Northampton County PA Archives History - Books .....Fries' Rebellion 1920
   ************************************************
   Copyright.  All rights reserved.
   http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
   http://www.usgwarchives.net/pa/pafiles.htm
   ************************************************
   
   File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
   Joy Fisher http://www.genrecords.net/emailregistry/vols/00001.html#0000031 November 13, 2008, 5:38 am
   
   Book Title: History Of Northampton County
   
   CHAPTER XV 
   FRIES' REBELLION
   
       The close of the Revolutionary War found the people of the country in a
   state of disquietude and unrest, with no organized national government. The
   formation of a national government was the cause of allaying the minds of the
   people, a majority of whom settled down to industrial habits and the blessings
   of peace. There were, however, discontented citizens, many of whom had been
   connected with the American army who, during their term of service as soldiers,
   had imbued a military spirit that was antagonistic to the laws of the land. This
   spirit of revolt was more evidenced in the northern than in the southern
   colonies. In the latter section of the country, which had suffered the most
   during the closing period of the war from the scarcity of the necessities for
   the preserving of life and of the lack of funds to purchase same, there was a
   disposition to return to their avocation of tilling the soil, which was their
   principal industry. This was made largely successful by slavery, which then
   existed amongst them.
   
       The closing events of the eighteenth century witnessed three events in
   America which at the time seriously alarmed the friends of the new republic. The
   first of these was Shay's rebellion in Massachusetts; in 1794 the opposition of
   the people of southwestern Pennsylvania, which was known as the Whiskey
   rebellion, and for the suppression of which Northampton county furnished twenty
   cavalrymen and three hundred and seventy-four infantrymen; the third event,
   which was known as Fries' rebellion, occurred in 1799, and was confined to the
   adjoining townships of Bucks and Northampton counties.
   
       The threatened war with France caused Congress to pass a special tax. The
   amount to be raised was $2,000,000, of which $237,000 was assessed to
   Pennsylvania. This tax was levied on real estate and slaves; there being but
   seventeen hundred slaves in Pennsylvania, the tax fell chiefly on buildings and
   lands. Discontent soon became manifest in the communities inhabited by the
   Germans, and designing men threatened that the provinces would again revert to
   the British throne. The law was a just one, and the burden of taxes fell upon
   those who well could afford it; the people, however, opposed it and would not
   listen to any explanations. The administration of President Adams was unpopular
   and politics had much to do with the opposition. The authorities of Northampton
   and Buck counties positively refused to furnish their quota under the law to
   increase the militia. In this condition of affairs, with the people against the
   government, it is not strange that a determination to resist the law should
   manifest itself.
   
       The most active in stirring up these disturbances was John Fries, an
   inhabitant of Milford township, Bucks county. lie was by trade a cooper, also an
   auctioneer. In his travels through the rural districts he took every opportunity
   to ferment the discontented people. He had been a soldier in the Revolutionary
   War, also in the Whiskey insurrection, had an extensive acquaintance, and no one
   was held in higher esteem; therefore his arguments were always conclusive. The
   other active leaders were John Getman and Frederick Heaney, the latter a
   resident of Plainfield township, Northampton county. He was for many years a
   justice of peace and a highly respected citizen.
   
       Pennsylvania was divided into nine districts to enforce the tax law. The
   fifth district comprised Northampton, Luzerne and Wayne counties; Jacob Everly
   of Nazareth was appointed commissioner. The dissatisfaction and discontent were
   largely augmented by a German newspaper, the Messenger and Intelligencer,
   published by Jacob Weyganat at Easton. Communications of libelous character
   against Everly and his appraisers were admitted to its columns. The assessors
   feared bodily harm; the women especially railed at them, set dogs on them, and
   often threw scalding water on their heads. In Hamilton township (now Monroe
   county) the people became so enraged at Nicholas Michael, the assessor, that a
   mob visited his house to do him harm, but he escaped to Easton. This state of
   affairs suggested to Commissioner Everly the propriety of calling a public
   meeting to explain to the people the law, thereby to obtain their submission
   peaceably. This meeting was held at Heller's tavern at Wood Gap, then known as
   Gaptown, and was presided over by Captain Jacob Heller. Commissioner Everly was
   accompanied by Judge William Henry, who proceeded to explain to the people
   assembled the House Tax Law, but the latter were not disposed to listen; they
   refused to accept a proposition that they appoint their own assessors, as such a
   course would amount to a submission to the law. A similar effort to explain the
   law was made in Upper Milford township, with like effect.
   
