CHAPTER III.
THE NEW HAMPSHIRE STATE-HOUSE.
BY ISAAC W. HAMMOND.

The first session of the Legislature that was held in Concord convened in March, 1782. Prior to that time, and subsequent to the commencement of the Revolutionary War, legislative sessions, with two exceptions, were held in Exeter; those two exceptions being the September session of 1777 and the October session of 1780, which were held in Portsmouth.

From 1782 to 1808 the Legislature was a movable institution, and held its sessions in Concord, Exeter, Portsmouth, Charlestown, Dover, Hanover, Hopkinton and Amherst,--at whichever town the members of the next preceding Legislature voted to have it held. The matter of deciding at what place the next Legislature should sit came up at every session, and often occasioned considerable strife among the members. A vote in favor of one town was occasionally reconsidered and another town finally decided upon, in consequence, probably, of some of the members having been "seen" and persuaded that a change would be for the best interest of the State.

Since 1808 all legislative sessions have been held in, Concord, although not permanently located here until the completion of the State-House, in 1819. In 1814 the matter of having a permanent habitation came up in the Legislature, and the members wisely concluded that the wandering life theretofore led by the honorable body and the exposure of its records to loss in consequence of frequent removals, as well as to destruction by fire for want of proper vaults, was not conducive to the best interests of the State, and accordingly, on the 6th day of June of that year, a committee was appointed by the Legislature "to take into consideration the expediency of building a State-House, and report where, and the time when, it will be expedient to commence the building," etc. Said committee reported that, so far as they could learn, all of the States in the Union, except New Hampshire, had provided themselves with a State-House and located a "seat of government;" and also, "That it is justly considered derogatory to a respectable and independent State to suffer the officers of its government to sit and transact the business of the State in a building mean in its appearance and destitute of suitable accommodations. That your committee are deeply impressed with a sense of the propriety, expediency and even necessity of providing fire-proof rooms for the safe keeping of the public records," etc. The committee further reported that a State-House might be built upon reasonable terms, and advised the appointment of a committee of three persons to sit during the recess of the Legislature, designate a location, prepare plans, ascertain the probable expense and receive proposals for erecting the building, and report to the next Legislature. The report was accepted, and a committee, consisting of Hon. John Harris, of Hopkinton, Benjamin Kimball, Jr., of Concord, and Andrew Bowers, of Salisbury, was appointed.

On the 13th of June, 1815, said committee reported that they had prepared a plan and ascertained that the probable expense would be about thirty thousand dollars if built of stone; that Stuart J. Park had made a proposal to complete the building for thirty-two thousand dollars; that a majority of the committee had designated a location in Concord west of the court-house; and also reported that the inhabitants of Salisbury had offered to contribute seven thousand dollars if the Legislature would locate the building in that town.

The report was accepted, and another committee was appointed to inquire whether any donations would be made by the town of Concord or its citizens if the building was located in the place designated by the committee. The citizens of Concord were agreed as to the propriety of having it in their town, but were not agreed as to the lot upon which to locate it. Subscription papers were circulated by each faction; the people at the north end favored the site of the present court-house, and those residing at the south end favored the "Green lot," which was the one finally selected. A sufficient amount of money was pledged by each party to meet the requirements of the legislative committee; but the disagreement as to location and the lack of funds, partially in consequence of the then late war with Great Britain, carried the matter over to the next June session.

On the 21st day of June, 1816, the matter came up in the House of Representatives, and the following resolution was passed:

   "Resolved, That a State-House, agreeably to the plan communicated by Stuart J. Park at the last June session, be erected in the town of Concord and county of Rockingham; the spot of ground to be selected, and the place on which to erect said State-House to be located by his excellency, the Governor, and the Honorable the Council.�

That board was also authorized to appoint a committee to make the necessary contracts and superintend its erection; and said committee was to be instructed to commence, as soon as practicable, and to employ the convicts in the State Prison in preparing the stone. By the same resolution, the sum of three thousand dollars was appropriated to commence the work, and it also contained a provision by which it was not to take effect unless the town of Concord, or its inhabitants, would donate the land, level and prepare it to the acceptance of the committee, give all the stone needed for its construction and convey the same to the lot free of charge.

