"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.

"But I Know Not Why I Should Make You Unhappy by Reciting What We Suffer" - A Civilian Account of the First Week Inside the Siege of Boston

In the days following the Battles of Lexington and Concord, Dr. Joseph Fiske travelled from house to house in Lexington, as well as along the British retreat route, tending to the British and American wounded. Meanwhile, on April 23, 1775, representatives from the Massachusetts Provincial Congress arrived in Lexington and deposed members of the Lexington militia as to the events surrounding the Battle of Lexington.

Meanwhile, in Boston, the British army found itself trapped; surrounded by an army of Massachusetts Yankees. On the evening of April 18, 1775, many of the residents of Boston already knew a military operation was in motion and thus, got little sleep. “I did not git to bed this night till after 12 o'clock, nor to sleep till long after that, & then my sleep was much broken, as it had been for many nights before.” Most were oblivious of plans to seize and destroy a supply depot and instead believed the British objective was the arrest of Samuel Adams and John Hancock. Sarah Winslow Deming recalled “the main was to take possession of the bodies of Mesrs Adams & Handock, whom they & we knew where were lodg'd. We had no doubt of the truth of all this.”

Over the next few days, as the American army surrounded the town and settled into a siege, scores of Bostonians discovered they were prohibited from fleeing the town. As Deming despaired “I was Genl Gage's prisoner -- all egress, & regress being cut off between the town & country. Here again description fails. No words can paint my distress.”

Representatives from the town voted to approach General Gage to secure his permission for Americans to evacuate. After a tense meeting, the general ultimately agreed on the condition they surrender their weapons.

Andrew Eliot was minister in Boston. Following the Battles of Lexington and Concord, he was fortunate enough to have successfully removed his family from the town before the lockdown.  However, he chose to remain behind to tend to his congregation. 

In a April 25th letter to Thomas Hollis, Eliot described the dire conditions of Boston at the onset of the siege and the preparations of its residents to flee.

“Boston April 25 1775, Dear Sir, I wrote you by Capt. Robson & should not so soon have troubled you again, were I not impelled by the unhappy Situation of this Town, which by the late cruel & oppressive measures gone into by the British Parliament is now almost depopulated or will be in a few Days. Filled with the Troops of Britain & surrounded with a provincial Army, all communication with the Country is cut off, & we wholly deprived of the necessaries of Life, & this principal mart of America is become a poor garrison Town. The inhabitants have been confined to the city more than a week, & no person suffer'd to enter . . . At length the General hath consented that if the Inhabitants would deliver their Arms they should be sufferd to depart This proposal humiliating as it is, hath been complied with In consequence of this agreement almost all are leaving their pleasant habitations & going they know not whither-- The most are obliged to leave their furniture & effects of every kind, & indeed their all to the uncertain chance of war or rather to certain ruin & destruction . . . The last Week I thot myself in comfortable circumstances had a convenient dwelling well furnished, a fine Library made so very much by the munificence of our late most worthy Friend, attended by a large, affectionate, & generous Congregation, happy in a Consort one of the best of Women, & surrounded by a large Number of desirable Children; now I am by a cruel Necessity turned out of my House must leave my Books & all I possess, perhaps to be destroyed by a licentious Soldiery; my beloved Congregation dispersed, my dear Wife retreating to a distant part of the Country, my Children wandering not knowing whither to go, perhaps left to perish for Want, myself soon to leave this devoted Capital, happy if I can find some obscure Corner wch will afford me a bare Subsistence. I wish to God the authors of our Misery could be Witnesses of it. They must have Hearts harder than an adamant if they did not relent & pity us . . . Forgive Dear Sir these severe Reflections on the Parent Country my Heart is wounded, deeply wounded, almost to [illegible] Death. Surely there is a God that judgeth in the Earth, & what must the Contrivers of these Schemes have to answer for in another World, if not in this. But I know not why I should make you unhappy by reciting what we suffer.”

"She Fought Bravely" - The Privateer Vengeance

We figured it was long overdue for the nerds to return to Newburyport and once again discuss Nathaniel Tracy’s privateer fleet that harassed British supply lines in the North Atlantic during the American Revolution. Today we'll review the privateer Vengeance.

