At a meeting held in Portsmouth on Dec. 16, 1773, one of the
resolutions adopted was, “That every virtuous and public-spirited
freeman ought to oppose, to the utmost of his ability, every attack
of the ministry to enslave the Americans.” Five months later, on May
19, 1774, a committee of the town of Portsmouth sent their
sympathies to the people of Boston on the closing of their port, and
for their fellow-townsmen, promised to exert themselves to carry
into effect any plan which might be concerted by the colonies for
the general relief, and that the interests of the people of Boston
would be considered as their own.
From this time to the departure of the royal governor forever, it
was a game of battledoor and shuttlecock between his excellency and
the general assembly; the latter energetic and firm; the former
diplomatic, but cautious and watchful, and ever on the alert to
subserve the interest of the home government.
To this end he refused at first to adjourn the assembly in May,
1774, but finally acceded to the request of the members, and an
adjournment was made to June 12 of the same year. Meantime the
excitement increased; events at home and abroad intensifying the
feeling against the government.
At the adjourned meeting in May, the House of Representatives, in
common with the assemblies of the other colonies, had appointed a
committee of correspondence. This Governor Wentworth tried to
prevent, and when he dissolved the assembly he was fain to believe
the committee of correspondence would disappear with it.
In this he was disappointed, for its very first act after the
dissolution of the assembly was to issue a summons to the
representatives, who again met in their own chamber. The governor,
attended by the sheriff of the county, entered, and in accordance
with custom they rose when he presented himself. He addressed them,
declaring the meeting illegal, and directed the sheriff to make
proclamation accordingly, ordering all to disperse. He then retired,
but they resumed their seats.
On further consideration they adjourned to another house, where it
was resolved to hold a convention at Exeter, which should choose
delegates to the General Congress to meet in Philadelphia, and to
that end, letters were sent to each town and parish in the colony,
inviting the people therein to send deputies to the Provincial
Congress. The last business transacted by the representatives was to
recommend a day of fasting and prayer to be observed by the people
of the province. According to Belknap, this was observed with
religious solemnity. A request was made at the same time for funds
to defray the expenses of the delegates to the Continental Congress,
and this was promptly responded to.
The convention called at Exeter assembled on July 21, 1774, and is
now known in history as the “First Provincial Congress” of New
Hampshire. There were eighty-five members present, with the speaker
of the assembly, Hon. John Wentworth, a relative of the governor in
the chair.
This distinguished body, composed of the best men in the province,
many of whom had seen service in the French and Indian wars, and who
can justly be styled the founders of the state, chose for their
first representatives to the Continental Congress Maj. John Sullivan
and Col. Nathaniel Folsom; and for the first time in the history of
his native state does the name of John Sullivan officially make its
appearance in its legislative records. It is evident to any one who
has read closely the history of the stirring events of the period
that some master hand was at work directing all the movements, civil
and military, occurring at the time; and that this was the hand of
John Sullivan later events prove clearly. The son of an Irish exile,
and the grandson of one of the ill-fated defenders of Limerick, he
was born in Somersworth, N. H., at a point opposite Berwick, Me., on
February 18, 1740.
He was educated by his father, who had himself enjoyed the benefits
of a liberal and thorough training before he settled in America, and
who, through a long life, extending to his one hundred and fifth
year, was diligently employed in the education of youth. After a
voyage to the West Indies he became a member of the family of Hon.
Isaac Livermore, a lawyer of Portsmouth having an extensive
practice, and under his instruction prepared himself for his
profession. He early exhibited ability of a high order, gained the
respect and encouragement of his instructor, and soon acquired a
distinguished position at the bar of New Hampshire. Just before
reaching his majority he located in the town of Durham, purchased a
handsome residence, which is still in existence, and in which he
lived up to the time of his death. Such was his professional
success, that he married at the age of twenty, and for ten years
later he was constantly employed in the most lucrative causes,
thereby incurring the resentment of sundry persons in Durham and
elsewhere, who petitioned the executive council in 1766, complaining
of him for evil practices as attorney-at-law. This trouble, whatever
its nature may have been, existed even to the end of his days, and
was doubtless at the bottom of the scheme to injure his reputation
years after his death; for to this day there are some who would rob
him of the credit given him in the state records for planning the
capture of the powder at Newcastle and leading the party that
effected it.
