"A Witness of the First Revolutionary Conflict" - Lexington's Mary Munroe Sanderson

Recently, the Nerds were contacted by Ruth Hodges, one of the founding members of the Ladies Association of Revolutionary America (LARA). LARA is a progressive, researched-based 18th-century living history group that encourages, supports, and promotes increased women’s voices and stories at historical sites and events. We’ll be honest - the Nerds are super fans of the organization and everything they do.

Ruth brought a surviving mid-19th-century photograph of Mary Munroe Sanderson of Lexington to our attention. The picture was taken in 1852 when Mary was 103 years old. As far as the Nerds know, this is the only surviving image of a female participant of the Civilian Evacuation of April 19, 1775, and eyewitness to the day's horrors.

Mary Munroe Sanderson was born to William and Rebecca Munroe in Lexington on October 10, 1748. Genealogical research suggests she was unrelated to the Munroe clan that owned Munroe Tavern. Instead, she belonged to a family far lower on the town’s social ladder. According to Lexington’s 1771 tax valuation, Mary’s family was part of the 7th decline, with the 1st decline being the wealthiest of residents and the 10th being the poorest.

Like most Lexington girls, Mary would have attended a “female” or “dame” school to receive instruction on reading and writing. In 1747, the town voted to allow girls to enroll in its “grammar” school, which focused on Latin, Greek grammar, and other advanced subjects. (Massachusetts grammar schools were created to help boys prepare for possible admission to Harvard or another educational institution.) It is possible Mary also enrolled in the town’s grammar school, but realistically, by age twelve, her primary education was housekeeping skills. Her mother or another female role model would have taught her to utilize raw materials and transform them into the goods the family needed to thrive. They turned their hands to carding and spinning fibers, sewing, mending, and embroidery; cooking and preserving; doing laundry; nursing and producing home medicines; gardening and making candles and soap.

Growing up, she would have engaged in or witnessed youthful and mischievous activities like her Lexington counterparts. At age 9, Mary likely witnessed the older teenage boys and girls who engaged in wild behavior outside the town’s meeting house during Sunday meetings. The conduct was so bad that residents held a special town meeting and resolved that “strict and special care be taken to prevent all disorders among the children and youth in and about the Meeting House, as well as to prevent their doing damage upon the grass and fruits of those who live nigh the Meeting House.”

As a teenage girl and young woman, Mary would have participated in tavern dances or “frolics” and frequented Buckman, Munroe, and other Lexington taverns to consume alcohol and socialize with members of the opposite sex. Of course, the “sinful behavior” of Mary and other teens in the early 1760s caught the attention of both parents and the Reverend Jonas Clarke, who warned the younger members of his congregation to avoid “patterns of youthful behavior: night-walking, frolicking, company-keeping, carousing, merry meeting, dancing, and singing.”

In February 1768, a poor Waltham carpenter named Samuel Sanderson arrived and occupied Lexington. Almost immediately, the town’s selectmen warned Sanderson out. “Warning out” was a practice of notifying non-resident poor that if they could not support themselves, the town would not support them, forcing the poor to return to their town of origin.

By 1771, Sanderson was still among the landless poor. Because he owned no real estate or personal property, such as livestock, or furniture, he did not appear on the town’s 1771 tax valuation.

However, Sanderson’s fortune appears to have changed after he began to court Mary Munroe. On October 22, 1772, the pair married and purchased a simple one-story home located along the Bay Road adjacent to the Munroe Tavern. Sanderson continued his work as a carpenter and was often called upon to make coffins for those Lexington residents. According to both family tradition and historian Michael J. Canavan, “Her husband using the basement for a workshop … Mrs. Sanderson related that many a night she had held the candle while her husband stained the 'narrow house' of some departed neighbor or townsman."

In July 1774, Mary gave birth to the couple's first child, a boy named Amos. Between 1776 and 1782, she had five more children - three girls and two boys.

In late 1774 or early 1775, Samuel was elected a corporal of Captain John Parker’s Lexington Company of Militia. Given his skills as a carpenter, it is possible Sanderson was assisting Jonas Parker (also a carpenter) in cutting down the stocks of fowling pieces so the weapons could accept socket bayonets.

