USA > Rhode Island > Providence County > Providence > State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations at the end of the century : a history, Volume 1 > Part 25
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73
221
THE PERIOD OF COLONIAL RESISTANCE.
cable and scuttled the sloop on the Point. Her boats were carried to the upper end of the town and burned. In the meantime the two Connecticut vessels escaped. Governor Wanton issued a proclamation for the arrest of the offenders, but without effect. This was not in itself a great deed, but it stands in history as the first overt act of the impending revolution.1
It was found much more difficult to adhere to the non-importation agreements than to make them. The private interests of merchants throughout the whole country often got the better of their patriotism. Providence was obliged to take energetic measures, and on October 10, 1769, the merchants of the town pledged themselves to maintain the agreements made until every portion of the revenue act should be repealed.2 In Newport the matter was much more serious. That town, almost from its very establishment, had shown strong royalist tendencies. Although in the present crisis the great majority stood firm against king and parliament, there was a small fraction, gradually · coming to be called Tories, which adhered to the royal cause. On October 30, 1769, the merchants of the town "entered into a very spirited and constitutional agreement of non-importation", to continue until every duty was repealed.3 But this patriotic beginning was soon defeated by rumors of a repeal of the revenue act, which induced the Newporters to set aside their agreement. The Providence merchants, who had in the meanwhile voted to "harmonize with the other colonies in their united agreements", were much incensed, and the town passed · a vote of censure upon Newport. For some reason the impression gained ground that Providence had departed from non-importation. Several towns refused her vessels port entry, while the town of Wind- ham, Connecticut, published a spirited protest. This angered the
1See Newport Mercury, July 24, 1769; Prov. Gazette, July 22, 1769; R. I. C. R. vi, 594. An account of the general friction existing between the colonists and the revenue officers is given in G. C. Mason's British fleet in Rhode Island (R. I. H. S. Coll. vii, 301.)
2Prov. Gazette, Oct. 14, Oct. 21, 1769.
3Newport Mercury, Nov. 6, 1769. A few months previous a patriotic com- munication to the Mercury of February 13, 1769, said:
"I hope the gentlemen who fill the several offices in this Colony will recom- mend themselves to their constituents by encouraging and patronizing our own manufactures, and I am so much in earnest to save my country from ruin, that I am resolved if I live, let others do what they will, not to give my vote for any of the candidates at the ensuing election who do not appear princi- pally clothed in cloth, made either in this colony or some part of America. Let a man's zeal for his country appear ever so flaming, if he is attired in foreign fineries, I can't believe his patriotism is sincere, for his very apparel gives him the lie."
222
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS.
Providence merchants, who considered themselves as sufferers for the conduct of another town. One irate writer in the Providence Gazette, in language more forcible than elegant, exclaimed: "The distinct parts of this Colony have been unhappily blended together, whereby we have suffered for the crimes of our neighbors. The merchants of Newport broke through the agreement, and were highly censured by the northern part of the Colony; the Town of Providence, 'tis well known, passed a vote of censure against them, which they affected to ridicule, in a very awkward manner. "Tis with pleasure I observe, that none of the Colonies have passed any censures upon this Town in particular; this was reserved for the little, dirty, insignificant Town of Windham, in Connecticut, the inhabitants of which, without the least shadow of reason, have dared publicly to stigmatize a people, than whom none have been more zealous in supporting the cause of American liberty".1
Parliament had, indeed, rescinded the duty on everything but tea in April, 1770. But there was no attempt to lighten the acts of trade, and the abstract right to taxation was fully retained. For about two years there was a period of comparative calm. Sources of irritation there certainly were, but the colonists hoped for a peaceful adjustment of all matters. The enforcement of the revenue laws finally gave rise to armed hostility. In June, 1772, occurred an act of violence in Narragansett Bay, whereby a royal ship of war was captured and sunk, and the first British blood of the Revolution was shed. His Majesty's schooner Gaspee, in command of Lieutenant Duddingston, had long annoyed the commerce of Newport and Providence. In interpreting the performance of his duty too strictly, he had detained unoffensive vessels, plundered the people on shore, and illegally used Massachusetts instead of Rhode Island courts. Exasperated by what they deemed violations of the law, the Rhode Island colonists were in a mood to take extreme measures. On the night of June 9, 1772, the Gaspee, in chasing a packet sloop up the Bay, grounded on Namquit Point. The patriots of Providence, hearing of this, resolved to attack the British vessel. A party of armed men quickly gathered. About
1Prov. Gazette, June 30, 1770. See also Idem, May 26, 1770, and Newport Mercury, June 4, 1770. Styles in his Diary, i, 54, alludes to the Newport vio- lation as an instance how "five or six Jews and three or four Tories may draw down vengeance upon a country". The Newport merchants, in the meantime, had reverted to their former non-importation agreement, and the merchants of Boston voted that "the town of Providence had faithfully adhered to the non- importation agreement, and that all reports to the contrary are without found- ation". (Idem, Sept. 15, 1770.)
