The
Loyalists
A Valuable
Paper by James Hannay
In The New England Magazine
Facts Never
Before Laid Before the Public
(New England Magazine)
From: The Saint John Daily Sun
published at Saint John, NB on Thursday morning, April 30th 1891
(This
article by Dr James Hannay appeared on the front page of The Saint John Daily Sun
published at Saint John, NB on Thursday morning, April 30th 1891
and is transcribed from the microfilmed copy thereof in the Queens University
Library in Kingston, Ontario. An original copy of this newspaper is at the NB
Museum, Douglas Ave, Saint John, NB
and microfilms thereof are available, inter alia, at the St John Free Public
Library in St John, NB
and National Archives of Canada in Ottawa.
The microfilms in St John and Ottawa are available through interlibrary
loan.)
Nearly
all the histories of the great revolutionary contest which ended in the
independence of the thirteen colonies are singularly deficient in their
information regarding the men who took the side of the crown during the war.
Yet the share of these me in the revolutionary struggle and their subsequent
banishment, are matters of deep interest, and only because of their influence
on the character of the contest, but also in consequence of the results which have
flowed from the proceedings taken against them by the successful party. The
expulsion of the Acadians has been a subject both of the poet and the
historian; but the banishment of the loyalists has passed with but scant
notice, and has evoked very little sympathy. Yet the exiled Acadians were
merely a band of ignorant peasants, whose sole claim to attention was on the
score of our common humanity, while the exiles loyalists included in their
ranks some of the brightest and ablest minds in the thirteen colonies.
Writers
on the Revolution frequently commit the serious error of leading their readers
to believe that the rising against British authority was universal, or nearly
so. That this is a mistake could be easily established if that subject formed
the theme of this article; but it is sufficient to say, for the present, that
the people of the colonies, at the time of the imposition of obnoxious duties
by the British government were divided into three parties. One of these
parties, a minority, but a strong minority, was determined to sever the
connection between the colonies and Great Britain. Another party, a
minority smaller in numbers but influential from the wealth and ability of its
members, was equally determined that the connection should be maintained; while
the majority of the whole people stood in an attitude of expectancy, without
any very definite views either one way or the other. In the course of time, the
minority in favour of separation obtained the ascendancy; but we have the
testimony of Franklin, John Adams and even of Washington himself, that the
final steps towards separation from the mother country were taken with the
greatest reluctance, and were not originally contemplated at all by the leaders
of the revolution.
In
New England the loyalists were never so numerous as in New York and some of the other colonies, but
this arose mainly from the character which the contest assumed. New York city, during the
whole of the revolutionary struggle, formed a rallying point for the British
forces, and gave the loyalists a place of shelter and refuge where they could
sustain themselves against the revolutionary armies. New
England formed no such rallying point for them. The evacuation of
Boston by the British forces, which took place in 1776, resulted in more than
fourteen hundred of the inhabitants of Massachusetts being carried into a
voluntary exile by embarking for Halifax with the British army. It is estimated
that altogether some two thousand inhabitants of the Massachusetts permanently left their native
state about this time and ended their days in the British dominions. Among
these men were some of the most eminent in the colony, lawyers like Putnam and
Sewell; clergymen like Byles and Bailey, distinguished for their piety and
talents; soldiers who had given good service to the crown in the French wars,
and who afterwards served against their own countrymen in the revolutionary
contest. Among them were representatives of some of the oldest blood in New England, the Winslow, the Tilleys, and others,
descendants of the men who came over in the Mayflower. The loyalists included
in their ranks Sir William Pepperell whose title was won by his father as a
reward for the greatest martial achievement in the annals of the New England
colonies, the capture of Louisburg in 1745. During the war many corps of
loyalists were formed in support of the British arms. It is estimated by
Sabine, who has made the subject a special study, that at least twenty thousand
loyalists entered the service of the crown between 1775 and 1783. New England furnished a number of regiments, but none of
any great efficiency. Among these may be mentioned the Loyal New Englanders who
were chiefly recruited in Rhode Island, Wentworth’s Volunteers and other corps,
some of which were more distinguished for their marauding disposition than for
any real ability which they displayed on the field of battle.
The
character of the contest which separated Great Britain from her colonies
furnishes a singular illustration of the manner in which families were broken
up by the war. Benjamin Franklin was, perhaps, the most prominent and bold of
all those who assisted to bring about separation, while his son, William
Franklin, governor of New Jersey,
was a loyalist. It is quite possible that if William Franklin had not held an
official position, he might have gone with his father, and perhaps this
consideration will explain who so many of the officials of the government
became loyalists and fought on the British side during the war. They naturally
took the side of authority, and regarded themselves as justified in standing
for the ancient order of things and resisting change. Many who would have stood
neutral, or who might have become adherents of the revolutionary party, were
driven late as attitude of hostility to the revolutionary movement by the
violence of the Whig mobs, which did many deeds that are by no means worthy of
commendation, and which injured the cause for which the father of the
revolution fought, in the eyes of right-thinking men.
