USA > New Hampshire > History of New Hampshire, Volume I > 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
· Wee do hereby charge and require you that freedom and liberty be duely admitted and allowed, so that they that desire to use the booke of common prayer and perform their devotion in that manner that is established here be not denyed the exercise thereof, or undergoe any prejudice or disadvantage thereby, they using their liberty peacably without any disturbance to others; and that all persons of good and honest lives and conversations be admitted to the sacrament of the Lord's supper according to said booke of common prayer, and their children to baptism.
The law was never made with the intention to force non- conformists to use the liturgy of the Church of England. This would be to take away liberty rather than allow it. But the ingenuity of malice can interpret almost anything to mean what it desires. Mr. Moody was brought to court and confessed that he had administered the sacraments contrary to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England. The attorney-general interpreted this as contempt of law and prayed that Joshua Moody might suffer the penalties provided. The warrant for
146
NEW HAMPSHIRE
committing Mr. Moody to prison was signed by Walter Bare- foot, Peter Coffin, Henry Green and Henry Roby. There was difference of opinion among the judges; Nathaniel Fryer and Thomas Edgerly were for acquital, alleging that "whereas his gracious Majesty hath been pleased to grant liberty of con- science to all Protestants in his royal commission, Mr. Moody being a Protestant is not liable to the penalties of the acts of Parliament." Henry Green and Henry Roby, both of Hampton, also at first signified their dissent from his condemnation, but the decision of the case was postponed till the following day, and Mr. Moody after some difficulty was permitted to pass the night at the residence of Capt. Elias Stileman, where he and William Vaughan had a cheerful time, both being confined in one chamber. Meanwhile Cranfield found ways of hectoring and threatening Green and Roby, so that they joined with Peter Coffin and Walter Barefoot in pronouncing Mr. Moody guilty. Both Fryer and Edgerly, persisting in opinions formerly ex- pressed, were dismissed from all offices. Mr. Moody was sen- tenced to imprisonment for six months. Vaughan's Journal says, "It is said that Justice Green is much afflicted for what he has done, but Roby not. Peter Coffin can scarce show his head in any company." The following is found in Mr. Moody's church record :
Not long after Green repented and made his acknowledgment to the pastor who frankly forgave him. Roby was excommunicated out of Hampton church for a common drunkard and died excommunicate, and was by his friends thrown into a hole near his house, for fear of an arrest of his carcass. Barefoot fell into a languishing distemper, whereof he died. Coffin was taken by the Indians, at Cochecho, 1689,-his house and mill burnt, himself not being slain but dismissed. The Lord give him repentance, though no signs of it have yet appeared.
This is an attempt to point out the divine hand of retri- bution and shows something of the vindictive spirit masked by pious phrases. To make out his case against his judges he should have been able to record that the Almighty allowed the Indians to torture Peter Coffin unto death, and Barefoot ought have come to an untimely end earlier than he did, 1688. Vaughan records that "Peter Coffin saith it is a nine days' wonder and will soon be forgotten." During the imprisonment of Mr. Moody there was preaching a part of the time by Rev. Seaborn
147
A HISTORY
Cotton of Hampton and Rev. Samuel Phillips of Rowley, but for a space of nine sabbaths there was, as Vaughan said, "a famine of the word of God," which much distressed him as he lay in prison. No other minister of the province was molested. The governor sent word to Rev. Seaborn Cotton, that after he had prepared his soul (whatever that might mean), he was coming to church to demand the sacrament of him, as he had of Mr. Moody, whereupon Mr. Cotton withdrew to Boston, reckoning prudence to be the better part of valor.
Mr. Moody was released from prison on condition of his leaving the province. He was employed as a preacher at the first church, Boston, and was invited to succeed Mr. Rogers as President of Harvard College, which position he declined. He visited Portsmouth from time to time till 1692, when he was recalled to his old pastorate and continued therein till his death, while on a visit to Boston, July 4, 1697.