The inhabitants residing at the north end were ready to give a bond to comply with these requirements, providing the Stickney lot (site of the present court-house) was selected; and those residing at the south end would do the same, providing the Green lot (site of the present State-House) was decided upon. The advocates of the north end location claimed that the Stickney lot was elevated and dry, and had been selected by the committee of the Legislature as being the more eligible of the two; that the Green lot was low and wet, and that it would cost a large sum to put in a substantial foundation. The other side urged that the Green lot was more central, and for that reason the most eligible.

William Plumer, of Epping, was Governor, and Benjamin Pierce, of Hillsborough, Levi Jackson, of Chesterfield, Samuel Quarles, of Ossipee, Elijah Hall and Enoch Colby composed the Council. Messrs. Pierce, Jackson and Quarles favored the Stickney lot; the Governor, with Messrs. Hall and Colby, favored the Green lot. Consequently, with all present acting in the capacity of a committee of the Legislature, as some of them subsequently claimed they did, the result would have been a tie. On the 2d day of July, Colonel Quarles asked leave of absence until the 4th, to attend to some matters of his own, and went away, as he afterward stated, with the understanding that the matter of locating the State-House should not be decided until his return. On the following day, July 3d, at a meeting of the Governor and four members of the Council, the matter was brought up, and they proceeded to examine the two locations, and then returned to the Council chamber. The Governor then asked the councillors, severally, if they were "ready to proceed in selecting a plot of ground for said house." Mr. Colby answered that he was ready, but asked whether it would not be best to wait until the return of Colonel Quarles.

According to the statement of Mr. Colby, no one else expressed any desire for postponement, and a ballot was taken, which stood three in favor of the Green lot and two in favor of the Stickney lot, the Governor voting with the Council. Had all of the councilors been present, and acting in the capacity of an executive board, as I think was the intention of the Legislature, the vote would have stood three in favor of the Stickney lot and two in favor of the present location, in which case the Governor could have used his privilege of negativing the vote of the majority of the Council, thus leaving the matter undecided. It was, therefore, fortune for the friends of the Green lot location that Colonel Quarles was called away at that time.

On July 4th, Colonel Quarles having returned, the Governor and Council held a meeting, the proceedings of which were recorded in the Council records in the same manner as were those of the 3d, or any other meeting of that board, the caption of the record being as follows: "At a meeting of His Excellency, the Governor, and the Honl. Council, July 4, 1816, The whole board present," etc. At that meeting some one moved a reconsideration of "the vote of yesterday, selecting a lot of land whereon to erect a State-House.� The question being put, the vote stood three for reconsideration--Messrs. Quarles, Pierce and Jackson,--and three against, the Governor voting with the Council, as before, and claiming subsequently, in vindication of his action in so doing, that they were acting in the capacity of a committee of the Legislature. If that was the case, and so understood at the time, it is not quite clear why they convened as "a meeting of His Excellency, the Governor and the Honl. Council," or why their proceedings in that matter were recorded in the Council records, with other acts done at the same meeting, which could not have been legally done by any body of men except the Governor and Council in executive session.

On July 5th the Governor and Council met and appointed Albe Cady, William Low and Jeremiah Pecker, all of Concord, as a committee to superintend the erection of the State-House. Messrs. Hall, Colby and Jackson acted with the Governor in making the appointment, a record of which was made by the Secretary of State in the same book and manner as the record of any executive appointment. The board then adjourned and did not meet again until September 18th.

The Legislature adjourned on the 29th of June, to meet on the third Wednesday of November following. During the recess the work of construction progressed, as also did the strife between the "north-enders" and the "south-enders." Charges of unfairness, on the part of the Governor and Council, were made by the defeated north-enders, the principal charges being that the matter was acted upon in the absence of Colonel Quarles, contrary to an agreement to delay it until his return, and that the Governor voted with the Council, as he had no right to do, if they were acting in their official capacity as an Executive Council.

