May

prosecute their devastations along the northern frontier; and the exposed settlements at Dover, Groton, October. Kittery, Exeter, Kingston, Casco, York, Wells, Marlborough, Winter Harbor (Biddeford), and Berwick again suffered from their ravages.1

Renewal

of Indian inroads.

It was the usage of these barbarians to disperse with their booty after a hasty invasion, and they left New England to a degree of repose through the next winter. As summer came on, they, with their friends the French, were again on the alert. Two parties, attached to one of which was Hertel de Rouville, who had led the expedition to Deerfield four years before, started from Quebec for the settlements, -one by the way of the river St. Francis, the other by Lake Champlain, — intending to meet near the English border. From cowardice or from whim, most of the Indian auxiliaries fell off, but a party not less than a hundred and fifty in number surprised the score or two of dwellings which made the town of Haverhill, on the Merrimac. Coming upon it just before daylight, they fired several houses, plundered Aug. 29. others, and killed some thirty or forty of the inhabitants, among whom were the minister, Mr. Rolf, and Captain Wainwright, lately the commander at Port Royal. The towns-people rallied, and after an hour's fighting drove them away. Amesbury, Brookfield, and Kittery were again beset, but without much damage. Exeter, near one end of the border line, and Deerfield, near the other, were invaded anew. One of four men whom the Indians carried off from Exeter, they roasted to death. From Deerfield, though they attempted it with a force of nearly two hundred men, they were this time repulsed with little loss to the conquerors.3 Dudley in

1708.

1709. May 6.

June 23.

Penhallow, 44-46; Niles, in Mass. Hist. Col., XXXV. 314.

Penhallow, 47; Niles, in Mass. Hist. Col., XXXV. 317; comp. Char

levoix, II. 325, 326; Chase, History of Haverhill, 218-225.

8 Niles, in Mass. Hist. Col., XXXV. 317, 318; Penhallow, 48, 49.

Feb. 16.

formed the General Court of the arrival of Lord Lovelace as Governor of New York, and advised that he should be desired "to let loose the Maquas and dependencies;" and messengers (Wait Winthrop and John Leverett) were accordingly sent by the Court to New York to confer with him.1

2

Plan for

the con

quest of

New

France.

March 31.

The plan of attacking the French at the central point of their power, and so cutting off the source of the continually recurring miseries, was so obviously the correct one that it could not fail to be revived as often as from adverse accidents it miscarried; though, more or less, it was embarrassed all along by the sense which prevailed in Massachusetts, and was expressed by her at this time to Lord Dartmouth, Secretary of State, ofthe criminal neutrality maintained by New York with the French Indians." The General Court sent an address to the Queen, praying for aid to an expedition, towards which they professed a desire themselves to do their utmost, for the conquest of Nova Scotia and Canada. The proposal was favorably received at Court, and operations on a larger scale were concerted.3 Colonel Vetch, who, two years before, had been in disgrace in Boston, as will hereafter be related, brought information from England that it was determined to despatch what was thought a sufficient naval force, and five regiments of the regular army; and by him Lord Sunderland sent instructions to Dudley respecting the action of the Colonies. Twelve hundred men were to be enlisted and equipped by Massachusetts and Rhode Island. These united forces were to attempt Quebec, while fifteen hundred men from the Colonies further west were to make a movement by land against Montreal.*

1 General Court Record, sub die. 2 Memorial of Massachusetts to Lord Dartmouth, of March 11, 1711. (British Colonial Papers.)

April 28.

8 Charlevoix, II. 335 et seq.

4 Letter of Lord Sunderland to Dudley, of April 28, 1709, in British Colonial Papers. Aug. 14, 1709,

May 20.

Postponement of

Oct. 11.

The Massachusetts troops were promptly mustered at Boston before the end of spring, in consequence of partial intelligence which had preceded the full development of the plan.1 The western contingent proceeded towards Lake Champlain, and lay encamped at Wood Creek, awaiting information of the arrival at Boston of the English fleet. Month passed after month of anxiety and expense, and the fleet did not appear. At length, General Stanhope having lost the battle operations. of Almanza, intelligence came that the troops expected in Boston were wanted in Portugal, and had been sent thither; and the ministers directed a consideration of the question, whether the preparations which had been made in Massachusetts might not be serviceable against Port Royal. The plan was approved at a consultation between the New England Governors. But the officers in command of the few King's ships which had come to Boston declared that their orders would not justify them in affording assistance, and they took the responsibility of sailing away at once. There was now no convoy for the troops, and, on a request from the General Court, the Governor disbanded them, to put an end to the oppressive expense. The army at Wood Creek, under the command of Nicholson, Lieutenant-Governor of New York,

Dudley wrote to Lord Sunderland: "I have these seven years last past represented to her Majesty, by all the offices proper, the unspeakable benefit to the British nation to have all the North America in her Majesty's hands, of which there is now a fair prospect, by the favor of Almighty God." (British Colonial Papers.)