According to the ship’s bond, the Vengeance was a four hundred ton brig armed with over twenty 6 pound cannons and a crew compliment of one hundred and twenty men. She was commanded by Wingate Newman, an experienced privateer who had previously commanded the brigantine Hancock. Newbury physician Samuel Nye served as the ship’s surgeon and kept a journal of his adventures on board the Vengeance.

The privateer left Newburyport on August 16, 1778 in search of a rumored British supply convoy bound from the West Indies to England. Approximately two and a half weeks later, on September 2, 1778, the Vengeance encountered the fleet, but was chased away by two frigates escorting it. Four days later Vengeance encountered the same convoy, but was too far away to give chase.

On September 17th, the Vengeance’s luck changed when its crew observed the sixteen gun packet ship HMS Harriot sailing westward for New York City. Captain Newman immediately ordered the Vengeance to give chase. According to the commander, the Harriot offered “small resistance.” 

Surgeon Nye described the engagement in greater detail. “Sept 17 Lat 49 Discovered a sail at 9 AM bearing ENE 4 leagues distance at 3 PM got within cannon shot of her gave her two or three bow chasers and received as many stern chasers from her soon after which she hauled up her courses and gave a broadside but her guns being light the shot did not reach she then endeavored to get away by making sail again but found it impracticable she again lay to till we got within pistol shot of her and then gave us another broadside which was returned on our part and to such purpose as to oblige her to strike at once after having one man killed and six wounded.”

After the Harriot surrendered, the crew was removed and the prize was sent to Newburyport to be sold.

Four days later, on September 21, 1778, the Vengeance encountered the fourteen gun HMS Snow Eagle, which was en route to Falmouth, England. After a long chase the Snow Eagle was forced to turn and engage the Newburyport privateer. 

Newman held his fire until the very last minute and then unleashed a full broadside into the Snow Eagle. After a twenty minute fight the British ship surrendered with two killed and six wounded.  Among the dead was one of the passengers, a Colonel Howard of the 1st Guards Regiment.  Nye recalled how he was brought on board the enemy vessel to render medical assistance to the wounded. One sailor was so badly injured the doctor “was obliged to amputate his leg.” 

On board the Vengeance, only Captain Newman was slightly wounded.

The Newburyport privateer took eighty nine prisoners that day. Among the detainees were an assortment of officers. “The prize proved to be . . . from New York to Falmouth out twenty eight days mounting twelve three pounders and having forty three men beside the following passengers Col Howard of the 1st Regiment Guards killed in the engagement Col McDonald 71st Regiment Highlanders Col Anstruther Col Stevens of the Guards Maj Barcley Maj Forbes and the Hon Maj afterwards Lord Charles Cathcart Capt of the Athol Highlanders and 2d Major of Lord Cathcart’s legion and brother to Lord Cathcart Mr Sloper cornet of horse two sergeants three or four servants and Miss Jane Marsh On board were some dry goods besides plate and cash to a considerable amount Got the prisoners on board our brig and sent Mr Thomas Newman prize master and a gang of our people aboard to repair her rigging.”

Captain Newman was now faced with a dilemna. Specifically, he had “more prisoners aboard than my own number consisted of, my vessel excessive crank, and not much provisions on board. I determined to go to Bilboa in order to get rid of my prisoners and to refit my vessel, but on making Cape Ortugal the wind came to the Eastward and blew very hard, which obliged me to put into this port [La Coruña, Spain] . . .”

Upon arriving in La Coruña around October 4, 1778, Newman turned all of his prisoners over to the British consul, Herman Katenkamp. In turn, he secured a receipt for the future exchange of American prisoners of equal ranks.

The Vengeance was back at sea in late October 1778. While on patrol off the coast of Spain she encountered the fourteen gun British privateer Defiance. A vicious fight ensued before the Defiance was forced to surrender. 

Newman lost eight men killed or wounded, while the British suffered fifteen casualties.

In December, 1778, the Vengeance captured the brigantine Elizabeth and the brig Francis.

