Transcriber’s Note:

New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the public domain.

Vol. I      No. 1
THE
MAGAZINE OF HISTORY
WITH
NOTES AND QUERIES
JANUARY 1905

WILLIAM ABBATT

281 Fourth Avenue, New York

Published Monthly      $5.00 a Year      50 Cents a Number

THE MAGAZINE OF HISTORY

WITH NOTES AND QUERIES

Vol. I      JANUARY, 1905.      No. 1

CONTENTS

THE BRONZE TABLET ERECTED AT QUEBEC TO COMMEMORATE MONTGOMERY’S DEFEAT | Frontispiece
|  | PAGE
THE ORIGIN OF THE MASSACHUSETTS MILITIA | James J. Tracy | 1
Chief of the Massachusetts State Archives Division
A BIT OF CHURCH HISTORY | Rev. Roscoe Nelson | 10
(The First Church, Windsor, Conn.)
ARNOLD AND MONTGOMERY AT QUEBEC. | (Illustration) | 13
The Bronze Tablet Commemorating Arnold’s Defeat
A “SCRUB-POETICAL” ANSWER TO A GOVERNOR | Otis G. Hammond | 18
HAS GOVERNOR LOVELACE OF NEW YORK BEEN PROPERLY IDENTIFIED? | W. G. Stanard | 30
THE INFLUENCE OF SLAVERY ON THE OLD SOUTHERN CIVILIZATION | H. E. Belin | 34
ANTHONY WALTON WHITE, BRIGADIER IN THE CONTINENTAL ARMY | A. S. Graham and Anna M. W. Woodhull | 40
ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS |  |
 Two Eighteenth Century Letters | 45
 The Panama Canal Twenty-five Years Ago | 48
 The Earliest Known Autograph of Benedict Arnold | 50
MAGAZINE OF HISTORY NOTICE | 51
GENEALOGICAL | 53
MINOR TOPICS: A Committee to Visit Nova Scotia | 56
BOOK NOTICES | 57
ANNOUNCEMENTS | 58

Entered as second-class matter, March 1, 1905, at the Post Office at New York, N. Y., under the Act of Congress of March 3, 1879.

Copyright, 1905, by William Abbatt

SCENE OF MONTGOMERY’S DEFEAT.

Tablet placed by the Literary and Historical Society of Quebec, 1904.

THE MAGAZINE OF HISTORY

WITH NOTES AND QUERIES

Vol. I      JANUARY, 1905      No. 1

THE ORIGIN OF THE MASSACHUSETTS MILITIA

Prior to the outbreak of the Revolution the militia of the Province of Massachusetts Bay was governed by the provisions of an act for regulating the militia, passed in 1693. Although quaint and antiquated in its provisions, it seems to have sufficed for all practical purposes; and no other act was passed regulating the militia until the Provincial Congress, almost at the beginning of its sittings, took steps to place the militia of the Province upon a different basis in order to find themselves prepared for the impending contest with the mother country, which at that date, October, 1774, was patent to all men as an unavoidable conflict.

It may be interesting to note some of the provisions and requirements that governed the militia during the Province period under the old act referred to. The act provided that all male persons from sixteen years of age to sixty, with certain exceptions, should bear arms and duly attend all musters and military exercises of the respective troops and companies wherein they were listed, allowing three months’ time to every son, next after his coming to sixteen years of age, and to every servant for the same period after his time was out, to provide themselves with arms, ammunition, etc. It also provided that, if any person liable to be listed as aforesaid—i.e., as a member of any troop or company, in the precinct or town where he resided—should avoid service by shifting from house to house or place to place, to avoid being listed as a member of a troop or company, he should be fined ten shillings for every offence, the money to be paid over to the company to which he belonged. Regimental musters, except in Boston, were to be held but once in three years; but the act provided that every captain, or chief officer, of a company or troop, should draw forth his company or troop four days annually, and no more; to exercise them in motions, the use of arms, and shooting at marks, or other military exercises. The punishment for any disorders or contempt committed by any member of a company on a training day or on a watch was to be by laying neck and heels, riding the wooden horse, or ten shillings’ fine. The exemptions from training included the members of the Council, the Representatives for the time being, the Secretary, Justices of the Peace, the President, Fellows, students, and servants of Harvard College, Masters of Art, ministers, elders and deacons of churches, sheriffs, physicians, surgeons, and professed schoolmasters, all such as had held commissions and served as field officers or captains, lieutenants or ensigns; coroners, treasurers, the Attorney-General, deputy sheriffs, clerks of courts, constables, constant ferrymen, and one miller to each gristmill. In addition there were exempted officers employed in connection with the Crown Revenue service, all masters of vessels of thirty tons and upwards, constant herdsmen, persons lame or otherwise disabled in body (on production of a certificate from two surgeons), Indians and negroes. It also provided that where any person could not provide his own arms, corn or other merchantable provision or vendable goods, to the extent of one-fifth part more than the value of the arms and ammunition, might be proffered to the clerk of the company, who was authorized to sell it and thus provide the person with the necessary arms. In case any were too poor to even supply merchandise, the arms were to be provided from the town stock. It also provided that a stock of powder and ammunition should be held in every town, and from time to time be renewed by the Selectmen. The necessary stock of powder, arms, and ammunition, was to be secured by a rate equally and justly laid upon the inhabitants and estates in such towns; and the rate for this purpose was collected by the constables, who were authorized, in case of non-payment, to distrain as for other rates. Under this act the militia of the Province were governed, and from the militia so authorized were raised the troops who formed the contingent of Provincials in the various expeditions against Canada, and proved their natural military capacity and their inherent quality as good soldiers at the siege of Louisburg, the expedition against Crown Point, and upon other occasions, as well as in various minor engagements with the Indian enemy upon the eastern and western frontiers of the Province.

After the events of the Stamp Act and when it became a certainty that the colonists could hope for nothing from the tyrannical ministry of Great Britain, and all thinking men faced the possibility of armed resistance to the mother country, it became necessary for those foreseeing the event and in the forefront of the Revolutionary party to provide a more elastic instrument and one more responsive to their urgent needs than could be looked for under the old militia act. Accordingly, in the first Provincial Congress, on the 26th of October, 1774, a committee appointed to consider what was necessary to be done for the defence and safety of the Province made a report upon which a resolve was immediately passed, making provision for the appointment of a Committee of Safety, who were empowered and directed to alarm, muster, and cause to be assembled, with the utmost expedition, such and so many of the militia of the Province, completely armed and equipped, as they might judge necessary for any contingency they might be called upon to confront. Provision was made for the pay and subsistence of any force that might be so assembled, and for the appointment of general officers, inasmuch as some of the officers holding commissions under crown appointments might have, and no doubt did hold, what were at the time conservative opinions concerning the causes that had led to the bitter feeling between the people of the Colonies and the ministers of Great Britain. It was resolved that such companies as had not already chosen officers should do so forthwith; and, where said officers should judge the districts included within the regimental limits too extensive, they should divide them and adjust their limits, and proceed to elect field officers to command the regiments, so called. The effect of this action, when carried out, was to practically redistrict the whole militia of the Province, and provide them with company officers and field officers that were in sympathy with the popular feeling; and this change took effect upon the initiative of what was practically a convention of delegates from the people, who had assembled in response to a call to take measures to save the Province from what they considered violation of their rights and privileges, and from aggressive militarism.

THE MINUTE-MEN: WHAT THEY WERE

It was at the same time provided that one-quarter, at least, of the respective companies in every regiment should be formed into companies of fifty privates at the least, who were to equip and hold themselves in readiness to march at the shortest notice from the Committee of Safety upon any emergency. Each company so formed was to choose a captain and two lieutenants, and they were to be grouped in battalions to consist of nine companies each and the captains and subalterns of each battalion were to elect field officers to command them. These were the minute-men, and were organized under this resolve, nearly six months before the affair of April 19, 1775; and the promptness with which they assembled in response to the alarm upon that memorable occasion is thereby accounted for. The foregoing statement will also serve to explain what has been a matter of confusion to many people; namely, the distinction between minute-men and militia. The minute-men, while of the militia, were, for a short time at the beginning of the war, a distinct body under a separate organization. A minute-man was a member of the militia who had engaged himself, with others, to march at a moment’s warning; while a militiaman was one who had not so engaged, and yet was equally liable to be called upon for service, when the Committee of Safety should deem it necessary to order out the militia. It happened, therefore, that companies of minute-men and companies of militia from the same town responded under different commanders to the alarm of April 19, 1775. The service of one was as patriotic as that of the other; but the minute-men were under special engagement to hold themselves in readiness to march at a moment’s warning, and you may assume that they were, as a rule, the youngest, most active, and most patriotic members of their respective communities.

In December, 1774, a patriotic address by the committee on the state of the Province was accepted by the Provincial Congress, and a copy thereof sent to all the towns and districts in the Province. In this address after a recital of the grievances and oppressions laid upon the people, and of the necessity of guarding their rights and liberties, it was recommended that particular care should be taken by each town and district to equip each of the minute-men not already provided therewith with an effective firearm, bayonet, pouch, knapsack, thirty rounds of ball cartridges and that they be disciplined three times a week and oftener, as opportunity might offer. The militia in general were also not to be neglected, and their improvement in training and drill was strongly recommended. Thus early before open hostilities were declared did the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts take prompt and energetic measures to place themselves upon a military footing, so as not to be taken at a disadvantage when the shock of armed strife should occur.

The second Provincial Congress in February, 1775, confirmed the powers of the Committee of Safety, to whom all military matters were directly intrusted, repeated the recommendations of the previous Congress relative to the militia, and appointed four general officers. The commanding officer of each regiment of minute-men, as well as the colonels of the militia regiments, were recommended to review their respective commands and to make return of their number and equipment. Six days before the 19th of April the Committee of Safety was authorized to form six companies of the train artillery already provided by the Colony, to immediately enter upon a course of discipline and be ready to enter the service whenever an army should be raised.

The events of the historic 19th of April, 1775, brought matters to a crisis more rapidly than had been anticipated; and, following that incursion of the British troops (excursion it is sometimes called in the quaint language of the day, although one would hardly term it a pleasant one), the Provincial Congress resolved that an army of 13,600 men should be raised immediately by the Province of Massachusetts Bay. A few days later it was moved and passed that the companies in each regiment should consist of fifty-nine men, including three officers, and that each regiment should consist of ten such companies.

The militia and minute-men, as reorganized and prepared in accordance with the directions of the Provincial Congress, responded with marvelous promptitude when the call to arms came. Within ten days after the battle of Lexington between fifteen and twenty thousand men had assembled at Cambridge and Roxbury. But it was an armed assemblage rather than an army. There was practically no cohesion beyond the company organization. They were not accustomed to act with other units as battalions or regiments. There was no term or limit of service prescribed or that could be required of these men that came forward in response to the alarm. Their own patriotic fervor or the persuasiveness of their officers made the measure of their stay in the service. It was, in consequence, a fluctuating force from day to day, with arrivals and departures in constant progress. The problems involved in making it a united or cohesive force for either aggression or defence would drive the modern military man frantic. Yet of necessity this force had to serve as the nucleus of the army it was proposed to raise to serve for eight months or to December 31, 1775.

The method of recruiting seems odd in these days, but in reality it was simple enough and was effective at the same time. “Beating orders,” as they were called, were issued to captains and lieutenants, or rather to those desiring to be commissioned in such capacities; and, upon their securing the specified number of men agreeing to serve under them, they were accepted with their men, and their commissions assured to them. In this way the men practically chose their officers, while at the same time each officer in a regiment from the colonel down became his own recruiting officer, captains and lieutenants in order to fill up their company strength, and colonels in order to obtain their full quota of companies. No commissions were issued to any regiment until it was completed. It was this practice that caused several New Hampshire companies to be embodied in Massachusetts regiments.

The effectiveness of this method of enlistment can best be judged by the fact, officially verified, that commissions had been issued to the officers of fifteen regiments, they having at that time the proper complement of men. It could not be expected, under the conditions that prevailed, that an army so hastily gotten together and formed from small local organizations, totally unused to acting in masses under any military system as regiments or brigades, should have presented, either in the matter of discipline or equipment, anything that would commend itself to the trained military man. One thing, however, all those who had assembled, whether as minute-men or militia, possessed in common; and that was the patriotic determination to resist by every means in their power any further encroachment upon their rights and liberties. A goodly number of the recruits and many of the officers had served in the expeditions against Canada; and these were sufficient to leaven the mass, and communicate by example and precept something of the military spirit to their younger comrades who had never rendered service in the field. At that time the army was a Massachusetts army, and in fact it is so termed in the official documents. The regiments were really what would be designated in these days as State regiments, being enlisted, officered, and maintained entirely by Massachusetts. There was no lack of officers of the higher grades, as there were provided in addition to the general officers previously named as having been appointed in making the establishment for the organization of the army, May 23, 1775, one lieutenant-general, two major-generals, four brigadier-generals, two adjutant-generals, and two quartermaster-generals.

By June 13, 1775, it had been resolved that twenty-three regiments should be commissioned, exclusive of one regiment of artillery, which latter was to consist of ten companies, and had already been partly organized. Such were the constituent parts of the army organized by Massachusetts inside of two months after the 19th of April, 1775, from her local militia; and it was these same raw and undisciplined levies, assisted by the contingents from the neighboring Colonies, which had assembled at Cambridge and Roxbury upon news being conveyed to them that Massachusetts had accepted the gage of battle, who time after time repelled the attacks of picked regiments of troops of Great Britain, until compelled to leave the field by lack of ammunition upon the seventeenth day of June, 1775. No better test of the mettle of the American militiaman, when converted into a soldier, can be conceived than was furnished upon that day when a number of these hastily organized regiments met and shrank not from the attack of trained soldiers. Although, naturally enough, regarded as a defeat, and, therefore, in a measure discreditable to the provincials, so much so that in after years veteran survivors cared not to exploit their participation in the battle, it really had a tremendous moral effect upon each side, the provincials being assured thereafter that under anywhere near like equal conditions they could defeat the British, while for the enemy there resulted the enforced conviction that the colonists were not unworthy foes, and that like victory would be altogether too dearly bought.

