USA > New Hampshire > Coos County > Lancaster > History of Lancaster, New Hampshire > Part 24
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
' The owner is a cooper, a jolly old soul,
We 'll drink all his rum, but leave the ridge-pole.'
" Standing erect, they drained, each one, his bottle, while all hands below cheered in the loudest tones. All took another drink, and the raising was over, every man started for his home. So ended the old-fashioned raisings."
207
TEMPERANCE ORGANIZATIONS.
CHAPTER XVIII.
TEMPERANCE ORGANIZATIONS.
Sixty years ago there were no temperance organizations, and little was said or done in the way of agitating what we call the tem- perance question to-day. In fact, it may be doubted if the people of that time had any questions over the drink habit. About every- body drank New England, or West India, rum, and kept a little brandy in the house for special occasions, as in times of sickness, marriages, births, funerals, and the visits of the minister. The laborers in the field had their dram at eleven, and again at four o'clock, and thought it sustained their flagging energies against the excessive toils incident to pioneer life.
With all this habitual drinking, the people of the town could not be called drunkards. It was extremely rare for one of those old- time fellows to become what they called a " toper," or what we now call a drunkard. Every family kept a supply of rum, which was considered as much of a necessity as bread. Those who could afford it generally laid in at once enough to last through the year. If one expected to have a log house, or a frame one, or a " clearing bee," during the course of the year he must have some rum to treat his neighbors properly. The most casual caller would expect some- thing set out to drink, and he who did not comply with that custom was considered by his friends and neighbors as too " close-fisted and stingy " to be respectable. If on any occasion any one imbibed too freely and became drunk or disorderly, he was scorned by his neighbors, and his sin was rebuked by his minister. These habits were deeply imbedded in the social life of this, as other New Eng- land communities.
When grave offences were committed against law, public senti- ment, or morality, the fact was not then, as now, charged to the drink habit. The quantity of alcohol in their drinks was not very great, and then the rugged, out-door life they led did not make them such ready victims to its ravages as are the victims of drink at the present time. There is a superstition or tradition that the liquor was purer then than now; but that was only relatively true. It is true that there was much less adulterated liquor used then than now. But that it was purer than the same article that is made to-day, is not true. It is very true that the alcohol in the liquor of to-day, that is procured in dram-shops, is not as injurious as are the adul- terants that are put into it to increase the profits to the venders.
Whisky was not much used, and but little known, in Lancaster until about 1815, when its manufacture from potatoes was com- menced. Even then it was not regarded as fit for use, but was
208
HISTORY OF LANCASTER.
shipped off to trade for other commodities. It was of such a fiery nature as to literally burn the throat of the drinker, and no one cared for it save as a source of revenue or gain.
Up to 1845 there had never been known a case of delirium tremens in town. Some years previous to that date drinks contain- ing larger proportions of alcohol, and also adulterated drinks, had produced a number of drunkards, some of whom suffered from delirium tremens about the middle of the present century. As this condition of affairs became somewhat common, a number of ladies began to make a move to induce the men to take the pledge to abstain from intoxicating drinks. This was not an organized move- ment at first, but after a few years it opened the way for the estab- lishment of a "Total Abstinence Society," under the auspices of which meetings were held about town in the schoolhouses. As is the case in such movements the pledge was signed chiefly by women and children who of all classes least needed the reform. It no doubt did the boys good to pledge themselves against drinking ; but the men most addicted to the evil habit were not easily induced to make so strong a resolve as to quit drinking rum and gin. The movement had some good results in creating a public sentiment against drunkenness. Even habitual drinkers began to leave off drink to some extent. They would fall back into the old habit on holidays, town-meetings, musters, and other occasions. The men of Lancaster who had been convinced that drink was a serious evil began to moderate their habits rather than abstain from the use of liquor altogether.
The legislature in 1791 passed a law entitled "An act to regulate licensed houses," which remained in force until far into the present century. It provided that no person should carry on the calling of " taverner or retailer " of liquors without a license procured from the selectmen of the town. A violation of this feature of the law subjected the offender to a fine of forty shillings, and any one could sue for the same and recover .for himself half the fine, the other half going to the county. Such license had to be duly recorded in the town records.
