USA > New Hampshire > Cheshire County > Gilsum > History of the town of Gilsum, New Hampshire, from 1752 to 1879 > Part 14
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 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74
The amount of good accomplished by this Society was very great. An extensive interest was manifest in well-attended meetings kept up for more than eight years. Its influence in the triple pledge has been great among the young people, many of whom have kept it strietly to this day. Some have gone out and carried its influence elsewhere. In Canada, in a small town where such a thing as Total Abstinence had never before been thought of, a member of this Society organized a similar one, with a membership of 150. It is much to be regretted that this Society has not continued to live and flourish, that it might still save the boys from the evil influence of not only rum, but also of tobaeeo, and profanity.
A new Division of the Sons of Temperanee was organized Oct. 15, 1874, with nearly the old name, " Ashuelot Division, No. 35." The Charter members are : -
Adaline K. Maek, Solomon Mack, Mary L. Hayward, George H. MeCoy, Charles W. Bingham, Miranda McCoy, Joseph S. Bingham, Osman MeCoy, Frances A. Beekwith, Rufus E. Guillow, Claudius B. Hayward, Lil- lie J. McCoy, Louis N. Loiselle.
Solomon Maek was elected Worthy Patriareh and Mary L. Hayward R. S. This Division has held a few publie meetings with leetures, and one exhibition. Steering elear of the roek of polities it has reelaimed and held up, for a time, at least, some who were before drunkards. The forms and methods of the Temperanee movement are continually ehanging, and it has been found difficult to sustain the meetings of the Division, sinee the organization of
THE GILSUM TEMPERANCE REFORM CLUB.
May 9, 1876, a meeting of the citizens was held in the Methodist Meeting House, now the Town Hall, to listen to Mr. Creasy of Charlestown, Mass., and members of Keene Temperanee Reform Club. The pledge was eireulated, and 93 names subseribed. A temporary organization was effeeted with F. A. Howard, President, and H. E. Rawson, Secretary. The following week the organization was completed by adopting a Constitution and By-laws. L. Roseoe Guil- low was chosen President, and Adolphe C. F. Laurent, Secretary. Meetings have sinee been
Luther Hemenvery,
97
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.
held weekly, except in the summer, with various literary exercises, and have been well attended. The pledge has been circulated through the town, securing a membership of 265. It is now largely sustained by the younger people. One interesting feature of the meetings is singing, led at first by Robert Cuthbert, Jr., and more recently by Thomas Charmbury, Jr.
The Presidents of the Club, since the first, have been Edouard Loiselle, Mason Guillow, Arthur Smith, and Fred A. Stevens. Much good has already been accomplished, and it is to be hoped this organization will long continue to exert a salutary influence in the community.
One thing is evident, a Temperance Society should be entirely free from outside entangle- ments. Any organization, paying tribute to a set of political " fuglers " and " bummers, " will, in the long run, find confusion in its ranks, and defeat in its purposes of good.
At a special meeting Dec. 16, 1879, the town voted to adopt the law prohibiting the sale of lager-beer in small quantities.
CHAPTER XX.
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.
" Religion is the chief concern Of mortals here below."
To understand the history of any people or town, nothing is more necessary than to study the religious sentiments which prevailed at its origin, and to trace their influence in molding the character of men, and directing the form and spirit of their institutions. A century of churchi history must be a most important element in the past record and present condition of any com- munity. A professed church of Christ, claiming to teach men the truths that pertain to their higher nature, that shall guide them to the best paths not only for the fleeting hours of time, but for the ages of eternity, cannot exist without exercising an immense power over the hearts and lives, not only of those who accept and yield to its teachings, but of those who not accepting their authority do yet come under its influence both of precept and example.
It is difficult for us at the present day to realize or even fully to understand the circumstances of our fathers a hundred years ago. Nothing is now more fully established in the minds of most Americans than that the union of church and state in any form is disastrous to the highest welfare of both ; but in the early history of New England that idca was scarcely understood at all. Men who came from the old country to avoid religious persecutions for themselves, thought no harm in incorporating their own religious views into their laws. They honestly supposed that as citizens, it was not only their duty to protect the religious interests of the people, but that they ought to compel them by law to serve God in public, and forbid all non-professors of religion from positions of trust and authority in the State. Their early training had been such that they supposed they could not be truly loyal to God, unless they did this. Nor at the first was anybody injured thereby. All were of one mind. No one thought of opposing the enactment of such laws, for all were agreed in believing them just and right. When the laws of the province of New Hampshire were enacted, no one thought of any other plan than that of requir-
7
98
GILSUM.
ing the people to support the preaching of the gospel by tax. It was supposed necessary to the idea of a Christian State that the services of the Christian religion should be maintained and supported in the same manner as civil offices. Nor was any wrong or injustice dreamed of in sneh enactments. So when towns were incorporated, reservations were made in the interests of the Christian religion. (Page 21.)