In eloquence as an advocate he won a place in the front rank, and
earned the reputation of being a sound lawyer and a judicious
counsellor. This character was not confined to his native state, for
in addition to the friendship of men like the Wentworths and
Langdons in New Hampshire, he had secured the esteem and respect of
Lowell, Adams, Otis, and other well-known legal lights in
Massachusetts. Although attached to his profession, he found time to
devote to agriculture and manufactures, being one of the early
promoters of the latter, establishing cloth and fulling mills in
Durham, and succeeding so well that on the authority of John Adams
he was worth ten thousand pounds before the Revolution broke out.
From his father and mother he inherited a robust constitution, and
was blessed with an active, lively disposition. He had a natural
taste for military life, but except an occasional bout with the
Indians, generally on the defensive, he had, before the
Revolutionary War, no actual experience in warfare; but all around
him were the veterans of the Indian and French wars, whose
descriptions of the campaigns of Louisburg and Quebec aroused all
the martial spirit in his fiery nature.
To his historical studies, especially those relating to military
movements, he was greatly devoted; and read them to such good
purpose that he was able accurately to describe nearly all of the
great battles of the world. It was natural, therefore, for him to
seek the exercise of arms early; so at the age of thirty-one he held
the commission of major in the Colonial militia, and spared no pains
to make himself familiar with the duties connected with the
position. From the first rumble of discontent, down to the actual
outbreak of hostilities, he was one of the most active men engaged
in the cause of liberty. His nature and his abhorrence of
oppression, two traits transmitted by generations of heroic
ancestors, marked his career from the beginning, and his extended
influence and popularity marked him early as a leader in the coming
contest. With a full realization of what was before him he organized
a company numbering eighty-three men in Durham, and associated with
him was the gallant young Scammell, who was then a law student in
his office. With a knowledge of these facts it is not too much to
say, especially when comparing them with the events occurring
afterwards, that the “hidden hand” which directed the movements of
the patriots in New Hampshire, down to the convening of the First
Provincial Congress in July, 1774, was that of the grandson of the
Limerick soldier, who, in little less than a century from the broken
treaty, was paying with interest the debt due the government which
had driven his father to the wilds of America. He was chosen by the
First Provincial Congress to represent his province in the
Continental Congress, being the first person to represent New
Hampshire in that body. Two instances will be sufficient to show his
energy and usefulness in that assemblage. On qualifying, he was at
once placed on two of the most important committees, of one of
which, that upon the grievances of the people, he was chairman.
“The committee of violation of rights,” says John Adams in his
diary, “reported a set of articles which were drawn by John
Sullivan, of New Hampshire; and these two declarations, the one of
rights and the other of violations, which are printed in the
journals of Congress for 1774, were two years afterwards
recapitulated in the Declaration of Independence on the 4th of July,
1776.”
“New Hampshire has perhaps not remembered that the bold hand and the
legal training of John Sullivan are in the immortal Declaration of
Independence.”
On the adjournment of Congress, Sullivan returned to New Hampshire.
During his absence the agitation had increased; nearly every town
had its committee of safety, and many persons of note, suspected of
a leaning towards the government, placed under arrest and kept in
confinement, or sent out of the state, unless they took the test
oath prescribed by the Assembly. Steps were also taken to prevent
the sending of carpenters and other mechanics to Boston to build
barracks for the royal troops, as men could not be secured there for
that purpose. In one instance a man suspected of procuring workmen
for General Gage, was waited on, and the charge being proven, he was
obliged to go on his knees, as nothing less would be satisfactory,
and make the following confession and promise:
“Before this company I confess I have been aiding and assisting in
sending men to Boston to build barracks for the soldiers to live in,
at which you have reason to be justly offended, which I am sorry for
and humbly ask your forgiveness. And I do affirm that for the future
I never will be aiding or assisting in any wise whatever, in act or
deed contrary to the constitution of the country, as witness my
hand.”
