USA > New Hampshire > Merrimack County > Canterbury > History of the town of Canterbury, New Hampshire, 1727-1912, v. 1 > Part 24
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46
252
HISTORY OF CANTERBURY.
the individuals in discharging their town duties resulting in their defeat at the next election.
It will thus be seen why the business of the annual town meeting required more than one day. Exciting as the first day was, it was often eclipsed in interest by the day that followed, even when none of the work laid out for the first day had to be postponed. On the second day came the selection of minor officials, such as highway surveyors, hogreeves, field drivers, sometimes called haywards,1 fence viewers, superintending school committee, pound keeper, etc. These positions were not usually sought, but the practice was to fill them by nominations from the floor. Young men were sometimes complimented by elec- tions as highway surveyors, while a newly married man was very likely to be chosen a hogreeve at the election following his marriage.
It was on the second day, moreover, that the citizens took up and analyzed the reports of the selectmen, the auditors and the superintending school committee and that votes of instruction or of censure were given to town officials. Sometimes, as has been seen, the articles in the warrant foreshadowed what was coming, but more frequently a discussion would arise from a wholly unexpected quarter, provoked by some criticism of official action.
At this time the old town house of Canterbury became a place of great excitement. The large open area extending lengthwise of the building from the door to the moderator's desk was filled with voters, while the aged and infirm sought the seats at the sides.2 From the front seats the speakers usually addressed the presiding officer and made their talks, a large part of the audience standing on the floor below. The moderator's desk was elevated so that this official was protected from any turbulent individual who desired to create a disturbance. The presiding officer was almost always one of the prominent citizens of Canterbury whose service in the legislature or experience in public gatherings had made him reasonably familiar with parliamentary practice. The contentions were earnest and the debates lively, often tinctured with spicy personalities which the moderator labored in vain to check. For the most part the discussion was carried
1 Act of February 8, 1791.
2 The town house was the old town church cut down one story, the seats being the gallery of the meeting house.
253
LEADING MEN OF CANTERBURY.
on by the older men of the town, but the youngsters of ability could always secure attention.
The leading men of Canterbury for the second quarter of the nineteenth century were well distributed over the town. In proximity to the Center were Dr. Joseph M. Harper, Squire Joseph Clough, Ezekiel Morrill, son of Masten Morrill, Laban Morrill, son of Samuel A. Morrill, James Elkins and Richard Greenough. In the Hill's Corner school district were Amos Cogswell, Dudley Hill, Gardner T. Barker, Joseph Ham, Jr., and Otis Young. At the Baptist was Elder Jeremiah Clough. In the western part of the town were Tristram Dow, Dea. John A. Chamberlain and Andrew Taylor. At the Borough or Pallet Borough, as it was also called, were John J. Bryant, Joseph Lyford, Jr., and Benjamin Sanborn, while at Hackleborough were members of the Foster family.
For almost a generation prior to the Civil War "Squire" Joseph Clough was one of the most prominent men in the political, religious and business life of Canterbury. A grandson of Thomas Clough, one of the first settlers, he seemed to have inherited the sterling qualities so pronounced in his ancestor. In a town hav- ing no lawyer, he was the adviser of his neighbors in business affairs and he was frequently at their service in making convey- ances of property, drawing wills and settling estates.
"Squire" Clough was a model presiding officer, dignified and courteous in his bearing. Of commanding ability and large information, he would have been a leader in the state had his lot been cast in a more favorable environment. There was not a town office of importance that he was not called upon to fill. Elected to the legislature, he took a prominent part in its pro- ceedings and later he became a member of the council during the administrations of Governors Jared W. Williams and Samuel Dinsmore, Jr.
At his home he dispensed a liberal hospitality, and more public men were entertained in the "Mansion House" than in all the other homes in Canterbury. Elder John Chamberlain at his funeral, remarking on Mr. Clough's guests, said, "At this fireside have been entertained those who became governors of states, congressmen and senators, judges of the Supreme Court and even a president of the United States."1
1 Franklin Pierce.
254
HISTORY OF CANTERBURY.
In 1838 Mr. Clough was ordained a minister of the Freewill Baptist Church and preached in Canterbury and the neighboring towns. A representative man, his entire life was one of helpful- ness to his fellowmen.
A close rival to Squire Joseph Clough in political influence was Elder Jeremiah Clough until he entered the service of the min- istry. He was a man of ability and integrity. His election to the legislature in 1831 and 1832 was when he was a comparatively young man, and had his inclinations to politics continued, there is every reason to believe that he would have occupied a command- ing position in the state. Fervent of speech, enthusiastic in purpose, he had all the attributes of a popular leader.
