Part 5

Sullivan himself said: “When I returned from Congress in 1774, and saw the order of the British king and council prohibiting military stores being sent to this country, I took alarm, clearly perceiving the designs of the British ministry, and wrote several pieces upon the necessity of securing military stores, which pieces were published in several papers.” Quint said: “Sullivan, bold and daring, then an active member of the Continental Congress, and well known throughout the province by his leadership at the bar, had great influence. The seizure of the munitions at the fort, though sudden at last, was doubtless not without previous thought. The result of this act was momentous. It was the first act of armed rebellion. It preceded Concord and Lexington by four months of time. The captors of the fort entered it against the fire of fieldpieces and muskets openly, and in daylight they pulled down the royal flag, the first time in American history. They gave three cheers in honor of their success. They carried off a hundred barrels of gunpowder, some light guns and small arms which, under the care of Sullivan, were taken up the river, which was at that time covered with thick ice, through which a channel had to be cut.”

This bold and audacious act was deeply felt in Great Britain. Conciliation was now out of the question. The king’s anger was aroused. It was already bitter enough on account of the Massachusetts troubles. Governor Wentworth issued threatening proclamations.

He dismissed the offending major and captain from their posts in the militia. In answer to his edict all persons in Durham holding civil or military positions under the governor, headed by Sullivan, assembled at the tavern on the green, and there publicly burned their commissions and insignia of office. There was no further need of secrecy. The die was cast and the leaders were well known. The official positions, civil or military, held by many of those who were principals in the affair, obliged them, up to this time, to act with caution. After the burning, not of his ships, but of his commission, Sullivan boldly stepped to the front. The very next day after the capture of the powder he headed a body of men numbering between three and four hundred from Durham and the adjoining towns, and, marching to the Council Chamber, demanded an answer to the question as to whether or not there were any ships or troops expected here, or if the governor had written for any.

His excellency meekly answered: “I know of none.”

The greater part of the powder was stored in the basement of the meeting-house in Durham. The balance, for safety, was distributed in several places, some of it going to Exeter. That stored at Durham, as well as another portion placed with Capt. John Demerritt, was taken by the latter in his own ox-cart, under Sullivan’s direction, to Cambridge, where it arrived barely in time to be dealt out to the troops at Bunker Hill. Of how much value it was there and how badly it was needed, is too well known to bear repetition. Without it and lacking the men from the old Granite State accompanying it, Bunker Hill would not have been such a serious affair for the British army.

In claiming the leadership for Sullivan in this affair there is no desire to extol him at the expense of those with whom he was associated,—men like Langdon, Weare, Bartlett, Thornton, Scammell, Thompson, Folsom, Wentworth, Gilman, and others whose names are now household words. The position was freely conceded by them at the time, and acknowledged by the best informed to-day. After the Lexington fight, and while Sullivan was in attendance at the Second Continental Congress, the gallant young Scammell, who was in his office in Durham, wrote him that, “when the horrid din of civil carnage surprised us on the 20th of April, the universal cry was ‘Oh, if Major Sullivan was here!’ ‘I wish to God Major Sullivan was here!’ ran through the distressed multitude.”

Capt. Eleazer Bennett, who died in Durham in 1852, at the age of one hundred and one, said “that at the time of the capture of the powder he was in the employment of General Sullivan, at his mill at Packer’s Falls, when word was brought in to come down to Durham, to go to Portsmouth, and to get anybody else he could to come with him.” So far as he could remember, the following persons were with him: Maj. John Sullivan, Capt. Winborn Adams, Ebenezer Thompson, John Demerritt, Alpheus and Jonathan Chesley, John Spencer, Micah Davis, Isaac and Benjamin Small, Alexander Scammell, John Griffin, James Underwood, and Eben Sullivan, the major’s brother.

