USA > New Hampshire > History of New Hampshire, Volume I > Part 9
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
97
A HISTORY
dred thousand feet of boards from Arrowsick. It pays to ex- terminate the heathen, although modern missionaries would have converted them at far less expense. Only thirteen Indians were killed on this expedition, without the loss of a whiteman.
Some had qualms of conscience and thought that it was wicked to employ the fierce Mohawks to kill off the eastern Indians, but their scruples were quieted on being reminded that Abraham made alliance with the Amorites for the rescue of his kinsman, Lot. Two agents were sent to incite the Mohawks to war. The latter came on to near Cochecho, whence Blind Will and seven other Indians were sent out to parley with them. Blind Will was wounded, dragged away by the hair and perished in the woods. Only two or three of his companions escaped. It was learned that the Mohawks planned to kill all eastern Indians, whether they were friendly or hostile to the English. The friendly Indians, learning this, mistrusted their English neigh- bors and listened to the seductions of the French, who in a few years made use of them to scourge the settlers. Thus the em- ployment of western Indians against eastern Indians made all the Indians of Maine and New Hampshire hostile and was the source of many calamities.
In the spring of 1678 Major Nicholas Shapleigh, Captain Francis Champernowne and Mr. Nathaniel Fryer were appointed commissioners to make a treaty of peace with Squando, the saga- more of Saco, and other chiefs. This was effected at Casco, and the Indians there brought in their captives and surrendered them. The treaty stipulated that a tribute should be paid to the Indians annually of one peck of corn for each family, as a sort of ground rent for the use of their land, and that one bushel should be paid for Major Bryan Pendleton, who then owned a large tract of land near the mouth of Saco river. Was this the begin- ning of our national policy of dealing out rations and clothing to western Indians, in order to keep them contented? Is it tribute or belated payment of ground rent?
The wish has been expressed that we might hear the In- dians' side of the story. Here is a little fragment of it. In 1677 a document was signed by nine Abenaki Indians. They say, "Because there was war at Narragansett, you came here when we were quiet and took away our guns and made prisoners of our chief sagamores; and that winter, for want of our guns, there
98
NEW HAMPSHIRE
was several starved. Is it your fashion to come and make peace and then kill us? Major Waldin do lie; we were not minded to kill anybody; he give us drink, and when we were drunk, killed us."
Belknap says that arms had been supplied to the Indians by Baron de Castine, but it is well to listen to Edward Randolph in his report to the Council of Trade. He says that the government of Massachusetts in 1657 sought to monopolize the Indian trade in furs and peltry. Nobody could trade with them without a license, and such as were licensed could sell to the Indians guns, swords, powder and shot, paying to the government three shillings for every gun sold, three shillings for a dozen swords, six pence for a pound of powder and six pence for every ten pounds of shot. Thus the Indians got their arms and ammuni- tion, and the government got some revenue and the massacre of its frontier families. He says that in King Philip's War about six hundred men and twelve captains were slain out of the ranks of the colonists, "whilst the church members had liberty to stay at home and not hazard their persons in the wilderness." Moreover, the settlers had twelve hundred houses burned, eight thousand cattle killed and many thousand bushels of grain destroyed, making the loss of property equal to one hundred and fifty thousand pounds. The Indians lost their homes, their lands, about all their property, and three thou- sand men, women and children killed. King Philip was robbed of Mount Hope, driven into the swamp and hunted down like a fugitive slave. Randolph mentions among the causes of the war that the Indians had been taught to love strong drink to the ex- tent that "they would strip themselves to the skin to have their fill of rum and brandy." The Massachusetts government made a law that every drunken Indian should pay a fine of ten shillings or be whipped, and many of the poor wretches offered their bare backs to the lash because they were unwilling or unable to pay the fines. Since no profit accrued to the government from whipping, the law was changed, substituting for whipping ten days' work, which the Indians resented more than the whipping. Randolph says, too, that the praying Indians of Natick were taught to use arms and were exercised as trained bands, under officers of their own. They learned to watch and fight as well as pray and were "the most barbarous and cruel enemies to the
99
A HISTORY
English above any other Indians, Captain Tom, their leader, being lately taken and hanged at Boston with one other of their chiefs." These praying Indian chiefs were supposedly among the number kidnapped by Major Walderne at Dover.2
2 N. H. Prov. Papers, Vol. I, pp. 339-345.
Chapter V NEW HAMPSHIRE A ROYAL PROVINCE
Chapter V NEW HAMPSHIRE A ROYAL PROVINCE.