The charter coming from the King's government before the revolution, gave no distinct recog- nition of any church but the Church of England. No other church was established by law. But our fathers had even then so far broken away from her authority that they secured a lot " for the first settled minister of the gospel." And this form of expression should serve to correct the erroneous impression that the Congregational Church, as such, was established by law. It was only that the church first gaining possession of the ground was recognized as the existing church to receive whatever privileges the laws should grant. So in regard to the taxes collected for the support of the ministry. The law required every taxable person to pay for the support of the minister settled by the town. It did not designate a particular denomination. It only put into the hands of the town the business now usually transacted by religious societies, such as building meeting-houses, hiring and settling ministers, fixing the amount of salary, and the like. Nothing in the laws restricted towns to employ ministers of any particular denomination. Whatever Protestant sect had a majority vote in any town, settled and supported its own minister. The town of New London, for instance, settled a Baptist for their first minister. He consequently received the minister's lot, and was supported by a town tax. The same is doubtless true of other towns. Many people have an idea that the laws favored Congregationalism or Orthodoxy as it was called. But this is entirely a mistake. The law made no distinction in favor of any seet. All had the same rights and privileges under the law, only whichever had the majority vote in town, thereby secured the reserved lot for its first minister, and gained the legal right to assess a tax for his support. The town as a body corporate was independent in its religious affairs, save that the State authorized it to have some religion, and having made its own choice, to support that religion by due course of law. What particular form of Protestant Christianity should be supported, was left to the free choice of every town. It was only because the first settlers were almost unanimously in favor of the Congregational belief and form of church polity, that this became the prevalent system, so as to be called the standing order. That their minis- try was supported by law, that taxes were assessed and collected by civil process, was not the fault of the church or of Congregationalism, or Orthodoxy, but a fault of the times. The odium which thereby became largely attached to the denomination is entirely unjust. Whatever hard- ships or oppressive acts may have been suffered under this system, were the result of the laws framed in accordance with public opinion. It was the ignorance of the times and not the fault of any church or denomination. The first movement against it was largely supported by those who had not arrived to the idea that all should be free to support preaching or not, but who admitting the right and duty of the State to require every one to be taxed for religious purposes, yet claimed the right for each to designate to what denomination his money should be paid. This system was evidently more absurd than the other. It was like allowing each voter in a school district to say what teacher should be supported by his money. This must, as it did, create inex- tricable confusion. The only tenable ground was that reached in 1819, when the support of religion was entirely separated from State authority, and left to the voluntary contributions of the people. And none more than Congregationalists would to-day oppose any semblance of return to the old system of supporting religion by law. Religion that is not voluntary is worthless.
99
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.
In regard to alleged oppressions occurring under the old system, after diligent search and inquiry, I find the facts to be as follows. Some prominent men in town being dissatisfied with the doctrines taught in connection with this church, refused, on that ground, to pay the tax for the support of the minister. The officers whose duty it was to enforce the collection of taxes took their property in some few instances, as they would have taken it for any other town tax. Tradition says that one Peter Ricc at the south end of the town had his only cow sold at auction to pay his minister tax. That this must have been unnecessary on his part, is evident from the Grand Levy, by which it appears that the year his tax was the lowest, twenty-five tax-payers ont of eighty-six were poorer than he, and the next year his Levy rose to within the first third of the town.