Not being able to pursuade the assembly to impose taxes according to his wishes Cranfield attempted to collect rates with- out their consent. This he did on the basis of a clause in his commission, "And for supporting the charge of the government of our said Province of New Hampshire our will and pleasure is, and we do, by these presents, authorize and require you and our said Council to continue such taxes and impositions as have been and are now levied and imposed upon the inhabitants thereof, and that the same be levied and distributed to those ends in the best and most equal manner that can be until a general assembly of our said province shall have considered and agreed upon the fittest ways for raising of taxes in such pro- portions as may be requisite for defraying the charge of the government." This had been done without objection at the beginning of more than one administration. The Assembly thought to block the wheels of government by refusing to pass any bill for taxation. Under such conditions was not Cranfield justified in continuing the old assessments and rates? Was this an act of usurpation or a necessary act in order to the existence of any government whatever? Could the governor and all under officers be expected to serve for nothing? Some later governors did, but Cranfield was not equally self-sacrificing. He was too stubborn and resourceful for his opponents. Indeed, it is quite remarkable that this one man, unsupported by soldiers and war
148
NEW HAMPSHIRE
vessels, managed to hold in check and compel to do his will about three thousand people, the then reckoned population of New Hampshire. Gradually he selected a few councilors and a few sheriffs and appointed judges and packed a jury, who all did his bidding, and the people for a long time did nothing more than to send agents and petitions to the king. Why did they not drive him out of the province, as Andros was sent away? Because not all the wrongdoing was on one side. They opposed, for the most part, passive resistance to shrewd activity, and they got the worst of it. Cranfield secured by fines, forfeitures, pres- ents and taxes the money that he wanted and then got himself transferred by the authorities in London to a more lucrative position. The same troubles continued in New Hampshire after his departure, as we shall see.
As an inducement to get the assembly to assess taxes the governor published information that an attack by eastern In- dians was imminent, and he went to New York to secure the aid of two hundred Mohawks, at an expense of forty pounds for his journey. The assembly assented to the continuance of the former taxes, and an order was given to fortify the meeting houses. Some ammunition was distributed. But the major part of the taxes collected went for purposes other than defense. The council voted, January 2, 1684, that the governor should be paid one hundred pounds per annum from the time of his arrival, together with his traveling expenses to New York. Thus he collected his back pay. The council further voted "that the residue of the said rate be disposed of for and toward the payment of salaries to the several officers, and discharging the public debts of the said province, which have been contracted since the arrival of the said Governor,"6 Thus they found as easy a way to fix and collect their own salaries as public officials and legislators do now, and the dear people uncomplainingly paid the taxes then as now. History repeats itself. A few de- termined men of brains in high office do about as they please, whether the government be a so-called monarchy or republic. The dear people have not sufficiently learned this; they can be fooled most of the time, if not all the time. Unless offices are filled by good and wise men, in vain are treaties, campaign prom-
6 Coll. N. H. Hist. Society, Vol. VIII, p. 223.
149
A HISTORY
ises, laws and former customs. Greed in high office works the ruin of nations.
The mission of Nathaniel Weare in England was so far suc- cessful that an order was sent to Cranfield to make use of an assembly in raising money. He complied with the letter of the order, called an assembly, did not like some of the men elected by the people, men like John Gerrish and John Pickering whom he had made constables in spite, and so at once dissolved the assembly once more, writing home that he feared their rebellious and mutinous disposition and asking again for a frigate to put them in awe of his authority. Seeing that the end of his admin- istration was approaching he asked for leave to go to the West Indies for his health. Then warrants were issued for collecting more taxes, without consent of the assembly. Again he called an assembly, this time to pass an act to suppress piracy and robbery on the high seas, which when they had done, he sent them home like boys dismissed from school.
