamin Aldrich, Richard Ward, Ca- leb How and Joseph Hutchins, to lay out the house lots, the meadow lots and suitable roads. They were instructed, March 31, 1752, to meas- ure all the meadow land in the town and to compute one acre on the "Grate river " to be equal to two on the Ashuelot River. While we have no plan of their work, yet, from references found occasionally in old deeds, we conclude that they first surveyed a base line perpendicu- lar to the Chesterfield town line and extended it to the Walpole town line. This line, begin- ning at a stone monument in the Chesterfield line, passed near the intersection of roads west of the house of L. G. Wheeler ; thence east of Ebenezer Leach's house, east of Henry Rodgers' house, and so on to Walpole line. From the base line to the eastward to Keene town line was the first division of lots ranged toward the east and lotted to the south. These lots were one hundred and sixty rods east to west and one hundred rods north to south. The second divi- sion of lots was incorporated into the town of Surry. From the base line to the meadow lots was the third division, which was lotted from

the base line to the west and ranged from the Chesterfield line to the north. These lots were one hundred rods east to west and one hundred and sixty rods north to south. Governor Went- worth and his son's lot, comprising in all six hundred acres, was laid out in one body in the southeast corner of the town. It was one mile in length north to south and seventy-eight chains east to west. Adjoining upon the north came the school lot, and then the glebe. The minis- ter's lot tradition reports as near the house of F. M. Proctor.

Governor Benning Wentworth had amassed a large fortune, a portion of it by questionable means. He virtually sold grants of townships to scheming proprietors, and reserved in each five hundred acres to himself. After his death, in 1770, the title to these lands began to be dis- puted. The Governor proposed in Council the question " Whether the reservation of five hun- dred acres in several townships by the late Gov- ernor Benning Wentworth in the charter grants conveyed the title to him?" Seven of the eight Councilors answered the question in the nega- tive, and the reserved lands were offered to pri- vate settlers. The glebe land the proprietors of the town divided among its thirteen soldiers that had served through the Revolutionary War, whereupon the church brought suit into court to maintain its proprietorship, and after a long and costly litigation secured the verdict in its favor. This suit cost the town about one thousand dollars. I am unable to ascertain the final disposition of the lot for the " Incor- porated Society for the Propagation of Ye Gos- pel in Foreign Parts." Probably a home de- mand absorbed it. The first meeting of the proprietors of the township of Westmoreland was held at the house of Thomas Chamberlain, March 31, 1752. Samuel Hunt was chosen moderator, Caleb How proprietors' clerk, and Joshua Warnen treasurer. These meetings were held by notifications posted in said town, in Northfield and in Winchester.

1An amusing anecdote is related of the origin of the se- lection of Benjamin Aldrich's pitch. As he was " viewing the landscape o'er " to make his selection, he paused upon a steep hill-side, leaning against an upturned tree. While in this position, for some cause, the tree suddenly flew back, hurling Aldrich down the declivity, heels over head. In this manner he made his pitch, which has remained in the ownership of his descendants to the present day. The present owner is Arvin Aldrich.

468

HISTORY OF CHESHIRE COUNTY, NEW HAMPSHIRE.

CHAPTER III.

WESTMORELAND-(Continu d). THE VERMONT CONTROVERSY.

THE territory now comprising the present State of Vermont was for a number of years claimed by New York, by virtue of a " Letter Patent," from King Charles II., in 1674, to the Duke of York, wherein was expressly granted all the lands from the Connecticut River to the east side of Delaware Bay. The provinces of Massachusetts and New Hamp- shire were in one, with one provincial. govern- ment ; but September 18, 1679, the King deerced that they should be separated, but left the bound- ary line between the two in uncertainty, which occasioned a heated controversy, and another royal decree, "that the northern boundary of Massachusetts be a similar curve line, pursuing the course of the Merrimack River at three miles distance, on the north side thereof, beginning at the Atlantic Ocean and ending at a point due north of Pawtucket Falls; and a straight line drawn from thence due west till it meets his Majesty's other governments." From this last clause New Hampshire inferred and claimed that her territory extended as far westward as Massachusetts. This claim would embrace nearly all of the present State of Vermont. To further add to the complications of the controversy, Massachusetts claimed a portion of the disputed territory, basing her claim upon the point that the royal decree could only af- fect particular grants of the Crown, and that New Hampshire embraced only the original grant to Mason, in 1629, which was bounded on the west by an uncertain located "curve line," which was not defined until it was sur- veyed, in 1787. The line, as surveyed, ex- tended from lot No. 18, in the town of Rindge, in a northeasterly direction to the town of Os- sipee. Between this line and the Connecticut River, and on both sides thereof, the territory was known as the New Hampshire Grants. Thus, three States at the same time were claim-

