4^ TMK RKIvATIONS OF THE TOWN AND THE STATE. An Hi^Torigai, 'Addre;^^ DELIVEKEr) AT THE ENTENNIAL CELEBRATION OF THE I^X•ORPORATION OF l^iTTl,e)Ton JULY 4, 1884, BV A. S. BATCHELLOR WITH AN APPENDIX. PATRIOT STEAM JOB PRINT, CONCORD, N. H. Glass Fi/^Lf- Book L THR RELATIONS TOWN AND THE STATE. An Hi^^origai, Addfie;^^ DELIVERED AT THE CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION OF THE INCORPORATION OF L^ITTL/E)T0N JULY 4, 1884, BY \y A. S. BATCHELLOR, 'I WITH AN APPENDIX. PATRIOT STEAM JOB PRINT, CONCORD, N. H. jfelvy 1G454 • LIBS THE EELATIONS OF LITTLETON AND THE STATE, ADDRESS BY A. S. BATCHELLOR. The President said : Although it was said of Littleton, in its early days, that it was too poor to live in, and that the roads were so bad that those that did live here could not get away, yet it has proved, in the end, that Littleton has not lived to itself alone. It has sent its men abroad, and its influ- ence has received its due weight in the councils of the State. We will now listen to remarks from Mr. A. S. Batchellor,. who has not only a place in the history of Littleton, but in that of New Hampshire, as to the relations of Littleton and the State. ADDRESS. Mr. President and Townsmen : Any one of our prosperous New Hampshire towns is a fair representative of the New England town system. These local municipalities are the schools in which many of the founders of the Republic received their political education, and they may well be regarded as the political basis of the best systems of govermnent that have yet been developed. A consideration of the relations of one of these towns to the state with which it is organized, which would not transcend the requirements of such an occasion as this, must be limited, in a great measure, to those features of the subject which are not common to all that belong to the same system. The re- marks that follow are offered with an intention to treat the subject in the restricted sense, and to touch only upon those points which may have special interest to the people ot Littleton. THE KINGS WOODS. The first that is known of the territory upon which Chis- wick, Apthorp and Littleton were successively laid, indicates that it was once the abode of the Indians of the Abenaquis na- tion. The tribe that dwelt in the immediate vicinity was the Cohasaukes. Their principal trails or carrying places were along the valleys of the Connecticut and Ammonoosuc rivers. Over these they passed in their fishing, hunting and maraud- ing expeditions. These are the same routes that have been successively followed by the early hunters and trappers, the ■exploring expeditions of Powers and Stark, the rangers of the French and Indian wars, the pioneer settlers, the soldiers and scouts of the war of the Revolution, and the surveyors, build- ers and travelers of our principal highways. Few of you are too young to remember the old daily mail stages to Lancaster, alternating over the Ammonoosuc and the Connecticut river routes. The old Ammonoosuc Indian trail is now the line of the railway. Sixteen trains daily bear the burdens of civiliza- tion over its iron, and suggest the memory of the dusky Indian travelers of the ancient forest valley only by the mag- nitude of the contrast. No local mementoes of Indian occupancy within our limits remain, save the names they gave the rivers : Ammo- noosuc,* the Fish-Place {Najuaos Auke) , and Connecticut, the Long-Deer-Place (^^uinne-Attuck-Auke) . As early as 1752 this region began to attract special ofii- cial attention. In 1754, our Provincial government, becoming suspicious that the French might be building a fort in the Coos country, or taking other active measures to assert jurisdiction of this re- gion, sent Capt. Peter Powers, with John Stark as guide, at the head of a small military expedition, or scout, to explore the valley and ascertain the facts about the rumored hostile occupation. On the 29th of June, this party passed up the west part of the present Littleton. On their return, they spent *Many of the best authorities on our local history and the Indian nomencla- ture give but one m in this word and a A; at the end; but custom has made the Bpelling, Ammonoosuc, almost universal. the fourth of July in marching twenty miles, "about," as Capt. Powers wrote, over the site of this village, along "the meadows" and down the Ammonoosuc valley. This was twenty-two years before the first Independence Day. These were the first official visitations, by authority of the Province government, made within the present limits of Littleton. The Coos country continued, during the progress of the French and Indian war, to be nothing but a wilderness fron- tier, and received the attention of government only as a part of its domain, which was at stake in the great contest, to be held and defended. The peace of 1760 laid open the region of the upper Con- necticut, as the most promising destination of the surplus pop- ulation of lower New England. Its advantages for settlement were made known by the soldiers and hunters who had trav- ersed it. The river was a natural highway, which made it accessible by boats in summer and by sleds in winter. In 1760 the Provincial government, preparatory to the ex- pected movement of settlers up the valley, caused a survey of the river to be made northward from Chaidestown, N. H., to the north east corner of what was afterwards granted as Newbury, and the next year a continuation of the same survey w^as made bv Hu g - hbaatio Neel,* to the north end of the great meadows, called the Upper Coos. From these surveys a plan was made, three tiers of townships on each side of the river projected, and several of them chartered without any further actual survey on the ground. The demand for land, not only for settlement in good faith, but also for speculation, was by these me^ns very fully met. CHISWICK. By the grant of Lancaster on the north, Lyman on the south, and Concord, with its gore, running steeple fashion, to an apex at the south-easterly corner of Lancaster, a tract, bounded by those townships and Connecticut river was left ♦History of Bradford, Vt., p. 10, Dr. Moore states that this survey was made by Gen. Bailey, and cites the authority of the late Jolin McDuffee, of Bradford, "Vt., and Dr. McKeen, the historian of Bradford, seems to rely upon the same au- thority for his proposition. ungranted. - Through some error, Gov. Wentworth, the next year after granting Concord, now Lisbon, laid another grant called Chiswick,* upon the larger part of Concord. Discov- ering his mistake, he compensated the proprietors of this in- valid grant by giving them, instead, the tract bounded by Lancaster, Concord, Lyman and Connecticut river. This, too, was named Chiswick. No settlement of the township, however, was effected. After the expiration of five years from the date of the chaiter, the proprietors admitted a forfeiture and petitioned for a new grant of the same territory. A settlement of Lancaster had been made about the time of the grant of Chiswick. The proprietors of Lancaster, by some means, procured a new survey, which located their township further up the river, bringing the lower line more than three and one-half miles further north, f and the upper line a considerable distance to the northward. Thus a large amount of what is now^ Dalton was abandoned and a good slice