USA > New Hampshire > Cheshire County > Dublin > The history of Dublin, N.H., Volume 1852 > Part 3
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
21
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
A bill to Robert Blood is made up of sundry bowls of West India toddy, mugs of flip, and other kindred spirits, with an occasional intermixture of victuals, lodging and horse keep- ing. It would seem, however, that he did not spend his money upon these vanities, as the bill had been standing so long that it was charged with eight years' interest.
Jonathan Morse must have been out during the greater part of the war. The author of the "Memorial of the Morses " represents him to have been in the battles of Bunker Hill, Bennington, Ticonderoga and Monmouth, and to have signalized himself by deeds of daring and acts of magnanimity, some of which he recounts, and concludes with saying, " In short, Jonathan was so humane and honest, so rough and ready, that, had he lived to this time, he might have been President of the United States."
Thomas Hardy was in the service for some time. There is a note given to him by the selectmen, on behalf of the town, dated April 17, 1778, for sixty pounds, payable within ten months, - and one of like amount, date and tenor, to Jonathan Morse.
In April, 1777, the town voted "to give one hundred dollars to each man sent for to this town to join the three battalions now raising in this State."
In August of the same year, they made a contribution of " material aid" to the cause, which, though not of great magnitude, was of a kind to make some noise in the camp. The receipt shows what it was. "Dublin, August 3, 1777. Received of the Committe of this town, two tin kittles, for the yuse of Genral Starks Briggade, Prised 14 shillings. Received by me, - SAMSON POWERS."
At the March meeting, in 1779, a committee was chosen to hire three soldiers for the Continental Battalions, during the war. The soldiers were not forthcoming, it would seem. In February, 1781, a committee was chosen to hire the town's quota of men, to serve in the Continental Army for three years, or during the war, and empowered to engage, on behalf the town, for payment of their hire.
22
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
The three soldiers appear to have been found, eventually. One was Jonathan Morse. One was John Stone. The terms on which the latter was hired appear, in part, from a receipt given by him to the committee. It is dated March 19, 1781, and sets forth that whereas he had received from the com- mittee three notes (the amount of them is not stated), for which he was to serve three years in the Continental Army, unless sooner discharged, he promises that, if he does not serve above six months, he will have the contents of but one note ; if not above eighteen months, the contents of but two notes ; and if he is gone two years, he will have but two notes. Mr. Stone probably died in the war or soon after its close, as in December, 1788, the town passed a vote, " that the selectmen make such consideration to the widow Stone as they may think reasonable, on account of the advantage the town had of the depreciation of her late husband's wages ; " - a very proper and honorable vote, certainly.
The other soldier I presume to have been Hart Balch, - as I find that in November, 1787, the town voted him five dollars, for the damage he had sustained by not having the land cleared according to bargain, which the town was to clear for him, for his service done in the army. There is also a receipt of his, dated April 26, 1784, acknowledging the receipt from the town, of keeping for a cow, fire-wood and house-room, for one year.
It was a part of the arrangement, that the soldiers' work upon their land, and the like, should be carried on, in their absence, by the town. In April, 1781, a committee was chosen, to appraise the labor to be done for the soldiers for the year, and to divide the town into classes, "so that each man may know what he is to do, and where to do it," - a very practical, common-sense reason. The same course was pursued in subsequent years. In 1783, the town voted to receive rye, at five shillings a bushel, for paying the soldiers' hire. Rye, by the way, was common currency, in those days. Not only did private individuals make their contracts payable in that article, but the town-treasurer frequently
23
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
gave and received, on behalf of the town, notes and obliga- tions payable in the same way.
