USA > New Hampshire > History of New Hampshire, Volume I > Part 22
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
On the fifteenth of September, 1725, the Indians again sought to capture the members of the Hanson family in Dover, who had been redeemed from captivity. This they threatened to do before the Hansons left Canada. The Indians were concealed
7 N. H. Prov. Papers, Vol. IV, p. 169.
260
NEW HAMPSHIRE
in a barn while two women passed by on their way to the garri- son. Some men were laboring in a neighboring field. At the first discharge of guns Benjamin Evans was killed. They wounded William Evans and cut his throat. John Evans was wounded and bled profusely. Thinking him dead the Indians stripped and scalped him, during which operation he feigned death, though conscious of all that was going on. They turned him over and struck him several blows on the head. After they had gone he staggered toward the garrison, and some friends meeting him in a fainting condition wrapped him in a blanket and carried him to a place of safety. He recovered and lived fifty years. The Indians got away unmolested, carrying with them Benjamin Evans, a lad of thirteen years. He was "re- deemed as usual by a charitable collection."8
Meanwhile William Dudley and Samuel Thaxter, commis- sioners from Massachusetts, and Theodore Atkinson, represent- ing New Hampshire, were sent to Montreal to confer with the Marquis de Vaudreuil, governor of Canada, bearing the incrim- inating letters of the latter, which were found among the papers of Sebastian Rasle. The commissioners sought the restitution of captives and to impress the governor that he was principally responsible for the outbreak of hostilities, since he had encour- aged the Indians to make war and had supplied them with arms and ammunition, which facts he denied. The evidences pre- sented were disconcerting, since his letters were produced, and, moreover, an Indian stood ready to affirm that he himself had been supplied with arms by the governor, by means of which he had killed one white man and captured and sold another. The governor finally promised to do what he could to restore peace and release the captives. Sixteen were redeemed at an extrava- gant price. Some Indians had an interview with the commis- sioners, and proposed that "if the English would demolish all their forts and remove one mile westward of Saco river ; if they would rebuild their church at Norridgewock and restore to them their priest, they would be brothers again." It was quite beyond the power of the commissioners to do all these things, especially to bring back Sebastian Rasle from the dead.
After the return of the commissioners to Boston prepara-
8 Farmer's Belknap, p. 217.
261
A HISTORY
tions were made for renewing the war with vigor, and a peti- tion was sent to the king, complaining of the French governor of Canada. The governor of New York was asked to co-operate in subduing and seizing the Indians. One of the Indian hostages in Boston was allowed to visit his countrymen and he soon returned with a request for peace. Commissioners went to St. George's, and arrangements were made for a meeting in Boston to conclude peace. Lieutenant-Governor Wentworth, Colonel Shadrach Walton, Major John Gilman, John Frost Esq., and Mr. Theodore Atkinson represented New Hampshire in that treaty, and each was paid five pounds for his expenses. The assembly also voted that twenty-five pounds should be expended for presents to the Indians. Three of the eastern Indian tribes had not come into the agreement made at Boston, and so the lieutenant-governor and three members of the council and one member of the house, Theodore Atkinson, went to Falmouth to meet the representatives of these tribes. Those from the council were George Jaffrey, Colonel Shadrach Walton and Richard Wibird.9
The treaty was concluded in the usual form, and truck- houses were established under the management of the govern- ment, for trading with the Indians. This put an end to depre- dations for about twenty-five years, though white men could not be wholly restrained from shooting a lone Indian, when opportunity was afforded. No court would convict a man for such a case of manslaughter, whatever the evidence might be. Those who had suffered on the frontiers were not scrupulous about the rights of the Indians, nor was there grief when the death of a former dreaded foe was reported. No treaty nor laws could entirely stop petty thefts by Indians. The whitemen stole on a larger scale by shrewd bartering, against which there was no civil law.
9 N. H. Prov. Papers, IV. 459.
Chapter XIII ADMINISTRATIONS OF GOVERNORS BURNET AND BELCHER
Chapter XIII ADMINISTRATIONS OF GOVERNORS BURNET AND BELCHER
Short Rule of William Burnet-Settlement of Penacook, now Concord- Suncook, now Pembroke-Grants of Epsom, Chichester, Canterbury, Barnstead, Gilmanton and Bow-Coulraine Granted but not Settled- Kingswood-The Governor and His Friends Get Large Grants-Jonathan Belcher-David Dunbar-Political Intrigues-Retirement of Dunbar- Conflict between the Council and the House-Growth of the Democratic Spirit-First Episcopal Church-Condition of New Hampshire in 1730 -Incorporation of Durham and Contoocook, now Boscawen.
