USA > New Hampshire > State builders; an illustrated historical and biographical record of the state of New Hampshire at the beginning of the twentieth century > Part 2
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
This year as usual the Coos country and the sea coast were guarded by New Hampshire men. Senter's bat- talion was sent to the relief of Rhode Island.
Late in 1777, Col. Timothy Bedel raised a new con- tinental regiment which was intended for Canadian or frontier service. It was discharged in March, 1778.
Subsequently in the same year Col. Bedel raised his fourth regiment, which was eventually discontinued by vote of Congress.
The winter of 1777-1778 found the New Hampshire
II
STATE BUILDERS
men of the continental line at Valley Forge and a bri- gade under Whipple in Rhode Island, where General Sullivan conducted a campaign which, though in a measure unsuccessful, was in every way creditable to that commander.
Gen. Whipple's colonels were Nathaniel Peabody, brigade adjutant, Stephen Evans, volunteer aid, Moses Nichols, Moses Kelley, Jacob Gale, Enoch Hale, Joshua Wingate and (lieutenant colonel) Stephen Peabody. John Langdon, James Hackett and William Gardner, all prominent Portsmouth men, were respectively Cap- tain, Lieutenant and Ensign of a company of Light Horse serving with the brigade.
The New Hampshire brigade under Poor served with distinguished valor at Monmouth. In 1779, Gen. Poor and the New Hampshire regiments in the same brigade participated in the campaign under Gen. Sulli- van against the Six Nations and here again displayed their soldierly proficiency and veteran courage and en- durance.
In the spring of 1779, New Hampshire sent a regi- ment under Colonel Hercules Mooney for service in Rhode Island.
The next year the state contributed two additional regiments for special service beyond its boundaries, one under Col. Moses Nichols and one under Col. Thomas Bartlett, while the continental regiments served in New York and New Jersey, in which second named state Gen. Poor died honored and lamented by the young nation he had served so well.
In 1781, a part of the New Hampshire contingent in the continental line remained in New York while the remainder took important duty in the Virginia cam- paign which culminated in the surrender of Cornwallis. Here died the brave and accomplished Scammell, then adjutant General of Washington's army. Col. Daniel
I2
STATE BUILDERS
Reynolds organized a new regiment in 1781, which served at Albany or in that region in the northern depart- ment until discharged in November.
The New Hampshire regiments of the Continental Line continued in service under Washington to the end.
Henry Dearborn in 1781 succeeded to the command of the third regiment. He was in later years Secretary of War under President Jefferson and senior major-gen- eral of the army in 1812.
The Cedars and Hubbardton are the only two points in the revolutionary period at which the historians of New Hampshire are held up for explanation or apology.
It is not improbable that of the upwards of sixteen thousand men in New Hampshire then capable of bear- ing arms, practically every one was at one time or an- other in the period of war in the active service, and many of them multiplying terms of service through re- peated enlistments. In that seven years of struggle, no armed enemy in visible organization crossed the boun- daries of the Granite State.
Nathaniel Folsom was made a major-general in the State service and was at different periods a delegate in the Continental Congress. His military services were principally confined to affairs of organization after the first few months of the war.
Congress after Bennington hastened to make the amende honorable to Stark. They accorded him their formal thanks and made him a brigadier-general. He participated with his characteristic ability in the battle of Springfield in New Jersey in June, 1780. He held commands consonant with his rank and his principal services were of great value in the northern department which was assigned to him after Saratoga, and which with periods of duty with Washington in the central department, with Gates in Rhode Island and recruiting services in New Hampshire occupied his attention largely
I3
STATE BUILDERS
till independence was achieved. He was then breveted a major-general as an expression of the esteem in which he was held by the representatives of the people.
Sullivan closed his distinguished career with the thanks of Congress for his successful campaign against the Six Nations in 1779, in which, as already written, the New Hampshire line regiments were an important factor.
He had distinguished himself most conspicuously in the two Rhode Island campaigns, the relief of the army in Canada, the campaign of 1779, in all of which he had independent command; and his loyalty, heroic spirit and superior military ability were well proven at the siege of Boston, the battles of Long Island, Trenton, Princeton, Brandywine and Germantown.
He continued in the public service his share of the time as did Langdon, Whipple, Bartlett and Livermore, as a conspicuously useful member of the Continental Congress.
THE RANGER SERVICE.