Not only the nature of the law itself, but the town records show conclusively that the whole action in such matters was by the town, and the church and ministry had nothing to do with it. Thus in July, 1802, we find a Committee, consisting of Jehiel Holdridge, David Blishand Zadok Hurd, was appointed to stand a law-suit with a prominent citizen, concerning his minister tax, and a hundred dollars was voted for the purpose. This was entirely a civil process, and a town, not a church affair. The whole system was no doubt a mistake. But the point to be insisted on is, that the responsibility rested not on the church or denomination, but on the whole people. The town had the control, and the odium of any forcible collection of church rates belongs not to church or ministry. It was simply the regular process of law, as ordered by town authority, and neither desired nor approved by the minister. It is certain that, in Gilsum, the minister, whenever it came within his power, remitted the taxes of those unwilling to pay, and refused to retain possession of property forcibly taken for his support. In one case a horse was taken by the officer and put in the minister's yard. When he knew it, he told his son to let him out, and the horse went immediately home.
This method of supporting the gospel is well illustrated in the district school system. The school agent chosen by a majority vote, may put in a teacher that many in the district dislike. But no one dreams of calling it oppression and tyranny that he must pay his school tax. No other way is possible, if schools are to be supported by law. The majority must rule, however obnoxious their action may be to the minority. So in regard to " minister taxes." The mistake was in the underlying notion that religion requires a legal support. That idea granted, no other course is possible. The majority must rulc. Nor should any reproach thereby be cast upon the sect to which that majority chanced for the time to belong. It was entirely a town affair. And no denomination had any advantage over another, save the advantage of being able to secure the largest number of votes.
The lands set apart by the charter, for religious purposes, were three whole shares, amounting to 750 acres. The land for a " Globe " for the Church of England was the 3d, 4th and half the 5th Lots in the 12th Range, also half the 10th Lot, 3d Range in the " second division." In the Proprietors' record of May 16, 1774, is the following : -
Voted to Chuse an agent to treat with the Revend Mr Cosset Relative to the Right Belonging to the Church of England accordingly Chose Mr abel allien agent for that Purpose.
The result of this conference is not recorded. (Appendix D.)
The share for the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts was laid out in one Lot " two hundred and fifty acres South of S'd Governor's Lott," and is marked S. P. G. on the map, (page 24,) where it will be seen that this share, as well as the " Glebe," was cut off from Gilsum in the final establishment of Stoddard line.
100
GILSUM.
The share " for the first settled Minister of the Gospel " consisted of the 4th Lot 4th Range, the 6th Lot 8th Range, half of the 5th Lot 9th Range, and half the 2d Lot 3d Range of the " second division." Rev. Mr. Fish being the first settled minister, was entitled to these lots. He built his house on the one first named. He sold one to Samnel Seward of Sullivan for £48, (page 26,) and in May, 1796, he sold the 6th Lot 8th Range to James Kingsbury of Surry for £94. " The second division " probably yielded him nothing, being beyond the " Patent Line."
THE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH
was formed three years after Surry was set off, which was nine years after the charter was given. Previous to this, and indeed for more than twenty years later, the town depended upon neighboring ininisters, especially from Keene, for preaching and other services.
The first record of the church is as follows : -
At a meeting of the brethren in full communion held at the house of Jonathan Adams in Gilsuni on the 25th day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand Seven hundred and Seventy-two: Chose Justus Hurd as Clerk. Appointed Josiah Kilburn, Deac. Ebenezer Dewey and Samuel Church as a Committee. Voted to apply to the Church of Christ in Northfield, [Mass.] in Winchester, in Swanzey, in Walpole, and in Charleston [Charles- town, N. H.] for assistance in collecting a church in s'd Gilsum. Also agreed that wednesday, the 27th of october next, be set apart for a day of fasting and prayer. Voted that the meeting be held on s'd day at the dwelling house of Ebenezer Dewey in s'd Gilsum.
Of the churches invited there were present Rev. Mr. Hubbard of Northfield, Mass., Rev. Edward Goddard of Swanzey, Rev. Micah Lawrence of Winchester, and two delegates whose names and churches are not given in the record. There was no minister at Charlestown at this time, and Rev. Thomas Fessenden of Walpole did not come. On that day, " the Church was collected in Gilsum and Ebenezer Dewey, Jr., Henry White and Sarah his wife were admitted as members in full communion." That is, these three persons were received on profession of their faith, while the others were collected from their previous church relations This is all the record we have of the proceedings of that day, except the baptism of Ebenezer Kilburn's son Ebenezer. It would be interesting now to know the services of the occasion and by whom performed, and it is specially to be regretted that no list of members is given. Nor can that list be accurately reproduced. As near as can be ascertained the original members were as follows : -
Jonathan Adams and Hannah his wife, Stephen Bond and Molly his wife, Samuel Church and Elizabeth his wife, Dea. Ebenezer Dewey and Temperance his wife, Ebenezer Dewey, Jr., and his wife, Justus Hurd and Rachel his wife, Ebenezer Kilburn (afterwards Deacon,) Josiah Kilburn and Marah his wife, Rev. Josiah Kilburn, Jr., Henry White and Sarah his wife.