The encouragement offered to men to enlist into the eight months’ service would hardly be considered in the light of a very extravagant bounty in these days. The Provincial Congress provided that a woollen coat should be supplied to every soldier who enlisted, in addition to his wages and travel allowance. These coats were to be provided by the different towns throughout the Province; and a schedule was made up, allotting a definite number to be furnished by each town. They were to be of a uniform pattern, as far as the style of the coat was concerned; but apparently the only distinctive military attachment in connection with them was the buttons, which it was enacted should be of pewter and bear the regimental number, when the coats were distributed to the men belonging to the different organizations. It may well be imagined that this method of securing coats did not result in very prompt delivery, and in consequence it was provided later in the year that soldiers might receive a money equivalent for the value of the coat. Inasmuch as many of the men served the full term of their enlistment without ever being gratified with the sight of the promised bounty coat, it is not to be wondered at that thousands of them accepted the money equivalent, and received it in some instances after the expiration of their term of service. With the appointment of Washington as commander-in-chief by the Continental Congress, the Massachusetts army, raised as I have described, together with the levies raised by the other Colonies, became a part of the Continental establishment. The eight months’ men raised by Massachusetts can properly be regarded accordingly as Continental soldiers, although originally raised under State auspices, without any outside encouragement or assistance. The actual transfer of State stores, supplies, etc., did not take place for some little time after Washington had taken command at Cambridge; and many of the officers exercised the duties of their positions under their State commissions, and did not receive Continental commissions until September or October, 1775.

It may be interesting to note how the effective forces at Washington’s disposition compared with the authorized number directed to be raised by the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts. They had provided for an army of 13,600 men; but on July 10, 1775, Washington expressed his concern at finding the army inadequate to the general expectation and the duties which might be required of it. In this communication he states that the number of men fit for duty of the forces raised by the Province, including all the outposts and artillery, did not amount to 9000. He also states that the troops raised in the other Colonies were more complete, although they also fell short of their establishment; and his estimate at that time of the total number of men at his disposition available for duty was not more than 13,500. The proportion, however, of the troops furnished by the different Colonies, and composing the army that invested Boston, is shown by a general return, signed by Adjutant-General Horatio Gates in July, 1775. It gives twenty-six Massachusetts regiments (an additional regiment not being completed is not included in the number), four independent companies, also of Massachusetts, with a regiment of artillery, three Connecticut regiments, three New Hampshire regiments, three Rhode Island regiments, and a Rhode Island company of artillery, making altogether a total force of 17,355 men.

At a council of war, July 9, 1775, it was estimated that the force of the enemy amounted to 11,500, and that the army investing Boston ought to consist of at least 22,000 men; and it was recommended, in order to supply the deficiency, that an officer from each company raised in Massachusetts Bay should be sent out to recruit all the regiments up to their standard efficiency as fixed by the Provincial Congress, Rhode Island and Connecticut being at the time engaged in recruiting for the purpose of filling up their quotas of troops to the full establishment. Naturally enough, the commander-in-chief found much to lament over in the deficiencies both as to number and equipment of the army he found almost ready made to his hand, and yet so lacking in all things from a military point of view; but there is little of criticism in his letters of the period, although they are filled with pleadings, expostulations, and exhortations for the purpose of bringing up the army to a desired state of efficiency.

While the enlisted men comprising this eight months’ army held the line and were being brought more or less under military discipline and system, there were times when their numbers fell short of the estimated number required for a besieging army, where it was at any time possible that the enemy equal in effective force might make an attack and break the line. It was found necessary from time to time to call forth the local militia from the towns in the vicinity of Boston to do duty for longer or shorter periods; but then, as later, the general officers criticised the efficiency of the militia thus called upon, as they could not be depended upon for a continuance in camp for any definite period, or regularity and discipline during the time they might stay. Such criticism was inevitable, and was applied during the whole term of the Revolutionary War to the militia contingents that were called forth in all the Colonies by the officers commanding the regulars or the Continental forces.

After the expiration of the term of service of the eight months’ men a call was made for twelve months’ men; and many of those who served the first term or first campaign, as it was called, both officers and men, engaged for the second campaign. The organization of the standing militia thereby became broken up and disrupted by the depletion of the local organizations. It therefore became necessary to make a reorganization and redistricting of the militia of the Province. An act was accordingly passed January 22, 1776, by which this object was attained. It provided that all able-bodied male persons from sixteen years of age to fifty, with certain specified exemptions, in every town and district should be considered members of the train band. The alarm list should consist of all male persons from sixteen years of age to sixty-five, not liable to be included in the train band and not exempted under special provision. Each company was to consist of sixty-eight privates, exclusive of the alarm list, officered by a captain and two lieutenants, non-commissioned officers to be four sergeants, four corporals, with a drummer and fifer for each company. A brigadier-general was directed to be chosen for each county, and under him the field officers of the different regiments were authorized to divide up and district the regiments, each regiment having a colonel, lieutenant-colonel, and two majors. Three major-generals were also to be chosen by the Council or House of Representatives. Under this enactment the county regiments were numbered, officered, and their organizations established, and from the standing militia thus provided for all detachments and drafts of Massachusetts militia that were made, either for short terms of service upon alarms or as re-enforcements to the Continental Army, were made during the remaining period of the war. This establishment for the militia continued in force until after the adoption of the State Constitution in 1780.

Boston.

James J. Tracy.

(Read before the Massachusetts Sons of American Revolution, 1904.)

A BIT OF CHURCH HISTORY

It is a subject of hope that someone—perhaps he is already cooing in his cradle and smiling in response to the wondering faces that bend over him—will be inspired to embody in imperishable epic, the adventurous deeds of the Puritan and Pilgrim Fathers in the New World. He must be a child of the Muses. He must have insight to sound the deeper currents of human motive and action, the instinct for dramatic situations, a feeling for the concrete in choice and act, and for the individual man. When that epic appears some cantos of it will relate to the settlements of the Connecticut valley, and among these old Windsor, to the ancient church in which place this brief article relates.

We are fortunate in having a memoir of Captain Roger Clapp, a young man of the company, written expressly for his own descendants, with glowing religious purpose, but in more than one particular illuminating upon the history and spirit of that early enterprise. Mr. Clapp’s own case is a fine exhibition of the process of selection and unification by which a party was made up of such as were fitted to undertake together the peculiar task of making a new community in the wilderness. One would readily guess that the relations of the individuals of such a company must be somewhat other than those secured by formal agreements and contracts on paper. They must be bound together by the finest of affinities, by mutual esteem, by the strength of commanding leadership. Add to this, of course, a rugged sense of the call and providence of God. Something of this sort would be essential to business success, not to say social happiness in the communal life of a new settlement; and if what Mr. Clapp says of himself is at all representative, such was actually the case. When a youth, evidently wishing to be self-supporting, he asked leave of his father to live “abroad,” and went to live on trial, three miles from Exeter (England). In his own language: “We went every Lord’s-Day into the City, where were many famous preachers of the Word of God. I then took such a liking unto the Revd. Mr. John Warham, that I did desire to live near him: So I removed (with my Father’s consent) into the city, and lived with one Mr. Mossiour, as famous a Family for Religion as ever I knew; ... I never so much as heard of New England until I heard of many godly Persons that were going there, and that Mr. Warham was to go also.”

Through Mr. Clapp’s personal history we can see in his account of the organization of the church, how here and there the preparatory process had been going on in individual lives, and often unconsciously to themselves men had been getting ready for this joint venture into the New World. I give his account of the organization somewhat fully: “I came out of Plymouth in Devon, the 20th of March, and arrived at Nantasket the 30th of May 1630. Now this is further to inform you, that there came Many Godly Families in that ship: We were of Passengers many in Number (besides Sea-men) of good Rank: Two of our Magistrates come with us, viz., Mr. Rossiter and Mr. Ludlow. These godly People resolved to live together; and therefore as they had made choice of these two Revd. Servants of God, Mr. John Warham and Mr. John Maverick to be their Ministers, so they kept a solemn Day of Fasting in the New Hospital in Plymouth in England, spending it in Preaching and Praying: where that worthy Man of God, Mr. John White of Dorchester in Dorset was present, and Preached unto us the Word of God, in the forepart of the Day, and in the latter part of the Day, as the People did solemnly make choice of, and call those godly Ministers to be their Officers, so also the Revd. Mr. Warham and Mr. Maverick did accept thereof, and expressed the same. So we came, by the good Hand of the Lord, through the Deeps comfortably; having Preaching or Expounding of the Word of God every Day for Ten Weeks together, by our Ministers.”

This little Israel, which came over the waters, one hundred and forty strong, in the good ship Mary and John, a craft of 400 tons, were forced by Capt. Squeb, contrary to his agreement, to disembark in a forlorn place on Nantasket Point. A place of settlement was soon selected and named Dorchester. Attracted by the rich Connecticut meadows, five years later Mr. Warham and the larger portion of his flock made the difficult overland journey thither, and settled in the beautiful region which was afterwards called Windsor by “order of the court.” Thus the First Church of Christ in Windsor goes back beyond Dorchester to Plymouth in Old England, and has had a continuous existence from March 20, 1630, to the present as a Congregational Church of what may be called, for lack of a better term, the orthodox or Trinitarian variety—a fact that can be affirmed of no other Congregational Church on the American Continent.

To speak of the members of this church and their numerous descendants, would take us beyond the limits of this article. A few names will suggest the significance of this body of Christians on the banks of the Connecticut, in the life of the nation. Matthew Grant, the clerk of the church and the town, whose fine records are now in the town clerk’s office, was the ancestor of Gen. U. S. Grant and the numerous clans of the Grant family in this country. The hero of Manila Bay is a descendant of Thomas Dewey, of the old Windsor church. Henry Wolcott, a man of wealth and social importance in old England, was the ancestor of the famous Wolcott family, which included two Connecticut governors and men of note in every generation to the present day. Roger Ludlow, the lawyer of the settlement, gave legal shape to the democracy of Thomas Hooker in the Constitution of Connecticut, the first written instrument of the kind on record. Captain John Mason led the federated colonists to the number of eighty men against the Pequots, and by no means least, Esther Warham, the youngest daughter of the minister, a woman of rare charm and remarkable gifts, was the mother of a mighty race, which has been distinguished by many illustrious names, chief among whom must be named her grandson, Jonathan Edwards. Two other men of national renown in quite different directions are Chief Justice Oliver Ellsworth and Edward Rowland Sill. Ellsworth was born in Windsor, lived here practically his whole life save, of course, when he was away on public business, and his home still remains, now the property of the Connecticut Society of the D. A. R. He was a devoted member of the church and chairman of the building committee in charge of the erection of the new house of worship in 1794, which still remains in excellent condition. The book containing, among many others, Mr. Ellsworth’s subscription of 100 pounds, with that for like amounts by Dr. Chaffee and Jerijah Barber, is in possession of the present treasurer. Edward Rowland Sill, the rare quality of whose poetic genius has won increasing recognition ever since his early death, was a descendant of Rev. David Rowland, one of the old Windsor pastors, and was, by immediate family connections as well as the associations of his own boyhood, a child of the Windsor church, though he spent the larger part of his mature life elsewhere.

Roscoe Nelson.

Windsor, Conn.

CORNER OF SAULT AU MATELOT AND ST. JAMES STREETS.

Tablet placed by the Literary and Historical Society of Quebec, 1904.
(The second barricade was across Sous Le Cap Street, behind where figure stands.)

ARNOLD AND MONTGOMERY AT QUEBEC

The last day of December, 1904, was the 128th anniversary of the unsuccessful attack on Quebec in 1775, and by a coincidence on almost that very day the Literary and Historical Society of Quebec erected two bronze tablets to commemorate the event. We are indebted to Mr. F. C. Würtele, the Secretary of the Society, for the photographs from which our two illustrations are made—they thus appearing in our pages in advance even of Canadian journals.

From the newspaper accounts furnished us, we condense:

When the Canadian Government erected monuments on the battlefields of 1812, the invasion of 1775 seemed to have been forgotten, and no memorials were placed in Quebec to commemorate the signal defeat of the Continental invaders on the 31st of December, 1775, at the hands of General Guy Carleton, the savior of Canada to the British Crown.

However, that brave defence has not been forgotten by Quebec’s citizens, and some time ago at a meeting of the Literary and Historical Society of Quebec, it was resolved, “That the time has come for the erection of historic tablets at Pres-de-Ville and the Sault-au-Matelot, in the lower town of Quebec, relating to the events of 31st of December, 1775, so important to the destiny of Canada; and as it is within the province of the Literary and Historical Society of Quebec to erect such memorials, a committee is hereby appointed on the subject.”

As such memorials would be battlefield monuments, the Federal Government was petitioned by the society for means to erect suitable historic tablets at these places. The request was graciously responded to and splendid memorials in statuary bronze have been erected, one bolted to the rock where at its base Montgomery was defeated and killed, and the other on the St. James street gable of the Molsons Bank, as near as possible to the site of the Sault-au-Matelot barricade, where Arnold was defeated, and over 400 of his men made prisoners, both events taking place in the early morning of that memorable last day of December, 1775. As these bronzes have been placed in position for the anniversary of that event, a short historic retrospect may be interesting:

One hundred and twenty-nine years have passed since a force under Montgomery was sent by Lake Champlain to attack Montreal, and another under Arnold marched from Cambridge, Mass., via the Voyageur trail up the Kennebec river and across to the source of the river Chaudiere, to St. Marie and thence by road to Levis opposite Quebec, where, after considerable hardships throughout the whole journey it arrived, and crossing the St. Lawrence appeared on the present Cove Fields, on the 14th, was fired on and soon retired to Pointe aux Trembles, where the arrival of Montgomery from Montreal was waited.

Montgomery carried all before him, taking Sorel, Montreal and Three Rivers. General Carleton, who was in Montreal, knowing the importance of Quebec, and that for divers reasons Montreal could not then be defended, destroyed the government stores and arrived at Quebec on the 19th of November, where Colonel MacLean, who had preceded him, was preparing for its defence.

The defences were strengthened and barricades erected and armed in the Lower Town, in Sault-au-Matelot street, and the present Sous-le-Cap, also at Pres-de-Ville, where is now the Allan Steamship Company’s property.

Montgomery arrived on the 1st of December with his army, and Arnold’s 800 raised the attacking force to 2000 men, who proceeded to take possession of St. Roch’s and erected batteries on the high ground, Montgomery issued general orders on the 15th December, which were sent into the town, and a copy is now to be found in the Dominion Archives at Ottawa:

(Q. 12. Page 30.)

Headquarters Holland House, near Quebec.

15th December, 1775.

Countersign—Adams.

Parole—Connecticut.

The General having in vain offered the most favorable terms of accommodation to the Governor and having taken every possible step to prevail on the inhabitants to desist from seconding him in his wild scheme of defence, nothing remains but to pursue vigorous measures for the speedy reduction of the only hold possessed by the Ministerial troops in the Province. The troops flushed with continual success, confident of the justice of their cause and relying on that Providence which has uniformly protected them will advance to the attack of works incapable of being defended by the wretched garrison posted behind them, consisting of sailors unacquainted with the use of arms, of citizens incapable of the soldier’s duty and a few miserable emigrants. The General is confident a vigorous and spirited attack must be attended with success. The troops shall have the effects of the Governor, garrison, and of such as have been acting in misleading the inhabitants and distressing the friends of liberty, to be equally divided among them, each to have the one hundredth share out of the whole, which shall be at the disposal of the General and given to such soldiers as distinguished themselves by their activity and bravery, and sold at public auction. The whole to be conducted as soon as the city is in our hands and the inhabitants disarmed.