The Legislature assembled on the twentieth of November, 1816, and the State-House matter was taken up on the ninth of December, at which time a committee was appointed to "request such information of the Governor as he possesses relative to the location of the State-House," and report to the House of Representatives. Said committee called on the Governor, made the request verbally and on the following day he communicated in writing a statement of the action of the board in making the selection of a lot, etc. This not proving satisfactory to the House of Representatives, the committee called again on the evening of the thirteenth, and requested copies of "all the votes and proceedings of the Governor and Council" relating to the matter, which request he complied with by furnishing attested copies from the Council records, covering said proceedings, and suggested, in his letter of transmittal, that if either branch of the government considered it necessary to make any inquiries of the other, whether it "would not better comport with the dignity of both that the inquiries and answers should be in writing." Whereupon the House of Representatives formulated several questions, and sent a copy to the Governor, and one to each of the councillors. The substance of the Governor�s answers was: That on the third day of July, 1816, Charles Walker, Esq., presented a bond to furnish a lot; and the required amount of stone, provided the building was located on the Stickney lot; that William A. Kent and Isaac Hill, Esqrs., presented a bond to do the same, provided it was located on the Green lot; that in the afternoon of that day, he and four of the councilors examined all lots that any one requested them to see, and then returned to the Senate chamber and made the selection, as here-inbefore stated. The Governor also stated, that he did not understand that any agreement had been made to wait until the return of Colonel Quarles before making the selection. Mr. Pierce, Mr. Jackson and Mr. Quarles stated that there was such an agreement. The Governor further stated that, in making said selection, they acted as a committee appointed by a resolve of the Legislature, and not in their executive capacity; and in this his answer was sustained by a majority of the Council. But no attempt was made to explain why their transactions as a committee were acted upon in a meeting of "His Excellency, the Governor and the Honorable Council," at which meeting executive appointments were made, and the proceedings of which were embodied in one record, by the Secretary of State, in the same manner as was the record of any meeting of the Governor and Council.

December 20th the investigating committee reported in full, from which report I extract the following: "Your committee would further report that, in their opinion, the general location of the lot whereon to erect the State-House never was made agreeably to the true meaning and provisions of the resolve aforesaid, inasmuch as that they have never seen any evidence that a majority of that Honorable board ever did agree to such location."

December 25th the investigating committee reported a resolution repealing the resolution of June 22, 1816, which placed the appointment of a committee to superintend the erection of the State-House in the hands of the Governor and Council, which failed of a passage. On the same day a resolution appropriating four thousand dollars toward the erection of the building passed, ninety-one to seventy.

December 27th the investigating committee reported a resolution providing that the committee to superintend the building should consist of one man, instead of three, and that Albe Cady should be that man. As no complaint had been made by the committee against any of the men composing the building committee, the presumption is that the resolution was introduced for the purpose of taking the matter from the control of the Governor and Council, by making the building committee an appointee direct of the Legislature. The resolution passed the House, but was defeated in the Senate.

At the June session, 1817, the sum of thirty thousand dollars was appropriated to continue the work, in accordance with a report and recommendation of the building committee, who stated that they desired to complete the outside that season.

In 1818 an appropriation was made for necessary furniture, and the building was first occupied by the Legislature at the June session of 1819, but the building committee was not discharged until June, 1820.

The building as completed was one hundred and twenty-six feet in length, including the wings, and forty-nine feet in width, with a projection of four feet in the centre of each front, and cost as follows, including fencing and furniture: Amount appropriated from the State treasury, $67,372.44; stone-work done at the State Prison by convicts, $10,455.16 ; lot and materials given by citizens of Concord, $4,000,--total, $81,827.60. The building, as thus erected, was occupied without any material change until remodeled, in 1864-66.

In 1854, Governor N. B. Baker, in his address to the Legislature, at the June session, called the attention of that body to the insecure manner in which the provincial and State records, Revolutionary War rolls and other valuable documents belonging to the State, were kept, stating that they were liable to destruction by fire at any moment and advising the construction of fire-proof rooms in the State-House, or of a separate fire-proof building for their safe keeping. A committee of the Legislature, appointed to investigate the matter, reported a resolution providing that the Governor be requested to employ some suitable person to estimate the expense and make necessary plans for erecting a fire-proof building of sufficient capacity to accommodate the Secretary of State, State treasurer, State Library and the standard weights and measures.