It
is not the purpose of this article to dwell on the revolutionary struggle or
the services of the loyalist to the crown in that contest. No one, however, who
reads the history of that time carefully, can fail to perceive that a serious
mistake was made during the war, and at its close, in the treatment of those
who differed in opinion from the majority. While the war lasted, very severe
measures were taken against those who refused to adhere to the cause of the
congress of the united colonies; and after the war ended, the bitterness which
had existed was intensified by continuing upon the statute book, acts of
confiscation and banishment against the loyalists, which compelled them to
leave their homes and country behind them, and seek shelter in the territory remaining
under the British flag.
It
was in this way that Nova Scotia which now
forms the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, received
the major part of its population. It was in the same manner that western Canada came into prominence as a British colony;
and even the province
of Quebec was inhabited
to no small extent to the loyalists for additions to its population, whose
value was not so much to be estimated in numbers as in the character of the men
who composed it. That what is now the Dominion of Canada was virtually created
by the revengeful feelings which prompted the legislatures of the several
states of the union to continue the laws which prevented the return of the
loyalists to their own homes after the war was ended. The nature of the laws
that were passed against the loyalists can be best ascertained by one or two
illustration. In Rhode Island,
death and confiscation of estate were the penalties provided for any person who
communicated with the British ministry or its agents, or who offered supplies
to the British forces and to the armed ships of the king. The offences of
enlisting or procuring others to enlist, in the royal army or navy, or of
piloting or assisting naval vessels, were punished with loss of estate, or of
personal liberty not exceeding three years. To speak or write or act against
doings of congress or of the assembly of Connecticut
were punishable by disqualification for office and imprisonment. In Massachusetts a person
suspected of enmity to the whig cause could be arrested under warrant and
banished, unless he would swear fealty to the friends of liberty; and the
selectmen of towns could prefer charges of political treachery in town meeting.
The individual thus accused, if convicted by a jury, could be sent into the enemy’s
jurisdiction. In Massachusetts, also, three hundred and eight persons were
designated by name, occupation, and residence as denounced and having fled
their home, the penalty for their return being imprisonment and transport to a
place possessed by the British and for a second voluntary return, without
leave, death, without benefit of clergy. In New Hampshire similar acts were passed. Thus
it will be seen that in a general way the forfeiture of estate, confiscation of
property, loss of personal liberty and in some cases, death, were the penalties
to which loyalists were subjected for the adherence to a cause which a few
years before had been upheld by all the people of the thirteen colonies.
In
the treaty of peace which was passed between the British government and the United States, by which the Independence of the latter was acknowledged,
three articles were inserted relating to the loyalist. First, it was agreed
that the creditors of either side should meet with no lawful impediments for
the recovery of all bona fide debts. It was also agreed that congress should
earnestly recommend the legislatures of the respective states to provide
compensation for all estates that had been confiscated belonging to British
subjects, and all the estates of those person residing in territories in
possession of his majesty’s armies who have not borne arms against the United
States; and that all other persons should have free liberty to go to any part
of the thirteen united states and there reside for twelve months, unmolested in
their endeavours to obtain restitution of such of their estates and properties
as might have been confiscated. Congress was also to recommend that the states
have a reconsideration and revision of all acts or laws regulating this matter,
and that the estates, rights and properties of such persons should be restored
to them, they refunding to any persons who might have gained possession if a
bona fide price which had been paid for the purchase of the properties in
question. It was also agreed that there should be neither confiscations nor any
prosecutions commenced as against any person by reason that the part he had
taken in the war.
Congress
carried out its agreement and passed a resolution recommending the states conform
to the terms of the treaty. But this recommendation was utterly disregarded,
and some of the loyalists who ventured into the United States to claim restitution
of their estates were imprisoned and banished. The states had the power in
their own hands and they used it without regard to the terms of the treaty of
peace or to the wishes of congress.
The
failure of the treaty to provide effectually for the safety of the loyalists
rendered it necessary for the British government to make arrangements for their
removal from the independent colonies. The violence of the feelings which
existed in reference to them may be judged from the correspondence of Sir Guy
Carleton in the early part of 1785. That general, who held command in New York at the close of the war, in a letter written to
Elias Boardinet of New Jersey,
says:
“The
violence of the Americans which broke out soon after the cessation of
hostilities increased the number of their countrymen who looked to me for
escape from threatened destruction; but these terrors have of late been so
considerably augmented, that almost all within these lines conceive the safety
both of their property and of their lives to depend upon their being removed by
me, which renders it impossible to say when the evacuation will be completed.