The General at Headquarters,

Ferd. Weisenfels,

Major of Brigade.

The division which was to attack Pres-de-Ville assembled at 2 o’clock A. M. of the 31st December, at Montgomery’s headquarters, Holland House (now the property of Frank Ross, Esq.), and headed by Montgomery, marched across the Plains of Abraham and descended into the beach path, now Champlain street. Those who were to make the attack by the suburbs of St. Roch, headed by Arnold, were about 800 strong. The plan was that Montgomery and Arnold were to meet at the foot of Mountain Hill and storm the Upper Town.

A heavy northeast snowstorm was raging at 4 o’clock that dark morning when Montgomery had descended the cliff and advanced along the narrow beach path, a ledge flanked to the left by the perpendicular cliffs of Cape Diamond and to the right by a precipitous descent at whose base flowed the tide of the St. Lawrence.

The Pres-de-Ville barricade and the blockhouse at the narrowest part of the road was defended by Captain Chabot, Lieut. Picard, 30 Canadian militiamen, Captain Barnesfare and 15 seamen, Sergeant Hugh McQuarters, of the Royal Artillery, with several small guns, and Mr. John Coffin, 50 in all. The garrison was alert and saw the head of the column approach and halt some fifty yards from the barricade, when a man approached to reconnoitre, and on his return the column continued its advance, when it was fired on by cannon and musketry, whose first discharge killed Montgomery, his aides Macpherson and Cheeseman, and 10 men. Thereupon the rest of the 700 men turned and fled, pursued by the bullets of the Canadians till there was nothing more to fire at. None behind the leading sections knew what happened, and the slain, left as they fell, were buried by the drifting snow, whence their frozen bodies were dug out later in the day.

Arnold’s column carried the barricade across Sous-le-Cap street, situated beneath the Half-Moon battery, and were stopped at the second barricade at the end of that narrow street (quite close to where is now Molsons Bank), defended by Major Nairne, Dambourges and others, who held them in check until Captain Laws’ strong party, coming from Palace Gate, took them in rear and caused their surrender, 427 in all, thus completing the victory of that morning. Arnold was put out of action early in the fight by a ball[1] from the ramparts near Palace Gate, when passing with the leading sections, and was carried to the General Hospital.

The late Governor-General, Lord Minto, took great interest in the tablets, and approved of the inscriptions which were submitted for his consideration.

These tablets, in shield form, are of statuary bronze, with the lettering cast in relief.

The large one on the rock under Cape Diamond measures six feet three inches by five feet nine inches, and is thus inscribed:

Here Stood

The Undaunted Fifty

Safeguarding

Canada

Defeating Montgomery

At the Pres-de-Ville Barricade

On the Last Day of

1775

Guy Carleton

Commanding at

Quebec

That on Molsons Bank measures two feet ten inches by two feet six inches, and its legend relates:

Here Stood

Her Old and New Defenders

Uniting, Guarding, Saving

Canada

Defeating Arnold

At the Sault-au-Matelot Barricade

On the Last Day of

1775

Guy Carleton

Commanding at

Quebec

[Fleuron]

A “SCRUB-POETICAL” ANSWER TO A GOVERNOR

His Excellency Jonathan Belcher, governor of His Majesty’s provinces of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, must have many times realized what a very difficult and disagreeable task it is to drive an ill-matched team, especially when one of them is to all appearances possessed of the Evil One, and the pole is loose and not to be depended on. Such a team the governor had in his two provinces, and he was a very busy man.

Massachusetts kept well in the traces and gave him comparatively little trouble. He lived in Boston, and was thus able to maintain a more intimate knowledge of the people of that State and the trend of public opinion than was possible to do in respect to more distant New Hampshire, where he was relatively a stranger. Though not popular as a man or as a Crown official, his personal presence in Massachusetts as governor, with the miniature court, the sumptuous appointments, and the dignity which accompanied the King’s commission, necessarily had some effect in steadying the progress of government there.

But in New Hampshire he had many serious problems. A small province both in population and resources, it had for many years stood between Massachusetts and the savages, who were continually hovering about the frontiers, and in this almost constant warfare, and by the costly vigilance which was necessary even in times of nominal peace, the province had incurred debts which were a heavy burden on the sparse population. During the time in which New Hampshire was considered by the Crown not of sufficient size, wealth, and importance to maintain a governor of its own, and accordingly yoked with Massachusetts, the power of granting townships in New Hampshire was, of course, vested in the governor, and exercised by him under the same royal instructions as in Massachusetts. The plans and purposes of the government in locating these grants in New Hampshire are easily seen by their peculiar but systematic location. They were largely laid out in lines, each line of towns answering a specific purpose. One line followed the Merrimack river, Amherst, Bedford, and Goffstown, guarding the west bank of the main inland waterway of the two provinces. Another line, Concord, Hopkinton, Henniker, Hillsborough, Warner, and Bradford, formed a northern frontier, and connected the Merrimack with Washington and Lempster the most northerly of another line, the Monadnock townships, which, nine in number, established a perfect connection back to the Massachusetts line. Still another line, Chesterfield, Westmoreland, Walpole, and Charlestown, guarded the east bank of the Connecticut. All these established and maintained a protection for the whole of central Massachusetts against any incursions of the Indians from the north, and enclosed large tracts of very valuable land.

The burden of the taxation necessary to pay the expenses of Indian warfare and maintain the government rested heavily on the people of New Hampshire, while they were engaged in conflict with the wilderness, planting the standard of civilization step by step further north and west. Therefore, when the governor in his recurring messages constantly besought the Assembly to raise money—to supply funds for repairing Fort William and Mary, for building a new prison or repairing the old one, for the expenses of carrying on the boundary line controversy with Massachusetts—he did not always meet with a cordial reception or a courteous reply. Money for current expenses and paying old obligations as fast as possible the Assembly was willing to provide, but little was to be had for other purposes which did not appear to its members absolutely and urgently necessary.

A strong opposition to the administration sprang up in New Hampshire, and manifested itself in an intrigue to procure the governor’s recall. The opposition was headed by Lieutenant-Governor Dunbar, a pugnacious Irishman, and Theodore Atkinson and Benning Wentworth, who had been appointed councillors through the efforts of Dunbar, but whose admission to the council board Governor Belcher prevented for two years. It was a strong combination. Dunbar was not possessed of great influence with the home government aside from that which pertained to his office, but Wentworth and Atkinson had powerful friends and connections in England, who were not slow to take advantage of Governor Belcher’s increasing unpopularity both in America and England. So successful were they, that when, in 1741, the royal decision on the boundary line was carried into effect, and New Hampshire finally freed from union with Massachusetts, Wentworth was commissioned governor of the province and Atkinson became secretary of the council, equivalent to the present office of secretary of state.

Governor Belcher was not, however, without friends in New Hampshire, and the chief of these, perhaps, was Richard Waldron, then secretary of the council. They were intimate friends, both officially and personally, and maintained a lively correspondence. Entirely different in character and disposition, the oddities of each attracted and amused the other. The governor’s peppery temper gave Waldron many a chance for a jest or a clever and good-natured retort. But his friends were too few, and the opposition too strong, and the settlement of the long-disputed boundary line gave the home government an opportunity too attractive to be lost for reestablishing the governments of the two provinces on a basis of complete separation, intended to result in a lasting peace, and the relief of the Board of Trade and Plantations from continual complaints and the burden of discussion and decision of what, to them, were but petty provincial squabbles.

This was, in brief, the general atmosphere of the provinces when Governor Belcher went to New Hampshire to meet the Assembly in the winter of 1733–4, and there delivered his regular speech and scolded on his regular subjects. That he was not considered seriously by all the inhabitants was not due to any lack of earnestness on his part. The author of the poetical reply has not yet been ascertained. Suspicion, however, points to Richard Waldron. The handwriting resembles his, but cannot be certainly identified.

During the first century of the life of the province no family was more prominent or carried a larger influence in the public affairs of New Hampshire than the Waldrons. Whatever may be said of peculiar characteristics which were displayed by some members of the family, the early Waldrons were, as a rule, strong, hard-headed pioneers, the type of men most needed in subduing a hostile wilderness. Later generations became wealthy, and wealth brought to them education and refinement, as brains brought distinction, both civil and military.

Secretary Richard Waldron, whom we assume to be the author of the reply to Governor Belcher’s message, was the son of Richard, and grandson of Major Richard, who was killed by the Indians at Dover in 1689, and was born Feb. 21, 1693–4. He was graduated from Harvard in 1712, and soon removed from Dover to Portsmouth. He was a member of the Governor’s council, Secretary of the province, and Judge of Probate. It is to the burning of his house in 1736 that we may charge a considerable loss of the early New Hampshire archives and records, and the breaks in the records which were thus created are serious obstacles to the historian of the present day.

The friendship of Governor Belcher kept Waldron in his office of Secretary until the end of the Belcher administration, but Governor Wentworth suspended him from the council, and removed him from the offices of Secretary and Judge of Probate. In 1749 he was elected Speaker of the House, which the Governor refused to allow, and a controversy was created which lasted three years. He died soon after, August 23, 1753.

The original manuscript of his “Scrub Poetry” is on file with the Governors’ messages in the archives in the office of the Secretary of State at Concord, N. H.

On the second day of January, 1733–4, the governor thus addressed the Council and House of Representatives:

Gent of the Council & House of Representatives.

By the last ships from London I have received an account of the French King’s Declaring War against the Emper of Germany with whome his Brittanick Majtie is in alliance & how far this unhappy Rupture may lead to a Genll War in Europe is uncertaine, however I think it a faire Alarm to all his Majties Dominions to put themselves in a Posture of defence & you cannot but be sensible how naked & Exposed this Province is both by Sea and Land. Fort William & Mary at the Entrance of this River (the only Fortifications his Majtie has in this Province) you know Lyes in a miserable condition nor are you ignorant how often I have prest the Repaire of this Fortress upon the Assembly here altho it has forty Guns yet it has for a long time had only a Capt a Gunner and two Centinels belonging to it. I hope your own Safety as well as his Majties Honr (at this Critical juncture) will put you upon doing what is absolutely necessary in this Important affaire.

I have Gent frequent Complaints of the ruinous condition of the Gaole of the Province which will Require a large Repaire or Rather Rebuilding as soone as may be their being Continual Hazards of Escapes thro’ its present Deficiency.

Gent of the House of Representative.

you very well know there has been no money in the Treasury of the Province for neare three years past which has greatly Exposed and dishond the Kings Govermt and has been a Publick Injustice & oppression—this with the threatening Aspect abroad (I have no doubt) will lead you to make Ample Provision for what I have now mentioned as well as for all the other Exigencies of the Govermt.

Gent of the Council, & House of Representatives.

Upon my meeting of the Assm of the Massts Bay in April last I earnestly recommended to them the passing an Order (agreeable to what had been done in this Province) for putting a stop (at present) to any process in the Law agt the Borderers on the disputed Lines of the two Provinces. But the Publick Prints have long Since told you it had not the desired Success.

In January Last, I wrote verry fully to the Right Honble the Lords of Trade praying them to Represent this long unhappy Dispute to his Majtie that there might be an End put to the Contention to which letter I have recd the Honr of their Lordships Answer, Saying they hope upon the return of my answer to their Letter no further delay may be occasioned to the accomplishing a matter of so much advantage to both Provinces and my answer to their Lordships Letter is Long Since gone forward and I shall rejoyce in Seeing this troublesome affaire brot to a happy conclusion.

Gent In whatsoever you can project for his Majties Honr & Service and for the Prosperity of his good Subjects in this Province you Shall have my hearty assistance and Consent.

Janr 1t 1733–4.

J. Belcher.

The reply in rhyme is found to follow very closely the official and more dignified document which was presented to the Governor, and is probably a versification of the prose message done for the amusement of the writer only, and never intended for the Governor’s ear. It is endorsed “Ansr to ye Govrs Speech Jany 1733–4. Scrub Poetry.”

PUNCH TO SHEARBACK

Good Sir, what fatall Dreadful things

The proclamation of French King’s

War ’gainst Emperour of Germany

May bring upon this new Country!

And Else how far it may effect

Tranquility of Europe great,

Approaching time must only speak.

But, Sir, great Britain, wee do hope

And other powers of Europe,

By prudent Mediation, may

Divert unto another day

Th’ alarming noise of cruell War,

With which wee so frightened are,

And then conclude a happy peace,

That war & war’s alarms may cease.

And this wee do believe full well,

Because, Great Sir, you did not tell

In Speech to us you lately made

The advise came from Board of Trade.

For surely wee do apprehend

That they would forward to us send

There timely wise Direction,

If of war they had Conception.[2]

If with such sums wee should Supply

The present wants of Treasury,

As wee do Judge Sufficient are,

The Walls & Towers to repair

Of Old Fort William and Mary,

And to pay poor Jos. & Harry;

If wee the Prison should rebuild,

Our promises not yet fulfill’d,

Together with the gen’rall Tax

Already laid by sev’ral Acts

For repaying and for drownding,

For Sinking & for Confounding

Money borrowed heretofore,

When Indians bad in Days of yore,

Like Dastard sons of Swarthy whore,

Proclaim’d a sad Unnatural War;

These things (if wee are right) wee Count,

To Sums so large would sure amount,

As Constable would not be able,

On Poles[3] & ’states (O Lamentable)

Of Subjects good of Majesty,

To gather in a Subsidy.

And such an Act would surely be

A great and sore Calamity,

And war itself by far outvye.

Which, should this house be Instrumental in,

It would not only much dishonour King,

But of Oppression be a peice,

And savour much of Injustice;

And wee presume you well do know

Peices this House are strangers to.

And to prevent such Imputations,

Wee once did, in December Sessions,[4]

An act pass for the Emitting

Pounds Six thousand paper bills in,

To repair William and Mary,

Treasury also to supply,

Which did both houses pass, ’tis said,

With the act which Courts Removed

From Portsmouth, O Unhappy Mischance!

To Towns from us a greater Distance.

And to say truth, O strange mistake!

Wee thought one Common happy fate

Would both these Laws attend,

And money stand poor Portsmouth Friend.

But your Excellence approved

That the Courts should be removed,

And the poor Ready money Act

Was into Breeches pocket clapt

Till pleasure of his Majesty

Be known to your Excellency,

Since which three Years are gon & past,

And yet this Act doth hang an Arse.