The military stores in Fort William and Mary at Newcastle were a
constant source of anxiety to the governor, but he felt confident
that no lawless act would be committed by the people without
provocation, and as he was cautious in his course, no pretext could
be found in that direction, but the inevitable was to happen. A
report was circulated that General Gage was to send a body of troops
to secure the ammunition.
The arrival of Paul Revere from Boston gave color to the rumor, and
on the day following, armed men from the surrounding towns assembled
in Portsmouth, and after effecting an organization and choosing
their leaders, marched in broad daylight, to the number of four
hundred, for Newcastle. On arriving at the fort the commander bade
them to enter at their peril. No heed being paid to his words, one
volley was fired from the three-pounders in position, but before the
guns could be reloaded the walls were scaled and the fort captured
at three o’clock P.M. on Dec. 14, 1774. The result was the
possession of one hundred barrels of powder, sixty muskets, sixteen
cannon, and other valuable stores.
In his letter to General Gage informing him of the event, Governor
Wentworth said, “The principal persons in this enormity are well
known.”
He mentioned no names, but a little over two years later Peter
Livius, who was at the time of the capture, one of the Provincial
Councillors, wrote thus to John Sullivan in June, 1777: “You were
the first man in active rebellion, and drew with you the province
you live in. You will be one of the first sacrifices to the
resentment and justice of government; your family will be ruined and
you must die with ignominy.”
Belknap wrote that “Maj. John Sullivan and John Langdon
distinguished themselves as leaders in this affair.” Adams, in his
annals of Portsmouth, said it occurred “under the direction of Maj.
John Sullivan and Capt. John Langdon.”
Sullivan himself said: “When I returned from Congress in 1774, and
saw the order of the British king and council prohibiting military
stores being sent to this country, I took alarm, clearly perceiving
the designs of the British ministry, and wrote several pieces upon
the necessity of securing military stores, which pieces were
published in several papers.” Quint said: “Sullivan, bold and
daring, then an active member of the Continental Congress, and well
known throughout the province by his leadership at the bar, had
great influence. The seizure of the munitions at the fort, though
sudden at last, was doubtless not without previous thought. The
result of this act was momentous. It was the first act of armed
rebellion. It preceded Concord and Lexington by four months of time.
The captors of the fort entered it against the fire of fieldpieces
and muskets openly, and in daylight they pulled down the royal flag,
the first time in American history. They gave three cheers in honor
of their success. They carried off a hundred barrels of gunpowder,
some light guns and small arms which, under the care of Sullivan,
were taken up the river, which was at that time covered with thick
ice, through which a channel had to be cut.”
This bold and audacious act was deeply felt in Great Britain.
Conciliation was now out of the question. The king’s anger was
aroused. It was already bitter enough on account of the
Massachusetts troubles. Governor Wentworth issued threatening
proclamations.
He dismissed the offending major and captain from their posts in the
militia. In answer to his edict all persons in Durham holding civil
or military positions under the governor, headed by Sullivan,
assembled at the tavern on the green, and there publicly burned
their commissions and insignia of office. There was no further need
of secrecy. The die was cast and the leaders were well known. The
official positions, civil or military, held by many of those who
were principals in the affair, obliged them, up to this time, to act
with caution. After the burning, not of his ships, but of his
commission, Sullivan boldly stepped to the front. The very next day
after the capture of the powder he headed a body of men numbering
between three and four hundred from Durham and the adjoining towns,
and, marching to the Council Chamber, demanded an answer to the
question as to whether or not there were any ships or troops
expected here, or if the governor had written for any.
His excellency meekly answered: “I know of none.”
The greater part of the powder was stored in the basement of the
meeting-house in Durham. The balance, for safety, was distributed in
several places, some of it going to Exeter. That stored at Durham,
as well as another portion placed with Capt. John Demerritt, was
taken by the latter in his own ox-cart, under Sullivan’s direction,
to Cambridge, where it arrived barely in time to be dealt out to the
troops at Bunker Hill. Of how much value it was there and how badly
it was needed, is too well known to bear repetition. Without it and
lacking the men from the old Granite State accompanying it, Bunker
Hill would not have been such a serious affair for the British army.