To provide the means of supporting its soldiers in the army, it became necessary for the State to levy taxes upon the towns. Sometimes the taxation was in the nature of raising a stated amount of specific articles, instead of money. Thus, they had a " beef-tax ;" and in August, 1781, an act was passed for supplying the Continental Army with ten thousand gallons of West India rum, - of which the share assessed upon Dublin was forty-six and a half gallons. Any town neglecting seasonably to furnish its proportion, was to forfeit " one Spanish milled dollar or other silver or gold equivalent, for each gallon in arrears." Instead of the West India, " good New England rum, in the proportion of six quarts of the latter to one gallon of the former," might be furnished as a substitute. It appears that Dublin, for some cause, failed to furnish its proportion of the article, - as the receipt of a deputy-sheriff shows the payment, at a subse- quent time, by one of the selectmen, of the amount of the town's "rum-tax and cost," upon an extent, or execution. We can hardly, in view of the prevailing sentiments and customs of the times, pay our ancestors the compliment of supposing that their omission to provide the article, in specie, arose from any conscientious scruples, on their part, as to the propriety of the use of it.
After the war was over, our townsmen cast about to see what was the condition of their military stores. In June, 1783, they chose a committee to examine the town-stock of powder, and dispose of it, if necessary. It appears that it was disposed of, some time afterwards, as in November, 1786, they voted to approve of what the selectmen had done in selling the town's powder. But, not to seem want- ing in respect to the art military, they voted that the selectmen " take four dollars of the powder-money and buy a drum and fife for the training company ;" and that the rest of the money be applied to purchasing ammunition for the town.
24
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
Before the Revolution, the usual form for the commence- ment of town-meeting warrants was, "These are in his majesty's name, to will and require you forthwith to notify and warn all the freeholders and other inhabitants of Dublin, qualified to vote in town-affairs," &c. This form continued to be used until March, 1775, inclusive. Then, for a time, it was, " You are required to notify," &c., without specifying the authority by which the requisition was made. After July 3, 1776, as provided by the General Court, it was, " In the name of the government and people of the Colony of New Hampshire." By an act of the General Court, of Sept. 11, 1776, the colony assumed the name of "the State of New Hampshire ;" and thenceforth the warrant opens, " In the name of the government and people of the State of New Hampshire."
The Federal Constitution having been framed and pre- sented for ratification, and a Convention being about to assemble, in New Hampshire, to act upon it, a town-meeting was called, in January, 1788, to take the matter into consid- eration. At the meeting, a committee was chosen, to con- sider the subject; and the meeting adjourned, for a week, to hear their report. No report was made at the adjournment ; but another committee was chosen, and thereupon the meet- ing was adjourned for a week more, when, the record states, " Met according to adjournment, and voted to dissolve the meeting." No reason is intimated why no action was taken in the case. A failure so marked and deliberate, to declare for the instrument, had it occurred in these days of constitu- tional enlightenment, there is reason to apprehend, would have subjected the delinquents to the grave suspicion of lacking patriotism.
There was no one chosen from Dublin as a delegate to the Convention which was to decide upon the ratification of the Constitution. But Samuel Griffin, who was chosen from Packersfield, it is presumed, represented Dublin also, as it appears from the treasurer's accounts that the latter
25
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
town paid a portion of his expenses for attendance at the Convention.
Dublin and Packersfield were, at first, classed together for the choice of representative to the General Court, - the member being taken from the one town and the other, alter- nately. Samuel Griffin, of Packersfield, was chosen in 1789, and again in 1791 ; whilst, on the part of Dublin, Reuben Morse was sent in 1790, and Samuel Twitchell in 1792. After the last-named year, Dublin was entitled, of itself, to send a representative.
The price paid officials in the town's service, such as selectmen, committees and the like, was, for a long time, pretty uniformly three shillings a day, - except for running town-lines, which was regularly four shillings. In 1795, the selectmen charged four shillings a day ; in 1800, ninety cents ; and, soon after that, it came to be a dollar a day, which is presumed ever since to have been the standing price.
In early times, and up to the year 1791, when an act was passed relieving them from that duty, the constables were, by virtue of their office, collectors of taxes. Every man in town was obliged, with certain limitations, to serve as con- stable, when chosen, under a penalty of three pounds. The collection of the taxes was, of course, rather an onerous ser- vice ; and, when the population became considerable, rendered it difficult to get constables who would willingly perform the duty. As early as 1785, the town allowed the constables something for their services ; and, soon after, the practice was introduced of venduing the collection of the taxes. Four- pence-halfpenny was about the common rate paid for col- lecting.
