USA > New Hampshire > The history of New-Hampshire > Part 17
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
" Mary Rann, aged thirty years or thereabout, witnesseth, that the 21 day of March, '84. being in company with Seabank Hog,t I heard her say ; it was very hard for the governor of this province to strike Sam. Seavy before he spoke ; the said Hog said also that it was well the said Seavy's mother was not there for the governor, for if she had, there liad been bloody work for him. I heard the said Hog say also, that the governor and the rest of the gentlemen were a crew of pitiful curs, and did they want earthly honor ? if they did, she would pull off her head clothes and come in her liair to them, like a parcel of pitiful beggarly curs as they were ; come to undo us both body and soul ; they could not be contented to take our estates from us, but they have taken away the gospel also, which the devil would have them for it."
" Sworn in the court of pleas held at Great Island the 7 of Nov. 1684.
R. CHAMBERLAIN, Prothon."
t [This name is Hodg in the records of the Quarter Sessions.]
116
HISTORY OF NEW-HAMPSHIRE. [1686.
complaint, be immediately redressed ; that information should be given of approaching danger from enemies; that the Indians should not remove their families from the neighborhood of the English without giving timely notice, and if they did, that it should be taken for a declaration of war; and, that whilst these articles were observed, the English would assist and protect them against the Mohawks, and all other enemies.1 The danger was but im- aginary, and the peace continued about four years.
Though Mason was hitherto disappointed in his views of re- covering the inhabited part of the province, he endeavored to lay a foundation for realizing his claim to the waste lands. A pur- chase having been made from the Indians, by Jonathan Tyng and nineteen others, * of a tract of land on both sides the river Merri- mack, six miles in breadth, from Souhegan river to Winnipiseogee lake; Mason by deed confirmed the same, reserving to himself
Apr. 15. and his heirs the yearly rent of ten shillings. This was called the million acre purchase.2 About the same time, he farmed out to Hezekiah Usher and his heirs, the mines, min- May 15. erals, and ores within the limits of New-Hampshire, for the term of one thousand years ; reserving to himself one quarter part of the royal ores, and one seventeenth of the baser sorts,3 and having put his affairs here in the best order that the times would admit, he sailed for England, to attend the hearing of Vaughan's appeal to the king.t
(1) Original MSS. in files. (2) Douglass, vol. i. p. 419. (3) Rec. of Deeds. -
* [The other purchasers were Joseph Dudley, Charles Lidget, John Usher, Edward Randolph, John Hubbard, Robert Thompson, Samuel Shrimpton, William Stoughton, Richard Warton, Thomas Hinchman, Thaddeus Maccar- ty, Edward Thompson, John Blackwell, Peter Bulkley, William Blathwayt, Daniel Cox, and " three other persons to be hereafter named and agreed upon." Douglass, i. 420.]
t [The town of Dunstable having been granted by Massachusetts, and settled for a number of years, ordained a minister at the close of the year 1685. The members who united in forming the church were, Thomas Weld, Jonathan Tyng, John Blanchard, Cornelius Waldo, Samuel Warner, Obadiah Perry and Samuel French. Rev. Thomas Weld, the first named, graduated at Harvard college in 1671; was ordained 16 December, 1685, and died 9 June, 1702, in the 50th year of his age. He was son of Thomas Weld, of Roxbury, and grandson of Rev. Thomas Weld, one of the first ministers of that town, who returned to England, and there died. Mr. Weld was succeeded in the min- istry at Dunstable by Rev. Nathaniel Prentice, who graduated at Harvard college in 1715. He was ordained in 1718, and died 25 February, 1737. Dun- stable suffered much from the Indians, as will appear in the course of this history. In the time of Philip's war, some of the inhabitants were obliged to leave their settlements and take up their residence in the older towns, but I have met with no evidence showing that the town was at any time wholly abandoned by the inhabitants. The early settlers of Dunstable were those above named, with Robert Parris, Thomas Cumings, Isaac Cumings, Joseph Hassell, Christopher Temple, John Goold, Samuel Goold, Christopher Read, John Sollendine, Thomas Lund, Daniel Waldo, Andrew Cook, and Samuel Whiting (son of Rev. Samuel Whiting, of Billerica) who was several years the town clerk, and who died in Billerica, 14 March, 1715, aged 53. On the settlement of the divisional line between the provinces of New-Hampshire
117
GENERAL GOVERNMENT. J. DUDLEY.
