j> iU j^v^u xjL^vwfc n. ft. 
 
■.:-■ ^00 | 
 
 ^ 
 
 Class , L3 6.L 
 Book __JLl=_ 
 
/ 
 
 STATEMENT 
 
 FACTS, 
 
 RELATIVE TO THE 
 
 PETITION AND PUBLIC HEARING 
 
 BEFORE 
 
 THE LEGISLATURE, LN JUNE, 1818, 
 
 FOR THE 
 
 REMOVAL 
 
 OP 
 
 EBENEZER EASTMAN 
 
 FROM THE 
 
 OFFICE OF MAJOR 
 
 IS THE 
 
 TENTH REGIMENT OF NEW-HAMPSHIRE 
 
 MILITIA. 
 
 COKCOR& . 
 PRINTED BY GEORGE HOUGH. 
 
 Jwxt— 1818. 
 
i 
 
 
 • 
 
STATEMENT. 
 
 JL HE late proceedings against the undersigned, to 
 procure his removal from his office in the Militia, have been 
 partially known, and have excited much interest. But in 
 the origin and progress of the affair, many wrong impres- 
 sions have been given, many falsehoods and misrepresent- 
 ations have gone abroad, and many truths important to be 
 known have been either wholly suppressed, or imperfectly 
 understood. With a view to correct erroneous impressions, 
 to detect falsehood, and to disclose the truth, the under- 
 signed presents himself before the publick. It is with reluct- 
 ance that he takes this step ; and nothing would induce him 
 to do it, but a settled conviction that he owes it to him- 
 self, his friends, and the cause of truth. It is not his de- 
 sign to employ invectives against those opposed to him, nor 
 to commend himself; but he does intend to make a plain 
 statement of facts, without fear or favour. And if, in the 
 execution of his design, the character of some individuals 
 shall seem to be treated with severity, he trusts, that, in the 
 view of every candid man, his complete justification will be 
 found in the circumstances of the case. 
 
 But before entering upon the consideration of the charg- 
 es preferred to the Legislature in June 1817, and on which 
 their late proceedings have been founded, it may be expe- 
 dient to advert to some facts of anterior date. 
 
 For several years past, the undersigned has had the mis- 
 fortune to perceive, that three or four of his townsmen, of 
 considerable rank and influence, have been either avowedly 
 or secretly hostile to him, and determined on his removal 
 from office. In December, 1816, a petition for this pur* 
 pose was presented to the Legislature then in session, signed 
 by twenty-three commissioned officers belonging to the reg- 
 
imcnt, nnd one hundred and thirty-right inhabitants in tht 
 towns of Gilmanton, Barnstead, and Gilford. At the same 
 session a remonstrance against that petition was presented, 
 signed Hy all the remaining officers in the regiment; also a 
 paper signed by thirteen of the twenty-three officers who 
 had signed the petition, disavowing the petition.* 
 
 These papers were all laid before the Legislature, where 
 it was decided that the petitioners against the undersigned 
 have leave to withdraw their petition. The undersigned, 
 however, found means to obtain from the clerk of the House 
 of Representatives, a copy of said petition against him, 
 without the knowledge of the petitioners, who with- 
 drew their petition, and doubtless destroyed it, thinking to 
 leave no remains of it, as was afterwards evinced by the 
 testimony of Judge Badger. 
 
 In June, 1817, was presented to the General Court the 
 petition containing the charges which have recently been 
 investigated at a publick hearing. This petition was signed 
 l>y ten persons only, oflicers of the regiment — the same 
 number that remained of the twenty-three, on the former 
 petition after the thirteen had withdrawn. Of these ten, 
 • i\ have since given their depositions, in which one of 
 them says that he never heard nor read the petition ; anoth- 
 er, that it was read to him differently from what it really 
 ; and all say that they did not know any of the ch 
 tinst me to be true; but were overcome by 'he so- 
 licitations of those who presented it-t ()llt ' other of the 
 
 signers has since absconded. So that this petition r 
 
 OD the ihould) PS <>f three only — and one of these three has 
 
 confi • I that he " had nothing to do about carrying on the 
 
 [tion" — "was at no expense" — and that -they had 
 
 ed to indemnify him incase any difficulty should 
 
 .'■ And I may renture to state, with full confidence, 
 
 • acquainted with tht (acts, thai of the tico rc- 
 
 • 8ee Appendix— Rc(10 t Bee Appendi*— Ho. ( ) 
 
maining petitioners has done nothing but lend his name, 
 and that, because he was taught so to do. One petitioner 
 then remains heartily engaged in the cause, and only one — 
 and that one is Capt. Cogswell. The motives of this petitioner 
 may, perhaps, be discovered in the depositions already re- 
 ferred to, and in that of Major Bickford.* Other persons, 
 however, besides Capt. Cogswell, have been engaged, as 
 will appear in the further progress of this trial. 
 
 The charges, on which the publick hearing was had, are 
 the following : — 
 
 " 1st. That the said Ebenezer Eastman, while he held 
 the commission of a Captain in said regiment, and during 
 the years 1810, 1811, and 1812, at sundry times, did car- 
 ry on the smuggling trade in articles forbidden by law with 
 the subjects of his Britannick Majesty in the Province of 
 Lower Canada, contrary to the laws of the United States, 
 which as an officer he was sworn to support, and the peace 
 and dignity of the same. 
 
 " 2d. That during the years 1812, 1S13, and 1814, while 
 the said Eastman was a Major in said regiment and com- 
 mandant of the same, and while the United States were 
 at war with the kingdom of Great-Britain and the subjects 
 and dependencies of the same, he the said Eastman, left 
 his said regiment and went into the Province of Canada, and 
 to Castine, while in the possession of the enemy, at sundry 
 times, for the purpose of carrying on an illicit and forbidden 
 trade with our declared enemies in said lime of war ; there- 
 by leaving his said regiment, of which he then was senior 
 and commanding officer, without a commander, who, as 
 commanding and senior officer of the same, could receive 
 and execute such orders from the general officer, who might 
 from time to time issue the same for the publick safety — in 
 open and gross violation of his official duty in time of war, in 
 contempt and disregard of his allegiance to this government, 
 
 * Sec Appendix— Nc. (8,) 
 
f his oath of office — contrary to the laws of which he was 
 .sworn and bound to take notice, and against the publick 
 peace and safety. 
 
 "3d. That the said Eastman, during the period last 
 aforesaid, and while he was under an indictment, did arm 
 against, resist, oppose, and obstruct an officer of the revenue 
 in due execution of his office, and thereby did prevent the 
 said officer from arresting him the said Eastman by virtue 
 of a warrant from the government, and of taking and se- 
 curing certain smuggled goods forfeited to the government, 
 which then were in possession of the said Eastman, which 
 is against his duty as an officer, and contrary to the laws of 
 the United States, and the peace and dignity of the same. 
 
 "4th. That the said Ebenezer Eastman, on the 19th day 
 of December last past, without any just or probable cause, 
 but from motives of personal revenge, did falsely, wickedly, 
 and maliciously file charges against Captain Rufus Parish, 
 who was not then in commission in said regiment, and 
 thereby caused the said Parish to be arrested and tried be- 
 fore a court martial constituted and appointed for that pur- 
 pose ; which said court took cognizance of the same, and 
 after an hearing thereof, did acquit the said Parish, with- 
 out censure, by means of which said malicious and unoffi- 
 cerlike conduct, to gratify an unwarrantable and personal 
 revenge, the said Parish was put to great expense in de- 
 fending himself against said prosecution, and there has 
 b< en drawn from the treasury of this State the sum of 154 
 dollars to defray the expense of said malicious prosecution. 
 
 " 5th. That the said Eastman, by reason of the aforesaid 
 tmoificer and ungentlemanlike conduct, and by reason of 
 other improper and illegal conduct, has deprived himself of 
 'h.t nespect and confidence which an officer can never be 
 useful without possessing, and ought not to be retained in 
 military office without meriting*" 
 
 [Signed by ten officers — two Captains, six Lieutcnor. 
 and two Ensigns.] 
 