The resolution passed, as also did another calling for a plan and an estimate of the cost of enlarging the Representatives� Hall, and, in accordance therewith, a report was made to the Legislature of 1855, plans presented and the expense estimated at $37,000 for enlarging the State-House and hall, and $17,500 for a separate fire-proof building. That report not being acceptable to the Legislature, the matter was postponed to the next session, and no material progress was made until 1863. At the June session of the last-named year the Legislature passed a resolution setting forth the fact that the largely increased business of the State government imperatively required an enlargement of the State-House; that the city of Concord derived considerable benefit from the location and should contribute materially to the expense of enlarging the capital. The resolution authorized the Governor and Council to cause new plans and estimates to be made, receive propositions from the city of Concord or any other city or town having necessary railroad facilities and "desirous of having the State-House established therein." In other words, the location of the capital was again for sale to the highest bidder, regardless of the fact that it had once been sold, paid for and delivered. Bids were to be made to the Governor and to be by him presented to the Legislature of 1864. The city of Manchester submitted a proposition to erect and complete a building without expense to the State, providing it should be located in that city.

Concord, by action of the City Councils on the 23d day of May, 1864, voted to raise and appropriate $100,000 to the work of enlarging the building then in use, and subsequently raised $50,000 more in the precinct. These propositions were transmitted to the Legislature by the Governor, June 6th, and referred to a select committee of one from each county. A sharp contest between the two cities ensued; the citizens of Manchester used every means in their power to obtain the prize, and the citizens of Concord as earnestly struggled to retain it, believing that, as they had once purchased the location, it ought not to be taken from them without cause; and believing also that no cause existed to warrant its removal, as Concord was nearer the centre of the State than Manchester, and had equal railroad facilities. A majority of the Legislature decided in favor of Concord, and the location of 1816 was confirmed by an act approved July 16, 1864, the act requiring Concord to bear the entire expense of the work, which amounted to nearly $200,000.

A contest of this kind between neighboring municipalities is much to be regretted; the placing of citizens in hostility to each other creates enmities which time alone can allay; and in this case, the twenty years that have elapsed have failed to obliterate the scars caused by that memorable contest. The proposition made by the Legislature of 1863 was wrong in principle, and should never be repeated. When a public building is needed for the use of the State, let the Legislature decide upon its location at such place as in their opinion will best accommodate the majority of the people, and then cause the same to be erected, and paid for from the State treasury.

A new steam-heating apparatus was placed in the building in 1879, and valuable improvements were made in the basement in 1883, and the State-House, as it now stands, is an artistic and substantial edifice. The halls and offices are well lighted and roomy, with the exception of the room used for the library, and, as a whole, the structure is a credit to the State.

The porch on the east front is two stories in height, each story being supported by eight granite columns of massive proportions, which present a fine appearance as viewed from Main Street. The Council-room contains the portraits of all the Governors of the state, except the first, of whom no likeness is known to exist. Portraits of many presidents of the Senate are hung in the Senate chamber, and the Representatives' hall contains portraits of Revolutionary officers and other eminent New Hampshire men. Doric Hall contains the battle-scarred flags of the regiments from this State who participated in the late war, some portraits, a bust of Hon. Amos Tuck, and a raised map of the State. In the Secretary�s office are portraits of two Provincial and two State Secretaries. In 1876 a fountain was placed in the front walk of the park, but proving to be a nuisance there, it was removed, in 1879, by order, of the Legislature, to the southeast quarter of the grounds.

A statue, in bronze, of New Hampshire�s most gifted son, Daniel Webster, presented to the State by Benjamin P. Cheney, is soon to be placed in the park, on the side adjoining Main Street. It will be seventeen feet in height, including the pedestal, which will be of granite. Mr. Cheney was a native, and for many years a resident, of this State, and the gift which he is able to make from the abundant accumulations of an honest, sagacious and industrious life is a credit to himself, an honor to his native State and the renowned Webster, whose reputation as a statesman is second to that of no other man, and whose name will be familiar to future generations, when this statue shall have crumbled to dust.