1683.]
CHAPTER IX.
The administration of Dudley as President, and Andros as governor of New- England. Mason's farther attempt. His disappointment and death. Rev- olution. Sale to Allen. His commission for the government.
WHEN an arbitrary government is determined to infringe the liberty of the people, it is easy to find pretences to support the most unrighteous claims. King Charles the Second in the latter part of his reign was making large strides toward despotism .- Charters, which obstructed his pernicious views, were by a per- version of the law decreed forfeited. The city of London, and most of the corporations in England, either suffered the execution of these sentences, or tamely surrendered their franchises to the all-grasping hand of power. It could not be expected that in this general wreck of privileges, the colonies of New-England could escape. The people of Massachusetts had long been view- ed with a jealous eye.1 Though the king had repeatedly assured them of his protection, and solemnly confirmed their charter priv- ileges ; yet their spirit and principles were so totally dissonant to the corrupt views of the court, that intriguing men found easy access to the royal ear, with complaints against them. Of these, the most inveterate and indefatigable was Randolph, who made no less than eight voyages in nine years across the Atlantic, on this mischievous business.2 They were accused of extending their jurisdiction beyond the bounds of their patent ; of invading the prerogative by coining money ; of not allowing appeals to the king from their courts ; and, of obstructing the execution of the navigation and trade laws. By the king's cominand, agents were sent over to answer these complaints. They found the prejudice against the colony so strong, that it was in vain to withstand it ; and solicited instructions whether to submit to the king's pleasure, or to let the proceedings against them be issued in form of law. A solemn consultation being held, at which the clergy assisted, it was determined " to die by the hands of others rather than by " their own." Upon notice of this, the agents quitted England ; and Randolph, as the angel of death, soon followed them, 1683.
bringing a writ of quo warranto from the king's bench ; but the scire facias which issued from the chancery did October. not arrive till the time fixed for their appearance was clapsed.
(1) Hutch. col. papers. p. 377. (2) Hutch. vol. i. p. 320.
and Massachusetts, Dunstable was divided into two distinct townships, one in each province. Dunstable in New-Hampshire, which included the ancient settlement, and by far the largest portion of territory, was incorporated by charter, 1 April, 1746.]
. 118
HISTORY OF NEW-HAMPSHIRE.
[1685.
This however, was deemed too trivial an error to stop the pro- ceedings ; judgment was entered against them, and the charter declared forfeited.
The king died before a new form of government was settled ; but there could be no hope of favor from his successor, 1685. who inherited the arbitrary principles of his brother, and Feb. 6. was publicly known to be a bigoted papist.
The intended alteration in the government was introduced in the same gradual manner as it had been in New-Hampshire. A commission was issued, in which Joseph Dudley, esquire, was ap- pointed president of his majesty's territory and dominion of New- England ; William Stoughton, deputy president ; Simon Brad- street, Robert Mason, John Fitz Winthrop, John Pynchon, Peter Bulkley, Edward Randolph, Wait Winthrop, Richard Warton, John Usher, Nathaniel Saltonstall, Bartholomew Gedney, Jona- than Tyng, Dudley Bradstreet, Johin Hinckes," and Edward Tyng, counsellors. Their jurisdiction extended over Massachu- setts, New-Hampshire, Maine and the Narraganset, or King's province. These gentlemen were mostly natives of the country, some of them liad been magistrates, and one of thein, governor under the charter. No house of deputies was mentioned in the commission.
The new form of government took place on the twenty-fifth 1686. day of May ; and on the tenth of June, an order of coun- cil was issued for settling the county courts, which con- sisted of such members of the council as resided in each county, and any others of them who might be present ; with such justices as were commissioned for the purpose. These courts had the power of trying and issuing all civil causes, and all criminal mat- ters under life or limb ; from them an appeal was allowed to a su- perior court, held three times in the year, at Boston, for the whole territory ; and from thence, appeals, in certain cases, might be had to the king in council. Juries were pricked by the marshal and one justice of each county, in a list given them by the selectmen of the towns. A probate court was held at Boston, by the presi- dent, and " in the other provinces and remote counties" by a judge and clerk, appointed by the president. The territory was divided into four counties, viz. Suffolk, Middlesex, Essex and Hampshire ; and three provinces, viz. New-Hampshire, Maine, and King's province. By another order of the same date, town-taxes could not be assessed, but by allowance of two justices ; and the mem- bers of the council were exempted from paying any part thereof.1
Things were conducted with tolerable decency, and the innova-
(1) Printed orders in the files.