The daily Gazette and publications furnish repeated proofs not only of a
disregard to the articles of peace, but of barbarous menaces from committees
formed at various towns, and even at Philadelphia,
which the congress has chosen for their seat.”
Some
idea of the treatment which the loyalists were likely to experience in New
York, notwithstanding the treaty, the moment British troops were withdrawn, can
be gathered from two letters, both written on the 23rd of October, 1783, the
first from a gentleman in Newburg to a friend in Boston and a second from a
gentleman in Fishkill to another in New Jersey. The first letter says:
“The
British are leaving New York
every day. Last week there came one of the damned refuges from New York to a place called
Walkill, in order to tarry with his parents where he was taken into custody
immediately. His head and eyebrows were shaved, he was then tarred and
feathered and a huge yoke put on his neck and cow bell on it. Upon his head a
very high cap of feathers was set will plumed with soft tar, and a sheet of
paper in front with a man drawn with two faces, representing Arnold and the
devil’s imps and on the back of it a card with the refugee or tory driving her
off.”
The
other letter says:
“By
our last accounts from New York,
we understand that the tories are in great perplexity and fear of the
associations which are formed and are daily forming by the whigs. They could
expect nothing but rough handling the moment the citizens were assembled. Such
of the old tory party who remain will be the first objects of the popular rage,
and the apostates who signed the association in 1775 and afterwards joined the
British with the traitors and other supporters who have gone into New York in the course
of the war will be notice in their order. Such, as I am informed, is the
intention of the other citizens and that if it is necessary that they will be
supported by their friends from the country; so that if any considerable number
of the obnoxious characters continues in the city after the British give it up
there will be great confusion for awhile, but no more than all things
considered might be expected.”
The
result of these severe measures against the loyalists was an emigration
compared to which the exile of the Acadians appears but a very small affair. It
is estimated by some authorities that as many as one hundred thousand persons
were driven out of the thirteen colonies at the close of the revolutionary
contest; and it is at all events certain that between thirty-five and forty
thousand loyalists from the old colonies settled in Nova
Scotia, which then had its boundary at the St
Croix. The British government had undertaken to provide for those
of its subjects who adhered to the cause of the crown during the war, not only
be recompensing them for the losses they had suffered, but also by making some
provision for their immediate needs. Sir Guy Carleton was the chief
instrument in this great exodus of
loyalists to Nova Scotia, and the arrangement he made for their settlement, in
connection with Governor Paar of that province, were such that the amount of
suffering which the loyalists had to endure was lessened as much as possible.
It was arranged that the loyalists leaving the thirteen colonies should be
provided with proper vessels to carry them and their horses and cattle as near
as possible to the place appointed in Nova
Scotia where they were to settle. Besides provisions
for the voyage, they were allowed up to a year’s provisions in their new home,
or money to enable them to purchase the same. They were also to have an
allowance of warm clothing in proportion to the wants of each family, and an
allowance of medicines. They were to be granted pairs of millstones, and
ironwork for grist mills and other necessary articles for saw mills. They were
to receive a quantity of nails, spikes, hoes, axes, spades, shovels, plowshares
and such other farming utensils as appeared necessary, and also a proportion of
window glass. They were to be provided with grants of land free from disputed
titles and conveniently situated, so as to give from three hundred to six
hundred acres to each family. It was also arranged that two thousand acres in
every township were to be given for support of a clergyman, and one thousand
acres for the support of a school, and that these lands should be inalienable
forever.
They
were also to receive a sufficient number of muskets and cannon, and a proper
quantity of powder and ball for their use. These terms, which were generally
agreed upon, liberal as they were considerably extended; for the loyalists who
came to Nova Scotia were allowed not only full provisions for the first year,
two thirds provisions for the second, and one third for the third year. Thus
they started with all the advantages possible in their new homes and subject
only to such necessary deprivations and hardships as were inseparable from the
settlement of a new and wild country.
The
agents appointed by the loyalists to make arrangement for the settlement of
Nova Scotia were, Lieutenant Colonel Benjamin Thompson of Massachusetts who is
better known as Count Rumford; Lieutenant Colonel Edward Winslow of
Massachusetts was one of those who left Boston at the time of the evacuation in
1776; Major Joshua Upham of Brookfield, Mass., a graduate of Harvard University
in 1763; the Rev John Sayre, who, when the war commenced, was rector of Trinity
church in Fairfield, CT; Amos Botsford of Newtown, Ct, who was a graduate of
Yale in 1763; and James Peters of New York. It is remarkable that of the seven
agents thus chosen to settle the loyalists in Nova Scotia,
six were natives of New England.