The large extent of frontier which surrounded the New Hampshire settlements on three sides, and which had been protected by the people themselves,-every generation in a period of a hundred years having had one or two French and Indian wars,-had caused the essential elements of the best soldiers of Ranger service to be hereditary with the men of this province. In 1775, several companies of "Rangers" of similar or- ganization and training to those of Rogers in the last French and Indian war, were raised and despatched to Canada under Bedel. After the termination of the operations in Canada in 1775 and 1776, which Pro- fessor Justin H. Smith in the Century Magazine aptly describes as the "Prelude of the Revolution," a
14
STATE BUILDERS
large area was open to raids by Canadians, Tories and Indians, by way of the wilderness region which is now northern Vermont, also by the Connecticut Valley and the Androscoggin region. Bedel's third and fourth regiments and, after the discontinuance of Bedel's fourth regiment in the summer of 1779, Hazen's Continental regiment, occupied the Connecti- cut Valley in force. Thus a most important pro- ducing region and granary was quite effectually secured from guerilla incursions. Besides these regiments was the battalion of Maj. Benj. Whitcomb, a partisan leader of a career which is replete with startling ad- venture and singular exemption from military misfor- tune and failure, which was in continuous employment, and many other companies and scouts raised for special duty and for limited periods. Among the ranger captains or commanding lieutenants were Joshua Heath, Jeremiah Eames, Nathan Caswell, Ebenezer Webster (father of the great expounder of the constitution), David Woodworth, Samuel Atkinson, Josiah Russell, George Aldrich, Nathan Taylor, Samuel Paine, Eph- raim Stone, Samuel Runnels, Thomas Simpson, Jonah Chapman, Joseph Hutchins, Peter Stearns, Jacob Smith, Jonathan Smith, James Osgood, Ezekiel Walker, Philip Page, John Adams, Elijah Dinsmore, Thomas Nichols, Peter Kimball, Absalom Peters, John House, James Ladd, and James Blake. The operations of the com- panies of rangers doing scouting duty between the arm- ies, or garrison service at the frontier outposts, were usually directed by and the immediate business of the commissariat committed to such prominent men of the vicinity as Col. John Hurd of Haverhill, Col. Joseph Whipple of Jefferson (then Dartmouth), Col. Israel Morey of Orford and Col. Charles Johnston of Haverhill.
I5
STATE BUILDERS
THE MARINE.
Colonel Chandler E. Potter in his Military History of New Hampshire, says, p. 367 :-
"The Governor of our State is styled 'The Com- mander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy.' This title was given when we had an army and navy, and when it was doubtless thought we might have still larger and more efficient ones.
"The attention of the Committee of Safety was early sought, to initiate a system of privateering which might grow more formidable, and at least greatly harass the enemy. Early in 1775 the armed schooner 'En- terprise' was fitted out by the citizens of Portsmouth, to cruise against the enemy, and Daniel Jackson was appointed her commander. Capt. Jackson, for some reason, resigned his office, and Capt. Thomas Palmer was appointed in his place by the Committee of Safety. His appointment is thus recorded in their journal :
" 'February 23, 1776. At the request of the proprie- tors of the schooner privateer, called the Enterprise, we have appointed Thomas Palmer commander, in the room of Capt. Daniel Jackson, resigned.'
"The 'McClary,' another armned schooner, under the auspices of the Committee of Safety, and commanded. by Capt. Robert Parker, 'sailed on a cruise against the enemy.' The 'McClary' took many valuable prizes, and among others the 'Susanna,' which for a time was the source of much difficulty betwixt our legislature and congress. The 'Susanna' was brought into Ports- mouth, and condemned as a lawful prize, being an American vessel trading at an enemy's port. The owners brought the matter before Congress, and the decision of our state court was reversed. This proceed- ing produced a most spirited remonstrance from our legislature, vindicating state rights. Many other armed
I6
STATE BUILDERS
vessels were fitted out, and did the enemy much in- jury, under the command of the noted and gallant sailors of Portsmouth. Some of these 'armed vessels,' and their commanders, were as follows :
The Enterprise, Thomas Palmer.
McClary, Robert Parker, (Thomas Darling. )
General Sullivan, (Thomas Manning.)
General Mifflin, Daniel McNiel.
Rambler, Thomas Manning.
Pluto, John Hill. Humbird, Samuel Rice. Fortune, John Mendum.