223
THE PERIOD OF COLONIAL RESISTANCE.
midnight they boarded the vessel, wounding some of her officers, and finally left her to burn to the water's edge. This high-handed act greatly incensed the royal government. Large rewards were offered to convict the perpetrators and a commission was quickly appointed to inquire into the matter. But the colony authorities were indiffer- ent, and even independent, and accordingly nothing was accom- plished.1 The whole transaction excited much interest throughout the country, particularly as the ministerial scheme of sending accused persons to England for trial was regarded as an encroachment upon colonial rights. As Samuel Adams said in referring to the incident, "An attack on one colony is an attack on all."2
Lord Dartmouth succeeded Hillsborough in 1773, but this made little change in conditions on this side of the Atlantic. All through that year opposition to the King gained in force and intensity.3 The initiatory movement early in March in Boston to create a union of the towns in that province, with a view toward ultimate union of the colonies, was approved by Virginia, and steps were taken for the appointment of committees of correspondence.+ These measures were very important as foreshadowing the later American Congress first proposed in Rhode Island.
The tea duty, the remnant of the Townshend taxation acts, still remained to invoke colonial opposition. On December 16, 1773, the famous Boston Tea Party emptied several hundred chests of the offensive article into the waters of Boston Harbor, and elsewhere in the country pronounced enmity was shown. Rhode Island adopted
1The destruction of the Gaspee is referred to in greater detail in the chap- ter on The Wars and the Militia. The documentary history of the matter can be found in R.I.C. R. vii, 55-192 (reprinted as Bartlett's Destruction of the Gas- pee) ; Staples, Destruction of the Gaspee; R. I. H. S. Proc. 1890-91, p. 80; R. I. H. S. Publ. vii, 238; Arnold, ii, 318; Prov. Gazette, June 13, 1772.
2Well's Life of S. Adams, ii, 15.
3In the Newport Mercury of Jan. 18, 1773, a Boston writer used the follow- ing language: "My own opinion is this, that no people on earth have a right to make laws for the Americans but themselves. Truth and common sense will at last prevail, and if the Britons continue their endeavors much longer to subject us to their government and taxation, we shall become a sep- arate state". These sentiments were general throughout the colonies.
#The Rhode Island Committee of Correspondence consisted of Stephen Hopkins, Metcalf Bowler, Moses Brown, John Cole, William Bradford, Henry Marchant, and Henry Ward. In the letter from the Speaker of the Rhode Island House of Representatives to the Virginia House of Burgesses, May 15, 1773, was the declaration that "nothing less than a firm and close union of the colonies in the most spirited, prudent and consistent measures can defeat the designs of those who are aiming to deprive them of their inestimable rights and privileges". The same sentiment appears in various other correspondence of that period. (See R. I. C. R. vii, 227.)