Jurisdiction of Massachusetts Inhibited-John Cutt First President-The Council a Court of Record-Liberty of Conscience Allowed only to Protestants-Defect of the Commission-Sketches of First Councilors- Address to General Court of Massachusetts-Conflict with Heirs of Mason-Superstition-First Laws-Sixteen Crimes Punishable with Death-Wearing of Capital Letters-Conditions of Becoming Freemen -Laws of New Hampshire Disallowed by England-Later Code-Ran- dolph and Barefoot again-Robert Mason as "Lord Proprietor"- Richard Chamberlain Secretary-Condition of the Province in 1670-80.
T HE royal commission for the government of New Hamp- shire, similar to the government of Virginia and New York, is dated September 18, 1679. It recounts that the authori- ties of Massachusetts had illegally taken upon themselves to organize a government and exercise jurisdiction over the inhabi- tants of Portsmouth, Hampton, Dover, Exeter and other places north of their true boundary, which was three miles north of the Merrimack river. Such jurisdiction is inhibited and restrained. The government of New Hampshire had never been granted to any person or persons whatsoever. For the protection and de- fense of the rights, liberties and properties of the inhabitants and that impartial justice may be administered the king appoints a president and council, naming John Cutt, Esq., of Portsmouth, as first president, and as councilors Richard Martyn, William Vaughan and Thomas Daniel of Portsmouth, John Gilman of Exeter, Christopher Hussey of Hampton and Richard Walderne of Dover. These together were authorized to make choice of three more councilors. The president was given authority to choose his deputy from the members of the council, and the president or his deputy and five councilors constituted a quorum. Nobody could sit and vote in the council till he had taken the following oath of allegiance :-
You shall swear well and truly to administer justice to all his Majesty's subjects inhabiting within ye Province of New Hampshire, under this
103
104
NEW HAMPSHIRE
government : and also duly and faithfully to discharge and execute the Trust in you reposed according to the best of your knowledge. You shall spare no person for favor or affection, nor any person grieve for hatred or ill will. So help you God.
The president and council thus appointed were required by the commission to meet within twenty days after its arrival, "all excuses whatsoever set aside." They were constituted a court of record, for administration of justice in civil and criminal cases according to the laws and customs of England, with right of ap- peal to the king and his privy council in any case concerning title to land or other real estate, or in any personal action or suit above the value of fifty pounds, every appellant giving good security to pay the costs, should the case be decided against him. In criminal cases no person could be deprived of life or limb without consent of the king and council, the case of wilful mur- der excepted. The president and council of New Hampshire were empowered to commission officers of the militia, who should repel attacks of the enemy. Liberty of conscience was expressly allowed to all Protestants, and the rites of the Church of England were to be particularly countenanced and encour- aged. Taxes were to be levied as usual in the best manner pos- sible, until a general assembly of the province be called and other method agreed upon. Such general assembly was to be sum- moned to meet within three months, who should make such acts, laws and ordinances as should be most for the public good, sub- ject to the approval of the president and council and to be in force till the pleasure of the king and his council were known to the contrary. A transcript of all laws made was to be sent to the king by the first ship departing for England. In case of the death of a councilor the rest of the council should nominate three persons and send their names to the king, who would choose one of the three to fill the vacancy. The commission, moreover, recognized the rightful claims of Robert Mason as proprietor of the lands granted to his grandfather, and the president and coun- cil were urged to reconcile all differences of claimants, if pos- sible, and if not, to send statement of such cases to the king, to- gether with their own opinions. The weak part of this commis- sion, which was equivalent to a constitution, was the following :-
We do hereby declare, that We, our heirs and successors, shall and
10.5.
A HISTORY
will observe and continue this method of grace and favor towards our loving subjects, in convening them in their Assembly, in such manner and form as is hereinbefore mentioned and provided, unless, by inconvenience arising from thence, We, our heirs or successors, shall see cause to alter the same.
