"Hark! What grumbling Noise" - Wild Weather in 1768 New England

We thought it was time to once again visit some of the wild and unusual weather events of 18th Century New England. Today, we’ll discuss a series of violent storms that pounded New England 250 years ago this summer.

On August 1, 1768 a cold front passed through New England. Period accounts assert that during the storm rain fell in torrents, wind gusts leveled trees and the vivid lightning struck and killed two cows belonging to Hartford’s Caleb Bull. In Norwalk, a barn owned by the “widow Benedict” was also struck by lightning and quickly caught fire.

Meanwhile, in Boston, a lightning bolt struck the residence of a “well-known victualler, Mr. Shirley.” At the home of one Dr. Sprague, lightning struck the chimney and travelled down into a china closet, destroying several saucers and plates. The bolt continued through several curtain rods and then into an imported clock located on the main floor. The device exploded into several fragments which were were found throughout the room.

At the residence of a barber known as “Mr. Davis”, a lightning bolt also struck his chimney and travelled down the side of the house before entering a closet. The heat from the electrical charge melted several alead weights and nail heads. Two of Davis’ children were also struck, thrown across the room and rendered unconscious.

At the home of a Temple Street carpenter, the damage from lightning strikes was so severe it melted pewter plates, shattered glass and a damaged a kitchen hearth.

Several days later, a poem describing the tempest appeared in the Essex Gazette.

“Hark! What grumbling Noise comes thro' the yielding Air! Is it the Cannon's Roar! The Din of War? No! — 'Tis the Voice of God; he Thunder rolls, And flashes Lightnings to the distant Polls. The Clouds impregnate with electric Ire, Join and disjoin, and fold the Skies in Fire: At which the Thunders burst with dreadful Roar, Sweep through the Skies, and grumble on the Shore! But still the Sound augments: while through the Air Surprising Lightnings gleam with frightful Glare! See! — from the Weft the gloomy Tempest rife: Successive Flashes fire the burning Skies ! — Such is the Noise, and such the Lightnings Chine. They both proclaim the Author is DIVINE!— Are fuch his Terrors, when his kind Command Bids pregnant Clouds water the thirty Land ! What firy Vengeance will he then display, In that great, awful and consummate Day; When down the Skies to Judgment he descends; To crush his Foes; and to reward his friends! When round his shining Throne (no more of Grace) Shall stand a numerous I loft, the human Race! Angels and Devils! When the fov'reign Lord Shall judge the whole, and give a just Reward! — Amazing Thought!”

About a month later, New England was hit once again by wild weather. During the evenings of September 7 and 8, 1768, a powerful storm accompanied by high winds, hail and vivid lightning struck southeastern Massachusetts. According to one account, a bolt of lightning struck Daniel Mann’s tavern in Wrentham. The bolt travelled down the side of the building, shattered a glass window and entered the parlor room. Unfortunately for , heMann was hosting a social gathering at the same time. One of the guests recalled there was a “flash of lightning . . . followed by an explosion, apparently as loud as the discharge of a cannon. Large sparks were seen, and the air in the room smelled as if impregnated with sulphur.” A large clock in the room was damaged and toppled over onto a guest. A subsequent inspection of the device revealed that the steel spring that held the pendulum in place had melted. The coat of a second guest was scorched on the right shoulder. 

Curiosity seekers who visited the tavern in the days after noted “the ceiling and doors of the room were much damaged and two of the floor boards were raised and split . . . A tree near the house was also struck.”

During the same tempest a ten year old Rehoboth boy was struck and killed by lightning.

In Mendon, Dr. William Jennison’s barn was struck by lightning. The structure, as well as all of its contents, quickly burned to the ground. In Uxbridge, Joseph Reed was knocked unconscious when a bolt travelled down the chimney and into his kitchen. When he awoke, he found his fireplace and floorboards all destroyed.