1 As early as March 1, 1709, Vetch received instructions on the subject, which recognized him in a manner as the originator of the scheme. (Papers in the British Colonial Office.) Writing from New York, May 18, he reported that vessels which had

been despatched from Portsmouth, March 11, had reached Boston, April 28.-May 26, in his speech at the opening of the General Court for elections, Dudley announced the Queen's purpose, and recommended the utmost expedition and diligence on the part of the Province in carrying out the project.

2 See letter (dated Boston, Oct. 24, 1709) of Dudley, Vetch, Nicholson, and Moody to Lord Sunderland, in British Colonial Papers.

3 Dudley put the best face upon the matter in a speech to the General Court, October 26.

was distressed by an epidemic sickness, occasioned, as was afterwards believed, by the perfidy of their native allies, who threw putrid skins into a stream which supplied the English camp. That force also, threatened by a movement of the French, precipitately withdrew, and the whole costly expedition came to nothing.

1710.

Sept. 24.

The project was renewed in the next year as to the less important of its objects, -the conquest of Nova Scotia. Nicholson, who had gone to England for the purpose of urging it, returned to Boston with a fleet of small vessels, which was increased during the summer, by ships of the four New England Colonies and of the July 15, royal navy, to the number of thirty-six. These conveyed to Port Royal a force, under his command, consisting of four regiments from New England, and a regiment of royal marines. The garrison, under the command of the officer, Subercase, who had foiled Captain Wainwright three years before, consisted of only two hundred and fifty men, and was too feeble to oppose the landing. At the end of a week, some mortar batteries having been erected, a summons was sent into the fort, and it capitulated the following day on fav- Comest orable terms. The garrison was to march out Scotia. with the honors of war, and be conveyed to a French post. Persons dwelling within three miles of the fort (who turned out to be four hundred and eighty-one in number) had liberty to remain for two years at their homes, with their farm-stock, provisions, and furniture, on taking the oaths of allegiance and fidelity to the Queen.3 The fort was out of repair, and the siege cost the English the lives of only fourteen or fifteen men. But the French were dissatisfied with their officer's conduct.1 Agreeably

of Nova

Oct. 1.

appointment of Judge-Advocate to this expedition. (British Colonial Papers for July 15.)

8 Haliburton, Nova Scotia, I. 85. Charlevoix, II. 343.

1

to a promise from Lord Sunderland, Vetch was "left in command there." It was also intended that he should be Governor of Canada, when further projected operations should have succeeded.2 Nova Scotia has remained ever since a possession of the British crown.

The summer had brought its accustomed sorrows along the line of the outlying settlements. At Exeter three men were killed, among them Colonel Hilton, of Norridgewock memory. At York, Biddeford, Berwick, Chelmsford, Brookfield, and other places, some murders were committed. The savages went as far as Connecticut, where they entered the towns of Simsbury and Waterbury.3

Lord Bolingbroke's

In England the Tory statesmen, Harley and St. John, were now in full power, from whom the people of Massachusetts did not presume to expect proofs project for of friendship for themselves, or of hostility to France. The surprise was great when Nicholson, who, before the change in the English minis

the con

quest of Quebec.

1 Penhallow, 49-56; Niles, in Mass. Hist. Col., XXXV. 319-323; comp. letter of Dudley to the Secretary of State, of Nov. 15, 1710, in British Colonial Papers.

2"The charge last year, when we did nothing, and the reduction of Port Royal this year, have cost this Province forty thousand pounds, which, added to their debts for the defence of the frontiers, will leave them greatly in arrears, while Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Jersey, and New York are covered by these northern Provinces, and sit quiet from losses or charges." (Letter of Dudley to the Secretary of State, of Nov. 15, 1710, in British Colonial Papers.) - March 21, 1711, "Governor Vetch" drew, in favor of his friend "John Borland, her Majesty's agent," for £2115, "for one hundred and twenty days' victualling of five hundred and sixty-four

men," serving "in her Majesty's garrison of Annapolis Royal, in Nova Scotia." (British Colonial Papers.) - Dec. 31, 1712, three months before the peace, the Massachusetts House of Deputies refused to make a grant for supplies to Port Royal. (General Court Records, sub die.) - Hutchinson mentions (II. 185) a message sent at this time to Quebec,. by the way of Penobscot River, toacquaint Vaudreuil with the conquest of Acadia, and demand the restoration of his prisoners (comp. Penhallow, 56); and he says that the journal of Major Livingstone, who conducted the expedition, was in his hands. After being lost sight of for a century, it has come a few years ago into the possession of the Chicago Historical Society. (Proceedings of the Mass. Hist. Soc. for 1861, 230.)

3 Mass. Hist. Col., XXXV. 325, 326; Penhallow, 58, 59.