The men made constables by way of punishment declared that they were unable to collect the tax-bills. The provost mar- shal, Thomas Thurton, the unpopular official whom we have often met, was then ordered to collect the taxes, with the assistance of the constables. He went to Exeter, fol- lowed by some of the citizens of Hampton with clubs. A long deposition of his describes the whole fracas. It was on the twenty-ninth of December, 1684, that he went to Exeter and demanded of John Foulsom a fine of fifty shillings that the justices had set upon him for failing to collect the taxes in Exeter. Thurton was warned that he would meet with a red hot spit and scalding water. The wife of Moses Gilman said that she had had the water boiling for two days. Among the club-men who followed Thurton from Hampton was Joseph Swett and John Sanborn, and they were joined by others at Exeter, the minister, the Rev. John Cotton, being among them with his shillalah. The constables were roughly handled and assailed with bad language. The clubs were not for show alone, and the word, "rogue," so often used at that time, seemed to comprehend the sum of all villainy. The following Friday Thurton attempted to arrest and carry to prison Samuel Sher- burne of Hampton, and for so doing was beaten while Sherburne was making his escape. Justice Henry Roby also received his
150
NEW HAMPSHIRE
share of the cudgeling. A company of twenty or thirty men, armed with clubs, seized Thurton, beat and bound him, put a rope around his neck, hauled him out of the house by a rope that tied his hands, pulled and cudgeled him for a mile and a half and then put him upon a horse that they had commandeered and drove him out of the province into Salisbury, his legs being tied beneath the horse's belly and he suffering intense pain. Here he was detained forty hours. Moses Gilman declared that some of Exeter and Hampton had signed a writing, that they would oppose the government and pay no taxes that were as- sessed unlawfully. A troop of horse under Mason was ordered out to suppress disorders, but no trooper responded to the call. The people, after three years of oppression, were beginning to wake up.
Nathanial Weare, the agent of New Hampshire, made slow progress in London, on account of the difficulty of getting depos- itions and copies of records from home. Every obstruction possible was put in his way. The imprisonment of William Vaughan had this in view. Nevertheless the first charges against Cranfield had the effect to stay his course, and the Lords of Trade sent orders to him to allow depositions and copies of public records to be taken. After such had been received at London, copies thereof with charges were sent to Cranfield for his answer. He at once suspended the Mason suits, ordered the desired information to be furnished and retaliated by saying that he also had difficulty in obtaining copies of records, because the town clerks had concealed their books, declaring on oath that they knew not where the books were nor who had taken them.
A new complaint was made against governor Cranfield, and depositions and other evidences were presented to fortify the complaint. It was as follows :
I. That at the first session of the general assembly Mr. Cranfield challenged the power of legislature and settlement of affairs to himself against the words of his commission, which are (you and they &c), meaning the general assembly, shall, &c., which words (and they) he affirmed were put in by mistake of the clerk in engrossing his commission, and so entered it in the council books, and desired the assembly to make like entry, and delivered a copy of his commission without those words (and they).
2. He hath, by purchase or mortgage from Robert Mason, made himself
151
A HISTORY
owner of the Province, and so is not likely to act impartially between Mason and the inhabitants.
3. He hath made courts whereof both judges and jurors have agreed with Mason for their own lands, and some taken deeds from him of other men's lands, so as they are engaged in interest to set up Mr. Mason's title.
4. That Mason has sued forty persons and cast all, and the governor's interposal to state the cases, as by his commission he is directed, was refused, though desired: That the defendant's pleas, grounded on the law and statutes of England, were rejected.
5. That they can not reconcile the verdict with the attachment, nor the execution with the verdict, nor their practice under color of execution with either.
6. That the charge of every action is £6, though nothing done in court but part of the commission read, and some blank grants without hand or seal, and those not read for one case in ten.
7. The court charges are exacted in money, which many have not, who, though they tender cattle, are imprisoned for them.
8. The ministers, contrary to his Majesty's commission, which grants liberty of conscience to all Protestants, have their dues withheld from them, even those dues before Mr. Cranfield came, and are threatened with six months' imprisonment for not administering the sacrament accord- ing to the liturgy of the church of England.
9. That though the general assembly agreed Spanish money should pass according to weight, the governor and council have ordered pieces of eight shall pass at £6, though under weight.
IO. That men are commonly compelled to enter into bonds of great penalty to appear and answer what shall be objected, when no crime is signified.
II. That they have few laws but those made by the Governor and Council, when his commission directed the general assembly should make laws.
12. That the courts are kept in a remote corner of the Province, and the sheriff was a stranger and of no visible estate, and so not responsible for jailers.7
7 The articles of complaint, as published in Belknap's History, in the State Papers, and in the eighth volume of the Coll. of N. H. Hist. Society, differ, and here the copy is followed which looks most reasonable. At the end of article sixth the word "ten" seems more probable than "time." At the end of article twelfth the word "jailers" fits the sense better than "failures," which is used by Belknap. Another article is found in Belknap's copy, which does not appear in the other authorites, inserted after the fifth article, "That the verdict found the land sued for according to the royal commission and instructions, and that commission only gave power to state the case, if Mason and the people could not agree; but the execution took land and all." This is in harmony with the charges first made. Indeed these articles of complaint cover the same ground as the first charges. In the ninth article Belknap's "though under weight" is pre- ferred to "each thousand light" found in the other authorities.