To the first charge I reply, that from May 1, 1810, to 
 March 2, 1811, there existed neither a nonintercourse nor 
 nonimportation law ; so that no objection can be formed 
 against trading at Canada during that period. Before and 
 after that period, and previous to June 1812, it did appear 
 in evidence that I went to Montreal ; but not that I ever 
 carried any thing in violation of any law, or brought out a 
 single article of goods of any kind. It also appeared, and 
 I readily admit the fact, that I went to Montreal on horse- 
 back, in June 1812; but not that I either carried or brought 
 any loading whatever. This charge, therefore, so far as 
 to any illegal traffic, is altogether unsupported by evidence. 
 
 I am also charged with violating my oath of office ! The 
 framers of this charge may take to themselves, either the 
 imputation of ignorance, which ill becomes the dignity of 
 their offices and professions, or that of base misrepresenta- 
 tion ; for the oath of an officer in the militia has no reference 
 to the laws of the United States. The insinuation, however, 
 is worthy of those who made it. 
 
 The second charge is similar to the first ; and so much of 
 it as relates to the time embraced in the first, is already an- 
 swered. Upon the subject of trading at Canada, after my 
 journey there on horseback in June 1812, as before men- 
 tioned, and during the war, the only evidence, or rather I 
 will say the only shadow of evidence, that was offered to the 
 Legislature, was a paper purporting to be the deposition of 
 John Prilay, who had lived with me several years. In this 
 paper — (for I cannot call it a deposition, unless, indeed, it be 
 the deposition of Lyman B. Walker, Esq. counsel for the 
 petitioners, and even he, I believe, would not have sworn 
 to it) — In this paper, I say, it is stated that this Prilay went 
 with me to Canada in the winter of eighteen hundred and 
 thirteen — that we then carried and brought away much 
 goods — that we "escaped soldiers, custom-house officers, 
 and government men"— and that " we found no difficulty in 
 the Province, notwithstanding the war, and the hosts of Bri f - 
 
8 
 
 hh troops that filled the country," &c. As this paper was 
 to the petitioners, the very ground of reliance, I will give a 
 concise history of it. In October last, Lyman B. Walker. 
 Esq. summoned said Prilay (then living in Littleton, in the 
 county of Grafton) to his office in Gilford, for the purpose 
 of taking his deposition. The day before that mentioned 
 in the summons, Mr. Prilay arrived at Gilford — Mr. Walker 
 met him, took him into his office, wrote the paper above 
 mentioned, and requested Prilay to sign it. This, Prilay 
 
 refused to do, because the statement was not true a very 
 
 good reason, one would think, for his refusing to sign it : 
 but Mr. W alkcr, with a faithfulness and zeal truly worthy of 
 his cause, could not admit the objection. He had volun- 
 teered in the cause — found it without support — had now 
 written what he wanted — and Mr. Prilay must subscript 
 and swear to it. He therefore detained him till about mid- 
 night, and by profane and scurrilous abuse and threats, at 
 length obtained his purpose.* At the trial, Walker admit- 
 ted that he wrote the statement for Prilay — and Walker's 
 own brother swore to the threats and abuse. 
 
 The abovemntioned paper is principally occupied in de- 
 scribing the supposed journey to Canada in eighteen hun 
 drcd and thirteen — a journey which never took place, as ai 
 pears by Mr. Prilay's ozen deposition, by other witnesses 
 and by the admission of the opposite party on the trial. — 
 This journey, Mr. Counsellor Walker had thought it all- 
 important to establish, otherwise the charge of trading 
 Canada during the war must wholly fail — must appear to l>< 
 false and malicious — and the Counsellor himself had framed 
 the petition and the charges. Yet this journey — this solitary 
 hope to which inconsiderate malice had attached itself, i* 
 become forlorn, and given up ! But mark the excuse, li It 
 Tea': a mistake for 1C12!" Whose mistake? Piiiu\ 
 No! lie not only did not make it, but refused to confirm 
 
 * See Appendix— >"o. M. 
 
it by his signature, until compelled. — Was it the Counsel- 
 lor's then ? Yes, poor man ! it was his. But he has an 
 excuse. "It was a mistake — a mere slip of the pen /" This 
 is a pitiful evasion — a mere trick ! for the whole story was 
 made out in nice conformity with the assumed time. If this 
 be wrong, the whole story is false. And this is admitted to 
 be wrong. But admit the excuse, and see the consequence ; 
 say the journey was in the winter of 1812, six months be- 
 fore the declaration of war. And how then appear the 
 Counsellor's declarations, that " we escaped soldiers,custom- 
 house-officers, and government men"' — and that " we found 
 no difficulty in the Province, notwithstanding the -oar, and 
 the hosts of British troops that filled the country." In this 
 position we leave the Counsellor for the present. 
 
 The proof of my going to Castine, while possessed by 
 the enemy, was the following declaration in the paper above 
 described. " I am also knowing, that in the fall of the year 
 1814, the said Eastman fitted out a waggon with two horses, 
 and carried specie, as I understood, to Castine. He was 
 absent about three weeks, and returned with glass ware, 
 fee. which I understood him that he purchased at Castine''' — 
 And also the deposition of Stephen L. Grecly, in which he 
 states, very truly, that he and myself " went to Castine ia 
 1814, purchased some goods, (for which we paid in specie) 
 shipped them in a neutral vessel, entered them at the Ameri- 
 can custom-house in Hampden, paid the duties required by 
 the laws of the United States, brought them home, and sold 
 them," as we had a right to do. As to the charge of " leav- 
 ing the regiment without a commander," it appears, that in 
 the years 1812, 1813, and 1GM, I was absent, on journics 
 twice or three times, for the space of two or three weeks 
 each time. If this is a crime, tjien am I guilty indeed — 
 much more so than my accusers have proved me ; for I 
 went several times to Boston during those three years, and 
 left my regiment "without a commander !» I can hardly be 
 serious upon a charge so ludicroi . 
 
.0 
 
 The third charge is, for resisting an officer of the revenue* 
 \K Bile under an indictment ; and " of taking and securing cer- 
 tain smuggled goods " &lc. It is not easy to understand 
 what is meant by this charge. This officer of the revenue, 
 as he is called, it appeared on the trial, was a deputy of Dis- 
 trict-Marshal M'Clary. He stated, that " he went to mj 
 house with a warrant founded on an indictment in the Dis- 
 trict Court — that I ordered him to go out, and he complied 
 — and that he did not tell me he had a precept against me, 
 nor that he mas an officer.^ This statement is substantially 
 correct. I did find a man who had lurked about and crept into 
 my house, and 1 drove him out. I did neither resist nor 
 touch him ; nor did I know him ; and he retreated without 
 giving me any information of himself, or of his authority. 
 So far was I from offering resistance to any officer, that 
 a short time afterwards, when the Marshal came to the 
 public house in my neighbourhood, and sent me word, I went 
 to sec him, and entered into recognizance as he required* 
 At the next session of the Court, I appeared and answered 
 to the charge then against me, and on trial was acquit- 
 ted by the jury, nothing being found against me, as appears 
 by the record of said Court. This was (he " indictment'* 
 alluded to. As to " smuggled goods in my possession," not 
 a tittle of evidence was offered, or attempted to be offered, 
 BO prove thfe pari of the charge. — Thus stands the third 
 ••!. argp. Of the motives of its framers and supporters, and 
 of their manfulncss, 1 leave the publick to judge. 
 
 The fourth charge i*. that "without any just or prob- 
 able cause, 1 wickedly and m.dicioiisly filed charges again-: 
 
 ptain Rufus Parish, who tods not then in commission in 
 mid regiment, and tin rely caused him to be arrested and 
 trii d 1>« for* a*Co n : Mi rtial, n iLc. 
 
 For an answer to t ! i i -. charge, I will refer the publick to 
 some extracts from the proceedings of said Court Martial. 
 
EXTRACT. 
 
 A General @ourt Martial, consisting ef seven members, 
 will convene at French's inn, in Gilmanton, on Thursday 
 the second day of January next, at ten of the clock in the 
 forenoon, for the trial of Capt. Rufus Parish,of the artillery 
 annexed to the tenth regiment of Militia, in this State ; on 
 charges exhibited against him the said Parish, by Major 
 Ebenezer Eastman, commandant of said regiment. 
 
 The members of the Court will appear in uniform, with 
 ^ide arms. 
 
 Lt. Col. Levi Jones is appointed President,. 
 
 Major P. P. Furber, "} 
 
 Capt. Stephen Davis, 
 
 Capt. Jos. Ham, ^Members. 
 