This House hath also often, too,

Made Estimate exact & true

Of province Debts, as well as Creditt,

(And being in debt have never paid it).

Into the Treasury wee voted

That what was due should be transported,

For to pay of the claims of Many,

Tho’ wee design’d not to pay any;

Which being sent down Non concur’d,

A written Message did Afford,

(And by the way a strange one, too).

[An explanation here seems necessary, beyond the possibilities of a foot-note.

March 6, 1732–3, the House passed a bill for emitting £20,000 in paper money. The province was much in debt on account of Indian warfare, repairing and maintaining fortifications, etc., and provision for payment of this debt had been made by heavy taxes to continue annually until 1742. But money was very scarce, and the House considered that the people would be unable to pay the taxes laid upon them for the want of a proper medium. Therefore this £20,000 was to be placed in the hands of a committee, to be loaned to the people at 5% interest for sixteen years, and the principal of each loan was to be paid at the rate of 25% each year for the four years next following the term of sixteen years for which the loan was made. And for the supply of the treasury for the time before the first interest payment was due, a further sum of £1,000 was to be issued. The council, however, was unanimous in refusing to concur with the House on this bill.

The House attempted to bring about a compromise by reducing the loan term to eight years and by other changes in the original bill, but was not successful, the Governor claiming that the approval of such a bill would be contrary to his instructions.

Finally, March 9, the House addressed a message to the Governor, in which the council is charged with saying that the House had nothing to do with the matter of issuing money; and the House further defends its action and position thus: “Now this House thinks they have and ought to have a vote in the disposall of all Publick money and that the Board were formerly of this opinion appears by their Sending down Mr. Atkinson’s account to be past upon in the last Sessions. So that, that money is Still unapplyed notwithstanding the Said Atkinson hath declared his readiness to pay the Same. So that the House can See no other way of Supplying the Treasury without oppressing the People whome we Represent than what they have come into. Wherefore this House are humbly of opinion that it will greatly tend to the Prosperity and welfare of his Majties Subjects of this Province to address his Majtie by the hand of our agent to obtaine his Royall leave for a further Emission of Paper Currency more Especially Since your Excelly has informed this House that you cant consent to. It being contrary to his Majties Royal Instruction to your Excelly and if the Honble Council Should think proper to appoint a com’ittee to Joyne with a Com’ittee of this House for the Ends aforesaid we are humbly of Opinion it would be attended with the desired effect.”

The next day, March 10, the council sent down a sharp and angry reply, as follows:

“Whereas in a Messa from the Honble House to his Excellency the forenoon bearing date the 9th Currt & Sent up this day and communicated to the Council There are Sundry things mentioned which Seem to cast an Odium on the Council as tho it lay at their door that there is not a due Supply of the Treasury to which the Council in justice to themselves are oblidged to Say that the reason of their non-concurrence to the 20000£ Bills on Loan was (as the House has been Heretofore once and againe Informed) because the Emission of Bills on Loan is directly contrary to his Majtie Royal Instructions And as to the thousand pounds Mentioned for the im’ediate Supply of the Treasury it was couched in the Twenty thousand pound Bills from whence tis plaine that the House never intended one Should pass without the other but that if the thousand pounds for the Supply of the Treasury would not tempt the Council to break this the Kings Instruction their complyance with the Kings Instruction Should defeat the Supply of the Treasury but if they had a Sincere disposition to Supply the Treasury as they pretended and Sent up a Bill for the Same they would have soon seen the heartiness of the Council in doing their Duty to his Majtie and the utmost Justice to this Province by the rediest concurrence as to the Interest of the 1730£ the Council have been long Endeavouring that that Loan Might by some means or other be beneficial to the Publick Tho to their great grief by the disappointment of their attempts in the Honbble House Private psons have enjoyed the benefit of that money at 2½ p Ct when there have been many that would gladly have given more than double yea treble for the same if they might have been favoured with it and the Council have this day Sent down a vote for the Setting that Loan at 6 p Ct for 2 years instead of 2½ p Ct in order to Ease the Tax of the Province which has at last Succeeded as to the Money in Mr. Atkinsons hands which he recd of Hughs’s Estate long agoe and which ought for Several years past to have been in the Treasury the Council presume his Excelly will take a due Care that that £292 Ballce Settled under his hands be paid by a Course of Law Since there is no prospect of its being done without it even after So much indulgence to him who has been So notoriously delinquent to the vast dishonr of the Govermt & unspeakable oppression of Sundry poor distressed Creatures to whome the Province is indebted—as to the Houses Saying they ought to have a vote in the Disposal of the Publick Money the Council Reply when they the Council think proper to deny that Point in Politicks it will be time Eno for them to form an argumt against it but that is not yet got unto the Question for saying the House of Representatives have nothing to do with a Confiscation or a forfeiture to his Majtie by a Judgmt in Court Is not Saying the House have nothing to do with the disposal of Publick Money unless it [is] So by some Logick in the House wch the Council have not Learn’d—As to Mr. Atkinsons declaration of his readiness to pay the Money in his hands what is there in it did he not declare heretofore even in the House and most Solemnly at the Council Board too that he would pay part of his Debt at Such a time and the Residue in a Short Space after & are not the terms long Since Expired But are the paymts made let the Treasurers accounts answer which Say no not one penny why then Gent Should you trouble your Selves in making Such a messa & boasting of Such declarations the Council might further verry well observe too that the Scheme of the House for an audit to be appointed by the Genll Court to Examine a Sheriffs Return of an Execution is intirely new however is a full Evidence that the House have been much bent on trifling as to what the House propose of the Councils Joyning with them in addressing his majesty by the hand of our our agent as they express it) &c the Council Say they know of no Person So qualified But if the House mean Capt John Rindge, Marriner then they answer That when it appears to them that his Capacity & other Quallifications are Equal to Such a Trust & he is hond with a Comissn for that place the Council will readyly do wt is proper on those heads.”]

They say the House had nought to do

With money to the province due,

And by which means that Money

Still is out of Treasury,

As also is the Interest

(As some do say who know it best)

Of pounds more than seventeen hundred,

And is not this much to be wondred,

Which the verry last assembly

Voted into the Treasury.

And if any wicked elf

Refused, for the sake of pelf,

To pay the Interest then due,

Also his Bonds for to renew,

Then Speaker he the Bonds must see,

And Borrower to Hampton send,

His Destiny there to attend.

Butt, Oh! when Mortals most are pleas’d,

How Subject are they to be Teaz’d!

The house disolv’d,[5] the Speakers gone,

And none the Affair can carry on,

Which to the province, and to us,

Has been occasion of much loss.

And this wee hope will imputation

Of Injustice or Oppression

Take from a Guilty Generation,

And so Confirm the good Opinion

You express’d towards us whilome,

By saying that wee always acted

What a good and gracious King expected,

A Charracter wee always merritted,

And so shall never be Dispirritted.

Wee think it then our Duty is

His Majesty for to address,

That wee may Cash sometimes Emitt,

(You know ’tis Money that buys wit),

Upon this province’s Credit.

And so wee hope for the Concurrence

Of the Council & Your Excellence.

Of the house you do receive the Thanks

For telling of the Circumstance

Of Borderers on line distressed,[6]

And staying process ’gainst th’ Oppressed,

Unto your other Government,

Tho’ what you said had no Effect.

Some of these towns, being offended,

Money at Law have much expended.

And is not this a Dismal sound?

Some say ’tis full a thousand pound,

Besides there time and loss of Ground.

But this, by what in yours you said,

And the Success our agent[7] had,

When at great Britain he resided,

Gives hopes that soon ’twill be decided.

For Copy, wee do Understand,

Of Memoriall from the Land.

From King and Council hath been sent

To Massachusetts Government

For answer, (if wee right remember),

By the first day of Last November.

After which wee dare boldly say

Wee hope there will be no Delay.

Wee beg leave to tell you next,

That wee are met with good pretext,

Such things Determined to act

As C——k May in our Noddles pack;

Which wee conceive was the Intent

Of those whom we do represent—

Otis G. Hammond.

Concord, N. H.

HAS GOVERNOR LOVELACE OF NEW YORK BEEN PROPERLY IDENTIFIED?

I am not sufficiently acquainted with the details of historical investigation in New York to know whether there has ever been any doubt as to the identity (or rather the family) of Governor Lovelace; but I presume that the Dictionary of National Biography gives the generally accepted account when it states that he was the second son of Richard, first Baron Lovelace.

Recently the examination of some old documents has led me to the belief that the Governor of New York was of a much more distinguished kinship than that which has been usually assigned to him. To most of us the Lords Lovelace are only known by a passing reference in Macaulay; but the author of the two songs to Althea and Lucasta is one of the immortals.

In a volume in the Congressional Library, which was bought from President Jefferson and which contains copies of miscellaneous historical records relating to Virginia, are two documents signed by Francis Lovelace, Governor of New York.

The first of these is a letter evidently written to Governor Berkeley of Virginia. It is as follows:

“Deare Sir:

Since my last to you sent by Mr Machen in answere to yors I received a letter from Mr. Tho: Todd of Mockjack bay who being appointed Guardian to the will Whitbey’s son by my neece Mrs Ruth Gorsuch he having hitherto taken great care and paines in the adjusting his interest in severall plantations being devolve to him by the death of his father Mr Tod desired me to signify to you that this lad I have brought over is the recitable child, and heare to Mr Whitby wch by these I declare to be soe and if you be satisfyed wth this relacon wch I assure you upon the faith of a Xtian and Honor of a gentleman you may rest assured of it but if the Ceremony of an oath be requisite, I shalbe ready (if desired as necessary) to make my Deposicon of it, and I shall furtr desire of you that when an application is made to you in his behalfe you would affourd him what favor and Countenance the Justness of his Cause & prtentions will beare he is now an orphant & I have been at considerable charge both to his transport education & clothing expecting noe other retorne but when he is in a capacity to make it onely to reimburse me with what I have expended for him, Sr I know his cause is safe in yor hands to whome I must refer him & the experience all that know you have of yor Justice & Compan * * [?] in p’tecting the fatherles shalbe argumts sufficient that I shall not miscarry in these my desires for him in gratitude of wch I can pay noe other returne but if you please to prepare any service for me you shall find me most ready to obey it when you reflect upon what I subscribe wch is

Yor most assured fathfull servt

Fran: Lovelace.

From ye Barbadoes I hear yor Bro: Ld Berkeley is designed to be Governor but the truth I refer to your Consideracon. Mr Winthrop Newley sent me This newes wch here inclosed will kisse yor hands adue

Jeames ffort 6th Decembr

1669 Recr p. Rich. Awborne

Jan: ye 7th 1668”

Richard Awborne was clerk of the Virginia Council, and this letter was evidently recorded for young Whitby’s benefit.

The other paper is entitled “Resolutions for the settlemt of Comerce to and from all his Majties Plantations in America, and other places to the port of New York & the rest of his Royall Highnes his Territoryes not p’hibited by act of Parliamt” and concludes “Given undr my hand at ffort James in New York on Manhatans Island the 18th day of November 1668

Fran: Lovelace”

This also had been copied into the Virginia records and attested by Awborne.

In the present discussion this last paper is valuable as proving that the writer of the letter to Berkeley was certainly Governor Lovelace of New York.

The chain of evidence which appears to contradict the commonly accepted statement in regard to Governor Lovelace’s family begins with the pedigree of a family of Gorsuch in the Visitation of London, 1633–4. (Harleian Society, p. 327.) In this pedigree it is stated that John Gorsuch, rector of Walkhome, Hertfordshire, 1633, married Anne, daughter of Sir William Lovelace, of Kent, Knight, and had the following children at the time of the visitation: 1. Daniel “about 4ao 1633”; 2. John; 3. William; 4. Cathrin.

On April 1st, 1657, Richard, Robert and Charles Gorsuch, sons and co-heirs of John Gorsuch, “P’fessor in Divinity,” petitioned the Court of Lancaster County, Va., that their sister Katherine Whitby might be their guardian for “such estate as doth in any ways belong to them in England,” and that Francis Moryson [afterwards governor of Virginia] be their guardian for Virginia. Shortly afterwards all of these boys removed to the Eastern Shore of Maryland. The records of that colony not only make notice of them, but also show that they had another brother Lovelace Gorsuch, and a sister Anne, who married Thomas Todd, of Mockjack (now Mobjack) Bay, Gloucester County, Va.

The Quaker records of West River, Maryland, contain the records of the marriage, in 1690, of Charles Gorsuch, “son of John and Anne Gorsuch, of the Kingdom of England, deceased,” and Anne Hawkins. In 1669, Charles and Lovelace Gorsuch confirmed title to certain land which had been granted to Lovelace Gorsuch in 1661. On Jan. 13, 1676–7, Mrs. Anne Todd made a deed to her children and appointed her brother, Chas. Gorsuch, trustee. It seems certain that that John Gorsuch, the “P’fessor in Divinity,” was identical with Rev. John Gorsuch of Walkhome, who married Anne, daughter of Sir William Lovelace, of Kent, and that one of his daughters, Ruth, married William Whitby, of Virginia, while another, Anne, married Thomas Todd, of the same colony. This explains at once why Thomas Todd was appointed, as stated by Governor Lovelace, guardian to William Whitby, Jr. Young Whitby was the nephew of Todd’s wife.

When these facts are made clear the rest of the identification of Governor Lovelace seems easy. Sir William Lovelace, of Kent, the father of Mrs. Anne Gorsuch, was also the father of Richard Lovelace, the poet. The other sons of Sir William were “Col. Francis” (of “Lucasta”), Thomas and Dudley. The Dictionary of National Biography only knows of Col. Francis Lovelace, that he served the Royalist Cause in Wales and commanded Caermarthen from June, 1664, until it was captured by Langhorne in October, 1645. From Governor Lovelace’s friendship with Berkeley it seems very probable that it was indeed he (and not the son of Lord Lovelace as stated in the D. N. B.) who received license from the Council in 1650 to go to Virginia, and who in May, 1652, was sent by Berkeley to inform Charles II. of the surrender of Virginia to the Parliamentary forces.

Francis Lovelace and the members of the Gorsuch family evidently came in the large royalist emigration to Virginia during the Civil War.

In conclusion it may be worth while to trace Governor Lovelace’s kinsman and protégé, William Whitby.

William Whitby, the elder, the husband of Ruth Gorsuch, lived in Warwick County, Va., and was Speaker of the House of Burgesses in 1653. He received two considerable grants of land, one in Warwick, where he lived, and another on Potomac Creek.