This was a gift with a string to it. The same power that could give could take away. The representatives of the people could be dismissed at the wish of the king. They were free to do his will, not their own. So long as his will and theirs coin- cided, all would be well for both. In any event his will must be done. This was unlimited monarchy concealed under the form of a representative government. Under a wise and benevolent sovereign such a form of government was well adapted to the wishes of the colonists, who preferred, as Canada and Australia now prefer, to retain a governmental connection with the mother country. In reality all people prefer to govern themselves, to be independent of the control of others, but since they need the help of others for protection and prosperity, civilized people will submit to be indirectly governed, and often they submit long to misgovernment rather than imperil the small amount of liberty they have.
There were wisdom and cunning in the choice of the presi- dent and council. All of them were Puritans and in favor of the jurisdiction of Massachusetts. They were the leading men of their towns simply because those who differed from them could not get themselves appointed to positions of power. The king's council had not been duped. They knew well the character of the men named in the commission. They knew that the appoint- ment of these men would create less friction and discontent than the appointment of churchmen and royalists. After the new form of government had been once accepted, it would be easy to make changes in the composition of the council. Doubtless the men named in the commission were surprised and the political leaders of Massachusetts smiled grimly, when the names were first heard. Some of the men appointed at first refused to qualify as councilors and were minded to reject the office and honor conferred, namely, Richard Walderne and Richard Martyn, but concluding that if they did not serve in the council other men might be appointed who would be less favorable to their inter-
106
NEW HAMPSHIRE
ests and more inclined to admit the claims of Robert Mason, re- luctantly took their seats in the council after the limit of twenty days had nearly expired. At first they were in favor of rejecting the plan of the king outright, but John Cutt was less headstrong and purposed to obey orders. The commission was brought to Portsmouth by Edward Randolph on the first day of January, 1680; the councilors took their oaths of office on the twenty-first of January, and the commission was published the next day. It is probable that the names were suggested in London by Rob- ert Mason or Edward Randolph in a conciliatory spirit, thinking thus to content the opponents of Mason and win them to obedi- ence to the king's wishes. The council chose three others to sit with them, according to instructions of the commission, and these were Elias Stileman of Great Island, Samuel Dalton of Hampton and Job Clements of Dover. Something more about these men may be of interest.
President John Cutt was reputed to be the wealthiest man in the province. He lived in the Great House, where his brother, Richard Cutt, had lived till his death in 1676, and he owned the greater part of the lands connected therewith, the old Straw- berry Bank. The Combination of 1640 had a way of making grants of Mason's property to suit themselves, and as usual to him that had was given. The wealthiest got the best lands and the largest quantities. John Cutt and his brother Richard served often as selectmen, and their sons-in-law were sharers with them of political power. These were Richard Waldron, Jr., Samuel Penhallow, William Vaughan and Thomas Daniel, all men of wealth and station. Richard Cutt was deputy to the General Court of Massachusetts six terms and associate judge. In the division of lands in 1663 John Cutt had four hundred acres, the largest allotment, and Richard Cutt had three hundred and fifty acres. John Cutt was inclined to admit the claims of Mason and was willing to compensate him for the lands he enjoyed. There is no record that he ever did so. He died April 5, 1681, at an ad- vanced age. His surname has been perpetuated by the descend- ants of his brother, Robert Cutt, or Cutts, a wealthy ship-builder of Kittery.
Richard Martyn received an allotment of sixty-two acres of land in Portsmouth in 1660. His first wife was a daughter of Richard Cutt, and that is enough to account for his prominence.
107
A HISTORY
He served several years as selectman and twice as deputy to the General Court of Massachusetts. He was the first treasurer of the royal province, being removed from office in 1683 by Gov- ernor Cranfield. He was sued by Cranfield and by Mason for the fines and forfeitures received by him as treasurer and dis- tributed for the government of the province with the approval of the council. The decision against him by the council of New Hampshire was reversed by the king's council on appeal. He was appointed judge of the court of common pleas and later was chief justice of the supreme court of judicature, holding this office till his death, April 2, 1694. His second wife was Mary, widow of John Denison and daughter of Samuel Symonds of Ipswich. His third wife was widow of Samuel Wentworth. He left sons, Michael and Nathaniel, and three daughters, Sarah who married John Cutt, Hannah who married Richard Jose, and Elizabeth who married Edward Kennard. That he was opposed to the claims of Mason and to the royal government appears by the following depositions, made April 7, 1681 :-
John Rand and John Bickford of Oyster River testified "that in ffebruary last they with several others came to Portsmouth to agree with Mr. Mason for a confirmation of their lands; they met with Richard Martin, one of the Councill, who dissuaded them from going to Mr. Mason and did tell them that neither the King nor Mr. Mason had no more right to any lands in New England than Robin Hood, and that the Councill were resolved to oppose him."