A few days later, yet another storm struck the region. In Charlestown, the bake house of Thomas Rayner was hit by lightning. The roof caught on fire and suffered considerable damage. Meanwhile at a nearby bolting mill a young apprentice was hit by lightning and knocked off his feet. As he recovered, he noted the bolting cloth inside the mill was burned and the mill damaged.

"You Need be Under No Concern About My Treatment Here" - Massachusetts Loyalists Return Home

At the conclusion of the American Revolution, there was a massive exodus of loyalists from the former colonies to various locations throughout the world. With the passage of Banishment Acts by the American states, the overwhelming majority of loyalists were unable to return to their homelands. Thus, upon departure, many expressed a sense of despair as they left their homeland behind. As the Reverend Isaac Smith opined “"I wish nothing more ardently upon earth, than to see my friends and country again in the enjoyment of peace, freedom and happiness.”

Surprisingly however, there was a small percentage of individuals who were welcomed back into Massachusetts society after 1784.

At the conclusion of the War for Independence, a handful of Massachusetts loyalists started to reach out to family and friends in an effort to secure permission to return home. Those who lacked necessary contacts asked influential Americans such as John Adams or Congressman James Lovell for help. They consciously tried to show their affection for the new United States, especially the state of Massachusetts. In December 1786, three years after the conclusion of the war, exiled loyalist Dr. John Jeffries assured John Adams "that having been honored by my birth, education & many years residence in the capital of the same state [Massachusetts], I feel myself really interested in the rising honour & future welfare of it." To demonstrate his new found loyalty to Massachusetts, Isaac Smith spurned other loyalists and began to socialize at the Franklin Club in London.

Naturally, Massachusetts residents were opposed to their return. Many Bostonians feared returning loyalists would “destroy public virtue, advance episcopacy, and support an aristocracy.” In a letter to her husband, Abigail Adams noted "the spirit which rises here against the return of the Refugees is violent, you can hardly form an Idea of it."

In response, John Adams and Theodore Sedgwick advocated for a conciliatory policy towards Tories. Both argued that prosperous and well-educated citizens like the loyalists would encourage Massachusetts's economy and place the new nation in a positive light.

Starting in 1784, a small number of loyalists were granted licenses to return by Governor John Hancock. Naturally, many were fearful of violent retribution or arrest upon arrival in Massachusetts. Instead, returning refugees were warmly welcomed and very kindly received by old friends and foes alike. William Pynchon noted in his journal that loyalist "Dr. [John] Prince is graciously received here by all ranks, even by the intolerant G.W.'s and T.M.n.” Dr. Jeffries landed in Boston and was "very politely received, congratulated on my arrival by the company met on the warf." Frederick William Geyer, a former Boston merchant who fled at the outbreak of the war was not only permitted to return, but was encouraged to "pay respect to his Excellency Governor Hancock." The wife of loyalist merchant Thomas Robie assured him that the residents of Marblehead treated her kindly. "You need be under no concern about my treatment here for the Queen of Sheba when she made her visit to King Solomon could not be better treated.”

Many returning loyalists immediately visited their friends and family. Robie’s daughter apologized for not writing promptly following her return in the summer of 1784 and explained "we have been so much engaged in receiving the congratulations of our friends here on our return.” Salem’s Timothy Pickering eagerly welcomed Mehetabel Higginson and assured the loyalist Salem was filled with supportive friends. “I persuade myself you will meet with very little trouble, except from such worthless characters as a `certain ------" who conscious of their infamy, greedily seize every opportunity of acquiring some little popularity.. to cover their reproach. But these efforts of such wretches will be fruitless against the powerful support such numbers of gentlemen of the first characters & influence in Massachusetts, who are your friends.”

