USA > New Hampshire > History of New Hampshire, Volume II > Part 16
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
This account by Ira Allen of the formation of the union between the grants on the east side the river with Vermont is substantially accurate, though it must be remembered that Allen had all the time been personally opposed to the union, and that this account is given as a reply to the protest made under date of August 22, 1778 by President Meshech Weare to Gov- ernor Chittenden against the action of Vermont, and in ex- tenuation of such action. The "long and tedious debates" mentioned by Allen closed March 17th when the proposals for articles of union submitted by the delegation from the United Committees were ordered by the Vermont Assembly to be sub- mitted to a vote of the Vermont towns. At the same time it was mutually agreed that there should be a like submission to a general convention of all the towns in Grafton and Cheshire to be held in Lebanon on the last Wednesday in May. The proposals were signed by Elisha Payne, Bezaleel Woodward, Abel Stevens, Samuel Chase, Nehemiah Estabrook and Jonathan Chase. The preamble is of decided interest, as indicating the attitude of the New Hampshire towns :
To the Honorable General Assembly of the State of Vermont, now held at Windsor in and for said State :
We the subscribers a committee appointed by delegates of the towns of Cornish, Surrey, Lempster, Marlow, Acworth, Plainfield, New Grantham, Lebanon, Enfield, Hanover, Canaan, Cardigan, Lyme, Plymouth, Orford, Piermont, Haverhill, Bath, Lyman and Gunthwaite, (20) all lying and being on the New Hampshire Grants, so called, east of Connecticut River, beg leave to represent that by the Declaration of Independence of the United States, all connections which ever subsisted between the aforesaid Grants and any state were dissolved; whereby it becomes necessary for the inhabitants thereof to subject themselves to some regular form of government, and as
18I
A HISTORY
their local and other circumstances render it convenient for them to unite with the State of Vermont, the delegates above mentioned, appointed us to confer with the inhabitants on the New Hampshire Grants west of said river (by convention or otherwise relative to a union with them, etc.).
That besides the towns above named we have confidence from informa- tion, that the towns of Croyden, Dresden, Dorchester, Cockermouth, Went- worth, Rumney, Campton, Trecothick, Warren, Landaff, Morristown, (II) and sundry other towns on the said Grants will unite in the measure; and would have united in the appointment of this Committee had they due in- formation and opportunity thereto.
Therefore in order to lay a foundation for such union, we the com- mittee beg leave to propose the following Articles of Union.
These articles were five in number. The Ist was as follows:
That the inhabitants of all the towns on said Grants which lie east of Connecticut river, and west of the western line of the State of New Hampshire, or the Patent line so called, or so many of said towns as shall consent and agree thereto, be united with the State of Vermont as the same is described in the Declaration of Independence, bearing date January 15th, 1777, provided they amount to a considerable number of inhabited towns, and that these two territories be united into one entire and distinct State by the name of Vermont.
The second article consisted of certain additions to and alterations in the constitution of the State of Vermont mostly relating to the judiciary of the State with certain actions made necessary by the union. The third article provided that all costs which had arisen to the Grants on each side the river previous to the union be defrayed by the Grants on each side separately. The fourth article provided that the union should take place when assented to by the major part of the towns represented in the Vermont Assembly and to be binding only on such towns east of the river as should assent thereto; and the fifth article provided that as soon as the union should take place, "the towns on the Grants east of the Connecticut river which shall agree thereto (provided they shall amount to any considerable number of inhabited towns), shall have right of representation in the General Assembly of said State agreeable to the afore-mentioned constitution."
It was voted by the Vermont House that these articles of union be laid before the Vermont towns for their approval or disapproval. Of the forty-seven towns making returns thirty- five favored the union and twelve opposed. The opposition
I82
NEW HAMPSHIRE
came from the Bennington party, and as has been seen from the letter of Ira Allen already quoted, the claim was made that most of the towns voted under a misapprehension that New Hampshire was entirely indifferent to the movement, and that the attitude of the New Hampshire government had been will- fully misrepresented by the leaders of the United Committees. Furthermore it was claimed, and justifiably so, that most of the Vermont towns west of the mountains and north of the southern extremity of Lake Champlain had been abandoned, the year previous, by their inhabitants at the time of Burgoyne's advance and were neither represented in the legislature, nor had been able to vote upon the question, and furthermore the vote had not been a direct one by the people, but had been by towns.