On arriving at Portsmouth they were joined by John Langdon with another party. They captured the fort, took the captain and bound him, and frightened away the soldiers. In the fort they found one hundred casks of powder and one hundred small arms. A portion of the powder was taken by Major Demerritt to his house in Madbury, but most of it was stored under the pulpit of the meeting-house in Durham. On July 19, 1775, as a final proof of Sullivan’s leadership in this movement, Matthew Patten, chairman of the committee of safety for the county of Hillsborough, wrote to General Sullivan congratulating him on his appointment to the rank of Brigadier-General, in which he said: “An appointment which, as it distinguishes your merit, so at the same time it reflects honor upon, and shows the penetrating discernment of those truly eminent patriots from whom you received it; nor are we less sanguine in our expectations of the high advantages which must result under God to the public by your military skill and courage, as you have been indefatigable in attaining the first, and have given a recent instance of the latter, to your great honor and reputation, in depriving our enemies of the means of annoying us at Castle William and Mary, and at the same time furnishing us with materials to defend our invaluable rights and privileges. This, sir, must ever be had in remembrance, and (amongst the actions of others, our heroes of 1775) handed to the latest posterity. That the Almighty may direct your counsels, be with you in the day of battle, and that you may be preserved as a pattern to this people for many years to come, is our frequent prayer.” In Sullivan’s reply he said: “It gives me great pleasure to find so respectable a number of the worthy sons of freedom, in the colony to which I belong, have so publicly given their approbation of my conduct in assisting to secure the warlike stores at Fort William and Mary, and thereby preventing these evils which must have resulted from our enemies having possession of them.”

Nothing further need be said regarding the value of the powder captured on this occasion, or the boldness of the act itself. At Lexington and Concord the British were the aggressors, the Americans acting on the defensive; but at Newcastle the Americans were the aggressors, made the attack boldly in the open day, and as Quint said, “for the first time in American history the British flag was torn down by men in armed rebellion.” John Sullivan’s history is well known. He and his three brothers gave their best services to the land of their birth, and in memory of those services the state of New Hampshire erected a monument of Concord granite on the site of the church in Durham, under which was stored the powder, and in the presence of the governor, council, and other officials, state and national, and a large concourse of people on Thursday, Sept. 27, 1894, the one hundredth anniversary of his death, dedicated it with appropriate exercises. The inscription reads:

IN MEMORY OF JOHN SULLIVAN.

_Born Feb. 17, 1740._ _Died Jan. 23, 1795._

Erected by the State of New Hampshire upon the site of the Meeting-house under which was stored the gunpowder taken from Fort William and Mary.

The tributes paid to Sullivan’s worth on this occasion by every one of the speakers were ungrudging and hearty. Professor Murkland said: “This may never become a large community, but it will always be exalted by its association with John Sullivan, lawyer, soldier, statesman, and judge.

“The plain granite shaft, inadequate as it may appear, will yet serve, when we shall have been forgotten, to recall the life of one who served his country so bravely and so well that he made slander dumb and malice impotent.”

Gov. John B. Smith said: “It is no invidious distinction to say that of all the New Hampshire men of the Revolutionary period Sullivan was not only peer, he was preëminently chief. His life is a part of the country’s history, and now, by virtue of my office (an office I am all the more proud to hold because John Sullivan filled and honored it), I accept these grounds from the town of Durham, and this monument from the committee in behalf of the state.”

O’Meara said:

“Your deeds for all the land that hold your fame Shall link you now to love New Hampshire’s name, While throbs high manhood round her glistening hills— While patriot gleam or pristine glory thrills.”

Dr. Quint said: “To John Sullivan, the man who in all the American provinces was the first to take up arms against the king, New Hampshire erects this monument of native granite.”

Professor Hadley said: “Washington’s never-failing trust and ever-affectionate respect are of themselves sufficient to prove their possessor’s title clear to proud historic praise; and Sullivan’s name does belong of right to that choice list of eminent commanders which bears such other names as Greene and Knox, Steuben and Stark.”

Senator Chandler said: “John Sullivan was one of the finest characters of the Revolution. A great general, and as a lawyer, a legislator, a statesman, a governor, and a judge, ranked among the very greatest men of the Revolutionary period. The luster in our annals of the gift to our early glories, bestowed by Ireland in sending to us the family of Sullivan, will never be obliterated or forgotten.”

Senator Blair said: “There is no sphere of public life in which he was not eminent, nor of private life in which he was not influential and beloved. The whole list of Revolutionary worthies does not furnish one name which, on the whole, shines more resplendently in all the great department of public service than that of John Sullivan.”

Hon. Henry M. Baker said: “The influence of such a life never dies. Seldom is it the fortune of any one to serve his country in such diverse yet responsible positions as General Sullivan held and honored. Still more rare to discharge every duty with such great energy and ability.”

Gov. Frederick Smythe said: “Wherever the rights of man are recognized, and so long as government by the people shall endure, the name of John Sullivan must be one of the imperishable, of those who were not born to die.”

Col. Daniel Hall said: “Sullivan is worthy of lasting commemoration as one of the most serviceable of the men it was New Hampshire’s great honor to contribute to the cause of American Independence.”