       The resistance to the law had now reached a point where it became necessary
   for the civil authorities to take notice of this flagrant opposition. Subpoenas
   were issued by Judge Henry, and persons were examined to obtain testimony
   against the offenders of the law. The witnesses, however, were reluctant in
   giving information, fearful of bodily harm from the insurgents. Judge Henry
   arranged to meet a number of persons at Trexlertown; the crowd there assembled
   were noisy and impudent, and from the proceedings there exhibited it became
   evident that the local authorities could not quiet the disturbance, and that
   federal aid was inevitable. What had become a local disaffection assumed a
   national importance; warrants were issued for the arrest of those who were
   opposed to the house tax, and they were declared insurgents and traitors to
   their country.
   
       The warrants were placed in the hands of United States Marshal Samuel
   Nichols, who arrived at Nazareth, March 2, 1799, and proceeded to execute them.
   The authorities arrested twelve in Lehigh township; five others voluntarily gave
   themselves into custody. These prisoners were sent to Bethlehem and confined at
   the Sun tavern. The marshal next proceeded to Macungie township, meeting with no
   resistance until they came to the house of George Snyder, near Emaus, who, armed
   with a club, defied the officers and refused to receive the warrant. The next
   attempt was at Millerstown, where the marshal's deputies attempted to arrest
   Henry Shankweiler. A crowd present declared if he were arrested they would
   fight. The marshal warned the mob of the consequences of a riot, and as
   Shankweiler refused to accompany the officers, the latter left amidst n shout of
   the people of "Liberty!" The officers succeeded in arresting Adam Stephen,
   Herman Hartman and Daniel Everly. They then returned to Bethlehem, where the
   prisoners were confined.
   
       The arrest and confinement of these prisoners at Bethlehem was soon noised
   abroad, causing unusual excitement and indignation throughout the surrounding
   country. The lives of Commissioner Eyerly and Judge Henry were threatened, and
   for several months their homes were nightly guarded. Meetings were held in
   Northampton county for the purpose of organizing and rescuing the prisoners.
   Fries having learned of these meetings, immediately prepared to lend his
   assistance. At a meeting of the Northampton county rescuers, Andrew Shiffert was
   elected captain of a body of men which had collected, and began their march
   towards Bethlehem. Fries, at the head of his insurgents to the number of one
   hundred and forty, variously armed, some with guns, others with swords and
   pistols, overtook the Northampton county delegation near the south end of the
   Lehigh bridge. Marshal Nichols received information of the intended rescue, and
   on consultation with the authorities organized a posse of twenty men. Two armed
   men about noon on March 7, 1799, arrived at the Sun tavern, and were promptly
   arrested and confined. Later three other men, mounted and in uniform, among them
   Henry Shankweiler, arrived in Bethlehem; but, making no demonstration, they were
   permitted to mingle with the crowd, which numbered about four hundred. News of
   the arrival of the insurgents at the Lehigh bridge reached the officers at the
   Sun tavern; it was determined to send a delegation of four citizens to prevail
   upon them not to come into Bethlehem. John Mulhallon, William Barnett, Christian
   Roth and Isaac Hartzell were appointed, and, proceeding on their errand, they
   crossed the bridge and met the Northampton insurgents. The latter, on being
   asked who was their commanding officer, replied they had none, that they were
   all commanders. The committee then explained the result of their resistance to
   the laws of the United States in rescuing their prisoners, but all arguments had
   no effect It was finally agreed that three of the insurgents should accompany
   the committee to confer with the marshal. This conference was held, the two men
   arrested in the morning were released and returned to their companions just as
   Fries and his contingent from Bucks county reached the bridge. The committee
   tried to prevail on Fries to abandon the march, but their arguments were
   fruitless. Fries, at the head of two companies of riflemen, one company of
   mounted men armed with drawn swords, with cockades in their hats, proceeded
   towards the Sun tavern. The insurgents reached the inn about one o'clock P. M.,
   drew up in line, resting on their arms. The marshal had stationed armed guards
   at the bottom and top of the stairs in charge of the prisoners. Fries,
   accompanied by two men, on entering the hotel, asked permission to ascend the
   stairs, which was granted by the marshal, whereupon he immediately demanded the
   release of the prisoners. The marshal replied it was not within his power to
   release them, and if he was determined to take them he must get them the best
   way he could. Fries then descended the stairs, reported the result of his
   interview-to the insurgents, who expressed their determination to have the
   prisoners at any risk, and at once prepared to take them by force. Instructing
   his men not to fire until they had been fired upon, Fries and his command rushed
   into the tavern, but the marshal's posse succeeded in clearing the entry of the
   enemy. This repulse maddened the crowd; they returned to the charge with a
   greater force, yelling, striking the floor with the butts of their guns, and so
   great became the alarm that the posse feared for their own safety. The marshal
   consulted Judge Henry what was best to be done, and he advised the surrender of
   the prisoners, but this he refused to do. The marshal suggested that he and his
   prisoners should proceed towards Philadelphia, and if the mob rescued the
   prisoners it would be their act, not his. Fries continued his demands for the
   release of the prisoners, and threats of violence were made against Henry,
   Eyerly and others in case they were not given up. The affairs thus taking a
   serious turn, the marshal concluded to deliver the prisoners to Fries, and they
   were accordingly released and turned over to them. The crowd soon dispersed, and
   in a little while there was not an armed man to be seen anywhere in the village
   of Bethlehem.
   