The son resided in Middlesex County, Va., and appears to have led an uneventful life, and to have died unmarried. His will, as that of “William Whitby, of Pyanketank River in the County of Middlesex, planter,” was dated July, 1676, and proved July 23, 1677. He gave “to Major Robert Beverley £100, Mrs. Mary Kibble [Keeble] £100, and my brother, Joseph Summers £200, all out of a rent due me out of Kent in England”; John Cocking to have 700 acres, and John Wright 500, both on Moratico Creek; his land on Potomac Creek to be divided equally between his brother, Joseph Summers, and Mrs. Mary Kibble, and also makes a bequest to Thomas Todd. Summers and Beverly, executors.

The following chart shows the relationship which would seem from the records cited to be correct:

[Chart]

W. G. Stanard.

Richmond, Va.

Note—Since the above was written I have recalled the account of “The Interment of William Lovelace, N. Y., 1671.” This, in mentioning Thomas and Dudley Lovelace, as brothers of the Governor, corroborates the genealogy I have given.—W. G. S.

THE INFLUENCE OF SLAVERY ON THE OLD SOUTHERN CIVILIZATION

Now that the “Old South” has passed away as utterly as the ancient kingdoms of Babylon and Assyria, before the very memory of her shall have faded from the earth, it may not be without interest to thoughtful readers to endeavor to trace the cause which produced the striking dissimilarity between her civilization and that of the Northern States of the Union. That such dissimilarity existed is beyond dispute; it only remains, therefore, to attempt to explain it. Beginning National life, as did the thirteen original colonies, under the same general conditions; with the heritage of a common origin, a common language, and a common faith, what influence was it which, within the term of a hundred years, was potent enough to effect so great a change in the habits, the manners, and the character of the people of the two sections?

Was the institution of Slavery mainly responsible for this result? I believe that it was.

While due allowance must be made for climatic and other local conditions, the institution of slavery, in its direct and indirect effects upon the Southern people, appears to be by far the most important factor in the equation.

Let us briefly consider the subject. On the colonial history of the Southern States, it is unnecessary to dwell. Suffice it to say, that while thoroughly imbued with the spirit of independence and taking a leading part in the struggle of 1776, in this course the South was actuated by a desire to assert its abstract rights, and to stand loyally by its sister colonies of the North, rather than by any personal grievance, or feeling of animosity towards the Mother Country.

Between the Southern States themselves, there were strongly marked differences, each possessing its own distinctly individual character. But in essentials, the family likeness between them was strong enough to make any one member of the group a typical representative of the whole, so far as the outside world was concerned. Bound indissolubly together by that common bond,—the institution of slavery,—in politics they were equally united. From those early days when the American Government was in its formative stage, down to the period of the Civil War in 1861, the South stood always a solid unit for republican principles as imbodied in the Constitution of the United States, and exemplified in the cardinal Southern doctrine of “States’ Rights.”

The term “democracy” as applied to the South is a total misnomer, and its application furnishes one of the many curious anomalies to be found in American political history. But this history is too tangled a skein to be unravelled here. Enough to say that the Old South was never a democracy, properly so called; on the contrary, it was an oligarchy of the most pronounced and exclusive type, its population being sharply divided into two classes, patrician and plebeian—the governing and the governed. Nay more, although nominally the entire white population belonged in the first category (and was therefore eligible for public office), practically the franchise was confined to the educated and property-holding class alone, the “poor whites” of the South being too numerically weak and insignificant to be an appreciable power in politics.

Thus it came about that, from first to last, in this fundamental particular the South differed from every other section of the Republic; and this difference was the direct result of the Institution of Slavery.

Secondly: The economic conditions existing at the South were totally unlike those in other parts of the country. The Old South was, emphatically, a community of agriculturists; and of all modes of making a livelihood agriculture is the one least liable to violent fluctuations and sudden collapse. It is true that in the South wealth never rolled up into the millions, and, judged by present standards, bank accounts were by no means imposing in round numbers; but all the real advantages and immunities that wealth can give were enjoyed by the Southern people who, as a class, were in possession of an assured income sufficient not only for the supply of their necessities, but for the gratification of their tastes as well. And in those days there was a solidity and a stability about men’s financial affairs which effectually removed from them the pressure of anxiety for the future, and protected them from that feverish, harassing mental strain only too well-known elsewhere.

And here again, we come face to face with that basal fact—“the institution”—on which rested the whole industrial system of the South.

Again: The intimate relation necessarily existing between economic and social conditions would lead us to infer that conservatism was the great law of Southern society. And in truth, permanence and continuity were its most marked characteristics. The fluctuations and vicissitudes which formed so striking a feature of Northern social life were practically unknown at the South. From generation to generation, men occupied the same habitations, pursued the same callings and held the same place in the community; and, as a rule, the father’s social status determined that of the son, and the son’s son after him. Thus was created and preserved a social atmosphere only attainable under these peculiar conditions; and the effect of such a social environment upon the whole tone of the people may readily be conceived.

In the South, for example, the spirit of commercialism was noticeably absent. Wealth was not there regarded as the “be all” and the “end all” of existence—the standard by which to measure the sum of human achievement. Nor was a money value affixed to the thousand and one little services passing current in the community. These were regarded simply as small social courtesies due from neighbor to neighbor, and were freely rendered and as freely accepted, without a thought of pecuniary obligation on either side.

An equally distinguishing characteristic of Southern society was the position universally accorded to woman. Southern chivalry has frequently been made a target for ridicule, as a “survival” from the Dark Ages; but the elevating and refining influence it exercised upon the public tone was assuredly a most salutary one. And although, in the light of later developments, it must be conceded that the old Southern idea of woman’s helplessness and absolute dependence upon man for support and protection, savored somewhat of Quixotism, the spirit of knight-errantry fostered thereby was a wholesome one, in that it acted both as an incentive to exertion and as an antidote to selfishness. Even the “code of the duello,” while of course indefensible in principle, had something to be urged in its favor for, beyond doubt, it exerted a restraining influence over a hot-blooded people and made for order in the land.

I have said that as a political entity the South consisted of two classes—the governing and the governed. In its social structure, however, it was far more complex. Tier above tier rose the social pyramid, ever narrowing as it neared the apex, on which delectable elevation rested those favored mortals “born in the purple,” placidly secure in their social preeminence. Society, that inevitable product of civilization, is, all the world over, composed of orders and degrees, but whereas at the North these several gradations merged almost imperceptibly one into another, at the South they were divided by very sharply drawn lines of demarcation. The tradesman, the artisan, the mechanic stood quite apart from the professional classes and the landed-proprietors. In every age and in every clime talent will assert itself and rise to the top; and to this rule the South was no exception. But comparatively speaking, south of Mason and Dixon’s line there were to be found few “self-made” men, and those few were almost without exception, men intellectually gifted, who had climbed the social ladder by the rounds of fame rather than of fortune.

This, however, is a digression; our present purpose being, not to uncover, fold by fold, the inner intricacies of Southern society, but to present a broad and inclusive view of that society as a whole, and as contrasted with the society of other sections. Perhaps this may best be done by treating the subject somewhat in detail.

In a recent criticism of a Western poet the reviewer remarked that whatever the poet’s shortcomings might be, his descriptions of homely rural life must strike a responsive chord in the hearts of his readers all over the country, carrying them back to scenes and phases of life with which in youth they were familiar. Now, as a matter of fact, not a single one of these allusions could awaken an answering echo in a Southern breast! Descriptions of farm life with its round of labors performed by the fanner’s own hands, might be interesting reading enough to the Southerner, but the interest would be that of novelty not of familiarity. For never in the days of his youth had he himself “driven the plough,” or joined as a worker in the jocund mirth of a “harvest home.” Neither would he recognize in the portraiture of the “village worthies” the companions of his own youth; and rustic wit and rustic manners were equally apart from his personal experiences.

Not by any means that the lot of the Southern planter was always easier than that of the Northern farmer. Hard work most generally fell to his share. Early to rise and late to rest, he toiled as arduously and as unremittingly as his Northern brother, but the toil was of a different sort. It consisted not in literally putting his own shoulder to the wheel, but in training, directing, and supervising the labors of others, and often (hardest and most harassing work of all) in contriving how to supply the wants of his numerous dependants. Supreme autocrat within his own domain, the very consciousness of his power created in him a sense of responsibility, which produced a strength and gravity of character and a certain dignity of bearing. Born to control, from his cradle the Southern land owner was trained to regard himself as the natural protector, provider, and friend of the weak and the helpless. Thus, while the environment of the Northern farmer was calculated to make him think first of his own personal needs and his duty to himself, that of the Southern planter as naturally impressed upon him the duty he owed to those by whom he was surrounded.

Such was his work. His pleasures consisted chiefly in field-sports—hunting, fishing, riding, boating—he was usually a keen sportsman and a capital rider and sometimes, though not so frequently, a great reader as well.

If for the most part not scholars, however, Southern men could at least generally lay claim to a collegiate education. And whether it was due to vague recollections of classic lore, and lingering memories of Alma Mater, or to the tone of the home atmosphere by which they were surrounded (which is, after all, the truly effective educating influence), certain it is that, as a rule, their manners were polished and their modes of expression those of the “classes,” not of the “masses.”

The Southern matron was noted for her administrative rather than for her executive ability. Not that, generally speaking, her days were passed in idleness; on the contrary, her life was usually a full and beneficent one, including not only her domestic avocations—among which may be mentioned the now well-nigh forgotten accomplishments of cookery and fine needlework—but the many good offices of a Lady Bountiful which she graciously dispensed among her numerous dependants; plantation life affording ample scope for her activities in this direction. But the menial drudgery of a household did not devolve upon its mistress; and, in consequence, she had at her command an abundant portion of that leisure which—while not a sine qua non as regards strictly intellectual acquirement—is undoubtedly essential to the cultivation of the mental graces. Truth to say, as a class, Southern women were more distinguished for their soft femininity and finished refinement of manner than for their erudition. By which I am far from implying that they ignored grammar; much less that—in common with their male relatives—they used the negro-dialect. As a matter of fact indeed, by no people was purer dictionary English spoken, than by the upper-class in the Old South.

In its whole internal arrangement and frictionless daily routine the homelife of the South much more nearly resembled that of the English gentry, than that of the dwellers in the Northern States of the Union. Thanks to “the institution,” the household machine was too complex a mechanism ever to be thrown completely out of gear, the direful domestic problems so often confronting the Northern housewife being at the South entirely unknown. And as conditions, homely and trivial in themselves, sometimes exert an influence on things seemingly beyond their sphere, it may be that that large hearted, free-handed hospitality for which the Old South was famed, was in part at least, the result of this feeling of stability about the domestic foundations.

H. E. Belin.

Charleston, S. C.

(To be continued.)

[Fleuron]

ANTHONY WALTON WHITE, BRIGADIER IN THE CONTINENTAL ARMY

The subject of this memoir descended from an ancient and honorable West of England family, noted for six generations for its military predilections. The first Anthony of whom we have particulars was a zealous partisan of Charles I., and left England for Virginia after the establishment of the Commonwealth; but, stopping at Bermuda, decided to remain there, where he became a member of the Government. The second Anthony returned to England and under William III. became a lieutenant-colonel and served at the battle of the Boyne. In reward for services, he was appointed a member of the King’s council, and Chief Justice of the Bermudas; an office which descended to his eldest son, Leonard, who entered the British Navy and served with distinction. The third Anthony, Leonard’s eldest son, came to New York about 1715, married a Miss Staats, and died soon afterwards, on the voyage to Bermuda. His only son, Anthony (IV.), after holding various civil offices in the State of New Jersey, entered the army and was a lieutenant-colonel in 1751. He married Elizabeth, daughter of Lewis Morris, governor of New Jersey, by whom he had the subject of our sketch, Anthony, the fifth of the name—his middle name coming from his godfather, the celebrated William Walton, of the “Walton House,” in the present Franklin Square, New York City. Anthony was born July 7, 1750, at the family residence near New Brunswick, N. J.

The family aptitude for officeholding secured him, in due time, several posts of honor and profit under the Crown, and up to the outbreak of the Revolution he pursued the ordinary routine life of a country gentleman of large property; when the hereditary love of arms, and a sincere attachment to the cause of country, transformed him into the ardent patriot. In October, 1775, he was appointed an aide to Washington,[8] and in February, 1776, became Lieutenant-Colonel of the Third N. J. Battalion. In this capacity he was actively engaged in service at the North until 1780, when he was transferred to the First Regiment of Cavalry, and ordered South, to assume general command of the cavalry in that department.

In July, 1780, despairing of receiving the promised aid from the State of Virginia, and anxious to join the army under Gates, then in South Carolina, Colonel White procured on his own personal credit, the funds necessary to remount and support for a short time, two regiments; with which he marched to join Gates—fortunately too late to share in the defeat at Camden (and yet, that same rout might have been a victory, had a sufficient force of cavalry been among Gates’ men). In 1781, White was ordered to Virginia to coöperate with Lafayette’s force against Cornwallis, and several times skirmished with Tarleton. In the winter of 1781–2, he was again in the Carolinas, opposed to him; and in the operations of Wayne at Savannah, May 21, 1782, Colonel White by his bold and adroit conduct, contributed largely to the success which followed. After the evacuation of the city by the enemy, he returned to South Carolina, and entered Charleston, where his noted generosity was exemplified by his becoming security for the debts of the officers and men of his command, who were in want of almost all the necessaries of life.

They agreed to repay him in tobacco—then the only currency of any stable value—which was to be delivered to him at Charleston on a fixed date. Owing partly to the failure of the crop that year, and partly to the inability of his beneficiaries to carry out their part of the agreement, he had to part with a large part of his Northern property, at a ruinous sacrifice. In the spring of 1783, he was married to Margaret Ellis, a young girl of only fifteen, but who is described as of remarkable accomplishments, as well as of wealth and beauty. After the conclusion of hostilities, he returned to the North and settled in New York City to spend the remainder of his life, as he hoped, in tranquil enjoyment of well-earned repose, and regain his former affluence; but was unhappily persuaded by his old army friends to join them in a speculation which, as the only responsible member of the organization, nearly ruined him as a result.

In 1793 he removed from New York to his native New Brunswick, where he spent the rest of his life. He was destined, however, to be once more called to arms; being appointed by Washington, in 1794, to command the cavalry in the expedition under Henry Lee, against the Western insurgents; in the delicate management of which duty, he not only won the esteem and gratitude of the inhabitants of the region which was the scene of the insurrection, but the gratitude even of the prisoners whom he was obliged to take to Philadelphia. He then petitioned Congress for repayment of the large sums he had advanced to the State of Virginia—but unsuccessfully; and though his last years were clouded by the loss of almost all the wealth which was once his, he endured the reverses of fortune with the courage of an ancient Roman. His homestead at New Brunswick was frequently the resort of the leading men of the day—and Kosciuszko was there nursed through a severe sickness, by the unremitting care of Mrs. White and her daughter, which he gratefully acknowledged, in letters still owned by the great-granddaughter of General (as he became) White, Miss Bellita Evans of New Brunswick. General White was a member of the Society of the Cincinnati,[9] his insignia of which is now owned by his descendant, Mr. Anthony Walton White Evans.[10]

General White’s grave, in the cemetery of Christ Church, New Brunswick, is inscribed:

Brig. Gen. Anthony Walton White,

who departed this life

on the 10th of February, 1803

in the 53d year of his age,

Rests beneath this monumental stone.

