« AnkstesnisTęsti »
stead of Nottingham. Among the North River Pond. The chief named
early settlers was Joseph Cilley who built a log cabin on Rattlesnake Hill about 1727. He brought with him all his worldly effects on one pack horse. The early settlers laid out a compact village with great exactness on the beautiful elevation later known as the Square. Here were the church, school house and stores. The petitioners asked for a tract of land ten miles square. The boundaries established were such that the settlement at the Square was far to the south of the center of the township and this remoteness resulted in the separation of those tracts which later became Northwood and Deerfield.
JOSEPH CILLEY AND WIFE..
MR. AND MRS. HARRY D. CILLEY BENJAMIN BUTLER AND WIFE... DR. FRED FERNALD, MISS ELIZABETH FER
SAMUEL BARTLETT AND WIFE
MR. AND MRS. I. A. COLBY
PAUL GERR SH AND WIFE
MR. AND MRS. CHARLES JONES LOBERT HARVEY AND WIFE
MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GLOVER ABNER CLOUGH ......GEORGE CARMICHEAL Indians and others.
During the early French and Indian wars Nottingham was an outpost town and was constantly in danger of Indian raids. The Longfellow block house was established in what is now Deerfield and another near the Square. Great anxiety prevailed and large numbers of settlers removed from the town. Clearing and tilling of the soil was nearly abandoned for a time. Some help was received from the provincial government, and rangers travelled the forests between Chester and Rochester. Most of the settlers lived at the Garrison house, but in spite of all precautions Robert Beard, John Folsom and Mistress Simpson were surprised and massacred while at work at their homes.
A small band of Indians lived near
The unrest of this period was keenly felt in the lower towns of New Hampshire and the taverns were the scenes of many discussions regarding the oppression of the crown and the unjust taxation. The settlers of Nottingham were ardent patriots and were represented by Cilley, Dearborn and others in the raid on Fort William and Mary which resulted in the capture of powder and other munitions. This plunder was brought to Durham by General Sullivan and later sent to surrounding towns for safe keeping. A part was secreted in Nottingham subject to General Sullivan's orders. Previous to this, militia had been organized and drilled by Dearborn and when the call to action came they left their tools in
PAST AND PRESENT
MRS. CLARENCE LAWTON Attendants, Mothers, Sons and concluding pageant procession.
Indians-Chief Swansen, MR. ANDREW J. AYERS; Braves, LEAVITT HARVEY, LEON DAME, JOHN DEMERRITT, HARRY PARKER, TOM STEVENS, PERRY HARVEY, WESLEY HARVEY, ELMER PARKER.
Spinners, MISS VIENNA SMITH, MISS ELIZABETH FERNALD, MRS. FRED FERNALD, MRS. GEORGE WIGGIN, MRS. WESLEY HARVEY, MRS. CHARLES JONES, MRS. JOSEPH GLOVER, MRS. MARGARITE DAVIS.
Soldiers, CLARENCE H. LAWTON, T. E. FERNALD, MR. PERLEY BATCHELDER, FRED GOVE, MR. GEO. WIGGIN, CHARLES CASE, JOSEPH GLOVER, MR. WESLEY HARVEY, HARRY PARKER, ELMER PARKER.
Fishermen and Maids, DUDLEY LEAVITT, GEORGE CARMICHEAL, LEAVITT HARVEY, LIONEL HARVEY, DORA CARMICHEAL, ELIZABETH BATCHELDER, MILLIE SMITH, JOSEPHINE FERNALD.
OTHERS TAKING PART IN
MISS HAZEL WATSON
MRS. WESLEY HARVEY CHARLES KELSEY
ANDREW D. STEVENS
HENRY GOVE WILLIS FERNALD HARRISON CHESLEY EDWARD Foss MANSFIELD JOHNSON
MISS JANET SIMMONS Those who attended this celebration have as their reward, as Lieut. Col. John Van Schaick described his visit to Nottingham Square:
"Pictures of the pine woods, the oaks and maples, the well-tilled fields, the great New England farmhouses, the little country churches, with old friendships renewed, new friendships made; with that keenest of joys which the lover of history has, in running suddenly upon beautiful and historic things, and with lasting memories of a people who seem worthy to be the children of such heroic fathers."
NEW ENGLAND'S INDUSTRIAL FUTURE
By lobert P. Bass.
(It will be the policy of the magazine to encourage discussions such as those recently begun by Dr. Hodsdon and Mr. Upham as to present-day New Hampshire problems. Approach from varying angles is desirable, so we republish here an article recently written by ex-Governor Bass for the Peterborough Transcript. We have promise of at least one other paper by another author for an early issue.-Editor.)
