USA > New Hampshire > Sullivan County > Claremont > History of the town of Claremont, New Hampshire, for a period of one hundred and thirty years from 1764 to 1894 > Part 5
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
To still the clamor and ascertain the real sentiments of the people upon the subject, the General Assembly in session at Exeter, on Sep- tember 13, 1786, formed a plan for the emission of fifty thousand pounds to be loaned at four per cent on land securities, and this to be a tender in payment of taxes, and for the fees and salaries of public officers. This plan was sent to the several towns, and the people were requested to give their opinions in town meeting for and against it, and to make return of the votes to the Assembly at its next session. This plan, however, did not meet with public ap- probation,- a majority of the people having voted against it.
CHAPTER III.
NEW HAMPSHIRE GRANTS-VERMONT CONTROVERSY.
In 1749 a controversy arose between Governor Benning Went- worth of New Hampshire and Governor George Clinton of New York, as to their respective jurisdictions over the territory now forming the state of Vermont, concerning the western line of the Province of New Hampshire, and the eastern line of New York. Governor Wentworth claimed that by the King's commission to him he had authority to grant townships on the west side of Con- necticut river, according to Williams's History of Vermont, extend- ing to a line "twenty miles east of Hudson river, as far as that ex- tended to the northward; and after that as far west as the eastern shore of Lake Champlain ;" while Governor Clinton claimed that he had jurisdiction over all the lands from the west side of Con- necticut river to the east side of Delaware bay. Governor Went- worth had granted the township of Bennington, gave to it his own name, and continued to give grants of townships on the west side of Connecticut river until August, 1764. On December 28, 1763, Mr. Colden, Lieutenant-Governor of New York, issued a proclama- tion "commanding the sheriff of the county of Albany to make return of the names of all persons who had taken possession of lands under the New Hampshire grants; and claiming jurisdiction as far east as Connecticut river," by virtue of a royal grant to the Duke of York.
The government of New York resorted to many methods to dis- possess all those who had derived their titles from Governor Went- worth. Officers were sent among them, commanding them to deliver up their premises ; landlords claimed rent, and attempted to
48
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
collect it ; actions were commenced against the occupants, which, being brought in the courts of New York, were invariably decided against the defendants. Long and bitter controversies arose, and the sturdy settlers, determined not to yield, resorted to arms in defense of their estates. Acts of violence were frequent, and the officers of New York often found the physical power was on the side of the settlers. There were among the inhabitants many daring, intrepid men, ready to encounter danger, if necessary, and by no means scrupulous of the observance of "points of law," as- settled by the courts of New York.
The early settlers of New Hampshire, especially the western por- tion of the province, as well as those of Vermont, were not, like the Plymouth colonists, actuated solely in their enterprises by re- ligious motives. Their association consisted primarily more in the regulations of mercantile companies than in civil legislation ; though, from the necessity of the case, the latter became their con- dition in the process of time. Speculation and the acquisition of wealth formed the basis of their movements ; and it is thought that, judged in accordance with the principles of sound morality and law, their acts would in some instances have been considered oppressive and unjust. The institutions of religion were not disregarded. In many cases, among the first of their legislative corporate acts was- the providing for a minister "to come and settle among " them. Particularly was this the case with the first settlers of Claremont.
Soon after the declaration of American independence the in- habitants of the territory in question assembled to take into con- sideration their peculiar condition, and to provide means of safety. The situation of the country created, as they believed, a radical change in their political connections. By the dissolution of the bonds which had subjected America to the rule of Great Britain, they imagined that all acts sanctioned by the authority of the mother country were abrogated, and no longer binding; and hence conceiving themselves free from the government of New York, to which they had never willingly submitted, and being, as they declared, " reduced to a state of nature," they insisted that they had a right to form such association as was agreeable to themselves.
49
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
Accordingly, they made the declaration that " they would at all times consider themselves as a free and independent state, capable of regulating their own internal police; that they had the sole, ex- clusive right of governing themselves in such manner as they should choose, not repugnant to the resolves of Congress; and that they were ready to contribute their proportion to the common defense." Guided by these principles, they adopted a plan of government, established a code of laws, and petitioned Congress to receive them into the Union.