152
NEW HAMPSHIRE
A brief of the case against Cranfield is very interesting, but contains little of historical value beyond what has been already stated. The Lords of Trade reported to the king's council upon three of the charges adversely to Cranfield, and, their report having been approved, they wrote to Cranfield, under date of April 29, 1685, in which letter they say, "We are commanded hereby to signify unto you that you have not pursued your instructions in reference to the propriety of the soil which Rob- ert Mason, Esquire, claims in the Province of New-Hampshire, inasmuch as you were directed that in case the inhabitants of New-Hampshire should refuse to agree with the said Mason, you should interpose and endeavor to reconcile all differences, which, if you could not bring to effect, you were then to send to his Majesty such cases, fairly and impartially stated, together with your opinion, for his Majesty's determination; instead whereof you have caused courts to be held in New-Hampshire, and permitted titles of land to be decided there, and unreasonable costs to be allowed, without first representing the particular cases to his Majesty. And yet, although it be his Majesty's undoubted prerogative to set and determine the price and value of coin within his Majesty's dominions, you have not done well in di- recting any alterations therein without his Majesty's special order. In both which you have been wanting in your duty to his Majesty." They then ordered a suspension of the suits against Mason, till the case of Vaughan should be decided on appeal.
On receipt of this letter, his request for leave of absence having been granted, Cranfield went to England by way of Jamaica, and there he obtained the collectorship of Barbadoes. It is said that there he paid special attention to masters of vessels and other persons who went thither from the Pascataqua. He must have collected some wealth, for he is said to have presented to the king a ship of war, during the reign of William III. He died about the beginning of the eighteenth century and was buried in the cathedral church at Bath, England.
An inclination to write as champions of the people of New Hampshire may have led some historians to portray the char- acter of Cranfield in too dark a hue. His career after he left the province does not seem to sustain such a portraiture. That he took unfair measures to secure revenue to himself can not be
153
A HISTORY
doubted, but he was goaded thereto by the refusal to grant him any salary. As for exercise of arbitrary power, most of it was granted to him in his commission, as the only way of subduing the people to the decisions of councils and courts in England. His acts of meanness in fines and imprisonments were through juries of New Hampshire men, and were done in the spirit of retaliation. It can not be questioned that he had unusual abil- ities and courage, and that he found a ready number of sup- porters in his schemes to secure the asserted rights of Mason and himself. His aim was unwise, and his methods were in part unworthy ; he could not well correct the latter without abandon- ing the former. Nothing would satisfy the holders of lands in the four towns but the complete abandonment of the claims of Mason, with perhaps some slight compensation therefor from the towns as such. Perhaps Mason and his agents ought to have thus compromised. To us, at this distance, they seem to have been pig-headed, but to persons reared in the England of that time their conduct was what might be expected of persons who had received large grants of land from the king. To yield such grants to squatters without a struggle could not be ex- pected, would have been thought dishonorable, and in the strug- gle for what each party thought to belong to it nobody was too punctilious about points of honor and legality. The purpose of each was to win, without offense if possible, with offense if necessary. The people of New Hampshire won, and therefore posterity justifies about all they did in opposition to Mason and Cranfield. Their representations have been taken at face value, while the letters of Cranfield and Randolph and others of like spirit that followed them have been largely discounted.
In his last letter to the Lords of Trade, January 6, 1684-5, Cranfield thus writes: "I esteem it the greatest happiness that ever I had in my life that your Lordships have given me an opportunity to remove from these unreasonable people, and the rather that your Lordships and the world may see it is those things enjoined in His Majesty's Commission they cavil at, and not my person, and time will show that no man shall be acceptable to them that puts His Majesty's commands in execution." This is pretty near the truth as to both history and prophecy.S
8 N. H. State Papers, Vol. XVII, p. 602.
Chapter VII THE UNGOVERNED GOVERN THEMSELVES
Chapter VII
THE UNGOVERNED GOVERN THEMSELVES.
