CHAPTER XXIII.
On the Eve of the American Revolution.
When the county of Sunbury was established in 1765, there was no English settlement north of St. Ann’s and the river was but sparsely settled from that place to the sea. Nevertheless the immense forest wealth of the St. John was gradually becoming known and appreciated.
The French ship of war “Avenant,” as long ago as the year 1700, after discharging her cargo of supplies for Villebon’s garrison and goods for the French traders, took on board some very fine masts for the French navy that had been cut upon the River St. John. Afterwards, when the control of Acadia passed into the hands of the British, they in turn began to procure masts for the navy on the St. John. England’s place among the nations then, as now, depended very largely on the efficiency of her navy, and the reservation of trees suitable for masts for the largest ships of war became a matter of national concern. In consequence Governor Legge, at the request of the home government, desired Charles Morris, the Surveyor general of Nova Scotia, to report as to ungranted lands in the province that might be reserved for the purpose of supplying masts for the navy. On the 21st May, 1774, Mr. Morris submitted his report. He states that his knowledge of the country was based upon personal observations during a residence of nearly twenty-eight years, in the course of which he had visited nearly all parts of the province. In the Nova Scotian peninsula there were very few pines fit for masts, but on the River St. John, above the settlements, and on the other rivers flowing into it were great quantities of pine trees fit for masts and great quantities of others growing into that state, which being so far inland, protected by growth of other timber and by hills, and remote from those violent gales which infest the coast would prove the most desirable reserve for the purpose intended. Mr. Morris adds: “I am of opinion that a reserve of all the lands on the River St. John above the settlements for the whole course of the river, at least twenty-five miles on each side, will be the most advantageous reserve to the Crown of lands within this province, especially as the river is navigable for boats and rafting of masts the whole course of it, as also for rafting of masts in the several branches of it; and in this tract is contained a black spruce, fit for yards and topmasts, and other timber fit for ship-building.”
The importance to coming generations of the “black spruce, fit for yards and top-masts,” was little dreamed of by Charles Morris. However, it seems that in accordance with his recommendation the region of the upper St. John was at this time reserved to the crown because its towering pines supplied the best masts in the world for the British navy, and at the close of the American Revolution it was still unbroken forest.
After the formation of the County of Sunbury, April 30, 1765, magistrates and other officers were appointed and representatives chosen to sit in the House of 259 Assembly. Some of our local historians, including the late Moses H. Perley, have stated that the first representative of Sunbury County was Charles Morris jr., but although Mr. Morris may have been the first to take his seat he was not the first elected representative. The late Thos. B. Akins, of Halifax, a recognized authority on all points of local history, in a communication to the late J. W. Lawrence states that the election writs on file at Halifax give the names of Capt. Beamsley Glasier and Capt. Thomas Falconer as the first representatives of the County of Sunbury. It does not appear that either of these gentlemen attended the sessions of the House of Assembly, and as it was the rule for members who were absent two years to forfeit their seats for non-attendance, a new election was held in 1768, when Richard Shorne and Phinehas Nevers were returned. The House of Assembly was dissolved two years later, and at the ensuing general election Charles Morris, jr., and Israel Perley were returned; the former took his seat but Mr. Perley appears never to have done so and in 1773 James Simonds was elected in his stead. Mr. Simonds was in attendance in October, 1774, and took the customary oath, being the first inhabitant of the county to take his seat in the legislative halls of Nova Scotia. A little later William Davidson was elected a member and he and James Simonds were the sitting members when the old Province of Nova Scotia was divided at the isthmus and the Province of New Brunswick constituted in 1784.
Among the earliest magistrates of the County of Sunbury were John Anderson, Beamsley Glasier, Francis Peabody, James Simonds, James White, Israel Perley, Jacob Barker, Phinehas Nevers and Gervas Say. The Courts of General Sessions of the Peace meet regularly at Maugerville and transacted such business as was necessary, appointed constables and other parish officers, administered justice and so forth. Benjamin Atherton was clerk of the peace for the county, James Simonds registrar of deeds and judge of probate, and James White deputy sheriff. The first collector of customs was Capt. Francis Peabody, who died in 1773. The attention given to the collection of duties was but nominal and Charles Newland Godfrey Jadis, a retired army officer who had settled at Grimross on the St. John river, wrote to the secretary of state in 1773 calling his attention to the prevalence of smuggling of which “Major-Ville” was the centre, connived at, as he alleges, by the magistrate and collector. This little incident is an indication that the sentiment of the Massachusetts settlers of Maugerville was identical with that of their kinsmen in New England in regard to the enactment of the stamp act and the duties imposed by the British government.