* [Hinckes was the only one of these counsellors who belonged to New- Hampshire. He had been appointed one of the provincial counsellors in 1683, and afterwards, in 1687, was one of Sir Edmund Andros's council.]
119
GENERAL GOVERNMENT. E. ANDROS.
1686.]
tions were rendered as little grievious as possible ; that the people might be induced more readily to submit to the long meditated introduction of a governor-general.
In December following, Sir Edmund Andros who had been governor of New-York, arrived at Boston with a commis- Dec. 30. sion, appointing him captain-general and governor in chief of the territory and dominion of New-England, in which the col- ony of Plymouth was now included .* By this commission, the governor with his council, five of whom were a quorum, were em- powered to make such laws, impose such taxes, and apply them to such purposes as they should think proper. They were also empowered to grant lands on such terms, and subject to such quit-rents, as should be appointed by the king.1 Invested with such powers, these men were capable of the most extravagant actions. Though Andros, like his master, began his administra- tion with the fairest professions, yet, like him, he soon violated them, and proved himself a fit instrument for accomplishing the most execrable designs. Those of his council who were back- ward in aiding his rapacious intentions were neglected. Seven being sufficient for a full board, he selected such only as were de- voted to him, and, with their concurrence, did what he pleased. Randolph and Mason were at first among his confidants ; but af- terward when New-York was annexed to his government, the members from that quarter were most in his favor."
To particularize the many instances of tyranny and oppression which the country suffered from these men, is not within the de- sign of this work. Let it suffice to observe, that the press was restrained ; liberty of conscience infringed ; ex- 1687. orbitant fees and taxes demanded, without the voice or consent of the people, who had no privilege of representation. The charter being vacated, it was pretended that all titles to land were annul- led ; and as to Indian deeds, Andros declared them no better than " the scratch of a bear's paw."3 Landholders were obliged to take out patents for their estates which they had possessed forty or fifty years : for these patents, extravagant fees were exacted, and those, who would not submit to this imposition, had w. its of intrusion brought against them, and their land was patented to oth- ers. To hinder the people from consulting about the redress of their grievances, town-meetings were prohibited, except one in the month of May, for the choice of town officers ; and to pre- vent complaints being carried to England, no person was perinit- ted to go out of the country without express leave from the gov-
(1) MS. Copy of the Commission. (2) Hutch. vol. i. p. 344. Coll. papers, p. 564. (3) Revolution in New-England justified, p. 21.
* [" There was a great new scal appointed for New-England under the ad- ministration of Andros, which was honored with a remarkable motto : Nur- quam libertas gratior eztat." Chalmers, 463.]
120
HISTORY OF NEW-HAMPSHIRE. [1687.
ernor. But notwithstanding all the vigilance of the governor, his emissaries and his guards, the resolute and indefatigable Increase Mather, minister of the second church in Boston, and president of the college, got on board a ship and sailed for England, with complaints in the name of the people against the governor, which he delivered with his own hand to the king ; but finding no hope of redress, he waited the event of the revolution which was then expected.1
When the people groaned under so many real grievances, it is no wonder that their fears and jealousies suggested some that were 1688. imaginary. They believed Andros to be a papist ; that he had hired the Indians, and supplied them with ammu- nition to destroy their frontier settlements ; and that he was pre- paring to betray the country into the hands of the French .* 2 At the same time, the large strides that King James the Second was making toward the establishment of popery and despotism, raised the most terrible apprehensions ; so that the report of the landing of the Prince of Orange in England was received here with the greatest joy. Andros was so alarmed at the news, that he im- prisoned the mant who brought a copy of the prince's declaration, and published a proclamation commanding all persons to be in readiness to oppose " any invasion from Holland," which met with as much disregard as one he had issued before, appointing a day of thanksgiving for the birth of a Prince of Wales.
The people had now borne these innovations and impositions for about three years : Their patience was worn out, and their native love of freedom kindled at the prospect of deliver- 1689. ance. The news of a complete revolution in England had not reached them ; yet so sanguine were their expectations, so eager were they to prove that they were animated by the same spirit with their brethren at home, that upon the rumor of an in- tended massacre in the town of Boston by the governor's gnards, they were wrought up to a degree of fury. On the morning of
(1) I. Mather's life, p. 107. (2) Revolution justified, p. 29, 40.
