by Barbara Rimkunas
This "Historically Speaking" column was published in the Exeter News-Letter on Friday, July 7, 2023.
New Hampshire citizens heavily participated in the fight for American independence during the war. Although no actual battles took place in the state, there were many ways that New Hampshire, and specifically Exeter, had great responsibility. Exeter was the capital of the state during these years – our inland location with direct access to the sea made it a secure place to seat the government. When the state government was not in session, the Committees of Safety met in town to manage affairs. Extending out the assistance, when the State of New York contacted New Hampshire for help with a very specific problem, Exeter seemed ready to help.
New York had already seen fighting in the fall of 1776. One of the direst of problems was determining the loyalty of New York citizens. In a war zone, it can be difficult to determine whether settled residents agree with what’s going on. And, contrary to what we sometimes hear, there were a lot of people who were sitting on the fence about independence. They had, after all, considered themselves British subjects. Even the parts of New York where Dutch was more often spoken than English, the idea of breaking away from a mother country was often viewed with skepticism. After the fighting broke out, the state set up a commission, called the New York Commission for Detection of Conspiracies, to root out any suspects. Beginning in September of 1776, the commission was, “for the express purpose of enquiring into, detecting and defeating all conspiracies which may be formed in this State, against the liberties of America.”
Quickly, men were brought before the commission – often turned in by anonymous sources. Some were legitimately spies, others were just unsure of where they stood. In any case, New York had to figure out what to do with them. Allowing them to live among the general population without some sort of assurance that they’d at least stay out of the war could be dangerous. After all, they might work against the new nation. Word was sent to various States, New Hampshire included, to take on the prisoners. Over one hundred such men were sent to Exeter. “Forthwith removed under guard to Exeter, in the State of New Hampshire, there to remain under such restrictions as to the General Court or Council or Committee of Safety shall seem most advisable.” They marched from Fishkill, New York overland during the early winter, arriving in Exeter in January of 1777.
One prisoner, Joshua Gidney, wrote, “On our march through Connecticut we were told that the people of Exeter would deal with us according to our deserts, by close confinement, if not by hanging, as every Tory deserved; but on our arrival and ever since we have been treated with civility and by some with Respect.” When they arrived, some of the prisoners were immediately placed in the town jail – a rather ramshackle affair on the eastern bank of the river overlooking Great Dam. Exeter’s jail was well-known for its permeability – prisoners often escaped with ease. Nonetheless, high-risk Tories were placed there. Of the other men, most were allowed to find homes to board in within a 6-mile radius of the Statehouse. Exceptions were made for Quakers, who might find housing in towns that had Quaker Societies (Dover, Hampton Falls, Seabrook, and Kensington). Exeter, at that time, had two Congregational churches, but no substantial Quaker populations. People were willing to board the prisoners with the expectation that there would be payment arriving from New York State. It was quickly determined, however, that New York was glad to be rid of them and made little effort toward their support. New Hampshire complained, “Great complaint has been made by numerous of these prisoners of the hardship of being sent from their houses without trial, and make solemn protestation of their innocence, which, together with their continual unwearied application for liberty to go home, has given great trouble and hindered from other business the General Court of the State and other Committees. We earnestly desire some further direction relative to them, and if you think for them to be longer detained that you would send some particular charge of their crimes: especially those in prison, “adding, “if any money has been sent to this State from your State to supply the prisoners it has not been delivered.” New York sent a bit more money, but it was clear the New Hampshire folks felt just a bit on the side of the prisoners.
By March of 1777, most of the prisoners were gone. Some requested time to return home for early planting or to visit relatives. These men simply never returned. Higher risk prisoners needed local people to sign a bond to insure their return. These men also didn’t return, but the State of New Hampshire, after finding it difficult to obtain support from New York, didn’t press the have the bonds paid. Also, some of them, after returning to their homes, reluctantly agreed to sign the Oath of Allegiance. The very risky prisoners were transferred to prison ships in New York. Our brief participation in the war effort – at least in the detection of New York conspiracies – had come to an end.
Barbara Rimkunas is curator of the Exeter Historical Society. Support the Exeter Historical Society by becoming a member! Join online at: www.exeterhistory.org
Image: Exeter’s jail (seen on this 1802 map labeled “County Prison”), was notorious for its inability to contain actual prisoners. It was here that the most dangerous of the New York State Tories were sent in January of 1777.