Bellona, Thomas Manning.
Adventure, Kinsman Peverly.
Marquis of Kildare, Thomas Palmer.
Portsmouth, frigate built, Robert Parker.
Hampden, frigate built, Thomas Pickering."
Paul Jones, though he was a Virginia planter at the beginning of the war, may fairly be regarded as a New Hampshire sailor. His "Ranger" sailed from Ports- mouth and many of the most efficient men and officers under his command on the "Ranger" and the "Richard" were of this State. t now transpires that George Roberts, who threw the grenades into the Serapis, amid- ships, and exploded her magazines, was a New Hamp- shire sailor. In a recent number of the Granite Monthly is an interesting sketch of Seaman Roberts by his grandson, Col. Charles H. Roberts. Gen. Whipple, Coi. Hackett, John Langdon and other New Hampshire leaders were actively engaged at different periods in fitting out ships of war at Portsmouth. The services of these men were invaluable. It is a desideratum long recognized in New Hampshire history that her part in the naval wars of the colonial, revolutionary and state periods has never been accorded seasonable or adequate
I7
STATE BUILDERS
treatment. In Buell's recent Life of Paul Jones; in the Centennial History of the Navy Yard at Portsmouth by Furness; in the History of the Navy Yard at Ports- mouth by Preble; in the Correspondence of Commodore Perkins; and in the printed proceedings on the occasion of the dedication of his statue at Concord, glimpses at the abundance of material available to this purpose are afforded.
A WHEEL WITHIN A WHEEL.
In almost the entire continuance of the war the ad- ministrators of the New Hampshire government were embarrassed by a serious defection which existed in the western part of the state, and particularly in Grafton county. While the state was maintaining a revolu- tionary attitude towards the mother country, a revolt against the authority of the state itself was a serious and persistent internal condition. This state of affairs involved a refusal of many of the towns to participate in state governmental affairs. These towns were all in the Connecticut river valley or in that vicinity. A number of the leading men in these towns were from Connecticut, and their ideas of government were naturally in accordance with their education and experience in the commonwealth from which they had emigrated.
Hanover, with its college and faculty, which consti- tuted a Connecticut colony of itself, was the intellectual centre for this movement which took substantial form early in 1776.
The form of government adopted for the time be- ing by the fifth Provincial congress was not acceptable to the majority of the people in the towns now con- stituting the western part of Grafton county. Col. Hurd and Lt. Col. Chas. Johnston, however, were not
18
STATE BUILDERS
partisans of the views which generally prevailed on this subject in their vicinity. Col. Morey and Col. Bedel were conspicuous among the opposers of the party in power in the so-called Exeter government. The group of towns which included Gunthwait on the north and Lebanon on the south in Grafton county, organized themselves by town groups and local committees for the management of civil and military affairs, and formally declined to recognize the new state government of New Hampshire. It will not be found useful to pursue the history of this controversy at length in this connection. It may be remembered, however, that the Independents of the Connecticut Valley manœuvred with skill and persistence to accomplish such a union of Vermont towns with New Hampshire as promised either to augment the influence of the western part of the state and to diminish in a corresponding degree the political power which the eastern section had acquired, or severing themselves from New Hampshire to join with the proposed state of Vermont or New Connecti- cut under more favorable conditions than they could expect from New Hampshire. At two periods between 1776 and the close of the war, that is to say, in 1778 and 1781-2, these towns were in active union with Ver- mont so far as the formal action of both parties could accomplish such a result.
THE CAUSE OF THE CONTROVERSY.
Briefly stated, the contention of the New Connecti- cut party was that upon the dissolution of political rela- tions between the colonies and the mother country, and more especially in respect to the territory in contro- versy between New York and New Hampshire, the towns, being the political units and the original source of political authority, were invested with the right to
19
.
STATE BUILDERS
determine for themselves the question whether to accord allegiance to the one or the other of the disputing states or whether to erect themselves into a state independent of the mandate of any other association of towns or communities formed for purposes of government. They urged that inasmuch as the New Hampshire con- stitution of 1776 had never been submitted to the people or to the towns for ratification and had been accepted by a part of the towns only, it was operative only upon such as had elected to ratify its provisions. The pro- testing towns took care not to do any act which could be construed as a ratification of that form of government in the six years from early in 1776 to 1782. Their argument was presented in the controversial and offi- cial literature of that time with great skill and effective- ness. They succeeded in making themselves felt as a political force to be reckoned with by three estab- lished states, and the Continental Congress, as well as the prospective commonwealth of Vermont.