A license could only be issued for a term of one year. The law provided that no taverner should suffer any of the inhabitants of the town to remain in his house tippling after nine o'clock p. m., or on the Sabbath, nor at any time to drunkenness, nor should he sell to minors, or servants, without their parent's or master's consent. He should not allow any gaming of any kind to be conducted in his house or on his premises. The retailer was not allowed to sell any mixed drinks of any kind in less quantity than one pint, and that was not to be allowed to be drunk on his premises. All these provisions were backed up by fines ranging from twenty to forty
209
TEMPERANCE ORGANIZATIONS.
shillings for each and every offence. In the main they were lived up to by the taverners and store-keepers. I cannot learn that any of them ever violated these provisions in this town.
One finds many such licenses recorded on the town records. They were granted to many of the leading citizens of the town, including the names of Emmons Stockwell, Fortunatus Eager, Edwards Bucknam, Jonas Wilder, Richard C. Everett, Sylvanus Chessman, Stephen Wilson, Artemas Wilder, Jr., John Toscan, Jonathan Carlton, Thomas Carlisle & Co., Benjamin Hunking, Francis and John Wilson, William and Noyes Dennison, Charles Baker, Benjamin C. Stevens, Ephraim Mahurin, Samuel White, and many others less known to history than they, but all keeping their transactions within the bound prescribed by law. Most of them were simply retailers of it as an article of trade in their stores, where it was as much an article of barter and trade as any other, and sub- jected the dealer to no odium or condemnation as he did not allow it to be consumed in his place of business. This line of traffic, how- ever, was destined to suffer a great change. When the " Washing- tonian Movement" reached Lancaster about 1845, with its battle- cry of " moral suasion," the stores began to give up the trade in liquors until in a few years it was left wholly to the taverns. The farmers still kept their supplies in their cellars to be used at the annual " butcherings, sheep-washings, sheep-shearings, and in haying."
About this time the churches began to take active measures against intemperance. The Orthodox Congregational church, formed in 1836 by seceders from the First Congregational church, had pledged themselves in their church covenant not to use dis- tilled liquors, except as medicine. No church, however, had been active in preaching against intemperance openly as a specific evil. The Washingtonian movement was organized, and for some years did much good in counteracting the evil of intemperance. As a sort of offset to the temperance movement there sprung up a habit of brewing so-called " health drinks." Among these were spruce beer and birch beer. The "brewing day," in the spring of the year, was one of much importance. The tender twigs of spruce, alder bark, and tags (the catkins), wild cherry bark, mountain ash bark, princess pine, dandelion roots, and various other roots and barks, that might be thought to possess flavoring or medicinal qualities, were sometimes added. This medley of roots and barks were boiled and the liquid strained off and allowed to "work." This was the spring and summer tonic of many of the best families in town. This stuff was no better than some of the drinks the people had been persuaded to give up. It cultivated an appetite for stronger stimulants much more effectively than it "strengthened"
I5
210
HISTORY OF LANCASTER.
the users of it. Even this form of drink did not escape the hearty denunciations of the Washingtonians.
From 1845, down to within a few years, many temperance organ- izations were instituted, as we have shown elsewhere, all of which have contributed to the development of a sound public sentiment against intemperance.
The public action of the town in relation to the matter are of interest to the student of social affairs. In the very early years grog was furnished at the expense of the town in connection with labor performed on the highways, bridges, and other public enter- prises. On one occasion when there were some logs drifted against or into the bridge over the Connecticut river, the town voted to authorize Sylvanus Chessman to notify the people to haul them off, and at the completion of the job give them a drink of grog at the expense of the town; and again in 1805, when the bridge over Isreals river was torn down to give place to a new one, the town voted to invite men enough to do the work with no other compen- sation than the liquor they needed to drink while engaged at the work. In 1830 sentiment had so changed that the town voted that no part of the money voted for highways should be spent for spirit- uous liquors.