The inhabitants of the eastern valley of the Connecticut river, both on account of location and sympathy, were strongly inclined to unite with those on the western side in the formation of a new state. They claimed that the original grant to Captain John Mason was limited by the line drawn at a distance of sixty miles from the sea ; that all the lines westward of that line were royal grants, which being under the jurisdiction of New Hampshire merely by the force of the royal commission, were vacated by the assumed in- dependence of the American colonies, and therefore, that all the inhabitants of this territory had " reverted to a state of nature." By this it was understood that each town retained its corporate unity, but was wholly disconnected from any superior jurisdiction. They made a distinction between commissions derived from the King, revocable at his pleasure, and incorporations granted on certain conditions, which conditions having been performed, the powers and privileges incident to or resulting from the corporate bodies were perpetual.
They asserted that when the power of the King had been re- jected and no longer recognized, the only legal authority remaining was vested in their town incorporations, and that the majority of each town had a right to control the minority. These views, how- ever, did not meet with universal approval.
Doctor Jeremy Belknap, in his History of New Hampshire, pub- lished in 1813, from which valuable work the facts connected with this matter are mainly derived, says,
The majority of some towns was in favor of their former connexion, and in those towns where the majority inclined the other way, the minority claimed
50
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
protection of the government. They supposed that the existence of their town incorporations, and the privileges annexed to them, depended on their union to New Hampshire; and that their acceptance of the grants was in effect an ac- knowledgment of the jurisdiction, and a submission to the laws of the State from which they could not fairly be disengaged without its consent, as the State had never injured or oppressed them.
Much pains were taken by the other party to disseminate the new ideas. Conventions were held, pamphlets were printed, and at length a petition was drawn in the name of sixteen towns on the eastern side of Connecticut river, requesting the new state, which had assumed the name of Vermont, to receive them into its union, alleging that they were not connected with any state, with respect to their internal police. These towns were Cornish, Lebanon, Dresden -now Hanover, Bath, Lyme, Orford, Piermont, Haverhill, Lyman, Apthorp- since divided into Littleton and Dalton-Canaan, Cardigan-now Orange, Lan- daff, Gunthwaite-now Lisbon, Morristown-now Franconia, and Enfield.
The Assembly at first appeared to be against receiving these towns; but the members from those towns which were situated near the river on the west side, declared that they would withdraw and join with the people on the east side, in forming a new state. The question was then referred to the people at large, and means were used to influence a majority of the towns to vote in favor of the union, which the Assembly could not but confirm. The six- teen towns were received, and the Assembly of Vermont passed a resolution that other towns on the eastern side of Connecticut river might be admitted on procuring a vote of a majority of the inhab- itants, as in the election of a representative.
In 1778 great effort was made to secure the favor of Claremont and other towns below in behalf of this movement, but without success. The towns thus admitted gave notice to the government of New Hampshire, and expressed their desire for an amicable adjustment of a jurisdictional line and a friendly interchange. Bitter animosities and confusion were the offspring of this act. The President of New Hampshire, as the executive was then styled, resorted to persuasions and threats in order to reclaim the seceders. Vermont was slow to give up an acquisition so valuable, and at last both parties appealed to Congress for aid. After long delay, Congress declared it an "indispensable preliminary " to the ad- mission of Vermont as a member of the United States, that she
51
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
should " explicitly relinquish all demands of lands and jurisdic- tion on the east side of the Connecticut river, and on the west side of a line drawn twenty miles eastward of Hudson's River to Lake Champlain."
The resolution being laid before the Assembly of Vermont, in session at Charlestown, they voted to "remain firm in the prin- ciples on which they had first assumed government, and to hold the articles of union inviolate; that they would not submit the question of their independence to the arbitrament of any power whatever; but they were willing at present to refer the question of their jurisdictional boundary to commissioners mutually chosen ; and when they should be admitted into the American Union, they would submit any such disputes to Congress."