The
emigration of loyalists to Nova Scotia began
as early as 1782, three hundred having arrived at Annapolis Royal in September
of that year from New York.
At the same time Sir Guy Carleton satisfied Governor Ma_ of Nova
Scotia that above six hundred refugees were to embark at New York for Nova
Scotia that autumn, and a much larger number in the
spring. The most arrivals in Nova Scotia were
more of the unfortunate Carolina loyalists, who
fled from Charleston
at its evacuation. Says the governor in a dispatch of December 7th
1782, from Halifax to the Right Hon Thomas
Johnston, the minister in England:
“I have the honor to inform you that with the
arrival here of the heavy contingent from Charleston in North Carolina, some
five hundred refugees, men women and children in consequence of directions from
Sir Guy Carleton to Lieutenant Governor Leslie who has sent them to the care of
Major General Patterson, commander of the troops in this province with whom I
have concurred as far as is my power to afford them a reception.”
In
January 1783 the governor notified the minister of future arrivals but it was
in the spring of 1783 that the real emigration commenced. In April of that year
a fleet of twenty vessels left New York for
the river St John
having on board three thousand loyalists, men women and children. They landed
at that place on the 14th of May and the day of their arrival has
been held sacred to their memory by their descendants. St John at that time contained no more than a
few dozen inhabitants who were engaged in fishing and burning lime. The site of
what is now a fine city of fifty thousand inhabitants was then a rude mass of
rock covered for the most part with scrubby pine and cedar. Te whole number of
inhabitants in what is now called the province of New Brunswick did not at that
time exceed one thousand of whom five hundred resided on the river at
Maugerville, Burton and Gagetown, most of these people being settlers who had
reached the river St John from Massachusetts in 1763, long before the beginning
of the revolutionary troubles.
The
season that year was late and when the loyalists landed, the ground was covered
with snow. For a time they lived in tents and huts hastily erected, but as
speedily as possible arrangements were made for the erection of log houses to
give them shelter. The fall fleet with twelve hundred more loyalists arrived in
the month of October, while other came in single vessels, so that it is
estimated that the number who wintered on the site of the city of St John in 1783-84 was at
least five thousand. Those people were provided with the necessary provisions
and with boards and shingles for the roofing of their log houses and with such
other materials and implements as their situation demanded. Although poor in
the world’s goods, the loyalists who came to St John were rich in intellect and in
experience. They lost no time in lamenting over their forlorn condition, but
addressed themselves immediately to the work of making a proper provision for
their families. The city of St John
was laid out, and the different lots comprising it were distributed among the
arriving loyalists. Many who remained at St
John during that winter were afterwards drafted to
other parts of the province where they received lots for farms. St John, in
fact, for a year or tow was a sort of distributing point for the loyalists; and
while its population was large during the period of immigration, it soon fell
to a low point as the immigrants scattered themselves all over the country for
the purpose of making a living. Smaller loyalist settlements were formed and
founded at Annapolis, Shelbourne, and other
districts in Nova Scotia; but the St John settlement in
consequence of the great fertility of the land on the banks of that river and
the abundance of scope for immigrants, was always the most important and early
assumed a prominence. This no doubt was the reason why an agitation about this
time commenced for the division of the province
of Nova Scotia into two parts; in 1784
this was effected by the creation of the province
of New Brunswick leaving in Nova Scotia only the
peninsula which is bounded on the north of the Misseguash river. The British
government expended vast sums in settling the loyalists in Nova Scotia and it pensioned a large number
of them who had served in the war. It also gave by way of recompense to those
who had lost the property the sum of £3,292,455
sterling which may well be described as an unparalleled instance of generosity
on the part of a nation which had already expended one hundred and eighty
millions in carrying on a fruitless contest.
Saint John, which is pre-eminently the Loyalist city, is a place
of great interest to those who would study the story of the loyalists. The old
graveyard which lies in he very heart of the city and contains some four acres
of land, is the resting place of many thousands of them, some of whom were men
of great eminence in their day in the old colonies. Among the most striking of
the monuments which have been erected to the loyalists in that place of the
dead is the Putnam tomb which the inscription tells us is sacred to the memory
of the Hon James Putnam who was appointed a member of His Majesty’s Council and
a Judge of the Supreme court in the organization of the government of New
Brunswick at the original foundation in 1784. We are further told by the
inscriptions that he had for many years before the war which terminated in the
independence of the United States
was an eminent barrister and attorney at law and that he was the last attorney
general under His Majesty in the late province of Massachusetts
Bay. Judge Putnam died on the 23rd of
October 1789 aged sixty nine years. Putnam was regarded as the greatest lawyer
of his day in Massachusetts and it was in his
office that John Adams, the future president of the United States, studied law, being
at the same time resident in his family. Putnam was of the same family as General
Isaac Putnam “as a man who possessed great acuteness of mind, who had a very
extensive and successful practice, and who was eminent in his profession.”