In 1846 there was an article in the warrant for the annual town- meeting, asking whether the town would instruct the selectmen not to grant any licenses for the sale of liquors. The measure was de- ferred by a vote to postpone action; but the postponement was only for a year as at the next annual meeting a vote was had upon . the question whether " it was expedient to prohibit the license and sale of liquor and spirits." Sixty-seven votes were given in the affirmative, and seventy-eight in the negative. This was not, how- ever, a full vote. Many persons did not vote at all, as is shown by the fact that the vote for governor at the same meeting was three hundred and thirty-five, or one hundred and ninety more than all the votes cast on the license question.
Maine had her prohibitory law, and the subject of prohibiting the sale of liquors as the surest means of preventing drunkenness was gaining ground with the people. The discussion of the subject drew nearly all the people into the expression of their opinions, and of course there was little to be said in favor of the liquor traffic, and nothing in favor of the use of alcoholic drinks, so public sentiment grew stronger with the passing years, until at the annual town-meet- ing of 1851, it was voted not to license taverns or stores to sell liquor. This was done under the old local option law, which has later given place on the statute books to a law that is prohibitory in its aims.
!
-
------_
2II
POLITICAL HISTORY.
CHAPTER XIX.
POLITICAL HISTORY.
Lancaster from a very early period has held a prominent place in the political history of the state. Its earliest settlers were men from the older towns in the neighborhood of the seat of government, and naturally they were interested in the affairs of state. They had, from their youth, been in close contact with the leading politicians and statesmen of New Hampshire and New England. Very natur- ally when they had become the prominent men of a new town they continued to feel their former interest in the important questions of state somewhat intensified by the consciousness of added responsi- bilities as the leaders of the new town.
No political questions of any great magnitude affected Lancaster until after the close of the Revolutionary War. Previous to that time the questions that challenged their attention and interests had been one-sided questions, like those of defence against the Indians, French, and British, and the Vermont Controversy. Those were simply business affairs that did not require party action. The peo- ple comprised a unit on all issues involved in them; and once they were settled the people were free to give their attention to the weightier matters of the policy of the general and the state govern- ments.
Though far removed from the scenes of party contest that went on in the towns along the seaboard, the men of Lancaster were neither ignorant nor indifferent concerning the state government.
The first action taken on any political measure in Lancaster was at the annual town-meeting of 1783, after Meshech Weare had been elected president of the provisional government that preceded the adoption of the constitution of 1784. Much dissatisfaction with the government existed in some parts of the state. Lancaster, however, was satisfied with the form of government and voted unanimously, " That the present form of government now in force in this state be continued in full force until the Ioth day of June, 1784." There were but six votes cast at that time, but they were all in favor of the government as it then existed.
In the warrant for the annual meeting of 1784, every voter who paid taxes was notified to bring in a vote for president of the state, and a senator. Weare received eight votes, all that were cast, for president, and Moses Dow the same number for senator. In 1785, the thirteen votes of the town were cast for John Langdon for presi- dent. In 1786 there were eleven votes cast for George Atkinson for president, and the same number for Moses Dow for senator. The same number of votes were cast for the Grafton county officers,
212
HISTORY OF LANCASTER.
maintaining the town's habit of voting unanimously for all candi- dates. In their devotion to Atkinson they threw their votes away as he only received a few hundred of the whole vote of the state, which was eight thousand. His votes were reckoned among " eight hundred scattering" in the election returns. Just what was Lan- caster's reason for voting for so unpopular a candidate we do not know. He must have numbered some of the leaders here among his personal friends to have carried the entire vote of the town. Then, too, such events seem to indicate that a few men must have practically controlled the majority of the voters in town. There seems to have been little use of the names of the great political parties of the time, for they are not mentioned in any public or private documents of that time. We find, however, the use of other terms that indicate pretty well how public opinion ran here. In the record of the vote for state officers in 1787 the town clerk, Gen.