Yet, despite these accomplishments, Mary and Samuel were still economically below the “middling sorts” of Lexington society. A 1774 tax valuation placed the couple firmly in the 7th decile, slightly above the poor of the town.

Samuel Sanderson House, Massachusetts Ave, Lexington, c. 1900

Sometime after 11 PM on April 18, 1775, the Sandersons received word of a British expedition advancing from Boston toward Concord. Realizing that their home was located along the path of the regulars, Mary began to prepare to evacuate her family to safety. According to early to mid-19th-century accounts, as Samuel prepared for war, Mary, her infant child and a pre-teen girl, who likely was a neighbor's daughter who served as a “helper,” gathered family valuables and “by the light of a lantern piloted their way to a refuge, the home of her father in new Scotland.” (New Scotland was a section of Lexington, along the Woburn line and occupied by Scottish immigrants.)

Mary, her son, and the young helper remained at her father’s residence until the afternoon fighting had cleared. Given the proximity of her home to the Munroe Tavern and Percy’s relief force, one would expect that the Sanderson home would have been plundered, torched, or vandalized. However, neither Mary nor Samuel submitted any claims to the Massachusetts Provincial Congress or Legislature seeking compensation for theft or property damage.

However, according to Canavan, Mary’s home was, in fact, damaged by the regulars. “After the British retreated Mary returned home and found a good many things had been stolen. Her cow (which was a good part of her marriage portion) had been killed.” worse, “a wounded British soldier was stowed away in her bed.” Furious, Mary allegedly cried out, “I won’t have him there,” and asked her husband, “Why didn’t you knock him on the head?”

A late 19th-century account by a Lexington resident who  interviewed her before her death asserts Mary stated “'The Satanish critters,' she said, 'stole and destroyed everything in the house, and didn't leave rags enough to dress the wounds of their own man … over one hundred years of age, Mrs. Sanderson described with minuteness many articles of her wardrobe and household goods which were destroyed or missing, rarely failing to mention the cow, and that she was part of her marriage portion.”

Both accounts claim Mary refused to care for the wounded soldier and demanded he be removed from her home. Ultimately, the selectmen ordered Mary to care for the man.

Again, there is no direct evidence of Mary or Samuel caring for a wounded soldier. However, a review of Massachusetts legislative records from 1775 and 1776 revealed wounded British regulars treated by Lexington's residents, including a marine who received extended care before defecting to the American cause.

Mary and her husband remained in town for a few more years before moving to Lancaster, Massachusetts. According to the deed of sale, “In 1783, Samuel Sanderson in the town of Lexington, County of Middlesex, joiner, sold to Samuel Downing, wheelwright, once piece of property with a dwelling house, shop, and barn and one and one half acres.”

Mary and her family remained in Lancaster until Samuel passed in 1803. Afterward, she returned to Lexington. Sadly, it appears she may have outlived most, if not all, of her children. According to historian Heather Wilkinson Rojo, Mary suffered from acute arthritis in her later life. 

On September 23, 1852, the women of Lexington organized a fundraising party and successfully gathered over $300 in funds for her.

That same year, Mary Sanderson sat for the photograph that is the subject of this blog post.

On October 15, 1852, Mary passed at the age of 104 and was buried in the “Old Burying Ground” in Lexington. The engraving on her tombstone aptly describes her contributions to Lexington and the events of April 19, 1775:

Mary Munroe relict of Samuel Sanderson

Born in Lexington Oct 10, 1748

Died in East Lexington Oct 15, 1852

Age 104 years 5 days

A witness of the first revolutionary conflict, she recounted its trying scenes to the last. The vitality of her Christian faith was envinced by cheerfulness under severy bodily infirmity for more than twenty years.

"They Brought Together Every Ounce Contained in the Town, and Committed it to One Common Bonfire" - The Lexington Tea Burning

This Sunday, the Lexington Historical Society will commemorate the 250th anniversary of the town's tea protest. So what exactly happened that caused the residents of this dairy community to rise up and openly protest English economic policies?