In claiming the leadership for Sullivan in this affair there is no
desire to extol him at the expense of those with whom he was
associated,—men like Langdon, Weare, Bartlett, Thornton, Scammell,
Thompson, Folsom, Wentworth, Gilman, and others whose names are now
household words. The position was freely conceded by them at the
time, and acknowledged by the best informed to-day. After the
Lexington fight, and while Sullivan was in attendance at the Second
Continental Congress, the gallant young Scammell, who was in his
office in Durham, wrote him that, “when the horrid din of civil
carnage surprised us on the 20th of April, the universal cry was
‘Oh, if Major Sullivan was here!’ ‘I wish to God Major Sullivan was
here!’ ran through the distressed multitude.”
Capt. Eleazer Bennett, who died in Durham in 1852, at the age of one
hundred and one, said “that at the time of the capture of the powder
he was in the employment of General Sullivan, at his mill at
Packer’s Falls, when word was brought in to come down to Durham, to
go to Portsmouth, and to get anybody else he could to come with
him.” So far as he could remember, the following persons were with
him: Maj. John Sullivan, Capt. Winborn Adams, Ebenezer Thompson,
John Demerritt, Alpheus and Jonathan Chesley, John Spencer, Micah
Davis, Isaac and Benjamin Small, Alexander Scammell, John Griffin,
James Underwood, and Eben Sullivan, the major’s brother.
On arriving at Portsmouth they were joined by John Langdon with
another party. They captured the fort, took the captain and bound
him, and frightened away the soldiers. In the fort they found one
hundred casks of powder and one hundred small arms. A portion of
the powder was taken by Major Demerritt to his house in Madbury,
but most of it was stored under the pulpit of the meeting-house in
Durham. On July 19, 1775, as a final proof of Sullivan’s
leadership in this movement, Matthew Patten, chairman of the
committee of safety for the county of Hillsborough, wrote to
General Sullivan congratulating him on his appointment to the rank
of Brigadier-General, in which he said: “An appointment which, as
it distinguishes your merit, so at the same time it reflects honor
upon, and shows the penetrating discernment of those truly eminent
patriots from whom you received it; nor are we less sanguine in
our expectations of the high advantages which must result under
God to the public by your military skill and courage, as you have
been indefatigable in attaining the first, and have given a recent
instance of the latter, to your great honor and reputation, in
depriving our enemies of the means of annoying us at Castle
William and Mary, and at the same time furnishing us with
materials to defend our invaluable rights and privileges. This,
sir, must ever be had in remembrance, and (amongst the actions of
others, our heroes of 1775) handed to the latest posterity. That
the Almighty may direct your counsels, be with you in the day of
battle, and that you may be preserved as a pattern to this people
for many years to come, is our frequent prayer.” In Sullivan’s
reply he said: “It gives me great pleasure to find so respectable
a number of the worthy sons of freedom, in the colony to which I
belong, have so publicly given their approbation of my conduct in
assisting to secure the warlike stores at Fort William and Mary,
and thereby preventing these evils which must have resulted from
our enemies having possession of them.”
Nothing further need be said regarding the value of the powder
captured on this occasion, or the boldness of the act itself. At
Lexington and Concord the British were the aggressors, the Americans
acting on the defensive; but at Newcastle the Americans were the
aggressors, made the attack boldly in the open day, and as Quint
said, “for the first time in American history the British flag was
torn down by men in armed rebellion.” John Sullivan’s history is
well known. He and his three brothers gave their best services to
the land of their birth, and in memory of those services the state
of New Hampshire erected a monument of Concord granite on the site
of the church in Durham, under which was stored the powder, and in
the presence of the governor, council, and other officials, state
and national, and a large concourse of people on Thursday, Sept. 27,
1894, the one hundredth anniversary of his death, dedicated it with
appropriate exercises. The inscription reads:
IN MEMORY OF
JOHN SULLIVAN.
_Born Feb. 17, 1740._
_Died Jan. 23, 1795._
Erected by the State of New Hampshire upon the
site of the Meeting-house under which was
stored the gunpowder taken from
Fort William and Mary.
