The Rev. David Avery on the Fight off Chelsea

The Rev. David Avery of Gageborough (Windsor) came to the siege of Boston as chaplain for Col. John Paterson’s regiment from western Massachusetts.

Here is Avery’s diary entry for 28 May 1775, describing several hours of fighting over livestock and hay on the Boston harbor islands that lay near Chelsea. Decades later, local historians called that fight the Battle of Chelsea Creek. At the time, it didn’t really have a name.

In his journal Avery used the thorn, the antiquated English letter that signified the “th” sound but looks like and gets transcribed as a Y. In fact, Avery used it so much, writing words like “ye” (the or they), “ym” (them), and “yr” (their), that I decided to change it to “th” in this extract for clarity. He also abbreviated “which” as “wh.”

28. L[ord]’s day. Yesterday a number of our army went on upon Noddle’s Island, but were repulsed by the Regulars. Upon wh they retreated to Hog Island, where a large number had taken the ground & got off the stock. Upon wh Regulars fired upon our men, then the Diana, a [Royal Navy] schooner with a number of barges came up & began their fire as soon as within swivel shot.

Col. [Israel] Putnam & his men planted themselves in a Ditch near the shore & reserved their fire till the barges came within reach of musket shot,—when a most hot and brisk fire commenced on both sides, & the Regulars finding too warm reception tried very hard for our boats, but our men happily secured them & made their escape from the island upon wh the barges & schooners retreated & were engaged with great fury by our men along the musketry—when Capt. [Thomas Waite] Foster of the train came up with two field pieces of 3 pounders & with one shot of a Double charge cleared the Deck of the Diana & she drove & lodged on the Ferry wharf —upon wh our men took bundles of hay & came up to her Stern, broke open the window & threw in & set it on fire, wh soon burnt down to the water.

In the meantime 3 cannon played upon us from the top of Noddle’s Island. The battle lasted 10 hours, from 4 P. M. Saturday till 6 Sabbath day morning. The heaviest of the Fire was about break of day. Our men had nothing to screen them but the Presence of God. The enemy made shift to get their wounded & dead chiefly away. There was a sloop anchored off near the Ferry in musket shot from the shore [coming] to the assistance of the Diana. Capt. Foster gave her a few shots & so wounded her as that the hands were obliged to towe her off to the Shipping. Then Col. Putnam & a few others returned to Cambridge in high spirits.

About half after 11 o’clock a detachment of several Regiments of 470 marched from Cambridge under the command of Col. [Ephraim] Doolittle, when I went with them upon desire. We arrived at Chelsea about 3 o’C. being about 12 miles. Here we took some refreshment & went to the relief of the guards about 6 o’C. There has been occasional fireing by turns good part of the day. Our men had supper very late.

Considerable treasure has been got out of the schooner today and it is very remarkable that not a single Cannon has been fired at our men any of the time they were to work on the hull of the schooner.

This wasn’t a major battle measured by casualties—the British suffered two dead and several wounded and the provincials only four wounded. But it was the first big action of the siege after the Battle of Lexington and Concord. The provincials not only showed that they could fight, but they even got lucky enough to destroy a Royal Navy ship, taking some of its cannon. A few more fights like that, and the war would be over!

A Matter “of too small importance to be noticed”

Here’s another snapshot of the situation in Massachusetts in September 1774, from the records of the Worcester Convention.

The Whigs were trying to stop all court proceedings under the Massachusetts Government Act to communicate their belief that law violated the constitution. A court clerk in Worcester County, Samuel Paine (1753-1807), was continuing to issue summons for jury duty, and the convention demanded an explanation.

On 21 September, the convention read this message from Paine:

To the several gentlemen of the committees of correspondence for the county of Worcester, now convened in Worcester,

Gentlemen:—

I thought I gave you all the satisfaction, relative to my issuing the warrants, at your last meeting, which could reasonably be expected: still, you have demanded of me more. As I considered myself, in that matter, as acting merely officially, and, as such, had no right to judge of the propriety or impropriety of the act of parliament, and my issuing the warrants gave the people, who were the only judges, an opportunity to determine for themselves whether they should be complied with or not, upon this representation, I hope I shall stand fair in the eye of my countrymen.

Should not this be a sufficient excuse for me, you must know, gentlemen, that I was regularly appointed clerk of the peace for this county, by the justices, in September last, and, as the said justices of the court of general sessions of the peace, as well as the inferior court of common pleas for this county, whose servant I am, on the sixth day of September current, did give assurance to the body of the people of this county, then assembled at Worcester, that they would not endeavor to put said act in execution, so, gentlemen, I give you the same assurance.

Your devoted servant,
SAMUEL PAINE.

The convention voted that that letter was “not satisfactory” and turned it over to a committee composed of Joseph Henshaw (1727-1794) of Leicester, Timothy Bigelow (1739-1790) of Worcester, and Ephraim Doolittle (d. 1802 at an old age) of Petersham. After “some time,” those men came up with this recommendation:

The letter appears to have been written by a young man, who, by his connections, has lately started into the office of clerk of the sessions and inferior court, through the indulgence of the bench of justices. The letter is affrontive to the convention, and in no respect answers their reasonable requisitions.

Considering the person who wrote it, the committee are of opinion, it is of too small importance to be noticed any further by the convention, and therefore recommend, that said letter be dismissed, and the person treated with all neglect.

Oh, snap!