 Capt. Isaac Jenness, 
 Lieut. Richard Furber, 
 Lieut. Thos. Plumer, 
 
 Adjutant Nehemiah Eastman, Judge Advocate. 
 
 Capt. Jacob Davis, ) c 
 
 t • . t i m > supernumeraries. 
 
 Lieut. John Plumer, } l 
 
 Rich* Furber, \ Brisade *g*g£ Brigatle 
 
 Dec. 23, 1816. 
 
 Agreeably to the above order, the Court convenes at the 
 above mentioned place and time of dajr, this second clay 
 of January, A. D. 1817. 
 
 PRESENT-^- 
 
 Lt. Col. Levi Jones, President. 
 Major P. P. Furber. Capt. Jacob Davis. 
 
 Capt. Jos. Ham. Capt. Isaac Jenness, 
 
 Lieut. Thos. Plumer,. Lieut. Richard Furber. 
 
 The Judge Advocate being absent, the Court appoint 
 Capt. Isaac Jenness to officiate in that capacity until the 
 Judge Advocate appointed, appears. 
 
 Adjourned, to meet again at this place to-morrow, at ten 
 
 o'clock, A. M. 
 
 ISAAC JENNESS, Judge Advocate 
 
1> 
 
 January 3. 
 
 Court met according to adjournment. 
 
 All the members present as yesterday. 
 
 Adjutant Neheminh Eastman, the Judge Advocate ap- 
 pointed, appears and commences officiating as such. 
 
 An intimation being made, that the prisoner would not, 
 from some cause, appear in Court, the Court is organ- 
 ized by the usual oaths being administered by the Judge 
 Advocate to all the members, and by the President to the. 
 Judge Advocate. 
 
 An agent and friend to the prisoner now appears in 
 Court, and informs verbally, that the prisoner cannot ap- 
 pear, in consequence of bodily indisposition, and at the 
 same time presents to the Court a paper purporting to be 
 a commission signed by his late Excellency John T. Oilman, 
 bearing date 7th February, A. D. 1814,., appointing said 
 Parish to his command as Captain as aforesaid ; on the 
 margin of which paper, thus purporting to be a commission 
 as aforesaid, was a writing, of which the following is a 
 • rue copy, to wit : 
 
 ' ; Js'ezc-IFumpsliire Executive Department, 
 
 Concord, Die. 16, 1316. 
 
 The said Rufus Parish having requested liberty to re- 
 sign this commission, his resignation is accepted. 
 
 WILLIAM PLOIER, Captain General." 
 
 Aecompanying which letter, commission, Szc. is also a 
 i, of which the following is a true copy, to wit : 
 
 w G'diiKinlnn, Jan. 3, 1C17. 
 To the Honourable President of a Court Martial, now 
 . ened at Samuel French's inn, in said town, for the con- 
 ration of the charges herewith exhibited against the 
 criber. — To which charges I plead not guilty, and prc- 
 >u with my commission for my defence, which commis- 
 you will have the goodness to return, when you have 
 9uffi< iently examim d it. 
 
 From your humble servant, RUFUS PARISH." 
 
13 
 
 And with this letter is presented also the copy of th» 
 charges and specifications of charges that has been served 
 on him the said Parish previously in this case. 
 
 The prosecutor now moves for liberty to introduce evi- 
 dence to shew the Court, that the aforesaid acceptance of 
 the said resignation of said Parish, was by accident, or by 
 gome other means, antedated. 
 
 Samuel Shepard, Esq. sworn for the prosecution. 
 
 Question by prosecutor. Have you any knowledge con- 
 cerning Capt. Parish's commission, from the Secretary's 
 ©ffice, or the resignation of the same 1 
 
 Answer. The Hon. Mr. Colby informed me that there 
 had been nothing done about such a resignation, on Mon: 
 day following the 20th December, 1816. 
 
 David Burnham sworn for the prosecution. 
 
 Ques. by pro. Have you not seen Capt. Parish's commis- 
 sion in his possession, without a resignation thereon, since 
 Pecember 16, 1816? 
 
 Ans. No. 
 
 Qucs. by the same. Did you carry Capt. Parish's com- 
 mission to Concord for him, after December 16, 1816 ? 
 
 Ans. On the 19th day of December, 1816, I went and 
 carried a letter for him ; but do not know that there was 
 any thing in it, nor do I believe there was. 
 
 Ques. by the same. Have you, since Capt. Parish was ar- 
 rested, heard him say any thing about his commission ? 
 
 Ans. Yes; I heard him say that he told the officer ar- 
 resting him, that he ought to have demanded his commis- 
 sion ; for as the business was then left, he had it in his pow- 
 er to resign. 
 
 Josiah Parsons sworn for the prosecution. 
 
 Qucs. by pro. What have you heard Capt. Parish say 
 about his resignation ? 
 
14 
 
 ' Anr. 1 heard him say, after he was arrested, that he 
 £ad resigned. 
 
 Ques. b\j the same. Do you know for what purpose Da* 
 €id Burnham went to Concord about the 20th Dec. 1816? 
 
 .'Ins. I do not. 
 
 Dr. William Prescott sworn for the prosecution. 
 
 Qucs. by pro. What have you heard Capt. Parish saj 
 about his resignation ? 
 
 Ans. I heard him say that he had sent his commission 
 to Concord by Mr. Ladd. 
 
 Ques. by the same. When did you see Mr. Ladd at Capt. 
 Parish's ? 
 
 Ans. I saw Mr. Ladd in this neighbourhood, but not at. 
 Capt. Parish's, on the 20th Dec, 1816, 
 
 Dudley Ladd, Esq. sworn for the prosecution. 
 
 Ques. by pro. Did you carry Capt. Parish's commission 
 to Concord for him, and if so, for what purpose ? 
 
 Ans. I did carry that commission to Concord, with 
 orders to keep it till called for — which commission I after- 
 wards delivered to Dr. Prescott, / think. 
 
 Dr. William Prescott caljed again. 
 
 Ques. by pro. At what time were you at Concord ? 
 
 Ans. In December. 
 
 Ques. by the same. Did you see Dudley Ladd, Esq. at 
 Concord, after the 20th December, 1816, the time you 
 Saw him at Gilmanton-Corner 2 
 
 .his. Yes. 
 
 Ques. by the same. Did you take Capt. Parish's commis- 
 sion from Mr. Ladd at Concord ? 
 
 Ans. Yes. 
 
 Qucs. by tlie same. On what day of the week was thiV"' 
 
 Am. On Tuesday or Wednesday* 
 
 k 
 
15 
 
 Ques. by the same. Had that commission, at that tun?; 
 the evidence on it of Capt Parish's resignation I 
 
 Ans. No. 
 
 Ques. by the same. Do you know whether or not there 
 had been a decision at that time, on Capt Parish's remon- 
 strance against me, in the House of Representatives 2 
 
 Ans. It was generally so reported. 
 
 Ques. by the same. What did you do with Capt. Parish's 
 commission after you obtained it from Mr. Ladd ? 
 
 Ans* I handed it to Governour Plumer, and by the verba? 
 request of Capt. Parish, got it resignated. 
 
 Ques. by the Court. Did Capt. Parish desire yo» to re* 
 quest Governour Plumer to antedate his resignation 1 
 
 Ans. He requested me to state to Governour Plumerf 
 that the commission had been in Concord a number of 
 days, and that he wished the resignation dated back as 
 far, if that would be legal. 
 
 Mr. Ladd called again, 
 
 Ques. by pro. Did you give Dr. Prcscott Capt. Parish's 
 commission, after a decision had been had in the House of 
 Representatives, on Parish's remonstrance against me ? 
 
 An*, I do not recollect. 
 
 Daniel Gale, 3d, sworn for the prosecution. 
 
 Ques. by pro. When did you see Dr. Prescott at Con- 
 cord ? 
 
 Ans. I think it was after a decision was had on Capt. 
 Parish's remonstrance against you, which I think was after 
 Dec. 20, 1816. 
 
 On summing up the foregoing evidence, the question is 
 put, Is Capt. Parish amenable to the powers and jurisdic- 
 tion of this Court ? And is decided in the affirmative. 
 
u 
 
 { 8lcrlitiry*s Office. 
 
 I Co i hi, i (I. J}< re* 181C. 
 
 Tlic foi ; is a true extract from a record of the pro- 
 
 ceedings of a Court Martial, returned to this office. 
 
