USA > Vermont > History of the state of Vermont; for the use of families and schools > Part 10
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
12. The overtures in the proclamation of Governor Clinton, from which the above extract is taken, have a semblance of fairness which might have misled a people, less discerning, and less jealous of their rights than they to whom they were addressed. But the people of Vermont had been too long accustomed to a thorough investigation of every point in the con- troversy not to perceive that these overtures held out uo prospect of substantial relief. They perceived at once that New York was now endeavoring to effect that by policy, which she had heretofore vainly at- tempted by force. They had ever acted upon the conviction that the claims of New York were ground- less ; and, having now declared their independence and adopted a constitution, they were by no means to be cajoled into an acknowledgement of the "su- premacy" of that state. An answer to this proclama-
1
127
CONTROVERSY WITH NEW HAMPSHIRE.
tion was afterwards published by Ethan? Allen, in which he points out its sophistry, shows that its over- tures "are all romantic, designed only to deceive woods people," and exhorts his fellow citizens to maintain inviolate the supremacy of the independent state of Vermont, as the only means of security to their persons and property.
---
SECTION III.
Controversy with New Hampshire in 1778, and 1779- Legislative proceedings in Vermont ..
1. After the royal decision of the controversy be- tween New Hampshire and New York, in favor of the latter, in 1764. New Hampshire had made no attempt to continue her jurisdiction over the disputed territory. Hence we have bitherto had occasion to consider the people of Vermont, only in their relation to the goverment of New York ; but the declaration of their independence and the organization of their government were, in their consequences, the occasion of new difficulties. not only with New York, but also with New Hampshire and Massachusetts.
2. The original territory of New Hampshire was granted to Jolm Mason, and was bounded on the west by a line sixty miles from the sea. The lands be- tween this line and Connecticut river, were royal grants, and belonged to New Hampshire by virtue of the commissions of the governors of that province. Vermont had no sooner organized her government than the inhabitants on these lands manifested their desire to dissolve their connexion with New Hamp- shire and unite with Vermont. In their justification,
2
128
HISTORY OF VERMONT.
they contended, that all the territory west of Mason's grant, had been held in subjection to New Hampshire by force of the royal commissions-that when the royal authority ceased in the colonies, in consequence of the declaration of independence, their allegiance to New Hampshire ceased, and they were left at lib- erty to form a separate goverment, or to unite with such neighboring government as would consent to a union.
3. With these views of their relations to New Hamp- shire, the people on the territory between Mason's grant and Connecticut river, proceeded to make ar- rangements for proposing a connexion with Vermont. The Legislature of Vermont met, for the first time, on the 12th of March, 1778, at Windsor, and the same day a petition was presented from sixteen towns on the east side of Connecticut river, praying to be admitted to a nion with : ormont. The Legislature was much embarrassed by this application. Most of the members from the west side of the mountains regar- ded the union as a dangeroa measure and the majority of the assembly appeared to be against it ; yet sever- al of the towns in Vermont on Connecticut river were very desirous that the towns from New Hampshire should be received, and went so far as to propose withdrawing from their connexion with Vermont and setting up another state. In this state of things, and for the purpose of preserving its own union, the Legisla- ture voted, on the 18th of March, 1778, to refer the decision of the question to the people.
4. The Legislature met again by adjournment on the 4th of June, at Bennington, when it appeared that a majority of the towns were in favor of the union with the sixteen towns from New Hampshire ; and, June 11th, it was "voted that the union take place-thirty seven in the affirmative and twelve in the negative." It was also voted that any other towns on the east side of Connecticut river might be admit- ted to a union, on producing a vote of the majority of
1
129
FIRST UNION WITH A PART OF N. HAMPSHIRE.
the inhabitants, or on their sending a representative to the assembly of Vermont. Having thus effected their purpose, the sixteen towns informed the gov- ernment of New Hampshire that they had withdrawn from their jurisdiction, and wished the division line to be established and a friendly intercourse to bo kept up.