There is no record existing of the Convention of delegates from the towns east of the river held at Lebanon the last Wednesday in May, but there is evidence that it was largely attended. The articles of union with Vermont were adopted, and an adjournment was taken to June 24 at Orford, a date which it was believed would be subsequent to the adjournment of the Vermont Assembly, which was to convene at Bennington June II. On this date the representatives of the towns of Cornish, Lebanon, Dresden, Lyme, Orford, Piermont, Haver- hill, Bath, Lyman, Apthorp (Littleton), Enfield, Canaan, Cardigan (Orange), Landaff, Gunthwaite (Lisbon) and Mor- ristown (Franconia) presented themselves at Bennington, and were admitted to the legislature by a vote of thirty-seven to twelve. At the Cornish Convention in March seven Cheshire county towns were represented, but only one of these, Cornish, came into the union in June. The other fifteen were Grafton County towns. The influence of both the Bennington and the Exeter parties was beginning to be felt especially in Cumberland and Cheshire Counties, and was destined to be still more power- ful after the consummation of the union.
As was expected the Assembly at Bennington adjourned June 18, previous to which the sixteen towns east of the river were invested with all the powers and privileges of other Ver- mont towns, and provision was made for the admission of such other towns as might desire it on the same terms. The ad-
183
A HISTORY
journed meeting of the United Committees held at Orford was supposed to be its last, since the chief purpose of the organiza- tion had been accomplished, and it proceeded to wind up its affairs before final dissolution. It recommended to the in- habitants of the towns east of Connecticut river who had lately united with Vermont, "strictly to comply with and obey those rules which may come to them from Authority of the State of Vermont, or by desire of any general or field officer on the Continental Establishment, or commanding officer on this river, through the hands of those military officers who were latest commissioned over them by the State of New Hampshire." It recommended that town meetings be held on the first Tuesday in July for the choice of a justice of the peace for each town, and that arrangements be made for admitting to the privilege of Freemen the inhabitants of the newly admitted towns. It also appointed a committee to receive and adjust accounts of claims for services rendered in completing the union with the State of Vermont. It recommended that estates in the pro- bate office of the County of Grafton be proceeded upon in that office in the name and by the authority of the State of Vermont until the next General Assembly of that State.
The chairman of the United Committees, Nehemiah Esta- brook, was directed to send the following communication to Meshech Weare, president of the Council of New Hampshire announcing the union of the sixteen towns with Vermont:
The Convention of Committees from the several towns mentioned in the enclosed copies take this opportunity to transmit to you as President of the Council of the State of New Hampshire, a resolve of the Assembly of the State of Vermont relative to a union of said towns, &c., with them, by which you will be advised of the political situation of these united towns and others on the Grants who may comply with said resolve. We hope, notwithstanding an entire separation has now taken place between your state and these towns, that an amicable settlement may be come into at a proper time between the State of New Hampshire and those towns on the Grants that unite with the State of Vermont, relative to all civil and mili- tary affairs transacted with the State of New Hampshire since the com- mencement of the war to the time of said Union so that amity and friend- ship may subsist and continue between the two states.
The Vermont legislature had adjourned to meet at Windsor, October 8. In the interval between the adjournment
184
NEW HAMPSHIRE
at Bennington and the meeting at Windsor, Hanover which was not represented at the June session and several other of the Grafton County towns, and a few of the Cheshire County towns also had accepted the act of union, and Dartmouth College on petition of the trustees was taken under the pro- tection of Vermont, and President Wheelock was made by that State a justice of the peace. The New Hampshire government at Exeter, however, had no idea of relinquishing its jurisdic- tion over these seceding towns, nor had the Bennington party acceded to the union in good faith, and both were busy. President Weare, under date of August 19, 1778, wrote Josiah Bartlett and John Wentworth, delegates from New Hampshire in Congress, enclosing the letter of Nehemiah Estabrook above quoted, asking them to use their best efforts to secure the intervention of Congress for the nullification of the act of the sixteen towns in question and "the pretended State of Ver- mont." He claimed that one-third at least, nearly one-half the people in the defective towns were averse to the proceedings of the majority, and feared that "the affair would end in the shedding of blood." He also charged that Col. Timothy Bedel of Haverhill, who had been an active member of the so-called United Committees, had "received great sums from Congress or their generals under pretence of paying men for service they never did, and by the influence of said money has occasioned a great share of the disorders in those towns." In closing his letter he said: "Unless Congress interferes (whose admonition only will be obeyed) I know not what consequences will follow: very possible the sword will decide it, as the minority in those towns are claiming protection from this State, and they think themselves bound by every tie to afford it."