The
same vault contains the remains of Jonathan Sewall, who died in 1796. Sewall
also was attorney general of Massachusetts, a
graduate of Harvard
University of 1748, and a
close friend of John Adams. Sewall and Adams frequently lived together and
often slept in the same chamber and sometimes in the same bed. It was in 1767
that Sewall was appointed Attorney General and of him Adams remarks that his
influence with Judges and Juries was as great as was consistent with an
impartial administration of justice, that he was a gentleman and a scholar,
that he possessed a lively wit, a brilliant imagination, a great solidity of
reasoning, and an insinuating eloquence. Sewall was an addresser of Hutchinson in 1774 and in September of that year his
elegant house at Cambridge
was attacked by a mob and much injured. His name appears among the proscribed
and banished, and among those whose estates were confiscated. Sewall attempted
to dissuade John Adams from attending the first Continental Congress, and it
was in reply to his arguments as they walked on the great hill at Portland that
Adams used the memorable words, “The die is now cast; I have now passed the
Rubicon; sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish, with my country is my
unalterable determination.” They parted and met not more until 1788, long after
the great contest had closed. Sewall’s wife was Esther, a daughter of Edmund
Quincy, and a sister of the wife of John Hancock. His son, Jonathan Sewall rose
to distinction and became chief justice of Lower Canada.
The Putnam tomb therefore contains the remains of two men who occupied the most
distinguished positions in the Massachusetts
colony.
Another
family that is represented in the old graveyard is that of Lillies, well known
throughout Massachusetts.
Jonathan Lillies, whose wife and son are buried here, was a native of Springfield, Mass.
and a graduate of Harvard of 1763. He was a member of the general committee of Massachusetts in 1768,
and one of the seventeen rescinders. He was proscribed under the act of 1778.
He rose to be chief justice of New Brunswick,
and died at Fredericton
in 1822 aged eighty years. His wife was a daughter of the Hon John Worthington
of Springfield, Mass.
At
another place in this graveyard a stone records the fact hat underneath it lies
interred the bodies of Colonel Chaloner who was High Sheriff of Newport in the
British colony of Rhode Island and afterwards
one of His Majesty’s justices of the peace for Kings County, NB
and of his wife Ann Chaloner. Here also lies interred Robert Parker a Massachusetts loyalist who became a storekeeper of the province of New Brunswick
and died at St John
at an advanced age. Two of his sons became Judges of the Supreme Court of the
province. The family of Putnam so well known in the annals of Massachusetts also finds a representative to
this burying ground. The Pelham family of New Brunswick can trace their descent back
to the Rev John Pelham, the first Methodist of Massachusetts. Here also lies
Thatcher Sears of Connecticut, who died in St John in 1819, aged sixty seven. Thatcher
Sears was descended from the Rev Peter Thatcher of Boston, and was the second son of Nathanial
Sears of Norwich, CT. The noted Whig, King Sears, as he was called, of New York, was his
father’s brother. In early life Thatcher Sears was mainly employed in the
Mohawk country, under the patronage of Sir John Johnston, in the purchase of
furs. His pecuniary affairs were injured with the burning of Norwich, and were otherwise deranged in
consequences of his adherence to the fortunes of the crown. He was finally
forced to leave home when he sought refuge with the royal army in New York. In 1783 he was
one of the emigrants that went to St
John and he received the grant of a lot of land in King street which
is still owned by his descendants. “With sorrowful and heavy heart” he said “I
commenced the task of cutting down and hewing the timber for the building which
was to be shelter and abode of myself and my family in our exile in the
wilderness.” Thatcher Sears enjoyed the distinction of being the only man in
his family who was a loyalist. His descendants still reside in St John. Here also is the
tomb of David Waterbury who was born in Stamford,
CT in 1768 and who died in St John in 1813. The name of Garrison, so
well known in Massachusetts,
is also represented here. A stone records the death of the death of Nathan
Garrison, who, as we are told, departed this life suddenly, February 18, 1817,
in the 39th year of his age. Nathan Garrison was the brother of
Abijah Garrison, the father of William Lloyd Garrison, the great anti-slavery
apostle. Abijah Garrison was born in New
Brunswick and probably died there but thee is no
stone to mark his grave.
