Saint Croix Courier, St. Stephen, NB
March 23, 1893
GLIMPSES OF THE PAST
Contributions to the History of Charlotte County and the Border Towns.
LIX – THE UNITED EMPIRE LOYALISTS.
[Rev. W. O. Raymond, M. A.]
6.- Persecution of Loyalists.
The position of the Loyalists after the Declaration of Independence was indeed a painful one.
History in times of civil discord always proves the impracticability of neutrality. Those of the Loyalists who desired at the outset to be conservators of peace, and who made some effort for the preservation of order and the rights of property, were denounced as enemies of liberty and finally compelled in self defence to claim the protection of the royal army rather than take the oath of allegiance to the Congress and fight against their king.
Probably a large portion of the people of America would gladly have remained neutral; but the Declaration of Independence left no neutrals. He who opposed independence became ipso facto ‘an enemy of liberty.’ Thus by the action of Congress at Philadelphia, July 4th, 1776, thousands of peace-loving citizens were classed as ‘enemies,’ ‘rebels,’ and even ‘traitors,’ because they declined to renounce allegiance to the mother land and swear allegiance to a new and self-created authority, relinquishing their privileges as British subjects at the command of republican leaders whom they neither liked nor trusted.
In the early stages of the Revolution, the Loyalists suffered greatly at the hands of organized mobs which, under the designation of ‘Sons of Liberty,’ dealt in the harshest way with all suspected of entertaining sentiments favorable to the crown. Private proceedings were devised to ascertain the opinions of any regarded as doubtful supporters of independency. The prominent Tories were called on to recant and swear allegiance to Congress. Failing to secure the desired recantation, there followed in order, disarming, confinement to residence or to certain limits, fines, imprisonment, banishment and in many instances gross personal injury and even murderous violence.
The use of tar and feathers, Sabine remarks, was ‘so frequent as to qualify the saying of the ancient, that man is a two-legged animal without feathers.’ The mob sometimes varied this punishment by smoking the Tories,-the victims in that case being confined in a close room before an open fire of green wood, with a cover applied to the top of the chimney. Still another alternative was the cruel and shameful practice of riding Tories on a rail.
To give a tithe of the recorded instances of the brutality of the New England mobs would far transcend the limits of this paper. The details of many of the outrages will be found in such books as Jones’ Loyalist History of New York, Sabine’s Loyalists of the American Revolution, Ryerson’s Loyalists of America and their Times, Peters’ History of Connecticut, Bartlett’s Frontier Missionary, etc.
A long list of pamphlets and other published writings might be given wherein individuals have recorded the pitiful tale of sufferings which they experienced at the hands of old time friends and neighbors. Little surprise need be manifested at the strong partisan feeling that runs through the pages penned by men who sacrificed so much and suffered so severely. The opinions of these old Loyalists were very pronounced, and their estimate of the general character and conduct of the ‘rebels’ by no means flattering. The counterpart will be found in the records of the actors on the other side, whose opinion of the ‘Tories’ is well known. Whilst, however, the opinions of these old Loyalists must be taken cum grano salis, there is every reason to believe that the facts recorded by them are substantially accurate. The subsequent history of the writers in the land of their adoption furnishes the most satisfactory evidence of their integrity of character, and inspires confidence in their credibility.
In no way can we acquire so vivid an idea of the brutality of the New England mobs as by reading the personal experience of some of the sufferers as related by themselves. The experience of Jacob Bailey in Maine, of Thomas Jones in New York, of James Moody in New Jersey, and of John Connolly in Pennsylvania, are only fair samples of the bitter trials endured by their compatriots. Mention may also be made of the hardships endured by the missionaries of the Church of England who were laboring at numerous points in all the colonies, from Maine to Georgia. Their reports transmitted to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts are filled with striking pictures of the horrors of civil war.
The cruelty and injustice of the mobs, select-men, Sons of Liberty and like organizations in the early days of the Revolution greatly contributed to the subsequent bitterness and animosity of the conflict, and no doubt added largely to the number of the Loyalists who took up arms and fought through the war on the royal side.
Take the case of Silas Raymond, of Norwalk, Conn., as an example of what was a very common experience. His sympathy was with the mother country, and he was averse to the idea of independence. Having the courage to express his opinions, he speedily aroused the animosity of the select-men. They threatened his life, and two attempts were actually made to shoot him as he was engaged in reaping wheat in his field in the autumn of 1776. He was obliged to join the British garrison at Lloyd’s Neck, Long Island, distant some twenty miles across the Sound. His real estate was ordered to be leased out for the use and benefit of the state, and his goods and effects confiscated by order of the authorities, in December, 1777. The confiscation papers allege as the ground of action that ‘the said Raymond has put and continued to hold and screen himself under the protection of the ministerial army.’