Secretary of State Stearns wrote: “Sullivan was a born leader of men, and preëminently a man for Revolutionary times. He was not a slave to ancient forms and customs, ruthlessly trampling upon the traditions of his time. He boldly assaulted the conservative barriers that confined the people of New Hampshire within the pale of accustomed usage.

“He early declared for a free government for a free people. In the march of events, when the people reached his early standpoint, the Constitution of 1776 was drafted on the line of his suggestions.”

“It is a century since the life of Sullivan was ended, and the qualities of his character and the magnitude of his work were submitted to the generous estimate of his fellow-men. His fame with the lapse of time suffers no impairment. A brilliant and an accomplished civilian, a distinguished lawyer, a matchless orator, a brave and an able general, a senator, a magistrate, and a governor, he bore his accumulating honors with modesty, and served the state which he loved with the restless power of a vigorous and versatile mind. The study of his life is instructive. Through the vista, obscured by a century, we read the story of his time in the light of the undimmed luster of his achievements.”

VICE-PRESIDENTS

With tributes like these from the men who were associated with John Sullivan in the struggle for independence, as well as from their descendants who participated in the dedication of the monument to his memory, we, who are members of the American-Irish Historical Society, can well be proud of the character and the services of Maj.-Gen. John Sullivan.

Edward J. Brandon, Esq., city clerk of Cambridge, read the following paper:

On a certain April morning, one hundred and twenty-two years ago, Samuel Adams prophetically remarked, “What a glorious morning is this!” and, as I stand here, I cannot restrain the feeling that the shade of that illustrious and honored American makes use of the expression with much greater emphasis to-day.

For the accomplishments of his country during the past four generations, her marvelous strides in acquiring and attaining a potent position among the world’s nations, the tremendous development of her magnificent natural resources, the genius and perseverance displayed by her children, the prosperity and importance of her institutions, the advance of her people in culture, the triumph of her principles of democracy, with its lesson to the world that “the people can be trusted with their own,” are surely causes for congratulation and satisfaction. And all this reality dates from an incident comparatively slight in the world’s history, but which is an important epoch in the story of America.

The period of resistance by the Colonies to British tyranny antedates April 19, 1775, by many years, but the culmination of a series of oppressive acts was realized on that day, and in the exciting events preceding and following the fight at Concord and Lexington, the town of Cambridge acted well its part, and contributed its blood and treasure to the common weal.

All Cambridge knows and feels a glow of patriot’s pride in the Declaration of Independence of the people of Cambridge, made months in advance of the Declaration of the Continental Congress, when the town instructed its representative that if the Provincial Congress should for the safety of the Colonies declare them independent of the Kingdom of Great Britain, “we, the said inhabitants, will solemnly engage with our lives and fortunes to support them in the measure.”

In all the preliminary work of the period Cambridge was active and conspicuous, and the animosity aroused by the opposition of her citizens doubtless inspired the hatred of the retreating soldiery of Britain, and caused the shocking brutality which has been told and so often retold. But the history of the time records all these events, and it is needless for me to recite them.

The British troops landed at Lechmere Point on the night of April 18, and marched across the marshes to the Milk Row Road in Charlestown, now Somerville, thence by Beech Street and the present Massachusetts Avenue to Menotomy, Lexington, and Concord. Captain Thatcher and his Cambridge men were among the first to rally for the public safety, and the militia of Cambridge improved the opportunity to attest its loyalty to principle. The muster roll shows that they marched on the alarm, and did service as far as Concord.

Paige, Cambridge’s historian, tells us that from Lexington line to Beech Street the passage of the British troops in retreat was “through a flame of fire.” Despite the fact that the conflict of this day is generally known as Concord Fight or Lexington Battle, the carnage in Cambridge was greater than in any other place, greater than in all others combined; for, according to Rev. Samuel Abbott Smith, in his address at West Cambridge, “at least twenty-two of the Americans, and more than twice that number of the British, fell at West Cambridge.”

Of the fierceness of the conflict we can to-day present ocular proof. The large number of bullet holes in the house then owned by Jacob Watson, some of which may be seen at this time, is one indication of the amount of fighting done in Cambridge; while the spoliation of Cooper’s Tavern in Menotomy and the Memorial stones all along the line of march teach the heat and bitterness of the strife. In our ancient burial ground, by which Lord Percy’s battalion marched to the relief, will be found a neat granite monument over the remains of John Hicks, William Marcy, and Moses Richardson, and in memory of these and of Jason Russell, Jabez Wyman, Jason Winship, buried at Menotomy—men of Cambridge who fell in defense of the liberty of the people.