of Stonington intervale appropriated. The proprietors of Chiswick so managed it that the land abandoned by the Lancaster parties was included in the new grant, which was to supersede Chiswick. * For an aucient towii.ship map of New York, Vermont and New Hampshire, showing tlie location of tlie lirst Chiswick, see Governor and Council Records, Vt., vol. 8, p. 430. fin 17S0, Ebenezer Willoughby ran out the distance in a right line and made it three miles, two hundred and twenty rods. Chiswic^k's southeast corner was three miles and ninety-two rods S., 20 E., from the northeast corner of Lyman. The easterly side line of Chiswick was theuce N.,'20 E., about six miles to the south- east corner of Lancaster. This was also the North corner of Concord Gore. The north line of Chiswick ran N., 26 W., about seven miles to the river. By laying oflf these distances on a township map one can readily ascertain where the proper boundaries of these towns would be with reference to existing locations. If the easterly line of Chiswick is taken as six miles, its north line would be south of the present south line of Lancaster, about seven and three-fourths miles on the Bethlehem line, and about six and seven-tenths miles on a straight line down Con- necticut river. The old Chiswick line cut the Bethlehem line at a point about a mile above the Scythe Factory village, and would probably cross the farms of Chester M. Goodwin, George E. Bartlett, Smith E. Jones, Luther B. Towne, and the old Rix place on the Connecticut river, now occupied by Milo C. Pollard. The migratory character of that important boundary, the southeast corner of Lancas- ter, made a vast deal of confusion as to the true location of Concord Gore, and as to the tracts that in early times depended upon it for boundaries. APTHORP. The second grant was called Apthorp and was made Jan- uary i8, 1770. A settlement was eftected in the spring of that year, but it is doubtful if it attracted the attention of the British colonial government, at any time in the period of its existence after the perfection of the grant, and until the dispersion of the British officials by the revolt of New Hampshire. A re- ceiver of quit- rents was, indeed, located at Haverhill, the county seat. Possibly that department had some fiscal rela- tions with the infant town, its settlers or proprietors. But the number of polls in Apthorp was but three, as late as 1775. Such a community would naturally be regarded as of trivial importance (even as a tax-paying institution) by a govern- ment that was trembling before the uprising of a revolution that rapidly developed force sufficient to throw oft' the English dominion and dismember the empire. REPRESENTATION OF APTHORP. The policy of the Wentworths had been to restrict rep- resentation in the Provincial assemblies. The first Provincial congress, as the revolutionary legislatures at that time were designated, met at Exeter on the 21st of July, 1774. Others followed ; the second, January 25, 1775, and the third, April 21, in the same year. A fourth convened at Exeter on the 17th of May. The rolls of membership have not been preserved for all of these bodies. There is no reason to suppose, however, that any of the towns situated as far north as Apthorp were represented until the assembling of the fourth congress. In that body, Abijah Earned,* of Cockburne (now Columbia) , ap- peared as a representative. No other town lying north of Gunthwaite (now Lisbon) was represented. This congress adopted a plan of representation for the future. According to that plan, "Apthorp, Lancaster, Northumberland, Stratford, Cockburne, Colburn, Conway, Shelburne and the towns above" were classed, with the privilege of sending one representative. * For sketch of Capt. Lamed, see Learned Genealogy, p. 45, by W. L. Learned. Albany, N. Y., 1882. The president of this congress was authorized to send a pre- cept to the selectmen of Lancaster for the purposes of an elec- tion of the representative for the class. The next congress was to meet at Exeter on the 21st day of December, 1775, and the term of office was one year. Capt. Larned was returned to that congress from the Apthorp class. The fifth congress assembled according to the proposed plan. On the 5th day ot January, 1776, this congress resolved itself into a house of rep- resentatives or assembly for the Province of New Hampshire. Thus the fifth New Hampshire congress became the first New Hampshire house of representatives or assembly. This Act of January 5, moreover, was our first written state constitu- tion and the first of any American state. Provision was made for a council, to be a separate and distinct branch of the legisla- ture, the members of which were to be chosen by counties and not by the state at large. Grafton county had one member under the apportionment of councillors. Real estate owners were alone eligible to the office of representative. A REBELLION WITHIN A REVOLUTION. In its provisions concerning representation, this constitu- tion was exceedingly distasteful to the people of Grafton county, inhabiting the Connecticut valley below Lancaster.* *The grantees of these townships were for the most part from Connecticut, though a considerable number were from Massachusetts, and a few from Rhode Island. As a rule, also, the first settlers came from the locality of the grantees; so that for many yeai-s the Connecticut element in the population predominated. Under their hberal charters the settlers speedily developed a system of town gov- ernment surpassing in its spirit of independence and unbridled democracy even that of its prototype, the Massachusetts and Connecticut town. Their remoteness from the seat of Provincial government at Portsmouth, the sparseness of the pop- ulation and the conscciiunt danger from the Indians, naturally led to this result, among a people already by previous training deci)lv imlnied with the idea of local self-government. The strength of the religious sentiment and the almost univer- sal prevalence of Congregationalism as a form of belief and of church poUty, greatly intensified this sentiment and lent a powerful impulse to all its manifesta- tions. There was scarcely a function of civil government which these fierce little repubhcs did not essay during the first twenty years of their existence. In the very beginning of the settlements, so manifest was this spirit of republicanism, that New York used it as an argument to the home government against New Hampshire's claim to jurisdiction West of ' the Connecticut; representing to the Lords of Trade and Plantations that " the New p:ngland Governments are formed on Republican principles, and these principles are zealously inculcated on their youth in opposition to the ininciples of the Constitution of Great Britain. The government of New York, on the contrary, is estalilishcd as nearly as may be, after the model of the English Constitution'. Can it, then, be good policy to dimin- ish the extent of Jurisdiction in His Majesty's Province of New York, to ex- tend the power and influence to the other " And it cannot be doubted that it was the "pohcy" here suggested, rather than any principle of law or equity, which made the Connecticut the boundary between the rival provinces. Proceedings Conn. Valley Hist. Soc. 1880, p. 157. They promptly repudiated the form of government. Here