USA > New Hampshire > Merrimack County > Warner > The history of Warner, New Hampshire, for one hundred and forty- four years, from 1735 to 1879 > Part 31
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
But the end is not yet. Heated discussion, wrangling, crimi- nation and recrimination, are rife. The rejected members from the east side of the river, with some others on the west side, form- ed themselves into a convention, and invited all the towns on both sides of the river to unite and set up another state, by the name
.
570
HISTORY OF WARNER.
of New Connecticut. Their leading purpose was, to take about all of Vermont east of the mountain chain, and a strip from the west side of New Hampshire, twenty miles in width or more, and out of this tract, up and down the Connecticut valley, erect their new state. In this view a convention of delegates from several towns on both sides of the Connecticut was held at Cornish, the ninth day of December, 1778. That convention resolved to go forward without regard to the limits established by the king in 1764, and to make the following proposals to New Hampshire, namely, either to agree with them on a dividing line, or to submit the dis- pute to congress, or to arbitrators mutually chosen. If neither of : these propositions could be accepted, then, if they could agree with New Hampshire on a form of government, they would con- sent " That the whole of the grants on both sides of the river should connect themselves with New Hampshire, and become one entire state, as before the royal determination in 1764." Till one or other of these proposals should be complied with, they deter- mined "to trust in Providence and defend themselves."
Vermont was in peril. The exigency seemed to demand a more emphatic declaration on her part ; so at the next session of the General Assembly of that state, which met at Bennington, Feb. 12, 1779, referring to the union of New Hampshire towns with Vermont, it was resolved, " That the said union be and is here- by dissolved, and made totally void, null, and extinct ; and that His Excellency the Governor be, and he is hereby, directed to communicate the foregoing resolve to the President of the Coun- cil of the State of New Hampshire." Thus was this brief union formally dissolved. But a tempest had been created, and it was not easy to control the storm. The inchoate state was shak- ing in the wind. The governor of Vermont wrote letters to the Assembly of New Hampshire, informing them of the separation, but those letters were not entirely satisfactory. The Assembly of New Hampshire desired a frank avowal against any future connection. It was a day of distrust and jealousy, and nothing was sure. I exonerate no party and cast censure on none. I ad- mit that leading men in New Hampshire, all through this contro- versy, held that the state should have persisted in her claim to all the territory of Vermont. Woodbury Langdon, a delegate in congress at this time, believed that such a stand, boldly taken
571
BOUNDARIES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.
and unflinchingly maintained, would have proved successful. As I have said, New Hampshire at first acquiesced in the indepen- dence of Vermont, but after the attempt on her part to sever from this state a portion of its territory, a change took place, so much so, that by 1779 both the people and the authorities of New Hampshire were in favor of asserting claim to the whole of the New Hampshire Grants.
In the year 1779 an attempt was made to form a new consti- tution for New Hampshire. In this constitution the claim to the whole of Vermont was indirectly recognized. Though this form of government was defeated, the sentiment in favor of claiming Vermont did not abate. New York renewed her claim to the same lands with much vigor, and it was suspected by Vermont that intrigues were being formed to divide that state between New Hampshire and New York, by the ridge of the Green Moun- tains. At any rate Vermonters caught new alarm, and, that they might lose no point in the game, they extended their claim west- ward into New York, and revived it eastward, into New Hamp- shire.