This state of things produced, as it naturally would, deep re- sentment between the people of New Hampshire and Vermont, which, on slight occasion, would break forth in acts of hostility. An example is furnished in an affray which had its beginning at Chesterfield in 1781. A constable, under authority of Vermont, had a writ against a man favorable to the interests of New Hamp- shire, and went in pursuit of him. He found him in a dwelling house, surrounded by his friends, and attempted to arrest him. The owner of the house interfered and ordered the officer to depart. The constable produced a book, which he said contained the laws of Vermont, and began to read. The householder commanded him to desist. Threatening words followed, and, finally, the officer was compelled to retire. Under a writ issued by a Vermont justice, the householder and another of the company were arrested and committed to prison at Charlestown. The prisoners sent a petition to the Assembly of New Hampshire for relief. The Assembly authorized the Committee of Safety to direct the sheriff of Cheshire county to relieve the prisoners; and, further, empow- ered the committee to cause to be committed to prison, in any of the counties, all persons acting under the pretended authority of the state of Vermont, to be tried by the courts of those counties where they might be confined; and for this purpose sheriffs were directed to raise the posse comitatus.
52
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
The sheriff of Cheshire county, in the attempt to release the two prisoners, was himself arrested and imprisoned by the Ver- mont sheriff, under the authority of three justices. The impris- oned sheriff applied to a brigadier general of New Hampshire to call out the militia for his liberation. This alarmed the Ver- monters, and orders were issued by the governor for their militia to oppose force with force. A committee from Vermont was sent to Exeter " to agree on measures to prevent hostilities." One of the committee was the Vermont sheriff, who was immediately arrested, thrown into prison at Exeter, and held as a hostage for the release of the sheriff of Cheshire.
There were many instances of collisions and open violence, in attempts of officers from each of the two states to collect the taxes and enforce other restrictions upon the people. Such was the menacing aspect of affairs at this juncture that Congress, from motives of general policy, determined to settle the difficulties, if possible. General Washington wrote the governor of Vermont the following letter :
LETTER FROM GENERAL GEORGE WASHINGTON TO GOVERNOR THOMAS CHITTENDEN OF VERMONT.
PHILADELPHIA, 1st January, 1782.
SIR, - I received your favor of the 14th of November, by Mr. Brownson. You cannot be at a loss to know why I have not heretofore, and why I cannot now address you in your public character or answer you in mine. But the confidence which you have been pleased to repose in me, gives me an oppor- tunity of offering you my sentiments, as an individual, wishing most ardently to see the peace and union of this country preserved, and the just rights of the people of every part of it fully and firmly established.
It is not my business, neither do I think it necessary now, to discuss the origin of the right of a number of inhabitants to that tract of Country, for- merly distinguished by the name of the New Hampshire Grants, and now known by that of Vermont. I will take it for granted that their right was good, be- cause Congress, by their resolve of the 7th of August imply it; and by that of the 21st, are willing fully to confirm it, provided the new State is confined to certain described bounds. It appears, therefore, to me, that the dispute of boundary is the only one that exists, and that being removed, all further diffi- culties would be removed also, and the matter terminated to the satisfaction of
53
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
all parties. Now I would ask you candidly, whether the claim of the people of Vermont was not, for a long time, confined solely, or very nearly, to that tract of country which is described in the resolve of Congress of the 21st of August last ; and whether, agreeable to the tenor of your own letter to me, the late extension of your claim upon New Hampshire and New York, was not more a political move, than one in which you conceived yourselves justifiable. If my first question be answered in the affirmative, it certainly bars your new claim. And if my second be well founded, your end is answered, and you have nothing to do, but withdraw your jurisdiction to the confines of your old limits, and obtain an acknowledgment of independence and sovereignty, under the resolve of the 21st of August, for so much territory as does not interfere with the ancient established bounds of New York, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts. I persuade myself you will see and acquiesce in the reason, justice, and indeed, the necessity of such a decision.
