MARRIAGE OF ETHAN ALLEN.

631

swered, that he had breakfasted at Norton's, and would, while they were engaged, step into Mrs. Wall's apartments and see the ladies. Entering without ceremony, he found Mrs. Buchanan in a morning-gown, standing on a chair, and arranging some articles on the upper shelves of a china closet. After recogniz ing her informal visitor, Mrs. Buchanan raised up a cracked decanter, and calling General Allen's attention to it, accompa nied the exhibition with a playful remark. The General laughed at the sally, and after some little chat, said to her, "If we are to be married, now is the time, for I am on my way to Arlington." "Very well," she replied, descending from the chair, "but give me time to put on my Joseph."

Meanwhile, the judges and their host, having finished their breakfast, were smoking their long pipes. While thus engaged the couple came in, and General Allen, walking up to his old friend Chief Justice Moses Robinson, addressed him as follows:"Judge Robinson, this young woman and myself have concluded to marry each other, and to have you perform the ceremony." "When?" said the Judge, somewhat surprised. "Now!" replied Allen. "For myself," he continued, "I have no great opinion of such formality, and from what I can discover, she thinks as little of it as I do. But as a decent respect for the opinions of mankind seems to require it, you will proceed." "General," said the Judge, "this is an important matter, and have you given it a serious consideration?" "Certainly," replied Allen, "but," glancing at Mrs. Buchanan, "I do not think it requires much consideration." The ceremony then proceeded, until the Judge inquired of Ethan whether he promised to live with Frances "agreeable to the law of God." "Stop! stop!" cried Allen at this point. Then pausing, and looking out of the window, the pantheist exclaimed, "The law of God as written in the great book of Nature? Yes! Go on!" The Judge continued, and when he had finished, the trunk and guitarcase of Mrs. Allen were placed in the sleigh, the parties took their leave and were at once driven off to the General's home. Thus did the step-daughter of Crean Brush become the wife of the man for whose apprehension Governor Tryon, at the instigation of Brush, had on the 9th of March, 1774, offered a reward of £100. The children by this marriage were Frances, Hannibal, and Ethan. General Allen died on the 12th of February 1789, and his widow subsequently became the wife of Dr. Jabez Penniman of Burlington.

Elizabeth Martha, the only child of Crean Brush, was about nineteen years old at the time of her father's death. At the age of twenty-two, she married Thomas Norman of Drogheda, Ireland, by whom she had four children, Henry M., Eliza, John E., and Forbes. By the will of her father she was heir to onethird part of his estate. Having purchased of Mrs. Penniman and of Mrs. Wall their respective thirds, and taken from them quitclaim deeds duly executed and acknowledged, she became entitled to the whole property. In the year 1795 her husband, who resided with her in Ireland, constituted her his attorney, and with this power she soon after came to America, and immediately took measures to recover the property to which she had become entitled. At Westminster, where she had fixed her abode, she was afterwards joined by her husband, and at that place they lived until the time of their removal to Caldwell, at the south end of Lake George, where Mr. Norman died in the year 1814. Mrs. Norman was a lady of fine manners, dignified deportment, and was, in every respect, an ornament to her sex. She enjoyed in early life the advantages of a good education, and never failed to receive that regard and attention to which her merits entitled her.

To what extent she succeeded in obtaining possession of the estate left by her father, is not known. In addition to the lands which he had held in New York and Vermont, he had owned also farms in Walpole, Westmoreland, Hinsdale, and Winchester; but according to John Kelly, Mrs. Norman's lawyer, she was prevented by "the manoeuvres of the Burt family of Walpole" from obtaining full possession of her landed property in these New Hampshire towns. By a letter from Mr. Kelly to Mrs. Norman, dated the 9th of June, 1795, it appears that all the lands which Mr. Brush had held in Vermont, under the New York title, were at that time deemed, as they afterwards proved to be, "irrecoverably lost." Mr. Kelly also stated that, in many instances, the citizens of Vermont had possessed themselves of Mr. Brush's lands during the war, and had since "held them by main force and strength;" that some of his farms in that state had been sold as confiscated; but that "the resolution of the Governor and Council of Vermont, under which they were so sold," did not pass until two years after Mr. Brush's death. Referring in another place to this resolution, he condemned it in the plainest terms, declaring "the attempt to confiscate a dead man's estate" as an act "superlatively wicked."

It is believed that Mr. Brush's property, situated in the state of New York proper, was never confiscated. Even if this were so, it does not appear that Mrs. Norman ever realized her expectations in the estate of her father. When on the 23d of April, 1799, the sum of $30,000 which Vermont had paid to New York, was divided among the claimants who had held lands on the "Grants," under charters from the latter state, Mrs. Norman made application for her portion, but obtained $718.60 only, a sum which bore no proportion to the real value of the possessions of her father in Vermont. The portrait of Crean Brush, from which the engraving given at the beginning of this sketch is taken, has for many years been preserved in the family of Mr. Henry M. Norman, who resides at Caldwell, and of whom several of the facts relative to his grandfather, previously mentioned, have been obtained.*

AMONG those who bore an active part as pioneers in the early settlement of Vermont, but few

endured as many

THOMAS CHANDLER.