IN a speech to the general assembly, December 13, 1727, Lieut- Governor Wentworth announced that William Burnet had been appointed governor of New Hampshire and Massachusetts, and added that "He is a Gentleman of known worth and has justly obtained a universal regard from all that had the Honor to be under his Government and will make us a happy people when he arrives here, if we are not wanting in paying that respect which his Character so justly deserves."1
The new governor was a son of Bishop Gilbert Burnet, who was regarded as a friend to civil and religious liberty. He had been popular as governor of New York and New Jersey, a man of literary tastes, fond of books and free from ostentation. He reached Boston July 13, 1728, whither a committee was sent from council and house of representatives to join in his recep- tion. In April, 1729, Governor Burnet came to Portsmouth and addressed the general assembly. He seems to have remained about a month. A house was provided for his entertainment. The government of Massachusetts could not be persuaded to grant him a regular salary, and many of the representatives of New Hampshire were unwilling to do so, although Governor Joseph Dudley enjoyed this benefit. There seems to have been stubborn opposition in both colonies to taxing themselves to pay the salary of officials whom they had not chosen. Popular
1 N. H. Prov. Papers, IV. 261.
265
266
NEW HAMPSHIRE
governors received presents from time to time, and unpopular ones little more than insults and neglect. Burnet had been in- structed to insist upon a salary, and after some debate he was voted two hundred pounds sterling, or six hundred pounds in bills of credit, out of which sum he was to pay his own traveling expenses and also one-third of the two hundred pounds to his lieutenant-governor. For this latter consideration Wentworth renounced all claim to other salary and presents. Governor Burnet made no lasting impression upon the province, by reason of his death soon after. He died September 7, 1729, at Cam- bridge, Massachusetts, in consequence of the oversetting of his carriage upon a causeway, when the tide was high, occasioning a violent cold and fever.
The controversy was still going on as to who had jurisdic- tion in the valley of the Merrimack, and Massachusetts was fastening her clutches upon choice tracts of land therein. Old Dunstable was not enough; thirty miles up the river were the planting grounds of the Penacook Indians, known to traders for more than half a century. Indeed it is said to have been visited by white men as early as 1638, and Major Richard Wal- derne and Peter Coffin of Dover had a trading house here in 1668. The General Court of Massachusetts granted this region, in 1659, to twenty-two petitioners of Dover and Newbury, but the conditions seem to have been unfulfilled. In 1663 the same court granted to the inhabitants of Salem, Massachusetts, a plantation six miles square at Penacook. This grant also was forfeited. In 1725 about one hundred and twenty petitioners from Essex county, Massachusetts, principally from Haverhill, Bradford, Andover, Newbury and Ipswich, obtained a grant of a tract seven miles square. Their petition states that some Irish people from Nutfield were likely to get a grant of this region from the government of New Hampshire, alluding to the Scotch settlers in Londonderry who were pushing northward. The settlement was begun the following year, and in 1727 Ebenezer Eastman was the first to bring his family to Penacook. While about forty men were clearing the lands and laying out lots, a committee from the government of New Hampshire ap- peared on the scene and entered protest. This committee con- sisted of Nathaniel Weare, Richard Waldron Jr., and Theodore
267
A HISTORY
Atkinson. There was no stay of proceedings. The Massachu- setts people kept on felling trees, laying out lots and killing rattlesnakes. This last industry was encouraged by the offer of three pence per tail as town's bounty. In 1726 a sufficient cart-way was cut through from Haverhill to Penacook, by way of Chester, and in the same year the proprietors voted to build a block house forty feet in length and twenty-five feet wide. This building served many years for fort, meeting-house, school- house and town-house. The site is marked by a properly in- scribed block of granite, near the corner of Chapel and Main streets, in Concord.
Suncook was granted by Massachusetts, in 1727, to the sur- vivors of Captain John Lovewell's company and the heirs of the deceased. The Indian name was changed to Pembroke, when that town was incorporated, November 1, 1759. Other grants to the number of eight were made by Massachusetts to those who had served in the Narragansett war and in the expe- dition against Canada. The object was not so much to pension old soldiers as to secure a claim upon disputed lands.