The Vengeance returned to the New England coast in April, 1779. On April 19th she met the British privateer Mary, which was en route to Antigua. Although only slightly outgunned, the Mary immediately surrendered without a fight.

The privateer returned to Newburyport on May 29, 1779.

While in port, the ship underwent extensive repairs. As she was nearing the end of her refit the British established a military outpost at Penobscot, Maine. In response, Massachusetts authorities began raising an expedition to drive them out. Among the privateers recruited for this expedition was the Vengeance.

Apparently Captain Newman declined to participate in the expedition with the Vengeance and thus, command was transferred to a Captain Thomas Thomas of Newburyport. (This is NOT a typo...his name really was Thomas Thomas.)

The privateer took part in the ill-fated Penobscot Expedition of 1779.  Privateer Micah Lunt of Newburyport would later report the fate of the ship. “[In] the year 1779 I shipped in Newburyport on board the armed ship Vengeance commanded by Thomas Thomas in the expedition to Penobscot which ship was driven up the river by the British fleet and with others in the expedition was burnt by order of the Commodore to prevent them falling into the hands of the British their crews took to the woods and on foot found their way back to the province of Massachusetts.”

The Vengeance was destroyed in the Penobscot River to prevent her capture on August 14, 1779.  All of her crew were discharged from Massachusetts service on August 27, 1779.

"To Be Ready At An Hour's Warning" - The Massachusetts Militia System on the Eve of Lexington and Concord

Starting this weekend there will be several interpretive programs highlighting the events surrounding the Battles of Lexington and Concord. In recognition of these educational programs, here is a quick refresher post on the Massachusetts militia system on the eve of the American Revolution.

By the 17th century, militias were the cornerstones of English society. Thus, when Plimouth and Massachusetts Bay colonies were founded, the establishment of the militia followed naturally. In both colonies, every man over sixteen automatically became a member. The governor maintained the sole authority to activate the militia in the time of crisis. Each time a new town sprung up, a militia company was formed. As the town expanded, additional companies often were created. When counties were formed, the various town militias within the borders of each county were organized into regiments. The governor held the sole authority to activate the militia in the time of crisis. 

In the decades following the establishment of the initial English settlements in Massachusetts, the number of hostile encounters had continually increased between the colonists and the French and Native Americans who opposed further English expansion west and north into New England. To counter the ever-present threat of French and Native American attacks, Massachusetts created rapid response militia units that evolved over time into the minutemen. During King Phillips’s War (1675-1676), Massachusetts ordered one hundred men from each county regiment “to be ready at an hour’s warning and . . . not fail to be at the [appointed] rendezvous.” With the outbreak of King George’s War in 1745, militia commanders were again required to appoint a fraction of their men “to be [ready] at a minutes warning to march [to the] enemy.” When the French and Indian War started, Massachusetts continued to make use of the rapid-response concept. Militia companies were required to single out particular men “to be completely furnished with arms and ammunition . . . and hold themselves in readiness to march at a minute’s warning to such part of the [frontier] or elsewhere as service required.”

However, with the elimination of the French threat as a result of the French and Indian War, the need for a militia decreased significantly. After 1763, companies and regiments of Massachusetts militia rarely assembled to drill and as a result, were of little military value. By the eve of the Boston Tea Party, a militia muster was not viewed as a military gathering, but rather as a sort of town holiday offering an opportunity for families and friends to get together. 

The Massachusetts Provincial Congress correctly surmised war with England was inevitable. As a result it had to “consider what is necessary to be done for the defence and safety of the province.” Quickly, it resolved to wrest control of the militia away from the group of loyalist officers who commanded it. To achieve this, the Provincial Congress first ordered the militias to “meet forthwith and elect officers to command their respective companies; and that the officers so chosen assemble as soon as may be . . . and proceed to elect field officers.” Congress also recognized the need to revitalize and further strengthen the colony’s militia system as quickly as possible. On October 26, 1774, the delegates set into motion the formation of minute companies within Massachusetts. As part of its resolution, it declared "[The] field officers, so elected, forthwith [shall] endeavor to enlist one quarter, at the least, of the number of the respective companies, and form them into companies of fifty privates . . . who shall equip and hold themselves in readiness, on the shortest notice from the said Committee of Safety, to march to the place of rendezvous . . . said companies into battalions, to consist of nine companies each."