The Chandler

hardships, and overcame as many of the difficulties of the wilderness, as Thomas Chandler. He was the son of John Chandler; was born at Woodstock, Connecticut, on the 23d of July, 1709; and was married to Elizabeth Eliot, on the 23d of November, 1732. At the close of the French war, when many of the inhabitants of Massachusetts and Connecticut were turning their attention to the rich lands lying between Lake Champlain and New Hampshire, Mr. Chandler did not remain unobservant. It is probable that he resided, during a portion of the time between the years 1761 and 1763, at Walpole, New Hampshire, for his name is found recorded at that period, as a selectman of that town. In the year 1763, he removed to New Flamstead, the name by which Chester was then known, being

* Letter from Hon. W. C. Bradley, dated February 27th, 1857. Letters from John Kelly to Mrs. Norman. Doc. Hist. N. Y., iv. 1024, 1025.

accompanied by his two sons John, and Thomas, Jr.* At a meeting of the proprietors of the town, held at Worcester, Massachusetts, on the 8th of March, in the year last mentioned, Mr. Chandler was chosen moderator. At "a meeting warned to be held at the dwelling house of William Warner," in New Flamstead, on the 12th of March, 1765, he was again chosen moderator. This was the last meeting held under the New Hampshire charter. For the better protection of the domains west of Connecticut river, which had lately been declared within the province of New York, the limits of Albany county were so extended as to include them; additional justices of the peace for this wide-spread bailiwick were appointed; and, on the 20th of January, 1766, Mr. Chandler received a dedimus potestatem commission, empowering him to administer oaths of office. It is probable that he was, at the same time, made a justice of the peace and of the quorum, for at a meeting held at Springfield on the 27th of February, 1766, he and others were present in that capacity, to appoint constables for a number of the then sparsely settled towns in that region. It appears that there was a military organization on the "Grants" at this period, for on the latter occasion, Simon Stevens received the commission of a captain in the "eighth company of foot in the regiment of militia for which Thomas Chandler Esquire is Colonel."

On the 16th of July, 1766, Mr. Chandler was appointed first judge of the Inferior court of Common Pleas of Cumberland county, a justice of the peace, and surrogate of the county. He also received a dedimus potestatem commission on the day following. For the purpose of securing the title of the lands in the town of his residence, he obtained a charter from New York for himself and thirty-six others, in which the name Chester was substituted for New Flamstead. The patent of the county was issued on the 3d of July, 1766. The charter of Chester was granted on the 14th of July, 1766. Mr. Chandler received his appointments a few days later. The first town meeting under the new charter was held on the first Monday in June, 1767. Though the officers were regularly chosen on this occasion, and on other similar occasions for a number of years following, yet their names were not recorded until the

* The Chandler family were settled in Chester previous to the 26th of December, 1763, for on that day Thomas Chester Chandler, a grand-son of Thomas Chandler, was born in that town. The birth of this child was the first that took place in Chester.

19th of May, 1772, when, at a meeting held in the Court house, Colonel Chandler was chosen moderator, supervisor, and town clerk. The latter office he continued to hold until the 3d of March, 1777. When the county was re-organized by a direct act of the Crown, in 1768, he was again chosen on the 7th of April, in that year, to all the positions he had held under the old regime. Four years later, on the 14th of April, 1772, he was re-appointed to all the offices he had before filled, with the exception of the surrogateship, and the office created by the writ of dedimus potestatem, as before explained.

Of the actual opinions entertained by Colonel Chandler at the time of the "Westminster Massacre," it is difficult to form a correct estimate. He had acted as moderator at many of the town meetings which had been held in Chester, during the six months previous 'to this occurrence, and when the conduct of Great Britain in oppressing her colonies was under discussion, and when the people resolved to "joyn with their Fellow American Subjects in opposing in all Lawfull ways, every incroachment on their Natural Rights," had shown no opposition to the measure. He also declared publicly, a few days before the affray, that he believed "it would be for the good of the county not to have any court as things were," and evinced a conciliatory spirit towards those who favored violent and decisive measures. After he had consulted with his associate, Judge Sabin, a man who deemed it his duty to uphold the laws, let the cost be what it might, it is probable that his views were changed; for, when asked a few hours previous to the commencement of the fight, whether he and Sabin would consult with the Whigs as to the expediency of holding the session, he replied that the judges were willing to give redress in a legal manner, but could enter into no discussion as to "whether his Majesty's business should be done or not." Sabine, in "The American Loyalists," referring to Judge Chandler's behavior on this occasion, remarks:-" He appears to have conducted with prudence, and to have used his exertions to prevent the melancholy consequences which resulted from the unwise proceedings of other adherents of the Crown." Although he was afterwards imprisoned in the Court-house, yet his confinement did not last but two or three days, and it does not appear that he was ever tried, although he gave bonds at the time of his release to appear and take his trial at such time as should be appointed.