CIVIL GOVERNMENT 1775-1784.
The Civil Government of New Hampshire from the time of the departure of Gov. Wentworth to the or- ganization of a new form of government in June, 1784, under the constitution of 1783, was purely legislative. The constitution of 1776, the first adopted by either of the thirteen states, was a very brief instrument and evidently intended to be temporary, or as it was offi- cially stated at the time, "to continue during the present unhappy and unnatural contest with Great Britain." It was promulgated and adopted by the fifth convention, chosen in the latter part of 1775, and it was never sub- mitted to or formally ratified by the people. It pro- vided for a council or senate of twelve members, to be elected for the first year by the house of representatives
20
STATE BUILDERS
and after that by the people. These councillors were chosen according to population, but with a recognition of county boundaries, so that a councillor, with rare exceptions, represented no county but the one in which he lived. A president of the council or senate was chosen by that body, the senior senator to preside in his absence. The president of the senate or council was, of course, always a member of that body. The legis- lature appointed the general and field officers of the militia and the officers of the state regiments and other state organizations in active service,-certain rights of election or nomination of company officers by the com- panies being recognized. The legislature appointed the judges of the court, but each court could appoint its own clerk. The legislature administered the executive business of the state. In periods when the legislature was not in session, those interims were carefully pro- vided for by the constitution of a committee of safety which enabled the legislative body to keep control of all affairs and have its own members in constant control of all vacation business. Meshech Weare was, how- ever, continuously president of the council and presi- dent or chairman of the Committee of Safety. Thus it was that this able, devoted and unassuming patriot be- came the "war governor" of New Hampshire in the "time that tried men's souls." The legislature chose the delegates to the continental congress. There was no occasion under this form of government for state election for any purpose. The counties elected the councillors, the register of deeds and the county treas- urer by popular vote. All other county officers were appointed by the legislature. There was no such work- ing principle as incompatibility in office holding. Meshech Weare, president from January, 1776, to June, 1784, was also a considerable part of the time chief justice and colonel of his regiment in the
2I
STATE BUILDERS
militia. It is evident from the fact that a differ- ent form of government under a new constitution proposed in 1778 was rejected that the temporary gov- ernment was satisfactory to the majority of the people. It was the manifestation of a sharp reaction against the former method of colonial government.
Among the most valuable men in the government of the Revolutionary period were Meshech Weare, John Langdon, John Dudley, Josiah Bartlett, Matthew Thorn- ton, William Whipple, Nathaniel Folsom, Ebenezer Thompson, John Hurd, Samuel Ashley, Nicholas Gilman, George King Atkinson, Timothy Walker, Jr., John Went- worth, Benjamin Bellows, Moses Nichols, Charles John- ston, Timothy Farrar, Enoch Hale, Francis Worcester, George Frost, Jacob Abbott, Thomas Sparhawk, Moses Dow, Francis Blood, John McCleary, Samuel Hunt, George Gains, Nathaniel S. Prentice, Paul Dudley Sar- gent, Otis Baker, Benjamin Barker, Thomas Bartlett, John Calfe, Jonathan Blanchard, Wyseman Claggett, Samuel Cutts, Levi Dearborn, Richard Downing, Stephen Evans, John Giddings, Benjamin Giles, David Gilman, Woodbury Langdon, John Taylor Gilman, Jo- seph Gilman, Samuel Gilman, Samuel Hobart, Jonathan Lovewell, Pierce Long, Hercules Mooney, Israel Morey, Josiah Moulton, Thomas Odiorne, Matthew Patten, Samuel Patten, Nathaniel Peabody, Samuel Philbrick, John Pickering, Ebenezer Potter, Ephraim Robinson, John Smith, Christopher Toppan, John Webster, John Wentworth, Jr., Robert Wilson, Phillips White, Joseph Whipple and John Hale.
It is a noteworthy fact that the record does not indi- cate that John Stark was the incumbent of any civil office whatever unless it might have been some town function or that he may have held a commission as justice of the peace.