You must consider, Sir, that the point now in dispute is of the utmost polit- ical importance to the future union and peace of this great country. The State of Vermont, if acknowledged, will be the first new one admitted into the con- federacy ; and if suffered to encroach upon the ancient established boundaries of the adjacent ones, will serve as a precedent for others, which it may here- after be expedient to set off, to make the same unjustifiable demands. Thus, in my private opinion, while it behoves the delegates of the States now con- federated, to do ample justice to a body of people sufficiently respectable by their numbers, and entitled by other claims, to be admitted into that confed- eration, it becomes them also to attend to the interests of their constituents, and see, that under the appearance of justice to one, they do not materially injure the rights of others. I am apt to think this is the prevailing opinion of Congress, and that your late extension of claim has, upon the principle I have above mentioned, rather diminished than increased your friends; and that, if such extension should be persisted in, it will be made a common cause, and not considered as only affecting the rights of those States immediately inter- ested in the loss of territory; - a loss of too serious a nature, not to claim the attention of any people. There is no calamity within the compass of my fore- sight, which is more to be dreaded than the necessity of coercion on the part of Congress; and consequently every endeavor should be used to prevent the execution of so disagreeable a measure. It may involve the ruin of that State against which the resentment of the others is pointed.
I will only add a few words upon the subject of the negotiations, which have been carried on between you and the enemy in Canada and in New York. I will take it for granted as you assert it, that they were so far innocent, that there never was any serious intention of joining Great Britain in their attempts to subjugate your country; but it has had this certain bad tendency -it has served to give some ground to that delusive opinion of the enemy, and upon which, they in a great measure, found their hopes of success; that they have
54
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
numerous friends among us, who only want a proper opportunity to show them- selves openly; and that internal disputes and feuds will soon break us to pieces. At the same time the seeds of distrust and jealousy are scattered among our- selves by a conduct of this kind. If you are serious in your professions, these will be additional motives for accepting the terms which have been offered, (and which appear to me equitable) and thereby convincing the common enemy, that all their expectations of disunion are vain, and that they have been worsted at their own weapons - deception.
As you unbosom yourself to me, I thought I had the greater right of speaking my sentiments openly and candidly to you. I have done so, and if they should produce the effect which I most sincerely wish -that of an honorable and amicable adjustment of a matter, which if carried to hostile lengths, may de- stroy the future happiness of my country - I shall have attained my end, while the enemy will be defeated of theirs.
Believe me to be, with great respect,
Sir, your most obedient Servant,
GEORGE WASHINGTON.
THOMAS CHITTENDEN, ESQUIRE.
Although the town records are silent upon the subject, it would seem from the following, copied from the New Hampshire Pro- vincial and State Papers, Vol. X., p. 483, that Claremont, if not in hearty accord with either side of this controversy, in common with other towns more actively engaged, had her trials in con- sequence of it.
PETITION OF SUNDRY INHABITANTS OF CLAREMONT, PRAYING FOR SPEEDY RELIEF FROM DIFFICULTIES OF VERMONT INTERFERENCE.
To the Honorable General Assembly or Committee of Safety for the State of New Hampshire:
We, the Inhabitants, as individuals, of the Town of Claremont Laboring under great Difficulties on account of the pretended claim of Vermont, & not being able to Hold Town meetings under New Hampshire, we Humbly Request Directions how to proceed, as we are threatened in person & and property, by their taxes and Laws, which we utterly refuse to submit to, they carry so High a hand that we must have a speedy relief or must submit to their Juris- diction which will be very grievous to your petitioners and therefore we Humbly pray for a speedy answer. We are short in words & perticulars as being sen-
55
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
sible you are in some measure knowing to our circumstances, & we your peti- tioners in Duty Bound shall ever pray.
CLAREMONT, Jan'y 14, 1782.
