USA > Vermont > Windsor County > Windsor > The birthplace of Vermont; a history of Windsor to 1781 > Part 14
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
No sooner was the court formally opened and the judges in their seats than Colonel Stone, armed with his sword and followed by his band of armed men, all "with their Hatts on," entered the chamber. Colonel Stone and Joseph Wait ad- vanced to the bench, while the rest of the rioters remaining a few steps behind stood facing the court. Colonel Stone then spoke. He demanded of the court that he be told what business the three judges had to sit there as a court, adding that he made "this demand in behalf of the Publick." This remarkable ques- tion and the equally remarkable assertion were "seconded," according to Judge Wells, "by the said Joseph Wait and the said Israel Curtis." "Some of the judges"-Judge Wells does not say which-countered rather neatly by the observation that the letters patent or ordinance creating Cumberland County and the "Commission of the Pleas," which was always read at the opening of court, disclosed the authority of the court. It was perhaps not necessary for the court then to announce, as Judge Wells says it did, that those who wished to be enlightened on the point of the court's authority should have attended the reading. Colonel Stone, however, was not to be put off with any such legalistic stuff as that and there- upon he, with Joseph Wait and Israel Curtis "by many Argu- ments Denied the authority this Government had to errect the said County." While these arguments were going on and after they were finished the court deemed it discreet to make little answer other than to announce that the business on the calendar would be taken up.
Colonel Stone and his followers then struck another note by putting forward Joseph Wait who demanded an immediate trial on a charge of rioting for which he with others had been indicted.1 The court now fully realized the danger of the situ- ation. To place Joseph Wait and his co-defendants on trial
1 This may have been either the indictment heretofore referred to or an earlier one of which no trace has been found.
157
COLONEL STONE'S RIOTERS INVADE CHESTER
at once would mean that any jury would be intimidated by fear of the armed mob. To refuse an immediate trial and to require bail for the defendants' appearance at the next term of court might excite instant acts of bodily violence directed at the judges themselves. "The insolent behavior of Joseph Wait, Nathan Stone and Israel Curtis and the martial appear- ance of them and their party, armed and ranged as aforesaid, being considered" the court informed the several persons under indictment that they might depart on their own recognizances. This suggestion was no more efficacious than the preceding.
Colonel Stone, Joseph Wait, and Israel Curtis then moved the court that John Grout be disbarred or "be disabled from practising" on the ground that he was "a bad man." On this motion the court ruled, rather speciously, that it had a good opinion of Mr. Grout and that if Grout were "a bad man" it was unknown to the court. The court then stated that if Stone, Wait, or Curtis desired to prefer a charge against Grout the clerk would assist them in drawing any necessary papers or they might apply to a higher court. The court pointed out that in any event if Grout were charged with an offence he would be entitled to a trial and that it would be unlawful for the court on the mere assertion that Grout was "a bad man" to prejudge him without evidence or particulars. To this Colonel Stone and Wait answered with naivété that they were not accusing Grout in such a way as to give him the right of trial, that they were not obliged so to accuse him, but that the court might depend upon it that "the People" would be satis- fied with nothing less than "Grout's being immediately ex- pelled the court in such a manner as never to have the privi- lege of practising as an attorney." Then, as Judge Wells deposes, apparently in reference to Colonel Stone's next move, "directing his speech particularly to the first judge," he said "if it is not done we shall do something I shall be sorry to be obliged to do which will make your Honour repent not com- plying with our request." Upon this the men who had been standing back pressed forward, clubs in hand, and crowded near the bench. Judge Wells solemnly states that they came nearer "in a Riotous disorderly manner and shewed signs of a Resolution to carry their Point by force." It was "impossible
158
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
to proceed to business in this confusion and tumult" and so, to prevent the scandal of "violence committed while they were sitting as a Court," the judges ordered an adjournment to the next day. If there was aught else they could do and at the same time save their skins no such alternative is hinted at by Judge Samuel Wells. As far as Sheriff Whipple was concerned, the battles at Windsor had so cooled the sheriff's fighting ardor that Judge Wells does not even allude to him as a possible factor in preserving the peace in the emergency.