 KICHAKD I3AUTLLTT, Dep. Sea. 
 
 V.\ t liir> it appears, that said Parish was then in commis- 
 sion. '1 '. .' ourt acquitted him, it is true ; but I leave it 
 with the publick to judge, whether the trick to antedate his 
 resignation be evidence of his consciousness of innocence 
 or guilt. If any thing more need be added, it will be found 
 in the order of the Brigadier General, disapproving of the 
 acquittal of Captain Parish by the Court Martial.* 
 
 The fifth and last charge is, that I have lost the " respect 
 and confidence necessary for an officer in the mili 
 
 In support of this pretty general charge, the testimony of 
 ;er alone was relied upon. The honourable wit- 
 ness, after answering a question or two, begged leave to re- 
 late the whole matter. lie said that I had become unpop- 
 in the regiment — that a general dissatisfaction hail for 
 some time existed — and on account of said dissatisfaction, 
 and in proof thereof, said the honourable witness, u a peti- 
 tion for the removal of .Major Eastman from his command 
 in the regiment Wa9 presented to the I I . ; . iafure in 1816, 
 ■ d by four orjuc hundred persons, consisting of officers. 
 Justices of the peace, selectmen, and the principal citi/. ri9 
 within said regiment." Here was no m\ P" itidn nor qual- 
 ifying expression,; it liritly and positively four or fitk 
 hundred signers, of whom were Justices of the pet . . \ — 
 liiis statement, if true, was an imposing proof of the eh; . 
 and who could question the truth of it? Tie JiKJge had 
 been well acquainted with that petition, for h ■ v, is its pa- 
 tron; a y remembered" the circumstance! 
 
 ' Bee Appendix— No. (5.) 
 
of the case, because the dissatisfaction was so general; tlierd* 
 fore he testified positively and roundly. But where was 
 that petition ? It was lost ! Probably not a vestige of it 
 was supposed to be left, except in the Judge's memory. In 
 this view, the charge was supported. If so many and re* 
 spcctable men had petitioned against me, I stood upon low 
 ground indeed. But there is another view to be taken of this 
 
 o 
 
 subject. At the important moment when the honourable 
 witness had finished his round statement, and had seated 
 himself near the parties, evidently pleased that he had giv- 
 en such important support to the cause, knowings without 
 doubt, that the petition had been withdrawn from the files 
 soon after the House had decided against it, and being ful- 
 ly persuaded that his statement could not be contradicted 
 by any facts in existence — At that important moment, I say, 
 a copy of that petition was introduced to the Convention by my 
 counsel I I am no poet, and shall not attempt to describe 
 the change of countenance that then took place. This copy, 
 as I have before stated, I had procured from the Clerk of 
 the House, without the knowledge of the petitioners. And 
 how did the Judged account correspond with the copy ? — 
 The copy contained the names of — not four or five hundred 
 — but simply one hundred and sixty-one ! and these from Gil- 
 ford, Gilmanton, and Barnstcad ! — How many officers were 
 there ? Twenty-three — thirteen of Whom, in a counter peti- 
 tion, disavowed the deed.* How many Justices of the peace I 
 One!— one, out of the twenty-nine then in commission in those 
 three towns t—and that one in Barnstcad. How many se- 
 lectmen ? Two, out of the nine belonging to those towns— 
 and those two from Gilford ! I 
 
 If the above statement be not true, it is most easy to dis- 
 prove it ; for it is drawn from the evidence given before 
 hundreds at the publick hearing, and from a copy attested 
 by the Clerk of the House of Representatives, Dec. 23. 1 316, 
 
 • See App.— No. (1.) t See Register for 1810, $ See App.— -No 
 
 •3 
 
18 
 
 which shall be published if needful. I will make no com- 
 ment upon the testimony of the honourable witness. 1 have 
 stated the fact-, and these are fully sufficient for my purpose. 
 
 r other evidence was offered in support of the fifth 
 charge. And what is the sum of that offered? It is, that 
 ui lull), out of three towns, whose inhabitants, at the last 
 census, were 5315, one Jiutulrcd and sixty-one had signed a 
 petition to the Legislature. Of the industry of my enemies^ 
 who procured those names — of their motives, their persc- 
 \ erance, and the means used in accomplishing their object, 
 1 leave the publick to judge from the evidence before them. 
 
 As to my standing with the regiment, I have nothing to 
 . B y — the facts in the case shall decide — I will recapitulate 
 them. 
 
 The officers usually in commission in the 10th regimen^ 
 arc about forty-jive. The petition against me in 1316, was 
 signed by twenty-three. A remonstrance at that time, against 
 tli it petition, was signed by twenty-tew — and the counter pe- 
 tition, before mentioned, by thirteen — leaving ten in favour 
 of the petition for my removal, and thirty-five against it. 
 
 The petition in 1017, upon which the publick hearing 
 has been had, was signed by ten — all officers — the same 
 number that remained against me in 1316. Of these /i?j, 
 six have said, on oath, that they "did not know any of the 
 rges against me to be true" — another has absconded— 
 and one other eonfesscd he " had nothing to do about (.■!•- 
 tying on the i iion." and '• had received a promise 
 
 [or bond] of indemnity." Two remain, who have made no 
 concession-:. 
 
 Out'.. I, a petition, signed by thirty officers 
 
 belonging to '.!.»• regiment, (of whom ten were Capl 
 
 at< d to the Goy< rnour and Council in September 
 1817, request u gmj promotion;* and afterwards,fi veotl 
 
 * Sec Appendix— -No. (7.) 
 
-19 
 
 who had since been eommissioncd to fill up vacancies, say, 
 in a petition to the Legislature, they " perfectly agree with 
 the officers who signed that petition*'' to the Governour and 
 Council. — And here I will just observe, that neither of the 
 petitions, nor the remonstrance, in my favour, was ever 
 presented to the privates — nor to Justices of the peace — nor 
 selectmen — nor other principal citizens. They were present- 
 ed to officers only. — Upon this simple statement of facts, 
 and the subjoined depositions, I am willing that this fifth 
 charge should be decided. * 
 
 It remains that I give a concise account of the petition of 
 1817 — its origin — its supporters, &lc. 
 
 In June, 1817, upon the Sabbath-day, Capt. Parish, Ly- 
 man B. Walker, Esq. and Capt. Cogswell, met at Judge 
 Badger's, in Gilmanton ; or to use the language of the Judge 
 at the publick hearing, ' ; Capt. Parish tarried at my house 
 Saturday night; the next day, Mr. Walker happened in, and 
 we sent for Capt. Cogswell, and he came."' The distance 
 at which these men live from the Judge's where they hap- 
 pened to meet, is as follows — Parish, 2 miles — Cogswell, 7 
 miles— and Walker, 7 miles — all in different directions. — 
 But these men happened to meet there upon the Sabbath. 
 During that day, (or as the Judge swore--" in the evening,'' 
 he '• believed as late as 12 o'clock or later")-- that petition, 
 and the five charges which we have examined, were pro- 
 jected and matured ; and on Monday morning following, 
 by 4 o'clock, Capt. Cogswell and the petition had travelled 
 to Barnstead— 10 miles— in pursuit of subscribers. There 
 the Captain commenced the cntcrprizc, by exhibiting— not 
 the petition only— but likewise a paper, winch was called a 
 bond of indemnity, signed by Lyman B. Walker, Esq* and 
 also another paper, which the Captain happens to have 
 with him, on which was written, a " petition," or " recom- 
 mendation." to His Excellency, for the promotion of— 
 
 - s Append!* — No 
 
-20 
 
 whom? Captain Cogswell ! This was byway of antici- 
 pation. The Captain simply wished, (in case of my re> 
 nioval) to become Lie utenant-Coloncl — or Colonel — if Ma- 
 jor Bickford would be obliging enough to resign.* — Thus 
 tie Captain conducted the enterprise with unabated zeak 
 having his rye steadily fixed on his own promotion. 
 