He was an affectionate husband, a tender parent, a sincere and generous friend, a zealous and inflexible Patriot and a faithful, active and gallant officer in the Army of the United States during the Revolutionary War.

APPENDIX

Genealogical and Biographical notes on the White Family. The ancestor of the first Anthony White was sent to Virginia by Raleigh in 1587, as Governor of his colony. Returning the next year with supplies, he was defeated by Spanish vessels and obliged to return to England. In 1590 he found the colony of Roanoke deserted. Leonard (probably his son), emigrated to Virginia in 1620. Governor White’s daughter was Virginia Dare, the first white child born in the New World. One of his brothers, Sir John White, also went to Bermuda, probably in 1609, with Sir George Somers. It was the “terrible tempest” and shipwreck which dispersed this company which in 1611 suggested to Shakespeare the play of “The Tempest.” Sir John White married a descendant of Sir Owen Tudor, the ancestor of Henry VIII. Joanna White, sister of Anthony Walton, born Nov. 14, 1744, d. s. p. June 26, 1834; third wife of Col. John Bayard (born Cecil Co., Md., Aug. 11, 1738). He was a member of the Council of Safety, Speaker of the House of Representatives, in 1785 a member of the Old Congress in New York. In 1789 he removed from Philadelphia to New Brunswick; was Mayor there and Judge of the Common Pleas.

He died Jan. 7, 1807, a patriot of spotless life, public and private. He was the great-great uncle of the late Senator Bayard.

Euphemia White, second sister of Anthony, born Dec. 10, 1746, d. s. p. Jan. 29, 1832; married Hon. William Paterson (born 1745; grad. N. J. Coll. 1763. Att’y Gen’l of N. J. in 1775; in 1793 nominated by Washington Associate Justice of the U. S. Supreme Court; in 1794 Governor of N. J.; died Sept. 9, 1806).

The Staats family was originally from Albany. Dr. Abraham Staes, who came to New Netherlands in 1642, was the ancestor of the Staats of to-day, the name having been changed soon afterwards to its present form. Dr. Samuel Staats, son of Major Abraham Staats of Albany, studied medicine in Holland. When New York was surrendered to the English, he returned to Holland, and remained until William III. became King of England, when he returned to New York, and died there in 1715.

Being appointed by the King to a Government post in Java, he married there a native princess, by whom he had six daughters, all of whom married. In May, 1709, he again married—Catharine Hawarden, of New York. Of the nine children which he had in 1703, the first five were probably born in Java or Holland. The Princess’ six daughters were: Sarah, married Isaac Gouverneur in 1704. Their daughter Sarah became the second wife of Colonel Lewis Morris, of Morrisania. The second daughter married in 1716, Andrew Coejman, of Coejman’s Manor near Albany, N. Y. The third, Catalina, was baptized, N. Y., June 16, 1689. The fourth, Anna Elizabeth, baptized Dec. 21, 1690, married Captain Johannes Schuyler. The fifth, Joanna, baptized Jan. 31, 1694, married in 1716, Col. Anthony White, of Bermuda. Her second husband was Admiral Norton Kelsall, R. N. The sixth, Tryntje, baptized April 5, 1697, was first wife of Col. Lewis Morris. His second wife was thus Tryntje’s own niece. Two sons were born of these two marriages—General Lewis Morris, the “Signer,” and Gouverneur Morris, who were half-brothers. Another brother, General Staats Morris, married in London, Catherine, Dowager-Duchess of Gordon. Their grandfather, Lewis Morris, was the first Royal Governor of New Jersey (1738). He married in 1691, a daughter of James Graham, Attorney-General of New York. The mother of Margaret Ellis was —— Vanderhorst, sister of Elias Vanderhorst, American Consul at Bristol, England, in 1780, who is mentioned in “Thaddeus of Warsaw.” The family is represented in the United States by the descendants of Major Arnoldus Vanderhorst of Charleston.

A. S. Graham,

Anna M. W. Woodhull.

New Brunswick, N. J.

(To be continued.)

ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS

TWO EIGHTEENTH CENTURY LETTERS

[Communicated by Mr. Wm. C. Lane, Librarian of Harvard]

(These two letters from Mrs. Delany—Geo. III’s “Dear Mrs. Delany”—were addressed to Capt. Henry Hamilton, who, in the autumn of 1778, had led the English expedition from Detroit which, by way of the Maumee and the Wabash, reached Fort St. Vincent (Vincennes) and surprised and captured it.

The post was soon after surprised and recaptured by the Americans under Capt. George Rogers Clark, and Hamilton was carried a prisoner to Williamsburg, Va. He remained in captivity eighteen months under very harsh conditions, until sent on parole to New York in October, 1780. An exchange of prisoners was arranged in March, 1781, and Hamilton reached England in June of the same year.

In 1782 he was again in Canada, and on November 15, 1784, when Haldimand left Quebec for England, he succeeded him as governor. The next summer he was recalled. He was Governor of Bermuda 1788–94, and Governor of Dominica from 1794 till his death in 1797.

Hamilton’s memoirs and the journal of his expedition from Detroit are in the Harvard University Library, and will be printed in book form.—W. C. L.)

St. James Place [London] 7 Feby. 1781.

Dear Sr:

Being offer’d a safe conveyance for my letter, I cannot resist the opportunity of congratulating you, on your enlargement from your Horrible Dungeon; you are too just, and generous to your Friends, not to have felt their anguish on your Sufferings, and fear, it was no small aggravation to them. My exquisite Friend the Duchess Dowr of Portland, took every precaution to conceal, what she with real concern, had heard was your situation, and during the rigor of it, I was ignorant of what must have griev’d me very much, as I cannot without shuddering recollect the inhuman treatment you have met with; most heartily I wish you at perfect Liberty, among your Friends here; tho it may be presumption in me, to have any expectation, of sharing the joy such an event would give them; and shou’d not be surpriz’d, if you started at my well known hand (tho somewhat the worse for the wear) supposing it a letter rather from the Dead, than the living; but, it has pleas’d God to Lengthen my Days to an age which commonly is attended with Labour & Sorrow; of the latter I have had some share of the most grievous kind that of surviving many Dear and Valuable Friends; but as I trust they are infinitely happier than I can possibly be on this turbulent spot, that consoles me and my spirits are still sufficient to enable me to enjoy my remaining Blessings; among the Number, The Honourable Station yr Excellent Brother Sackville possesses, the high esteem he is in with every Body that can distinguish merit & his Domestick and social Happiness must gladden the heart of all that know him; I say no more of the rest of yr familly as I suppose you have better intelligence from them; my last accts. were satisfactory of all. The Death of our ingenious Friend and most excellent woman Mrs. Hamn of Summer Hill had been so long expected from the severity of a long illness that her release was rather to be wished tho her loss must be lamented. I have felt much for her good Daughter who I fear has not so cordial a Friend in her Brother as she truly deserves; her Mother has taken care to leave her in comfortable and independent circumstanse. Your constant Friend Mrs Sandford has supported a very delicate state of health, marvellously, and gone thus far with great success in the Education of her 4 fine Sons; she has been very unhappy abt you as she heard how inhumanly yu had been treated—I know if she was at my Elbow I shou’d be charged with her affectionate complimts and wishes to her old Friend Harry, and think if you were to meet you wou’d still recollect your old Friend Pooney.

And now it might become me to apologize for so long a letter; but that would be meer ceremony for I know your good heart too well not to suppose even so imperfect an account of your Friends will be welcome, I therefore add before I conclude, that my three Nephews are well tho not all Happy, my Bror Dewes died last summer and has left his Eldest Son in good circumstances,—my Nephew Bernd was the Happiest of Men till deprived some months ago of a most amiable wife; my 3d Nephew has not a wish to make being the Husband of an agreeable worthy wife settled to their hearts’ content at Calwich. My Niece Mrs Port mother of 6 Children and consequently full of Parental anxieties but well in health—you see by trespassing so much on your Friendp how confident I am of it—will you hazard a letter to me? if waves and wind are favourable I may receive it—please God,—before my 82d year is compleated; and, if not by that time superannuated, it will give sincere pleasure to Dear Sr

Your affectionate Friend

and obliged humble Servt

M. Delany.

Bulstrode, Nov. 25—1784

Dear Sir:

I fully intended to have given my self the Pleasure of acknowledging you[r] letter dated the 31 of July a month ago—without any remorse for the trouble it might give you but flattering my self you woud rather receive a good account of my Health than an indifferent one—I waited for that Hour and can assure you I am as well in Health as can reasonably be expected at my years and to convince you that I am not grown Callous I am very sensible of you kind solicitude about me. You are well acquainted with the delices of Bulstrode with the Merits of its Soverign Lady [the Duchess of Portland]—and the ingaging qualities of Miss Hamilton (Sir William Hamiltons Niece) who I think you are no Stranger to—but to do her Justice one must be intimate with her. I would not venture to say so much tho’ you are at such a distance—as it is a dangerous subject—were she not an ingaged Person—and perhaps before this reaches you may be united to one who seems very worthy of such a Prise—our Pleasant society will soon be Dissipated I fear in less than a Month—we expect a weeks visit from Mr. Dewes before our departure. Yesterday Admiral and Miss Forbes made us a visit Just returned from my Lord Uxbridge’s in Yorkshire, where they had spent 6 weeks. The Admiral said he had or wou’d write to you soon—I don’t believe there is any thing in the report of Mr. Gardner being to be married to Miss Forbes tho’ he has made them a visit at Chaffont [Chalfont]—Mrs. Poole is well and Happy in Ireland but comes to Town in a month. The last letter from thence gave a very good account of our Friends there—my kind Friend and intelligencer Mrs. F. Hamilton is much afflicted I fear on the Death of Lady Drogheda who died of a Fever about 6 weeks ago—I can tell you no news—we are intoxicated with Balloons[11] and nothing else at Present talked of. I Grumble like an old woman at a Project that seems to promise no advantage but a waste of time and money. My secretary—your young Friend will be very angry with me that I did not postpone this letter till she comes to Town which will not be till the end of Janry. At present she is engaged attending her poor Mamma who has been in a bad state of Health for some months past with nervous complaints—but I hope is some what better.

The Dutchess Dowager of Portland desires me to make Her best compliments to you—she is much obligd to you for the fossils you intend sending her. I dont doubt but she will find some among them worthy of a place in her Cabinet. Her Grace’s eager Pursuit at present is Land and River Shells—to compleat her Collection. Those that are most common in your Country may be rair and acceptable to her provided they come with their natural surtouts and inhabitants—upon recollection I believe I am mistaken in saying you are acquainted with Miss Hamilton—she tells me she never had the pleasure of meeting you at my House—I hope that time may come tho’ a presumptions Expectation from Dear Sir your very old but sincere Friend and Humble Servant

M. Delany.

P S—Pray write me a long letter soon delays are dangerous

THE PANAMA CANAL TWENTY-FIVE YEARS AGO
LETTER OF THE LATE SENATOR DOOLITTLE OF WISCONSIN

[Contributed by Duane Mowry, Esq., Milwaukee.]

[The Senator’s views on his subject are interesting and pertinent in view of recent events on the Isthmus—Ed.]

Chicago, March 26, 1880.

M. Ferdinand de Lesseps.

Dear Sir:

I have just returned to my office from the house of Mr. Washburn, where I had the honor to meet Madame de Lesseps,—an honor and pleasure wholly unexpected to me.

I went to see Mr. Washburn for the purpose of conferring with him in relation to yourself and the great International Canal through the Isthmus of Panama.

Mr. Washburn was absent. But Mrs. Washburn very kindly invited me to stay and lunch with them. As we had been in Congress twelve years together, he in the House, and I in the Senate from Wisconsin, and as our families were so well acquainted at Washington, I could not decline her invitation, especially as it would give me such an opportunity to make the acquaintance of your excellent wife.

But what I wanted to say to Mr. Washburn and have him join me in saying to you, is thus: I am not satisfied with the Message of President Hayes upon the subject of the Isthmus routes.

While I am, as an American citizen, prepared to stand by the Monroe doctrine, so far as it opposes the control of these routes by Great Britain or any other power, I do not think the Monroe doctrine goes so far as to assert that we as the great Republic of the New World propose to take the control into our hands.

While we may be more interested in that route than any other nation, we cannot assert for ourselves what we are unwilling to allow to other nations,—the domination of the route, which, from its position on the earth, of right belongs to all mankind.

So long as we assert the doctrine of President Monroe we stand upon the defensive. We stand for the freedom of the seas. Our policy, our traditions, our arms will maintain that.

But if we assert the doctrine of President Hayes, we leave the ground on which Monroe stood and upon which our people would stand solid, even to the point of war, and we place ourselves in antagonism to the very idea which makes the Monroe Doctrine strong among our own people, and strong throughout the world.

If we follow Mr. Hayes, instead of defending the freedom of the seas we dominate the Isthmus ourselves, and lay our hands upon the commerce of the World.

When this subject comes to be discussed, calmly (but I fear that cannot be until the next President election is over), the sound sober thought of our people will repudiate this new departure of Mr. Hayes, and will sustain the Monroe Doctrine, in its true meaning, viz:

That the routes across the Isthmus, between North and South America, shall not pass under the domination of any foreign power to levy tribute upon our commerce nor upon the commerce of any other nation.

The Isthmus of Panama, the Isthmus of Suez, and the Bosphorus, ought to be free channels of commerce to all nations in peace, and in war; and no less in war than in peace. And the law of nations should provide that if any nation shall attempt to close or blockade them in peace or in war, that nation should be treated as having made war upon the commerce of all other nations.

As I go to my home in Wisconsin this evening and shall not be able to meet you, I beg to say that I hope you will not be discouraged in your great work. The people of America will be in sympathy with you, upon the basis that no control shall ever be permitted to any government, and that its freedom shall be guaranteed by the civilized nations, both in peace and in war.

With great respect,

I am very truly yours,

J. R. Doolittle.

THE EARLIEST KNOWN AUTOGRAPH OF BENEDICT ARNOLD

(The original letter is owned in New York City. It it particularly interesting as showing Arnold’s dual trade—in books as well as drugs. A few of the characters are almost illegible, and we do not guarantee our correct transcription of them. It is also in evidence from the body of the letter that the “servant-girl question” was alive in 1765.—Ed.)