COLONEL SOLON A. CARTER.

Solon Augustus Carter (7) was born in Leominster, Mass., June 22, 1837; seventh generation from Rev. Thomas Carter (1) who was born A.D. 1610, graduated at St. John�s College, Cambridge, England, in 1629, and came from St. Albans, Hertfordshire, England, in the "Planter," embarking April 2, 1635. On his arrival in this country he was admitted an inhabitant of Dedham, Mass.; thence he removed to Watertown, Mass.

He was ordained the first minister of the church in Woburn, Mass., November 22, 1642, which office he filled to the acceptance of his people until his death, which occurred September 5, 1684. Johnson, in his "Wonder-Working Providence," says, "He was a reverend, godly man, apt to teach the sound and wholesome truths of Christ."

The subject of this sketch traces his descent from Rev. Thomas (1), born 1610; Rev. Samuel (2), born 1640; Samuel (3), born 1677-78; Josiah (4), born 1726-27; James Carter (5), born 1768; Solon Carter (6), born 1801; Solon A. Carter (7), born 1837.

Josiah (4), his great-grandfather, married, at the age of eighteen, Tabitha Howe, aged sixteen, and settled in Leominster, Mass., clearing the homestead where the three succeeding generations were born and reared. He served in the Revolutionary War, attaining to the rank of lieutenant-colonel. He was with the army under General Washington in the disastrous campaign in New Jersey, previous to the retreat across the Delaware. He died at the ripe age of eighty-four, on the farm his own hands had cleared, and in the house his own hands had reared. At the time of his death he had living more grandchildren than he was years old, several of the fourth degree and one or two of the fifth, so that he could without fiction say, "Arise, son, go to thy son, for thy son�s son has born unto him a son."

James Carter (5) reared and educated a family of eleven children. James G. (6), the eldest son. graduated from Harvard in 1820, and was engaged in educational enterprises, being contemporary with Horace Mann and a co-worker with him in educational matters, notably the establishment of the system of Normal Schools in Massachusetts.

Solon (6), the second son, succeeded to the homestead farm, which he cultivated successfully until his death, in 1879. He was an active participant in the social, religious and civil affairs of his town, being called upon at different times to fill the various town offices within the gift of his fellow-citizens.

Solon Augustus Carter (7), the eldest son of Solon (6) and Lucretia (Joslin) Carter, was born upon the farm cleared by his great-grandfather, educated in the public schools of his native town, completing his education in the High School at the age of seventeen, working upon the homestead farm between terms, and also during term-time. The winter succeeding his seventeenth birthday he taught a district school in Leominster. The superintending committee, in his report of the school, said of the teacher, "It is evident, he does not need to learn to teach--it is in him." The next winter he taught in the neighboring town of Lancaster. The summer of 1857 he spent in Chicago, in the employ of an uncle engaged in the lumber trade; but the panic of that year had such a depressing effect upon business in general that a commercial life had few attractions for him and he returned to the farm, teaching during the winter months.

He entered the employ of the Keene Gas-Light Company as its superintendent in December, 1859, and has since that time considered Keene his residence. In August, 1862, he enlisted in the Fourteenth Regiment New Hampshire Volunteers, and was commissioned captain of Company G, serving with his command until July, 1863, when he was ordered upon recruiting service at Concord, where he was assigned to duty as acting assistant adjutant-general upon the staff of Brigadier-General Edw. W. Hinks. In the spring of 1864, General Hinks was assigned to the command of a division of colored troops near Fortress Monroe, and Captain Carter was, at General Hinks� request, by a special order from the War Department, directed to report to him for assignment to duty. Captain Carter was announced in General Orders as acting assistant adjutant-general of the Third Colored Division, Eighteenth Army Corps, and remained on duty with that organization until the close of the war, having received a commission from the President as assistant adjutant-general of volunteers, with the rank of captain (July 25, 1864). He participated with his command in all the skirmishes and battles in which it was engaged before Petersburg, on the north of the James, at Deep Bottom, Newmarket Heights and Fort Harrison, and in both expeditions to Fort Fisher and the subsequent campaign to Raleigh. He was subsequently breveted major and lieutenant-colonel for gallant and meritorious services during the war.