Congress had been appealed to, but the Revolutionary war en- grossed its great care, and congress was slow to act. Indeed, less than nine disinterested states could not act. A deficiency in the representation caused a long delay,-a year or more,-but at last the question came up. New York and New Hampshire both pleaded that Vermont had no right to independence. The agents of the new state spiritedly asserted their rights, and offered to be- come a part of the Union. Should this be denied them, they rep- resented (to use the words of Gov. Chittenden) that "they should be under the disagreeable necessity of making the best terms with the British that might be in their power "
On the sixteenth day of January, 1781, a convention of dele- gates from forty-three towns was held at Charlestown, N. H. A portion of the towns here represented were on the New Hamp- shire side of the river. Each of the parties to the controversy was ably represented before this convention, and the delegates were warmly beset on every hand. New Hampshire, through her agents, was active and hopeful. Twelve of the delegates were mem- bers of the council and assembly of New Hampshire. The New York agents, who favored a new state that should be bounded
37
*
572
HISTORY OF WARNER.
by the Masonian grant on the east and the Green Mountains on the west, were pressing their views with vigor. Vermont had also in the field men of indomitable energy and perseverance to engineer the cause of that state. It was no idle convention. The governor of Vermont had designated Col. Ira Allen as one of the agents of that state. When Allen arrived, the convention had been in session two days; a committee had been appointed to consider the situation, and report thereon. Allen says,-" At length the committee reported to unite all the New Hampshire Grants to New Hampshire, which was adopted, and went, in fact, to annihilate the state of Vermont." Now the friends of that state aroused themselves. Allen assured the members of the con- vention that the governor and council, and some of the leading men on the west side of the mountain, were for extending their claim to the Mason line, and that he was authorized to say, if the convention would take proper measures, that " the legislature of Vermont would extend their claim, at their adjourned term, in February, 1781 (the next month), and that he was authorized to give such assurance." .
Allen continues : "The report was recommitted ;" " the friends of New Hampshire were much pleased with their success, and well enjoyed the night, but the scene changed the next morning. The committee reversed their report, and reported to unite all the territory of New Hampshire west of Mason's line, with the state of Vermont, which report was accepted by a great majority."
Twelve members protested and withdrew. The convention ap- pointed a committee to confer with the legislature of Vermont, which was to meet at Windsor during the next month, and then adjourned to meet at Cornish (only three miles from Windsor) at the same time.
Agreeably to adjournment, the Charlestown convention met at Cornish, Feb. 8, 1781; the legislature of Vermont assembled at Windsor. The New Hampshire towns were desirous of being united again with Vermont, in' one separate, independent govern- ment ; and the convention, in due form, so notified the legisla- ture. This application was warmly received, and on the twenty- second day of February, the articles of union were agreed upon and confirmed. It was provided that the question of com- pleting the union on the terms proposed should be submitted to
z
573
BOUNDARIES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.
the several towns in the state of Vermont, and to the towns in New Hampshire, to the distance of about twenty miles from Connecticut river ; and that if two thirds of the towns on each side of the river approved of the union, it should be considered as ratified and completed.
The two bodies then adjourned to meet again in their respect- ive places on the first Wednesday in April following. The terms of union were submitted to the towns, and at the adjourned meet-" ing of the legislature, at Windsor, April 5, 1781, the result of the vote on the question of union was made known. The following towns on the New Hampshire side of the river had given in their allegiance to the state of Vermont,-viz., Alstead, Gilsum, Hins- dale, Chesterfield, Surry, Marlow, Richmond, Westmoreland, Cornish, Plainfield, Croydon, Saville (now Sunapee), Newport, Charlestown, Claremont, Acworth, Lempster, Grantham, Grafton, Lebanon, Dresden (part of Hanover), Hanover, Haverhill, Pier- mont, Dorchester, Lyme, Gunthwaite (now Lisbon), Landaff, Lyman, Lincoln, Morristown (now Franconia), Bath, Cardigan (now Orange), and Lancaster.
The assembly appointed a committee to wait on the convention, and "inform them that the union is agreed on by a major part of the towns in this state, agreeably to the articles of union as proposed ; and that the assembly will wait to receive the members returned to sit in the assembly, on the union's taking place, to- morrow morning at 9 o'clock." Forty-four members had been chosen from the New Hampshire towns east of the Connecticut river; they were introduced by the committee to the legislature of Vermont ; they produced their credentials, took the oaths of office, and were conducted to their seats in the house.