* [Justice to Sir Edmund Andros requires it to be stated, in reply to these allegations in Revolution in N. E. justified, that he sent a letter to the Jus- tices of the Court of New-Hampshire, concerning trading with the Indians, whereupon it was, probably in pursuance of the instructions contained in it, at a private or special session, holden on the 28 of January, 1688-9, by his Majesty's Justices, " Ordered tliat no person within this Province (of New- Hampshire) presume to trade with, furnish or supply any Indian, or Indians (particularly those of Pennicook) with any ammunition. instruments of war, goods, provision, or any thing whatsoever. And whosoever can give any in- formation of any person or persons that have already supplied and furnished the said Indians with ammunition and instruments of war, they are desired forthwith to give notice thereof to the next Justice of the Peace, that they may be secured and proceeded against with all severity." Records of the Quarter Sessions.]
t [John Winslow, of Boston, who, although he offered £2000 security, could not escape imprisonment.]
121
RE-UNION WITH MASSACHUSETTS.
1689.]
the eighteenth of April, the town was in arms, and the country flocking in to their assistance. The governor, and those who had fled with him to the fort, were seized and committed to prison. The gentlemen who had been magistrates under the charter, with Bradstreet, the late governor, at their head, assumed the name of a council of safety, and kept up a form of government, in the exigency of affairs, till orders arrived from England ; when An- dros and his accomplices were sent home as prisoners of state, to be disposed of according to the king's pleasure.
The people of New-Hampshire had their share of sufferings under this rapacious administration ; and Mason himself did not escape. Having attended the hearing of Vaughan's appeal to the king, which was decided in Mason's favor ; the judg- Nov. 6, ment obtained here, being affirmed ; and having now the 1686. fairest prospect of realizing his claim, he returned hither in the spring of 1687, but found his views obstructed in a manner which he little expected. The government was in the hands of a set of hungry harpies, who looked with envy on the large share of territory which Mason claimed, and were for parcelling it out among themselves.1 The new judges delayed issuing executions on the judgments which he had formerly recovered, and the at- torney-general, Graham,* would not allow that he had power to grant lands by leases. This confirmed the people in their opin- ion of the invalidity of his claim, and rendered them (if possible) more averse to him than ever they had been. At length, how- ever, he obtained from Dudley, the chief justice, a writ of certio- sari, directed to the late judges of New-Hampshire, by whichi, his causes were to be removed to the supreme court of July 18, the whole territory, then held at Boston ;2 but before this 1688. could be done, deathi put an end to his hopes and relieved the people for a time of their fears. Being one of Sir Ed- Aug. or mund's council, and attending him on a journey from New- Sept. York to Albany ; he died at Esopus, in the fifty-ninth
1688. year of his age ; leaving two sons, John and Robert, the heirs of his claim and controversy.3
The revolution at Boston, though extremely pleasing to the people of New-Hampshire, left them in an unsettled state. They waited the arrival of orders from England ; but none arriving, and the people's minds being uneasy, it was proposed by some of the principal gentlemen, that a convention of deputies from each of the towns should consider what was best to be done. The convention-parliament in England was a sufficient precedent to
(1) Hutch. collection of papers, p. 564. (2) MS. in Superior Court files. (3) Hutch. vol. i. p. 365. Coll. papers, p. 566.
* [James Graham was one of the confidants and advisers of Sir Edmund Andros, and his attorney-general. See Revolution in N. E. justified 21, 31. Hutchinson, Hist. Mass. i. 345.]
18
122
HISTORY OF NEW-HAMPSHIRE. [1689.
authorize this proceeding. Deputies were accordingly chosen,* and instructed to resolve upon some method of government. At
Jan. their first meeting, they came to no conclusion ; but after- 1690. ward, they thought it best to return to their ancient union with Massachusetts.1 A petitiont for this purpose being presented, they were readily admitted till the king's pleasure should be known ; and members were sent to the general court, Mar. 12. which met there in this and the two following years.}- The gentlemen who had formerly been in commission for the peace, the militia and the civil offices, were by town votes, ap- proved by the general court, restored to their places, and ancient laws and customs continued to be observed. ||
(1) Mass. Records. Portsmouth, Dover and Exeter Records.