Brevet Major-General Charles J. Paine, in recommending him for brevet commissions, wrote,--

   "Captain Solon A. Carter, late assistant adjutant-general United States Volunteers, served as assistant adjutant-general of the division which I commanded for about a year, from the beginning of August, 1864.
   "First, in front of Petersburg, under constant fire day and night' them across the James, in front of Richmond, taking part in a very severe and successful assault by the division on the enemy's lines on the Newmarket road, September 29, 1864, and in other engagements; later, in both Fort Fisher expeditions. At the taking of Wilmington and in the march in pursuit of General Johnston's command, never for a moment away from his post, and never neglecting his duties, which often were quite as severe as those of any officer of the division.
   "He was a brave and faithful officer of great merit, and I always exceedingly regretted that he was not promoted. There is not, within my knowledge, an instance of equal desert without greater reward."

After his discharge from the service he returned to Keene and engaged in the furniture trade. He was a member of the House of Representatives from Keene in 1869 and 1870.

In June, 1872, he was elected State treasurer, which office he has held since that time, with the exception of one year (1874-75), receiving the nomination by acclamation, and without opposition, in nine successive re-elections, and also the commendation of successive auditing committees for the satisfactory manner in which the duties of the office have been performed. He is an active member of the Unitarian organization, having been for several years president of the State association, and is also identified with the Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States and the Grand Army of the Republic.

He has taken an active part in Masonic organizations, having passed the chairs of the Blue Lodge, Royal Arch Chapter and Commandery, and also the chairs of the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge, serving as Most Worshipful Grand Master for two years (1878-79), and as Right Eminent Grand Commander of the Grand Commandery in 1875.

He was married, December 13, 1860, to Emily A. Conant, of Leominster, Mass.

HON. OLIVER PILLSBURY.¹

William Pillsbury, from whom most and probably all of the Pillsburys of this country have descended, emigrated from Dorchester, England, in 1631, and settled in old Newbury (now Newburyport), Mass., in the year 1641.

It will be seen that the family belonged to that brave old Puritan stock that had been ground and sifted in the mills of God for generations, and had been prepared to go forth in the fullness of time and take possession of a continent in the name of liberty and truth. In such mysterious ways the progress of government, church and society is evolved from the seed of the dead ages, and we move upward by the providence of Him who "works within us to will and to do of His own good pleasure." The families that planted our nation were not the sport of fortune, drifted by an accident of history to these shores, but were preordained and guided to their destiny.

Oliver Pillsbury, the subject of this sketch, sprung from this line. He was born in Henniker, N. H., February 16, 1817. His parents, Deacon Oliver Pillsbury and Anna Smith Pillsbury, were both persons of unusual physical and mental strength. The writer recalls distinctly, after a lapse of more than thirty years, the amiable expression and serene dignity of Mrs. Pillsbury, and the masculine thought and deep, solemn voice of the deacon, as he led the devotions of the religious assemblies of the people. He was one of the strong men of the town and a pillar in the church. Others might veer and drift, but we all knew that the deacon was anchored within the vail, and was as sure to outride the storm as the hill upon which he had fixed his home. He was a man of strong powers, a stern will and constant devotion to the great ends of life as he saw them. The qualities of both parents were transmitted in large measure to their children. Our State has produced but few men who were the peers in intellectual strength and moral courage to their first-born, Parker Pillsbury. Not many men in our country, indeed, in the years that preceded the Civil War, struck heavier blows for, or clung with a more courageous, self-sacrificing devotion to, liberty than he. Those of us who knew him could hear the deep undertone of the deacon�s voice in his, and knew he would conquer or die. In the roll-call of the imperishables in the great struggle for liberty his name will be heard among the first.