224
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS.
prompt measures in full sympathy with the attitude of Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. The first meeting in this colony for the consideration of the subject was held in Newport early in January, 1774, and another followed in Providence.1 Similar gatherings were held during the month of February in most or all of the towns. The Providence meeting adopted the following: "We, the freemen of the town of Providenee, legally assembled in meeting, eannot be silent on so interesting and alarming an occasion. Should we, in this case, omit to assert and express the firmest resolutions to vindicate our rights, it might be construed as a eession of them into the hands of those who have wantonly evaded them in this instanee." Further resolutions against permitting the landing of tea in the port, and applauding the action of the populace in Boston Harbor were also adopted. The Bristol meeting went even further in saying that, since the eharter was broken, the people might "in time be provoked to renounce their allegiance and assert an independency".2
The defianee and the daring resistance of the American colonies ereated a great division of feeling in England. Although many recognized the American grievanees and recommended conciliation,3 Parliament took the unwise course of passing illegal laws to punish these Ameriean aets of resistance. In 1774 it passed five eoereive acts, one prohibiting all eommereial intereourse with the port of Boston, another requiring that "persons questioned for any aets in execution of the law" should be sent to England for trial, and another for quartering soldiers in Ameriea.
A Newport news item in the Providence Gazette of January 8, 1774, says: "We can assure the public, that a lady in this town, of affluent circumstances, and equal to any one in it for good sense, politeness and consequence, last week came to the resolution to have no India tea drank in her family, until the duty is taken off."
2R. I. C. R. vii, 272-280.
3Catharine Macaulay, the English historian and a strong Whig, in a letter to Henry Marchant of October, 1774, thus voices the Whig feeling in England at the time: "The situation of England and her colonies is grown very alarm- ing and critical. You undoubtedly saw enough of this country on your last visit to be convinced that no degree of public virtue exists in the generality of Englishmen. Some few amongst us yet retain sentiments worthy a Roman breast, and those few wait with all the anxiety which the possession of fear and hope occasion, and the determinations of America, determination which in their opinion will either establish the power of our despots on a permanent basis, or lead to the recovery of our almost lost liberties. As you read the English papers, it may perhaps be needless to inform you that my brother Lawbridge has strenuously defended the rights of America through the whole last session of Parliament, and even in some points when almost every mem- ber of the House was against him". (From a copy in the the R. I. H. S. Library. )
225
THE PERIOD OF COLONIAL RESISTANCE.
A union of the colonies in some form was now the chief subject of discussion, and the officials and private citizens of Rhode Island were among the foremost advocates of the measure. The first proposal by any political body that such a congress should be called emanated from the town of Providence, which, at a meeting, on May 17, 1774, in- structed her deputies to "use their influence at the approaching session of the General Assembly of this Colony, for promoting a congress, as soon as may be, of the reprsentatives of the General Assemblies of the several colonies and provinces of North America, for establishing the firmest union; and adopting such measures as to them shall appear the most effectual to answer that important purpose; and to agree upon proper methods for executing the same".1 A few days later the Virginia House of Burgesses formally recommended the plan. The Rhode Island assembly, on June 14, took action favor- ing the Congress and appointed delegates-Stephen Hopkins and Samuel Ward-to attend such a convention.2 During this same session sympathy was expressed for the people of Boston, stricken by commercial isolation, and future aid was promised them. This sym- pathy produced practical results in substantial subscriptions from the several Rhode Island towns during many succeeding months.3
That American statesmen now foresaw war is indicated by military preparations on every hand. The act was passed by the general assembly at the June session, 1774, establishing the Providence Light Infantry. This was followed by a more general act in October, ap- pointing a committee to consider petitions for the establishment of independent companies in Providence, Newport, East Greenwich, and other towns. In December a part of the armament of Fort George was ordered to be removed to Providence, and at the same session a Train of Artillery was established in Providence and armed, and the pur- chase of quantities of ammunition was ordered. Other companies authorized were the Scituate Hunters, the Providence Artillery, the Providence Fusileers, and the North Providence Rangers. At the
1R. I. C. R. vii, 280. See also Staples, R. I. in the Continental Congress, p. 10, and Foster's Stephen Hopkins, ii, 232.
2R. I. C. R. vii, 246. Thus Rhode Island was the first assembly to make an express call for a congress and also the first to appoint delegates. Many of the other colonies, however, were preparing similar legislation at the same time. To Massachusetts belongs the honor of fixing the time and place of meeting. Rhode Island's participation in the Congress which assembled in Philadelphia, Sept. 5, 1774, is traced in Staples's R. I. in the Continental Con- gress, p. 14-21.