Three days later he wrote Governor Chittenden of Ver- mont protesting against the action which had been taken, and characterizing the claim that the sixteen towns had not been connected with any state with respect to their internal policy, as "an idle phantom, a mere chimera without the least shadow of reason for its support." Continuing he wrote: "Were not these towns settled and cultivated under the grant of the Gov- ernor of New Hampshire? Are they not within the lines thereof as settled by the King of Great Britain prior to the present
185
A HISTORY
era? Is there any ascertaining the boundaries between any of the United States of America, but by the lines formerly established by the Authority of Great Britain? I am sure there is not. Did not the most of these towns send delegates to the Convention of this State in the year 1775? It is well known they did-and that New Hampshire, at its own expense hath supplied them with arms, ammunition, etc., to a very great amount, as well as paid soldiers for their particular defence,- and all at their request, as members of this State-whence then could this new doctrine, that they were not connected with us, originate? I earnestly desire that this matter may be seriously attended to."
He called the attention of Governor Chittenden to the diffi- culties in the way of the admission of Vermont into the con- federacy of the United States, and intimated that by connecting Vermont with towns belonging to the State of New Hampshire these difficulties were being largely increased.
On receipt of this letter, Governor Chittenden, who had from the inception of the matter been opposed to the union, convened the Council, and Ethan Allen was designated to go to Philadelphia, ostensibly to ascertain the views entertained by Congress of the proceeding of Vermont, but really, as the sequel indicated, to work for a dissolution of the union which had been formed.
The Exeter government also, depending not alone on the protests of President Weare, issued precepts for the election of members to its third General Assembly, these precepts con- taining a direction to the people to instruct the Assembly, should they see fit, through the representatives whom they should choose, to call a new Constitutional Convention. This action was not without its influence, and many towns were in- fluenced to await further developments before casting in their lot irrevocably with Vermont, preferring to hold aloof from both New Hampshire and Vermont, recognizing the authority of neither. The result of this was that when the Vermont Assembly met again at Windsor, October 8, only eleven New Hampshire towns, all in Grafton County, were represented, viz., Lebanon, Dresden, Hanover, Canaan, Cardigan (Orange), Or- ford, Piermont, Haverhill, Gunthwaite (Lisbon) and Landaff.
186
NEW HAMPSHIRE
From these towns, however, came the leading spirits of the College party east of the river, and at the organization of the House everything seemed to promise smooth sailing for the friends of the union. Bezaleel Woodward was elected clerk and was a member of every important committee of that body, the election sermon was delivered by the Rev. Eden Burroughs, pastor of the Eastern Church of Hanover, and Alden Spooner, who had been imported by the College with his printing press from Connecticut was chosen public printer.
On the 10th came the report of Ethan Allen relative to his mission to Philadelphia. He said he had been to Philadel- phia to ascertain concerning the political situation of the State of Vermont so far as Congress was concerned, that he had discovered that New Hampshire had emphatically remonstrated against the union of the towns east of the river with Vermont; that New York had made allegations against Vermont opposing to admission as a State into the Confederacy, and that had it not been for his timely arrival, the probability was that the State of Vermont would have been annihilated. He reported that he had secured postponement of action on the part of Congress, until Vermont by action of its General Assembly could be heard in the matter. He did not believe that the claims of New York would be regarded by Congress, as of suffi- cient force to prevent the establishment of Vermont, but he regarded the attitude of New Hampshire as of a more serious and threatening character. He said: "From what I have seen and heard of the disapprobation, at Congress, of the union with sundry towns, east of Connecticut river, I am sufficiently authorized to offer it as my opinion, that, except this State recede from such union immediately, the whole power of the Confederacy of the United States of America will join to anni- hilate the State of Vermont, and to vindicate the right of New Hampshire to maintain, inviolate, the articles of confederation, which guarantee to each state their privileges and immunities."