Amos Cogswell succeeded his father as the local "Squire" at Hill's Corner, transacting the legal business of his neighbors necessary to their conveying property during life and administer- ing on their estates after death. His election as town clerk. in 1841 and 1842 was at a time when the Corner was a thriving com- munity and bidding fair to become the business village of the town. After holding various town offices, he was elected to the state senate in 1838 and 1839.
Ezekiel Morrill, son of Masten Morrill, was one of the substan- tial citizens of Canterbury, and through a long life was held in high esteem. The records of the town attest his activity and the confidence of his fellow-townsmen. For a series of years he was almost continuously in office, receiving in 1836 the nearly unanimous vote of Canterbury for the office of member of the governor's council. He was a state senator and a councillor for two terms each.
For a period of twenty years following 1839 the town was in litigation over the laying out of new highways. Petitions for these roads would be addressed to the selectmen who, after notice and hearing, would determine whether the public good required such a highway to be laid out and built. If they denied the petition, the applicants could appeal to the county court for a hearing. The petition was then referred to a committee of three men appointed by the court, or to the road commissioners of the county, after these officials were provided for by statute, who heard the parties and made their report to the court. What- ever the action of the county tribunal, there was still opportunity for appeals for a rehearing or to the higher court on questions
. STEVENS-BRADLEY HOUSE .
."MASTER" PARKINSON HOUSE ยท HOME OF ELDER JEREMIAH CLOUGH .
RESIDENCE OF HERBERT L BROWN-HOMESTEAD OF JOSEPH GERRISH
255
LITIGATION OVER HIGHWAYS.
of law. Few matters were ever fought with greater pertinacity than those relating to the laying out of new highways.
Usually the proposed road accommodated but a few individuals and the sentiment of the town would be decidedly against the expenditure necessary to build it. Oftentimes the new highway was to take the place of an old one, shortening the distance or saving a hill. As most of the highways of Canterbury traversed the lines of the early settlements, or followed the range roads north and south, and east and west, they were naturally hilly. When it was proposed to avoid these elevations by petitioning for a new highway, or the desire was to make a more direct route between two points, the request did not directly appeal to the people of other sections of the town who seldom had occasion to use either the old road or the proposed new highway. There- fore, when the selectmen, looking to the financial interest of the larger number, refused a petition for a highway, the town was generally disposed to instruct them to oppose its laying out by the county authorities.
-
The story of the contest for a highway from Canterbury across Merrimack River to Boscawen Plain, which involved the build- ing of a bridge, has already been told.1 There was litigation for a full decade. Other highway controversies in Canterbury were not so long drawn out, but they were the occasion of frequent town meetings, and of sharp and bitter controversy.
A special town meeting was held September 16, 1839, "to see if the town will choose an agent to make defence against the report or doings of the committee 2 in laying out a road from Sanbornton Bridge to Carter's Tavern in Concord."
Another article in the warrant was "to see if the town will authorize the selectmen to make alterations in the road from Northfield line north of Jonathan Ayers to Concord line by making a new road and graduating the hills."
The proposed highway was in the western part of the town on the route from Concord to Sanbornton Bridge (Tilton), east of the Merrimack River. It was evidently to take the place of an old road in part, and it was to contribute to the comfort of travelers by avoiding hard grades. The town records indicate that the project was promoted by Concord people, as they refer
Chapter IX.
2 Committee of the Merrimack County Court.
256
HISTORY OF CANTERBURY.
to the highway "as laid out on the petition of John P. Gass and others." Mr. Gass was a hotel keeper at the capital of the state. While the controversy over this petition was still in court, another petition was presented by Laban Morrill and other citizens of Canterbury for a highway running in the same general direction, but over a different route. The probability that this petition would also be granted by the county authorities led to a town meeting in March, 1842, to take the sense of the voters on their choice of the two routes, over one of which it was evident the town would have to build a highway. It was voted seventy-eight to sixty-eight to favor the road petitioned for by Mr. Gass. In March, 1844, the town voted to discontinue the road which had been laid out by the road commissioners upon the petition of Laban Morrill.