       Immediately on the release of the prisoners, Fries returned home and,
   deliberating on his insurgent act, he doubted with all sincerity its propriety.
   Efforts were made to harmonize matters so that the assessments could be made.
   Meetings were held, committees appointed, and the people peacefully submitted to
   the law, none being more willing to have it carried out than John Fries, who
   returned to his occupation of vendue crying, and his conduct evidenced his
   repentance of his former acts. The government authorities were kept informed of
   the progress of events in the disaffected districts. When information reached
   the President of the disturbances at Bethlehem, he assembled his cabinet, and
   after deliberation a proclamation was issued declaring that the insurgents had
   been guilty of treason. On the appearance of the proclamation great excitement
   prevailed; the insurgents began to realize the seriousness of their resistance
   to the laws of the land. The newspapers reviewed the question from a legal as
   well as from a political standpoint. Fries' name was so frequently mentioned
   that he became greatly disturbed in his peace of mind; he frequently expressed
   himself that he would give all he was worth if the matter was settled. The
   proclamation gave the affair a national importance; the state legislature
   received it, but took no action.
   
       A change of policy now took place, the Fries rebellion being relegated to
   the military forces for treatment. The Secretary of War on March 20, 1799, made
   a requisition on the governor of Pennsylvania for militia to quell the
   insurrection. The governor called out the militia, ignoring Northampton county,
   as it was deemed that its militia would be unreliable owing to the residence of
   a number of the insurgents within its boundaries. Brigadier-General William
   Macpherson was placed in command of the government forces. The War Department
   called all the available regulars, about five hundred, and made a requisition on
   the governor of New Jersey for two thousand militia. Headquarters were
   established at the Spring House on the Bethlehem turnpike, where the state
   troops arrived early in April, and they were soon followed by the regulars.
   
       General Macpherson issued an address to the people, dated April 6, 1799,
   advising them of the danger of combining in an unlawful proceeding, pointing out
   the duty and necessity of the people to submit to the laws; reviewed fully the
   tax law, how it affected all classes, and promised full protection to all that
   needed it. The army proceeded from the Spring House to Sellersville, accompanied
   by Judge Richard Peters of the United States court, who was on hand to bind over
   for appearance any person who might be arrested, for at this point the active
   operations of the campaign were to commence. Fries naturally was the first
   prisoner that the military leaders sought to secure. Four companies of cavalry
   were detailed on the morning of April 5th to capture him. He was crying a
   vendue, mounted on a barrel, with a fire shovel in his hand when the troops
   appeared. He immediately fled, as also did his audience. Fries made for a
   near-by swamp, but was captured by the soldiers. The next day, after making a
   statement before Judge Peters, he was taken to Philadelphia with another
   prisoner, John Eberhard, and they were lodged in jail to await their trial for
   treason. The others accused in the late disturbances were arrested, and the army
   retired to Reading, Pennsylvania, where the militia was disbanded. The military
   expedition, as far as arresting those who had disturbed the peace of Bucks and
   Northampton counties, was a success, the leaders were in the hands of the
   Federal authorities, and the trial, conviction and execution alone remained to
   be accomplished.
   
       The United States court convened April 11, 1799, with James Iredell
   associate justice on the bench to try Fries. He was defended by Alexander J.
   Dallas, John Ewing and William Lewis. The government was represented by Samuel
   Sitgreaves and William Rawle. The trial began May 1st and many witnesses were
   called; on May 9th the jury returned a verdict of guilty; on the fourteenth of
   that month Fries was called up for sentence. His counsel made application for a
   new trial, basing his motion on the plea that John Reynolds, one of the jurors,
   had declared a prejudice against the prisoner after he was summoned as a juror,
   producing testimony to that effect. After a long argument a new trial was granted.
   