Returning loyalists were permitted to sue to recover seized property. Thomas Brattle sued William Foster for seizing his two acre home located adjacent to the Boston Common. The matter was eventually brought before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which ruled that if a loyalist’s property was illegally seized, then it must be returned to its legal owner. In 1784, the Suffolk Court of Common Pleas ruled if a loyalist’s estate was legally confiscated and sold during the war, the previous owner could profit from the sale. For those loyalists who could not recover seized property, they built new homes. William Walter, whose confiscated estate was sold in 1783, bought a house in the North End of Boston. One account described the new residence as “the finest house in that part of Boston, with a yard so large that a generation later nineteen houses were built on." 

The returnees also were able to collect debts. Mary Robie successfully recovered outstanding loans from Marblehead and Salem businessmen. Elijah Williams was able to collect debts owed to him by residents in Keene, New Hampshire.

Other loyalists moved comfortably into Massachusetts society because they had the needed skills or capital. Doctors like John Jeffries and William Paine established substantial medical practices were always needed. Mary Robie encouraged her husband to reopen his store in Marblehead because of a significant demand for goods from the residents.

"Suffer’d Such Barbarous Cruelties" - The Deprivation of Civil Liberties of Massachusetts Loyalists

In 1775, Massachusetts politicians and public figures quickly adopted measures to suppress the rights and liberties of loyalists who had not fled to the safety of Boston and still resided within their communities.

Towards the end of November, 1775, Massachusetts selectmen from dozens of towns called for town meetings and issued orders to their constables to “warn a meeting” of their residents. Typically, constables were instructed “in his majestyes name to Warn a Meeting of the freeholders Inhabitants of Said town Qualifyd by Law to Vote in Town meetings that they meet at their meeting house.”

The town meetings addressed what to do with their loyalist neighbors. After extensive discussion, many of the towns determined that those who remained faithful to the Crown should be prosecuted as criminals. Residents selected men via ballot to serve as both investigator and prosecutor. These individuals were charged with the responsibility of building criminal cases against those suspected of loyalist sympathies.

Selectmen were expected to assist their inquisitors by compiling a list of men who had displayed loyalty to the Crown since the outset of the war. Anyone could submit a name and if the majority of local residents agreed, the person was added to the list of suspected loyalists.

Once the investigation was complete, the “prosecutor” would appear before a local county court and submit evidence of the "inimical character of any inhabitant whom the freeholders charged with favoring the British cause" before sympathetic justices. If satisfied with the presentation, the court would issue warrants for arrest.

Once hauled before the court, criminal defendants were given the opportunity to swear that the American conflict was a just cause, that they would not aid the British government and they would defend the American colonies.

If a defendant refusal to take this oath, he was prosecuted as an enemy of the country. If and when he was found guilty following a trial by jury, the defendant was incarcerated or placed under house arrest. Often Massachusetts courts would also rule that convicted loyalists could neither hold office nor vote. Worse, if the defendant was “a justice, minister, schoolmaster, or a governor of Harvard College,” he was stripped of his position and salary. One colonial judge received such a punishment after a Massachusetts court found him guilty and ruled “whether any suspected to be inimical to the liberties of the Independent States of America, which they are now contending for, and refuses to declare his attachment for the same, should have a seat in this Judicature? Voted they should not.”

On February 4, 1777, the Massachusetts government passed a law restricting loyalist speech. Entitled A law for the punishment of crimes below the degree of treason and misprison of treason, the statute silenced critics of the Declaration of Independence. Those who continued to criticize the push for independence were subject to a monetary fine “not to exceed £ 50 nor to be less than 20s or confinement in jail.”

Two months later, on April 9, 1777, Massachusetts officials passed An Act to prevent the waste of the estates of loyalists leaving estate of £ 20 or more within the state. Under this law, loyalists who abandoned real and personal property when they fled the state were to be treated as if they were dead. In turn, probate judges were authorized to appoint agents who would to take possession of the estate, file an inventory and render accounts as ordered by the court. Preference was given to “patriot” creditors at subsequent estate sales. If a loyalist wife remained behind to care for the family property, she was only entitled to one-third of the real and personal estate.