Of course an adjournment of the court was not at all what Colonel Stone and his company desired. If the court could adjourn from one day to the next it could keep up the process indefinitely. Judge Wells, Judge Lord, perhaps two or three assistant justices, and the sheriff were the only officers who had come from a distance. For them and for a jury panel, if there was one, provision in the way of board and lodging had been made in advance. The Windsor rioters, on the other hand, were without rations, funds, or credits for a long campaign. To commandeer from the countryside meant resentment against the insurgent cause. Plainly what had to be done must be done quickly. In this emergency Colonel Stone reasoned that the business of a court could not be transacted without the presence of a member of the bar. The bar of Cumberland County at that time consisted of John Grout lately of Windsor and now of Chester and Solomon Phelps of Marlborough. The latter resided at some distance from the court, paid only desultory attention to his profession and seems to have been afflicted with a mental disorder. Grout was attending court. If, therefore, the bar of Cumberland County for practical purposes existed only in the person of John Grout it occurred to Colonel Stone and his followers that the death or incapacity of Grout would leave the courts unable to deal with litigation. To kill John Grout or to incapacitate him through bodily wounds would accomplish the object but would be unpleasant, highly criminal and out of proportion to the amount of hatred for Grout that they actually felt. The men of Windsor were not criminal by nature nor were they bloodthirsty. Among themselves they hit on a safer and less repulsive measure which is described in the next chapter.
CHAPTER XXI THE ABDUCTION OF JOHN GROUT
UPON the adjournment of court John Grout went into the cabin of John Chandler who was the county clerk or "clerk of the Peace" for Cumberland County. Whether Grout found there any of the Windsor rioters or whether some of them fol- lowed him into John Chandler's dwelling does not appear; but inside the building he was soon set upon by Benjamin Thurston and David Getchell who seized him and "forcibly and violently carried him" out and away to where the rest of Colonel Stone's men were assembled. In the band, which Grout estimated at near thirty persons, he recognized not only most of those mentioned by Judge Wells, but David Stone, Elisha Hawley, Ebenezer Curtis, Andrew Norton, Elnathan Strong, Joseph Thomson, Samuel Gridley, Jacob Getchell, Ebenezer Hoisington, Simeon Mills, Solomon Emmons, Jona- than Noble, Samuel Whiston, Ebenezer Howard 1 and Aaron Bartlett. All told, Judge Wells and Grout name twenty-four of the men who were implicated in this raid upon the court. Neither Wells not Grout mentions Samuel Stone, while Grout overlooks Israel Curtis. With a few exceptions the names are the same as the list of those who fought and overpowered the sheriff in Windsor the month previous.
Thurston and David Getchell delivered their captive to the mob who immediately surrounded him. Armed with "sticks" they pressed in upon their prisoner and, after pulling, shaking, and "twitching" Grout "with the utmost cruelty," they hurried him off with them-Captain Joseph Wait in command of the company- on the road to Charlestown. The distance to Charlestown, which Grout states to be twelve miles, they walked with great rapidity. It was not a hard trip for "the hardy backwoodsmen of Windsor" but for Grout it was fa- tiguing, the more so because his captors treated him "with
1 In the printed copy of Grout's affidavit this name is erroneously given as Ebenezer Heywood.
159
160
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
great incivility and cruelty" by pulling, shaking, and "twitch- ing" him as they sped along. Twice Grout mentions this "twitching" as one of the forms of torture to which he was subjected. His original affidavits recounting the outrage have been lost and one wonders if the manuscripts have been cor- rectly read. Is it not likely that the word he used was "switch- ing" and that his captors thus made use of the "sticks" he says they carried ? By such a reading one would have an in- stance of that practice referred to in Ira Allen's History of Vermont under which upholders of the New York Provincial Government were "severely chastised with twigs of the Wilder- ness." 1
Two miles out of Chester they met Captain William Utley to whom Grout attempted to speak. The mob would have none of this and forced Grout back into the ranks with the injunction that he "could speak to no man in private."