was thebeginningof acivil conflict of great bitterness, and only second in importance, during the time of its continuance, to the contest for Independence. The views of the people of this vicinity can be well ascer- tained from the statement which they made in explanation of their refusal to send a representative according to the precept sent for the towns of Haverhill, Bath, Lyman, Gunthwaite, Landaft'and Morristown. "At a meeting legally named, in consequence of a pre- cept from the Assembly at Exeter, for the purpose of choosing a representative, also to give in their votes for a Counsellor for the county of Grafton^ having refused a compliance with said precept, have chosen us, the subscribers, a committee to return the precept, together with the reasons of their non-compliance, which reasons are as follows, viz. : First, because no plan of Representation has yet been found in this state consistent with the liberties of a free people ; and it is our humble opinion, that when the Declaration of Independence took place, the Colonies were absolutely in a state of nature, and the powers of the people reverted to the people at large, and of conse- quence annihilated the political existence of the Assembly which then was. Secondly, because the precept directs to have a number of different towns (who have an undoubted right to act by themselves separately) unite for the purpose of choosing a Representative and Counsellor.* Thirdly, because we are limited in our choice of a Representative to a person who has a real estate of two hundred pounds, lawful money ; whereas we conceive that every elector is capable of being elected. Fourthly, because that no bill of rights has been drawn up, or form of government come into, agreeably to the minds of the people of this state, by any Assembly peculiarly chosen for the purpose, since the Colonies were declared inde- pendent of the Crown of Great Britaijt. Fifthly, because if a council is necessary, every elector ought to have a choice of each counsellor, and not to be restricted to any particular limits within this state. *As a matter of fact, Col. Timothy Bedel represented at one of the sessions of the Vermont Assembly three or more of these protesting towns ; but, undgubted- ly, he was chosen by the different constituencies, acting individually, and not in classes. Records of Governor and Council, Vt. Vol. 3, p. 299. lO Foi» which reasons we protest against a Counsellor being chosen in this county, as directed in the precept. Ephraim Wesson, Elisha Cleaveland, John Young, James Bailey, John Clark, Committee. Haverhill, December 13th, 1776." Similar protests were made by other towns in the Con- necticut valley, but none was offered in the Upper Coos class. All the protests doubtless had a common origin in a con- ference of representative men of the disaffected towns, held at the College Hall in Hanover (then Dresden) in the previous July- This dissatisfaction resulted in an open revolt of these towns from the government of New Hampshire during the period of the war. They sent representatives to conventions of the towns holding similar views, on the disputed questions, at Charlestown, Hanover, Cornish and other places. At one period they considered themselves annexed to Vermont, and were represented in her legislature. Their local concerns they managed so far as practicable in town meetings, and, as to matters whereon co-operation was required, neighboring towns associated. together and acted through a representative agency called a Committee of Safety. DIVIDED ALLEGIANCE OF APTHORP. Apthorp must have been more or less affected by these various political movements and organizations, and its relations to them were of a peculiar character. As a member of the Lancaster class, it was represented in the legislature of New Hampshire every year from i775> to the adoption of a new constitution for the state in 1 784. It was also admitted to representation as an individual town in the State of Vermont, June 11, 1778. In the act of the Vermont assembly of that date it was set forth "that six- teen* towns in the north-western part of said grants have as- *Dresden, the territory in which was Dartmouth College, was represented in this Vermont Assembly as a separate town, as was Hanover. Counting these as two towns, seventeen were represented. Records of Governor and Council, Vt., Vol. 1, p. 275. sented to a union with this state agreeably to articles mutually proposed." Apthorp was expressly named as one of those sixteen towns, but whether it was individually represented in the Ver- mont Assembly, and, if so, by whom, does not appear. This union was soon interrupted by the refusal of the Vermont Assembly to create a separate county for these and neighboring towns on this side of the river. On the 22d of February, 1781, the same union with Vermont was revived, or a similar one negotiated. Gunthwaite, Morristown (now Franconia), and Lancaster were among the towns east of the river that are said to have made returns, at this later period, according to "an Union with Vermont."* Thus the nearest settled towns on both sides of Apthorp seem to have been in the movement at this time.f There is abundant evidence, however, of a serious division of sentiment among the inhabitants of many of the towns, which, as political organizations, joined the union or favored separation from New Hampshire under some plan. It may be remarked that Apthorp, in 1773, had but a total population of 14. There were but three married men in the number. In 1782, there were but nine polls reported. No larger number is given for any year of the war period. How- ever violent, therefore, party spii'it may have been in Apthorp, the factions, whether for New Hampshire, Vermont or a new state, separate from either, must have been, numerically, rather small. There are indications that the Caswells were the New Hampshire party. The old Captain, in times of danger, seems to have be- taken himself, with his fomily, to the fort at Northumberland, in preference to Haverhill. His sons, as soon'as their age would *The towns in this part of the valley, were made part of Orange County, and they constituted a Probate District, called the Haverhill Probate District. Geu. Israel Morey of Orford, was Probate Judge, 1781--2. Slade's State Papers, Vt., 472. Records of Governor and Council, Vt., Vol. 2, p. 110. fJustices of the Peace were appointed by Vermont authority, for Lyman and Mon-istown among other towns east of the "river, but no recoi'd of any such ap- pointments for Apthorp has been found. Records of Governor and Council, Vt., Vol. 2, p. 96. 