In 1773, Parliament passed the Tea Act to refinance the shaky economic base of the British East India Company. Established in 1709, the East India Company derived over ninety percent of its profits from selling tea. However, by 1772, the company desperately needed a bailout due to severe mismanagement. The company directors looked to Parliament for relief. Parliament’s response was the Tea Act, through which the East India Company was given exclusive rights to ship tea to America without paying import duties and to sell it through their agents to American retailers. American merchants who had for years purchased tea from non-British sources (Dutch tea was a particular favorite of New Englanders) faced the prospect of financial ruin.

Massachusetts immediately opposed the act and began to organize resistance. On November 29, 1773, the tea ship Dartmouth arrived at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston. The Beaver and the Eleanor arrived at the same wharf three days later. Bostonians demanded that Governor Hutchinson order the three ships back to England. On December 16, 1773, the owner of the Dartmouth apparently agreed and went to Hutchinson to beg him to let the ships return to England. Hutchinson refused, and at approximately six o’clock that evening, some 150 men and boys disguised as Indians marched to the three ships, boarded them, and dumped 340 chests of tea into Boston Harbor.

Meanwhile, as tempers boiled over in Boston, the citizens of Lexington assembled three days before the Boston Tea Party to discuss the unfolding events. The matter was referred to the town’s committee of correspondence, which quickly drafted an emotional and stinging condemnation of the Tea Act.

"[It] appears that the Enemies of the Rights & Liberties of Americans, greatly disappointed in the Success of the Revenue Act, are seeking to Avail themselves of New, & if possible, Yet more detestable Measures to distress, Enslave & destroy us. Not enough that a Tax was laid Upon Teas, which should be Imported by Us, for the Sole Purpose of Raising a revenue to support Taskmasters, Pensioners, &c., in Idleness and Luxury; But by a late Act of Parliament, to Appease the wrath of the East India Company, whose Trade to America had been greatly clogged by the operation of the Revenue Acts, Provision is made for said Company to export their teas to America free and discharged from all Duties and Customs in England, but liable to all the same Rules, Regulations, Penalties & Forfeitures in America, as are Provided by the Revenue Act . . . Not to say anything of the Gross Partiality herein discovered in favour of the East India Company, and to the Injury & oppression of Americans; . . . we are most especially alarmed, as by these Crafty Measures of the Revenue Act is to be Established, and the Rights and Liberties of Americans forever Sapped & destroyed. These appear to Us to be Sacrifices we must make, and these the costly Pledges that must be given Up into the hands of the Oppressor. The moment we receive this detested Article, the Tribute will be established upon Us . . . Once admit this subtle, wicked Ministerial Plan to take place, once permit this Tea . . . to be landed, received and vended . . . the Badge of our slavery is fixed, the Foundation of ruin is surely laid."

The committee also issued six resolves pledging to preserve and protect the constitutional rights that Parliament had put into jeopardy, to boycott any teas "sent out by the East India Company, or that shall be imported subject to a duty imposed by Act of Parliament," to treat as enemies anyone found aiding in the landing, selling or using of tea from the East India Company, and to treat the merchants of the East India Company with contempt. Finally, the town expressed its gratitude to Boston for its undertaking in the name of liberty and pledged

"We are ready and resolved to concur with them in every rationale Measure that may be Necessary for the Preservation or Recovery of our Rights and Liberties as Englishmen and Christians; and we trust in God That, should the State of Our Affairs require it, We shall be ready to Sacrifice our Estates and everything dear in Life, Yea and Life itself, in support of the common Cause."

Upon completion, the Town of Lexington unanimously adopted the resolutions. Immediately afterward, an additional resolve was passed, warning the residents "That if any Head of a Family in this Town, or any Person, shall from this time forward; & until the Duty taken off, purchase any Tea, Use or consume any Tea in their Famelies [sic], such person shall be looked upon as an Enemy to this town & to this Country, and shall by this Town be treated with Neglect & Contempt."