Two years later, the Massachusetts legislature passed a pair of confiscation laws. Entitled An Act to confiscate the estates of certain persons commonly called absentees and An Act to confiscate the estates of certain notorious conspirators against the government, these laws set aside the pretense that loyalists who fled the state were “civilly dead” and permitted committees and appointed agents to openly seize abandoned loyalist property without due process protections.

Many loyalists watched helplessly as their properties were stripped away from them with a simple legal notice: “To all People to whom these Presents shall come: Greeting-Whereas in and by an Act of the great and general Court passed and enacted on the thirtieth day of April in the Year of our Lord One Thousand seven hundred & seventy nine the Estate of the Persons therein mentioned for the Reasons in the same Act set forth are declared to be forfeited & ordered to be confiscated to the use of the Government, And Whereas by another Act of the same Court passed in the same Year the Estates of all Persons guilty of the Crimes therein mentioned & described are made confiscable in manner as by the same Act is provided.”

In 1778, Massachusetts passed a law denying loyalists the right to work within certain professions. Specifically, members of the General Assembly, civic and military officers, attorneys at law and physicians were all summarily excluded from their occupations.

By 1783, the state had passed two banishment acts, a law implementing a bill of attainder and resolutions restricting loyalist movement within the boundaries of Massachusetts.

The anonymous author “Plain English” (believed to be Boston loyalist Peter Oliver) correctly surmised the deprivation of personal liberties during the American Revolution when he stated “the distresses of some of those people who, from a sense of their duty to the King and a reverence for his laws, have behaved quietly and peacably, and for which reason they have been deprived of their liberty, abused in their persons, and suffer’d such barbarous cruelties, insults, and indignities beside the loss of their property by the hands of lawless mobs and riots as would have been disgraceful even for savages to have committed.”

"They Will Take All The Cattle From The Island" - The Forage Operations of May 1775

A year ago this week, the nerds of Historical Nerdery posted a pair of articles discussing American efforts to starve British forces out of Boston. Today we’d like to go into a little more detail about the forage operations of May, 1775.

Following the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the Massachusetts Grand Army surrounded Boston and began to lay siege to it. The Massachusetts Committee of Safety quickly recognized that in order to drive the British army from Boston, it had to starve them out.

On May 7, 1775, the Committee passed a resolution ordering selectmen and Committee of Correspondence members for Chelsea "to take effectual methods for the prevention of any Provisions being carried into the Town of Boston."

The British military had a longstanding practice of supplementing troops’ rations with fresh meat and produce that it purchased from local farmers. If these supplies were cut off, Gage would be forced to depend upon a long and tenuous line of communication to British possessions in Nova Scotia and, ultimately, back to England. To complicate matters, Gage’s Atlantic supply lines would be exposed to the privateer wolf packs of Newburyport, Salem and Plymouth.

At first, Gage contemplated purchasing supplies from American farmers who lived on the islands in Boston Harbor. Unfortunately, many yeomen were reluctant to cooperate. As farm manager William Harris noted, he was “very uneasy, the people from the Men of War frequently go to the Island to Buy fresh Provision, his own safety obliges him to sell to them, on the other Hand the Committee of Safety have threatened if he sells anything to the Army or Navy, that they will take all the Cattle from the Island, & our folks tell him they shall handle him rufly.” Thus, Gage decided he would initiate operations to forcefully seize supplies.

On May 10, 1775, Elijah Shaw testified before the Massachusetts Committee of Safety. The farmer testified that a British detachment of fifty men visited his farm and seized a large number of animals and five tons of hay, He also reported that he had heard rumors “the Troops would soon make a push either towards Dorchester Neck or Chelsea.”