Allen did not in this report make mention of the fact, of which a little later, in a letter to President Weare, he boasted, that while in Philadelphia, he came to a secret understanding with Josiah Bartlett, delegate from New Hampshire to the effect that if the union of the New Hampshire towns should be
187
A HISTORY
dissolved, Bartlett would use his influence to secure for Ver- mont Congressional recognition. The remonstrance of Presi- dent Weare addressed to Governor Chittenden the preceding August was introduced coincident with the report of Allen, and the whole subject was discussed for several days in joint com- mittee of the whole, and by a sub-committee consisting of Governor Chittenden, Jonas Fay, Lieut .- Gov. Marsh and Bezaleel Woodward. The matter came to a vote October 20, decidedly in favor of the union and Ethan Allen, Elisha Payne, Jonas Fay, Bezaleel Woodward and Jacob Bayley were made a special committee to prepare and publish a vindication of the action taken.
What the Bennington party were unable to directly accom- plish in the way of a dissolution of the union, they seem to have obtained by indirection. The protest of New Hampshire evidently had large influence, and so the very next day after the vote favorable to union when the college party introduced practical measures for erecting the towns east of the river into a county, or annexing them to the existing county of Gloucester, they were defeated, several of the towns in Eastern Vermont voting with the majority. Three questions were proposed :
Ist. Whether the counties in this state shall remain as they were estab- lished by the Assembly in March last? Yeas, 35. Nays, 26.
2d. Whether the towns east of the river included in the Union with this state, shall be included in the County of Cumberland? Yeas, 28. Nays, 33.
3d. Whether the towns on the East side of Connecticut River, who are included by Union within this state, shall be erected into additional county by themselves? Yeas, 28. Nays, 33.
Naturally these votes were regarded as rescinding the union, inasmuch as they disallowed any and all of the sixteen towns involved any connection either with the already established. counties of Vermont, or any county by themselves. The act of union had guaranteed to these towns "the same privileges and immunities enjoyed by the other towns in the State." These votes of October 22 were a plain denial of such rights. The representatives from the New Hampshire towns, twelve in number, also twelve from ten Vermont towns bordering on the river north of Windsor and in the vicinity of Hanover, the Lieutenant-Governor Joseph Marsh, two members of the
188
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Council, Col. Peter Olcott and Thomas Murdock, at once with- drew, and assembling by themselves laid before the legislature their solemn protest against the action taken the day before.
Bezaleel Woodward also resigned his office as clerk of the House. Their action was somewhat precipitate, but it is not unlikely that they believed the Assembly would be left without a quorum by their withdrawal. If, however, they hoped to embarrass the Bennington party they reckoned without their host, if anything may be judged from the tone of the letters written the next day, October 23, by Governor Chittenden and Ethan Allen to President Weare of New Hampshire. The former wrote that the Council and Assembly had "resolved that no additional exercise of jurisdictional authority be had (by this State) east of Connecticut river for the time being; on which resolution the members who appeared to represent those sixteen towns east of the said river, said to be united to this State, have entered their dissent on the minutes of the house and withdrawn: under which circumstances they can have no pretensions to any claim of protection from this State."
Ethan Allen wrote: "In conformity to my engagement to Col. Bartlett, one of the members of Congress from New Hamp- shire, I am induced to write your honor respecting a number of towns to the eastward of Connecticut river, which inadvertently, by influence of designing men, have lately been brought into union with the State of Vermont :- which in my opinion is now entirely dissolved. I engaged Col. Bartlett to use my influence at this Assembly for that purpose. The union I ever viewed to be incompatible with the right of New Hampshire, and have punctually discharged my obligation to Col. Bartlett for its dissolution : and that worthy gentleman on his part as- sured me, that he had no directions from the government of New Hampshire, to extend their claims to the westward of Connecticut river, to interfere with the State of Vermont; and I hope that the government of New Hampshire will excuse the imbecility of Vermont in this matter. I apprehend Col. Payne had a principal influence in it and it was with difficulty the Assembly got rid of him. I am appointed by this Assembly to act as agent for the State of Vermont, at Congress, where I shall shortly repair, and defend that New Hampshire will ac-
189
A HISTORY
cede to the independency of Vermont, as the late obstacles are honorably removed."