Take again the case of Walter Bates, of Stamford, Conn. He writes:
‘The British fortified Lloyd’s Neck with a garrison, opposite the islands and coves lying between the churches of Norwalk and Stamford, whose inhabitants were wealthy farmers-Churchmen and Quakers-all loyalists, which afforded a complete asylum and safe passage, by which my three brothers and hundreds of others passed by night almost continually to the British garrison.
At length the thing I greatly feared came upon me. A small boat was discovered by the American guard, in one of these coves, by night, in which they suspected that one of my brothers, with some others, had come from the British. They supposed them concealed in the neighbourhood and that I must be acquainted with it.
At this time I had just entered my sixteenth year. I was taken and confined in the Guard House; next day examined before a Committee and threatened with sundry deaths if I did not confess what I knew not of. They threatened among other things to confine me at low water and let the tide drown me if I did not expose these honest farmers. At length I was sent back to the Guard House until ten o’clock at night, when I was taken out by an armed mob, conveyed through the field gate one mile from the town to back Creek, then having been stripped my body was exposed to the mosquitoes, my hands and feet confined to a tree near the Salt Marsh, in which situation for two hours time every drop of blood would be drawn from my body; when soon after two of the committee said that if I would tell them all I knew, they would release me, if not they would leave me to these men who perhaps would kill me.
I told them that I knew nothing that would save my life.
They left me, and the Guard came to me and said they were ordered to give me, if I did not confess, one hundred stripes, and if that did not kill me I would be hanged. Twenty stripes was then executed with severity, after which they sent me again to the Guard House. No ‘Tory” was allowed to speak to me, but I was insulted and abused by all.
The next day the committee proposed many means to extort a confession from me, the most terrifying was that of confining me to a log on the carriage in the saw mill and let the saw cut me in two if I did not expose those Tories. Finally they sentenced me to appear before Col. Davenport, in order that he should send me to headquarters, where all the Tories he sent were surely hanged. Accordingly next day I was brought before Davenport-one of the descendants of the old apostate Davenport, who fled from old England-who, after he had examined me, said with great severity of countenance, ‘I think you could have exposed those Tories.’
I said to him, ‘You might rather think I would have exposed my own father sooner than suffer what I have suffered.’ Upon which the old judge could not help acknowledging that he never knew any one who had withstood more without exposing confederates, and he finally discharged me the third day. It was a grievous misfortune to be in such a situation, but the fear of God animated me not to fear man. My resolution compelled mine enemies to show their pity that I had been so causelessly afflicted, and my life was spared. I was, however, obliged to seek refuge from the malice of my persecutors in the mountains and forests until their frenzy might be somewhat abated.
After two years’ absence, on my return home, I found my father down with the small-pox, suspected to be given him by design, consequently the family were all in inoculation, which I also had to endure, after which I could not by any means think of leaving my father until I had assisted him in his wheat harvest.
The first night after I was summoned with a draft for the Continental Service with three days’ notice, consequently was compelled to flee for refuge, I knew not where, but providentially found myself next morning in the immediate neighborhood of a British garrison.
After the Declaration of Independence, the new state authorities claimed the right to enforce against all Royalists severe punishments-confiscation of property, imprisonment, banishment, and even death. In Massachusetts, a person suspected of enmity to the cause of independence could be arrested and banished, unless he would swear allegiance to the friends of liberty. Three hundred and eighty persons were designated by name, who had fled from their homes; the penalty of their return was fixed as imprisonment and transportation to a place possessed by the British, and for a second return without leave, death without benefit of clergy. In Rhode Island, death and confiscation of estate were the penalties provided for any person who communicated with the British ministry or its agents, or who offered supplies to the British forces and to the armed ships of the king. The offence of enlisting or procuring others to enlist in the royal army or navy was punished with loss of estate and of personal liberty not exceeding three years. The laws enacted by the other states were similar. Forfeiture of estate, confiscation of property, loss of personal liberty, and even death were the penalties Loyalists were subjected to for adhering to the cause in which they believed. In New York alone, sixty Loyalists of note are mentioned by name in the Confiscation Act, which decreed that ‘each and every of them who shall at any time hereafter be found in any part of this state shall be and are hereby declared guilty of death as in case of felony without benefit of clergy.’ The proscribed list includes the names of Beverley Robinson, George Duncan Ludlow, Gabriel Ludlow, Christopher Billop, James DeLancey, Robert Bayard, Dr. Charles Inglis and others prominent in the early history of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. The estates of all these Loyalists were confiscated. That of James DeLancey was sold by the state for $234,198.75, and that of Frederick Phillipse, another of the attainted sixty, was valued in 1809 at above £600,000. The names of Susannah Robinson, Margaret Inglis, and Mary Morris, (wives respectively of Col. Beverley Robinson, Dr. Charles Inglis and Col. Roger Morris,) were included in those ‘forever banished from this state.’ They were placed among the sixty, says Judge Jones, because they were possessed of large and valuable real estate in their own right; the vindictive legislature of New York, in order to get possession of these estates, attainted the women for adhering to the enemies of the state-that is to say, for living with the husbands! Their children, many of them mere infants, were thus debarred from inheriting the estates of their mothers.