Elihu Everts Wm Strobridge
Jesse Matthews
Henry Stevens
Gideon Davis
Thomas Jones
Roswell Stevens
David Rich Joseph Ives
Rueben Petty
Josiah Stevens
Bartlett Hinds
Josiah Rich
Elihu Stevens
John West
John Peckens T. Sterne
The effect of General Washington's letter to Governor Chitten- den was salutary. At a session of the Vermont Assembly at Ben- nington, on the nineteenth of February, 1782, it resolved itself into a committee of the whole to take into consideration the action of Congress on the seventh and twenty-first of August, 1781,- His Excellency Gov. Chittenden in the chair,- and also the letter of Gen. Washington of January 1, 1782. The next day the committee adopted the following resolution :
Resolved, That in the opinion of this Committee, Congress, in their resolu- tions of the 7th and 21st of August last, in guaranteeing to the respective states of New York and New Hampshire all territory without certain limits therein expressed, have eventually determined the boundary of this State.1
This resolution being accepted and adopted by the Assembly, then on the twenty-second of February, 1782, an act was passed " to relinquish the claims to territory therein mentioned," and on the twenty-third it was
Resolved, That the west bank of Connecticut River & a line beginning at the northwest corner of the Massachusetts State, from thence northward twenty miles east of Hudson's river, as specified in the Resolutions of August last, shall be considered as the east and west boundaries of this State, and that this assem- bly do hereby relinquish all claim and demand to the right of Jurisdiction in and over any and every district of territory without said boundary lines; and that authenticated copies of this Resolution be forthwith officially transmitted to Congress and the States of New Hampshire and New York respectively.
This relinquishment of jurisdiction by Vermont substantially . ended the controversy between that state and New Hampshire, so
1 Dr. N. Bouton's notes, Provincial Papers, Vol. X., page 485.
56
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
far as boundaries were concerned, but Dr. Belknap, in his history before alluded to, said, "Though cut off from their connexion with Vermont, the revolted towns did not at once return to a state of peace, but the divisions and animosities which had long sub- sisted continued to produce disagreeable effects."
The members of the Assembly from the east side of the river, find- ing themselves thus virtually cut off from the legislative body, took their leave with chagrin and feelings of resentment. Though ex- cluded from their recent connection, the excluded towns did not at once peaceably place themselves under their former jurisdiction, but for some time continued to keep alive the difficulties and animos- ities which had so long existed. During these strifes the courts of New Hampshire had held their regular sessions, with but little op- position, though the officers of Vermont claimed and exercised jurisdiction in the same territory; but when the latter were de- prived of authority by the Assembly of Vermont, a spirit of resist- ance against the former became apparent.
In September, 1782, during the sitting of the Inferior court at Keene, several persons attempted to stop its proceedings, and suc- ceeded in effecting an adjournment. Three of the leaders were ar- rested and bound over to the Superior court. Meanwhile efforts were being made to resist and overpower the Superior court. Re- ports were circulated that two hundred men had combined and armed themselves for that purpose. On the morning of the open- ing of the court several of the leaders went to the chambers of the court and presented a petition, praying " that the court might be adjourned, and that no judicial proceedings might be had while the troubles in which the country had been involved still subsisted." They were told that the judges could come to no decision upon the subject but in open court. The court was opened in due time, the petition was publicly read and its consideration postponed to the next day. The court then proceeded to its business. The grand jury were impaneled, and, with open doors, the attorney-general laid before them the case of the rioters at the Inferior court. A bill was found against them, they were arraigned, pleaded guilty, and threw themselves upon the mercy of the court. The court
57
HISTORY OF CLAREMONT.
remitted their punishment on condition of future peaceable be- havior.
This method of firmness and lenity at once disarmed the disturb- ers, and they quietly dispersed. From this time the spirit of insub- ordination gradually died away, and the people quietly returned to their allegiance to New Hampshire.
New Hampshire was first settled in 1628, by Edward and Wil- liam Hilton, brothers, from London, and David Thompson, from Scotland. For eighteen years after the first settlement the people in the several plantations were governed by agents appointed by the proprietors, or by magistrates chosen by themselves. In 1641 they were united with Massachusetts, and so continued until 1680, when New Hampshire became a royal province, and continued a provincial government until the Revolution, with the exception of the interim from 1688 to 1692, when the people, in consequence of the disorders and confusion which attended the short but oppressive administration of Sir Edmund Andros, again placed themselves under the protection of Massachusetts. Massachusetts was made a province in 1692, and the same person was governor of both prov- inces from 1699 to 1741, when a separate governor was appointed for New Hampshire, and this was the beginning of Governor Ben- ning Wentworth's administration. He was a son of Lieutenant Governor Wentworth, "was a merchant of good reputation in Portsmonth, and well beloved by his people." He had represented his town in the Assembly several years, and had been a member of the Council.
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.