Edwards Bucknam, says : "Twenty votes were cast, and were divided by political candidates. Twelve friends to popular rights, however, prevailed." Gen. John Sullivan, the Federalist candidate, received the votes of the "twelve friends of popular rights." Whether the eight voters who voted against General Sullivan should be counted as anti-Federalists we have no assurance. A time had come, however, when an intense party spirit was to characterize the voting in Lancaster. The formation of the constitution of the national government was to bring that document before the people for adoption. The election of the state government, that was to. vote upon the Constitution of the United States in 1788, was one of the most important matters that had ever engaged the attention of our local politicians and embryo statesmen. Six states had already adopted the constitution, and others were to act about the same time that New Hampshire would, which made it a matter of great importance whether the friends or the foes of the constitution should win. A few hundred votes might turn the scale one way or the other. Langdon and Sullivan were candidates for president, and divided the vote nearly even. There were only thirteen votes cast that year. Sullivan received six, while his competitor received seven.
Later, in the same year, when the first election for members of congress occurred, the votes, twenty-seven in all, were divided as follows: Samuel Livermore, eight; Benjamin Bellows, eight; Elisha Paine, two; Christopher Toppan, one; Paine Wingate, one; John Pickering, one, and Simon Olcott, six. For presidential electors the vote stood as follows : Beza Woodward, eight; Benjamin West, nine; Elisha Paine, eight; Woodbury Langdon, nine; Christopher Toppan, eight; Moses Dow, two, and Samuel Livermore, one.
Party spirit had taken possession of the people, and contests
-
213
POLITICAL HISTORY.
began to be bitter and earnest. In 1788, the candidates for gov- ernor were John Langdon, Republican, and General Sullivan, Fed- eralist. Langdon received eight votes, and Sullivan only seven. Nearly half of the votes of the town were not cast when that office was voted for, either from a feeling of indifference or because the factions to which the non-voters belonged had no candidates.
The election of 1789 was a hotly-contested one as there were four candidates for president, and all of them were good men. The issue was on their party alliances and not on their merits as statesmen or their efficiency to fill that office. In Lancaster John Picker- ing, Federalist, received every vote cast. Pickering, however, was beaten by General Sullivan when the election was carried before the legislature. When the election came around the following year with Pickering as Federalist candidate sixteen votes were cast for him, with only four against him, in favor of Joshua Wentworth. Neither candidate, however, was chosen as the legislature elected, and Dr. Josiah Bartlett was their choice.
The full number of twenty-seven votes were cast at this election. Both candidates for congress in 1793, Jeremiah Smith and John S. Sherbourne, received the full vote of the town. No serious changes had taken place in the division of the vote on other officers during the last few years; but in the election of 1794, opinion had so effec- tually changed that for the first time in the history of the town the whole vote was given to Beza Woodward who ran for governor in opposition to John Taylor Gilman, the long-tried Federalist leader of the state. The number of votes cast that year was thirty-five. As once before, the entire vote of the town went for nothing by being given to the candidate who stood no show of election, as Gilman received four votes to Woodward's one. During the long term of Governor Gilman's holding the office-thirteen years-politics in Lancaster were at a low ebb. It is impossible to discover any evi- dence of more than the most common-place interest in elections. Other matters seem to have engrossed the attention of the people. The town had seventy polls in 1794, and its wealth had increased considerably, so that when the state tax reached twenty-seven thousand dollars Lancaster's proportion was thirty-eight dollars and eleven cents, which was a large sum for those times. The school tax was one hundred and sixty-six dollars and sixty-seven cents, one third of which had to be paid in silver money, and two thirds could be paid in marketable wheat at the rate of one dol- dollar a bushel. The people were more concerned about paying a little more than two hundred dollars taxes, than they were about the difference between a Federalist and a Republican acting as governor of the state.