The party reached the Connecticut River in due season and there, taking the boats and canoes in which they had made the journey down stream the day before, they crossed over to the New Hampshire side. They then proceeded to Sartwell's tavern in Charlestown for the night. Grout's manuscript account of the evening spent at Sartwell's is entertaining. Although he is unlikely to have perceived any humor in the situation it must have had its absurd side for it was evidently featured with the coarse buffoonery which so frequently marked the conduct of the Green Mountain Boys in their dealings with representatives of their oppressors. He says that both Sart- well and the Windsor rioters treated him "with as much humility and civility as could be expected under such circum- stances." No doubt in the relaxation of that June evening, safe in a hospitable New Hampshire inn, beyond the jurisdiction of New York officers, the Windsor outlaws enjoyed themselves after the exciting scenes and the triumph of the day. "We have broken up the court" said they, and Grout agreed with them. "If we thought we had not effected it, we would go back and bring away one of the judges," said some of the band, fired, perhaps, with Dutch courage. Plying Grout with questions they asked if he thought the court would continue in session.
1 Allen's History of Vermont, p. 26.
161
THE ABDUCTION OF JOHN GROUT
To this he deemed it discreet and in the interests of peace to answer that he was "sure" the court would not sit. It must have been a fine night of song and jokes and drinking at Sart- well's. One would like to know more of the details and whether the rioters sang that ancient Vermont classic:
"Fire upon the mountain ! Run, boys, run !"1
They kept Grout up until all hours besieging him with ques- tions and conversation although he was well nigh played out and in dire need of rest and sleep. Next morning Colonel Nathan Stone assumed command of the rioters, proceeded on foot with them and their prisoner to the river and took the boats and canoes for the hard, sixteen-mile journey against the swift current of the Connecticut up to Windsor. Upon setting out for the day Colonel Stone had had the magnanimity to assure Grout that he should suffer no bodily hurt nor be in the least insulted but on the contrary would be treated with respect. Colonel Stone apparently regarded his captive in the light of a prisoner of war. "You must go to Windsor and be imprisoned at my house," said he, "and there you shall ex- perience the kindness and generosity of our people." This was in marked contrast to other treatment Grout received, for, as he swears, "the rioters made use of the most shocking threats to this deponent in case he should attempt to escape, swearing that if this deponent was anywhere between Heaven and Hell he should be taken again." In view of such threats and the violence of the preceding day Grout seems to have been only partially reassured because he replied to Stone by merely expressing the hope that his physical weakness might excite compassion.
The journey to Windsor appears to have been accomplished before nightfall and Grout was then taken first to the house of Joseph Wait of which he had unpleasant memories associated with his visit of a few weeks before. Here, as on the previous occasion, the Windsor insurgents began to dictate terms. Steel Smith was the spokesman. Addressing Grout "privately" Steel Smith informed him that he might have his liberty im-
1 The Algerine Captive, vol. I, chaps. VII and XI.
162
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
mediately on agreeing to certain conditions, the first of which was that he should send for his family and re-settle in Windsor. Such a proposal, in view of Grout's previous relations with the people of Windsor, must have been somewhat distasteful and he begged that pity might be taken on his exhausted con- dition which amounted to illness and that discussion might be reserved for another day. David Getchell now took a hand in the conference but both he and Steel Smith were finally per- suaded by the prisoner to desist from pursuing the subject that evening and presently in the custody of Colonel Nathan Stone "amid the good wishes and low bowing compliments" of his captors Grout was permitted to go to Colonel Stone's home for the night.
Up through the Windsor settlements to Colonel Stone's home in the north part of the township walked the colonel and his prisoner. Grout began by begging Stone not to insist on discussion that evening, but it was no use. The colonel stated that the people of Windsor would re-assemble in the morning and would expect a decision. Therefore he urged it as to Grout's advantage to listen to the proposals and to make up his mind. "You must," said the colonel, "agree not to practice the law in this county. We mean that your agreeing to this shall be no disadvantage to you. We will make good all your damages if you will come and live in this town and become one of us. You will be treated with the greatest respect and shall have a genteel settlement." Colonel Stone added the further assurance that no one would object to Grout's prac- ticing in New Hampshire. While Grout's affidavits do not offer to explain the motives underlying the proposals it is reasonably clear that Colonel Stone wanted to force Grout into adopting the cause of the New Hampshire party. The ob- ject of that party being the establishment of New Hampshire's jurisdiction over Windsor and the other Cumberland County towns there would be, if the object was attained, no Cumber- land County of New York in which Grout could practice law. He would, by the change of jurisdiction, thus become a New Hampshire practitioner and in that capacity they would per- mit him to become a citizen.