5. Those who were anxious for this union, had represented to the Legislature, that the inhabitants of the sixteen towns were nearly unanimous in their votes to join Vermont, and that New Hampshire, as a state, would not object to their withdrawing from her jurisdiction. But the event proved both these representations to be false. The government of New Hampshire was justly incensed at the pro- ceedings .. Mr Weare, President of the Council of New Hampshire, wrote to Congress on the 19th of August, to procure advice, and, in case of necessity, the interference of that body. On the 22d of Au- gust, he, in the name of the general assembly of that state, wrote to Mr Chittenden, governor of Vermont, claiming the sixteen towns as a part of New Hamp- shire. He stated that a large portion of the inbabi- tants of those towns were opposed to the union, that this minority had claimed the protection of the state, and that the government of New Hamp- shire considered itself bound to protect them. He urged Governor Chitenden to exert his influence with the Legislature, to dissolve a connexion, which would endanger their peace and probably their po- litical existence.
6. On the reception of this communication, Gov- ernor Chittenden convened the council, and it was agreed that Colonel Ethan Allen should repair to Philadelphia and ascertain how the proceedings of Vermont were regarded by Congress. On his return he reported that Congress was unanimously oppo- sed to the proceedings of Vermont in relation to the union with New Hampshire; but that if those pro-
130
HISTORY OF VERMONT.
ceedings were disannulled, only the delegates from New York would oppose their independence. The Legislature met again by adjournmeut on the 8th of October, 1778, at Windsor, and, having received the report of Col Allen, Oct. 13th, they took up the sub- jeet of the union.
7. At the first session of the Legislature in March, the state had been divided into two counties, Ben- nington on the west side of the mountains, and Cumberland on the cast. After considering and debating the subject of their connexion with the six- teeen towas from New Hampshire, from the 13th to the 21st of October, votes were taken in the Legislature on the following questions, the result of which evin- ced the determination of a majority of the members to proceed no further in that hazardous experiment. Question Ist. Shall the counties in this state remain as they were established in March last ? This ques- tion was decided in the affirmative ; yeas 35, nays 26. Question 2d. Shall the towns on the east side of the Connecticut river, which have been admitted to a union with Vermont, be included in the county of Cumberland ? Question 3d. Shall said towns be erected into a county by themselves ? The last two questions were both decided in the negative; yeas 28, nays 33.
8. Finding by these votes that the Legislature did not ineline, at present, to do any thing more on the subject of the union, the representatives from the towns on the east side of the Connecticut, with drew from the assembly, in which they had been admitted to seats, and were followed by fifteen rep- resentatives from towns on the west side of the river, together with the Lieutenant governor, and two of the Council. After these members had withdrawn, the number left was barely sufficient to constitute a quorum. They therefore proceeded to transact the remaining business of the session, and adjourned on the 24th of October, to meet again at Bennington ou
13I
FIRST UNION WITH PART OF N. II.
the second Thursday of February next, having re- solved to refer the subject of the union with New Hampshire to their constituents for instructions how to proceed at their next session.
9.9. The seeceeding members, after entering a for- mal protest upon the journals against the proceed- ings of the Assembly, held a meeting at which they made arrangements for calling a convention, to which they invited all the towns, in the vicinity of Connecticut river, to send delegates. The object of this convention was to establish a government in the valley of the Connecticut, the centre and seat of which should be some where upon that stream. The convention met at Cornish, New Hampshire, on the 9th of December, and a union was agreed upon by a majority of the delegates, without any regard to former limits, and a proposal was made to New Hampshire, either to agree with that state upon a division line, or to submit it to Congress, or to ar- bitrators mutually chosen. hi case neither of these proposals was accepted, they proposed that they would consent that all the grants should be united with New Hampshire and altogether become one entire state, coextensive with the claims of New Hampshire previous to the royal decision in 1761. Till one of these proposals was acceded to, they " re- solved to trust in providence and defend them- selves."