New Haven, March 2d, 1765.

Sir

Your favour of the 28th ulto came duly to hand—am much obliged to you for your Trouble in sending me a Maid—but had engaged one for Six Months before this came. Mr. Wm Johnston wrote me word that Mrs. Hobby Imagined the maid you have send (sic) was not able to do our business upon which we Engaged an other—as the Girl is willing to return and says it will be no disapointment (sic) we have Sent her back again.

I have credt your acc. ¹⁹⁄₆ according to your desire & have sent you

—Vitriol ʒ2 9d | 1.6
Liqu-Laud Syd ʒ2p. ⅙ | 3.9
Stoper Vial ½ |
Common Vial 2d | 1.4
| £0.0.7

N. B.—(illegible)

I shall have in a day or two.

The Books you wrote for are Sold.

I am Sir

Your obligd Servt

Benedt Arnold.

To Dr. John Dickinson,

Middletown,

[Conn.]

THE MAGAZINE OF AMERICAN HISTORY

Which was founded in 1877, ceased to appear in 1893, not long after the death of Mrs. Martha J. Lamb, who had then been its editor for nearly ten years; and has never since been equalled, until the present time. A legal obstacle preventing the word “American” in connection with the title, the present Magazine will bear the name of

The Magazine of History, with Notes and Queries.

(The latter phrase formed a part of the title of the Magazine of American History in 1880, and is adopted as peculiarly descriptive of an important part of the new publication.)

The Publisher (who will act as Editor for the present) desires it to be understood that this difference in title does not indicate any difference in the character or contents of the Magazine. It will be as near an exact duplicate of the original Magazine of American History in form, size—even in type,—as is possible, while the character and scope of its contents will be the same as won for the former in the past such approval as is found in the following paragraphs, taken from many such in one year:

“This periodical is without a rival in its domain, and is becoming indispensable to all intelligent readers. It is an unfailing source of historical and documentary evidence of the growth and expansion of our vast country.”—Christian Advocate.

“It is more than a periodical; it gathers into permanent and accessible form material that would otherwise be lost, or only found with great effort. Its articles are uniformly well written, and the illustrations and print complete the attractiveness of the magazine.”—New York Commercial Advertiser.

“This magazine is one of the best periodicals in America.”—New York Tribune.

“It is always a pleasure to welcome the Magazine of American History, with its antiquarian interest, its historical and biographical value, its fine type and paper, and its antique illustrations.”—Brooklyn Eagle.

“Each number presents an admirable collection of papers, and maintains the high character of the gifted editor, who, in her history of New York city, displayed the highest qualities of an author. The magazine is as instructive as it is entertaining.”—Scientific American.

“This publication has steadily increased in interest. It fills a niche of its own, and fills it so admirably as to ward off any attempt at competition.”—Baltimore American.

“The editor is giving great dignity to our country in recording the lives of families that are noble in the highest sense.”—Boston Globe.

“This periodical richly deserves the high rank accorded to it by leading historical scholars in the two hemispheres.”—Boston Transcript.

“It is crowded with facts of historical interest. The editor is remarkably at home with her subject, and her selections are made with a thorough appreciation of the wants of her readers.”—Manufacturers’ Review.

“It is beyond all question the most admirable historical periodical published. It is filled with articles prepared after long research by prominent students of history, and original documents never before published appear from time to time, adding to its value.”—Detroit Commercial Advertiser.

“It is rich in illustration and its make-up is of the highest order. Its articles are on subjects of real interest and value to all students of American history.”—Westminster Teacher.

In the February number will appear an interesting Lincoln article, by Mr. F. E. Stevens, author of “The Black Hawk War.” It will be illustrated with two heretofore unknown portraits of contemporaries of Mr. Lincoln. There will also be a valuable article by Dr. Thomas Addis Emmet, on “Some Popular Myths of American History,” which will also contain an unpublished letter of Washington’s of peculiar interest.

A specific department—of Genealogy—not found in the M. A. H. will be added to the others, under the able care of Mr. William Prescott Greenlaw, the well-known Librarian of the New England Historic Genealogic Society. This will afford an excellent opportunity for such queries, which are usually inserted only in periodicals issued at much longer intervals than monthly.

During the next six months there will appear a series of articles on the Progress of Discovery of the Mississippi River, by Mr. Warren Upham, Secretary of the Minnesota Historical Society—as follows:

1. The Voyage of Vespucci past the mouths of the Mississippi.

2. De Soto and Moscoso on the Mississippi, 1541–3.

3. The expedition of Oñate, 1601.

4. Groseillers and Radisson, 1655–6 and 1660; besides a variety of other articles, covering the whole field of our country’s history; and a number of articles of less length, from the various writers who have offered their assistance to make the Magazine as interesting and valuable as its title and aim demand.

All that is necessary to insure the permanence of this most valuable publication is a hundred subscriptions, in addition to those pledged or already received. Towards this consummation, the various institutions of learning, as well as the old subscribers, are requested to lend their aid. Specimen copies will be sent on receipt of the price, 50 cents. Address the publisher.

The publication of this, the first number, has been delayed by having to change printers at the last moment; but after the March number shall have appeared, it is expected to publish regularly before the 15th of each month.

GENEALOGICAL

All communications for this department (including genealogical publications for review) should be sent to William Prescott Greenlaw, address: Sudbury, Mass., from April to November, inclusive; Commonwealth Hotel, Bowdoin St., Boston, Mass., from December to March, inclusive.

QUERIES

[A limited number of queries will be inserted for subscribers free; to all others a charge of one cent per word (payable in stamps) will be made.]

1. a. Webb—Wanted, the date of birth, baptism, or proof of parentage of Nathaniel Webb, Sr., of Woolwich, Me., who married Jane, dau. of Samuel and Jane (Derby) Blanchard, of Weymouth, Mass.

b. Blanchard, Phillips—John Blanchard, b. at Weymouth, Mass., March 27, 1660, son of Nathaniel, is said to have married Abigail, dau. of Nicholas Phillips. Nicholas Phillips, of Weymouth, and Nicholas Phillips, of Boston, both had daughters Abigail of the right age to marry Blanchard. Which was her father?

G. 1.

2. a. Derby—Wanted, the birth and parentage of John Derby, Darby, or Darbyshear, who moved from Dunstable to Groton about 1705, and died before 1725. He married about 1697 Mary Blanchard, of Dunstable, and had children Mary, William, and James.

b. Blanchard—Mary (Blanchard) married for her second husband Nathaniel Wood. She was the daughter of John³ (Samuel,² Thomas¹) Blanchard and Hannah ——. Wanted: the birth of Mary Blanchard, the maiden name of her mother, Hannah, and the record of Hannah’s birth, parentage and marriage.

c. Burr—A certain Samuel Gault, (or Galt, Gaalt, etc.), born about 1780, married about 1810 Mercy Burr, “a Green Mountain girl,” who is supposed to have been born about 1790. Their first child, James Washington Burr Gault, was born in 1812, in or near Smithfield, Madison Co., N. Y. Wanted: birth, marriage, and parentage of Mercy Burr.

d. Gault—Samuel Gault was the son of Alexander Gault, a Scotch-Irish immigrant who has a Revolutionary record. Wanted: birth record of Samuel Gault and any information about his parents.

e. Wilder—The “Book of the Wilders,” p. 283, says: “There is a church record in Northampton that states that, ‘Catherine, daughter of Catherine and Aholiab Wilder, was baptized in 1741,’ which is all that we can learn of his [Aholiab’s] wife.” Their children were Catherine, Aholiab, Daniel Witherby, Samuel, and Joshua. Who was Catherine, and when and where did she marry Aholiab Wilder?

f. Brown-Sheldon—The “Index of the Births, Marriages, and Deaths, Recorded in Providence,” p. 109, Marriages, gives: “Brown, John, and Sarah Sheldon, Jan. 3, 1747. 1:18.” Wanted: parentage of John Brown, and of Sarah Sheldon.

g. Bullock—Who was Comfort Bullock, born in Rehoboth, Mar. 9, 1762, married 1st to Sybil Pierce, of Dartmouth, Dec. 19, 1784, and 2d, in Rehoboth, Dec. 4, 1788, to Bethia Bowen? He was said to have been the son of the Comfort Bullock who was born at Barrington in 1741 and married to Holmes Whitman in 1768, but this Comfort proves to have been a girl, and Holmes Whitman, her husband. The date of birth of the first named Comfort is from family records which do not give his parentage.

B. 1.

3. a. Maverick—Was Moses Maverick, of Marblehead, a son of Rev. John Maverick, of Dorchester? Is there any known evidence that Moses was a brother of the King’s Commissioner, Samuel Maverick, of Noddles Island? Moses was admitted Freeman at Dorchester in 1633 while Rev. John was minister there, a fact indicating relationship, but I can find no positive evidence. Savage and Palfrey did not believe that Samuel was son of Rev. John, but perhaps some later investigator has found conclusive evidence one way or the other.

S. 1.

4. a. Quincey—“Col.” Edmund² (Edmund¹) of Braintree, b. 1627, d. Jan. 7, 1697–8. He was a Major in the 1690 Expedition. Is there good authority for the title Colonel? Is the date of his commission known?

b. Cogan—What relationship existed between Mr. John Cogan, of Boston, who died 27 April, 1658. Henry Coggin, of Barnstable, who died 16 June, 1649, and John Coggin who m. Mary Long, of Charlestown, Dec. 24, 1664? Please give references.

c. Sloper—Proof wanted of the parentage of Mary Sloper who married in Boston, Apr. 3, 1751, Thomas Uran, of Boston. Ambrose Sloper, of Portsmouth, N. H., deeded land, 1758, to his sons Ambrose and Richard, of Boston. Mary (Sloper) Urann’s first child was named Ambrose Sloper and another, Richard; she died in Boston, Nov. 28, 1815, aged 85. Can she have been a daughter of Ambrose² Sloper, (Richard¹) b. 20 Jan., 1684, and Mary Pickering?

d. Rogers—Joanna, born Dec. 30, 1722; m. Dec. 30, 1750, Elisha⁵ Morse, of Foxboro, Mass. (See Morse Memorial, 1850: p. 57.) Who were her parents?

e. Lewis—Maiden name and parentage of Jane ——, who m. Thomas³ Lewis (Thomas,² George¹) of Eastham and Falmouth, Mass. He was b. July 15, 1656, and d. Mar. 19, 1718.

f. Bickford-Young—Jeremiah Bickford and Hannah Young were m. in Eastham 26 Oct., 1705. Would like proofs of the parentage of both and any information relating to John Bickford, of Dover, who testified, Mar., 1669, “aged 60 years or thereabouts,” and Samuel Bickford, variously called of Salisbury, Amesbury, and Newbury, who testified 1669, “aged about 21,” and Jan. 9, 1667, “aged 27.” This Samuel (see Hoyt’s Salisbury and Amesbury Families) married Mary Cottle about 1667, and went to Nantucket.

E. 1.

5. a. Hale—Samuel Hale, of Dana and Holland, Mass., cooper, married first (intentions Dec. 23, 1773, Petersham), Elizabeth Green, of Granby; married second, between 1788 and 1790, a widow Abigail ——. Samuel Hale died Sept. 4, 1813, age 67, Abigail, his wife, died March 12, 1820, age 71; gravestones in Dana Center, Mass. Wanted: ancestry of Samuel Hale and his second wife, Abigail.

b. Pratt—Wanted, parents’ names and date of birth of Anna Pratt who married July 7, 1747, John Stone, Jr., in Groton, Mass.

c. Parker—Wanted, date of birth and ancestry of Aaron Parker, of Oxford, Mass., who was married to Abigail Covel, June, 1752.

d. Eldredge—Wanted, ancestry and date of birth of Samuel Eldredge who married about 1804 Sarah Emery, b. Aug. 7, 1785, and lived in Middlebury, Vt.

e. Osborn—Wanted, date of birth and ancestry of Ephraim Osborn, of Fitchburg, Mass., who married Sarah Fisk, November 26, 1759.

f. Hazzard—Wanted, ancestry of Mary Hazzard, born Vermont, 1791, married Samuel Blanchard, who was a soldier in the War of 1812.

g. Hodge—Wanted, date of birth and ancestry of Elizabeth Hodge who married in or near Boston, Gen. Robert Earll, who served in War of 1812, from New York State.

T. 1.

6. a. Stetson—Who was Elizabeth, wife of Isaac Stetson, of Pembroke? They were probably married about 1704 or ’5. The eldest child was Abisha.

b. Ray-Smith—Parents wanted of Samuel Ray and his wife Miriam Smith who were married at Wrentham, 1713.

c. Waters—Who was the wife of William Waters, who came early to Boston? Their marital troubles were “aired” in General Court and she finally went back to England. The son, William Waters, was in 1665, or earlier, “Clerk of Writs” at Dameril’s Cove. Whom did he marry?

d. Lincoln—Who were the parents of Elizabeth Lincoln, who married Elisha Bonney, of Pembroke, Mass., in 1728?

S. 2.

7. a. Ellison—Ancestry desired of Edward Ellison, who removed from Uxbridge, Mass., to Chester, Vt., his son Josiah being born there, Nov. 5, 1800.

b. Lund—Ancestry desired of Eliza Ann Lund, born Oct. 2, 1805, Philadelphia, Pa.; according to tradition family supposed to be of Nantucket or Martha’s Vineyard.

c. Harlow—Ancestry desired of Levi Harlow, born about 1747; he was of Tauton, Mass., in 1783, and died, Springfield, Vt., June 30, 1832.

d. Cobb—Ancestry desired of Silence Cobb wife of Levi Harlow, born about 1747 and died, Springfield, Vt., June 27, 1831.

E. 2.

MINOR TOPICS

A COMMITTEE TO VISIT NOVA SCOTIA.

By His Excellency, Geo. Washington, Esq., Commander-in-Chief of the United Colonies.

To Moses Child:

The Honorable, the Continental Congress, having lately passed a Resolve, contained in the following words, to wit:—“That two persons be sent at the expense of the Colonies to Nova Scotia, to inquire into the state of that Colony, the disposition of the inhabitants towards the American cause and the condition of the fortifications, dockyards, the quantity of the warlike stores and the number of soldiers, sailors, and ships of war there and to transmit the earliest intelligence to Gen. Washington.”