Thus was the second union between these contracting parties consummated, and the same, with due pomp and ceremony, was pro- claimed. The next session of the legislature of this new state,-a state now stretching from Lake Champlain to the Pemigewasset river,-was at Charlestown, N. H., October, 1781. One hundred and thirty members were present, representing, according to Hiland Hall's history, fifty-seven towns west of the river, and forty-five towns east.
When the legislature convened at Charlestown, as above stated, Thomas Chittenden had been reelected governor, but no choice
574
HISTORY OF WARNER.
had been made of lieutenant-governor. The House elected Col. Elisha Payne, of Lebanon, to that office. Two members of the council also belonged to the east side of the river. Mr. Payne was perhaps the leader of this movement among the New Hamp- shire towns. He came from Connecticut in 1773, and settled in Cardigan, now Orange. He was for a time a trustee of Dart- mouth college. At the October session of the Vermont Assembly in 1778 (during the first union) he was a representative from Cardigan. He was prominent in all these conventions which I have mentioned, and in April, 1781, he represented Lebanon in the Vermont Assembly ; and now, in October of the same year, he is made lieutenant-governor of his cherished state.
Congress, at last, after years of vexation and delay, had pro- ceeded so far, in August, 1781, as to lay it down as an indispen- sable preliminary to the recognition of Vermont as a member of the Union, that she should " explicitly relinquish all demands of land and jurisdiction on the east side of Connecticut river, and on the west side of a line drawn twenty miles eastward of Hudson's river." Here was a stumbling-block and a rock of offence not to be disregarded. This resolution of congress was laid before the assembly, but that body stood firm. They would not subinit the question of their independence to any power whatever; but they would refer the question of their jurisdictional boundary to com- missioners mutually chosen ; and when they should be admitted into the American Union, they would submit any such disputes to congress.
They proceeded to their work ; they extended Vermont coun- ties over this New Hampshire tract ; they levied taxes, created courts, and appointed sheriffs and justices of the peace,-all in New Hampshire. They did with the east side of the river as they did with the west, or attempted to. The state of society within the seceding towns was deplorable. The majorities at- tempted to control minorities. Affairs reached such a pitch as to bring the divided inhabitants in these towns into direct collision. New Hampshire, of course, relinquished jurisdiction to none of her territory or people. Strong remonstrances against the au- thority of Vermont came to the Committee of Safety of New Hampshire, numerously signed by citizens on the disputed dis- trict. John Clark, of Landaff, sent in a memorial, setting forth
575
BOUNDARIES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.
the violence that had been committed on him, because, as he al- leged, he had stood for New Hampshire, " in opposition to wheed- lings, flatteries, promises, frowns, threats, insults, and every other conceivable machination." Memorials came from all parts of the district over which Vermont attempted to exercise authority.
Cheshire was Washington county, under Vermont rule. Samuel Davis, of Chesterfield, in Washington county, a constable under Vermont authority, complains, that on the night of the fifth of November, 1781, in attempting to serve a precept on James Rob- ertson, in the house of Nathaniel Bingham, John Gandy, Jr., did, by force and arms, oppose him, the said Davis, and did not suffer him to make his service, "all which is against the peace and dignity of this state." Whereupon, the sheriff of Washington county was ordered to take the body of John Gandy, Jr., of said Chesterfield, and him commit to the common jail in Charlestown. This he did. Nathaniel Bingham was in like manner committed to Charlestown jail for hindering and opposing the aforesaid con- stable in the execution of his office. Bingham and Gandy peti- tioned the authorities of New Hampshire for release. Accom- panying this petition was a statement made by Bingham of the offence. It was, in substance, this : That the town of Chester- field was destitute of any officers, civil or military, who would act . under the authority of New Hampshire ; that a number of friends were assembled at his house the evening of Nov. 5, to nominate one or two persons for justice of the peace, to be commissioned by the assembly; that about eight o'clock, Samuel Davis, acting as constable under Vermont, came in with five others, took a book from under his coat, and said he would like to read a paragraph ; that he (Bingham) forbade his reading any Vermont laws in his house, and'advised him to withdraw; that John Gandy told Da- vis if he read any riot act there, he (Gandy) would kick him into the fire ; that Davis said he had a precept against one of the com- pany ; and that he. (Bingham) forbade his reading any Vermont precept under his roof, on which Davis and his attendants left.