The
old graveyard was closed in 1848, and since then many of the monuments erected
to the loyalists have disappeared. Others have been removed to the rural
cemetery which is situated almost two miles from the city. Among those who were
originally buried in the Old Burying Ground and afterwards removed were the Hon
William Howe and his family, Isaiah Chandler and Amos Botsford. The Hon William
Howe was a resident of Newburyport, MA which he left in 1775 removing to St John where he was engaged in business with
James Newcombe and James White. When Col John Allan made his raid on the St
John river during the revolutionary war, Howe was taken prisoner but escaped
and made his way to Halifax and gave the royal
forces the warning that led to troops being sent to St John. The house which he erected is still
standing in that part of the city of St John
formerly known as Portland.
It is situated at the corner of Simonds and Main
streets and was erected prior to the close of the war about the year 1777. It
is a typical example of the old style of mansion of that day, the rooms being
very large, and the general arrangements exceedingly comfortable. The frame and
other materials probably came from New England, the frame being of oak which is
not found in abundance in New
Brunswick. The clapboards are made of a style not
often seen at the present day, some of them being thirty five or forty feet
long. They are of white pine and appear to have been cut out of the log full
length, by hand, with a whip-saw after which they have been planed and had a
hand rub on the edge. Although they have been more than a century exposed to
the weather, the material is so excellent that they are just as good as the day
they were put on the house. This house was the envy of every inhabitant in the
early days of the province.
The
eldest daughter of the Hon William Howe was married to Ward Chipman, a Massachusetts loyalist,
and a graduate of Harvard in 1770. Chipman left Boston
at the evacuation of 1776, and went to Halifax,
but afterwards returned to New York
where he served with the King’s troops. He rose to distinction in New Brunswick and was a recorder of the City of St John, solicitor general
and afterwards judge of the supreme court. Ward Chipman’s son Ward was also a
man of distinction in New Brunswick,
and became chief justice. He was likewise a graduate of Harvard of the year
1805. Another daughter of the Hon William Howe married Thomas Peters Murray,
the son of John Murray of Redland,
Massachusetts. Col Murray, whose
portrait is still preserved in St John at the
residence of J Douglas Hazen, was a colonel of the Massachusetts militia. Before the war, in
1774, he was appointed a mandamus councilor. Owing to his political principles
he was compelled to abandon his house and fly to Boston
and he went with the royal army to Halifax
in 1776. In 1778 he was proscribed and banished and the following year lost his
estates under the confiscation act. These estates were valued at £23,387 sterling. As an indemnity Col Murray was
allowed a pension of £200 per annum from the British government. The portrait of Col Murray
is by Copley and represents him as sitting in the full dress of a gentleman of
the day. There is a hole in the wig and the tradition in the family is that a
party who sought the colonel at his house, vexed because he had eluded them,
vowed they would leave their mark behind them, and accordingly pierced the
canvas with a bayonet.
Amos
Botsford, a loyalist whose body at one time lay in the Old Burying Ground,
belonged to Newtown, CT and was a graduate of Yale of 1763. He
came to New Brunswick
after the war, became a member of the assembly and speaker. His son, the Hon
William Botsford became of judge of the supreme court. James Chandler, who was
also buried here, was a native of New
Haven, CT and a
barrister at law. He was a member of the general assembly in 1773. His property
in and near New Haven,
which he valued at £30,000 sterling, was confiscated in March 1778. He perished
while crossing the Bay of Fundy in a snowstorm, the vessel being wrecked on
Musquash Point, about nine miles from the City of St John. With him also perished his daughter
Elizabeth who was the widow of Major Alexander Grant, and William Chandler, his
son.
These
details of the New England loyalists who went to New
Brunswick after the war will sufficiently show the intimate
relations that existed between the old colonies of Massachusetts
Bay, Rhode Island and Connecticut and the new
provinces which were founded by the loyalists. In many cases, members of the
same family took different sides in the contest and were separated from each
other forever. The heart breakings which resulted from these partings must be
left to the imagination of the reader who can scarcely form a conception of the
gulf which separated the men who went to Nova
Scotia from those who were left behind in the
thirteen colonies. Frequently, ties of kinship were forgotten, the animosities
of the contest, and brethren who parted from each other as enemies in the war
never afterward became reconciled. Whatever political animosities now exist
between the people of Canada
and the United States
may be traced back to the date of the loyalist emigration.
The
market slip bears the same relation to the loyalists of St John that Plymouth Rock does to the
pilgrim fathers. It was on the spot seen in the foreground of the pictures
given with this paper that the exiled loyalists landed on the 18th of May,
1783, to the number of upwards of three thousand. The day claimed to be Sunday,
and of that period everything about the site of Saint John wore the most forbidding aspect.