The subject of this sketch, during the first seventeen years of his life, experienced the usual fortune of the sons of New England farmers,-- a maximum of hard work and a minimum of schooling; but at that time, having been overtaken by a lameness which threatened to be permanent, he was sent to the academy that he might prepare for duties suited to his prospective infirmity. He entirely recovered, but this circumstance gave a new drift to his life. For nearly five years he pursued his studies with unabated interest and industry, giving thoroughness and a practical character to his acquisitions by teaching during the winter months. Mr. Pillsbury had few equals and no superiors among those who taught at that time in our public schools. He was master both of his school and his studies, and had the faculty of inspiring his pupils with his own spirit. Many who have since done good work in life look back with gratitude to those years of pupilage.

In 1839, Mr. Pillsbury left New England and went to New Jersey, where he opened a tuition school, there being no free schools in the State at that time. There, though an entire stranger, he gained the confidence of the community and held it during eight years of successful work. During the last six years of this time he taught the academy at Bound Brook, Somerset County. While there he married Matilda Nevius, who died in 1847, leaving a young daughter, an only child. The position which Mr. Pillsbury acquired among the educators of New Jersey may be learned from the fact that he was prominent among the few gentlemen who held the first school convention at the capital, over which he presided, and which was followed by similar conventions in other cities. The movement thus begun resulted in the establishment of public instruction in that State.

At the end of this time, Mr. Pillsbury�s health having become impaired, he returned to his native place, where he purchased the paternal homestead and entered again upon the work of his boyhood. For seventeen years he followed the life of a farmer, but did not move in its old empirical ruts. He applied the knowledge and improved methods which modern investigation has given to agriculture, and in a little time doubled the productive power of his farm. The successful factor in every industry is brains, and in this case even New Hampshire farming proved no exception to the rule.

Mr. Pillsbury contracted a second marriage, in 1850, with Miss Sarah Wilkins, of Henniker.

Though assiduous in the pursuits of agriculture, his benevolent instincts led him to take an active interest in the causes of temperance, anti-slavery and whatever else the public welfare seemed to demand. His efforts in this direction, in co-operation with those of others, produced a change in the politics of the town, which resulted in his introduction to public life. He was elected to various town offices and to the Legislature three times. As a legislator, he did not seem anxious merely to shine, but to be useful and to advance the interests of the State. Such qualities and service commended him to public favor, and in 1862 he was elected a councilor for the last year of Governor Berry�s administration, and re-elected to the Council of Governor Gilmore. This, it will be remembered, was while the hardships and horrors of the Civil War were upon us, and when questions that could not be settled by precedent, and that tested the authority and resources of the State, were brought daily before the Governor and his Council for decision. The exigencies of the government would not suffer delay. Not only great permanent interests, but the very life of the nation was in peril, and large and frequent demands were made upon the States for supplies of men and money, when every resource seemed exhausted. In such times means must be invented and resources created. Criticism becomes silent, and waits for the return of peace to awaken into unreasoning activity. Under the pressure of such events, weak men are likely to be paralyzed, avaricious men corrupt and bold men to abuse power.

The qualities which Mr. Pillsbury developed in these trying circumstances ought to make his name historic. The writer has received communications from two gentlemen who were associated with him in the Council, and whose services to the State are universally acknowledged, and, as they express more forcibly than any words of mine can do the part which the subject of this sketch took in that eventful period, I take the responsibility to publish such portions of their respective letters as bear specially upon the subject of this paper. The known character of the writers will give additional weight to their strong language of encomium.

Hon. John W. Sanborn, of Wakefield, writes as follows:

   "Learning that you are to prepare a biographical sketch of Hon. Oliver Pillsbury, I take pleasure in saying that I formed acquaintance with him in 1863, being then associated with him in Governor Gilmore's Council. His great executive ability, patriotism, honesty and integrity won the respect and admiration of all his associates. At that time the country was engaged in that terrible war for the support of the government and its own salvation, and grave questions came before us relative to the prosecution of the same. Although an ancient Republican, he never let partisan feeling warp his judgment in his official acts. He had strong convictions of right, but was always ready to discuss all questions with frankness and fairness, and he fully appreciated the opinions of his opponents. I had the honor to serve with him on the military committee of the Council, which had important matters to consider,--questions involving the rights and interests of the soldiers, their families, and the State. The duties of this committee were arduous and often difficult, but I can attest to the fidelity and untiring energy with which he performed his part. He took great interest in the welfare of the soldiers, particularly the sick and wounded, and was ever ready to minister to their wants. In a word, he was a model councilor for the time in which he served, and the future historian will class him among our ablest and most efficient men."