 \t length the " petition"— the Sabbath-day's production 
 ai Judge Badgers— comes in turn, into the hands of Lyman 
 B. Walker, Esq., one of its legitimate authors and warmest 
 supporters. This unassuming counsellor, and Capt. Parish, 
 and one Horatio G. Prescott, attack Capt. David Norris and 
 Ensign Joseph L. Bartlett, at the " tavern," and urge them 
 to sign the petition. They declined. The counsellor "pre- 
 tended to read it," and by " entreatits''' their signatures were 
 prDcured.t 
 
 Thus, by the exertions of Judge Badger, Captains Parish 
 :nd Cogswell, Lyman B. Walker, Esq. and Horatio G. 
 Prescott, ten of the forty-five officers in the regiment are in- 
 duced to subscribe the petition. Of these petitioners, enough 
 Baa been said. And need I say more of the abettors? — I 
 must remind the Judge of his story of the four or fve hun- 
 dred sighersj Justices, cyr. Was that a mistake of the memory ? 
 The assertion was positive — no reservation — no possibility 
 of inaccuracy was admitted. — To his Honour and the pub-- 
 lick, 1 refer the matter.) 
 
 • Sec Appendix— Xo. (3.) 
 
 t Bee Barllett's deposition — Appendix — Xo. (2.) 
 
 : .tciy understood, thai the Judge feels troubled about the 
 
 ■• »tat( merit 1 ' he made, bifice it is bo widely contradicted l>\ tlie ropv pro- 
 
 U to say, or seopjs ah ngtoMwar, that he Mid 
 
 ,-e were tiro or lltrcr f undred signers to the petition — and Dot /eur vr 
 
 hundred; and that he either dtd re/er, or intended to rrfrr the < 
 
 [t -■ • i .ilni">t a pity that this poor apoloi 
 . 1 the hoi . .in. i. But it implies a falsehood, and 
 
 be allowed. I hat < v lined the Clerk 1 61es, and' the petition is 
 not th — and by n hem ? By 
 
 ■'"..•<. 
 
•ft 
 
 A view of Capt. Parish may be had in the proceedings of 
 the court-martial, and in the depositions in the Appencix. 
 Captain (perhaps I should say Major, or Colonel) Cogswell, 
 is pretty well represented in going to the Judge's on the 
 Sabbath ; and afterwards, with the '« petition," the " bond," 
 and his own " recommendation," in his pocket, riding ten 
 miles while it was yet dark, to procure petitioners — and all 
 this out of pure patriotism ! believing that he could do bet- 
 ter for the regiment, and the country generally, than any 
 other officer, and especially than one who will journey and 
 <* leave his regiment three weeks at a time without a com- 
 mander !" And this Capt. Cogswell--let me repeat it— was 
 the only petitioner who took any active part. 
 
 As to Mr. Walker, he has already flourished considerably; 
 but as he is a flourishing man, and desirous to appear in pub- 
 lick, he may come forward once more. And among the 
 group of abettors, this man is foremost— he stands-m relievo. 
 But it may be asked, What can be the object or motives of 
 Mr. Walker in these transactions ? It is my opinion— and 
 it is the most charitable conclusion I can draw from the 
 facts— that mVchicf purpose from the beginning has been 
 to bring himself into notice— into publick view. The pub- 
 lick hearing before the Legislature gave him a fine oppor- 
 tunity to accomplish this purpose. He has now been be- 
 fore the publick — and he appeared in a light, at once strong, 
 and rendered more brilliant by contrast with the murky 
 shades that here and there attached themselves to the pic- 
 ture. He will probably pretend that he was engaged as 
 counsel in the cause, and must be faithfid. Faithful ! — to 
 whom or what? to the guilty purposes of his employers? — 
 Does an attorney, when he engages in a cause, engage also 
 to practise upon the views of his client? If a client would 
 remove an opposing witness, or suborn one for himself, must 
 his counsel administer poison to the one, or hold out the 
 reward of perjury to the other ? Did professional duty call 
 
n 
 
 Mr. Walker t» ride 7 miles upon the Sabbath, to meet and 
 i uisact business with his clients— and that too even before 
 ;h<e cause commenced? Did his duty require him to aid in 
 getting up the cause — to frame the petition — to urge others 
 ♦o sign it— to sign an '• indemnifying bond" himself — to write 
 a deposition for a young man, and compel him to sign it — 
 *ml, in short, to do the various other deeds which Mr.Wab 
 k- 1 has done? No — He must have acted from choice — Wq 
 dee. him in his proper element. 
 
 Before I take final leave of the counsellor, I will mention 
 one other " mistake" of his, which has some relation to the 
 * statement" of Judge Badger, and will throw some light on 
 his testimony. Jt is one of those mistakes which look s» 
 much like a trick as not to be distinguishable from it. At 
 the close of the publick hearing, I missed an important pa- 
 per, which both these gentlemen doubtless « ished had never 
 existed — I mean the copy of the petition of 1016, which 
 shewed the Judge's statement, to be just so far from the fact 
 ■as four or five hundred is from one hundred and sixty-one. — 
 1 inquired of the counsellor for the paper. He knew not 
 ■where it was. He examined all his papers, very carefully^ but 
 could find nothing of it. My suspicions, however, were not 
 removed. And after returning to our lodgings, I inquired 
 of Mr. Rogers, another of the counsel for the petitioners — 
 ■who I believe is an honest man. although for once in bad 
 company — and asked him to look for the copy. lie did A 
 and found it among the papers of the counsellor, (who was 
 then absent) and gave it to me. And now, Mr. Counsellor 
 did duty to your clients require this mistaJcc? — Please settle 
 these question • 
 
 Of 1 loratio G. IVcscoit. the only remaining abettor whom 
 I have not mentioned, I shall say nothing. 
 
 Such is ihe cause — BBCfa arc the abettors and supporters 
 •f it — and such, a concise history of the proceedings against 
 fcic. The Legislature granted the pi £ the pettoknc 
 
2.3 
 
 1 do not undertake to give any opinion as to the correctness 
 or incorrectness of their decision. I have endeavoured to 
 state the facts and the evidence in the case, fairly and in- 
 telligibly. Those who read this statement, will form their 
 own conclusions. I have endeavoured to speak of those 
 opposed to me, with candour and moderation. If I have,, 
 in any degree, failed, let it be remembered, that I consider 
 myself falsely accused and wickedly misrepresented by the 
 advocates of the petition against me ; and may therefore be 
 unwittingly influenced by prejudice, which I have studied 
 to avoid. I am not petitioning for favours. It is my right 
 to establish the truth — and this is all I claim. 
 
 EBENEZER EASTMAK 
 Gilmanton, July 15, 1818. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 No. (1) — From page 4. 
 
 Extract from a Remonstrance to the Legislature, against the 
 
 Petition of IS 10. 
 
 The signers of this remonstrance, after replying to the 
 charges in the petition, add — 
 
 " We would further represent, that we have understood 
 that a private misunderstanding has subsisted for a long 
 time between Major Eastman and the first Captain of 
 his battalion ; and we believe that all the other officers in 
 the regiment, except the said first Captain, have cheerfully 
 discharged their several duties under Major Eastman. And 
 from our knowledge, and the best information we can ob- 
 tain, we are decidedly of opinion, that the aforesaid peti- 
 tion, for the removal of Major Eastman, originated in the 
 aforesaid private misunderstanding, and not in any real 
 and substantial reasons which ought to have any weight in 
 the minds of the Honourable Legislature, to induce you to 
 address His Excellency the Govcrnour to remove the said 
 Eastman from office. 
 
 " We would further state, that if Major Eastman should 
 be removed, the said first Captain would be promoted to 
 Lieutenant-Colonel, and that that promotion would be much 
 less satisfactory to the officers and soldiers of the regiment 
 generally, than for Major Eastman to be promoted to the 
 office of Colonel. Believing, as we do, the aforesaid pe- 
 tition for the removal of Major Eastman from office, did not 
 originate in any well founded reasons for his removal, bur 
 in the private quarrel of the said first Captain with Major 
 Eastman, and aided perhaps by the ambition of a few offi- 
 cers who wish for promotion, and that the prayer thereof, 
 if granted, would rot tend to promote union, harmony, subo- 
 rdination, and discipline, among the officers and soldiers 
 of i he regiment; but would have an effect directly the re- 
 verse — we respectfully request the honourable members of 
 the Legislature to dismiss said petition from their further 
 osideration : and we, as in duty bound, will ever pray. 
 "Gilmanton, Dec. 9, 1816." 
 
 [Signed by twenty-two officers! 
 