I do hereby constitute and appoint you the said Moses Child to be one of the persons to undertake this business, and as the season is late and this a work of great importance, I entreat and request that you will use the utmost despatch, attention and fidelity in the execution of it. The necessity of acting with a proper degree of caution and secrecy is too apparent to need recommendation. You will keep an accurate account of your expenses, and upon your return you will be rewarded in a suitable manner for the fatigue of your journey and the service you render your country by conducting and discharging the business with expedition and fidelity. Given under my hand this 24th day of November, 1775.

George Washington.

Moses Child, born Waltham, Mass., Apr. 6, 1731; died Feb. 8, 1793.

He was appointed Special Agent of the United Colonies by virtue of the above commission.

The original of the above is in Historic Genealogical Society, Boston, Mass.

[Where can any full account of the results of this mission be found?—Ed.]

BOOK NOTICES

Descendants of Reinold and Matthew Marvin, of Hartford, Ct., 1638, and 1635. Sons of Edward Marvin of Great Bentley, England. By George Franklin Marvin, of New York, and William T. R. Marvin, of Boston. T. R. Marvin and Son, Publishers, 73 Federal Street, Boston, 1904. 8vo. 659 pages.

Not many families can expect the publication of their genealogies under more favorable auspices. Mr. William T. R. Marvin, the joint-author, printer and publisher of this book, inherited the traditions of his art, and his taste for genealogical studies from his father, who, nearly half a century ago, printed a genealogy of the Marvins. A comparison of that little duodecimo of 56 pages with this later volume shows the marked progress made during the last half century in the arts of compiling and printing family histories. The vital details of all branches of the family, beginning with the English ancestry and extending through nine generations in America have been gathered with scrupulous care, and the biographical memoranda presented have been selected with discrimination. The arrangement of the data, the illustrations, the complete index, and all of the details of book-making are such as one would expect from an educated man, having a deep interest in the subject and a lifelong experience as a genealogist and a printer. This book may well be taken for a model by anyone contemplating the publication of a genealogy....

THE STEBBINS GENEALOGY

By Ralph Stebbins Greenlee and Robert Lemuel Greenlee. In two volumes. Chicago, Illinois. Privately printed, 1904. 4to. 1386 pages.

These two magnificent volumes are devoted to Rowland Stebbins (who died at Northampton, Mass. December 14, 1671), and his descendants. A study of the name in England is presented, but no positive connection of the immigrant is shown. The compilation was made under the direction of a Chicago genealogist, Mr. Edward A. Claypool, and the work was printed in Chicago. Both compilation and printing seem to be very well done. One of the first genealogies printed in New England (1771) was of a branch of this family. The paper used is of an excellent quality, and, while the size and weight of these massive volumes is against durability, it is probable that they will long survive many of the genealogies of recent years where little or no care has been exercised in the selection of paper.

All of the descendants of the hardy pioneer settler of the Connecticut Valley, whose race furnished a pioneer genealogist, have good reasons to be thankful to the Messrs. Greenlee for their splendid history of the family.

ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR 1905

I expect to publish within the coming twelve months several interesting items of Americana, viz:

I.—The History of the Second Company, Governor’s Foot-Guard of the State of Connecticut; by Jason Thomson, Esq., of the New Haven Bar (a member of the Company). This was originally issued as a pamphlet, but has long been out of print. The Company is the third oldest military organization in the United States, beginning its history with service in the Revolution when Benedict Arnold, its first captain, took the Colony powder by force from the hesitant Selectmen of New Haven, and marched to Cambridge, accompanied by Israel Putnam, to join the patriot forces there. It has since served in the War of 1812, the War of the Rebellion, and the Spanish-Cuban War. The history of such an organization is obviously well worth preserving and enlarging by illustrations, as I have done. It will contain:

1. A rare plate of Benedict Arnold, in uniform, as he appeared before Quebec.

2. A colored plate, showing the present uniform of the Company.

3. A most interesting reproduction of a document of unique interest—the original manuscript petition to the Assembly of Connecticut, praying for the incorporation of the Company. This is signed by all the original members of the Company, including Arnold and his brother-in-law, Pierpont Edwards, who afterwards, by the irony of Fate, became the executor of his estate, at the discovery of his treason.

The original is owned by the New Haven Colony Historical Society, and will be reproduced, not by engraving, but by an actual photograph—folding to fit the size of the page. The edition will be limited to 250 copies, of which 248 will be for sale.

200 will be octavo (6 × 9) gilt top, bound in cloth. $3.00.

50 will be large paper, bound in boards, 8 × 11, untrimmed edges, gilt top, special paper. $5.00.

Postage extra on each.

The printing will be from type, distributed as soon as the work has been done, and this edition will never be duplicated.

II.—The Poems of Edward Coate Pinkney. With a biographical sketch of of the poet, by Eugene L. Didier, author of a “Life of Edgar A. Poe,” “Life of Madame Bonaparte,” etc. The original edition of these poems is now one of the rarest items of Americana. It was published in 1825, and won the admiration of the chief American critics, Poe among them, who pronounced Pinkney to be “the first of American lyrists,” and his poem, “A Health,” (of which I give two verses herewith) “especially beautiful—full of spirit and brilliancy.”

A HEALTH

I fill this cup to one made up of loveliness alone,

A woman, of her gentle sex the seeming paragon;

To whom the better elements and kindly stars have given

A form so fair that, like the air, ’tis less of earth than heaven.

Her every tone is music’s own, like those of morning birds,

And something more than melody dwells ever in her words;

The coinage of her heart are they, and from her lips each flows

As one may see the burthened bee forth issue from the rose.

Only Pinkney’s untimely death—before he was twenty-five—prevented his becoming one of the foremost poets of our country. The North American Review, then the highest literary authority in the country, said: “If the name of Thomas Carew or Sir John Harrington had been attached to these poems, we should, in all probability, like others, have been completely taken in.” Another critic declared: “Some of his poems are not surpassed by any similar productions in the English language.” I risk nothing in saying that Pinkney’s readers of 1905 will re-echo these praises—and I trust all who have heretofore sustained me in my historical publications will give as hearty support to this, my first effort in the field of American poetry. The edition will consist of 250 copies, of which 200 will be in octavo (6 × 9) form, gilt top, uncut edges, at $3.00.

50 copies, on special paper, large paper (8 x 11). $5.00.

Postage extra on each.

Each style will have a portrait of the author, from an authentic original.

III.—Adventures in the Wilds of America and the British-American Provinces. By Charles Lanman, author of A Dictionary of Congress, The Private Life of Daniel Webster, etc., etc. With an Appendix by Lieut. Campbell Hardy, Royal Artillery.

2 vols., octavo. 500 pp. each. Illustrated. Portrait, and memoir of the author by William Abbatt. Price $10.00.

Large paper (8 x 11) 3 vols. (consecutive paging), special fine paper. Only 15 copies. $20.00.

Originally published in 1857, this most valuable and interesting work has long been out of print and scarce, and hence not known to the present day as its merits deserve.

While other books on similar subjects have been issued since, I think none of them—or all combined—equal this, as a record not alone of sport, but of travel, description of scenery, literature and legend (for the author has recorded many most beautiful Indian legends). The range of his journeys was from Florida to Labrador, and from the Atlantic to the present St. Paul and Minneapolis. His style needs no encomium from me. I prefer to quote from letters to him from Washington Irving and Edward Everett:

My Dear Sir:

I am glad to learn that you intend to publish your narrative and descriptive writings, in a collected form. I have read parts of them as they were published separately, and the great pleasure derived from the perusal makes me desirous of having the whole in my possession. They carry us into the fastnesses of our mountains, the depth of our forests, the watery wilderness of our lakes and rivers, giving us pictures of savage life and savage tribes, Indian legends, fishing and hunting anecdotes, the adventures of trappers and backwoodsmen; our whole arcanum, in short, of indigenous poetry and romance: to use a favorite phrase of the old discoverers, “they lay open the secrets of the country to us.”

I return you thanks for the delightful entertainment which your Summer rambles have afforded me. I do not see that I have any literary advice to give you, excepting to keep on as you have begun. You seem to have the happy, enjoyable humor of old Izaak Walton, and I trust you will give us still further scenes and adventures on our great internal waters, depicted with the freshness and skill of your present volumes.

With the best wishes for your further success, I am

Very truly, your obliged

Washington Irving.

Edward Everett wrote:

I fully concur with the opinions expressed by Mr. Irving on the subject of a collective edition of your narrative and descriptive writings. While I am not familiar with all of them, from those which I have read and from his emphatic and discriminating commendation, I am confident the series would be welcomed by a large class of readers. You have explored nooks in our scenery seldom visited, and described forms of life and manners of which the greater portion of our busy population are entirely ignorant.

Wishing you every success, I am

Very truly yours,

Edward Everett.

A selection of a few of Mr. Lanman’s chapters will give a slight idea of the variety of his book:

Legends of the Illinois—Lake Winnipeg—Fish of the Upper Mississippi—Down the St. Lawrence—The Saguenay River—The Hermit of Aroostook—The Falls of Tallulah—The Valley of Virginia—The Cheat River Country—Tombigbee and Black Warrior Rivers—Accomac—A Week in a Fishing Smack—A Virginia Barbecue—Esquimaux of Labrador—The Western Pioneer.

IV.—Garden’s Anecdotes of the Revolution (both series). The author, Alexander Garden, was Major in Lee’s Legion—and his work is one of the best on its theme. The first volume was published at Charleston, in 1822; the second in 1824. Each is scarce and valuable, the second particularly so. I propose revising the text, to eliminate errors, and to issue my edition in two octavo volumes (6 x 9) with a number of illustrations, including one or more of the author, and one each of the brothers Pinckney (not heretofore published), and a number of landscapes.

The edition will be limited to 200 copies (6 × 9) and 50, large paper (8 x 11)—the former in cloth, gilt top, with paper label; the latter in charcoal boards, gilt top, and untrimmed edges. The prices will be $10.00 and $15.00 respectively.

N. B.—All these works will be printed in large type (Small Pica, same as this line) on fine paper, well bound and produced in the general style of my other publications. Address, William Abbatt, 281 Fourth Ave., N. Y.

SUBSCRIPTION FORM

TO WILLIAM ABBATT

281 FOURTH AVE., NEW YORK

I Hereby Subscribe For:—

I. The Governor’s Foot-Guard

____Copies, ordinary form

____Copies, large paper

II. The Poems of Edward Coate Pinkney

____Copies, ordinary form

____Copies, large paper

III. Adventures in the Wilds of America, by Lanman

(3 Volumes)

____Copies, ordinary form

____Copies, large paper

IV. Garden’s Anecdotes of the Revolution

(The two series in one volume)

____Copies, ordinary form

____Copies, large paper

Name________________________________

Address________________________________

Date________________________________

1. In all probability that bullet saved Quebec. Had Arnold not been disabled, his energy and daring would have successfully carried through the attack on the second barricade.

All his subsequent history shows this.

The attack on Quebec failed from four causes: the extraordinary inclemency of the weather, the death of Montgomery, the precipitate retreat by order of Lieut.-Col. Campbell, who was next in rank, and the disabling of Arnold.

The first was contributory only, and the second would not have been conclusive but for Campbell—an officer of whose subsequent career absolutely nothing appears of record.

The fourth was the deciding blow. Even Morgan lacked the decision which would have led Arnold to carry the (second) barricade at all hazards—and that carried, the third must have fallen and with it the city. Had Arnold so much as suspected Morgan’s inaction, it is certain he would have remained in the field, and personally directed the assault in which he could not join.

It was his first and last failure. Valcour Island, Saratoga, Ridgefield—all exhibit the vigor of him of whom Mr. Codman justly remarks: “Arnold, with the exception of Ethan Allen, seems beyond all others, to have understood the value of rapid action at the beginning of (he might have said, throughout) a war.—Ed.

2. The official reply to the governor’s message expresses this shrewd inference in prose thus: “But we hope Great Brittaine & the other Powers of Europe may mediate and divert the War with which we are alarm’d & conclude it in a happy and lasting Peace, and this we believe in as much as your Excelly doth not mention in your Speech that the advice you recd in the last ships was from the ministry of Great Brittaine who this House apprehends would have sent forward their Directions had they conceived any immediate Danger of a War.”

3. Polls and Estates.

4. December 3, 1730, the House passed acts for raising £6000 for the repair of Fort William and Mary and for building a state house, and for removing three of the courts of general quarter sessions of the peace and the inferior courts of common pleas from Portsmouth to Exeter, Hampton, and Dover. The same day the governor in council approved the act for removing the courts, but no action was taken on the money bill.

5. The same day, March 10, the governor, in anger, dissolved the assembly, intending thereby “to give his Majties good subjects an opportunity of sending such to represent them in the next Assembly as will do all in their Power to retrieve the Injustice you have practiced in not paying the Publick Debts; and those that will promote peace & a good agreemt amongst all Branches of the Legislature.”

6. This refers to the disputed boundary between New Hampshire and Massachusetts, which had been in controversy for many years, and was then in an acute stage. See the governor’s message, ante.

7. Capt. John Rindge was appointed by the House to be agent of the province to present the boundary line controversy to the home government in England, but the appointment was not recognized by the council.

8. Anthony Walton White, Major and Aide-de-Camp to General Washington, October, 1775; Lieutenant-Colonel Third Battalion, First Establishment, February 9, 1776; Lieutenant-Colonel Fourth Regiment Light Dragoons, Continental Army, February 13, 1777; (this regiment appears to have performed its services mostly in the South, where the commanding officer achieved a national reputation as a brilliant cavalry leader); Lieutenant-Colonel Commandant First Regiment, Dragoons, December 10, 1779; Colonel, February 16, 1780.—Official Register, N. J. in the Revn. Stryker.

9. Mrs. Lamb, in her “History of the City of New-York,” gives an account of the grand procession three days before the adoption of the Federal Constitution by New York, July 23, 1788 (the State Convention did not adopt it till July 26): “Mounted on a fine gray horse, elegantly caparisoned, and led by two negroes in oriental costume, Anthony Walton White bore the arms of the United States in sculpture, preceding the Society of the Cincinnati, in full uniform.”

10. The insignia is that once owned by Kosciuszko, who exchanged his own with Gen. White, on the occasion of his return to the United States in 1798. Thus there is now in the possession of Mr. Evans the identical badge which was worn by the brave Pole on the battlefields of Poland in 1794, where as history tells us he rivalled Washington in his strategy and intrepidity, though alas, not in the ultimate success of his patriotic cause.

11. The Montgolfiers and François Blanchard were then making aeronautics the fashionable wonder of the day, and the latter, with Dr. John Jeffries, of Boston, had just made the first crossing of the Channel to France, in a balloon.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES

Page | Changed from | Changed to
58 | tiful—full of spirit and brilliancy | beautiful—full of spirit and brilliancy

Typos fixed; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.

Used numbers for footnotes, placing them all at the end of the last chapter.