ing the same territory. The Governor of New Hampshire at this time was Benning Went- worth ; he was a man full of ambition and decisive energy ; he heeded not the contending claims of Massachusetts and of New York, but proceeded to grant townships of land with a rapidity that numbered one hundred and thirty- eight townships prior to the year 1764, all west of the Connecticut River. The first town- ship granted he named after his own name- Bennington. These towns were also known as the New Hampshire Grants. The activity of Governor Wentworth naturally hastened the controversy to a conclusion sooner than it would otherwise have been. All the claimants naturally appealed to the King to have their respective claims verified by royal edict. In 1764 the King responded in favor of New York.

Thereupon for a time the government of New Hampshire ceased in Vermont. New York regarding all grants made by Governor Went- worth as null and void, refused to compromise, and enacted laws hostile to the claims of the settlers, thus succeeded in arousing their bitter opposition, which culminated, in 1777, in a declaration "That they would at all times con- sider themselves as a free and independent State," at the same time petitioning Congress to receive them into the Union as such. Hav- ing adopted a constitution, representatives as- sembled at Windsor for the first time in 1778. Representatives from sixteen towns located upon the east side of the river made applica- tion to be admitted into the new State, elaim- ing that the original grant to John Mason did not include their territory ; and inasmuch as their existence depended on a royal commission, which was now annulled by the Revolution, they were free to choose their own rulers. These petitions met with favor from a conven- tion of the freemen of Vermont, assembled at Bennington June 11, 1778, and an invitation was extended " to any others that might choose to unite with them, should have leave to do so."

469

WESTMORELAND.

Meschech Ware was now President of the province of New Hampshire. He remonstrated with the officers of the State of Vermont against this dismemberment of his province. In consequence, only ten towns on the east side of the river sent representatives to the next session of the Vermont Legislature. But the terms of union imposed by the Vermont Legisla- ture upon these New Hampshire towns were peculiar, inasmuch as it refused to receive them upon equal terms with the Vermont towns, by refusing to allow them to unite with Vermont counties already established, or to constitute anew. This action led to opposition, to dissent, to withdrawal from the Assembly, and to the calling of a convention of all the towns upon both sides of the river who favored the union, to meet at Cornish, N. H., December 9, 1778. In this movement Westmoreland participated, but not with unanimity. A respectable minority, under the leadership of Colonel Joseph Burt, was strongly in favor of the New Hampshire government. The following memorial, ad- dressed to the General Court in 1781, illus- trates fully the views of the minority party :

This convention resolved to unite "to pursue such legal and regular measures as would secure to the Grants a satisfactory form of government without regard to any former limits." The pro- ject of forming a new State met with opposition on every side.

The party in opposition in Westmoreland, it appears, were not so much opposed to the idea of the proposed new State as to the manner of formation. On the 8th day of June, 1780, they sent a memorial to the General Court of New Hampshire, signed by thirty-nine of its leading citizens, with Joseph Wilbore at its head, expressing dissent to the idea of secession, " but if the Confederated States Shall consent to erecting the New Hampshire Grants on both sides of the river into a new State, upon a just and equal footing, then we shall have no ob- jections."

The Legislature of Vermont took active

measures to dissolve it. The New Hamp- shire Legislature did not incline to relinquish one iota of its jurisdiction upon the west side of the river, and to make affairs all the more complicated, Massachusetts claimed a por- tion of the disputed territory. The matter was submitted to Congress, but without result. Under these ill-omened auspices the several towns upon both sides of the river persevered in forming the new State. A convention of delegates met at Walpole, November 15, 1780, "to compare opinions." Jonathan Cole and Joseph Wilbore were the delegates from this town. The result of this conference was " that the union of all the towns granted by New Hampshire was desirable and necessary," and recommended a convention be held at Charles- town, N. H., on the third Tuesday of January, 1781. It was a time of great excitement. Three parties were in the field of action. Each were eager for victory.