All bills and accounts against the town were required to be brought before the inhabitants, in town-meeting assem- bled, for allowance. This was uniformly done, until the year 1814, when, by a vote of the town, the allowance of such claims was submitted to the selectmen ; and, unless in respect to the accounts of the selectmen themselves, that has doubtless been the practice ever since. In like manner,
4
26
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
the abatement of taxes was always by vote in town-meeting. In matters of this kind, while the public convenience has been subserved by the change, the practice, it will be per- ceived, has been growing less democratic, - the people having entrusted to their agents the doing of many things which formerly they attended to themselves in town-meet- ings.
The town has, at times, been subjected to considerable expense for supporting paupers, and assisting needy people. In the earlier days of its history, the practice was adopted of warning new-comers out of town, with a view to prevent their acquiring a legal settlement. This had to be done within a year after the person came into the town. There is a list preserved of the persons included in the successive warnings, made once a year or oftener, commencing in 1778, and extending through a period of ten years ; and undoubt- edly the practice was continued afterwards. They seem, certainly at first, to have warned out all, indiscriminately, - without regard to their condition or ability to support them- selves, -as the list contains some of the most substantial inhabitants, being headed by Nathan Bixby, who came from Framingham, in 1777, and who, for many years, was com- monly the largest tax-payer in the town.
There were, however, some, at an early day, whom the town had to assist. The family of Jabez Puffer, - a most unfortunate family, - received such aid as early as 1779. For several years, they were supplied by the town, with articles of subsistence and necessaries, - and very liberally supplied, it would seem ; as these items, for a long while, con- stitute one of the main staples of the town-expenditures.
At length, the wisdom of somebody devised the scheme of venduing the town's poor, as it was expressed. The ex- periment was first tried in 1795, and was so successful that the practice was continued, certainly till 1822. It is one of the most exceptionable practices that ever obtained in the town. It was aggravated tenfold by the custom of furnish- ing, at the expense of the town, on those occasions, intoxi-
27
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
cating drinks, for those who were present, serving to make the most prompt bidders of a class of men the least fitted to have charge of the bartered victims. Whether this custom prevailed from the first, I am not advised; but certainly it was in vogue in comparatively recent times, - from 1814 to 1822. The treasurer's accounts, for almost every year during that period, contain items for "liquor furnished at the time the poor were put out," and on other occasions when it was thought necessary to stimulate men's ideas, and make them do things which they would not do when in the full possession of their sober senses. Thus, in 1815, there is a bill of nine mugs of toddy, at the time the poor of the town were let out; two mugs at the letting out of the school- house by Drury Morse's ; and fifteen mugs at the venduing of the town-land, - the price, twenty-five cents a mug. The practice in question, as well as the aggravation thus superinduced, may claim the benefit of the plea of common usage, to go, in extenuation, for what it is worth.
Our townsmen were sometimes sorely tried by the depre- dations of wild beasts and mischievous birds. In the earlier days of the settlement, bears haunted the vicinity of the cultivated lands ; and, though scarcely dangerous to human life, they were a terror to the inhabitants, and were sadly destructive especially of the corn-fields. To a much later time, wolves, which found a retreat in the rock-cleft chasms of the Monadnock's ragged sides, in their nocturnal incur- sions into the sheep-folds and pastures, made deadly havoc of the flocks. A call for the redress of a grievance of this kind was made, through the town-warrant, in August, 1792, in the shape of an article, "to see if the town will give any encouragement for killing wolves." The town responded to the appeal by voting to give a bounty of eight dollars to any of the inhabitants of this town, who should, before the twentieth day of the next March, kill any wolf found within the limits of Dublin, Jaffrey, Rindge, Fitzwilliam or Marl- borough ; also to give to any inhabitant of any of the other towns named, the same bounty for killing any wolf found in
28
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
either of these towns, which the respective towns shall give for killing wolves ; - provided, that such towns will give the inhabitants of Dublin the same bounty which they give their own inhabitants.