Under the long and honest administration of Governor Gilman
214
HISTORY OF LANCASTER.
the state enjoyed a marked degree of prosperity. Law and order characterized the conduct of the people everywhere; and a good class were attracted to the state as settlers. Many from the older communities south of the state came into it and settled upon its cheap and abundant lands. In this general immigration Lancaster shared, as the fame of the Upper Coos country had gone abroad. As the century was drawing to a close a new order of things was apparent in the life of the town. The hard struggle for existence was to give way to a better condition of things. New settlers were now coming to buy the vacant lands, and to open up new farms, and build homes. Most of these newcomers were men and women of marked worth and character. From Portsmouth, Greenland, and other of the older settled towns there came many men and women of ability, of mind and character, and fully fitted in other respects to enter into the renewed life of the town. This influx of intelligent population made many improvements of things pos- sible. They changed the character of the town to a great extent, though their political relations did not immediately work a great change in the party standing of the vote of the town. In 1801 there were cast for Gilman fifty-six votes for governor; but a year later he only received fifty-three, while his competitor, John Lang- don, received seven.
A point had been reached in the development of the town when, through immigration and the reaching of their majority of a large number of the sons of the older settlers, the voters rapidly increased until in 1804 there were ninety-nine votes cast in the state election. The candidates that year were Gilman and John Langdon. Gilman received ninety votes while Langdon got only nine. The contest was a hot one from a party point of view. The two great parties, Federalist and Democratic-Republican, were bitterly arrayed against each other over grave national issues. The election of Jef- ferson as president had filled the Federalists with gloom. They abused the president and predicted all kinds of calamities as certain to take place because of the change in the party administration of the general government. Lancaster then became so thoroughly aroused over party politics that thenceforth she has always been divided in her vote on strict party lines. The time had gone by when any man could secure all her votes for any high office in either state or national governments.
It was at that election of 1804 that the first officials of Coos county were elected. Party lines did not hold as strictly in the selection of county officers as they did in the election of state and national officers. Although Moses P. Payson received seventy-five votes for senator in the twelfth district as against five for William Tarlton, it would seem that many voters broke over the party lines
ยท
215
POLITICAL HISTORY.
when it came to voting for county officers. William Lovejoy re- ceived eighty-seven votes for register of deeds, while his competitor, Stephen Wilson, only received two. Joseph Peverly received seven- ty-seven for treasurer, while Jeremiah Eames for the same office only received one. Stephen Wilson was a good man, while it may be doubted if Lovejoy was his equal in point of popularity. These facts go to show that the voters were governed more by their politi- cal opinions or preferences for particular fitness in the candidate for office; and that they had got done voting at the dictation of prominent local leaders. At all events from this time forward the development of political parties went on more rapidly than before in town. There was much zeal displayed in local, as well as state and national, politics. Federalism was, and had been, rampant and triumphant for more than a decade, and it seemed as if it was so thoroughly entrenched in the confidence of the people that it would hold sway for many a year to come; but such appearances were deceptive, for at the election of 1805, John Langdon, the bitter and obstinate opponent of Federalism, was elected governor by a majority of four thousand. For some years the vote of Lancaster was so divided that a fair-sized majority went to the support of the Democratic-Republican party.
The prophesies that the country would go to ruin under the ad- ministration of Jefferson proved false. On the contrary there was much prosperity enjoyed; and some of the peculiar doctrines of his party were either ignored or violated by Jefferson, as in the matter of the "Louisiana Purchase." The president and his party won friends everywhere, even in far-off Lancaster. There was left but a remnant, and that not a very large one, of the Federalists. At the election of 1808, only thirty-five votes were cast in Lancaster. Of them Langdon, Republican, received eight; Gilman, the tried and proven Federalist, received sixteen. Jeremiah Smith, Federalist, got one vote, and R. C. Everett, ten. This was evidently due to the complete reversion of political power in the election of 1805, for the election of the year following was without the appearance of rivalry among the parties. It is difficult to surmise the cause of such a heavy decline in the votes cast for the two popular party candidates in 1808, on any other ground than that of a complete indifference in politics from the defeat of 1805, during the next two years. At all events but few of the people voted. Many, no doubt, were in- fluenced by the religious opposition to Jefferson. He was called an atheist, and it was said he was hostile to religion, the church, and especially the Bible. Jefferson was nothing of the kind nor was he hostile to church or Bible. Good old Deacon Wilder was one of the "false prophets" in Lancaster; and as he was popular in the church probably influenced many persons into a state of political in-
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.