A few particulars of interest regarding the settlers on the River St. John are to be gleaned from the papers of David Burpee,[100] at one time deputy sheriff of the county. There were very few framed dwellings, nearly all the settlers living in log houses. As late as 1783 there were in Gagetown, Burton, and at St. Anns and vicinity about 76 houses occupied by English inhabitants, of which only 9 were framed buildings. The proportion of framed dwellings in Maugerville was little better, the vast majority being log houses.
Horses were few and nearly all the ordinary farm work was done by oxen. It is doubtful if any of the settlers owned a carriage, wagon or sleigh at this time. Carts were generally used in summer and sleds in winter. Some of the men owned saddles, of which there was much borrowing, and there were a few pillions for the ladies. Traveling in the summer time on land was either on horseback or afoot for the roads were too bad to admit of the use of wheeled vehicles.
All the cooking in those days was done at old-fashioned fireplaces and the utensils included a gridiron, toasting iron, frying pan, iron kettle and a number of pots and pans. The dishes used in the farm houses were mostly of pewter and their number limited.
A broadcloth coat or a beaver hat was a valuable asset which might be handed down to the second or even the third generation. A decent broadcloth suit would cost a man as much as he could earn in three months at the current rate of wages, after paying his board; consequently the early settler did not often indulge in the luxury of a new suit. Leather breeches were commonly worn, and from their lasting qualities were an economical garment.
The money handled by the early settlers was quite insignificant; nearly all transactions were of the nature of barter. Corn and furs were the staple articles of trade. The value of corn varied considerably, according to the season, from 4 shillings to 8 shillings a bushel, the average rate 5 to 6 shillings. Half a bushel of corn was the equivalent of a week’s board. The ordinary rate of farm wages was 2s. a day except for such work as mowing, framing, hoeing corn, and raking hay, for which the rate was 2s. 6d. a day. The wages of a woman servant were 10s. a month and as all articles of clothing were very dear compared with modern prices, they became excessively so when the rate of wages was taken into account. It took a whole month’s wages to purchase a pair of stays and two months wages to buy a gown. A pair of silk mits cost 5s. 6d. and a lawn handkerchief 6s. 6d. Calico was charged as high as 6s. a yard and cotton wool at 6s. 6d per lb. As a rule everything that had to be purchased out of a store was dear, while the prices of country produce were exactly the reverse. Butter sold as low as 6d. per lb.; lamb at 2½d. per lb.; beef, 1½ to 3d. per lb.; geese at 3s. each; fowls 1s.; potatoes 1s. 3d. a bushel.
Dr. Hannay quotes the following as a transaction on the part of Mr. Burpee, which would be regarded as unusual at the present day:
“September 30, 1778.
“Took a hog of Mr. Joseph Howlin of Burton to fat, the hog weighs now 113 lbs. and I am to have as many pounds of pork as he weighs more when I kill him.
“Dec. 1st, 1778, killed Mr. Howlin’s hog. Weighed before he was killed 181 lbs.”
Showing that Mr. Burpee obtained 68 lbs. of pork as the result of his bargain.
David Burpee taught school one winter, receiving 4s. per month for each pupil. The tuition fees were paid in a great variety of ways; in work, in grain, leather, musquash skins, rum, hauling hay and making shoes; he only handled 10s. in cash for his entire winter’s work.
In the year 1770 Mr. Burpee kept a diary which, while it contains some facts of interest, serves on the whole to show how narrow and monotonous was the life of the early settlers on the St. John. On Sundays they attended religious services 261 held at the houses most convenient for the purpose and in the winter there was some social visiting. However, we are now to speak of more stirring events.
Many were the trials and tribulations of the dwellers on the St. John—particularly of those living at the mouth of the river—during the American Revolution. Most of their calamities might have been avoided had an efficient garrison been maintained at Fort Frederick, but the troops were withdrawn from that post in 1768 and sent to Boston in consequence of disturbances there, and for five or six years the care of the fort and barracks was entrusted to James Simonds.
Lord William Campbell reported, about the close of 1771: “Since Fort Frederick at the entrance of St. John’s river has been dismantled and the garrison, which formerly consisted of an officers’ command, reduced to a corporal and four privates, he had had frequent complaints of the Indians on the river.” The presence of a half dozen soldiers was of little utility at any time and of no utility whatever after the Revolution began. It was not until the erection of Fort Howe that adequate steps were taken for the protection of the inhabitants.