2(3 
 
 l'u t'iw. Honourable the Senate and House of Representative of 
 the State of NetD'Hampshire^in (Jon nil Court now convened, 
 at Concord, in said State. 
 RESPECTFULLY BBEW8 — 
 
 The undersigned officers of the tenth regiment of the mi- 
 litiaof said State, that we. with a number of others, signed 
 a petition, praying your Honours to address His Excellen- 
 cy the ( rov< roour to remove from office Major Ebenezer 
 
 mian. 
 
 We now ask leave to state, that by reason of improper 
 representations made to us, of the private and official con- 
 duct of Major Eastman, we were induced incautiously to 
 sign said petition; hut upon a more mature consideration, 
 and being better informed of the charges in said petition 
 inst Major Eastman, and the motives of those who pre- 
 sented the same to us, we arc satisfied that we acted too 
 precipitately in giving the same the aid of our names; and 
 that if we had not already signed the same, we should re- 
 fuse to do it. 
 
 We therefore request, that said petition may have no 
 more weight in the opinion of the Honourable Legislature^ 
 than it would if our names were erased from the same. 
 
 Gihnanton, Dec. 9, 131C. 
 {Signed by thirteen — of whom seven were Captains, thre^ 
 Lieutenants, and three Ensigns.] 
 
 No. (2) — From page. 4. 
 Extracts from certain Depositions. 
 
 [Jonathan Sanborn, jun.] 
 
 Question by Eastman* Were you an officer last June in 
 the 10th regiment? 
 
 Answer. Vis — I was then, but have since resigned. 
 
 (J. by same. Did you sign a petition, presented to you 
 by ( !apt. ( logswell, t'> have me removed from the office of 
 Major in this regiment? 
 
 . Inswi r. \ ' 
 
 Q. / / same. I )i<! you read that petition, or hear it read. 
 ned it ? 
 
 . Ins. No, no! Much of if. 
 
 by same* JL>id Captain Cogswell urge you to sign this 
 petition 7 
 
2,7 
 
 A. Y es — f told liim that I believed I should not sign any 
 more petitions of this nature. 
 
 Q. by same. Have you since seen a copy of the petition, 
 and heard it read ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. by same. If you had have read the petition, or heard 
 it read, before signing, should you have signed it? 
 
 A. I should not. 
 
 (Signed) JONATHAN SANBORN, jun. 
 
 Sworn to, May 30, 1818— Before, 
 
 THO. BURNS, Jus. Peace. 
 
 [Joseph L. Bartlett.] 
 
 Question by Eastman. Do you hold a commission in the 
 10th regiment? 
 
 Answer. I do. 
 
 Q. by same. Did you sign a petition that was sent to the 
 Legislature in June 1817? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. by same. Who presented that petition to you to sign ? 
 
 A. Lyman B. Walker handed me the petition, and he 
 and Capt. Parish and Horatio G. Prescott urged me to sign 
 it. I refused for some time ; but they engaged to hold me 
 harmless, and urged so much, that 1 at length signed it. 
 
 Q. by same. At what place were you when they entreat- 
 ed you to sign this petition ? 
 
 A. At Major Piper's tavern at Meredith Bridge. 
 
 Q. by same. Was Capt. Norris present at that time when 
 you signed said petition ? 
 
 A. Yes — and he signed at the same time. 
 
 Q. by same. Did not they urge both of you very hard, 
 and a long time, before cither of you would consent to 
 sign it? 
 
 A. Yes — they urged us both a great while, and repeat- 
 edly assuring us that we should not be injured in conse- 
 quence of signing it. 
 
 Q. by same. Did you read, or hear read, said petition, 
 before you signed it ? 
 
 A. Walker pretended to read it. 
 
 Q. by same. Have you since seen a copy of said petition 
 which was served on me, and heard it read? 
 
 A. Yes — and it did not appear exactly to me then, as 
 ,vKen Walker read it to me. 
 
 (Signed) JOSEPH L. BARTLETT. 
 
 Sworn to. Mav 30, 1818 — Before, 
 
 THO. BURNS, Jus. Peace. 
 
28 
 
 ["Oilman L. Edgcrly.] 
 
 I Gilmap I,. Edgerly, of lawful age, depose and ov. t) 
 some time in* June, i;:i7. Pearson Cogswell came to my 
 house, hewed me a petition which ho said they intend- 
 
 ed to present to the Legislature, rqqui sting thai Major Eb- 
 ehefccr Eastman might be removed from office; which he 
 requi st< d me to ign. 
 
 Q'u stion by Eastman, Did you hold a commission at that 
 time in the 10th regimehl ? 
 
 Answer, I did at that timo, and since resigned. 
 
 Q. by same. Did you know any of the charges preferred 
 againsl me in that petition to be true? 
 
 A, 1 did not, to my recollection. 
 
 (Signed) GDLM A N L. EDGERLY. 
 
 Sworn to, May 30, 101 8— Before, 
 
 77/0. BURNS, Jus. Peace. 
 
 [Hugh Blasdrll.] 
 
 1 Hugh Blasdel!, of Gilford, of lawful age, testify and 
 say. thai I signed a petition that waspresented to tl is- 
 
 !:• tire in June 1817, for the removal of lor Ebenezer 
 Eastman from his office as Major of tin- tenth regiment. 
 
 Question by Eastyhan, Wasyou an officer in said regi- 
 ment when you signed the petition, and are you in office 
 now? 
 
 . Inswer, Yes. 
 
 Q. by same. Where were you when you signed the pe- 
 tition f 
 
 .1. At Jonathan Piper's tavern in Gilford. 
 
 ( t >. l:u same'. Do yon know any thing of the truth of the 
 ch; lierein asserted? 
 
 A. I know them only by information from credible 
 persons, 
 
 Q. btijami. Who presented that petition to you ? 
 
 .'/. Captain Parish. 
 
 Q, by same. Was Lyman B. "Walker anxious for you fo 
 sign the petition ? 
 
 . '. lie appeared to be inter* sted. 
 
 Q, by same, J)id Horatio Ql Prescott appear to be in- 
 terested in the petition ? 
 
 A. V. . 
 
 (Signed) TH (ill BLASDELL. 
 ■I'D to, June 4. 1818 — B< fore, 
 
 DANIEL AVERY. Jus. Pcac 
 
[William Walker, jun.] 
 
 Question by Eastman. Did you sign a memorial, or pe- 
 tition, which was presented to the Legislature of this State 
 last June, for the removal of mc from office — and had • 
 any knowledge that any of the charges therein were true? 
 
 Answer. 1 signed the petition or memorial mentioned; 
 but knew nothing of the truth of any of said charges there- 
 in contained, any other way than from what was told me 
 by Capt. Pearson Cogswell, who presented the said peti- 
 tion to me, who then stated that the charges were true. 
 
 Q. by same. Were you urged a long time by Capt, Cogs- 
 well, before you consented to sign the memorial? 
 
 A. Yes — I being loath to sign, he urged me some time. 
 
 Q. by same. How long have you been an officer in the 
 tenth regiment of militia ? 
 
 A. About four years. 
 
 Q. by samr. Have ever you discovered any ungcntleman 
 or unofficer-like conduct in me, on muster doys, at any 
 time ? 
 
 A. I never did at any time. 
 
 Q. by same. At what time did you sign the petition men- 
 tion C..I? 
 
 A. T think it was the first of June, 1C17. 
 
 Q. by same. At the time Capt. Cogswell presented the 
 memorial to you, did he shew you another paper — and 4 
 he did, what was it ? 
 
 A. He shew me one other paper, but I do not recollect 
 its contents; but recollect, it appeared to be signed with 
 the name of Lyman B. Walker. 
 
 Q. by same Have you since been informed, that the 
 paper you mention was a bond, signed by Lyman B. V\ al- 
 kcr and another, to indemnify whoever might sign said 
 memorial ? 
 
 A. Yes — I have. 
 
 (Signed) WM. WALKER, jun. 
 
 Sworn to, June 5, 1318 — Before, 
 
 SAMUEL SHEPARD, Jus. Peace. 
 
 [George Chesley.] 
 
 I George Chesley, of Barnstcad, in the county of Straf- 
 ford, and State of New-Hampshire, first Lieutenant of the 
 artillery company annexed to the tenth regiment, depose 
 and say, that 1 signed a memorial for the resaoval of Major 
 
 Ebenezcr Eastman, presented to me by Capt. Pearson 
 Cogswell, about one vear ago. ■ 
 
30 
 
 Question hy Eastman. Do you know that anj ©f rho 
 chaises contained in said memorial arc true? 
 