The New Hampshire assembly took up the case at once, and, Nov. 27, 1781, unanimously enacted that the committee of safety be empowered to issue their order to the sheriff of Cheshire county to release from prison all persons in Cheshire or Grafton county confined there, by order of any pretended court, magis-
576
HISTORY OF WARNER.
trate, or other officer claiming authority under Vermont. They further empowered the committee to cause to be apprehended and committed to prison, in any of the counties, all persons act- ing under the pretended authority of the state of Vermont, and for this purpose the sheriffs were empowered to raise the posse comitatus. Under the authority thus given, Col. Enoch Hale, of Rindge, sheriff of Cheshire county, proceeded to the release of the prisoners in Charlestown jail. He demanded Bingham and Gandy. On being refused, he attempted to break the jail, when he was immediately seized and committed to jail himself by the Vermont authorities.
Hale, the imprisoned sheriff, called on Gen. Bellows to raise the militia for his liberation. Bellows at once notified President Weare of the state of things, and went about his work. This alarmed the Vermonters, and orders were issued by Gov. Chit- - tenden for their militia to oppose force to force. The sheriff (Wm. Page), and others in authority under the laws of Vermont, aroused themselves to resist any attempt on the part of New Hampshire to rescue Col. Hale or the other prisoners confined at Charlestown. The regiment of militia under Col. Samuel King was immediately placed in a state of readiness by Vermont to meet any attack that might be made. The excitement was in- tense, and every one felt that " the hour had struck."
While this was the condition of affairs in the western part of the state, the authorities of New Hampshire in the eastern part were not idle and indifferent spectators. President Weare, the . committee of safety, and all others in authority, realized the grav- ity of the occasion, and acted with decision and vigor. The sheriff of Hillsborough county (Moses Kelley, Esq.) was ordered "to raise the body of his county," for the purpose of liberating Col. Hale. Gen. Nichols was ordered to assist the sheriff "in raising the body of the militia in Hillsborough county." Gen. Benjamin Bellows, of Walpole, was ordered to raise as many of the militia of his county as possible, to take command of them, and be in readiness to cooperate with those raised in Hillsborough county. Francis Blood, of Temple, was ordered "to supply the troops with beef from the cattle collected for the army, and, if practicable, to exchange a sufficient quantity of beef to supply them with bread."
577
BOUNDARIES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.
Gov. Chittenden, of Vermont, appointed Gen. Payne (the lieu- tenant-governor) to take command of the militia of the state, to call to his aid Generals Fletcher and Olcott, and such of the field- officers on the east side of the mountains as he thought proper. About the same time, a committee from the state of Vermont was sent to Exeter " to agree on measures to prevent hostilities." William Page, the Vermont sheriff, was on this committee. He had no sooner reached Exeter than he was arrested and cast into prison, and held as a hostage for the release of the sheriff of Cheshire. The assembly of New Hampshire issued a proclama- tion allowing forty days for the people in the revolted towns to repair to some magistrate, and subscribe a declaration that they acknowledge the extent of New Hampshire to Connecticut river, and that they would hereafter observe the peace. They also ordered the militia of all the counties to hold themselves in readi- ness to march against the revolters. The committee of safety of New Hampshire issued a warrant to Jonathan Martin, of Wilton, ordering him to arrest Col. Samuel King, of Chesterfield, who, as magistrate, committed Bingham and Gandy to jail; also, to arrest Nathaniel S. Prentice, Moses Smith, and Isaac Griswold. Another warrant was issued to Robert Smith, of Londonderry, commanding him to arrest Benjamin Giles, of Newport. (Pren- tice, Griswold, and Giles were deputy sheriffs under Vermont rule.) Smith "apprehended the body" of Prentice and carried him to Exeter, where he was committed to jail. He also arrested King, carried him a dozen miles, when he was forcibly rescued. Gen. Bellows, in addressing President Weare in reference to this rescue, says,-" The mob, after refreshment at King's, sought for all those who assisted Smith in the arrest, some of whom they caught and abused in. a shameful manner, by striking, kicking, and all the indignities which such a hellish pack can be guilty of."