The following statement, concerning matters in town at this time, is of interest :

" WESTMORLAND 13 Feby 1781- " Sir-

" Before this reaches you, you will undoubtedly hear of the disorder in this part of the State,-I find that people pretend to be actuated by several mo- tives,-some say that the Court of New Hampshire are so Arbetary that they ought to brake from them, some say that New Hampshire had rather confine the State to the Mason Line, then have any of the Grants west of the River; but some more bold Enemies to the State and States, such as Capt Daniel Carlile of Westmorland who on the seventh of this Instant be- fore several witnesses,-Did declare, that for his part, he was for the Convention, not because he saw what they was after, but the more disorder the better in order to bring about a Revolution : for says he We must either be subject of France or Britton and for his part he chose Great Britton, and if the people would rise and drive the French from the Continent, . he would go in parson, or contribute one hundred hard Dollars towards the same ; for says he, the people must throw of the authority, and then they could make a peace, for a peace with Great Britton was what he wanted and said, I am not, afraid to declare my sen- timents before your best Authority, for said he your Authority is weak and if three towns will Combine

470

HISTORY OF CHESHIRE COUNTY, NEW HAMPSHIRE.

together, the Authority dare not medle with them, nor send for any Tax and as for myself says he I will pay no more Taxes to New Hampshire, for a Revolt, from Authority is what I want, and such like conver- sation, this Capt Carlile and some other disaffected persons have been very active by one means or other to lead the people to Act as inconsistant with and I think as much against their interest and the common good, as they could have acted ; this is not the only Town for I am well informed that the disaffected per- sons are all engaged in this new Plan, for seperating from New Hampshire, as they please to term it; but I believe it is more as Cap* Carlile desires it to be, to bring on all the disorder possible. He and some others are grone to very bold and I wish for heavens sake that Authority might take place and all our domestick Enemies might either be subjected to Au- thority or driven from us for they are the Pest of So- ciety, and I think they are on the gaining hand in this part of the State-Sir I thought it my Duty, to inform your honor of this that you might be ac- quainted of what persons we have amongst us-

" I am Sir

" Your Honors most

" Obedt and Hble Serv

"JOSEPH BURT " The Horde MESHECK WEARE"

The following is a petition of sundry citizens against a union with Vermont, etc .; addressed to the General Court, 1781 :

" The memorial of a number of the Inhabitants of the Town of Westmoreland in the County of Cheshire & State of New Hampshire :- Humbly sheweth- That your memorialist, ever Anxious to promote the grand cause of the United States of America, & par- ticularly the State of New Hampshire; and at all times have endevored to defend the same, and never sought by any means whatever, to leave the Govern- ment of New Hampshire by attempting to Joine with any other State, or Body of People; yet conterary to our will, there has been Votes obtained in many Towns in this Part of the State, to Joine Vermont so called : the Town of Westmoreland (at least a major- ity of it) has Voted to Joine with them. Your me- morialist conceive that such Votes are unconstutinal, therefore cannot be binding upon us :- We your me- morialist viewing ourselves as part of the thirteen confederated States, have a right to protection there- from, and particularly from the State of New Hamp shire, considering ourselves as part thereof; and your memorialists humbly pray, that we may be protected from the usurped Authority of Vermont or any un-

constitutional Authority whatever, Hoping your Hon- ors will take our unhappy Situation, under your wise consideration and grant us such relief, as shall be most for ours and the States public good ;- we beg leave to say that we are much exposed to the inroads of the Enemy-& in a defenceless State, through de- ficiency of Arms & irregularity of the Militia, aecru'd by the unhappy Dispute,-Officers Ellected under the Authority of Vermont; some of which have been, in years past considered as inamical to the Liberties of America; altho they are very zealous for the inde- pendence of Vermont-we do not pretend to say that they are not good men now ; yet we are not without fears, that their designs are not, altogether so friendly to the common Cause, Others who were under the Oath of Fidelity to the thirteen States, have dis- penced with their Oaths, & have sworn to support & maintain the Independence of another State; which conduct creates much confusion in this part of the State .- We have entered our protest against their proceedings, and do appeal to the confederated States for protection ; wishing that our unhappy situation may be laid before Congress :- Altho those gentle- men that are for the New State, say that Congress, will not take up to determine any thing upon the matter, Nay some say, that Congress have no business to Do any thing more then to receive Vermont into confederation, they direct us to look upon the Other Side of the River, where the New York party have been waiting some years for protection from New York, and Congress, and cannot obtain it, they also add that we had better unite with them, & then Con- gress will establish the State; but we had rather have the consent of the confederated States first, which if they shall determine that we leave the State of New Hampshire, & be erected into the State together with the grants, west of the river (which if done we trust will be upon a Just and equal footing) we shall have no Objections, in whose wisdom and prudence we confide, & as in duty bound will ever pray-