1See R. I. C. R. vii, 283; 4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. iv, 1-278; and Bates, R. I. and the formation of the Union, p. 52-53.
15-1
226
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS.
December session, also, an act was passed "regulating the militia of this colony".1 Early in the course of events it was seen that one of the principal difficulties of the patriot army would be to obtain firearms, and measures were adopted for their manufacture at liome. Both small arms and cannon were turned out and many of the recently formed companies were supplied by Rhode Island manufacturers.2
The 1st of March, 1775, was the day on which the use of British tea was to be wholly proscribed. The long-existing sentiment through- out the colony on this subject was aroused to an enthusiasm that was not exceeded even in Boston,3 and a striking exhibition was planned in Providence. The Gazette of March 4 contained the following: "On the 2nd the Town Cryer gave this notice : 'At five of the Clock this Afternoon, a Quantity of India Tea will be burnt in the Market Place. All true Friends of their Country, Lovers of Freedom, and Haters of Shackles and Hand-cuffs, are hereby invited to testify their good Disposition, by bringing in and casting into the Fire, a needless Herb, which for a long Time, hath been highly detrimental to our Liberty, Interest, and Health'." At the appointed time a fire was started on Market square and upon it was cast a tar barrel, a copy of Lord North's speech and other objectionable material. Women and men brought their tea to the extent of about 300 pounds and fed the rising flames. The Gazette said there was "great cheerfulness in committing to destruction so pernicious an article", and continued : "Whilst the Tea was burning, a spirited Son of Liberty went along the streets with his brush and lampblack, and obliterated or unpainted the word TEA on the shop signs."
From this time forward the march of events was rapid. The continuance of the repressive acts and the presence of British troops at Boston placed a premium on friction. A second Congress was preparing to raise a military force and proposing methods of com- bination. It only needed a slight action to kindle the smouldering spirit of resentment into the fierce flame of revolution. On April 19, 1775, British assumption of authority was met with armed opposition. At Lexington and Concord the momentous struggle had begun.
1R. I. C. R. vii, 247, 258, 260-264; Arnold, ii, 342-344. For a list of chartered companies, see Smith's Civil and Military List, p. 658.
2A Newport item in the Providence Gazette of Feb. 11, 1775, said: "A number of excellent fire-arms, manufactured in this colony, have lately been brought here, and sold; others are making in different parts of the Colony, particularly a large quantity in Pawtucket."
3In the Newport Mercury of Feb. 14, 1775, appeared an item describing how a countryman fell into the dock while carrying a bag of tea. The item con- cluded thus: "Be cautious how you travel with this baneful article about you; for the salt water seems of late to attract it as a loadstone attracts iron."
CHAPTER XV.
RHODE ISLAND IN THE REVOLUTION.
The news of Lexington reached Providence on the evening of the battle. The people at once assembled, and the citizens and military officers held a meeting. Two expresses were sent to Lexington, who returned with the details of the event, and the troops in Providence and neighboring towns stood ready to march wherever they might be needed. A special session of the assembly was held on April 22, and it was voted that 1,500 men "be raised and embodied, properly armed and disciplined, to continue in this colony, as an army of observation, to repel any insult or violence that may be offered to the inhabitants. And also, if it be necessary for the safety and preservation of any of the colonies, to march out of this colony and join and co-operate with the forces of the neighboring colonies".1 This resolution was publicly opposed and dissented from in the upper house by Governor Joseph Wanton, Deputy-Governor Darius Sessions, Thomas Wickes, and William Potter. The reasons for their action were thus expressed : "Because we are of the opinion that such a measure will be attended with the most fatal consequences to our charter privileges; involve the country in all the horrors of a civil war; and as we conceive, is an open violation of the oath of allegiance which we have severally taken, upon our admission into the respective offices we now hold in the colony." But their protest was disregarded, and at the June session a long and elaborate code of rules and regulations for this "army of observation" was drawn up and published.
Wanton's bold opposition to the measures of resistance adopted by the assembly resulted in heroic action. The annual election of 1775 had resulted in his re-election as governor; but when on May 3 the time came for his installation into the chair, he pleaded sickness, and instead addressed to the assembly a letter recommending calmness and deliberation. That body, however, was in no mood for conciliation,
1R. I. C. R. vii, 310.