The tributes paid to Sullivan’s worth on this occasion by every one
of the speakers were ungrudging and hearty. Professor Murkland said:
“This may never become a large community, but it will always be
exalted by its association with John Sullivan, lawyer, soldier,
statesman, and judge.
“The plain granite shaft, inadequate as it may appear, will yet
serve, when we shall have been forgotten, to recall the life of one
who served his country so bravely and so well that he made slander
dumb and malice impotent.”
Gov. John B. Smith said: “It is no invidious distinction to say that
of all the New Hampshire men of the Revolutionary period Sullivan
was not only peer, he was preëminently chief. His life is a part of
the country’s history, and now, by virtue of my office (an office I
am all the more proud to hold because John Sullivan filled and
honored it), I accept these grounds from the town of Durham, and
this monument from the committee in behalf of the state.”
O’Meara said:
“Your deeds for all the land that hold your fame
Shall link you now to love New Hampshire’s name,
While throbs high manhood round her glistening hills—
While patriot gleam or pristine glory thrills.”
Dr. Quint said: “To John Sullivan, the man who in all the American
provinces was the first to take up arms against the king, New
Hampshire erects this monument of native granite.”
Professor Hadley said: “Washington’s never-failing trust and
ever-affectionate respect are of themselves sufficient to prove
their possessor’s title clear to proud historic praise; and
Sullivan’s name does belong of right to that choice list of eminent
commanders which bears such other names as Greene and Knox, Steuben
and Stark.”
Senator Chandler said: “John Sullivan was one of the finest
characters of the Revolution. A great general, and as a lawyer, a
legislator, a statesman, a governor, and a judge, ranked among the
very greatest men of the Revolutionary period. The luster in our
annals of the gift to our early glories, bestowed by Ireland in
sending to us the family of Sullivan, will never be obliterated or
forgotten.”
Senator Blair said: “There is no sphere of public life in which he
was not eminent, nor of private life in which he was not influential
and beloved. The whole list of Revolutionary worthies does not
furnish one name which, on the whole, shines more resplendently in
all the great department of public service than that of John
Sullivan.”
Hon. Henry M. Baker said: “The influence of such a life never dies.
Seldom is it the fortune of any one to serve his country in such
diverse yet responsible positions as General Sullivan held and
honored. Still more rare to discharge every duty with such great
energy and ability.”
Gov. Frederick Smythe said: “Wherever the rights of man are
recognized, and so long as government by the people shall endure,
the name of John Sullivan must be one of the imperishable, of those
who were not born to die.”
Col. Daniel Hall said: “Sullivan is worthy of lasting commemoration
as one of the most serviceable of the men it was New Hampshire’s
great honor to contribute to the cause of American Independence.”
Secretary of State Stearns wrote: “Sullivan was a born leader of
men, and preëminently a man for Revolutionary times. He was not a
slave to ancient forms and customs, ruthlessly trampling upon the
traditions of his time. He boldly assaulted the conservative
barriers that confined the people of New Hampshire within the pale
of accustomed usage.
“He early declared for a free government for a free people. In the
march of events, when the people reached his early standpoint, the
Constitution of 1776 was drafted on the line of his suggestions.”
“It is a century since the life of Sullivan was ended, and the
qualities of his character and the magnitude of his work were
submitted to the generous estimate of his fellow-men. His fame with
the lapse of time suffers no impairment. A brilliant and an
accomplished civilian, a distinguished lawyer, a matchless orator, a
brave and an able general, a senator, a magistrate, and a governor,
he bore his accumulating honors with modesty, and served the state
which he loved with the restless power of a vigorous and versatile
mind. The study of his life is instructive. Through the vista,
obscured by a century, we read the story of his time in the light of
the undimmed luster of his achievements.”
[Illustration:
REV. GEORGE W. PEPPER
OHIO
]
[Illustration:
VERY REV. ANDREW MORRISSEY
INDIANA
]
[Illustration:
COL. O’BRIEN MOORE
WEST VIRGINIA
]
[Illustration:
JOSEPH T. LAWLESS
VIRGINIA
]