The year 1774 was an extremely busy one at St. John. Our old pioneers James Simonds, James White and William Hazen were making strenuous efforts to place settlers upon their lands in the township of Conway, while at the same time Mr. Hazen’s house was being finished at Portland Point, an aboideau was being built to reclaim the “great marsh,” and the business of the fishery, lime-burning and general trade was being vigorously prosecuted. Troublous times were now at hand.
The situation of Hazen, Simonds and White when hostilities arose between the old colonies and the mother country was very embarrassing. By birth and early association they were New Englanders and most of their old time friends and neighbors were hostile to the crown. Massachusetts was practically the cradle of the Revolution, and the vast majority of its inhabitants were bitterly opposed to the King and his government. But while Simonds, White and Hazen were Massachusetts men they now held various official positions under the government of Nova Scotia and had sworn true allegiance to the King. Very likely they would have gladly assumed a neutral attitude in the approaching contest, but alas for them the force of events left no room for neutrality.
It is clear that at the beginning of the war the people of Massachusetts hoped for the cordial support of the settlers on the River St. John. This is probably the reason why the small colony at Portland Point was not molested during the early stages of the war and that William Hazen was able on two occasions to obtain the release of the company’s schooner “Polly” after she had been taken by American privateers. But as the war progressed considerate treatment gave place to acts of vandalism, and the sentiments of the settlers at St. John towards their old compatriots of Massachusetts became intensely bitter. Their tenants in the township of Conway were driven from their homes and obliged to seek refuge up the river, and those living at Portland Point suffered equal hardships.
When the Loyalists arrived in 1783, it was proposed that the township of Conway 262 should be escheated for their benefit. James Simonds protested stoutly against this, representing the expense that had been incurred in the endeavor to settle the township and the losses and sufferings of the tenants who were for a long time unprotected against the depredations of the enemy. He adds, “Instead of our being stripped of our rights to make amends for the losses of the Loyalists, who were plundered in New York or elsewhere, we have at least as weighty reasons as they can possibly offer to claim restitution from Government for the value of all the property taken from us, our distress by imprisonment, etc. They had a numerous British army to protect them, we had to combat the sons of darkness alone. In a word we had much less than they to hope for by unshaken loyalty and incomparably more to fear.”
The statement of Mr. Simonds is confirmed by Major Studholme who wrote to Gov’r. Parr, “Messrs. Hazen and Simonds, two of the original proprietors of Conway, have at different times placed a number of settlers on the lands of that Township and have used every effort on their parts to comply with the terms of their Grant, but the continual robberies committed by the Rebel boats during the war, to which these settlements have been exposed, obliged a number of their tenants to remove. However, as every exertion was used by them I take the liberty to recommend their claims on that Township to your consideration.”
During the earlier stages of the Revolution the attitude of the people of Machias on the one hand, and of the inhabitants of the township of Cumberland on the other, proved a matter of concern to the dwellers on the River St. John. Machias was settled in 1763 by a colony from Scarborough, one of the oldest towns in Massachusetts. During the war it was the asylum of disloyal spirits who fled thither from various parts of Nova Scotia. The township of Cumberland included a considerable portion of what is now the county of Westmorland. The inhabitants were mostly natives of New England, and many of them warm sympathizers with the revolutionary pasty. Jonathan Eddy was their representative in the Nova Scotia House of Assembly in 1774, and John Allan in 1776. Eddy and Allan, aided by William Howe and Samuel Rogers, succeeded in stirring up an active rebellion in Cumberland, which called for prompt action on the part of the Government of Nova Scotia. The leaders fled to Machias and a reward of £200 was offered for the apprehension of Eddy and £100 for each of the others.
The attitude of the Indians was another matter of serious concern to the settlers on the River St. John. Immediately after the Declaration of Independence the American congress authorized Washington to call forth and engage the Indians of Nova Scotia, St. John and Penobscot to take up the hatchet and fight against the English. With strange inconsistency Congress a few days later, in an address to the people of Ireland, denounced the King of England on the ground that “the wild and barbarous savages of the wilderness have been solicited by gifts to take up the hatchet against us, and instigated to deluge our settlements with the blood of defenceless women and children.”