Hon. John W. Noyes, of Chester, who was also in official association with Mr. Pillsbury, says:

   "I was with him a very considerable portion of the time for two years, while we were members of Governor Gilmore's Council during the war. He was the most important member of the Council, on account of his experience and familiarity with the duties of the situation; in fact, his information and good judgment were exceedingly valuable to the Governor and all the other members of the Council.
   I regard Mr. Pillsbury as one of the best informed and most competent business men in this State. I hardly think there is another man in the State that could fill his present position as well as he does. I said to Governor Stearns, before he made the appointment, that, if he knew Mr. Pillsbury as well as I did, he would not need recommendations, but would urge his acceptance of the place."

It would be idle to add anything to such commendations.

In 1869, Mr. Pillsbury was appointed insurance commissioner by Governor Stearns, for a period of three years, and has been reappointed, from time to time, to the office which he still holds. Soon after his appointment he drafted and secured the enactment of the present law of the State relative to insurance companies of other States and other countries. This law established the department of insurance, and has given to the people a degree of protection against the frauds and impositions of unreliable companies never before enjoyed in this State, and has brought into its treasury, by tax on insurance premiums, nearly one hundred and thirty-eight thousand dollars, in addition to the compensation of the commissioner.

During the whole term of his office Mr. Pillsbury has worked quietly, but assiduously, to eliminate unreliable companies from our borders, and has carefully avoided the admission of all such as are not regarded as perfectly trustworthy. It is universally affirmed, by men familiar with the insurance business, that the commissioner of this State has administered his office with unusual skill and success, and his reports are much sought for and often quoted and referred to as authority in other States. The State may well congratulate itself on having had the continued services, for sixteen years, of one so able and experienced in an office so intimately connected with the material interests of the people.

In 1871, Mr. Pillsbury moved to Concord, and the estimation in which he is held in the community is attested by the fact that, during the fourteen years of his residence at the capital, he has twice been elected to represent one of its wards in the Legislature, and has been a member of its Board of Education for seven years, and was president of the board at the time he tendered his resignation. When a member of the Legislature, Mr. Pillsbury was eminently practical, and whenever he spoke, was listened to with marked attention, for he only addressed the House on subjects that he had thoroughly considered, and it was understood that his remarks were likely to aid the members in reaching wise and just conclusions.

As one of the supervisors of the educational interests of Concord Mr. Pillsbury was exceptionally intelligent, conscientious and pains-taking. His views on the general subject were comprehensive, and he kept himself informed as to all real improvements in methods of instruction. He discountenanced shams and superfluities, and labored faithfully to make the schools sources of knowledge, of discipline and of virtue. To the other public trusts so honorably held by the subject of this sketch we may add that of president of the board of trustees of the State Industrial School. He has had a deep and abiding interest in this institution since its founding, and has given to it an active and efficient support.

We can only realize how pure and unselfish his labors of this character have been when we reflect that Mr. Pillsbury has no children of his own to kindle and feed his sympathies, but that they spring from a general benevolence toward all children, of whatever condition in life. His only child was a daughter of rare mental activity and attainments, and of unusual sweetness of temper. She married Mr. J. S. Eveleth, of Beverly, Mass., where, after a residence of nearly two years, she died of consumption, in the flower and promise of early womanhood, leaving two homes stricken and desolate.

In this brief sketch we have unconsciously drawn a model citizen,--a man in all the relations of life faithful to the claims of duty; in the family, society and the State, blameless; benevolent without ostentation, patriotic without the claim of reward and true to every trust.