Home

Location Mysteries – Southermost School

July 28, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History , Leave a comment

“If it wasn’t here, it was near.” That was the repeated phrase of our guide when we toured the Holy Land. I find myself saying the same thing when it comes to the second location of the Southermost School. I always thought that location was the same lot that was the home of the Gibbs School. The timing worked out perfectly. The schoolhouse went to Lakeside Farm when the Almy family bought it at auction in 1863. The building date of the Gibbs School was 1864. I imagined that the Southermost School had to be moved away for the construction of the newer school. When I went to research the Gibbs School, I began to have my doubts. There was much debate about what to do with the Gibbs School when it was no longer needed in the 1940s, because the original donor of the land (Listed as Parker Lawton in one newspaper article and Edward Lawton in another) stipulated that the property is “to be used and improved by School District No. 3 for school purposes only, forever.” (Note – at that time each of the one room schools functioned independently as is own district.). This was written in a deed in 1845. Parker sold the lot to the town for $60, but family members claimed that the land should go back to the Lawton family if it is not needed for a school.

Gibbs School from Collection of Jim Garman

Some histories of the Southermost School said it was moved around 1800 to a location on Union Street closer to West Main Road. If the Gibbs School lot wasn’t available, Southermost School could not have been in its location unless it was not on town property. A newspaper account from 1970 reports that “Southermost School was moved from its first location to the west end of Union Street – the Fred Sherman land now owned by Mrs. Robert Young.” The article states that the Gibbs School was built across Union Street from the land where the Southermost school had been. What is further confusing is that the 1850 Ward map of Newport County shows the schoolhouse to the North of Union Street close to West Main Road. Confusing!

Ward Map 1850

Commanders of the Battle: Robert Pigot

July 25, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History , , , Leave a comment

Robert Pigott- 1720-1796
Sir Robert Pigot was from a prominent Huguenot family in London. His brother Hugh was an admiral in the Navy. Pigot joined the British Army before the Revolutionary War and in 1758 was a major in Seventieth Regiment. Although he continued in the army, he was elected as a Member of Parliament. He commanded the Fifty-Fifth Regiment in Ireland as colonel in 1775. After this assignment he moved to America. During the Battle of Bunker Hill, Pigot commanded the left flank of Howe’s army. He led the second assault on the colonists’ position but he failed to break the Americans. In 1776, he was promoted to Major General and was placed in command of the British forces occupying Rhode Island. In 1778 he was in command of British forces during the Rhode Island Campaign. This was a joint effort of French and American forces, but the French pulled out unexpectedly when a storm damaged their ships. When the French ships had arrived near Newport, Pigot ordered his forces to evacuate Portsmouth. The Americans progressed close to Newport, but they began a retreat off the island when it was clear that the French would not come back to help them. Pigot’s forces hoped to catch the Americans in their retreat and his men chased the Americans as they prepared to leave via Howland’s Ferry. This action was known as the Battle of Rhode Island. The British were not able to prevent the Americans from retreating off the island. Rhode Island remained in British hands, but Pigot faced criticism for failing to capture the retreating army. He soon moved back to England.

Eyewitness Account – Pigot gives his orders on August 29th: “As soon as the day broke this Morning and we could see as far as the Enemys Encampment it was observed that their tents were struck; I went immediately on top of Dudleys house, and when it grew lighter, I could plainly perceive that the Rebels had struck their whole Camp, and had marched off; hardly a man was to be seen in their Batteries or Trenches. I rode as fast as possible to General Pigot’s quarters in Newport and informed him of it, and returned to the Camp with his orders for all the troops to get under arms with the utmost expedition. The General came to Irishes Redoubt by the time the Troops were assembled, and being satisfied that the Rebels had quitted their position, he gave orders for a part of the Army to march out, in three Columns, to pursue them, but to advance with caution, and not bring on an Action with a part of our force.” Frederick Mackenzie’s Diary – August 29, 1778.

Commanders of the Battle: John Sullivan

July 24, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History , , Leave a comment

Major General John Sullivan : Commander in Chief.