" The members of this convention were, for Portsmouth. John Tuttle,
Major William Vaughan,
John Roberts,
Richard Waldron,
Thomas Edgerly,
Nathaniel Fryer,
Nicholas Follet.
Robert Elliot,
Exeter.
Thomas Cobbet,
Robert Wadley,
Capt. John Pickering. Dover.
William Moore, .
Samuel Leavitt.
Capt. John Woodman,
Capt. John Gerrish,
Portsmouth, Dover and Exeter Records
It does not appear from Hampton records whether they joined in this con- vention, or returned immediately to the government of Massachusetts.
[From a letter of Nathaniel Weare of Hampton to Major Robert Pike of Salisbury, dated 15 March, 1690, printed in the Coll. of the N. H. Hist. Soc. i. 136, it appears that Hampton was one of the first towns in choosing persons to meet with commissioners of the other towns, if they should see cause to appoint any, "to debate and conclude of what was necessary at this time to be done in relation to some orderly way of government, and to make their return to the several towns for their approbation or otherwise." Afterwards, when the inhabitants of Portsmouth had met, and " made choice of some persons, to meet with the commissioners of the other towns to debate and consider of what was to be done in order to the settlement of some government till their · Majesties should give order in the matter," the town of Hampton, " after several meetings and debates," chose six persons as commissioners, with pow- er according to the other towns of Portsmouth, Dover and Exeter. But in the choice of " meet persons" for the Convention, it seems that a spirit of jealousy arose among the people of Hampton, who, being " fearful and sus- picious of their neighbor towns ;- that they did not intend to do as was pre- tended, but to bring them under to their disadvantage," passed a vote that " they would not choose any person according to the direction of the commit- tee met, and so all proved ineffectual."]
t [The original petition, signed by 372 persons, is among the files in the Secretary's office of Massachusetts, and a copy of it is in the office of Secre- tary of State of New-Hampshire.]
# [The representatives, during this period, for Portsmouth, were,
1690 Elias Stileman, 1691 Richard Waldron, 1692 Richard Waldron. John Foster. John Pickering.
Waldron was son of the Major who was killed by the Indians in 1689.]
|| [The Military and Civil officers as presented to the Governor and Coun- cil, and approved by them and the deputies of Massachusetts, in March, 1690, were the following.
Military Officers. William Vaughan, Major.
123
RE-UNION WITH MASSACHUSETTS.
1691.]
Had the inclination of the people been consulted, they would gladly have been annexed to that government. This was well known to Mather and the other agents, who when so- 1691. liciting for a new charter, earnestly requested that New-Hamp- shire might be included in it.1 But it was answered, that the people had expressed an aversion to it, and desired to be under a distinct government.2 This could be founded only on the re- ports which had been made by the commissioners in 1665, and by Randolph in his narrative. The true reason for deny- Apr. 27. ing the request was, that Mason's two heirs had sold their title to the lands in New-Hampshire to Samuel Allen of London, merchant, for seven hundred and fifty pounds, the entail having been previously docked by a fine and recovery in the court of king's bench ; and Allen was then soliciting a recognition of his title from the crown, and a commission for the government of the province.3 When the inhabitants were informed of what was doing, they again assembled by deputies in convention, and sent over a petition to the king, praying that they might be annexed to Massachusetts. The petition was presented to Sir Henry Ash- urst, and they were amused with some equivocal promises of suc- cess by the earl of Nottingham ; but Allen's importunity coincid- ing with the king's inclination, effectually frustrated their attempt. 4 The claim which Allen had to the lands from Naumkeag to three miles northward of Merrimack, was noticed in the Massa- 1692. chusetts charter ; and he obtained a commission for the government of New-Hampshire, in which his son in law, Mar. 1.
John Usher, then in London, was appointed lieutenant governor, with power to execute the commission in Allen's absence. The counsellors named in the governor's instructions, were, John Ush- er, lieutenant governor, John Hinckes, Nathaniel Fryer, Thomas Graffort, Peter Coffin, Henry Green, Robert Elliot, John Ger-
(1) I. Mather's life, page 136. (2) Hutch. vol. i. p. 412. (3) MS. in Supe- rior Court files. (4) Hutch. vol. 2, p. 6.
Dover. John Gerrish, Captain. John Tuttle, Lieutenant. William Furber, Ensign. Oyster River. [Durham.]
John Woodman, Captain. James Davis, Lieutenant.
Stephen Jones, Ensign. Portsmouth.
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.