       The second trial of Fries took place April 29, 1800, Judge Samuel Chase
   presiding. A new indictment was drawn against Fries, to which he pleaded not
   guilty. He was again defended by Alexander J. Dallas and William Lewis, but they
   withdrew from the case because of the extraordinary course of the judges in
   declaring their opinions as to the law before hearing counsel, thus prejudicing
   the case to the jury. This left Fries without counsel; he, however, expressed no
   desire to have any, and the case proceeded on the part of the government. The
   jury rendered a verdict of guilty on May 1st; the following day Fries was
   sentenced to be hung. The trial of the other parties indicted followed Fries'
   second trial, and they were found guilty, and the following sentences imposed
   upon them: John Getman and Frederick Heaney, to be hung; Henry Jarret a fine of
   $1,000 and two years' imprisonment; George Schaeffer was for a first offence
   fined $400 and eight months' imprisonment, and for a second offence four months'
   imprisonment and a fine of $200; Daniel Schwartz, Sr., was fined $400 and given
   a prison sentence of eight months; Christian Ruth, Henry Stapler and Henry
   Schiffert were fined $200 and sentenced to prison for eight months; Michael
   Schmeier was given a prison sentence of one year and fined $50; Valentine Kuder,
   fine of $200 and two years' imprisonment; Rev. Jacob Eyerman, a fine of $50 and
   one year's imprisonment; Henry Shankweiler, a fine of $150 and one year's
   imprisonment; Michael Snyder, a fine of $400 and nine months' imprisonment;
   Henry Schmidt, a fine of $200 and eight months' imprisonment; Philip Desch and
   Jacob Kline were fined $150 and received a prison sentence of eight months;
   Philip Ruth and Christian Sachs were fined $200 and sentenced to six months'
   imprisonment; John Eberhard, John Klein, Jr., George Getman, William Getman,
   were each fined $100 and given six months' prison sentence; .Herman Hartman,
   John Huber, Daniel Klein, Jacob Klein, Adam Breich and George Memberger were
   fined $150 and sentenced to six months in prison; Abraham Schantz, Henry
   Memberger and Peter Hagar received a sentence of imprisonment of four months and
   a fine of $100; Abraham Samsel and P. Huntsberger were fined $50 and given a
   three months' prison sentence; Peter Gable, Daniel Gable and Jacob Gable were
   fined $40 and sentenced to two months in prison.
   
       The conviction of Fries increased the excitement of the people from the
   adherents of both political parties, and all possible exertions were made to
   save his life. A petition signed by a large number of citizens was presented to
   President Adams for the pardoning of Fries. The President had watched the
   proceedings of both trials, and on May 20, 1800, he submitted to his cabinet
   thirteen questions, which indicated his leaning on the side of clemency. One of
   the cabinet was of the opinion that the three insurgents under death sentence
   should be executed, while other members thought the hanging of Fries alone would
   be sufficient to show the power of the law. The President acted on his own
   judgment; though he represented what was then the aristocratic element of the
   country, also the political party that was fast disintegrating, he had that
   Yankee trait in his character of caution which made him hesitate to inflict the
   severe court sentence passed on the offenders. He decided that the excitement
   prevailing in the country could more readily be allayed by mercy than the
   opposite course. Therefore, in opposition to the opinions of his cabinet, he
   decided to deal with leniency towards these misguided citizens and pardon them
   for their misdemeanors. President Adams on May 21, 1800, issued a proclamation
   granting absolute pardon to all those who stood convicted of treason in
   Northampton and Bucks counties. This, however, did not include Fries, Getman and
   Heaney, who, having received the death sentence, it required a special pardon
   from the President, which was issued a few days later. This was the closing act
   of an event that was a critical period in the history of the United States.
   
   
   
   Additional Comments:
   
   Extracted from:
   
   History of Northampton County
   [PENNSYLVANIA]
   and
   The Grand Valley of the Lehigh
   Under Supervision and Revision of 
   WILLIAM J. HELLER
   
   Assisted by AN ADVISORY BOARD OF EDITORS
   VOLUME I
   1920 
   THE AMERICAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY
   HOSTON    NEW YORK     CHICAGO
   
   
   This file has been created by a form at http://www.genrecords.net/pafiles/
   
   File size: 20.3 Kb