American commanders found themselves unprepared to respond to these foraging operations. Initially the Massachusetts Committee of Safety proposed ““that all the live-stock be taken from Noddle’s Island, Hog Island, and Snake Island, and from that part of Chelsea near the seacoast, and be driven back.” However, the Committee failed to secure troops from nearby communities to carry out the instructions. Afterwards, the Committee turned to a New Hampshire regiment to take up defensive posts on the various islands and prevent supplies from falling into British hands. The was the 1st New Hampshire Regiment under the command of John Stark. Unfortunately, Stark reported that his unit could not carry out the mission because it was too poorly equipped. After receiving this news, the Committee of Safety resumed debate on how to best undertake interdiction operations.

Gage took advantage of the American confusion and continued to send out foraging parties. On May 21st, he enlisted the support of Vice Admiral Samuel Graves, and dispatched an armed schooner, two sloops and a detachment of one hundred troops to Grape Island.

The island, incorporated within the town of Hingham, was owned by Elisha Leavitt, a wealthy loyalist who had previously offered or sold the supplies to Gage. The vessels’ approach alarmed the neighboring towns. General John Thomas, in command of the provincial militia at Roxbury, sent three companies to a point of land across from Grape Island. The militiamen opened fire on the island but, given the range, had little effect beyond drawing a response from the ships’ cannons. Eventually, the regulars had escaped, taking with them what they could.

In response, the militiamen torched Leavitt’s barn and eighty tons of hay still inside, and seized the remaining livestock. 

Provincial leaders scrambled to find a way to prevent further such raids and stop the flow of supplies into Boston. The Committee of Safety drafteda new resolution to the Massachusetts Provincial Congress on May 23, 1775. The Committee urged the Provincial Congress to use its authority to secure resources on the harbor islands and Massachusetts seacoast. The next day, the Committee issued a second resolution, stating "Resolved, That it be recommended to Congress immediately to take such order respecting the removal of the Sheep and Hay from Noddle’s Island, as they may judge proper, together with the stock on adjacent islands."

In compliance with the Committee of Safety resolutions, Major General Artemas Ward, commander-in-chief of the army surrounding Boston, convened a council of war to discuss removing or destroying all supplies on Noddle’s and Hog Islands. From this meeting a plan would be formulated regarding the removal of resources from some of the nearby Boston Harbor islands.

British spies quickly gathered intelligence and passed it on to Gage. In a note to Vice Admiral Graves dated the morning of May 25th, the British commander reported “I have this moment received Information that the Rebels [intend] this Night to destroy, and carry off all the Stock & on Noddles Island,for no reason but because the owners having sold them for the KingsUse: I therefore give you this Intelligence that you may please to

order the guard boats to be particularly Attentive and to take such Other Measures as you may think Necessary for this night.”

In response, Graves recommended landing “a Guard upon the Island [as] the Most probable Means of preserving the Hay from being destroyed.” That evening there was an attempt to send a detachment over to Noodle’s Island. However, as Lieutenant John Barker of the King’s Own Regiment noted “50 Men order’d last night; did not go on account of the tide not serving.”

"For a Trial of the Powder" - Andover's Gunpowder Mill

In the aftermath of Lexington, Concord and Bunker Hill, Massachusetts officials recognized that its armies had a critically short supply of gunpowder. After spending many months attempting to acquire powder from third parties outside the colony, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress voted to build its own mill in Stoughton.

Recognizing a potential economic opportunity, Andover’s Samuel Phillips Jr. approached the Provincial Congress and requested permission to build, at his own expense, a privately powder mill. After extensive negotiations, Massachusetts lawmakers agreed to the proposal and promised “to furnish him with saltpetre and sulphur at cost for a year, and to pay him at the rate of eight pence per pound for all the gunpowder which he should manufacture”.

In turn, Phillips agreed to “keep a good and sufficient Guard about the mill at all time to prevent any wicked and design ing persons from destroying the same and also to cause to be published all the discoveries which he shall make relative to the construction of said mill and the manufacturing Powder as aforesaid.”

Construction of Phillip’s powder mill was completed by March, 1776. By late Spring, the mill was producing large quantities of gunpowder. According to the Massachusetts Spy, “the Public may rely on it as a fact that there has been made at the Powder-mill, at Andover, within these six weeks past about one thousand pounds weight of good Gunpowder per week.”