Joseph Smith of Oyster River testified that "about the beginning of March last he heard Richard Martin Esqr, one of the Councill, to say That the King had nothing to doe in this province nor could grant any lands therein."
William Vaughan is said to have been a Welshman, bred in London under the care of Sir Josiah Child. He is first mentioned in Portsmouth in 1666, then being a merchant of distinction. He married, December 8, 1668, Margaret, daughter of Richard Cutt, by whom he had two sons and six daughters. He sat as justice and judge. Not being in harmony with Governor Cranfield, he was imprisoned by the latter and remained in confinement on Great Island nine months, whence he wrote a long and illuminat- ing letter. Again he became a member of the council and in 1693 was appointed treasurer. He also served as recorder, major in
108
NEW HAMPSHIRE
the militia, and chief justice of the superior court, serving from 1708 till 1716. He died in 1719.
Thomas Daniel appears in Portsmouth in 1669 as a juryman. He served as selectman six years and is called captain in 1676, when he was one of the commissioners to make peace with the eastern Indians. He was associate judge in Portsmouth and in York county. He died in November, 1683, and his widow, who was Bridget, daughter of Capt. Richard Cutt, married Thomas Graffort. There is no record of any children.
John Gilman of Exeter, was a son of Edward Gilman of Hingham, England, who came to Boston in 1638. He was elected a selectman more than a dozen times, commissioner, lot- layer, surveyor of town line, captain and associate judge before being nominated as councilor. He had a grant of two hundred acres of land in 1652, an exclusive grant of water for his grist- mill in 1670, another grant of six hundred acres in 1674 and a hundred more in 1702, so that he cannot be blamed for steady opposition to the claims of Robert Mason and heirs. He was speaker of the House in 1697 and again a delegate to the As- sembly in 1697. He married Elizabeth, daughter of James Tre- worgy and had six sons and ten daughters. He died July 24, 1707, aged 84. Among his descendants have been many dis- tinguished men.
Christopher Hussey was born at Dorking, in Surrey, Eng- land. He married Theodate, daughter of the Rev. Stephen Bachiler, and came to Lynn in 1630, whence he removed to New- bury and later to Hampton. He was one of the most prominent men of Hampton, serving as justice of the peace, lot-layer, mod- erator of town meetings, town clerk and selectman. He was deputy or representative of the town to the General Court of Massachusetts in 1658-60. Two hundred and fifty acres of land were granted to him. He is called lieutenant and captain. Mason won a suit against him, and he was imprisoned, where he was forbidden to work and forced to live on the charity of his friends. He is said to have been cast away on the coast of Florida in 1685, then eighty-seven years old. The family has been well represented in Quaker annals.
Richard Waldern, as he spelled his name, was born in Alces- ter, Warwickshire, about 1615. He came to Dover Neck in 1635 and there purchased land of Capt. Thomas Wiggin. Then he
109
A HISTORY
went back to England, married and returned before 1640, settling at Cochecho Falls. Here he built mills and had large grants of land. He may be regarded as the founder of the city of Dover. He built the meeting house on Dover Neck in 1654. He was six times deputy to General Court from Dover, once from Saco and once from Kittery, and seven times he was elected speaker of the House of Representatives. He was an associate or magis- trate in both Norfolk and York counties. As a military man he is most famous, serving as captain and major and commanding expeditions against the Indians. We have already noticed the part he took in the first Indian war and also his persecution of the Quaker women. We shall have occasion to speak of him often as a member and vice president of the council and opponent of the claims of Robert Mason. He was strongly in favor of the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, and the honors conferred upon him gave him good reason to support the claims of that govern- ment. The following depositions throw some light upon the spirit in which he acted and his great influence in political matters :-
April 7, 1681. Philip Chesey [Chesley] of Oyster River testified that in the year 1665 Major Walderne did say unto him, "You are one of those that petition to have kingly government. You shall have a king and I will be your king," and he hath ever since oppressed the inhabitants.
John Michelmore of Oyster River testified that "major Waldern in the month of ffebruary last said unto him, You Michelmore, you have been with Mr. Mason for a confirmation of yor Lands, for which I will smoke you over the Coales."