10. Only eight towns on the west side of Contre- ticut river were is presented in this convention, and the delegates from some of these declined taking any part in making the foregoing proposals io New Hampshire. From the proceedings of this conven- tion it became obvious that the whole aim of the leading men in the vicinity of Connectiem river, was to establish such a government as to bring themselves in the centre, and it did not appear to be material with them whether this was effected by a mion of a part of New Hampshire with Vermont, or by bring-
132
HISTORY OF VERMONT.
ing the whole of Vermont under the jurisdiction of New Hampshire. The people of Vermont were now fully sensible of the impolicy, as well as injustice, of aiding in the dismemberment of New Hampshire, and they were wise enough to embrace the first opportunity to retrace their steps and dissolve a con- nexion which threatened their ruin.
11. The Legislature of Vermont met at Benning- ton, according to adjournment, on the 11th of Febru- ary, 1779, and the next day they voted to dissolve the union which had subsisted between them and the towns in New Hampshire. This determination of the Legislature of Vermont, was immediately communicated to the government of New Hamp- shire by Ira Allen, and was received while efforts were making to gain the assent of that government to the proposals made by the Cornish convention. Encouraged by these divisions, the Legislature of New Hampshire now resolved to lay claim, not only to the sixteen towns, which had united with Ver- mont, but to the whole state of Vermont, as grants originally made by that province. Application was made to Congress for a confirmation of this claimn, and at the same time New York applied to that body for a confirmation of her title to the teri- tory in question.
12. Circumstances connected with these applica- tions convinced the people of Vermont, that they were the result of the intrigues of the leading men in those states, and were designed to effect a division of Vermont between them, by a line along the sum- mit of the Green Mountains. As the other states in general took but little interest in these controversies, and as the adjustment of them was embarrassing to Congress, it wasthought that, if New Hampshire and New York should agree, it would be left pretty much to those two states to settle the affairs of Ver- mont between them, in which case Vermont must certainly lose her separate existence as a state. But
133
CONTROVERSY WITH N. K. AND N. Y.
either to disappoint the parties, which appeared to be resolved on the annihilation of Vermont, or for some other cause, Massachusetts now interposed and claimed a portion of the disputed territory, as within her jurisdiction. Thus was Vermont struggling to maintain her independence against the three adjoin- ing states which were all claiming her territory and the right of jurisdiction, nor had her proceedings yet received any countenance of encouragment from the continental Congress.
SECTION IV.
Controversy with New York, New Hampshire and Massachusetts, in 1778-1779, and 1780.
1. During their troubles, resulting from their union with a part of New Hampshire, and which have been mentioned in the preceding section, Vermont was still as deeply as ever involved in the controversy with New York; but now, events transpired in the southeastern part of the county of Cumberland, which gave to that controversy a much more alarming as- peet. On the 7th of July, 1778, Governor Clinton wrote to his friends in Vermont, recommending, that wherever the partizans of New York were sufficient- ly powerful, firm resistance should be made to the draughting of men, the raising of taxes and to all the acts of the "ideal Vermont State ;" and also "that associations be formed for mutual defence against this usurpation." At the same time he wrote to Congress, urging their decision of the controversy, and blaming the people of Vermont for the violence of their proceedings.
2. In conformity to the recommendation of Governor Clinton, the friends of New York met in convention at Brattleborough on the 4th of May, 1779, and, hav-
12
134
HISTORY OF VERMONT.
ing organized, drew uy a petition to the Governor of New York, in which, after shading the summary man- ner in which the pretended State of Vermont was proceeding to confiscate their property, and various other grievances, they " entreat his Excellency to take immediate measures for protecting the loyal subjects of that part of the state, and for convincing Congress of the impropriety of delaying a decision in a matter, which so nearly concerned the peace, welfare and lives of many of their firm adherents." About the same time a military association was formed for the purpose of opposing the authority of Vermont.