1740-1795

Sullivan was the son of Irish immigrants who settled in New Hampshire. He served as a Delegate to the Continental congress, Governor of New Hampshire, and United States district judge. The was trained as a lawyer. In 1772 the Royal governor of New Hampshire appointed him as major in The New Hampshire militia. Sullivan began to have rebel leanings. Sullivan was sent as delegate to first continental congress in 1774 and in 1775 he was sent to the Second Continental Congress. Congress appointed George Washington commander in chief and John Sullivan as brigadier general. Sullivan joined the American Army at the siege of Boston. Later he took command of a force in Quebec which ended as a failed invasion. Sullivan had to withdraw the survivors. He was captured in defeat at Battle of Long Island. British General Howe released him on parole to deliver a message to Congress. He was later released in a prisoner exchange for captured British general Prescott. He had some success in battle but had continued difficulties as well. In Early 1778 he was transferred to the post of Rhode Island where he led the continental troops and militia.

His eyewitness account:

General Sullivan writes in a letter to Congress:

“To make a retreat in the face of an enemy, equal, if not superior in number, and cross a river without loss, I knew was an arduous task, and seldom accomplished, if attempted. As our sentries were within 200 yards of other, I knew it would require the greatest care and attention. To cover my design from the enemy, I ordered a number of tents to be brought forward and pitched in sight of the enemy, and almost the whole army employed themselves in fortifying the camp. The heavy baggage and stores were falling back and crossing through the day; at dark, the tents were struck, the light baggage and troops passed dawn, and before twelve o’clock the main army had crossed with the stores and baggage. The Marquis de la Fayette arrived about 11 in the evening from Boston, where he had been by request of the general officers, to solicit the speedy return of the fleet. He was sensibly mortified that he was out of action; and that he might not be out of the way in case of action, he had rode from hence to Boston in seven hours , and returned in six and a half, the distance near seventy miles — he returned time enough to bring off the pickets, and other parties, which converted the retreat of the army, which he did in excellent order; not a man was left behind, nor the smallest article left. I hope my conduct through this expedition may merit the approbation of Congress. Major Morris, one of my aids will have the honor of delivering this to your Excellency; I must beg leave to recommend him to Congress as an officer who is in the last, as well as several other actions, has behaved with great spirit and good conduct, and doubt not Congress will take such notice of him, as his long service and spirited conduct deserves. I have the honor to be, dear Sir, Your very humble servant – John Sullivan.”

Commanders at the Battle of Rhode Island

July 23, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History , , , 1 Comment

I am working on a simple role playing game to take people through the Battle of Rhode Island. Right now I am working on cards to introduce the primary actors in the battle. I am going through the biographies of these men and I will post the material here on my blog.

John Trumbull

Aide to General Sullivan – In Battle Nathanael Greene put him in charge of Lovell’s Brigade

1756 – 1843

Military Career up to Battle of Rhode Island

Born in 1756 in Lebanon, Connecticut, John Trumbull graduated from Harvard College in 1773. He served with the Connecticut First Regiment in the early months of the revolution. Many of the biographical materials have him resigning from that regiment and going on to England to study painting, however he wrote about the Battle of Rhode Island. In 1778 he became an aide-de-camp to General John Sullivan in Rhode Island.

An Eyewitness Account by Trumbull

“Soon after daybreak the next morning, the rear-guard, commanded by that excellent officer, Colonel Wigglesworth, was attacked on Quaker, and General Sullivan, wishing to avoid a serious action on that ground, sent me with orders to commanding officer to withdraw the guard. ….. 

Nothing can be more trying to the nerves, than to advance deliberatively and alone into danger. At first I saw a round shot or two drop near me, I spurred on my horse to the summit of the hill, and found myself in the midst of the melee. ‘Don’t say a word, Trumbull;’ cried the gallant commander, ‘I know your errand, but don’t speak; we will beat them in a moment.’ 

‘Col. Wigglesworth, do you see those troops crossing obliquely from the west road towards your rear?’ 

‘Yes, they are Americans, coming to our support.’ 

‘No sir, those are Germans; mark, their dress is blue and yellow, not buff; they are moving to fell late your rear, and intercept your retreat. Retreat instantly — don’t lose a moment, or you will be cut off.’ 

And Wigglesworth did retreat.

As the action in the battle shifted to the West side of Portsmouth, General Greene moved his men to action against the Hessian troops that were attacking the Artillery Redoubt. Greene put John Trumbull in charge of Lovell’s Brigade and sent it to flank the Hessians on their left and attack their rear. The combination of Lovell’s Brigade working with Sherburnes, Jacksons, Varnum’s 2nd RI, Livingston’s First Canadian and Webb’s and Lauren’s guards succeeded in forcing the Hessians back to Turkey Hill leaving their dead and wounded behind them.