Meantime, General George Washington, then commanding the armies of the Revolution, had been applied to by a committee of congress, who had under consideration the question of admitting Vermont into the Union and determining its boundaries. Said committee prevailed on Gen. Washington to address a letter to the governor of Vermont. And now the climax is at hand. On the first day of January, 1782, Washington wrote as requested. The letter is too long to be inserted here ; but it advised the gov-
578
HISTORY OF WARNER.
ernor and the people of Vermont to relinquish their late exten- sion as an " indispensable preliminary" to their admittance into the Union. Washington intimated that if they refused to com- ply with this requirement they must be considered as having a hostile disposition towards the United States, in which case coer- cion on the part of congress would become necessary.
This letter, taken in connection with the action of congress, hereinbefore mentioned, had the desired offect. The war ended. The assembly of Vermont, which had been in session at Charles- town, N. H., and which had adjourned to meet at Bennington the last day of January, 1782, was not ready to act at once, as no quorum appeared till Feb. 11. On the 23d day of February, Anno Domini 1782, the said assembly did solemnly resolve, "That the west bank of Connecticut river, and a line beginning at the north-west corner of the Massachusetts state, from thence northward twenty miles east of Hudson's river, as specified in the resolutions of August last, shall be considered as the east and west boundaries of Vermont, and that this assembly do hereby relinquish all claim and demand to, and right of jurisdiction in and over, any and every district of territory without said bound- ary lines.".
Thus ended this bitter and prolonged contest,-a contest which, for years, had been productive only of mischief, by dividing fami- lies and neighborhoods, and distracting the country. Thus end- ed, also, this second union of certain disaffected New Hampshire towns with the state of Vermont. The summary work of dissolu- tion was accomplished in the absence of the New Hampshire members. Before they arrived at their posts in Bennington, the die had been cast ; Vermont had gone back over the river, and the boundary of New Hampshire rested on the west bank.
ALONG THE HIGHLANDS.
Now the boundaries of this state are established on the south, on the east, and on the west, never, probably, to be disturbed while the foundations of the government stand.
But I have not yet encircled the state. New Hampshire, on the south-east, borders on the ocean, and on the north, on Her Britannic Majesty's Dominion. Our northern boundary line is
579
BOUNDARIES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.
" along the highlands," between the waters of the Atlantic ocean and the river St. Lawrence, and is about thirty-seven miles in length. I shall dwell very briefly on this branch of my subject ; shall exclude much that might properly be introduced here, but which is not necessary to an understanding of the main facts. There has been no dispute about this line : there was a disagree- ment and a delay. By the royal decree, in 1740, New Hampshire was extended to Canada. That country was then in the posses- sion of the French. It was conquered by the English in 1759, and became a British province. When the treaty of peace was concluded between the United States and Great Britain, Sept. 3, 1783, it was agreed and declared that the boundaries should be from the north-west angle of Nova Scotia, along the highlands which divide those rivers that empty into the St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic ocean, "to the north-western- most head of Connecticut river; then down along the middle of that river to the 45° of north latitude ; thence due west," etc.
