Page:The Granite Monthly Volume 7.djvu/20

 8

��THE GRANITE MONTHLY.

��1813, the British attacked the Amer- ican camp at Stony Creek, Canada West, in the night, and were repulsed. It was very dark, and in the confusion Gen. Chandler mistook one of their regiments for his own, and giving an order to its colonel, he, with Gen. Winder, were made prisoners. His horse was shot under him and he was severely wounded. When peace was declared, February 18, 1815, he returned to his home in Monmouth and attended to his farm, which is said to have been one of the best in the county. He was by no means indifferent to what was agitat- ing the public mind. The question of separating the district of Maine had engaged the minds of the people as early as 1785, when a convention was held at Falmouth to consider the matter. Another was held in 1786 at the same place. The movement failed there ; but the discussion was contin- ued in the papers of that day. The agitation of the questions, out of which grew the war of 181 2, caused this matter to be in abeyance, until the close of the contest. The course of Governor Strong and the Federal party toward Madison's administra- tion during the war, had roused the Democrats of the district, who were in the majority, to great activity to procure a separation and establish a state government.

The papers of that time were full of the discussion. William King, John Holmes, John Chandler, Mark Lang- don Hill, and James Bridge, were the conspicuous leaders. Gen. Chandler was one of the committee that called the convention in 1816. In the ^4/'- gus of Nov. 25, that year, may be found an address to the people of Maine, signed by a committee, of whom he was one, urging the impor- tance of separation. In that conven- tion he was on the committee to frame a. constitution for the new state, and with William King and John Holmes on the committee to make applica- tion to congress. He was also one of the committee to address the leg-

��islature of Massachusetts on the sub- ject.

The movement failed again, but he with his party continued the agitation of the matter. In the meantime he was actively engaged in politics. A convention of his party in his section would have been tame without his presence. In 18 16 the Federal party made their last national nomination. Their candidate for president was the greatest statesman ever born on the soil of Maine. To my mind he ranks in ability next to Hamilton among the men of that day. When his history is written, as I trust it will be, our peo- ple will know that Rufus King, in point of ability, public service, and far-seeing statesmanship, was the peer of any of our public men.

In no part of the country did party politics of that time run so high as in Massachusetts. Our fathers, judged by the civil service reform standards, were a hard lot of political inipeni- tents ; they " cried aloud and spared not " their enemies, in a way that would shock some of their descend- ants. A man of the political fame and activity of General Chandler came in for a double portion of abuse from his opponents. His conduct in the affair at Stony Creek was over- hauled, and an attempt to belittle him, based upon a report of the engage- ment made to Hon. John Armstrong, secretary of war, by General Morgan Lewis, of New York. It was pub- lished in the Eastern Argus of July 15, 1813. The Republican papers replied. In the Argus of Sept. 25, 1816, may be found an able defence of General Chandler, which was con- cluded in the issue of a week later. The discussion was continued until January 11. 181 7. Hon. Joseph F. Wingate. of Bath, who afterward was in congress froni the Lincoln district, wrote a letter of inquiry to that noble old Roman, Major-General Henry Dearborn, who was General Chan- dler's superior officer in the engage- ment at Stony Creek. Here is the reply :

�� �