12 admit*of it, entered the army. Col. Whipple of Dartmouth (now Jeflerson) and Capt. Eames alternately represented the class in the New Hampshire House of Representatives, after Capt. Larned's second term, until 1 7S4. So far as their conduct, as we are informed concerning it at this time, can be taken as guide for our opinion, it may be concluded that the Cas- wells affiliated with Eames and Whipple. These men were undoubtedly loyal to New Hampshire. On the other hand, the classification of Apthorp with the towns north of it might have been made without reference to the preference of the inhabitants ; and Capt. Caswell might have gone to Northumberland, strictly under military orders, as commander of the garrison or a scout, and not by his own choice. These things might be possible, while at the same time, as a Connecticut man, he could entertain the New Con- necticut ideas of the rights of the towns, and, as a friend of Gen. Morey and Gen. Bailey, he could sympathize with them in their desires for the establishment of a new state, or a re- modelled Vermont, which should include the Grafton towns near the river, wnth a seat of government in the Connecticut valley. It is not yet absolutely determined who were the other inhabitants of Apthorp at the time of nullification in the grants. The Hopkinsons were undoubtedly here, as well as the Caswells. Though Capt. Peleg Williams came at a later date than the others mentioned, he also may have been in town early enough to aid these movements. He was from Charles- town, N. H., where the ideas of the agitators for a separation flourished to a considerable extent. Some of our people must have co-operated with Col. Bedel of Bath, the Youngs of Gunthwaite, or other party leaders in the disaffected towns, to identify Apthorp with their schemes. The record shows very conclusively that it was effected, in a measure at least, by some means. But the an- nexation of this or any other town east of the river to Vermont, and the scheme of forming the state of New^ Connecticut from a union ot the valley towns, ceased to be a practical question, after Vermont, in 1782, with the full approbation of the Con- 13 tinental congress, if not by some mild coercion from that quarter, finally disavowed any claim of jurisdiction beyond the west bank of the Connecticut river. So far as Apthorp's connection with the Vermont union, or a new state, was con- cerned, it was, at the most, hardly more than a school-girl flirtation before the age of consent. TOWN ORGANIZATION. The only written evidences of any municipal organization of Apthorp, that have come to light at the present day, are a paragraph in Bouton's Province and State Papers (Vol. 8, p. 868) which is as follows: — "Account Jeremiah Eames for holding town meetings in Gunthwaite and Apthorp, — paid iC24," and which indicates some corporate organization and action prior to June 28, 1781, the date of the record; and a passage of Nathan Caswell's letter of June 3, 1786. He writes that " precepts have been sent to the selectmen of Apthorp." This might have been done through a mistake of the state offi- cials, based upon a premature assumption that town officers had been chosen ; but Dr. Moore suggests the probability that there were town officials who failed to preserve records of the town for want of books. It is, on the whole, a reasonable conjecture that there may have been an organization of the town before its division in 1784^ which the diligence of mod- ern investigation may hereafter conclusively determine ; but the historical data available at this time does not seem to justify a positive conclusion. APTHORP AND THE WAR. The people of Apthorp, no doubt, did their whole duty in sustaining the cause of the colonies, and in the common de- fence against Canadian incursions. As has already been inti- mated, there were seasons when the township was abandoned and the non-combatants lodged in the forts for safety, while the fighting men ranged the futher frontiers in scouts, or fought the common enemy in the regiments of rangers, or of the line. Every house was a military out-post, and every citizen a minute man. H Xhey forgot the controversies over the boundaries of states, and knew^ no parties when the work of war with a common enemy was to be performed. The pioneers of Apthorp bore far more than the common burdens of war. Savages lurked in the forest, tories intrigued in the settlements, and the armies of England hovered for seven years upon the near border, now threatening, and now invading the intervening settlements. Practically, the town remained within the scene of hostilities from the beginning to the end of the Revolution. TAXATION IN APTHORP. While the grants were indulging in their " futile dal- liance " with secession, the New Hampshire state govern- ment was, nevertheless, prosecuting the war for independence with vigor. Taxes were laid to meet the heavy demands made upon the treasury. Of the thirty-one towns in Grafton county, assessed in 1778, Apthorp was the sixteenth in amount, and bore the proportion of £1 is. 5 3-4d. to every £1000 of the whole tax. The proportion of Apthorp in the tax of June 27, 17S0, to supply the army with beef, was 850 pounds, in a total of 73,463 pounds for the county of Grafton. The beef levy of January 37, 1781, called for an aggregate of 101,100 pounds from Grafton county and 1060 pounds from Apthorp. By the act of August 30, 1781, "for supplying the Conti- nental army with ten thousand gallons of West India rum," Apthorp was required to raise 71-2 gallons. It was also pro- vided that good New England rum might be furnished instead, in the proportion of six quarts of New England rum for one gallon West India rum. For each gallon in arrears, or unde- livered, the town would forfeit one Spanish milled dollar, or other gold or silver equivalent. It is very doubtful if the town was then able to raise so much rum, even for so worthy a cause. If it be considered how slight a matter it is to raise 71-2 gallons of the article for any purpose at the present day, an idea may be had of the potent advances of civilization in a century of the Cohos country. In such comparisons, it may not be well to emphasize the clause of the act which required 15 ^ood New England rum, for says a modern proverbial phi- losopher, in eloquent apostrophe :-" Farewell, good old New England rum with some tanzy in ye. Thou hast gone ! Yes, thou hast gone to that bourne from which no good spirits come back "* It appears, from the best evidence attainable, that some, at least, of these assessments remained in arrears for many years. Capt. Caswell probably referred to rum and beef, as well as money, when, on the 3d of June, 1786, he wrote that : " The inhabitants * * * being poor and much exposed to our enemy during said war, never paid any taxes into the treasury of said state. "t , , . . . Arrearages were consequently accumulated with the cus- tomary doomage. ., , . . ^1 This condition was a source of much tribulation to the early settlers, and continued to be so for many years. LITTLETON. The territorv of Apthorp, in 1784, so far as it had not been sold to actual settlers, was in the hands of a very few persons. They petitioned the legislature for a division of Apthorp. An act was passed, in accordance with the desires of the proprietors, on the 4th of November, 1784. Bv this act, Col. Timothy Bedel was designated to call the fir^t meeting of the new town ; but before the occasion for performing this duty, he died, and, in his stead, John \oung of Gunthwaite was named by a subsequent act. By his agency, the town of Littleton was organized in 1787. Ihe other part of Apthorp took the name of Dalton. To-day we celebrate the centennial anniversary ot that event. STATE TAXES IN LITTLETON. The new town was harrassed by the state treasurer's de- mands for over-due taxes, as its predecessor, Apthorp, had *Josh Billings. jNew Hampshire Town Papers, Hammond. Vol. 12, p. 425. i6 been. ^None had yet been paid for any of the years since 1776. At length, such effectual representations were made to the