The story of this controversy is not of sufficient general interest to justify the narration of all the details. Two attempts were made, one in 1844 and the other in 1848, to discontinue parts of the old highway which the new road had superseded in public use. Both failed, but at a special town meeting September 16, 1848, there was an article in the warrant "to see if the town will discontinue the old road or any part thereof leading from John J. Bryant's south to its intersection with the new road near Jonathan Randall's, and, in case of discontinuance, to lay out a new highway from the south side of the bridge on the new road south of Bryant's across to Susan Arlyn's house and also to open and establish the road from Reuben R. Hutchin's across to the new road near the house of Jonathan Glines." The town voted to adopt this article.
Another contest for a change in the route of travel which provoked strenuous opposition related to a highway leading from the Shakers to Hill's Corner. The old road ran north from the Shaker Village over a high hill, the top of which is said to be the most elevated point on the traveled highway between Concord and Meredith. The grade in several places was very steep and difficult of ascent, especially by loaded teams. The Shakers were interested with others, having occasion to frequently use the road, and under the lead of David Parker, their principal trustee, petitioned for a new highway around this hill.
At the annual meeting in 1840, there was an article in the warrant "to see if the town will raise any money to lay out on
257
OPPOSITION TO THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC.
the old road between Amos Cogswell and the Shakers graduating the hills to prevent making the new road."
The town appointed Andrew Taylor, Richard Greenough and John Peverly a committee to expend $1,200 on the old road, provided said expenditure would satisfy the petitioners for the new road.
The town records show that the petition for the new highway was taken to the court and that a committee appointed by that tribunal laid out the road. For more than a year the town continued to treat with the petitioners to avoid the necessity of building it, going so far as to offer to spend as much money in grading the hills of the old highway as they later voted to appro- priate for constructing the new one. Nothing came of these negotiations, however. It may seem strange to anyone visiting the locality at the present time that serious opposition should have been made to this improvement, but to a great part of the town, whose business affairs took them in other directions, this particular highway was without interest and of no individual benefit.
Canterbury very early indicated its disapproval of the liquor traffic. In 1832 the selectmen were instructed to prosecute any person who retailed spirituous liquors without a license. At the annual meeting two years later, they were requested "not to approbate any individual as a retailer of spirituous liquors for the current year." How far the selectmen followed this instruction the records do not show, but, in 1836, the town took advance ground in favor of state-wide prohibition. At the annual meeting the following resolutions were adopted:
"Whereas it is believed that the use of ardent spirits as a drink is injurious to the health, interest and morals of the com- munity and, as retailing houses are public nuisances and the prin- cipal cause of the perpetration of drunkenness, misery and crime, therefore,
"Resolved that the present board of selectmen be requested to withhold licenses from such the present year.
"Voted that the selectmen be instructed to petition the legis- lature at their next session in the name of the town of Canterbury to repeal the law granting licenses to sell spirituous liquors."
At this same meeting the town fathers were instructed "to prosecute to final judgment and execution" any person found 18
258
HISTORY OF CANTERBURY.
selling liquor unlawfully. Apparently no licenses were issued by the selectmen for the greater part of this year, as, at a meeting in November, the spring instructions were so far modified that the selectmen were given authority "to license any suitable person or persons to keep tavern." The selling of liquor in the stores probably ceased about this time.
That the people were in earnest is shown by another vote authorizing the selectmen "to call upon the militia or any part thereof to stop the sale of ardent spirits on Muster Day or any other day while under duty."
The subject does not appear in the records again until the annual meeting in 1848. The legislature at its June session, 1847, adopted a resolution to take the sense of the voters of the state on the question, "Is it expedient that a law be enacted by the General Court prohibiting the sale of wines and other spirituous liquors except for chemical, medicinal and mechanical pur- poses?" The vote was taken at the March meeting the next year. The yeas and nays were demanded on this question in Canterbury and the record shows 110 voting in favor of a pro- hibitory law and only eleven against it. The sentiment of the town ever since 1834, when its people first declared against granting licenses for the sale of liquor, has been in favor of pro- hibition. Few towns of the state have a record of seventy-five years' consecutive opposition to the liquor traffic.
The legislature of 1844 passed a resolution requiring the sense of the voters of the state to be taken on the question of abolishing capital punishment.1 At a town meeting held November 4, that year, Canterbury voted on this question. The record gives the names voting-in favor of abolition and those against it. It is a remarkable showing, the vote standing seventy-five to do away with capital punishment to only thirty-five to retaining it.2 The sentiment of the state was largely the other way, but there is no official compilation of the vote. The roll of Canterbury voters on this subject is here given:
Yeas-Jonathan Ayers, Jr., Alfred Abbot, William Brown, Alexander G. W. Bradley, Nahum Blanchard, Jacob Blodgett, John J. Bryant, Abiel F. Bradley, John L. Bradley, Enoch.