Meanwhile the government of New Hampshire was alert. On the eighteenth and twentieth of May, 1727, Lieutenant- Governor Wentworth, in the name of the king, signed grants of the townships of Epsom, Chichester, Canterbury, Barnstead, Gilmanton, and Bow. The first five were clearly within the territory of New Hampshire, while Bow, according to the grant, comprised the greater part of the lands already granted by Massachusetts to the settlers at Penacook and Suncook. This made trouble for many years. The conditions of these grants were, that seventy settlers should clear lands within a few years, that a meeting house should be built, that lots should be reserved for a parsonage, a school and the minister, etc.
Epsom was a tract six miles in length by four and a half miles wide, adjoining Nottingham, now Deerfield and Northfield, on the northwest. It was named from a town in Surry, Eng- land, and was granted to Theodore Atkinson, John Frost, and others of New Castle, Rye and Greenland. The early meetings of the proprietors were held at New Castle and Portsmouth. As usual in the new grants few of the original proprietors settled here. The land was given to them to speculate with. They laid out some money in building roads and meeting houses and then
268
NEW HAMPSHIRE
sold their lots to the best purchasers. The first settlers in Epsom were Charles McCoy from Londonderry, William Blazo, a Frenchman, Andrew McClary and Samuel Blake.
Chichester was granted to Nathaniel Gookin and others, many of whom were of Hampton. It adjoins Epsom, on the northwest. The northeastern portion of it was incorporated as the town of Pittsfield, March 27, 1782.
Canterbury, adjoining Chichester on the northwest, was granted to inhabitants of Oyster River, now Durham, and some of them settled here. The annual quit rent was one pint of Indian corn, if demanded. The southeast part of Canterbury was incorporated as the town of Loudon, in 1773, probably named for John Campbell, Earl of Loudoun, at one time com- mander of the British forces in America. The northern part of Canterbury became the town of Northfield in June, 1780.
In the grant of Barnstead to the Rev. Joseph Adams and many others of Newington it is said that the town was to "begin on the head of the town of Barrington, on the southwest side of the town of Coulraine and running by the said town of Coul- raine eight miles." Many of the first settlers of Barnstead were from Durham. Few settlements were made before 1767. Here mention is made of a town of Coulraine. This was chartered December 8, 1726, and granted chiefly to the inhabitants of Londonderry, as the names of the grantees indicate, so that that town might have its share with the rest in the distribution of unoccupied land. Coulraine began at the northeasterly cor- ner of Rochester, at or near Salmon Falls river, and ran twelve miles on Rochester head line, and thence northwest half a point northerly ten miles, making a township twelve miles by ten. Each proprietor was to build a dwelling house within two years or forfeit his claim. The annual quit rent was ten pounds of hemp and a barrel of tar. The conditions of the grant were not fulfilled, and October 20, 1737, Governor Belcher signed a grant "of the Town Corporate of Kingswood" to sixty persons of Portsmouth, beginning at the southeasterly corner of Barnstead and from thence to run upon the same course as Barnstead's easterly side line, to Winnipiseogee Pond, thence by a right angle till it came to the boundary line of what formerly was the Province of Maine, thence to northeasterly corner of Roch-
269
A HISTORY
ester, and thence by Rochester and Barrington head lines to the starting point. This charter, too, lapsed, and out of its terri- tory were formed New Durham, which was granted to Ebenezer Smith and others in 1749 and incorporated January 15, 1796, and Middleton, which was settled by Thomas Morgan and others a little before the Revolution and was incorporated March 4, 1778. Brookfield was set off from Middleton in 1794. Wake- field, originally called East Town, was incorporated August 30, 1774. Its southern part belonged to the lapsed grant of Kings- wood. Alton, once called New Durham Gore, was settled by Jacob Chamberlain and others in 1770 and was incorporated January 15, 1796. Its southern part belonged to the ancient Coulraine. (For charter of Coulraine see N. H. Prov. Deeds, XV. 186-190.)
Gilmanton was granted, May 20, 1727, to twenty-four per- sons by the name of Gilman and one hundred and fifty-three others, chiefly from Exeter and Stratham, as compensation for services rendered in defense of the country. To these grantees were added sundry others, making the number up to two hun- dred and fifteen proprietors. The conditions of settlement were not fulfilled, and this township was claimed by the Masonian proprietors and regranted by them, June 30, 1752. Governor's Island was annexed December 30, 1799. Gilford was set off and incorporated June 16, 1812, and Upper Gilmanton was set off and incorporated June 28, 1859, its name being changed to Belmont in 1869.