The list of men chosen by the New Hampshire Legisla-
22
STATE BUILDERS
ture to be representatives in the Continental Congresses contains many historic names. It is probable that not all of these delegates were in actual attendance. As indi- cated by the record they were :
John Sullivan, Nathaniel Folsom, Josiah Bartlett, Wil- liam Whipple, Matthew Thornton, John Langdon, Sam- uel Ashley, George King Atkinson, Benjamin Bellows, Jonathan Blanchard, Moses Dow, Abiel Foster, George Frost. John Taylor Gilman, Woodbury Langdon, Samuel Livermore, Nathaniel Peabody, Ebenezer Thompson, Timothy Walker, Jr., John Wentworth, Jr., Benjamin West, Phillips White, Pierce Long, Elisha Payne, Nicholas Gilman, John Pickering, John Sparhawk and Paine Wingate.
Bartlett, Whipple and Thornton were the ones who had the exceptional opportunity and distinction of having been signers of the Declaration of Independence.
The chief justices of the superior court in the war pe- riod were Meshech Weare, who had been educated for the ministry, but who had a long experience as a judge of the province, and Samuel Livermore, an able lawyer and dis- tinguished statesman.
The associate justices were Leverett Hubbard, lawyer; Mathew Thornton, physician: John Wentworth, Sr., law- yer; Woodbury Langdon, merchant; Josiah Bartlett, physician, and William Whipple, merchant.
These will be recognized as men who were conspicu- ous in other important branches of the public service. The courts at times were not open at all and until late it the progress of revolutionary events there was no demand for the services of judges and juries. There seemed to be scant opportunity for law suits between man and man, while an all-absorbing international contest was con- trolling every effort and every resource of individual and state.
23
STATE BUILDERS
PERMANENT STATEHOOD.
The leaders in the Revolution naturally became the leaders in civil affairs upon the settlement of a permanent government. The first period under the constitution of 1783 will be included between the beginning of the new government in June, 1784, and the government under the amended constitution in 1793.
By general consent the patriot Weare became president of the state and served from June, 1784, to June, 1785. This closed a career of remarkable purity, usefulness and conspicuous success. President Weare's war administra- tion was in the most trying epoch through which the state has ever passed. No student of New Hampshire history should pass by the story of the life of this man with superficial examination. The most adequate ac- count of this service yet presented is to be found in the biography by Hon. Ezra S. Stearns in the proceedings of the New Hampshire Society of the Sons of the American Revolution.
When Meshech Weare passed from the sphere of political activity the not unfriendly rivalry of John Lang- don and John Sullivan for the honors of state became the most interesting feature of New Hampshire politics. Langdon succeeded Weare for one term; Sullivan suc- ceeded Langdon for two terms. Langdon was again elected in 1788, and Sullivan was returned to office in 1789. Josiah Bartlett took office in 1790, serving three terms in succession. He was the last to hold the title of president.
Meanwhile the federal convention of 1787, of which John Langdon and Nicholas Gilman were the New Hampshire members, had formulated a constitution for the United States of America. The consent of nine states was required for its ratification. This constitution be- came the organic law of the new nation by its ratification
· 24
.
STATE BUILDERS
on the part of New Hampshire, the ninth state, in June, 1788.
Under this new federal government John Langdon and Paine Wingate became senators in the winter of 1788-9, while Nicholas Gilman, Samuel Livermore and Abiel Foster were the first representatives in congress elected by this state. John Sullivan was appointed as the first district judge of New Hampshire by President Washing- ton in the ensuing year. He was at the same time presi- dent of the state and held both offices until the end of his term as president in June, 1790.
Senator Langdon, who was president of the state for the year 1788-9, resigned this office January 22, 1789, to take his seat in the senate. John Pickering then suc- ceeded to the office as president of the state, and was the incumbent of it until the following June. This fact is often overlooked in tables of official succession and in political histories of the state.
The contest over the adoption of the federal constitu- tion was the most important subject before the people in this period. Debt and paper money disturbed and de- ranged the business affairs of the new state and were the causes of great distress among the people.
The disaffected elements were upon the verge of rebel- lion in 1786 and surrounded the assembled legislature in a clamorous mob. This uprising was successfully quelled under the discreet management of President Sullivan,- a display of military force being made under the com- mand of the veteran, Cilley.
STATE GOVERNMENT FROM 1793 TO 1816.
If the political standards of a free people may be fairly judged at any given time by the character of the chief magistrates whom they select, it may be said of New Hampshire that in no other period does this test respond
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.