There are few cities which have been less favored by nature in the matter of
site than the city of St John;
and when the loyalists saw their future home many of them lost heart and sighed
for the land they had left behind them. Tents were erected near the landing
place; and in on of them, Ann, the daughter of Thatcher Sears of CT, was born
shortly after the landing, she being the first child of loyalist parents born
in that city. The whole region about the landing place of the loyalists is full
of historical associations. Market square, of which is forms a part, was for
many years the chief business centre of the city, and contained the old city
hall, which was used for many years as a market, a court house, a council
chamber and a lock-up. It was this
building that in 1828, a boy eighteen years of age named Patrick Durgen, was
tried and found guilty of entering the dwelling of his master at night and
robbing the till of a quarter of a dollar. For this offence he was condemned to
death and executed. Such was justice as administered in New Brunswick sixty-three years ago.
The
Crookshank house is the older in Saint
John, and stands within a hundred feet of Market
square. The lot upon which it stands was drawn by James Codner, a native of New England, who was a lieutenant in the 2nd American
Regiment. He became a magistrate in St
John, was one of the first merchants of the city, and
for many years filled the office of chamberlain. The Crookshank house was
erected by a merchant named John Colville, who died in it upwards of
eighty-three years ago. His wife was the daughter of Captain George Crookshank,
a Scotchman, who sailed out of New
York during the Revolutionary war. The old house has
changed but little in its outward aspect since it was first built, and although
now sadly dilapidated, it was once the abode of luxury and wealth. It may be
taken as one of the last representatives of the better class of houses built in
St John by the
loyalists in the last century.
The
Chipman house, which stands apart at the head of Prince William Street, is another of the
old historical houses of St John.
It was built by Ward Chipman who as has already been stated, was a Massachusetts loyalist and a distinguished lawyer both in
Massachusetts and in New Brunswick. Ward Chipman, who became
judge of the supreme court in 1809 resided in this house until his death in
1824, and his son Ward Chipman, who became chief justice of the province,
occupied it until 1851 when he died. From that time it was inhabited by the
widow of the chief justice who was childless, and who lived until the 4th of
July 1876, the hundredth anniversary of American Independence. The Chipman House
was long regarded as the finest in St
John and many distinguished visitors were entertained
her from time to time. The most notable of these was the Prince of Wales, who
visited St John in 1860 and who took up his residence in the old house, which
was expressly fitted up for his reception. The original Ward Chipman was a
friend and correspondent of Benedict Arnold, who resided in St John for a number of years after the close
of the revolutionary war. The old house is now completely overshadowed by more
pretentious buildings, but it is well worthy of a visit as a relic of the past.
An
interesting reminder of Arnold’s residence in St John is an old sofa which belonged to him and formed a
portion of his household effects, which were sold at auction in 1791 at the
time of his departure from St John.
This sofa is now the property of Ward Chipman Drury, registrar of deeds for the
county of St John, and is in an excellent state of
repair, being little the worse for its century of usefulness. It is curious to
read the advertisement of the sale of General Arnold’s effects, which was held
on the 22nd of September, 1791, but John Chaloner, auctioneer. Among the
articles advertised for sale were “excellent feather beds, mahogany four poster
bedsteads, a suit of elegant cabriole chairs covered with blue damask, sofas,
and curtains to match.” There were also sold “card, tea and other tables,
looking glasses, a secretary desk and bookcase, fire-screens, and girandoles,
lustres an easy and sedan chair, an elegant set of wedgewood gift ware, two tea
table sets of Nankeen china, a variety of glassware, a terrestrial glove, a
double wheel jack and a great quantity of kitchen furniture; also a lady’s
elegant saddle or bridle.”
General
Arnold appears to have lived in a considerable degree of luxury in St John, notwithstanding
the fact that he was looked down upon by its loyal inhabitants as a double
traitor. His house was on the east side of King Street, at the corner of Canterbury, but it has
long since been swept away, and the site is now occupied by a large dry goods
store.
Carleton,
which is on the west side of the St
John harbor, contains a famous old house which was
built immediately after the landing of the loyalists. This house was erected by
the Hon Gabriel G Ludlow, a New York loyalist,
who was the first mayor of St John.
The sport upon which his house was built had been used by the French as a
garden in the ancient times when Fort La Tour was held by them, more than two
hundred and fifty years ago. The Ludlow
house has now become a mere house of tenements but it was a famous residence in
its day. In the year 1803 when Governor Carleton of New
Brunswick took his departure for England, Colonel Ludlow, as senior
councilor, was sworn in as president and commander in chief of the province. He
administered the government of the province until his death in 1808, and the
building which was formerly his residence for that reason is still known as the
old government house.
In
the North End of St John there is another old government house, which was
occupied by St Howard Douglas after the fire had consumed the government house
at Fredericton
in the year 1825. This structure is now known as the Bentley building and has
been converted into a public school.