It is noticeable that among the grantees of these new towns, Coulraine, Epsom, Chichester, Canterbury, Barnstead, Gilman- ton and Bow, appear the names of Governor Shute and Lieuten- ant Governor Wentworth, each of whom had four hundred acres in Coulraine and five hundred acres in each of the other towns. Also the members of the governor's council came in for a share in each town, as well as the leading officials and merchants of Portsmouth and New Castle. Four sons of Wentworth were remembered in these grants, as well as his sons-in-law, Theodore Atkinson and Archibald McPhaedris, and his brother-in-law, Mark Hunking. Others repeatedly named in grants of towns were John Frost and son Andrew, Jotham Odiorne and son Jotham, Richard Waldron and son Richard, Shadrach Walton
270
NEW HAMPSHIRE
and son Benjamin, George Jaffrey and son George. The wealthy families of Portsmouth needed more land for their sons. Went- worth must have received, or taken, over three thousand acres of land, and the members of his family as much more. It is easy for a governor to get land, when his signature to the charter or grant is necessary.
The grant of Bow was to Jonathan Wiggin and others of Stratham and Exeter, including also members of the governor's council and some of his friends. It began on "the southwest side of the town of Chichester, running nine miles by Chichester and Canterbury, and carrying that breadth of nine miles from each of the aforesaid towns, southwest, until the full complement of eighty-one square miles are fully made up." This grant was intentionally so made as to cover most of the land already granted in the townships of Penacook and Suncook by Massa- chusetts, each province hoping that the rival claims would be decided finally in its own favor. Therefore Massachusetts kept on her way and in 1733 incorporated Penacook as the town of Rumford, with no ascertainable reason for the new name. The Rev. Timothy Walker became the first settled minister in 1730, at a salary of one hundred pounds per annum. He built the first two-story framed house, which the town surrounded with a palisade and used as a garrison, or place of refuge in time of Indian depredations. Henry Rolfe, who had lately graduated at Harvard college, was the first town clerk and first deputy to the general court of Massachusetts in 1740. The controversy with the town of Bow will be noticed in a later chapter.
At the time of the death of Governor Burnet there was in England an agent of Massachusetts, named Jonathan Belcher. He was born in Cambridge, Massachusetts, January 8, 1682, son of Hon. Andrew Belcher, one of the provincial council, and grandson of Andrew Belcher who lived in Cambridge in 1646. Jonathan Belcher was graduated at Harvard college in 1699 and spent six years in Europe, visiting twice the court of Hanover, where he received from the princess Sophia a golden medal. He became a wealthy merchant and member of the provincial coun- cil of Massachusetts. Belknap describes him as "graceful in his person, elegant and polite in his manners; of a lofty and aspiring disposition ; a steady, generous friend; a vindictive, but not
JONATHAN BELCHER
27I
A HISTORY
implacable enemy. Frank and sincere, he was extremely liberal in his censures, both in conversation and letters. Having a high sense of the dignity of his commission, he determined to support it, even at the expense of his private fortune; the emoluments of office in both provinces being inadequate to the style in which he chose to live." It may be added that perusal of his letters does not impress the reader with a sense of the governor's innate dignity, and many expressions are vulgar and belittling. While agent of Massachusetts in London he was understood to be a champion of the rights of the people and opposed to a fixed salary for the governor, but after his own appointment to that office he was very strenuous in insisting upon a fixed salary for himself, according to advice and requirement of the king in council. His interest was in Boston rather than in New Hamp- shire. During the eleven years that he held office it is not easy to point to any progress due to his activity and influence. Much of the time he was at loggerheads with the house of representa- tives, because they would not impose and collect taxes as he desired. In the boundary dispute he wrote for New Hampshire and acted for Massachusetts.
Yet he resented what appeared to be duplicity in others. Wentworth had written to London letters complimentary to both Shute and Belcher, not knowing then whether the former would be continued in office. Governor Belcher refused to be entertained the second time at the house of Wentworth, after he had been informed of what the latter had done. This also may have made him the more insistent that no part of the salary of two hundred pounds voted to him should be shared with Wentworth, as Governor Burnet had agreed, and Belcher made Wentworth sign an agreement that quit all claim to any salary or allowance from the assembly, depending wholly on the gov- ernor, who allowed him nothing, except the fees and perquisites arising from registers, certificates, licenses and passes, amount- ing to about fifty pounds annually. In consequence of this the friends of Wentworth formed an opposing party, led by his son Benning Wentworth, afterward governor, and his son-in-law, Theodore Atkinson. The latter was shorn of most of his offices and emoluments and was made to feel his inferior position. Richard Wibird became collector of customs in his stead, and he
272
NEW HAMPSHIRE
was left with only half the office of high sheriff, Ellis Huske having the other half.