Emphasis on proper military skill and logistical supply was strongly emphasized by the delegates. On the same day as the creation of minute companies, the Provincial Congress resolved "That, as the security of the lives, liberties and properties of the inhabitants of this province, depends under Providence, on their knowledge and skill in the art of military, and in their being properly and effectually armed and equipped, it is therefore recommended, that they immediately provide themselves therewith; that they use their utmost diligence to perfect themselves in military skill; and that, if any of the inhabitants are not provided with arms and ammunition according to law, and that if any town or district within the province is not provided with the full town stock of arms and ammunition . . . that the selectmen of such town or district take effectual care, without delay, to provide the same. "

Finally, the Congress voted to create a Committee of Safety, charged with the responsibility to “carefully and diligently . . . inspect and observe all and every such person or persons as shall at any time attempt or enterprise the destruction, invasion, detriment or annoyance of this Province . . . [The Committee] shall have the power . . . to alarm, muster, and cause to be assembled with the utmost expedition, and completely armed, accoutered . . . march to the place of rendezvous, such and so many of the militia of this Province, as they shall judge necessary for the ends aforsaid.” 

To support the logistical needs of the Committee of Safety, a sister committee was created to gather “such provisions as shall be necessary for [the militia’s] reception and support, until they shall be discharged by order of the Committee of Safety.”

Three days later, on October 29, 1774, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress addressed what appropriate military exercise the various militia and minute companies should adopt. It is possible that the delegates considered the “Norfolk Exercise”. Developed in England in 1757, the Norfolk Exercise, or “A Plan of Discipline, Composed for the Use of the Militia of the County of Norfolk”, had been adopted by many New England militia companies by 1768 and was declared the official drill of the colony in the early 1770’s. However, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress ordered that “it be recommended to the inhabitants of this Province that in order to their perfecting themselves in the Military Art, they proceed in the method ordered by his Majesty in the year 1764, it being, in the opinion of this Congress, best calculated for appearance and defence.” Known as the 1764 Crown Manual of Arms, this was the drill used by the British troops stationed in Boston in 1775.

Acting upon these instructions, the recently elected militia officers loyal to the Provincial Congress traveled throughout their respective counties recruiting minutemen. Andover’s Samuel Johnson, colonel of the 4th Essex Regiment of Militia, appeared before each of his companies to recruit and organize companies of minutemen. On February 2, 1775, he spoke to the four companies of militia from the North and South Parishes of Andover. According to the Essex Gazette, "Last Tuesday at 2 o'clock p. M. the town foot-companies of the 4th regiment of Militia in the County of Essex, Inhabitants of the North Parish in Andover, being mustered (after attending prayers for the direction of the God of armies), Col. Samuel Johnson, lately chosen first officer of said regiment, addressed himself to the companie and with great zeal recommended to them the necessity of enlisting themselves into the service of the province and in a short time fifty able-bodied effective men, being one quarter part of said companies — more than a third part of whom are heads of families and men of substance and Probity, willingly offered themselves: they were then escorted to an Inn, where they made choice of Capt. Thomas Poor, junr, for their captain, Ensign Benjamin Farnum first lieutenant, and Samuel Johnson junr. for second lieutenant. They then subscribed a covenant obliging them to conform to the Resolves of the former or any future Congress or General Assembly of the Province that hath or may have Relation to their Duty, and by said Covenant subjected themselves to martial discipline for the term of one year from the time of their enlisting. And this day the two companies in the South Parish in this town were mustered at two o'clock afternoon, when after attending prayers for direction, Col. Johnson enlisted forty-five able-bodied men as aforesaid and of the like condition and probity, being one quarter part of said companies last mentioned, who immediately proceeded to make choice of Capt. Benjamin Ames for their captain, Lieut. David Chandler first lieutenant and Isaac Abbot for second lieutenant, and subscribed the covenant aforesaid. All being performed with great unanimity, seriousness and decorum, and the soldiers seeming rather to be animated than disheartened by the late disagreeable news contained in the king's speech."

