Unyielding course of the parent Government—Efforts of the Earl of Chatham unavailing—Address to the Crown from New-York—Leslie's Expedition to Salem—Affair of Lexington—Unwise movements of Tryon County loyalists—Reaction—Public meetings—The Sammons family—Interference of the Johnsons—Quarrel at Caughnawaga—Spirited indications at Cherry Valley—Counteracting-efforts of the Johnsons among their retainers—Intrigues with the Indians—Massachusetts attempts the same—Correspondence with the Stockbridge Indians—Letter to Mr. Kirkland—His removal by Guy Johnson—Neutrality of the Oneidas—Intercepted despatch from Brant to the Oneidas—Apprehensions of Guy Johnson—Correspondence—Farther precautions of the Committees—Reverence for the Laws—Letter of Guy Johnson to the Committees of Albany and Schenectady—Substance of the reply.
The parent government did not relax its coercive measures, notwithstanding the efforts of the Earl of Chatham, now venerable for his years, who, after a long retirement, returned once more into public life, to interpose his eloquence and the influence of his great name in behalf of the Colonies. His lordship's address to the King for the removal of the troops from Boston, was rejected by a large majority. His conciliatory bill was also rejected. On the 26th of January, Messrs. Bolland, Franklin, and Lee, the Committee from the Colonies, charged with presenting the petition of the Continental Congress for a redress of grievances, brought the subject before the House of Commons, and after an angry debate they refused to receive it by a decisive vote. Meantime bills were passed, by large majorities, restraining all the thirteen Colonies, excepting only New-York, Delaware, and North Carolina, from the prosecution of any foreign commerce other than with Great Britain and her dependencies. The Eastern States were likewise excluded from the fisheries of Newfoundland. But notwithstanding that, from motives of policy, New-York had been thus excepted from the restraining law, its local legislature was at the same time engaged in preparing a memorial to the Crown for a redress of grievances—a fact which the ministers soon learned, and not without mortification. The New-York address was a strong denunciation of the measures of the Government toward the Colonies, and an energetic appeal for redress. "We feel," said they, "the most ardent desire to promote a cordial reconciliation with the parent state, which can be rendered permanent and solid only by ascertaining the line of Parliamentary authority and American freedom, on just, equitable, and constitutional grounds. . . . From the year 1683 till the close of the late war, they had enjoyed a legislature consisting of three distinct branches, a Governor, Council, and general Assembly; under which political frame the representatives had uniformly exercised the right of their own civil government, and the administration of justice in the Colony. It is, therefore, with inexpressible grief that we have of late years seen measures adopted by the British Parliament, subversive of that constitution under which the good people of this Colony have always enjoyed the same rights and privileges, so highly and deservedly prized by their fellow-subjects of Great Britain." Adverting to the essential privilege of trial by a jury of the vicinage, they "view with horror the construction of the statute of the 35th of Henry the VIII. as held up by the joint address of both houses of Parliament in 1769, advising his Majesty to send for persons guilty of treasons and misprisions of treasons, in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, in order to be tried in England;" and they "are equally alarmed at the late acts, empowering his Majesty to send persons guilty of offences in one colony, to be tried in another or within the realm of England." They complain of the act of 7th of George the III. requiring the legislature of this Colony to make provision for the expense of the troops quartered among them; of the act suspending their legislative powers till they should have complied; and of the Quebec act; considering themselves as interested in whatever may affect their sister Colonies; they cannot help feeling for the distresses of their brethren in Massachusetts, from the operation of the several acts of Parliament passed relative to that province, and earnestly remonstrating in their behalf. "We claim," said they, "but a restoration of those rights which we enjoyed by general consent before the close of the last war; we desire no more than a continuation of that ancient government to which we are entitled by the principles of the British constitution, and by which alone can be secured to us the rights of Englishmen." The address was presented to the House of Commons by Mr. Burke, but was never called up. [FN]
[FN] Holmes's Annals.
A new Provincial Congress was assembled in Massachusetts in February, which, anticipating that the parent Government was preparing to strike the first blow at that Colony, adopted farther means of precaution and defence—but with great wisdom avoiding any thing like an overt act of resistance. Hostilities had well nigh been commenced on the 26th of February, between Salem and Danvers, by the opposition of Colonel Timothy Pickering and others, to Colonel Leslie, who had been sent to Salem by General Gage, to seize some military stores, which he had been informed were collecting at the former place. The interposition of Mr. Barnard, the minister of Salem, prevented the effusion of blood, and Leslie returned to Boston from a bootless errand.