3. In consequence of representing that they had a regiment of 500 men, and of making some other false assertions, several commissions had been obtained from Governor Clinton ; and the government of Ver- mont, therefore, found it necessary to take measures to put a stop to these military movements. Ethan Allen was accordingly ordered by the governor to call out the militia for that purpose. When the adherents of New York were informed of these transactions on the part of Vermont, Col Patterson, who held a com- mission in the county of Cumberland under the au- thority of New York, wrote to Governor Clinton, May 5th, for directions how to proceed, an I suggesting the necessity of sending the militia of Albany county to his assistance. This letter and the foregoing petition Were answered by the governor with assurances of protection ; and he recommended that the authority of Vermom should not be acknowledged, except in the alternative of submission or inevitable ruin.
4. On the 18th of May, Governor Clinton wrote to the president of Congress, "that matters were fast approaching to a very serious crisis, which nothing but the inmediato interposition of Congress could possibly prevent ; that he daily expected he should be obliged to order out a force for the defence of those who adhered to New York; that the wisdom of Congress would suggest to them, what would be
135
PROCEEDINGS OF CONGRESS ON THE SUBJECT.
the consequence of submitting the controversy, espe- cially at this juncture, to the decision of the sword ; but that justice, the faith of government, the peace and safety of society would not permit them to cominue any longer passive spectators of the violence committed on their fellow citizens." This letter and sundry oth- er papers relating to the disputes, were laid before Congress on the 20th of May, 1779, and were referred to a committee of the whole; and on the 1st day of June, Congress resolved " that a committee be ap- pointed to repair to the inhabitants of a certain dis- triet, known by the name of the New Hampshire grants, and enquire into the reasons why they refuse to continue citizens of the respective states, which have claimed jurisdiction over the said district. And that they take every prudent measure to promote an amicable settlement ; and to prevent divisions and animosities, so prejudicial to the United States".
5. While Congress was engaged in passing these resolutions, Allen marched with an armed force and made prisoners of the Colonel and other offleers who were acting under the authority of New York. Com- plaint was immediately made to Governor Clinton, with an earnest request that he would take speedy measures for their relief. Governor Clinton wrote again to Congress on the 7th of June stating what had taken place, disapproving of the resolutions of Congress before mentioned, and requesting that the committee, appointed to repair to the New Hamp- shire grants, might postpone their visit till after the next meeting of the New York Legislature. June 16th, Congress resolved that the officers captured by Allen should be liberated, and that the committee above mentioned be directed to inquire into the cir- cuinstances of that transaction.
6. Of the five commissioners appointed to repair to Vermont two only attended-Dr Witherspoon andMr Atlee. These gentlemen repaired to Ben- nington in June, had several conferences with the
7
136
INSTORY OF VERMONT.
friends of Vermont, and, also, with others, who were in the interest of New York. It seems to have been the aim of these commissioners to effect a reconcil- iation between the parties; but it appears from the report, which they made to Congress on the 13th of July, that they did not succeed in accomplishing the object of their mission. Four parties were now claiming the same tract of country, and each of these parties had applied to Congress for a decision of the controversy. Under such circumstances Congress could not well avoid taking up the matter and among others, on the 24th of September, 1779, passed several resolutions, the substance of which was as follows ;
7. Resolved that it be earnestly recommended, that New Hampshire, Massachusetts and New York ex- pressly authorize Congress to determine their disputes relative to their respective boundaries-and that on the first of February next, Congress will proceed to settle and determine the same, according to equity. It was, moreover, declared to be the duty of those in- habitants of the New Hampshire grants, who did not acknowledge the jurisdiction of either of the above named states, to refrain from exercising any power over such of the inhabitants as did acknowledge such jurisdiction, and it was likewise recommended to the said states to refrain, in the mean time, from exe- cuting their laws over such inhabitants as did not acknowledge their respective jurisdictions.
8. From the whole tenor of these resolutions, it was evident that Congress wished for the present to pacify the parties, without coming to any decision upon the matter in dispute ; and it was equally evi- dent that she would prefer sacrificing Vermont as a separate jurisdiction, to a rupture at this time with either of the states, which laid claim to that territory. Nor shall we be sapprised at this partial and evasive policy, when we consider that the successful termina- tion of the war for independence, which was then undecided, and the fate of the colonies generally de-
137
VERMONT APPEALS TO THE WORLD.
pended upon the integrity of their union in the com- mon cause.