On February 14, 1775, Johnson visited Methuen. Following his speech, fifty men enlisted as minute men under the command of Captain John Davis. Haverhill likewise established a minute company under the command of James Sawyer. On February 22, 1775, Johnson visited Boxford. The colonel “addressed himself with great zeal to the two foot-companies of the Fourth Regiment, recommending to them the necessity of enlisting themselves into the service of the Province, and in a short space of time fifty-three able-bodied and effective men willingly offered themselves to serve their Province in defence of their liberties.” Amesbury, one of the few towns not visited by Johnson, was slow to respond in the formation of a minute company. On March 20, 1775, the town finally “voted to raise fifty able bodyed men including officers for minnit men and to enlist them for one year.”

"I Got Hold of the Bridle of His Horse and Dismounted Him" - The State of the British Column As It Advanced on Lexington

Later this week, Historical Nerdery's Alexander Cain will release his book We Stood Our Ground in print format. The following is an excerpt from the book and discusses the experiences of the British soldiers and Loyalist guides as they advanced on Lexington the morning of April 19, 1775.

The regular soldiers and officers marching towards the Lexington militia were in an understandably foul mood. The expedition, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Smith of the army and Major John Pitcairn of the Royal Marines, consisted of over seven hundred men. The force was composed of one company of marines, and the grenadier and light infantry companies of eleven different regiments.

Also present with the column were the Loyalist guides who either volunteered or were recruited to assist the mission to Concord. Little has been written about the role Loyalists played in Gage’s military operation. A review of primary sources, including Loyalist claims for compensation after the American Revolution, suggest that at least six loyalists were recruited to assist Lieutenant Colonel Smith’s expedition by navigating colonial roads and assisting troops in locating military stores in Concord.

Among the guides were former Harvard classmates and friends Daniel Bliss of Concord and Daniel Leonard of Taunton. Both were well established attorneys who were forced to flee to the safety of Boston in 1774. It was suspected by many Massachusetts Loyalists that Leonard was the anonymous author “Massachusettensis”, who had published a series of pro-government letters drafted in response to the political arguments of John Adams.

Dr. Thomas Boulton of Salem and Edward Winslow Jr. of Plymouth also voluteered for the mission. Boulton was a vocal supporter of Crown policies towards Massachusetts and was forced to flee to Boston in 1774. Winslow held several political and legal posts in Plymouth County. Sensing a radical shift in the political mood in October of 1774, he abandoned his estate and also retreated to Boston.

Another Loyalist was William Warden. Warden was born in Boston and was a shopkeeper, grocer and barber. Unlike many of his station, Warden had been opposed to the political and violent activities of the Massachusetts “patriots” since the Stamp Act.

It appears the guides were interspersed throughout the column. Lieutenant William Sutherland of the 38th Regiment of Foot references on two separate occasions a “guide” attached to the front of the column. “When I heard Lieut. Adair of the Marines who was a little before me in front call out, here are two fellows galloping express to Alarm the Country, on which I immediately ran up to them, seized one of them and our guide the other, dismounted them and by Major Pitcairn's direction gave them in charge to the men.” In a separate letter, Sutherland describes how a Loyalist guide identified a captured American prisoner as being a person of importance. “I mett coming out of a cross road another fellow galloping, however, hearing him some time before I placed myself so that I got hold of the bridle of his horse and dismounted him, our guide seemed to think that he was a very material fellow and said something as if he had been a Member of the Provincial Congress.”

The troops and guides started crossing the Charles River by boat at ten o’clock at night. According to the Reverend William Gordon, “On the first of the night, when it was very dark, the detachment, consisting of all the grenadiers and light infantry, the flower of the army to the amount of 800 or better, officers included, the companies having been fitted up, and several of the inimical torified natives, repaired to the boats, and got into them just as the moon rose, crossed the water, landed on Cambridge side, took through a private way to avoid discovery, and therefore had to go through some places up to their thighs in water.” For the next two hours, the entire expedition stood in the freezing marshes of Phips Farm until rations that they did not need arrived and were handed out.