The Micmacs seem to have been reluctant to take sides in the contest and in answer to John Allan’s solicitations they said, with quiet dignity, “We do not 263 comprehend what all this quarreling is about. How comes it that Old England and New England should quarrel and come to blows? The father and the son to fight is terrible! Old France and Canada did not do so; we cannot think of fighting ourselves till we know who is right and who is wrong.”
The style of argument employed to induce the simple minded natives to side with the Americans is seen in the letter addressed to them by the agent of the Congress of Massachusetts (May 15, 1775), in which the following statements occur: “The ministry of Great Britain have laid deep plots to take away our liberty and your liberty; they want to get all our money and make us pay it to them when they never earned it; to make you and us their servants and let us have nothing to eat, drink or wear but what they say we shall; and prevent us from having guns and powder to kill our deer and wolves and other game or to send to you to kill your game with so as to get skins and fur to trade with us for what you want. * * * We want to know what you our good brothers want from us of clothing or warlike stores, and we will supply you as fast as we can. We will do all for you we can and fight to save you at any time. * * * The Indians at Stockbridge all join with us and some of their men have enlisted as soldiers and we have given each of them a blanket and a ribbon, and they will be paid when they are from home in the service, and if any of you are willing to enlist we shall do the same for you. * * * Brothers, if you will let Mr. John Preble know what things you want he will take care to inform us and we will do the best for you we can.”
In consequence of the inducements of Allan and the other agents, Pierre Tomah and Ambroise St. Aubin, leading chiefs of the Maliseets of the River St. John, went to the trading post the Americans had established at Penobscot, and signed an agreement to the following effect: “We heartily join with our brethren the Penobscot Indians in everything that they have or shall agree with our brethren of the colony of Massachusetts, and are resolved to stand together and oppose the people of Old England that are endeavoring to take your and our lands and liberties from us. * * * We desire that you will help us to a priest that he may pray with us to God Almighty, etc., etc.” The Indians agreed to bring their furs and skins to Penobscot and to procure their provisions, goods and ammunition there. Many of them were heavily in debt to Simonds & White, so that the prospect of a new trading post with no old scores to settle appeared to them particularly inviting.
Washington honored the Indians with letters accompanied by belts of wampum, after the approved Indian fashion. A delegation from the St. John river, Pierre Tomah at its head, went soon afterwards to Washington’s headquarters on the Delaware, where they received a flattering welcome and were sumptuously entertained. On the 24th December, 1776, Washington thus addressed them:
“Brothers of the St. John’s tribe: It gave me great pleasure to hear by Major Shaw that you keep the chain of Friendship, which I sent you in February last from Cambridge, bright and unbroken. I am glad to hear that you have made a treaty of peace with your brothers and neighbors of Massachusetts Bay. My good friend and brother, Gov’r Pierre Tommah, and the warriors that came with him shall be taken good care of, and when they want to return home they 264 and our brothers of Penobscot shall be furnished with everything necessary for their journey. * * * Never let the King’s wicked counsellors turn your hearts against me and your brethren of this country, but bear in mind what I told you last February and what I tell you now.”
Washington’s overtures were not without effect. This is evident from the fact that the Maugerville people in May, 1776, reported that Gen. Washington’s letter had set the Indians on fire, and they were plundering all people they thought to be Tories, and that perhaps when the supply of Tories was exhausted others might share the name fate. “We think it necessary,” they added, “that some person of consequence be sent among them.” The Indians had always been allies of the French and had never fully accepted the change of ownership on the River St. John. They were disposed to view the cause of the Americans with favor, more particularly when the French became their allies.
John Allan was by far the most active and energetic agent of Congress in dealing with the Indians. He was born in Edinburgh and when four years of age accompanied his parents to Halifax when that city was founded by Cornwallis. At the commencement of the Revolution he lived near Fort Cumberland, on the New Brunswick side of the isthmus of Chignecto and carried on an extensive Indian trade visiting all the villages as far west as the Penobscot river. His estimate of the Indians is not particularly flattering. He says: “The Indians are generally actuated according to the importance or influence any one has who lives among them. They are credulous to a degree, will listen to every report, and generally believe it and think everything true that is told them.”
We shall presently see that Allan was able to make good use of his knowledge of the weaknesses of Indian nature. He was appointed superintendent of the Eastern Indians in 1777 by the Massachusetts Congress, with the military rank of Colonel. He was the most persevering and troublesome antagonist the British had in Eastern New England. Had it not been for his exertions it is probable the Americans would have lost their outpost at Machias, and it is possible that the English would then have held the country as far west as the River Kennebeck.