Now, the question in controversy has been, What was meant by the words " the north-westernmost head of Connecticut river" ? This river has three recognized heads. The eastern is in Lake Connecticut, a small lake in the northern extremity of the state, and about midway of the state from east to west, as our lines now are. The head of this branch is the lake, and at the very outlet of the lake it takes the name of Connecticut river. West of that, rising further north at the ridge of the highlands, is Indian Stream. It flows south, passing by Connecticut lake on the west, and emptying into the Connecticut branch several miles below the lake. Still farther west, rising in the highlands, is Hall's Stream, flowing south, west of Indian Stream, and falling into the Con- necticut branch yet lower down.
Several attempts were made, up to 1823, to settle the point in controversy, but they were fruitless, and the subject was then dropped till 1842. A committee was appointed by the legislature of New Hampshire, in 1789, " to run our northern line." Having attended to duty, that committee reported that "they had spotted a birch tree for the north-east corner of the state;" that "they then spotted along the highlands, south-westward, to the head of the north-west branch of Connecticut river, then down said river to the main river, about half a mile below latitude 45' north."
38
V
580
HISTORY OF WARNER.
This could have been none other than Hall's Stream, for that only falls into the Connecticut below the 45°. And that " birch tree," if it stands, is to-day the north-east corner of New Hampshire and the north-west corner of Maine. It stands on the great "divid. ing ridge," on Crown mountain, in latitude 45° 19' north.
The English have contended that a fair construction of the treaty would make the main branch of the river the boundary line, because the other streams do not bear the name of Connecti- cut, but distinct names. If this view had prevailed, our state would have been less in territory than it now is, by three good- sized townships. But if this first view could not be entertained, then the English have insisted that Indian Stream, the middle branch of the three, must be accepted as the boundary. It is larger than Hall's Stream, and more direct in its course. They contended that little brooks and rivulets were not to be consid- ered. Now, if the boundary had been fixed here, New Hampshire would have been less in territory than it now is by at least one large township.
Our government contended, from the beginning, for Hall's Stream. It is the north-west branch of Connecticut river, and therefore its source is the " north-westernmost head of Connecti- cut river." No one can go into that country, or look upon a cor- rect map of it, without being convinced that Hall's Stream fully answers to the designation in the treaty. It is considerable in size ; its head is in the highlands, north of the 45th degree; it is a branch of the Connecticut ; and it is more north-west than Ind- ian Stream. Carrigain's map, Morse's Geography, and Belknap's History have all, since 1789, taken it for granted that the high- lands and Hall's Stream constitute our northern boundary.
But the question hung fire till 1842. Webster and Ashburton, in the treaty of Washington of that year, accepted this line, and determined it to be the boundary forever between the British pos- sessions and the state of New Hampshire.
Thus, for years and centuries, has the question of boundary, in one form or another, agitated the people of this state. Happily for us and for posterity, those questions have now for long years been adjusted, and we have had peace. There has been no at- tempt to disturb any boundary line when once fairly determined. There will be none. What New Hampshire is, as to its territorial
581
BOUNDARIES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.
limits, it will remain. It is not large in area or in population, but respectable in both. In extent of territory it excels Massa- chusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Delaware ; and in population, according to the census of 1870, it excels Rhode Island, Delaware, Florida, Nebraska, Nevada, and Oregon.
New Hampshire is a good state to be born in, equally good to live in, and quite as good as any place on earth to be buried in. In productiveness of soil, she is above an average of the states ; in healthfulness of climate and in the grandeur of her mountains, she is unsurpassed. She has produced her full share of the great men and eminent women of the country, and is still producing them. Her population enjoy as much of the good things of this life as any people under the sun; and those of us to the manor born who have attained to middle age, and especially those of us who are admonished by the lengthening shadows that night is coming on, should remain on our "native heath," hallowed by the recollection of the joys and sorrows of two hundred years, and finish our journey at home, thanking God if we may do this in faith, looking for a city that hath foundations.
Aga 54
Planchers Deck 1941
Wenche Leri form grove 11th Pushte Now 20th
11 58
L
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.