When the expedition finally got under way at two o’clock in the morning, Colonel Smith soon realized that the entire countryside seemed to know of its existence. As he reported days later, “notwithstanding we marched with the utmost expedition and secrecy, we found the country had intelligence or strong suspicion of our coming, and fired many signal guns, and rung alarm bells repeatedly.” Realizing that the expedition was running behind schedule and that the success of the mission was in jeopardy, Smith halted the column upon reaching Menotomy. There, he gave his men a short rest and summonsed Pitcairn. He ordered the Major to take the six companies of light infantry and “march with all expedition to seize the two bridges on different roads beyond Concord.” Pitcairn set off immediately, pushing his detachment hard, and sent forward an advance guard consisting of Lieutenant Jesse Adair of the Royal Marines, loyalist guide Daniel Murray, several other officers and eight light infantrymen.

As Pitcairn’s force mobilized, the advance guard captured two men on horseback: Asahel Porter and Josiah Richardson of Woburn. As the two riders were taken into custody, signal guns and alarm bells began to sound. Hearing the alarms, Smith ordered an officer to return to Boston to request reinforcements.

At the front of Pitcairn’s column the sound of many galloping horses was heard, and into the ranks of the advance guard rode Major Mitchell’s party which had earlier captured Revere and three Lexington riders. As Lieutenant William Sutherland of the 38th Regiment of Foot remembered, “[we] were joined by Major Mitchell . . . and several other gentlemen who told us the whole Country was alarmed and had Galloped for their lives, or words to that purpose.”

Yet, Pitcairn was determined to still press ahead to Concord. As the expedition advanced, a third alarm rider, Simon Winship of Lexington, was captured. However, unlike his two predecessors, he refused to dismount and had to be dragged off his horse at gunpoint.

The column encountered other individuals on the road that morning both on horse and on foot. Each of them, when questioned by the officers, emphasized that a large body of militia was gathered in Lexington and would resist the regulars if they continued their march to Concord. 

As the column crossed into Lexington, Lieutenant Sutherland physically collided with Benjamin Wellington, a thirty-one-year-old Lexington resident who had his musket and bayonet in hand. “I . . . mett one of them in the teeth whom I obliged to give up his firelock and bayonet, which I believe he would not have done so easily but for Mr. Adair’s coming up.” Wellington was forced to surrender his musket and was then ordered to go home. Instead, he ignored the instruction and hurried back to the village common. He rearmed himself with another musket from the town’s stock.

As the column closed in on Lexington’s common, a British sergeant reported that a party of colonial horsemen rode out from the village and shouted, “[you] had better turn back, for you shall not enter the town!” One of the mounted men then “presented a musquet and attempted to shoot them, but the piece flashed in the pan.” According to Lieutenant Sutherland, another individual fired at him from the vicinity of Buckman’s Tavern. He reported this to Pitcairn who then galloped to the front of the column, halted the men and ordered them to load their muskets and fix bayonets.. “On this, I gave directions to the troops to move forward, but on no account to Fire, or even attempt it without Orders.”

William Sutherland noted “shots fired to the right and left of us, but as we heard no whissing of balls, I [concluded] they were to Alarm the body that was there of our approach.” Off in the distance, militiamen could be seen hurrying into line. “The road before you go into Lexington is level for about 1000 yards . . . when we came up to the main body which appeared to me to Exceed 400 in and about the village who were drawn up in a plain opposite the church.”

Captain Parker’s men waited nervously for the arrival of the British regulars. As the troops approached, many began to realize the danger they were in. One was bold enough to tell Parker “There are so few of us! It is folly to stand here!” The militia captain, ignoring the outcry, turned to his company and stated “Let the troops pass by, and don't molest them, without they begin first.”

Pitcairn was confronted with a military quandary. If he chose to ignore the militia company drawn up on the village common, he would be leaving an armed opponent to his rear. If he halted, he could exacerbate an already tense situation