We have here an exemplification of the doctrine of comity, and fair reciprocity, between the towns, as well as a practical illustration of the theory of intervention on their part, to secure non-intervention on the part of the wolves. How many of these latter suffered under the operation of this sanguinary edict, we know not ; but certain it is, from receipts for the bounty, paid upon certificates of the fact from the selectmen of Jaffrey, that Captain Benjamin Spaul- ding caught a grown wolf, in Jaffrey, which he killed on the 5th of September, 1792, and another about the first of November following. He must have been a terror to all surviving wolves, if any there were.
In June, 1799, it was voted, upon like principles of reci- procity, to give, for one year, ten dollars for killing a wolf a year old, and five dollars for a younger one, within either of the towns of Dublin, Fitzwilliam, Jaffrey, Marlborough and Packersfield.
In March, 1805, the town voted to give a bounty of twenty-five cents on all old crows, and twelve and a half cents on all young ones, killed within the town, in May and June next. As the crow is fabled to live a hundred years, it might become a nice question of casuistry, at what age the creature could be said to be old. But, as the maxim is, that the evil intent makes up for deficiency of age, it may be presumed they deemed the crow old, as soon as it became capable of doing mischief.
These things, apparently so trivial, show, nevertheless, the temper of the men. They aimed at a practical result, and looked steadily to that. In offering a bounty upon these animals, they were evidently not actuated by any special enmity to the wolves or the crows : they did not, according to the modern doctrine, demand indemnity for the past, also, but only sought security for the future. Hence they grad-
29
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
uated their rewards to meet the estimated exigency, calcu- lating the chances that the juvenile wolf or crow would attain to the full maturity of wolf or crowhood, and become a permanent settler in the vicinage. They seem, however, to have come to the conclusion, that they had underrated the vitality and inhabitativeness of the crow ; for, upon the next occasion of their legislating upon the subject (in 1811), we find them offering twenty-five cents on old crows, and seven- teen cents on young ones.
The town has, from time to time, extended its countenance, though to a limited extent, to the military. The memorable grant, in 1786, of four dollars, to buy a drum and fife, has been already noticed. In 1807, the town, through a com- mittee appointed for the purpose, petitioned the General Court for an artillery company. That body responded to the application for one thing by granting another, which was probably just as good. They authorized the formation of a company of grenadiers ; and the town, the next year, voted to accept the substitute, and chose a committee to consult with the field-officers concerning the rank, which the company should hold in the regiment. Military and fire companies are always sensitive upon this matter of rank.
At the March meeting in 1809, a vote was passed em- powering the selectmen to furnish the grenadier company with a stand of colors, if they should think best. It seems that, for some cause, they failed to do it ; for in November, 1810, the town voted, peremptorily, that the selectmen fur- nish the company with a stand of colors ; which was done soon after, at an expense of twenty-five dollars. The com- pany continued to perform its warlike achievements under that standard, until, having become faded and tattered, it was superseded by another, which was presented to the company by a former resident of the town.
I have stated that the proprietors of the township had expended about six hundred dollars upon the meeting-house, by the year 1773. In April of that year, they voted not to raise any more money, at present, for that purpose. This
30
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
was the last meeting held by the proprietors, until, ten years later (Sept. 11, 1783), a meeting was called, " to see if the proprietors would finish building the meeting-house, or give it to the town ; " and it was voted to give it to the town, as their property.
At a town-meeting, held Oct. 13th of the same year, it was voted to accept of the meeting-house, as a donation from the proprietors. At the same time, they voted to finish the house, and sell the pew-ground in it, except one pew on the right hand of the pulpit. Precisely how much had been done to the meeting-house, up to that time, is not known. Doubtless it was only rough-boarded upon the outside. The pew-ground was planned out in 1773; but it is presumed that no pews were built, and probably no pulpit, till after the house came into the possession of the town. It had then been used for a meeting-house some twelve years, and Mr. Sprague had been settled six years.