 Answer. Only by information, not by any knowledge 
 I had of the facts. 
 
 Q. by <<tm,\ If you did not know that the charges in the 
 memorial were any of them true, what induced 3'ou to sign 
 it? 
 
 A. Because Capt. Cogswell stated to me, that the charg- 
 ?•* were facts, and would be proved. 
 
 Q. by same. Did Capt. Cogswell shew you any other. 
 paper at the time he did the above mentioned memorial — 
 and if so, what waa its contents '! 
 
 A. He did shew me an indemnifying bond, signed by 
 Lyman B. Walker and another, purporting to be to. 
 whomsoever might sign said memorial ; which bond he of- 
 fered to leave with me ; but I did not keep it. 
 
 Q. by same. How long have you been an officer in the 
 tenth regiment of militia ? 
 
 A. About four years ; and I have been generally welS 
 Satisfied with you as an officer. 
 
 Q. by same. Had Capt. Cogswell a petition, which he 
 circulated to obtain signers, to His Excellency the Gkro 
 ernour and the Honourable Council, to appoint Major Bick- 
 ford Colonel, and himself either Lieutenant-Colonel or 
 Major ? 
 
 A. Yes — he did circulate such petition, at the time he 
 did the above mentioned memorial; but do not distinctly 
 recollect whether said petition to the Executive waa for 
 him the said Cogswell to be Lieutenant-Colonel, or Major. 
 
 (Signed) GEORGE CHESLEY. 
 
 Sworn to, June 5, 1818 — Before, 
 
 SAMUEL S1IEPARD, Jus. Peace. 
 
 J$o. (3) — From page 5. 
 
 [John Bickford.] 
 
 I John Bickford, of Barnstead, in the county of Sfraf- 
 ford, Major of the second battalion in the tenth regiment 
 of militia in the State of N« W-Hampshire, testify and say, 
 that (lie last "!' M .-.\. or the first Of June, in the year 1817, 
 
 Capt. Pearson Cogswell, of Gilmanton 7 , called on meat 
 
 Barnstead, and asked me to sign a memorial to be present- 
 ed to tne General Court of said State at their >n in 
 
 June lasti which memorial the Baid Cogswell shew me. f< •• 
 
34 
 
 the removal of Major Ebenezer Eastman from his office ; and 
 the said Cogswell, at the same time, shew me a paper, con- 
 taining a recommendation to His Excellency the Governour 
 and the Honourable Council, for the appointment of myself, 
 Colonel, and him the said Cogswell, Lieutenant-Colonel, of 
 said tenth regiment ; and he, Capt. Cogswell, and Lieuten- 
 ant George Chesley, signed said recommendation j but I re- 
 fused to sign either of said papers. 
 
 Question by Eastman. Did Capt. Pearson Cogswell 
 come to you some time before the time you mention 
 above, and ask you if you would resign your commission, 
 and recommend him, so that he might be appointed before. 
 any one could be appointed in the first battalion ? 
 
 Answer. He did. 
 
 Q. by same. How long have you been an officer in 
 flhe tenth regiment of militia ? 
 
 A. About thirteen years. 
 
 Q. by tame. Have you ever discovered any ungentleman 
 or unofficer-like conduct in me on muster days ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. by same. Has Lieutenant Nathan W. Norris* ab 1 
 aconded ? 
 
 A. Yes — I understand he has. 
 
 Dated at Barnstead aforesaid, June 5, 1818. 
 
 (Signed) JOHN BICKFORD. 
 
 Sworn to, June 5, 1818 — Before, 
 
 SAMUEL SHEPARD. Jus. Peafc 
 
 No. (4) — From page 8. 
 
 [John Prilay.] 
 EXTRACT. 
 
 1 John Priiay, of lawful age, depose and say, that I re- 
 ceived a summons to appear at Lyman B. Walker's office 
 
 in Gilford, in the county of Strafford, in the State of New- 
 Hampshire, at ten o'clock in the forenoon, the 22d day of 
 October, 1817, to testify what I knew relative to a petition 
 for the removal of Major Ebenezer Eastman from office, to 
 be heard and tried before the Honourable Legislature of 
 New-Hampshire, on the first Tuesday of their next June 
 session, David Norris and others, petitioners, against the 
 said Eastman, petitionee. And that I was travelling from 
 
 * One of the ten who signed the petition cigainst me. 
 
i 
 
 my home in Littleton", in the county of Grafton, to i 
 
 h' p-in-1 -.. '- in t lilmanto !lst oft i : : — 
 
 ; 1 stopped : : in Gilford, fo) fi i sh J 
 
 ment, and was there attacked by Lyman 15. Walker, scared 
 
 1 compelled t<> testify 1 to many things, which upon hear- 
 ing them read over the next day, I found to lie xevy 
 v and incorri d. Thai I « is very much 
 
 d, being among strai eioh ntly"thr< aten- 
 
 c<\ by Walker, thai my head was so confused that Walker 
 wrote what he was a mind to, and frightened me to sign it. 
 A- I I forth r -' tte, that when I refused to relate any thing 
 respecting the business until the next day, the time tnal n 
 summo 3 ■'. I. tan T>. Walker threatened, if ! Wotald 
 not tell, that he \ take off my skin*; [her--' follows lan- 
 
 guage tooprbl curriloustobcrepeatedjandifl^tart- 
 
 ithoutt he would send an officer after me, and 
 
 send me to jail : he said that 1 had received his money, and 
 was o! totellthen: and, damn lid he, you shall 
 
 tell ; and detained me in his office until a very late hour, I 
 think as late as midnight, [furthers! , tat 1 attended th 
 next i -i ■< able to my summon.-, and seas' taken before 
 
 Esq.Perlej .where the writing that Walker made the night be- 
 for< was read by him, and I perceived many crrours and 
 mistakes iu it; and on refusing to answer as he wished me 
 ■ i, to what v.;is therein written, 1 was pui into the custody 
 of an oilier, by Esq. Perley, and detained for more than 
 th, ps, until Lyman B. Walker made out a mittimus 
 
 to commit mete prisonj and then 1 was called, and th< 
 mittimus was read over to me ; audi was threatened, \i I 
 would no! answer to die questions as they there had them 
 . ifed, that 1 should go to jail, although ! was not sworn, 
 neither was I requested to hold up a hand and receive the 
 
 h for the daj . or to 
 
 Question by J. . >w many years did you liv$ with 
 
 me? 
 
 zeer. \\<^\\ « lr\ 
 
 Q. by sami. I>id you ever go with me into Canada, 
 .'!• know of my goi Ler the declaration of war in June 
 
 112 7 
 
 ./. No. 
 
 Q.byt . Did 1 go to Casline al anytime duri 
 war - 
 
 . /. No! to . . knot* led • 
 
 Q.hy . Did 1 carry on any traffick with the 
 
30 
 
 enemy at any time or at any place during the war above- 
 mentioned ? 
 
 A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 (Signed) JOHN PRILAY. 
 
 Sworn to, Oct. 23, 1817— Before, THO, BURNS, Jttt. Butt. 
 
 No. (5) — From page 16. 
 
 BRIGADE ORDERS. 
 
 Farmington, Feb. 17, 1817. 
 Having minutely examined the testimony adduced in sup- 
 port and defence of the charges exhibited by Major Eben- 
 ezcr Eastman, against Capt. Rufus Parish, 1 see no reasotr 
 i\ y the said Capt. Rufus Parish should not have been found 
 gu, Ity of the first specification in the first charge, as also 
 the third specification in the second charge ;* and therefore 
 disapprove of the foregoing decision. 
 
 lRir>ri cK IVnrVi^r S Brigade General 2d Brigade 
 1V1CU J. UI Uei , £ >, lL Militia. 
 
 No. (6)— From page 17. 
 
 [Stephen C. Lyford.] 
 
 I Stephen C. Lyford, depose and say, that I was present 
 at the hearing of the memorial of David Norris and others, 
 at Concord, for the removal of Major Ebenezer Eastman 
 from the command of the tenth regiment of the New- 
 Hampshire militia ; that I heard all the testimony, and do 
 v, ell recollect, that the Hon. William Badger, Esq", testified, 
 that a petition for the removal of said Eastman from his said 
 command, had been presented to the Legislature, signed 
 by four or five hundred subscribers, consisting of officers, 
 Justices of the peace, selectmen, and citizens, within said re- 
 giment 5 and that in 1813 and 1814 there was a great or 
 .general dissatisfaction throughout said regiment, among 
 officers, soldiers, and citizens: on account of said dissatis- 
 faction, said petition had been presented for his removal — 
 as I understood him. STEPHEN C. LYFORD. 
 