These things are the inspiration which the Cambridge boy and girl breathe at every step, impelling influences to love of country and fearlessness in her defense.

The _Journal of the Provincial Congress_ estimates the loss of property in Lexington at £1761, in Cambridge at £1202, and in Concord at £274.

But when we consider these exciting events of that memorable day and read the stories of individual heroism, we feel a particular pride that our race was permitted to be a factor in the great result. It would be to us a matter of sincere regret if Ireland, who had contributed so much that was noble and sublime to the military history of other nations, had been deprived of the opportunity to manifest her sympathy by active participation in the “Lexington Fight.” More especially as the feeling of the people of Ireland was well known to Britain and Britain’s rulers, as is evident from the records of the House of Parliament in 1775, where it is of record that Governor Johnstone, in the debate at the opening of the session used these words:

“I maintain that the sense of the best and wisest men of the country is on the side of the Americans; that three to one of the people of Ireland are on their side; that the soldiers and sailors feel an unwillingness to service; that you will never find the same exertion of spirit in this as in other wars. I am well informed that the four field officers in the four regiments now going from Ireland have desired leave to retire or sell out.”

Again, Mr. George Washington Parke Custis, the adopted son of Washington, says that Ireland contributed men to the Continental Army at the rate of 100 to 1 of any nation before the coming of the French. General Lee—Light Horse Harry—said that one-half of the Continental Army was derived from Ireland. It is an undoubted fact that two hundred and fifty soldiers served in the Revolutionary War who bore the Christian name of Patrick. It is also undoubted that the rolls of the soldiers who served at Bunker Hill contained over one hundred and fifty typical Irish names. Verplank referred to the services of Irishmen in the Revolutionary War in these words: “Both in that glorious struggle for independence and in our more recent contest for American rights, England’s penal laws gave to America the support of hundreds of thousands of brave hearts and strong arms.” I might repeat many more instances did the time permit. Sufficient to say that the opportunity was accorded to Ireland’s sons to do glorious work in the first conflict of the Revolution.

Cullen says: “The Irish came into the full light of colonial history at Lexington and Concord. The cry of Paul Revere roused them to take their share in the defense of the common cause. Among them was Hugh Cargill, the Ballyshannon man. To his prompt response Concord owed the safety of her records.”

Rev. Mr. Maccarty is heard from in Worcester on that eventful morning of April 19, 1775. Lincoln’s history of Worcester states that as the minutemen were paraded on the green, under Capt. Timothy Bigelow, a fervent prayer was offered up by Rev. Mr. Maccarty, after which they took up their line of march.

“Another prominent name in the accounts of Concord and Lexington is Dr. Thomas Welsh, who was army surgeon to the patriots. He it was who met brave Dr. Joseph Warren as he rode through Charlestown at about 10 o’clock on the morning of that April day.”

With the evidence of participation indisputable, cannot we of Irish lineage feel the glory of this day as our own right, purchased by the self-sacrificing effort of our predecessors?

And can we not, in fullest measure, in dwelling on the great and famous events of April 19, 1775, exclaim with America’s noble son, “Thank God, I also am an American!”

Cullen (pp. 86, 88) gives the following names found on the rolls of minutemen at that period:

Joseph Burke, Richard Burke, Daniel Carey, Joseph Carey, Peter Carey, Patrick Carroll, Joseph Carroll, Cornelius Cockran, Daniel Connors, William Connors, James Dempsey, Philip Donahue, Joseph Donnell, John Donnelly, Andrew Dunnigan, John Farley, Michael Farley, John Flood, William Flood, John Foley, Matthew Gilligen, Richard Gilpatrick, James Gleason, Daniel Griffin, Joseph Griffin, John Hacket, Joseph Hacket, John Haley, John Kelly, Patrick Kelly, Peter Kelly, Richard Kelly, Stephen Kelly, Daniel Lary, John McCarty, Michael McDonnell, Henry McGonegal, John McGrah, Daniel McGuire, Patrick McKeen, John McMullen, John Madden, Daniel Mahon, James Mallone, John Mahoney, John Murphy, Patrick Newjent, Patrick O’Brien, Richard O’Brien, Daniel Shay, John Shea, John Walsh, Joseph Walsh.

Joseph Smith, Esq., of Lowell, read the following paper on “The Irishman Ethnologically Considered.”