legislature that the relieving act of June 29, 1787, was passed. By its provisions all taxes, except the portion laid on lands, from 1776 to 1784, were abated, and those on lands were reduced one-half. The proportion of Littleton in the Apthorp arrearages was fixed at seven-twelfths. State taxes, accruing prior to the division, were to be levied in the man- ner first indicated, and those accruing subsequently would fall upon both real and personal estate. Distinct tax bills were to be provided for the two periods. The extents of the treasurer were stayed until the next session of the legislature. This act failed to give the relief sought for by the inhab- itants. January 27, i7^9' ^fter more representations and pe- titions, and action by the town, recorded as follows in the town books : — " March ye 17th, 1788 " * * " Capt. Peleg Williams voted an agent to go to the Ginrel Court, to receive Five Dollars in Cashand twelve Bushels of wheat for his services," they procured legislation which enabled them to " assess and cause to be collected all publick taxes due there- from, prior to the first day of January 1789, on the lands of the proprietors of said town, in one tax bill, in way and manner as taxes by law are collected of non-resident proprie- tors in other towns." Another difficulty was then discovered. It was in the application of the method stated in the last clause above quo- ted, for Littleton was not lotted and divided as other towns had been. The legislature was informed that the unsettled part of the entire town was held in a body by the proprietary. Therefore, the inhabitants prayed for an act enabling them to assess and collect the tax due from the " town, in one tax bill, on the lands therein, not confining them to any particular rights, but to sell as much of said lands in one body as will pay the tax." They did not obtain this request. A general law was enacted, February 22, 1794? under which, in connection with the special legislation previously obtained, they attempted to 17 lay a tax and raise money to meet the arrears. This is the town record, of date March lo, 1795 : " Voted for Mr. James Rankin, to go to General Coiu-t to settle Back Taxes." On the petition of James Rankin, the town agent, another special act was passed, June 18, 1795, relative to these arrears of taxes, which had not yet been raised and paid to the state and county. It provided for the reduction of the paper taxes to seven shillings specie for every twenty shillings paper. Modern politicians have not suffered this method to become a lost art. It is now termed readjtist?nent. The act also provided that the extents against the town be again stayed for a limited period, and powers were given certain officials, similar to those granted by the act of February 22, 1794. The an-earages were afterwards disposed of without any further special action by the legislature. Special acts, how- ever, were repeatedly passed, in the few years previous to 1805, to aid the town, by way of extra taxation of proprietary and other lands, in the matter of providing liighways and bridges for the accommodation of the public travel. Otherwise, the business of municipal taxation here has generally proceeded according to the provisions of the general law. THE STATE AND THE HIGHWAYS OF LITTLETON. The proprietors, as the early settlers state in their peti- tion to the legislature, promised to make good roads through the town, but had been guilty of neglect in this respect. Of course something in the nature of highways had existed, but, if ever of any considerable utility, they had, at this time, fallen into the most wretched condition. Hence the state was importuned to relieve the people by special legislation. Of the urgent necessities of the case, something may be learned from the statement of Capt. Peleg Williams, agent of the town, dated June 16, 1788. He says :—" Although it is eighteen years since the town began to settle, there is but nine families in it at this time, and there is no mills in said town, nor can we git at any under fifteen miles, the Publick Road that runs through said town is eleven miles in length, and al- most Impossible to pass in the same, which road your peti- tioners have to travel to get to mill, to market, to courts, and almost every kind of Business, so that your petitioners have got under such poor and difficult circumstances, that we can neither live in said town, nor move out of the same, except your honors will Interpose in our behalf." This, and like appeals, met with an efficient, but perhaps rather tardy response from the state. The town was authorized to tax non-residents for the pur- pose, and a road was laid out and built by a committee, from Dalton line, passing down from North Littleton, nearly on the present route, to the vicinity of what is now the site of the old town house ; thence across what is now the Elijah Fitch place, to the vicinity of the Griggs cross road, but running along the ridge of the hill, west of that road as it now is, and from thence down the Ammonoosuc valley to Gunthwaite line. A detailed plan and survey of this route is recorded in the state secretary's office at Concord. The well known Bucknam committee were also given authority, by the act of September 26, 1786, to construct a road from the vicinity of the present White Mountain House, near Fabyan's, on the Cohos and Conway road, to Littleton and Gunthwaite. By these measures on the part of the state, and by local co-operation, the people in a few years obtained suitable high- ways, whereby they could either ''live in the town, or move out of the same." Legislation followed in relation to ferries, bridges, turn- pikes, canals and, later on, railways. There is not space here to particularize on these topics. THE EARLY REPRESENTATION OF LITTLETON. Upon the adoption of the constitution of 1784, "i very large legislative class was constituted, which included all the towns north of Haverhill, and west of the mountains. The second year a division was, or had been, effected, and Little- 19 ton was associated with Batli, Landaft', Lyman, Concord and Dalton. (The compilers of the appendix to Rev. David Sutherland's historical discourse at Bath are in error on their page 98, as to the representative class.) This arrangement continued till 1793, when Lancaster, Littleton, Dartmouth and Dalton were classed. In iSoo, the next change was made, Littleton, Bethlehem and Dalton being classed, and so con- tinuing till 1S08. From that year this town had the privilege of separate representation, which it has never failed to utilize. Previous to 1809, but three Littleton men had been represen- tatives. They were James Williams, in 1794? James Rankin, in 17985 and David Goodall, who was chosen by the Little- ton, Bethlehem and Dalton class, seven years in succession, beginning with the year iSoo. These were all Federalists. The}- served before the days of railways and complimentary railroad passes, and appear to have been almost invariably at their official posts. It may be of interest to glance at the indications found in the legislative journals, as to their opinions and actions on public measures. Capt. Williams was one of the majority who voted the authority to the Governor, on requisition of the President of the United States, to march the state militia into anv state in the Union, but he also voted for the vigorous protest that was sent to congress, against the encroachments of the federal courts upon state rights and state court jurisdiction in the matter or The Mc Clary ^* a case which was famous in its day. He favored the removal of the chief justice of the state from his office, and supported John Langdon for United States Sen- ator, against James Sheafe. He voted to ratify the amend- ment of the constitution of the United States, which was sub- mitted to that legislature. The state debt was scaled down at that time, and he voted with the readjusters. The description of the condition of Littleton, and the burdens of taxation, un- der which it labored at this time, already given, explain the attitude of Mr. Williams on this subject. *Barstow'8 History, N. H., p. 304. 