It is not certain that these eighteen make the exact list of original members, but it is as nearly accurate as it can now be made. There are records of baptism of the children of some who are nowhere recorded as church members. But it is not safe to infer their membership from this alone. The practice largely prevailed in the New England churches of allowing per- sons to take tlie half-way covenant as it was called, not admitting them to full communion, but only thereby granting them the privilege of household baptism. It has been doubted whether this church ever fell into this practice, but the following record is conclusive : -
June 5, 1796, Received Jesse Dart into the church who had previously owned the covenant & had had his children baptized.
When Mr. Fish came, the practice was discontinued. Others too, who being members of churches elsewhere, had not transferred their relation to this, brought their children to receive baptism. This is known to have been the case with John and Ann Mark, who being members of the Presbyterian Church in the old country, had their children baptized here, but withou joining this church. So doubtless with others.
101
MEETING HOUSE.
What few records are now extant from the organization of the church till the settlement of the first pastor, a period of twenty-two years, consist mostly of datelcss baptisms and admis- sions to the church. Those who are recorded as having become members, during this time, are as follows : -
Phinehas Allen, Ebenezer Bill and Rachel his wife, Samuel Bill and Sarah his wife, John Bingham and Sibyl his wife, Jonathan Bliss, Jr., and Sarah his wife, Levi Bliss and Ann his wife, Sibyl the wife of Elisha Y. Bond, Gershom Crocker and Ann his wife, Thomas Dort and Sarah his wife, Irene the wife of Asa Davis, Temperance Dewey afterwards the wife of Rev. Josiah Kilburn, Timothy Dort, Joseph Ellis, Aaron Hammond and Rachel his wife, Shubael Hurd and Rachel his wife, "widow" Phebe Mack, Theodore Preston and Eunice his wife, Obadiah Smith and Martha his wfe, Mary the wife of Eleazer Wilcox, and Margaret the wife of Joseph Young.
Others of whom no record is found but whose membership is well ascertaincd are as follows : -
David Blish (afterwards Deacon,) and Lucy his wife, Justus Chapin and Martha his wife, William Comstock, Silvanus Hayward and Olive his wife, John Row, Jr., Obadiah Wilcox and Lydia his wife.
Probably there were some others, but these are all whose membership can now be determined. As the church was organized at a private house, there was probably no Meeting House then built. There can be no doubt, however, that the town built one, very soon after, on the height of land between William Mark's and David Bill's, where the foundation is still visible. (Map 43.) A lever-wood about two inches through and 15 feet high, now stands within six inches of the northeast corner-stone, and a red-oak and a hemlock each about 15 inches through, stand a little east of the center. Herc the people gathered in time of the Revolution, to form patriotic plans, and to enlist for the defence of their country.
This house was built like an old-fashioned school-room with seats raised at the back and sides for the singers, and boards laid upon movable blocks below for the rest of the congregation. The men and women sat on opposite sides, facing each other. It remained on this spot till 1783, and perhaps longer. As the eastern part of the town began to be settled, the people there demanded its removal for their accommodation. It is a common tradition that this house was moved several times. Rev. Aaron Hall of Kecne riding up one Sabbath morning to preach, was unable to find it, not knowing that it had been removed during the week. There is a faint tradition of there having been a Meeting House near the old Sullivan road, east of the Mark meadow. (Map 356.) It is not improbable that its first removal may have been to this spot. It was certainly moved to a spot a little west of the Keenc road, about 20 rods southeast of the " wheel-pit," where the foundation still remains. (Map 51.) No proof has been found of its standing elsewhere. A foundation was prepared and the " sills leveled," on the hill southeast of Henry Bingham's, (Map 87,) but the house was never set there. It is well known that there was much excitement about its location, and an obscure tradition cxists that, in 1788, about the time the last foundation was made ready, " king David " having seized an ax to knock off the first board, an opposing citizen was struck down by the blow.