" Westmorland June 8th 1781

"Joseph Wilbur george Clark

Elijah Temple David Witherell

Joseph Burt Ebenezer gilbart

Nath' Wilbore

Levi goodanow

Daniel Stone Simeon Proutey

Job Wilbore Elias Chamberlain

John Pierce Jonas Butterfield Isaac Butterfield

William Brittin

george Aldrich

Francis Putnam

Ephraim Lenord Philap Wilbore

Elisha Wilbore Philip Wilbore Jur

Joseph White

Joseph Tompson

471

WESTMORELAND.

David Brittin

Ebenezer Brettun

Jeams Brittin

Caleb Aldrich

Ebnzr Brittin Ju

Nath1 Tinney

Ezekal mixer

Ephraim Wood

Philap Brittin

John Snow

John Adams David Wilbore

Pendleton Brettun

William Adams "

Nehemiah Browne

But the controlling majority were in favor of forming a new State, however, to be called New Connecticut, to extend from the " curve line " to the Green Mountain range. With this pur- pose in view, Westmoreland sent to this conven- tion her representative, Joseph Wilbore.

Forty-three towns were represented from the two States. December 5th, Westmoreland chose Jonathan Cole for its delegate, with in- structions that in case the convention allowed any member a seat in the same without first taking the oath of fidelity to the United States to withdraw; also that the grants on the east side of the river make a full and free represen- tation at the Court of New Hampshire. This convention appointed a committee to confer with the Vermont Assembly in reference to terms of union and adjourned to meet at Cor- nish in February, when the Assembly would be in session at Windsor, a few miles distant.

The result of this convention was favorable to Vermont. On the 5th of February a town- meeting was called, which " Voted to accept of the proceedings of the Convention held at Charles- town, Jan. 16, 1781." The convention lay the matter before the Assembly in the form of a petition ; it received a favorable response, with a condition attached that two-thirds of the towns interested on both sides of the river, to a distance of twenty miles, should approve of the union, and adjourned to April. On assembling they found that the necessary number of towns had given a favorable vote, and the union was therefore consummated. Representatives from thirty-five towns on the east side of the river took their seats as members. The towns south of the north line of Claremont and east of the river were organized into Washington County.

After meeting at Bennington the following June, the Vermont Legislature assembled Oc- tober 11, 1781, at Charlestown. Captain Eph- raim Stone represented Westmoreland. The Lieutenant-Governor and one of the Councillors were chosen from the east side of the river. This Legislature was a body of men of more than average intelligence. Its members were chosen for distinguished ability and prominence. Questions of momentous importance were be- fore it for action. A regiment of New Hamp- shire troops appeared under Colonel Reynolds ; he was promptly advised that his foree was too small for conquest, too large for intimidation. He made no attempt to disturb the session. Meantime, Vermont had applied for admission to the Union. Congress voted to admit her upon the condition that she relinquish the towns upon the east side of the river. This she re- fused to do. She had possession of nearly a third part of New Hampshire. This condition of things could not long continue. Nearly every town had its court and judicial officers duplicated, each acting under their respective State governments. In Chesterfield it ter- minated in a conflict of physical prowess. The New Hampshire government, now actively aroused, was making preparations to send troops into the revolted towns to put down the secession party. Upon the other hand, Ver- mont was equally vigilant. Dr. William Page, of Charlestown, was now sheriff of Washington County. He issued orders, December 1, 1781, to Colonel Chamberlain, Captain S. Nathan Frank- lin, John Cole and Jonas Butterfield, all of Westmoreland, to be in readiness, with their com- mand to march at short notice. Two Chesterfield men having been arrested and lodged in the Char- lestown jail by a Vermont sheriff, the New Hamp- shire assembly authorized Colonel Hale, the sheriff of Cheshire County to release them. In the attempt he was himself arrested by the Ver- mont sheriff and committed to the same jail. In retaliation, Sheriff Page was arrested and lodged in the Exeter jail. Civil war was now immi-

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.

History of Cheshire and Sullivan counties, New Hampshire, Part 75

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton) Publication date: 1886 Publisher: Philadelphia : J. W. Lewis Number of Pages: 1200

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton)
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Philadelphia : J. W. Lewis
Number of Pages: 1200