9. Those resolutions seem to have quieted all parties but Vermont. New Hampshire and New York complied with the recommendations and an- thorized Congress to settle the dispute. Massachu- setts did not comply, and she probably neglected it for the purpose of relieving Congress from the ne- cessity of deciding the matter at the time appointed and of preventing the sacrifice of Vermont. A com- pliance with these resolutions on the part of Vermont, would have been to admit the existence of four sepa- rate jurisdictions at the same time in the same terri- tory, and in a territory too, the inhabitants of which had declared themselves to be free and independent, and had assumed the powers of goverment and ex- ercised them in all cases and in every part of the territory. No alternative therefore remained to Ver- mont. She had taken a decisive stand-declared her independence-formed a constitution-enacted laws, and established courts of justice, and now nothing remained for her but to go onward with finmess and resolution ; and happy was it for her that she possess- ed statesmen endowed with courage and abilities suited to the emergency of her condition ; statesmen who well understood the rights and interests of the community and were determined that they should not be sacrificed by the neighboring states, or by the poli- cy of Congress.
10. On the 10th day of December, 1779, the gov- ernor and council of Vermont, in reference to the foregoing resolutions of Congress, published an ap- peal to the candid and impartial world, in which they declared that they could not view themselves as holden, either in the sight of God, or man, to sub- mit to the execution of a plan, which they had reason to believe was commenced by neighboring states ; that the liberties and privileges of the state of Ver- mont, by said resolutions aro to be suspended upon 12*
138
HISTORY OF VERMONT
the arbitrament and final determination of Congress, when, in their opinion, they were things too sacred ever to be arbitrated upon at all; and what they were bound to defend at every risk : that Con- gress had no right to intermeddle in the internal policy and government of Vermont ;- that the state existed independent of any of the thirteen United States, and was not accountable to them, or to their representatives, for liberty, the gift of the benevolent Creator ;-
11. That the state of Vermont was not represented in Congress, and could not submit to resolutions passed without their consent, or even knowledge, and which put every thing which was valuable to them at stake ;- that there appeared a manifest in- equality, not to say predetermination, that Congress should request of their constituents power to judge and determine in the cause, and never ask the con- sent of the thousands whose all was at stake. They also declared that they were, and ever had been, ready to bear their proportion of the burden and ex- pense of the war with Great Britain from its com- mencement, whenever they were admitted into the union with the other states. But they were not so lost to all sense, and honor, that, after four years of war with Britain, in which they had expended so much blood and treasure, they should now give up every thing worth fighting for,-the right of making their own laws, and choosing their own form of govern- ment,-to the arbitrament and determination of any man, or body of men, under heaven."
12. Congress, as already noticed, had appointed the first day of February, 1780, for considering and determining the matters in question ; but contrary to the wishes and expectations of all the parties, the subject was not called up. Congress, however, or- dered, on the 21st of March, that, as there were not nine states represented in that body, exclusive of the parties concerned, the matter should be, for the pres
-
L
139
REPLY OF VERMONT TO CONGRESS.
ent, postponed, but on the 2d of June, resumed the consideration of i, and among other things resolved "that the proceedings of the people on the New Hampshire grants, were highly unwarrantable and subversive of the peace and welfare of the United States, and that they be strictly required to abstain from all acts of authority, civil or military, over those inhabitants who profess allegiance to other states." The subject was again called up on the 9th of June, and the further consideration of it postponed to the second Tuesday of September following.
13. The foregoing resolutions and proceedings of Congress were communicated to Governor Chitten- den, who laid the same before his council; and on the 25th of July, they replied, in a communication ad- dressed to the president of Congress, that " however Congress may view those resolutions, they are consid- ered by the people of this state, as being in their na- ture, subversive of the natural rights which they had to liberty and independence, as well as incompatible with the principles on which Congress grounded their own right to independence, and had a natural and direct tendency to endanger the liberties of America ; that Vermont, being a free and indepen- dent state, had denied the authority of Congress to judge of their jurisdiction ;-
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.