1 Resolution approved June 18, 1844.
2 The record shows thirty-six against abolishing capital punishment, but the name of Enoch Gibson appears twice in the negative vote.
259
SENTIMENT ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.
Bradley, Ebenezer Bachelder, Samuel Buswell, Stephen Barnard, Joseph Clough, William S. Currier, Moses Carter, Abiel Cogs- well, Amos Cogswell, Solomon M. Clifford, Lucien B. Clough, John Chamberlain, Tristram Dearborn, Moody Emery, Nathan Emery, Jr., Jeremiah C. Elliot, James S. Elkins, Joseph M. Foster, William H. Foster, Benjamin Foster, Ebenezer Glover, James M. Glines, Hiram G. Haines, Joseph M. Harper, Mark Davis, Asa Foster, Adam Foster, Trueworthy Hill, Joseph Ham, Jr., William Hancock, Ira Huntoon, Nathaniel P. Ingalls, John Kezer, Joseph Kezer, John B. Knowles, Perley Knowles, John Lake, Thomas Lyford, John P. Lock, Daniel G. Leavitt, David Morrill, David Morrill, Jr., Laban Morrill, John S. Moore, Van Ranselear Moore, Samuel Neal, Edward Osgood, William M. Patrick, Billy E. Pillsbury, John Snider, Jr., Samuel Sargent, Edward L. Sargent, Benjamin Sanborn, Daniel Sanborn, Hazen Sanborn, Joseph W. Scales, Royal Scales, Thomas S. Smith, Christopher Snider, Amos C. Shaw, James Tallant, James Tallant, Jr., Samuel Tallant, Andrew Taylor, Andrew B. Taylor, Solomon Young.
Nays-Jonathan Ayers, Albert Ames, Fisher Ames, Jacob Blanchard, Phineas D. Butman, Jerome B. Blanchard, Thomas Clough, Jeremiah F. Clough, Marquis D. Chaplain, John A. Chamberlain, Tristram C. Dow, John T. G. Emery, Nathan Emery, Reuben French, Charles Gerrish, Enoch Gibson, Warren Ham, Jr., Amos Hannaford, Moses C. Lyford, Oliver H. Lock, Orville Messer, Samuel A. Morrill, Frederick P. Moore, Daniel Pickard, Joseph Pickard, William Patrick, Darius Small, Charles D. Sargent, Tilley H. Shepard, John Wheeler, Joseph Whitney, Nathaniel Wiggin, James M. Wiggin, John L. Young, Stephen Young.
As early as 1832 there was a demand that a hearse be purchased for the use of the town. It was voted to buy one and to build two houses for storing the same, these houses to be located where they would best accommodate the inhabitants. In thinking the matter over, the people evidently concluded that this action was unwarranted extravagance, for, at a special meeting in November that year, they voted to reconsider the decision made at the annual meeting previous. The subject did not come up again until 1839, when the attempt to use part of the surplus revenue for this purpose met with failure. No further action was taken until 1867, when James S. Elkins, Edward Osgood and Nathan Emery were appointed a committee to buy a hearse and provide a building.
The old town house was never heated so long as it was used as
260
HISTORY OF CANTERBURY.
a church, nor did the voters seem to think that this comfort was necessary after the building was devoted to secular purposes until 1832. Then it was "voted that a stove may be set up in the town house by subscription." Volunteer offerings apparently did not materialize and nothing more was done towards heating the structure until 1858, when it was "voted that the selectmen cause a chimney to be erected in the town house and procure a suitable stove." As the initiative for this improvement was taken by Dr. Lorrain T. Weeks, it is probable that some of the older citizens had contracted serious illness by standing around an unwarmed assembly hall some inclement days in March.
Doctor Weeks was a respected and influential citizen of Canter- bury, who later moved to Laconia. He was a successful phy- sician and one of the early practitioners of the homeopathic school. Progressive in his ideas, he appears to have enjoyed the confidence of his fellow-townsmen to a marked degree, being frequently elected to office and serving for a number of years on the school board.
The soapstone industry at one time gave promise of becoming a thriving business in Canterbury. By act of the legislature, approved July 4, 1851, the Merrimack County Soapstone Com- pany was incorporated with a capital of $30,000. Nathan Emery, Joseph Clough, Freeman Webster, Henry Emery and their associates were the incorporators. The quarry is located in the west part of the town not a great distance from the railroad. For a time some work was done, but the lessened demand for soap- stone caused the enterprise to be abandoned.