 State of New- Hampshire, ^ 
 
 Strafford— se. $ July 2, 1818. 
 Then the above name-l Stephen C. Lyford, personally appeared, and 
 made solemn oath, that the above affidavit, by Mm subscribed, to be just 
 and true.— Before me, THOMAS BURNS, Jus. Pun,. 
 
 * First specification in the first charge, is disobedience of orders. Third 
 specification in the second charge— contemptuous and ULOiIictr-lil^ ■ - 
 duct on miifl^r dny. 
 
u 
 
 [Isaac W. Page.] 
 
 T Tsaae W, Page testify and say, that T was present at 
 J" laic publick hearing before the Honourable-Legislature 
 on the petition tor the removal of Major I or East- 
 
 man: that I heard the testimony of Judge Badger; and 
 thai be si ited, that a general dissatisfaction prevailed ihro'- 
 out the regiment, among officers, soldier*, and citizens, to- 
 wards the conduct of Major Eastman, (or words to this ef- 
 fect;) and in support of this opinion, he said there wa I 
 •petition presented to the Legislature, in 1816, for Major 
 Eastman's removal from office, signed (as I understood him) 
 by four or five hundred persons, consisting of selectmen, 
 Justices of the peace, &c. 1 have since seen a copy of the 
 petition alluded to by Judge Badger, certified by the. Clerk 
 of i ho House of Representatives, and the number of signers 
 is only one hundred and rixtyone — among these there is but 
 one Justice of the peace, viz. Joseph Tasker, of Barnstead — 
 and but tieo selectmen, and those of Gilford, viz. John $. 
 Osgood and William Blasdcll. 
 
 ISAAC \V. PAGE. 
 State of {few-Hampshire, Strafford— ss. July 13. i:«l8. 
 
 Then the above named Isaac W. Page mad'- solemn oath, that the fore 
 £01115 affidavit, by him Bob* rihed, waa juet and true. 
 
 Before me, STEPHEN MOODY, Jus. Peace: 
 
 No. (7) — From page 18. 
 
 To Hts Excellency the Governour and die Honourable tin 
 Council of the Slate of JfewJHQmpskire* 
 
 The undersigned, officers in the 10th regiment of the mi- 
 litia of said State, respectfully shew — that for more than 
 thr< e years past, the office of Colonel in said regiment has 
 not. been filled. A large proportion of the subscribers pe- 
 titioned the Honourable Executive at their session in June 
 last, to fill said office ; and we regret that the prayer of 
 that petition was hot granted. We believe, that this pro- 
 tracted vacancy 1- 1 01 to be attributed to any disinclination 
 in the Executive to 'ill the office, but to an unfortunate mis- 
 understanding which has existed between Major Ebenezer 
 n and Capt. Rufus Parish, and which has indi 
 r and his friends to interfere with the Executive 
 and the Lt gi 1; tun to | the appointment of the 
 
 mcr gentleman to tie ol Colonel. We therefore 
 
 pcctfully request the Honourable E v( ' to promote 
 
 tfaior KIm'iu zcr Eastman to the office ot el 
 
 ( lilm inton, Sept. 13, 1 17. 
 /Signed by 10 Captains— and 20 other officers.] 
 
Ko. (8) — From page 19. 
 [Pcirce P. Furbcr.] 
 
 I Peirce P. Furber, Brigade Major and Inspector of t;, 
 i\icond brigade of militia in New-Hampshire, testify and 
 say, that in the fall of 1813, I inspected the 10th regiment 
 of New-Hampshire militia, ordered out for that purpose, in 
 battalion order, one of which battalions was then com- 
 manded by Major Ebcnczer Eastman, of CJilmanton : that 
 in the fall of 1817, I again inspected said regiment, in bat- 
 talion order, then commanded by the aforesaid Major East- 
 man : that Major Eastman's military appearance and con- 
 duct was good, and not exceeded by any field officer 1 have 
 seen in the second brigade : that the officers and soldiers 
 under his command were generally prompt in obeying his 
 orders : that the military appearance and discipline of the 
 troops, composing the regiment now commanded by Major 
 Eastman, are not exceeded by any regiment of New- 
 Hampshire militia I have ever seen, except when drilled in 
 the United States service. 
 
 I further testify and say, that Major Eastman is one of 
 the few commanding officers of regiments in the second bri- 
 gade, who have been punctual in making returns of the re- 
 giments under their command. 
 
 (Signed) P. P. FUPtBER, Brigade Major and 
 Inspector 2d brigade N. H. militia. 
 
 Farmington, June 13, 1818. 
 Sworn to, jsame day — Before, 
 
 RICHARD FURBER, Jus. Peacr 
 
 [Jeremiah Wilson.] 
 
 I Jeremiah Wilson, testify and say, that I have been an 
 inhabitant of Gilmanton upwards of thirty years, and have 
 done military duty as a private and an officer in the 10th 
 regiment of New-Hampshire militia for upwards of twelve 
 years, and have been acquainted with Major Ebenezer 
 Eastman ever since he has been an officer in snid regiment ; 
 all of which time he has been generally considered a good 
 officer, and a respectable citizen. 
 
 And I further state, that it is my opinion that there would 
 no difficult v have existed in said 10th regiment, since the 
 said Eastman had the command, had it not been for a pri- 
 vate misunderstanding heretofore existing between the said 
 Eastman and Capi. Rufus Parish. 
 
 And I further state, that as far as came within my know- 
 ledge, the said Eastman, during the late, war with Great 
 
.U, 
 
 Britain, was active as an ofiiccr to do his duty in his com- 
 nd. JEREMIAH WILSON. 
 
 Gilmanton, July 13, 1810. 
 • I , i r-Hampshire. } 
 
 Sir.itn.ni— ss. \ Jul/ 13, 181f;. 
 -.iiiullv appearing, till named Jeremiah Wilson, made oath. 
 
 'hat the foregoing affidavit, by him subscribed, is just and true. 
 
 Be SAMUEL SUEi'ARD, Jus. l>.<.ac<. 
 
 [David Sanborn.] 
 
 I David Sanborn, of lawful age. depose and say. that I 
 have held a commission in the tenth regiment of the New- 
 Hampshire militia twenty years: that 1 was the last Colonel 
 in the regiment, and that my resignation was dated June 23. 
 1814 : th.it Major Ebenezer Eastman held a commk-inn 
 with me in the same regiment, about seventeen years ; dur- 
 ing which time, 1 was well acquainted with him as an otli- 
 and knew lam to have been esteemed by his brother 
 officers generally ; and never knew of any difficulty between 
 him and his soldiers: that he, while a Captain, command- 
 ed a volunteer company of light infantry annexed to said 
 regiment; and that his company always appeared full and 
 cctable : that he was promoted to be Major, and at- 
 tended with me in the field at one battalion muster before 
 I resigned mv commission, and conducted with proprii 
 
 (Signed) DAVID SANUOILV 
 
 Sworn to, Juno 13, 1S13— Before, THOMAS BURETS, Jus. F 
 
 [William Hutchinson.] 
 
 I "William Hutchinson testify and say. thai I common 
 t light infantry company in the tenth regiment ofth 
 Hampshire militia, commanded by Major Ebenezer I 
 man. during the late war with England : that 1 was wcH 
 i with him as an oificcr, and always h since 
 
 1 held a commission in said regiment, which is rl 
 that my under-officers and soldiers have also been well satis* 
 tied, and never have been di d, to mj knowiei 
 
 and that there always h is been a large proportion of 
 officers, soldiers, and citizens, in his favour. 
 
 I fiirthi r stati il as mj oj inioi that no d "ion 
 
 r would have i , had ii not been for tl. 
 
 1 inflaence of Capt. Rufu '"' a w <»! 
 
 ticular friends. WILLIAM HUTCHINSON. 
 
 State of New-Hani] shire. ) 
 
 \ I 
 Then the above named William Hutchinson personal 
 
 e jusi 
 
 id true.- T