On the death of John Wentworth, December 12, 1730, Colonel David Dunbar, a native of Ireland with a Scotch name, was appointed lieutenant governor of New Hampshire and surveyor of the king's woods. Both offices occasioned him much trouble. He had had charge of the fort at Pemaquid and had induced many to settle in the neighboring parts of Maine. Here he had a fine residence and farm. He made himself unpopular everywhere he went by an overbearing attitude, per- haps fostered by his military office. There had been opposition between him and Governor Belcher before the former's appoint- ment to office in New Hampshire and this became at once manifest on his arrival at Portsmouth. In Belcher's correspond- ence with Richard Waldron he calls Dunbar "that bull-frog from the Hibernian fenns" and often alludes to him as "Sancho." Dunbar sought to magnify his office, as George Vaughan had done before, claiming that when Governor Belcher was out of New Hampshire, the duties of governor in that province devolved upon himself, and he submitted to the council a series of questions bearing upon that claim, to which no reply has been found.2
Dunbar sided with Benning Wentworth and Theodore Atkin- son in their dislike of Governor Belcher and schemes to get rid of him. A petition for the removal of Governor Belcher was signed by fifteen persons, and another petition for his retention in office was signed by more than a hundred. Both petitions went to London on the same vessel. Dunbar sought to get himself appointed governor in place of Belcher, only to bring himself into contempt, as shown by a citation from a letter of John Sharp, one of the lords of trade, to Governor Belcher :
"The first Degree of Power in every Province ought only to be in- trusted to those of great & exalted minds, & will always, by a wise Prince, be kept at a distance from or out of the reach of all, who are of a grovelling & mean Disposition ; & I am therefore fully convinced your Excellency will continue to hold your Reins of Government, without a possibility of their being snatched out of your hands by this vain aspiring man; & that he will Phaeton-like fall in the Attempt he is now making for that purpose; for he has presented the most extraordinary petition, the end of which is to obtain
2 N. H. Prov. Papers, IV. 645.
273
A HISTORY
two very modest Requests, tho' entirely inconsistent one with the other; to wit, that he may be made Governor-in-Chief of New hampshire, & that he may have a moiety of your Excellency's salary as such; but men of poor & low talents will always blunder in this manner."3
It is only fair that the student of history should see another portrait of Colonel Dunbar, drawn by his friend, Theodore Atkinson, in letters to the province's agent in London, Mr. John Thomlinson :
"Whatever is proposed by the house for the good of the Province is not concurred by the Council, who is so entirely swayed & Influenced by the Governor that any thing that seems in the least to clash with the Massa- chusetts Interest is Immediately rejected, & this we fear will always be the case while we are governed by a Massachusetts man, which we are fond of believing is near at an end & should be, I believe, Intirely content to be govern'd by Coll. Dunbar who is a gentleman, that the more knowledge we have of him the more we are attached to him & we flatter ourselves he will be the man at least the Governor of this Province" "The Coll hath been as illy treated both by Superiours & Infer's as perhaps any man ever was, the Governor still not only Insisting upon all POWER & SALLARY even when in Boston that he in all Companies Ridicules & Denys that there ever was any thing said at the Board of Trade, that really Coll Dunbar is no more than a Cypher; not one of the Governor's officers ever comes near him either civil or military, the militia often meeting and beating drums about the Town without his knowledge or consent; if they are asked by any indifferent person why they don't pay that Complyment, they will tell you 'tis to obleige the Governor; the Council setts in the same house where the Coll. lives & are summoned by the President by orders from the Governor & there transacts the affairs without even taking the least notice of the Lieut Governor. These transactions render the Coll. Intirely uncapable of doing any service either as Lieut Governor or as Surveyor General, for now if he gets decrees from the Admiralty, the people will mob & murther his men that will venture to put in execution such Decrees & if they apply to the Governor he will forward their account against the Coll. & will at the same time refuse to call those rioters to an account or make any Inquiry into it tho' desired by a large part of the Lower house-indeed he many months after put out a Proclamation but offered no reward & En- deavours by all ways & means he can to render the Coll. odious, who not- withstanding the nature of his Imployment, being what the people ignorantly think detrymental to them, yet was there an Election tomorrow for Com- mander in Chief I am sure he would have three to one against Governor Belcher. The Government is a farce & we are Laugh'd at by every body. One act hath been all that has been done in Two years, tho' at each Sessions many publick acts hath been voted by both Houses so
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.