In accordance with the provisions of the statute prohibiting the sale of spirituous liquors in New Hampshire, the selectmen of Canterbury appointed a town liquor agent August 9, 1855. This appointment was offered to the chairman of the board of selectmen, Nathan Emery, by his associates. For some reason he declined the honor, and the following November John P. Kimball was designated to discharge the duties of the office. His appointment reads as follows:
"Whereas a late law passed by the New Hampshire legislature requires us the subscribers to appoint some person for the sale of spirituous liquors and whereas we the subscribers have confidence in your ability and integrity to perform the duties of said office,
261
APPOINTING A LIQUOR AGENT.
we do hereby appoint you, the said John P. Kimball, an agent to sell brandy, gin, wine, alcohol and rum as permitted by law. You are required to sell the same at a profit not exceeding 15 per cent. at the place of retail, the same to be kept and sold only at your dwelling house where you reside. You shall use all laudable efforts to obtain pure liquors and sell the same without adulteration. Upon having this appointment recorded by the town clerk, you shall have the powers, perform the duties and be subject to the liabilities of said office until the 15th day of next April, unless previously removed.
"NATHAN EMERY. EDWARD OSGOOD.
"Dated at Canterbury, New Hampshire.
"November 3, 1855."
The appointment was apparently accepted with reluctance. Mr. Kimball evidently held purchasers to the strict requirements of the law, for the profits did not swell the town receipts by any large amount. This first appointment was probably made upon the supposition that the prohibitory law would be enforced in contiguous territory and that such a town agency would be nec- essary to meet perfectly legitimate calls for liquor. The agency was never popular, and it only survived until 1861, when at the annual town meeting it was abolished. No subsequent attempt was ever made to revive it.
By act of the legislature, approved January 7, 1853, the bound- ary of Canterbury was again changed by setting off the farms of certain residents near Rocky Pond in the east part of the town to Loudon. The territory annexed to the latter township is thus described, "Beginning at the east corner of Canterbury near the house of William G. Leavitt, thence running on the line between Canterbury and Gilmanton to the center of Rocky Pond, so called, thence on said pond and the river running out of the same to Loudon line, thence on said Loudon line 489 rods to the place of beginning, together with inhabitants living within said limits, namely, Elijah B. French, Joseph French, Nathaniel Pease, Dudley Pease, William G. Leavitt and James Ellise."
CHAPTER XI.
ANTI-SLAVERY AGITATION. PARTISAN POLITICS. EXCITING ELEC- TION IN 1861. CALL TO ARMS FOR THE CIVIL WAR. FILLING THE QUOTAS OF THE TOWN. BOUNTIES TO SECURE , ENLIST-
MENTS. DEBT AT THE CLOSE OF THE WAR. ROSTER OF THE ENLISTMENTS FROM CANTERBURY. FIRST PRINTED TOWN REPORT. MOVEMENT FOR A COUNTY ALMS HOUSE.
From early in the fifties until more than a decade after the close of the Civil War there was a period of intense politics and continued partisan strife in Canterbury. The contest had its inception in the slavery question, the agitation of which in New Hampshire had begun even earlier, and party alignment con- tinued rigid until the issues growing out of the war had passed.
Politics dominated everything, entering the church, the schools and the fireside. Strong men came to the front in town and exerted more than a local influence. Among these was a native son of Canterbury, Stephen Symonds Foster, an abolitionist, contemporary with Parker Pillsbury, Wendell Phillips and Wil- liam Lloyd Garrison. Graduating from college in 1838, he stud- ied for the ministry. When the clergy of New England declined to permit their pulpits to become the forum for the discussion of the slave question, he abandoned his profession and became an anti-slavery agitator. With all the earnestness and much of the indiscretion of the crusaders of old, Mr. Foster threw him- self into the cause with a zeal that defied precedents, disturbed established customs and set at naught the regulations of society for its peace and comfort. Upon all occasions he pleaded for the emancipation of those in bondage. He entered churches unbid- den, interrupted services on the Sabbath and demanded to be heard. From several houses of worship he was ejected. Not daunted by violence, arrest or imprisonment, he continued an unrelenting enemy of slavery, denouncing its defenders and apolo- gists and upbraiding those who hesitated at immediate action.
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.