Like penalties might be imposed on all who could by a summary trial be proved guilty of treason. The 9th section of the Confiscation Act states what overt acts shall be deemed evidence of high treason, viz.
Voluntarily withdrawing to any place within the power or possession of the King of Great Britain, his fleets or armies; or being apprehended by order of provincial congress, or committees thereof, or councils of public safety of this State.
John Adams, ‘the colossus’ of the congress of 1776, which gave to the world the Declaration of Independence, in that very declaration affirmed that ‘all men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,’ yet in almost the same breath he ‘strenuously recommended to fine, imprison and hang all inimical to the cause, without favor or affection.’ The Revolutionary party learned all too well the lesson instilled into their minds by their leaders.
Early in the contest, great bitterness was excited; and wherever the two parties were nearly equal the internecine strife assumed all the horrors of a civil war. It is as easy as it is unfair for United States local historians to record, with some exaggeration of detail, the outrages which were committed during the conflict by certain of the Loyalists, and to ignore like acts on the part of the Whigs.
It should be remembered that the Loyalists who were victims of outrages at the hands of mobs, Sons of Liberty, etc., would naturally carry ever after a keen remembrance of their sufferings, and be disposed to retaliate whenever fitting opportunity presented itself. Here is a case in point.
William Frost, a Loyalist, of Stamford, Conn., after suffering the usual persecutions at the hands of the selectmen of his native town, fled for refuge to the British garrison at Lloyd’s Neck. The ‘rebels’ of Stamford were in most instances attendants at the Rev. Dr. Mather’s services, the doctor himself being a pronounced advocate of American independence. On the night of July 21st, 1781, Capt. Frost, at the head of an armed party, crossed the Sound in seven boats, and the following day (Sunday) surprised and carried off Dr. Mather and forty-eight prominent ‘leaders of sedition.’ They were brought within the lines of the garrison at Lloyd’s Neck, where they found many of their old neighbors whom the war had now changed into bitter enemies. Doubtless Frost’s exploit was a brilliant success from the British standpoint, but the Stamford local historian views it as a ‘sacrilegious foray,’ and enlarges in detail on the subsequent sufferings of Dr. Mather and his flock. But why omit the account of the cruel treatment experienced by their neighbor, Rev. Dr. Leaming, who was confined in jail as a Tory, and even denied a bed? His treatment caused hip disease, and rendered him a cripple for life. Dr. Mather’s prison was probably not a whit worse than some which were occupied by the Loyalists, as witness the following:
Under the convention chamber in which the New York provincial congress met in 1777, were jail rooms in which were confined the Loyalists who had been arrested by the committee appointed to inquire into and detect conspiracies. This prison was so full, and the prisoners so neglected and in such a horrid state, that the convention, on motion of Governor Morris, passed the following resolution:
Whereas, From the past want of care in the prisoners now confined in the jail immediately underneath the Convention Chamber, the same is supposed to have become unwholesome, and very nauseous and disagreeable effluvia arises, which may endanger the health of the members of the Convention;
Therefore resolved, That for the preservation of their health, the members of the convention be at liberty at their pleasure to smoke in the Convention Chamber, while the House is sitting and proceeding to business.
(Governor Morris, who moved the resolution, was not a smoker.)
Shortly afterwards, the jail became so crowded that a prison fleet was established, which in turn became so over-crowded as to be no fit abode for the worst of criminals. These prison ships were eventually burned, to prevent their capture by the British. Judge Jones states:
There were at this time about 150 Loyalists on board, and confined below decks in irons. The rebel crews got on shore, but they never released the poor prisoners, who all perished in the flames.
Correction: Article LXX contains the following correction to this one: "In the paragraphs near the close, the name of the mover of the resolutions should be ‘Gouverneur Morris,’ not ‘Governor Morris.’"