Grout still persisted that he was too weak and ill to talk and
163
THE ABDUCTION OF JOHN GROUT
was allowed finally to go to bed to think the matter over. His answer, given to Colonel Stone for the people of Windsor on the following day, is copied in Mr. B. H. Hall's history as follows: "Violence has taken me out of my business. My wife is of slender constitution. Less trouble than this I have hereto- fore thought would have been too hard for her. The circum- stances of my transportation will make her think I am mur- dered. My anxiety on her account and for my family deprives me of the power of speaking and almost of thinking. Why am I asked 'What will you agree to' or told I am 'free to act' my sentiments ? I am in your power and you mean to impose terms and mean that I shall agree to them whether I am willing or not. Under my present circumstances I can agree to noth- ing. Willingly I take my liberty if it be offered me. I will say nothing to your people. Call them only to ask them what terms they have to impose and what punishment they will in- flict on me if I disobey them, my masters." 1 This answer, of course, did not earn for Grout his liberty. The threats against him if he attempted escape were repeated and he was permitted to write no letter to his wife or his friends unless it was first read and approved of by his captors. At the same time, as Mr. Hall informs us, Grout's creature comforts were attended to with care. He was also treated with a respect that seemed more like flattery than springing from true regard. On Sunday, the tenth day of June, after a captivity of five days, Grout effected his escape, but was unkind enough to have left no hint or ex- planation of how it was accomplished.
It would seem to have been a difficult matter for Grout, unaided, to have slipped from the custody of the Windsor rioters if they had been disposed to keep him a prisoner. He had, of course, a few friends in Windsor-notably the Deans-but there is no evidence that they came to his rescue. One item in an affidavit of Justice Oliver Willard of Hertford (Hartland) may, however, throw a little light on the subject. He testifies that he had been "instrumental towards prevent- ing the late riots in the township of Windsor in which divers persons with Nathan Stone were very active." 2 This affidavit, sworn to in the month of March, 1771, obviously refers to some
1 History of Eastern Vermont, pp. 167-168. 2 4 Doc. Hist., 428.
164
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
of the disturbances we have been discussing; and while "pre- venting" seems a large word for him to have used, it is proba- ble enough that Justice Willard, who resided not many miles north of Colonel Stone's home, may through personal influence or show of authority have persuaded Colonel Stone and his men to let Grout off. How long the lawless condition of affairs prevailed in Windsor is not clear. Plainly, from Justice Willard's affidavit, the riots were a thing of the past in March, 1771. Yet they were remembered by the dwellers on the Grants for some time after. In a letter of Judge Thomas Chandler's, written in the month of February, 1772, there are several interesting allusions to them. In the first he com- plains of the impropriety of nominating David Stone as a justice of the peace, saying: "Stone lives in Windsor among the Rietous Inhabitants where there is two parties and for this Reason I am of ye opinion that to omit appointing any Justice of ye Peace in Windsor for ye present will be best, . . . " Again, in speaking of Sheriff Whipple, Judge Chandler ob- serves that Whipple "was very faithfull in striving to appre- hend the Windsor Rietors" for which good services the New York government "made him a Grant of a Township of Land." Judge Chandler also commended Judge Lord for his services to Cumberland County, "especially for assisting the Sheriff with the Posse when he went to apprehend the Rietors at Windsor, wherein he was very servisable in stilling the same, and for which he has never had any Reward as some others have had, . >> 1 There is further pointed allusion to the Windsor riots in a petition to the governor of New York by the inhabitants of Guilford under date of May 11, 1772, in which they assert as ground for favor "that your petitioners have always been staunch friends to the interest of this gov- ernment particularly at the time of the unhappy Riots at Windsor. . . . " 2
In the month of August following his escape from Windsor John Grout went to New York City and there, on the strength of one of his two affidavits to which we have referred, obtained from Chief Justice Daniel Horsmanden of the Supreme Court an order for the issuance of process in an action or actions for 1 4 Doc. Hist., 462-463.
? Id., p. 476.