Ethan Allen was not accustomed to the language of di- plomacy, but went straight to the point. If his word is to be trusted there was an understanding between Exeter and Ben- nington relative to the dissolution of the union of New Hamp- shire towns with Vermont. Allen has fulfilled his part of the contract, and asks New Hampshire to fulfill hers. There was a jubilant tone to his letter to President Weare.
On the other hand, it is not so certain that the leaders of the College party were greatly aggrieved by the turn in affairs. They left the Assembly immediately, standing not on the order of their going. The protest they filed was signed by twelve members on each side the river, and of the three other signers, Joseph Marsh, lieutenant-governor, and Councilor Peter Olcott were also from Vermont. In their protest they declared that the Assembly had by its votes of the 21st1 "totally destroyed the Constitution of the State, by Depriving those Towns included in the Union of the Exercise of Jurisdiction, power or privilege granted them; and the Confederation by which the towns in the State are combined and held together as one body; and as no political Body can exercise a partial jurisdiction by virtue of a Confederation or agreement for the people, to exercise Govern- ment over the whole; it is therefore either void, or destroys both the Confederation and Constitution. We do therefore publicly declare and make known that we cannot, consistent with our Oaths and Engagements to this State, exercise any office or place either Legislative, Executive or Judicial in this State, but look upon ourselves as being thereby Discharged from any and every former Confederation and Association with this State."
In other words, they declared that there was a total absolu- tion, not only of the New Hampshire towns included in the Union, but of all other towns as well from the bonds of con- federation by which they had been held together as one State. The State of Vermont which had been formed by a confedera- tion of towns, through town delegates, as such, had in con- vention adopted a constitution, which had never been submitted
1 N. H. State Papers, Vol. X, p. 286.
190
NEW HAMPSHIRE
to the people for approval or disapproval. In fact, both parties to the controversy, the Allens, Chittendens and Fays on the one hand, as well as the Woodwards, Estabrooks, Paynes and Bayleys on the other, held to the theory that the State was simply a confederation of towns, to which the people first of all owed allegiance, and through which alone they were related to the State. It was in no sense a direct union of the people regardless of their town charters and incorporations.
The State of Vermont had been wiped out of existence. The towns were free to unite as they saw fit, and the leaders of the College party saw their dream of a new state in the Con- necticut Valley, embracing the towns east of the Green Moun- tains, and west of the Masonian patent line, with its seat of Government in the College town of Dresden, or Hanover, give promise of realization. They would give the Vermont As- sembly a chance to rescind its action, were it done immediately, but there would be no waiting policy on their part. The seced- ing representatives from the ten towns of Hartford, Sharon, Corinth, Morestown, Fairlee, Royalton, Norwich, Barnet, Wil- mington and Strafford, all in Gloucester County, except Hart- ford and Wilmington, and the nine Grafton County towns of Cardigan, Enfield, Canaan, Dresden, Hanover, Lebanon, Haver- hill, Gunthwaite and Orford, immediately organized with Lieu- tenant-Governor Marsh as chairman and Bezaleel Woodward as clerk. They voted to call a convention of the towns in the valley to meet at Corinth, December 9, 1778, and also drew up an ad- dress to Congress, protesting against any recognition of Vermont under conditions then existing, which address they sent by the hand of Col. John Wheelock, son of President Eleazer Whee- lock, with instruction to give such other information to Con- gress as might seem expedient or desirable. This address was written by Lieutenant-Governor Marsh and briefly recited the events leading up to the withdrawal of the members of the As- sembly, the Council and himself, from the Vermont State govern- ment, and protested against any action which would, by an acknowledgment by Congress, form a new State containing only that part of the Grants which lies west of the Connecticut river. Much dependence was placed on the influence of Col. Wheelock with members of Congress on account of his engaging manners and attractive personality.
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.