An eyewitness who visited the mill confirmed the newspaper report. “Last week I was at the Powder Mill at Andover. They go briskly on and turn out, as they told me, twelve hundred pounds per week, and shall soon turn out considerably more.”

Unfortunately, the mill could not keep up with the demand for gunpowder and was forced to operate seven days a week. When several of his employees, including his foreman, were drafted into service with the Continental Army, Phillips petitioned the Massachusetts General Court to exempt them. “When your Petitioner considers the distress this state has suffered for want of this article of Gunpowder, the danger it is still exposed to through the still remaining deficiency, That the anxiety of the Assembly on this account was such that they lately requested that this mill should be kept employed by night as well as day: and not on the week time only, but also on the Sabbath, and at the same time reflects how much the manufacturing will be retarded by changing hands, and also the difficulty of making Powder of so good a Quality, and the Impossibility of improving the stock to so much Advantage for the State, he thinks it his Duty in regard to the Publick interest as well as his own to make application to the Honble Board, as having the first command, that the aforesaid Foreman, Joshua Chandler by name, may be discharged from his enlistment, and that the men necessarily employed in that manufactory be excused from all military service during their continuance therein.”

Eventually, the mill’s saltpetre supply dwindled. Phillips quickly wrote to Massachusetts officials and begged for the necessary ingredient. “All the saltpetre is worked up. My pestles must stand still till I receive more." Little assistance was provided and by 1777, the Andover gunpowder mill was forced to cut corners. Period accounts suggest Andover residents were tearing down sheds and coops and excavating the soil underneath them to serve as a substitute for saltpetre.

General Washington and his officers quickly noted the poor quality of Massachusetts gunpowder. “There must certainly be either roguery or gross ignorance in your powder-makers, because the powder made in the other states is esteemed better than that imported from Europe It is a matter of so much importance that it should be strictly inquired into."

In response to Washington’s complaints, Massachusetts officials focused on Phillip’s business and ordered its powder be recalled and replaced with a superior product. “[That] as some of the gunpowder made at Andover . . . had been found defective . . . all such defective powder should be received back into the mills and good powder furnished the Government instead.” In fact, lawmakers were so troubled by the product coming out of Andover that it also ordered a Colonel Burbeck to visit the mill, “for a trial of the powder and to make experiments of divers mixtures 2 and ingredients of gunpowder and various methods of drying.”

In early June 1778, disaster struck the Andover mill when an explosion destroyed two buildings and killed three men. Residents of the town were outraged and within weeks, Massachusetts officials formed a committee to investigate the practices of the mill.

Upon completion, the committee cleared Phillips and concluded the "late misfortune in blowing up the two buildings at said Andover was not owing to any Imprudence in Mr. Phillips but to mear accident, also that in their opinion the public service requires that Mr. Phillips should still proceed in the manufacturing of Gunpowder."

Andover residents objected to the findings and demanded that Phillip’s mill suspend operations. However, after Massachusetts promised to insure against future accidents, and that experts would be hired to oversee operations, the town agreed to tpermit the mill to reopen. Shortly afterwards, two Frenchmen were hired “to propagate the art of making powder in these States and were ordered to come to Andover to give the necessary instructions.”

Following the explosion, many local residents were reluctant to work for Phillips As a result the mill employed British prisoners of war. The Massachusetts government was not pleased with this arrangement and threatened to remove the prisoners from the mill. Phillips successfully convinced them not to as "some have married, had children, taken the oath of allegiance, paid taxes, and become useful members of society."

The mill remained in operation throughout the remainder of the war and in the decade afterwards. By the mid 1790s Phillips decided to convert his business from the production of gunpowder to the making of paper. Unfortunately, on October 19, 1796 the mill exploded for a second time, killing two men. Phillips’ gunpowder operation permanently ceased immediately afterwards.