That evening, the residents of Lexington gathered all tea supplies and burned them. According to the December 16, 1773 edition of the Massachusetts Spy "We are positively informed that the patriotic inhabitants of Lexington unanimously resolved against against the use of Bohea tea of all sorts, Dutch or English importation; and to manifest the sincerity of their resolution, they brought together every ounce contained in the town, and committed it to one common bonfire."

The resolves of Lexington reflected the general political mood throughout the American colonies on the eve of the revolution. Many colonists believed a set of corrupt and mysterious men had been able to assert control over George the Third, his ministers, and his favorites through bribery and deceit. Most Americans were certain that powerful men were plotting to make the colonists slaves by curtailing their liberties as Englishmen.

The common belief emerged that an immoral British government, having exhausted opportunities for plunder and profit in England and Ireland, was now seeking a dispute with the American colonies as an excuse to enslave and deprive them of their wealth and liberties. Parliament had hoped to accomplish this goal quietly, but the furor aroused in the colonies by England’s economic policies had given the government a temporary setback. Now, these mysterious men, who controlled Parliament and the king’s ministers, were undertaking to openly incite a war, declare American rebels, and enslave them. As early as 1772, Lexington was expressing apprehension that "[Our] Charter Rights & Liberties are in danger, are infringed and upon a most careful, Serious & mature Consideration of them . . . and are comparing them with Acts of the British Parliament, & Measures adopted by the British Court, Ministry & Government . . .some of which have been carried into Execution amongst us, We are clearly of opinion that . . . the Plan of Oppression is begun, & so far carried on that, if our Enemies are still Successful, and no Means can be found to put a Stop to their Career, . . . we have just Reason to fear That the Eyes of the Head of Government being blinded, the Sources of Justice poisoned and Hands of administration bribed with interest, the system of slavery will soon be complete."

The colonists' concerns and fears, evident in letters, journals, and diaries of the period, increased following the Boston Tea Party.

That action was viewed in England as so rebellious an act of defiance that it could not be ignored. As a result, the English Parliament adopted several harsh and restrictive measures aimed at punishing Massachusetts, but particularly Boston. On March 31, 1774, King George the Third signed the Boston Port Bill, intended to reprimand rebellious Boston severely. The port was closed to all seagoing traffic until damages for the destroyed tea were paid in full. The Massachusetts Provincial Charter of 1691, which residents viewed as a sacred guarantee of their liberties, was revoked. Additional regiments of regulars were dispatched to Boston and Major General Thomas Gage replaced Thomas Hutchinson as governor. Gage moved the seat of government from Boston to Salem and the customs office from Boston to Plymouth. The Governor’s Council was replaced with a non-elective Mandamus Council, town meetings were prohibited without the consent of the governor and jury trials were abolished.

To the citizens of Massachusetts, it was clear that the British government had thrown down the gauntlet. The passage of these “Intolerable Acts,” as they became known, was seen as the most blatant of England's attempts to provoke a war with her American colonies. Throughout the colonies, committees of correspondence toiled to spread this message and increase opposition to Parliament. Towns adopted covenants asserting their opposition to the British attempt to crush their rights, while Middlesex and Essex counties ordered its courts to refrain from conducting business.

On September 26, 1774, Lexington voted to form committees whose responsibilities were “to bring two pieces of cannon from Watertown and mount them, to provide a pair of drums for the use of the military company in town . . . [and] to have the militia and alarm list meet for a view of their arms.” On October 5, 1774, Lexington’s Deacon Stone was in Salem along with his fellow representatives to the General Court. There, when General Gage acted to adjourn the General Court arbitrarily, the representatives voted to make the Massachusetts Provincial Congress the governing body of the colony “to promote the true interests of his Majesty, in the peace, welfare and prosperity of the Province.”

Any hope of avoiding a civil war now seemed dashed.

In Boston, Hugh Earl Percy correctly surmised the state of affairs in Massachusetts on the eve of the American Revolution. “Things here are now drawing to a crisis every day. The people here openly oppose the New Acts. They have taken up arms in almost every part of this Province, & have drove in the Gov’t & most of the Council . . . A few days ago, they mustered about 7,000 men at Worcester . . . In short, this country is now in an open state of rebellion.”