Walter Barefoot at the Head of Government-Scrap at His House-Robert Mason Thrown into the Fire-Too Much Stimulant-Charter of Massa- chusetts Forfeited-Governor Joseph Dudley-Sir Edmund Andros Ap- pointed Governor-Death of Robert Mason-Revolt in Boston against Andros-New Hampshire without Government-Four Little Independ- ent Republics-Convention at Portsmouth-Hampton Wants Initiative and Referendum-Indian Attacks Necessitate Union-Petition Puts New Hampshire once more under Jurisdiction of Massachusetts-Province Sold to Samuel Allen-Extent of the Province-Lieutenant Governor John Usher-Grant of Dunstable by Massachusetts-The Million Acre Purchase.
T HE departure of Governor Cranfield left Captain Walter Barefoot, as his deputy, at the head of government in New Hampshire. His sway was brief and uneventful, yet the same spirit possessed him that he had caught from his predecessor. More levies and imprisonments led to the sending of Nathaniel Weare a second time to London as agent of the oppressed peo- ple of New Hampshire and of William Vaughan in particular, whose case seems to have been a test, to determine for all the rest the validity of decisions in court against the holders of land. The decision on appeal was against Vaughan, yet this seems to have settled nothing, because the New Hampshire peo- ple felt that matters could not be settled right till they were settled in their favor. Weare remained in England from the spring of 1686 till sometime previous to June 19, 1689, when a meeting of the proprietors of Hampton was held, to raise their proportion of his expenses, seventy-five pounds. What he accomplished in England does not appear.
The opposition to deputy governor Barefoot must have been keen and wide spread, for it brought discord into his own family. His sister, Sarah, had married Thomas Wiggin, son of the Capt. Thomas Wiggin who led the settlement of Dover Neck. Robert Mason was lodging with Barefoot at the latter's house on Great Island, now New Castle, when Thomas Wiggin and Anthony
157
158
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Nutter, who had been a member of the council and was a prom- inent citizen of Dover, came to talk over the claims and pro- ceedings of Mason. What followed is best told in the words, of Mason's deposition, taken March 8, 1683, before Richard Chamberlain :
I, Robert Mason, Esq., proprietor of the Province of New-Hampshire, do make oath, that upon the 30th day of December last, being in my lodgings. at the house of Walter Barefoot, Esq., deputy governor, and seeing Thomas Wiggins and Anthony Nutter, of the said Province, yeomen, talking with the deputy governor, I bid them welcome, and invited them to stay to supper. After supper, upon some discourse, Wiggins said he and others had read the papers I had set up, but they did not regard them at a rush, for I had nothing to do in the Province, nor had one foot of land therein, nor ever should have, and withal did give very abusive and provoking language, so that I commanded Wiggins to go out of the room, which he did not, but asked the deputy governor whose the house was, Barefoot's or Mason's. The deputy governor told him that the house and servants were mine, and entreated him to be gone and not to- make a disturbance. I then opened the door, and took Wiggins by the arm to put him forth, saying he should not stay there to affront me in my own house. Whereupon Wiggins took hold of my cravat, and being a big, strong man, pulled me to the chimney and threw me upon the fire, and lay upon me, and did endeavor to strangle me by grasping my windpipe, that I could hardly breathe. My left foot was much scorched and swelled, my coat, periwig and stockings were burnt, and had it not been for the deputy governor, who was all that time endeavoring to pluck Wiggins off from me, I do verily believe I had been murdered. I was no sooner got out of the fire but the said Wiggins laid hands on the deputy governor, threw him into the fire, and fell upon him so that two of the deputy governor's ribs were broke. I did with much difficulty pull Wiggins off the deputy governor. Wiggins being risen upon his feet did again assault me and the deputy governor, and threw the deputy governor down; thereupon I called to a maid servant to fetch my sword, saying the villain would murder the deputy governor. The servant coming with my sword in the scabbard, I took hold thereof, but it was snatched out of my hands by Anthony Nutter, who was present in the room, and did see the assault made both upon the deputy governor and myself, and hindered me from relieving the deputy governor. Nor did the said Nutter give any help or assistance to the deputy governor.1
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.