Numerous articles. have recently appeared in the newspapers and periodicals published in New Hampshire and in other New England states discussing the future of New England industrial development.
Many of these have undertaken to point out the dangers which threaten the continued prosperity of various industries in New England. Among those most frequently mentioned, are first, the high cost of coal, which is the motive power used in most of our industries. Second, the handicap under which our manufacturers labor, in importing their raw materials from a long distance and exporting those manufactured goods which they sell outside of New England. In this connection, it is pointed out that the center of population in the United States is moving steadily westward, and that it has now reached the State of Indiana. Conseqently, New England products have further to travel before they reach their ultimate
Other obstacles to industrial prosperity frequently mentioned, are high taxation and high wages.
It has seemed to me that there is much food for sober thought in these suggestions. They raise questions vital to the continued prosperity of many of those industries which have been the chief source of the wealth and growth of New England, and England, and which have provided employment for an increasing part of the people who
live in these States. There are few questions which more vitally or per
manently affect the continued prosperity and development of this section of the Country.
In reading these various articles, I have been surprised at the absence of certain constructive remedies which I believe would be of material assistance in successfully meeting this critical business situation.
One of the chief burdens which New England manufacturers now have to contend with is the high cost of coal. It is unfortunate that we are so far removed from the deposits of coal, oil and gas. On the other hand nature has favored us with a substantial amount of water power. Much of this power is still undeveloped and going to waste, while industries are staggering under the burden of their coal bills. It would seem that one of the first steps necessary to meet new conditions is to hasten the development of these water powers, and to do this in a way which will most benefit our industries and the public. New Hampshire, in particular, has undeveloped water power. Some of those which have been developed are of little benefit to our industries, for a large part of the power is now transmitted beyond this State and used in the operation of industries elsewhere.
The creation of storage reservoirs near the sources of our larger streams would increase the minimum flow for all those powers already developed on such streams. This would diminish or eliminate the need for auxiliary steam power now so commonly used during regular periods of low water. It would be necessary for the State to take the initiative in this matter in order to apportion the charges to the various industries which would be so largely benefited by the new power so provided. The extent of the public benefit which would be derived through the conservation of the water
which now goes to waste, can be realized when we consider that every cubic foot of water which was thereby released during periods of low water would increase the amount of power generated at every plant on the stream. The cost of large storare reservoirs, which would be prohibitive for any one plant, would become very moderate if distributed among all those who made use of the water on the stream.
This is a matter in which the State should take immediate action. The valuable information made available through Col. Leighton's recent report showing the extent and location of our water powers, could well be used as a basis for the formulation of a State policy which would encourage their development for the use of New Hampshire industries. We might
even find that they could be used to reduce the cost of railroad transportation. Such a policy should have as one of its chief purposes the protection of the public and business interests by preventing monopoly and exorbitant rates for hydro-electric power. It would be disastrous for New England if the water power were exploited for the private gain of a few, as the coal mines now seem to be.
Bringing raw material for our manufacturers to New England is one of the heavy burdens now hampering our industries. There are two lines of action which will clearly help to overcome this obstacle. First, to develop and increase the supply of such raw materials which we ourselves
produce. In New Hampshire, the most important raw material at our command is to be derived from our forests. At present, we are not only rapidly exhausting the supply of this valuable raw material, but much timber which is now cut in this State is being shipped beyond our borders, to be manufactured elsewhere into a finished product. Furthermore, much of our soft timber is being cut before
it is mature. Little is being done to insure a continuous supply of lumber for New Hampshire. A recent survey of the State made by the Federal Government, shows that we have over two million acres of waste land which is at present producing little or nothing of value, and which might easily be made the source of a large revenue to the State, and of a continuous supply of a valuable raw material which could profitably give employment to a large number of people in New Hampshire, were it manufactured here into finished products.
We sorely need a far-sighted and advanced State policy in regard to our forests. One of the first steps in this direction lies in the adoption of a new method of taxing growing timber. Under our present tax system, no one can afford to own and raise a crop of growing trees. The owner of young growth has a continual outlay to meet tax requirements. Each year
he must pay a tax on the full value of his growing timber, and gets no income for something like fifty years. A single stand of mature timber is required to pay taxes forty or fifty times over before the crop matures. This is one reason why so much land, well adapted to growing trees, is today, lying unproductive in our state.
Under a far-sighted and progressive State policy, we could easily produce a continuous supply of timber which would place this industry at least in a position to compete successfully with any other section of the United States. This is the kind of constructive action, which will insure the continued growth and prosperity of at least one important New England industry.
New England railroads should be owned by New England people, and developed in their interests. There is now much talk of consolidating great railway systems. We should not allow our arteries of commerce to become mere adjuncts of the systems in New York and Pennsylvania. If they