The pew-ground, as it was termed, which was the space upon the floor on which the pews were to be built, was sold, in separate lots, to the highest bidder, with the restrictions that no man be allowed to purchase a pew-lot, but an inhab- itant of the town; that the purchasers build the pews uniform, with handsome panel-work and a handsome banister on the top ; that pews on the walls of the house the owners should ceil up as high as the bottom of the windows ; and that the floor of the pews should not be raised above eight inches from the floor of the house. The purchaser was required to build his pew when called on by the committee appointed to finish the meeting-house, or he forfeited his lot. There was a further provision in these words : "Every person that owns a pew shall occupy no other seat in the meeting-house, until his pew be as full seated as is comfort- able for those that seat it; and, if any person owns more than one pew, he shall not shut it up, and keep people from sitting in it."
The amount expended at this time appears, from a paper entitled " The Account of what the Committee have laid out
31
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
toward finishing the Meeting House," to have been about six hundred dollars, - about the same sum that was origi- nally laid out upon it. But this seems not to have fully satisfied everybody, since, in 1788, we find, in the town- meeting warrant, an article, " to see what method the town will take to finish the meeting-house." The article was, however, passed over " to some future meeting ;" and it is a grave question, if, indeed, there be any question about it, whether, in fact, the meeting-house was ever finished at all.
The salary of Mr. Sprague, - sixty pounds, or two hun- dred dollars, - not extravagantly large at the best, was soon rendered wholly inadequate by the depreciation of paper- money, which began in 1777, and went on so rapidly, that, by 1781, it had become nearly worthless. At the March meeting in 1779, the town voted to give Mr. Sprague one hundred and sixty pounds salary that year. In September following, they voted to make his salary as good to him that year as it was when he was settled ; and, for that purpose, to give him nine hundred pounds salary, - including what was granted him in March. But even this sum, nominally fifteen times the amount, he undoubtedly found, before he got it, to be quite unequal, in actual value, to the original salary. To give some idea of the extent of the deprecia- tion, even while the paper-money continued to be used as a standard of value, it may be stated, that the town was assessed for state-tax, in 1780, ten thousand and thirty-seven pounds five shillings, - not old tenor, but lawful money, - equal to $33,457.50. Rye sold for fifteen pounds, or fifty dollars, a bushel; and other things in proportion.
But the people soon abandoned the task of making their computations by the depreciating currency, and resorted to a more substantial standard. In 1780, we find them voting Mr. Sprague two hundred bushels of rye, or the value thereof in beef, pork, Indian corn, butter, cheese, sheep's wool, flax or any other article that shall be acceptable to him, as a salary for that year ; allowing, for rye, six shillings a bushel ; Indian corn, five shillings and fourpence ; butter,
32
CENTENNIAL ADDRESS.
one shilling a pound ; cheese, eightpence ; sheep's wool, two shillings and threepence ; flax, one shilling ; beef, three- pence three farthings ; and pork, fivepence.
The next year they voted him the same salary, -two hun- dred bushels of rye, or the value thereof in other articles, at the same rates as last year, - to be delivered at his house by those who were to pay it. It will readily occur to any one, that this method of receiving his salary could not have been particularly convenient, nor was likely to be peculiarly ad- vantageous to him. There is an anecdote widely circulated of Mr. Sprague, that his people once proposed to increase his salary, but that he begged them not to do it, since it plagued him almost to death to get what they agreed to give him at first. Considering the way in which his salary was paid, one can readily appreciate the feeling which must have prompted the deprecatory reply that was thus given, or cer- tainly might well have been, had the proposal in question actually been made.
The difficulties growing out of the depreciation of the currency, coupled with some others relative to Mr. Sprague's improvement of certain of the town's land, led to rather a sharp encounter between him and the town, in 1781, in which he sent to them two or three letters, couched in language very plain, and not slightly tart. The troubles, however, were amicably adjusted. The next year the town voted Mr. Sprague, for his salary, "two hundred hard dol- lars, or two hundred bushels of rye."
In 1801, Mr. Sprague, having received from the estate of his father, who died three or four years before that time, a considerable amount of money, made a proposition to the town, which was accepted, to relinquish his salary entirely, upon certain conditions. A letter from him was laid before the town, setting forth that, in consequence of bodily indis- position and infirmities, he had been advised by the best physicians to a change of air and situation, and not to re- tain a permanent residence in Dublin; and he proposed to relinquish, from the 12th of May, 1801, his annual salary
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.