165
THE ABDUCTION OF JOHN GROUT
damages for assault and imprisonment against David Stone, Samuel Stone, Elisha Hawley, Enoch Judd, Ebenezer Curtis, John Benjamin, Andrew Norton, Elnathan Strong, Joseph Thomson, David Getchell, and Steel Smith. This matter, Mr. B. H. Hall says, does not appear to have been advanced beyond the original process,1 but in this he is in error since the Supreme Court docket shows that the sheriff of Cumberland County made return on the 27th day of October, 1770, that he was unable to find any of the defendants except Steel Smith. The other ten residents of Windsor evidently had no difficulty in keeping out of the sheriff's reach. The sheriff's return is reported as follows:
"The Sheriff of Cumberland County returns the defendant Steel Smith taken and as to the others Non Sunt." Then follows the entry of this order: "On motion of Mr. Brush,2 Ordered that the Sheriff bring in the Body of the Defendant taken, sitting the Court, or be amerced forty shillings and that the Defendant plead in twenty days after filing Declaration, or Judgment."
It may be worth noting that the judges of the Supreme Court sitting at the date of the sheriff's return were the Honor- able Robert R. Livingston and the Honorable George Duncan Ludlow who had presided at the trial of the ejectment suits the June previous.
Why John Grout should not have included as defendants Nathan Stone, Israel Curtis and the Waits may possibly be explained by the fact that the magistrates of Cumberland County had anticipated him in filing with the New York Pro- vincial Council on or before July 25 a formal complaint against Justices Nathan Stone and Israel Curtis impleaded with Joseph Wait and others. This complaint the New York Council re- ferred to the New York Supreme Court for action and it may have been considered best by the chief justice and by Grout that the two proceedings should deal with separate defendants. No record can be found of what the Supreme Court may have
1 History of Eastern Vermont, p. 168.
2 Perhaps the notorious Crean Brush.
166
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
done by way of disciplining the two justices of the peace and their confederates nor is there any further record of Grout's action for damages other than the sheriff's return and the court order already quoted.
CHAPTER XXII THE EARL OF DUNMORE
WHILE Colonel Nathan Stone was conducting his rebellion against the authority of New York, Ethan Allen made his first appearance as an actor in the affairs of the New Hampshire Grants. Allen's activities, following the pattern of Colonel Stone's initial efforts, had their beginning in lawful measures. He interested himself in the pending ejectment suits which Kempe and Duane had filed in the New York Supreme Court. In order to get to the bottom of these cases Allen went to the trouble of making a trip to Portsmouth to seek advice from Governor John Wentworth and to obtain from him a set of certified copies of New Hampshire charters and other papers bearing on the New Hampshire titles.1 He also retained as counsel for the defendants Judge Jared Ingersoll 2 who, it will be remembered, was the person to whom Governor John Wentworth had first complained of the trespasses of Captain William Dean.
For a very full account of the trial in several of these eject- ment suits the reader is referred to Governor Hiland Hall's Early Vermont History at pages 118 to 119. Suffice it here to say that when the cases came on to be heard the court ruled the titles under the New York grants to be valid and those under the New Hampshire charters to be void. The trials took place at Albany in the month of June, 1770, and in every instance the plaintiff recovered judgment. At the conclusion Ethan Allen bowed himself out of court with his famous cryptic remark that "the gods of the valleys are not gods of the hills." 3 Defeated though he was, he had won through the decision of the court a lasting grievance which he and his followers re- garded as nothing less than a miscarriage of justice and which they nursed until Vermont became independent.
The decision of the Supreme Court in these cases afforded a certain sense of relief to the New York Provincial Council
1 Allen's History of Vermont, p. 23.
2 Id. 3 Id., p. 24.
167
168
THE BIRTHPLACE OF VERMONT
which for several months past had been keeping in a pigeon hole the uncomfortable demand of Governor John Wentworth as surveyor-general of the King's Woods that the lands of Captain William Dean be declared forfeited to the Crown for breach of the condition against cutting white pines as set forth in the New Hampshire charter of Windsor. Now, the New York Council felt it safe to act. Accordingly, after waiting a reason- able time for some of the unfortunate defendants in the eject- ment suits to file notices of appeal and no such appeals being taken, the Provincial Council on August 14, 1770, took up Governor Wentworth's "memorial" of the preceding February and referred it to a committee for investigation and report. The "memorial," as will be recalled, involved not only the matter of Captain Dean's conviction and the possible forfeiture of his New Hampshire title but also the conduct of Judge Samuel Wells.
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.