20 Sqine of the matters that engaged the attention of Repre- sentative Rankin were perhaps of less general interest. He opposed the incorporation of a Baptist society at Northwood, and antagonized the proposed exceptions to the statute of lim- itations, calculated to keep alive certain stale claims. He de- voted some friendly official attention to the animal kingdom, being a member of a committee to frame a deer law, and opposing the bill providing for a bounty on crows. Mr. Ran- kin was a rigorous Presbyterian, but believing, it may be pre- sumed, that "He prayeth well, who loveth well Both man, and bird, and beast." his love for the Baptists was manifested in a spirit of scrip- tural "chastening." He voted to sustain the President incase of war with France. Mr. Goodall was a college graduate and a retired clergy- man. He became an experienced legislator, and was often designated to act upon important committees. His repeated elections by his neighbors of the three towns attest his use- fulness as a representative, and his fidelity to his constituents. A detailed examination of the records of our later repre- sentatives in the general court might be made interesting, but it would more properly come within the domain of the town historian. PARTY RELATIONS. There is veiy little on the town records, until the begin- ning of the present century, to indicate the existence of a division of the people of Littleton on state or national pol- itics. The inhabitants were Federalists, and practically unani- mous in that faith. In 1801, however, nine citizens ventured to vote for Timothy Walker, the Democratic candidate (then termed Republican) , against John Taylor Oilman, who had twenty-nine votes, and, as usual, was elected in the state. In the intervening years, between this and 1805 (in which year Langdon was elected over Oilman) the Federalist majority averaged about two to one. This year Oilman, had 44, and Langdon 43. The next year, 1806, the vote stood, for Lang- 21 don 43, Oilman 40, and Jeremiah Smith 3. The next year, Langdon again obtained a majority, and in 1808, only a plu- rality. In the fall elections of that year, for congressmen and electors, a great advance was made in the Federal vote. It is recorded as 106 to 13, in August, and in November, as 73 to 19. The Federal candidates continued to receive similar ma- jorities until 1S20. when Samuel Bell, Democrat, i"eceived 104, the whole vote, tlie Federalist and Democratic candidates for councillor receiving 66 and 40 votes respectively. The Plumer electoral ticket had 29 votes, all that were cast. Gov- ernor Bell, again in 1S21, obtained a unanimous endorsement — 124 votes. The councillor vote at the same time was 75 to 45 in favor of the Federal candidates. In 1823, the candidates for governor, Levi Woodbury and Samuel Dinsmore, were both Democrats, and their vote here was 102 to 4 in favor of the former. At this period the Federal partv appears to have become extinct, and the voters subsequently divided politically as Adams or Jackson men. The next year Governor Wood- bury received a large majority over all othei's in this place. In the presidential election of 1824 there was no division. The Adams Republicans had the whole. In the election of 1825, the town gave Morrill (Adams candidate), loi, and Woodbury (Jackson) 2. In 1S26, Morrill (A.), had 95, and Benjamin Pierce (J.) 13. Next year the figures seem to be substantially reversed. Pierce having 106, Morrill 2, Har- vey 16, and two scattering. About this time the people of Lit- tleton seem to have first seriouslv divided themselves as partisans of Jackson and Adams. In 1828, Bell, the Adams candidate for governor, had 107, against 70 for Pierce, who bore the Jackson standard. The Adams electoral ticket ob- tained 135 votes, against 83 of the Jackson party. The Adams party maintained a similar ascendancy until the presidential election of 1S32, in which the Jackson ticket had So, Clay 78, and an Anti-Masonic partv, on whose ticket General David Rankin of this place appeared for elector, polled 25 votes. It was at this period that the opposition to the Jackson Democracy assumed the partv name of Whigs. That party flourished for some twentv or twentv-five vears. The next two March elections, 1833 and 1834, showed a Democratic majority. In 1835, Healey, the Wliig candidate for governor, secured 96 votes, Badger, Democrat, 93, and Simeon B. Johnson, 3. The next year. Governor Hill had 95 votesj against 18 for Badger, also a Democrat, and there were five scat- tering. In the fall, the Democratic electors had 70 votes, a majority of 18 over the Whigs. In 1837, Governor Hill re- ceived 104 votes, all that were cast for governor. There was a party contest for town representative, in which Capt. Ab- bott, Whig, was elected by 13 majority. ' From this time on, until 1842, there was a considerable Whig majority at every election. At the March election of that year, the Independent Democracy, of ^vhich John H. White was the gubernatorial candidate, first developed strength in town, he having 33 votes. Stevens, Whig, had 176, and Hubbard, Democrat, 131. Next year, Colby (W.) had 141, Hubbard (D.) 116, and White, 33 again. In 1844, Steele (D.) had 157, and Colby (W.), 154. In the presi- dential election of that year, the Democrats cast 174 votes, the Whigs 167, the Free Soil, or Liberty Party, 4, and a ticket for Edmund Carleton had one. In 1845, Steele (D.) had 160, Colby (W.), 138, and Daniel Hoit, Free Soiler, 29. At this time, Hoit had been the candidate of the Free Soil party, in five successive annual elections, but this was the first one in which he had received a vote in Littleton. The next year, 1846, and in 1847, Colby (W.) had a majority over Williams, (D.) ; but the balance of power laid with the Free Soil vote of 34, given each year for N. S. Berry. In 1848, he, being a general candidate for both the Whigs and the Free Soilers, had a vote here of 217, against 193 for Williams (D.). In the presidential election, the Democratic electors had 170, Whig, 155, Free Soil, 39, scattering, 3. Each year follow- ing, except 1850, until the next presidential election, the Whig ticket had a plurality over the Democrats. With the same exception, the Free Soilers held the balance of power, their vote being, in 1849, ^5 ' '^^ 1850, 16; in 1851, 29; and 1852 (March), 31. In 1850, the Democrats had a majority of eleven over all. The Pierce presidential ticket carried the 23 town by a ^..ajority of i8 over all.