The ill-starred expedition, by the direction of General Gage, to Concord, and the battle of Lexington on the 19th of April, gave the signal of a general rush to arms throughout most of the Colonies. True, it was not admitted to be a formal commencement of hostilities, and the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts despatched an account of that affair to Great Britain, with depositions, establishing the fact indisputably, that both at Concord and Lexington the firing had been commenced by the King's troops—Major Pitcairn himself discharging the first shot, at the former place. But although this message was accompanied by an address to the people of Great Britain with continued professions of loyalty, yet those professions were sent, hand in hand, with a declaration that they would "not tamely submit to the persecution and tyranny" of the existing ministry, and with an appeal to heaven for the justice of a cause in which they were determined to die or conquer. It was very evident, therefore, that reconciliation was out of the question, and that a trial of arms was near at hand. Of course the exasperation of the public mind was now at its height, and those who had not taken sides could no longer stand neutral.
It was at this moment, just as the Continental Congress was about to reassemble, and just as the exciting intelligence was received from Boston, that, most unwisely for themselves, the influential loyalists of Tryon County undertook to make a demonstration against the proceedings of the Congress of the preceding Autumn. A declaration in opposition to those proceedings was drawn up, and advantage taken of the gathering of the people at a Court holden in Johnstown, to obtain signatures. The discussions ran high upon the subject, but the movers in the affair succeeded in obtaining the names of a majority of the Grand Jurors, and the greater portion of the magistracy of the County.
The Whigs in attendance at the Court were indignant at this procedure, and on returning to their respective homes, communicated their feelings to those of their neighbors who had embraced kindred principles. Public meetings were called, and committees appointed in every district, and sub-committees in almost every hamlet in the County.[FN-1] The first of these public meetings was held at the house of John Veeder in Caughnawaga. It was attended by about three hundred people, who assembled, unarmed, for the purpose of deliberation, and also to erect a liberty-pole—the most hateful object of that day in the eyes of the loyalists. Among the leaders of the Whigs on that occasion, were Sampson Sammons, an opulent farmer residing in the neighbourhood, and two of his sons, Jacob and Frederick. Before they had accomplished their purpose of raising the emblem of rebellion, the proceedings were interrupted by the arrival of Sir John Johnson, accompanied by his brothers-in-law, Colonels Claus and Guy Johnson, together with Colonel John Butler, and a large number of their retainers, armed with swords and pistols. Guy Johnson mounted a high stoop and harangued the people at length, and with great vehemence. He dwelt upon the strength and power of the King, and attempted to show the folly of opposing his officers or revolting against the authority of his crown. A single ship, he said, would be sufficient to capture all the navy which could be set afloat by the Colonies; while on the frontiers, the Indians were under his Majesty's control, and his arms were sustained by a chain of fortified posts, extending from the Gulf of the St. Lawrence to the Mississippi. He was very virulent in his language toward the disaffected, causing their blood to boil with indignation. But they were unarmed, and for the most part unprepared, if not indisposed, to proceed to any act of violence. The orator at length became so abusive, that Jacob Sammons, no longer able to restrain himself, imprudently interrupted his discourse by pronouncing him a liar and a villain. Johnson thereupon seized Sammons by the throat, and called him a d—d villain in return. A scuffle ensued between them, during which Sammons was struck down with a loaded whip. On recovering from the momentary stupor of the blow, Sammons found one of Johnson's servants sitting astride of his body. A well-directed blow relieved him of that incumbrance, and, springing upon his feet, he threw off his coat and prepared for fight. Two pistols were immediately presented to his breast, but not discharged, as Sammons was again knocked down by the clubs of the loyalists, and severely beaten. On recovering his feet once more, he perceived that his Whig friends had all decamped, with the exception of the families of the Fondas, Veeders, and Visschers.[FN-2] The loyalists also drew off, and Jacob Sammons returned to his father's house, bearing upon his body the first scars of the Revolutionary contest in the County of Tryon.
[FN-1] The County of Tryon then included all the Colonial settlements West and South-west of Schenectady. It was taken from Albany County in 1772, and named in honour of William Tryon, then Governor of the Province. In 1784 the name was changed to Montgomery. When formed, it embraced all that part of the State lying West of a line running North and South, nearly through the centre of the present County of Schoharie. It was divided into five districts, which were again subdivided into smaller districts or precincts. The first, beginning at the East, was the Mohawk district, embracing Fort Hunter, Caughnawaga, Johnstown, and Kingsborough. Canajoharie district, embracing the present town of that name, with all the country South, including Cherry Valley and Harpersfield, Palatine district North of the river, and including the country known by the same name, with Stone Arabia, &c., and German Flats and Kingsland Districts, being then the most Western settlements, and the former now known by the same name. The county buildings were at Johnstown, where, as before mentioned, was the residence of Sir William Johnson.—Campbell's Annals.