Perhaps
the most interesting relic of the revolutionary period now in St
John is the royal coat of arms, which at one time hung on the walls
of the council chamber of the Old State House in Boston. This coat of arms was removed when
the British evacuated that city in 1776, and was taken to Halifax
and afterwards to St John, NB. It was placed in the first church
erected in St John
by the loyalists, which was Trinity, and of which the rev George Bisset was
rector. The Rev George Bisset was an Episcopal minister of Newport, RI.
He died in St John
in 1788, and his body was place in the Putnam tomb. The second rector of
Trinity church was the Rev Mather Byles, Jr, who was the last rector of Christchurch, Boston, and
who was the son of the Rev Mather Byles, also of Boston, who was the first pastor Hollis street
church. Old Trinity church in St John
was destroyed by the great fire of 1877, but the precious relic of the
revolution, the royal arms, was saved and now adorns the wall of the handsome
stone structure which has been erected in place of the consumed edifice.
One
of the most romantic spots is the province in connection with the history of
the loyalists in Kingston, which is about 20
miles from St John, on a creek which flows into the
St John river. Kingston
was settled by a party of loyalists who came from Connecticut,
the majority of them being passengers on the Union, Transport, which arrived in
St John in the
spring of 1783. Among the names of the Kingston
loyalists were Lyon, Pickett, Hendrickson, Hait, Raymond, Chick, Bates and
Scribner, all New England names. The old
church, which they erected shortly after they formed their settlement, is still
standing, and is in an excellent state of preservation. The first clergymen was
the Rev James Scovil, of Waterbury, CT. Mr Scovil continued to be rector of
Kingston until the year 1809, when he was succeeded by his son, the Rev Elias
Scovil, who was rector of the church until his death in the year 1841. About
Kingston are gathered some of the most striking traditions of the early times
of the loyalists, and no place in the province is better worthy of a visit by
those who are looking for the trace of the history of this interesting period.
The Raymond house is one of the oldest houses in Kingston,
having been erected in 1787 by the late Silas Raymond, who came from Norwalk, CT, and whose
ancestors were among the earliest settlers of New England, having come to Portsmouth, NH
in 1630.
Gagetown,
which is on the River St John about fifty miles from St John, is also a spot of
great interest in connection with the early history of the loyalists. Gagetown
was settled prior to the loyalist immigration by a number of families from Massachusetts, most of
them from Rowley, who arrived there in 1763. These people, for the most part,
sympathized with their brethren in the old colonies in the struggle with the
British government, but they were overcome and when the loyalists came in 1783
they were, to some extent, crowded out by the new comers. Gagetown is a
beautiful spot, having all the picturesque features of river and valley scenery
which delight the eye, but it has rather fallen into decay of late years, owing
to the business formerly done on the river having been largely transferred to
the railways. Still it is well worthy of the attention of the lover of the
picturesque, and nothing can be more charming than the air of calm and quiet.
There are many relics of the loyalists to be found at Gagetown, among other an
old chair, a table, and a pair of andirons, now in the possession of JR Currey.
The chair belonged to Molly Brown, who in the year 1765 married Zebulon Estey,
and soon afterwards came to New
Brunswick, where her descendants are now very
numerous. The andirons are typical of a time when the business of warming
houses was conducted in a very different manner from that which prevails at the
present day.
The
province of New Brunswick is full of relics of the ante-revolutionary period,
in the shape of old bibles, spinning wheels, antique furniture, household
utensils and other articles of domestic use which have been peserved to the
present day. There is hadly an ancient house in the province but contains one
or more of these reminders of the past age, and of a state of things which has
long since ceased to be.
The
political effects of the emigration of the loyalists have been already referred
to. No one who studies the history of that age can fail to be convinced that
the punishment of the loyalists has as its dual result the severance of the North
American continent into two nations. The people who inhabited Nova
Scotia prior to the revolution were largely drawn from New England and for the most part they sympathized with
the revolutionary movement. But for the banishment of the loyalists, Nova Scotia would long
have remained without a population, and certainly could never have hoped to
obtain an enterprising, active and energetic a set of inhabitants as those who
were supplied to it by the acts of the several states hostile to the loyalists.
The hold of the British government upon the British province
of North America which remained to the crown
would have been but slight indeed, but for the active hostility of the
loyalists. They created the state of affairs which consolidated English power
on this continent and built it up into the Dominion of Canada. To the
short-sighted policy which banished them may be traced nearly all the political
troubles of this continent, since that date, in which the British crown has
been involved. Sabine says in his excellent work on the loyalists,
“Dearly
enough have the people of the United
States paid for this exile and the violent
wars of the revolution; for to the loyalists who were driven away, and to their
dependants, we owe almost entirely the long and bitter controversy relating to
our northeastern boundary and the dispute about our right to the fisheries in
the colonial seas.”
END
Transcription
completed November 17, 2006
BACK