Robert Watson of Oyster River testified that "Major Waldern in ffebruary last in the town of Dover did advise severall people not to agree with Mr. Mason for confirmation of their lands, upon hopes there might be alteration of the government in England, and further said that if he were disposessed of his lands by the powers now in England yet he was certain upon the change of government he should be restored."
May 8, 1681. William fforbes [Furbish] of Newichawannock [ upper Kittery] testified that "about two years since he being at the house of Joseph Hammond in the towne of Kittery in the province of Maine Major Waldern, now one of the Councill, took out of his pockett a paper which he read, being in derision of the government of England, and after some discourse said these words, There was no more a king in England than thou, Richard Nason, unto whom he then spoke."1
He was fined five pounds for mutinous and seditious words
1 Colonial Papers, Vol. XLVI, No. 118. Manuscript copy in library of N. H. Hist. Soc'y.
IIO
NEW HAMPSHIRE
and was prosecuted and fined ten pounds for the following lan- guage, as affirmed by Robert Mason, Richard Chamberlain and Joseph Raynes :-
Upon the third day of May 1681, Richard Waldron, Esq., of Cochecho, then Deputy President of this Province, did, upon ye said day above writt, at Strawberry Bank, declare about ye King's letter, then newly brought over by Robert Mason Esq., that they were not ye more bound to believe it because the King had writt it."
He evidently continued to speak against the king and his authority, for in 1685 he was arrested as a perturber of the peace. After this he remained without office. The manner of his death will be told in another chapter.2
Elias Stileman, born about 1617, was son of Elias Stileman, an early settler of Salem, Mass. He removed to Portsmouth before 1658. He was selectman at least fifteen times and deputy to the General Court six times, filling other minor town offices. As captain in the militia he had command of the fort on Great Island several years. He was first secretary of the Provincial Council, and in 1681 Deputy President. He represented Ports- mouth in the Assembly in 1692 and 1695. He is called Major Stileman in 1692, when he was made chief justice of the court of common pleas. He died December 19, 1695, aged 78.
Samuel Dalton was son of Philemon Dalton and nephew of the Rev. Timothy Dalton of Hampton, who came from England to Watertown in 1635 and thence to Hampton in 1640. He was town clerk in 1653, selectman ten years and deputy to the Gen- eral Court thirteen times. He was also a judge in Norfolk county and treasurer. Altogether he was one of the most promi- nent and useful men in his town, popular as a public official be- cause of high character and abilities. He died August 22, 1681, having had six sons and eight daughters.
Job Clements was son of Robert Clements of Haverhill, Massachusetts, who came over in 1640. He removed to Dover in 1652, living as a tanner on Dover Neck. He had large grants of land, was selectman six years and commissioner for the trial of small cases. He died in 1683 while holding the office of coun- cilor.
2 Coll. of N. H. Hist. Soc'y. Vol. VIII, p. 339. The excellent biographical sketches of the Councilors, contained in that volume, have here been utilized.
III
A HISTORY
All of the first councilors had lived in New England between thirty and forty years and knew well the wishes and needs of the people. All were opposed to the claims of Robert Mason, except perhaps Job Clements. All were men of considerable wealth, gained in commerce. The planters were not represented in the council. Indeed not many of them were permitted to vote and send representatives to the Assembly. The selectmen of the four towns sent to the president and council lists of the names and estates of the inhabitants. The council selected from these lists the names of such persons as they judged qualified to be voters and great complaint was made that many fit persons were left out of the lists. Thus the council had opportunity to determine indirectly who the assemblymen should be, and they doubtless improved the opportunity. The number of qualified voters in Portsmouth was seventy-one; in Dover, sixty-one; in Hampton, fifty-seven, and in Exeter, twenty, making a total of two hundred and nine voters out of about five hundred that paid taxes the same year. The election of the assemblymen was held March 9, and the deputies chosen were, for Portsmouth, Robert Eliot, Philip Lewis and John Pickering; for Dover, Peter Coffin, An- thony Nutter and Richard Waldron, Jr .; for Hampton, Anthony Stanyan, Thomas Marston and Edward Gove; and for Exeter, Bartholomew Tippen and Ralph Hall. The Assembly met at Portsmouth March 16 and was opened by prayer and a sermon by the Rev. Joshua Moody. President Cutt named Richard Wal- dern as his deputy or vice-president ; Richard Martyn was chosen treasurer and John Roberts marshal.
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.