228
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS.
and voted that the Deputy-Governor and his assistants be "forbidden to administer the oath of office to the said Joseph Wanton, Esq., unless in free and open General Assembly, according to the unvaried practice in this Colony, and with the consent of such Assembly ; that until the said Joseph Wanton, Esq., shall have taken the oath of office, as afore- said, it shall be unlawful for him to act as Governor of this Colony, in any case, whatever". The charges made against him were that he had made a protest reflecting on the action of the assembly, that he had neglected to issue a fast-day proclamation, that he had failed to qualify as Governor, and that he had refused to sign commissions for the recently appointed Rhode Island officers. Wanton attempted to justify his course, but his explanations were not satisfactory, and in October the office of Governor was declared vacant.1 Nicholas Cooke, the patriot Deputy-Governor, was elected in his place.
In discussing the patriotic measures taken by our ancestors during the period just previous to the Revolution, we are apt to throw dis- credit on the many loyalists who, like Governor Wanton, believed the British acts to be oppressive, but saw only disaster in offering armed opposition. No just view of the Revolution can be obtained unless the great strength of this loyalist element is recognized. While the great majority of Americans stood firm against King and Parliament, a very large minority-perhaps one-third of the whole population of the country-were directly opposed to armed resistance. They belonged chiefly to the influential merchant class, men who were perhaps on a higher social and educational grade than their fellows, and who also feared a war that would utterly destroy their profitable commerce. Except in advising revolution, they often showed as patriotic a spirit as the most ardent sons of liberty. Governor Wanton, for instance, had told a British admiral who tried to show him the path of his duty : "Please to be informed that I do not receive instructions for the administration of my government from the King's Admiral stationed in America".2 Many other of his utterances exhibit his absolutely independent attitude toward British despotism. But when the Revolution actually broke forth, the necessity of union required that all divisions of opinion should be subordinated to the public good. The patriots uprose and, through their preponderance in numbers and organized party strength, either forced or frightened the loyalists into silence.
1R. I. C. R. vii, 325, 332, 393.
2R. I. C. R. vii, 63.
229
RHODE ISLAND IN THE REVOLUTION.
In Rhode Island, as elsewhere in the country, this Tory element was a very important factor in the oncoming conflict. As they came to be a source of trouble and irritation to the patriots, they were given to understand that public acts or expressions favorable to England would not be tolerated. One of the early incidents of this phase of the Revolution was the threatened destruction of the village of East Greenwich by a mob of some hundreds of citizens, on account of treatment to which a resident of that place had been sub- jected for propagating principles unfriendly to American liberty.1 At Newport, the loyalist party was especially predominant, and even after the beginning of the war, gained in numbers and strength. Governor Cooke explained this fact in a letter of July 8, 1775, to General Greene, from whom he received this reply: "I received your favor of the 8th of this instant from which I learn that the Tory party gains ground in Newport. May God defeat their wicked councils and scatter their collected force. It is very surprising that the once highly respected town of Newport for liberty, spirit and freedom, should be willing to bow down their necks with base submission to the galling yoke of tyranny".2 This lack of patriotic sentiment was undoubtedly due to the presence of the enemy's vessels in Newport Harbor, as well as to social and commercial conditions. When the news of Lexington arrived in Newport in April, 1775, Captain Wallace, of the English man-of-war Rose, gave out the information that if Newport took part with Providence and New England, he would "lay the town in ashes". Yet in spite of this threat, two companies of patriots were raised to join the army before Boston.3
At the October session of the assembly, 1775, an act was passed for the punishment of traitors and those guilty of supplying the "minis- terial army or navy" with provisions or arms, or of acting as pilots on the enemy's ships. The assembly was addressed on several later occasions by Tories who made petitions, declarations and confessions and sought absolution.4 At the beginning of the Revolution they were fearless in their public utterances and acts, but as the struggle progressed they were held to strict accountability, and either relapsed into silence or fled the country, leaving their lands to be confiscated and sold. It is little wonder that Tories frequently reckoned upon an
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.