Resources used:

Battle information from Christian McBurney’s book on the Battle of Rhode Island.

Eyewitness account in Edwin Stone’s Our French Allies.

Recent Booklets on Revolutionary Portsmouth

July 9, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History , Leave a comment

A Walking Tour of Butts Hill FortDownload
drivingtourDownload
Hillsstory-pdf-P17791989Download

Remembering Revolutionary Women

July 4, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History Leave a comment

Judge Benjamin Cowell collected the stories of Rhode Islanders who applied for pensions many years after the war. He published his stories in a book called “Spirit of 76” and he started his book with the stories of women who had to step up and take extra responsibilities with their husbands at war. Cowell commented: “The women also of Rhode Island, with all the sympathies peculiar to their sex, took an active part in sustaining the “great cause,” and a more noble race of women never existed.”

Today is July 4, 2025 and I am thinking of what I have learned about what Rhode Island women endured during Aquidneck Island’s Occupation by the British (1776-1779). Would we have the bravery to face the hardships that women of that era faced?

Even before the fighting began the women of this island began to spin yarn to make homespun cloth as a protest to British taxes. Newspaper accounts confirm that “Daughters of Liberty” were active in local protest spins. The Stamp Tax required Americans to pay tax on everyday items like newspapers, marriage licenses, business papers and even playing cards. The act was named for the official “Stamp” on the paper that proved the tax had been payed. The money from the taxes were to pay for the presence of British troops in America. Some of the colonists saw this as “taxation without representation” because they had no representatives in the British Parliament.

In Newport this tax was met with some violence, but the women took more peaceful strategies. Colonists still imported a great deal of goods from Britain. The women hoped that if Americans boycotted English goods that British merchants would pressure Parliament to repeal the Act. Colonial women had the responsibility of purchasing and making goods their families needed. They were willing to make the sacrifices needed to make a political statement. It gave women a voice at a time when they couldn’t hold public office. Benjamin Franklin appeared before the British House of Commons to argue against the Stamp Act. He noted that while Americans used to take pride in wearing fine imported garments, it was now their pride “to wear their old clothes over again, til they can make new ones.” (see blog on “Revolutionary Women: the Daughters of Liberty” for more information on these protest spins.

Revolutionary Women: The Daughters of Liberty Spin Their Protest

Aquidneck Island women faced unimaginable hardships during the Occupation by British forces.

They faced homelessness when their homes were commandeered to house British forces.

They lost their orchards, wagons, fences and any other wood for the heating of the British forces.

They lost the ability to move about the island or move off the island. Travel was greatly restricted.

If their husbands were serving in the army or militia, women had to run their farms or their businesses on their own. They had to plant, tend and harvest the crops without their husband’s help.

Looking at records of those petitioning for compensation for war losses, many lost all their animals, furniture, everything they had owned. The Binney Household Manifest in the collection of the Portsmouth Historical Society is an example of what Portsmouth families lost during the Occupation.

Binney household losses included
I orchard five acres. 1 crib
I cider press and mill 2 cows and one calf 1 mare
5 hogs
12 goats
14 forks
1 –jackass
1 ox cart
4 acres of corn
12 loads of hay

Aquidneck Island families suffered the most because of the Occupation. We need to remember their sacrifices towards the liberty gained in the Revolutionary War. It is certainly a time for us to ponder what we would sacrifice to keep our freedoms – our time, our voices, our money?

A Schoolhouse Mystery

June 25, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History Leave a comment

Did Portsmouth have a schoolhouse before the Southermost School? That was the question I had when I was transcribing a document that called for Portsmouth Freemen to “meet together at the town school house that is at the south end of said town..” I have been working on materials to celebrate the 300 anniversary of the Southermost School which we all assume was built in 1725. The problem for me was that the document was signed in 1723. We have been dating the schoolhouse from the bill for construction as the completion date and that bill was listed as March of 1724-25. Determining dates in colonial times can be tricky because the Julian Calendar year they used began in late March.

The Portsmouth Historical Society was saving documents for me that might be related to the school. This document was

“to give timely notice and warning to all the freemen of the above said town to meet together at the town school house that is at the south end of said town of twenty day of this instant, being according to the governor’s warrant and to meet at eight of the clock of said day then and there to make the choose of such and so many well qualified members Deputies to seat in general assembly according to the governor’s warrant to to meet at the colony house at Newport the 26 day of this instant ..”