-the Free Sod vote being To M the next four gubernatorial elections, the Democratic candidates had a plurality, and a majority also except m ,855, when Baker (D.) had 306, Metcalf (Amencan o. Know Nothing), 153, Bell (W.),73,-d bowler (F S ) I. The Free Soil vote for these four years averaged about 18 In 1858, Haile, the Republican candidate had 247, against 22A for Gate. Democrat. At the presidential election of i860, the Lincoln ticket had 334, Douglas, 194, the American party, 6, Breckenbridge, 5, and Pierce, i. At every general election from 1S56 to the present time, except in 1S58 (state), and i860 (presidential), the Demo- cratic party has had a majority in Littleton. The first vote of the Republican party in this town was in the presidential election of 1856, when in a total pol of 480, FrLont had 338, and Buchanan 341. At the U.s ekc- tion the total vote was 80S, of which Samuel W. Hale, Re- publican had 394, M. V. B. Edgerly, Democrat, 412, and a Temperance ticket two. In all the foregoing statistics of elections, reference is made to the vote for governor in this town, unless it is other- wise explicitly stated. CONCLUSION. During the first and larger part of the century of muni- cipal history, which we are reviewing today, Littleton was not very near the front rank of the northern towns in po- litical o'r business influence. Haverhill, Bath and Lancaster long continued to be the centres of political power social influence and business enterprise. But of these Lancas- ter alone has maintained its position. When, in ^ §53, the railroad found a terminus at this point, the town had never had a bank or an academy. Its first newspaper was only one year old. It had never been repi-esented upon ^he benches of the inferior or superior courts of the state. It had had but one state senator, and he, as the political phrase goes, had "died a yearling." It had been represented m the ex- ecutive department by one councillor for the two years of 24 1832 and 1833. Not one of its representatives had been so much as the candidate of either party for speaker of the house, or president of the senate. Both political parties almost invariably went elsewhere for candidates for important offices. Henry A. Bellows, who was a candidate for con- gress, and Nathaniel Rix, were the principal exceptions to the rule. Haverhill, Bath and Lancaster were the homes of our congressmen, governors and political leaders. In the rolls of the soldiery of the wars of 1S13, and with Mexico, the name of Littleton is rarely found. Among the bold battalions that did duty at Cobleigh's Meadow, however, it cannot be said that our citizens did not accomplish eminence. Were such an assertion ventured, the melon stained swords of Gen. Ran- kin, Col. Moffitt, Col. Eastman, Maj. Thayer, Maj. Bellows, Maj. Brackett and Capt. Bingham, might rattle ominously in their scabbards. There was but one church edifice ; and it is intimated by the Rev. E. Irving Carpenter, in his sketch of his own, the Con- gregationalist church, that the people had always been rather backv\^ard in spiritual matters.* The advent of railway communication seems to mark, approximately, the beginning of a revolution in the develop- ment of the town, and in its relations with the state at large. An estimate of the influence that the town has acquired and exerted in the state, that would be satisfactory or approx- imately correct, cannot be made. Some of its elements may be pointed out and briefly considered. The constantly increasing variety of commodities pro- duced or consumed in our midst, the improved facilities for transportation and communication, the constant interchange of ideas through the public prints, the diversification of em- ployments, the changes in the constituents of population, and in the habits, interests, necessities and notions of the people, have wrought a revolution in the relations of this town and the commonwealth, within the century now ended. Each of the church organizations, each of the so-called *N. H. Churches, p. 556. 25 secret societies, the societies for the promotion of temperance and morality, some of the principal branches of trade and la- bor, the learned professions, the veterans of the war, the Pat- rons of Husbandry, now severally constitute, in the town, organized sections of state organizations of the same activities. Delegates periodically meet in council. The interests of the town are represented in the delibera- tions as to the greatest interest of the whole. The influence of the town is not lost, but is combined, and the aggregate is made effective. Local interests and energies are thus federal- ized. All these organizations, gathering strength from all directions, and employing it in all the avenues in which it may be effective, are rendering the relations of the municipal- ities and the state exceedingly complex and difficult of analysis. Other forces in our midst are even more systematically and effectively organized upon a similar basis. This is an age of caucus government. We have come to look, in the main, to party organizations for the men and measures that give vitality and character to the political policy of the state. The policy of the party that is in the ascendan- cy is not altogether, or indeed very largely, a matter of its own deliberate choice. It is governed in no slight degree by the strength and character of the opposition. Viewing the important political movements of the past thirty years with reference to these considerations, it will be observed that this town has not been without inffuence in the politics and statesmanship of New Hampshire in the period in question ; and that this influence has been constant and un- wavering. It is for otners to consider it in comparison with that of other communities. It may, however, be asserted here, with propriety and truth, that at least in a third j^art of the century under review the town has been actively, contin- uously and prominently represented in political controversy and party councils, and the history of the political parties of that period is, in no small degree, the history of men of Lit- tleton. More especially for twenty-five years just passed, the town has given to the service of the state, as a part of its represen- 26 tation, men of prominent ability. While many other constit- uencie's have been represented hardly more than in name, here somebody has been advanced, and kept at the front, under a rule that finds availability in experience and capacity for lead- ership. There has been no hesitancy in ignoring that doc- trine of rotation in office which would supplant experience and fitness, by the advancement of inexperienced mediocrity. By these means the relations of the town to political move- ments and organizations, to measures and matters that have demanded consideration in administrative, judicial and legis- lative stations, have been rendered worthy of attention. As to this point, the public records of the state, the columns of the contemporary press and current history, yield evidence that is abundant and suggestive. In the general jurisprudence of the state, influences have emanated from this place, and had an effect which is recog- nized by all who are familiar with the subject. From the bar of Littleton, Bellows, Rand and Bingham have gone upon the bench. The influence of these, and their brethren who have long been known and felt in the deliberations of