In 1789, Sullivan having been set off, the quarrel about location seems to have been ended. There was a general agreement to set the Meeting House as near the center of the town as practicable. The exact center was then supposed to be Vessel Rock. The spot chosen was about a quarter of a mile further north, where the foundation still remains. (Map 78.) It is indicated by the white flag in the accompanying heliotype.
At a legal town Meting of the inhabitants of gilsum Holden at the hous of Lieut daniel wrights on tuesday the Tenth day of March 1789
first Choes Justus hurd Moderator * *
Choes John Bingham Zadok Hurd Samuel B lock
To plan the Meting hous and Sel the pews
At an adjourned meeting, March 24, -
102
GILSUM.
The Committee Brought in their plan and was Excepted
1 ly Voted that the payment for the pews Shall Be Paid in Neat Cattle Equil to Beef at twenty Shillings per hundred To Be paid as folows one third to Be paid in Sept 1789 One third in Sept 1790 and one third in Sept 1791
2 ly Choes Aaron hammond Daniel Wright E WillCox Committee To receive the pay for the pews and See it is laid out At the Best advantag upon the Meting hous
3 ly Agreable to the Vote of the town the Committee Set up the Pews at public Vandue John Bingham was Vandue Master
Pew No one was B off By Aaron hammond at Six pound Thirteen Shilings.
Pew No two Bid of By Robert lane hurd at Seven pound Sixteen Shillings
The remainder were as follows : - -
No. 3. Elezer Willcox CH 2sh. No. 14. Jonathan Clerk 6£ Osh.
No. 4. Samuel B. Lock 9
6 No. 15. Ebenezer Bill 5 2
No. 5. david Bish and Daniel right 6
7 No. 16. Samuel Bill Jr. and JJonathan Church 4 13
No. 6. Stephen Bond and Jonathan Addams 8
1 No. 17. Aaron hammond and Zad Hurd 4
1
No. 7. Zadok Hurd 5
12 No. 1. " in the Girlery " * Roger dorte 5 10
No. 8. david fuller and Jehiel holdridge 7
8 No. 2. Aaron hammond and Ebenezer Kilborn 3
6
No. 9. Samuel Barron Lock 7
2 No. 3. Zadok hurd and Justus hurd Jr 3
3
0
No. 12. david Addams and israel Loveland 5
1 No. 6. Brooks Hudson 2 10
July 1 1793 Voted to Sell the pews that the town took back at publick Vandue. Chose Levt Daniel Wright Vandue Master.
No Nine Struck of to David Bill and Elisha Bond 5£
No 11 Turner White and Jesse Dart 5£ 1s
No. 1 " in the Galery " Joseph Taylor Ebenezer Bill Peletiah Pease Jr Benjamin ware 5£ 2s.
Voted to Sell the Ground for four pews taking out the low hind Seats in the Bodey of the meting hous and the persons that purchis sd Ground are to Build Sd pews on thare one Cost By that time the meting hous is finished. the first pew Ground in the Boddy of the meting hous at the Right hand Struck of to Zadock Hurd tow pounds Six Shillings.
the Second at the Right hand Struck of to Justus Chapin one pound fourteen Shillings
the first in the boddy at the Left hand Struck of to Aaron Hammond tow pounds fifteen Shillings the Second in the Bodey of at the Lef hand Struck of to David fuller two pounds Eight Shillings
Nov. 5, 1789, twenty pounds to be paid in labor was voted for underpinning the house, and the work was to be done by the next June. The Committee for this work were Ebenezer Kil- burn, Ebenezer Bill, Ebenezer Dart, Sam'l Whitney and David Blish. Some parts of the older house were used in the new one, as we find the next March the account of Eleazer Wilcox allowed, " for moving the Old meeting House Boards and Streightening the Nails." It was voted at the same meeting to raise twenty pounds for carrying on the Meeting House "to be pay'd In Good potaslı Salts at markt price at Keen." The House was not finished till 1793, but a town meeting was held at the Meeting House Aug. 30, 1790. Sept. 26, 1791, it was voted to finish off the Meeting House. It was struck off to Thomas Redding to finish for 157 Pounds, paid in Neat Cattle at twenty shillings per hundred weight, " said Redding to procure a Bonds- man to the Exceptance of the town." This he probably failed to do, for we find a meeting Oct. 20, when it was bid off by Aaron Hammond for 180£. It was stipulated that
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.