Portsmouth freemen were to meet at the school house to choose Deputies to attend the General Assembly that would meet at the Colony House in Newport.

I wondered if the date had been copied wrong. Many of the documents in the Historical Society collection are duplicate copies, so I wondered if the date could be wrong. I checked the General Assembly dates and there was a meeting on November 26, 1723.

Was the school house mentioned our Southermost School, or was there an earlier schoolhouse? I went to an article written by Portsmouth historian Edward West – “Early Schoolhouses and Schoolmasters of Portsmouth, Rhode Island.” In his research I found my answer. West records minutes of a town meeting 31, August, 1716 that “we having considered how excellent and ornamental learning is to mankind, and the great necessity there is in building a Publick School-house on the South Side….which if erected will no doubt prove a great benefit to thos who look at the good and wellfare of their posterity.” Twenty pounds of town money was allocated and contributions to the cause would be welcome. William Sanford offered a triangular plot of land (3/4 of an acre).

By 1720 it seems that little had been done. A group of ‘Subscribers” – maybe parents who wanted an education for their children. This group was awarded the school house lot and the twenty pounds for construction. The land would belong to this group of subscribers. In 1723 town records show that “The school already erected, be finished by the town. The subscribers would relinquish their title to the land. The town would be looking for a schoolmaster.

At this point the school had not been finished. Captain George Lawton, Adam Lawton and William Sanford would finish the school house and dig a well for he use of the school. A year later in 1725 the town agreed to pay Adam Lawton 23 pounds, twelve shillings and seven pence. Finances did not get straightened out until 1725 when the money for the “subscribers” got straightened out.

It may have taken nine years (from 1716 approval) to the completion, but somewhere along the way the “subscribers” succeeded in building (but not completing) the Southermost School that we celebrate today. As one of the few town buildings, it clear that it served as a meetinghouse in 1723/24.

John Paul Jones Describes the Action during the Battle of Block Island

June 5, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History , , , Leave a comment

April 6, 1776 was the date of the Battle of Block Island, Rhode Island. This was an early battle (before the Declaration of Independence) for Esek Hopkins, commander in chief of the new Continental navy. It was considered a victory for the British because the British ship Glasgow was able to get away from the Americans. Hopkin’s fleet was returning from a successful raid on the town of New Providence on Nassau island in the Bahamas. The Americans seized eighty-eight desparately needed cannon, fifteen mortars, thousands of roundshot (types of cannon balls), other artillery implements and some gunpowder. The American ships spotted and gave chase to the HMS Glasgow, commanded by Captain Tryingham Howe. The Glasgow fired and hit the American flagship USS Alfred and disabled it. On April 7, 1776 American ships began dropping anchors off New London, Connecticut. Commodore Hopkins and the other commanders were criticized for their actions in the battle and even for their decisions to go to the Bahamas. This mission was controversial and marked the beginning of Hopkin’s downfall. The debate was over the nature of the orders Congress had given Hopkins before the raid.

John Paul Jones’s narrative of the action in the Alfred’s log-book gives details:

“At 2 A.M. cleared ship for action. At half past two the Cabot, being between us and the enemy, began to engage and soon after we did the same. At the third glass (a time reference) the enemy bore away and by crowding sail at length got a considerable way ahead, made signals for the rest of the English fleet at Rhode Island to come to her assistance, and steered directly for the harbor. The Commodore then thought it imprudent to risk our prizes, &c. by pursuing farther; therefore, to prevent our being decoyed into their hands, at half past six made the signal to leave off chase and haul by the wind to join our prizes. The Cabot was disabled at the second broadside, the captain being dangerously wounded, the master and several men killed. The enemy’s whole fire was then directed at us and an unlucky shot having carried away our wheel-block and ropes, the ship broached to and gave the enemy an opportunity of raking us with several broadsides before we were again in condition to steer the ship and return the fire. In the action we received several shot under water, which made the ship very leaky; we had besides the mainmast shot through and the upper works and rigging very considerably damaged.”

George Matthews After an image by Peale
The Alfred at Philadelphia

Block Islanders Endured Military Law during Revolutionary Times

June 1, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History , , Leave a comment

When I speak to student groups I stress the hardships of Aquidneck Islanders during the British Occupation 1776-1779. Until I began to research Block Island in the Revolutionary era, I didn’t realize that they were suffering as well. The Rhode Island Assembly believed that leaving resources on Block Island might tempt the enemy to attack the island. Historian Reverend Livermore comments:
“The policy adopted was much like that of befriending a banker by taking away his money to save him from being robbed.”