legisla- tures, or in the contests of the courts, will be a part of the theme of another on this occasion. Almost the whole body of the case law, now recognized and embodied in the sixty volumes of New Hampshire court reports, has grown up in the time of these men ; and in the growth of that system of law, their brain work is interwoven for all time. The great corporations of the state have arisen in the period over which the professional careers of the oldest and ablest of our own jurists extend. Under their official or pro- fessional scrutiny, has passed much of the most important legislation, granting powers and privileges to, or restraining those great institutions. An irrfportant portion of it has emanated directly from them, or has been moulded by their judgment, counsel and criticism, or has felt the impress of their opposition or advocac}'. In innumerable other directions the town has borne hon- orable relations with its state. It is impossible to follow the 27 subject further, even within its most accessible limits. In a vast number of business enterprises our citizens have put forth energies to the advantage of their fellows^ Thev have made the forests and mountain scenery, the rugged farms and the mountain waterfalls, pay rich tribute to the industrv and capital of the state. They have borne well their part in the public burdens of peace and of war. While the town has thus contributed to the strength and integrity of the state, the state has protected the town in peace, prosperity and security. , , ^^ As a member of a republic of towns, and as a ocal de- mocracy of the old New England type, the lot of this town has been equally fortunate. r , a It stands, at the conclusion of a hundred years of hard and often doubtful struggle, in the fair prospect of a future which shall be no less creditable to itself, and no less useful to the state, than has been its past.^ APPENDIX. TABLE I. State and County Officials from Littleton. Supreme Court Judge, Geo. A. Bingham, - 1876 to 188^ 1884 to Congressman, Evarts W. Farr, - - - 1S78 to 1880 Presidential Elector, Henry L. Tilton, - - 1880. Speaker H. of R., Edgar Aldrich, - - 1885. Clerk, " James R. Jackson, - - 1871. Councillor, Nathaniel Rix, - - - 1832 to 1833 " Cyrus Eastman, _ . . 1859. " Evarts W. Farr, - - - 1876. " A. S. Batchellor, - - - 1887 to 1889 *State Senator, Simeon B. Johnson, - - 1841. " George A. Bingham, - - 1864 to 1865 " James J. Barrett, - - 1872. " Harry Bingham, - - - 1883 to 1887 Trustee State Normal School, Geo. A. Bingham, 1871 to 1877 Lake Commissioner, John Farr, - - - 1879- Mem. State Board of Agriculture, C. M. Tuttle, 1879 to 1882 County Solicitor, Charles W. Rand, - - 1855 to i860 " ^' Evarts W. Farr, - - '73, & '76-78 " " John M. Mitchell, - - 1878 to 1880 A. S. Batchellor, - - 1880 to 1882 fCommissioner, John Sargent, - . . 1856. John Farr, - - - 1862 to 1865 Treasurer, Henry W. Rowell, . _ . 1859 to 1861 " Porter B. Watson, - - - 18S3 to 1885 § Sheriff; B. H. Corning, - - - - 1885 to 1889 *Hon. John G. Sinclair and Hon. Henry L. Watson, M.D., had been State Sen- ators before becoming residents of the town, the former in New Hampshire and the latter in Vermont. jMr. Farr was re-elected to the office of County Commissioner in 1868, but re- signed after holding the office three months. §Mr. Corning was Sheriff of Coos County from 1866 to 1871, by executive ap- pointment, and Col. Timothy A. Edson, who had been Sheriff of Grafton County from 1813 to 1818, was a resident here from 1824 to 1845. TABLE II. Federal Officials of Littleton. ) (Not Including those that were merely local.) Treasury Agent, Harry Bingham, - - 1867. Assessor of Internal Revenue, Evarts W. Farr, 1869 to 1872 District Attorney, Charles W. Rand, - - 1861 to 1871 TABLE III. Delegates in Constitutional Convention. 1775. Apthorp Class, - Abijah Larned of Cockburne 1778. " " None sent 1781. ct u .... *David Page 1788. Littleton Class, - - - - Samuel Young 1791. u ct _ . . . Peter Carlton n ;( j Eben Eastman ^ " " ■ ( Marquis L. Goold {Harry Bingham John Farr Cyrus Eastman *This name is given in N. H. Register, 1852, p. 25, as " by tradition from Con- way," for the " Lancaster, &c., &c.," class. By reference to vol. 8, Province Papers, p 800, it will be seen that on the 6th November, 1778, the Assembly voted to make a separate class of Conway, Shelburne and the locations adjacent. It woul.i appear, therefore, that if David Page was from Conway, he did not repre- sent the Lancaster- Apthorp class. As to David Page, of Lancaster, see Town Papers, Hammond, vol. 12, p. 352 ft stq. TABLE IV. Delegates to National ConTentions. i860. Dem. Charleston and Baltimore, Geo. A. Bingham 1866. Peace. Philadelphia, - - - Harry Bingham 1872. Dem. Baltimore, - - - - " " 1880. " Cincinnati, - - - " " 1S84. " Chicago. - - - - " " 1884. " Chicago, for Vermont, W. A. Richardson 1868. Right Worthy Grand Lodge Good Templars, Richmond, Ind., - Evarts W. Farr 1884. National Encampment, G. A. R., Minneapolis, Minn., - . . George Farr 1883, American Medical Society, Balti- more, Md., - - Frank T. Moflett, M.D. i885-'86. National Encampment, G. A. R., Portland and San Francisco, - - George Farr i885-'86. National Association, W. C. T. U., Philadelphia and Minneapolis, - - Mrs. N. H. Knox Mr. Bingham attended the convention of 1868, as proxy for Hon. Josiah Minot, who was the member of the Demo- cratic National Committee for this state. Mr. Bingham was chosen by that convention as the member of the National Committee for New Hampshire, and filled that position until 1872. TABLE V. Military Aids to Governors. 1854. Col. Frank A. Eastman, to - - Gov. Bakei' i860. " Henry W. Rowell, to - - Gov. Goodwin 1 87 1. " Charles A. Sinclair, to - - Gov. Weston 1872. " Henry L. Tilton, to - - - Gov. Strav^ Col. Joseph L. Gibb of Carroll, of Gov. Martin's staff, and Col. Charles H. Greenleaf of Franconia, of Gov. Pres- cott's staff, were regarded, in a measure, as Littleton men, though occupied largely in hotel enterprises at other places of domicile. Evarts W. Farr was tendered a staff appointment by one of the governors, but declined it, prefering to be known in military parlance only as ''the major." TABLE VL Social and Professional Organizations. State Homceopathic Medical Society- T. E. Sanger, President, iS78-'79-'8o Grand Comtnayidery of Knights Templar . Chauncey H. Greene, Grand Commander, 1S77 Departfnent of Nezv Hampshire.^ G. A. H. George Farr, Department Commander. 1SS6 Women's Christian Temperance Unioti^ N. H. Div. Mrs. N. H. Knox, President, i885-'86 TABLE VII. Showing the Tote of Littleton at each General Election Since 1860. Dem. Rep. 3d Party. Scat. i860. Gov. 257 224 I86I. a 232 219 I 1862. a 255 210 I. D. 7 1863. a 279 191 u 6 1864. a 273 205 1864. Prest. 262 203 186=;. Gov. 243 171 1866. a 254 196 1867. (( 315 211 4 1868. (( 391 238 1868. Prest. 272 250 1869. Gov. 345 241 1870. a 319 247 Lib. R. 22 I87I. n 324 236 1872. a 360 267 Lib. R. I T. I. 1872. Prest. 352 256 1873- Gov. 330 252 Lib. R. 8 1874. a 330 262 Temp. 2 1875. (t 367 260 u 5 1876. a 367 292 1876. Prest. 350 323 1877. Gov. 365 315 1878. u 382 303 1878. i I 364 312 G. B. 28 1880. Prest. 411 356 Temp. 3 G.B. I 1882. Gov. 412 394 i i 2 1884. Prest. 339 493 (( 16 1886. Gov. 297 434 u 41 \^^ f !^-i 014 014 993 7 <.-(-■■ 5t r'i^-a. V V ^- j^4Cr ■ . '"^v i^-^^.- --'^-^^