Aquidneck Islanders had their livestock taken to feed the British army.

Block Islanders would find their livestock taken by the Rhode Island Colony. An act Passed by the General Assembly in August of 1775 directed that the the island livestock “be brought off as soon as possible, and landed upon the continent.” According to Block Island Historian Rev. Livermore: “Such stock as was suitable was to be sent immediately to the army. Such as was not fit for market was to be sold at public or private sale..” Almost 2,000 sheep and lambs were taken but there was no record how many cows and oxen. Captain John Sands, Joshua Sands, and William Littlefield were authorized to determine how much livestock was needed to feed the islanders. This same committee collected firearms and delivered them to the Rhode Island Committee of Safety. Then the went door to door and suggested that since the livestock was gone, Block Island men should volunteer for the American Army.

Aquidneck Islanders had no freedom of movement during the Occupation. They couldn’t get on or off the island or they would be suspected of spying.

The Colony of Rhode Island decided that Block Island residents were “in the power of the enemy” and therefore they could not leave the island.

“Whereas the inhabitants of New Shoreham, from their peculiar situation, are entirely in the power of the enemy, and very pernicious consequences may attend the intercourse of the said inhabitants with the continent, by means of the intelligence and supplies which the enemy may procure thereby:
” It is therefore voted and resolved, that the said inhabitants be, and they are hereby prohibited from coming from said Island into any other part of this State, upon pain of being considered as enemies to the State, and of being imprisoned in the jail in the county where they may be found, there to remain until they shall be discharged by the General Assembly…”

By the end of 1776 a committee (Sands, Sands and Littlefield) was given permission to gather needed supplies and bring them back to Block Island. In 1777 Block Islanders who were on the mainland were able to go back to the island.

Block Islanders were left under suspicion and without help from the mainland.

August of 1779: General Assembly

“Whereas, many evil minded persons, not regarding the ties of their allegiance to the United States in general, and this state in particular; but influenced by the sordid principles of avarice, continue illicitly to correspond with and supply the inhabitants of New Shoreham, in the county of Newport, with provisions, and other articles, to the great detriment and distress of the virtuous inhabitants of this state.”

“And whereas, the said town of New Shoreham hath been for a long time, and still is, within the power and jurisdiction of the enemies of the United States, whereby they obtain, in consequence of the evil practices aforesaid, supplies for themselves, and intelligence from time to time of the situation of our troops, posts, and shores; by which means they are enabled to make frequent incursions, and thereby commit devastations upon, and rob the innocent inhabitants of their property, and deprive them of their subsistence; wherefore, “Be it enacted, &etc.”

What this act did was to prohibit all trade with the islanders except by special permit. The offender’s property would be confiscated and he might have to do service in a continental battalion, or war vessel until the end of the war. Corporal punishment was the alternative if the offender was a female or unfit to be a soldier. There are records that some Block Islanders were treated as prisoners of war but their fates are unknown. By the end of 1779 the acts prohibiting Block Islanders from going to or from the mainland were abolished, but there were still restrictions on transport of goods. Even Governor Greene had to comply with these rules.

In July of 1780 messengers from the colony came to take whatever horses, cattle, grain, fish or cheese they deemed the Block Islanders could spare.

The Block Island historian Rev. Livermore wrote:

“Thus the Islanders, besides the depredations from the British, denied traffic on the main, unrepresented in the General Assembly of Rhode Island, unprotected by the colony from the enemy, was burdened with a heavy tax. This was taxation without representation; nay more, it was the imposition of a heavy burden upon those cut off from the common privileges on the main and abandoned to the cruel mercies of the enemy. But even this their faith and patriotism could endure while patiently waiting for the dawn of freedom.” (Livermore, pg. 102)

Livermore, S. T. A history of Block Island from its discovery, in , to the present time, 1876. Hartford, Conn., The Case, Lockwood & Brainard co, 1877. Pdf. https://www.loc.gov/item/rc01002999/.

Rhode Island., Bartlett, J. Russell. (185665). Records of the colony of Rhode Island and Providence plantations, in New England: Printed by order of the General assembly. Providence: A. C. Greene and brothers, state printers [etc.].

Finley, A, and Young & Delleker. Rhode Island
. [Philadelphia, 1829] Map. https://www.loc.gov/item/76692364/.

Resolves Against the Duties on Tea: Block Islanders in Union

May 28, 2025

portsmouthhistorynotes Portsmouth History , Leave a comment

Although Block Island remained neutral in the Revolutionary War, they expressed their unity with other Rhode Island communities in a Town Meeting at New Shoreham, March 2, 1774. According to Livermore’s “History of Block Island,” Newport had sent a copy of resolves on the tea duties and Block Island was asked to unite with the other towns in the Colony. The resolves voted by the Town Meeting give us a glimpse of the grievances of the Americans.

What were the tea duties?

Cartoon from American Battlefield Trust

Americans were consuming smuggled tea and that hurt the profits of the East India Company. This company was a private business, but it was important to Britain’s economy. The British Parliament passed the Tea Act in 1773 to give the East India Company the right to ship its tea leaves directly to America. Only the East India Company could sell tea in the colonies. This lowered the price of East India Company’s tea in America. This forced the colonists to pay a tax of 3 pennies on every pound of tea. The Tea Act thus retained the three pence Townshend duty on tea imported to the colonies. The money was to go to the support of the British Army in the colonies.

What were the Block Island Resolves?

I am listing the resolves, bolding what struck me, and commenting briefly on the concern of the Block Islanders with parentheses.

  1. Therefore we the inhabitants of this town, being legally convened in town meeting, do firmly resolve, as the opinion of said town,
    • 1. That the Americans have as good a right to be as free a people as any upon the earth; and to enjoy at all times an uninterrupted possession of their rights and properties, (Americans were concerned about maintaining their rights and properties)
  2. That the act of the British Parliament, claiming the right to make laws binding upon the Colonies, in all cases whatsoever, is inconsistent with the natural, constitutional, and charter rights and privileges of the inhabitants of this Colony. (Acts like the Tea duties go against the colonial rights given in colonial charters).
  3. That the express purpose for which the tax is levied on the Americans, namely, for the support of government, administration of justice, and defense of His Majesty’s dominions in America, has a direct tendency to render Assemblies useless, and to introduce arbitrary government and slavery. (The duty is suppose to go toward the support of British forces in America. This overrides the authority of the Colonial Assemblies.)
  4. That a tax on the inhabitants of America, without their consent, is a measure absolutely destructive of their freedom, tending to enslave and impoverish all who tamely submit to it. (The phrase “no taxation without representation” is evident here. The Americans have not voted for this.)
  5. That the act allowing the East India Company to export tea to America, subject to a duty payable here, and the actual sending tea into the Colonies, by said Company, is an open attempt to enforce the ministerial plan, and a violent attack upon the liberties of America. (As East India Company is the only sanctioned tea importer, this violates the right to choices in America.)

The other parts of the Block Island resolutions give us an idea of the sympathies of the islanders.

  1. That it is the duty of every American to oppose this attempt. (This is a strong statement of duty to oppose.)
  2. That whosoever shall, directly, or indirectly, countenance this attempt, or in anywise aid or assist in running, receiving, or unloading any such tea, or in piloting any vessel, having any such tea on board, while it remains subject to the payment of a duty here, is an enemy to his country. (Even stronger language calling those who assist in this are enemies.)
  3. That we will heartily unite with our American brethren, in supporting the inhabitants of this Continent in all their just rights and privileges. (This is a call to unity with the colonists).
  4. That Joshua Sands, Caleb Littlefield, and John Sands, Esqs., and Messrs. Walter Rathbone, and Edward Sands, Jr., or the major part of them, be appointed a committee for this town, to correspond with all other committees appointed by any town in this Colony; and said committee is requested to give the closest attention to everything which concerns the liberties of America; and if any tea, subject to a duty here, should be landed in this town, the committee is directed and empowered to call a town meeting, forthwith, that such measures maybe taken as the public safety may require.
  5. And we return our hearty thanks to the town of Newport for their patriotic resolutions to maintain the liberties of their country ; and the prudent measures they have taken to induce the other towns in this Colony to come into the same generous resolutions.
    WALTER RATHBONE,
    Town Clerk:’

Perhaps the sympathies of the Block Islanders were with the other towns in Rhode Island – even if later they technically remained neutral.

Reference: Livermore, ST. A History of Block Island. Block Island Historical Society – 14th printing 2024 (original 1877).

Older Entries Newer Entries