Descendants of William CHANDLER
21. John CHANDLER
This is such a well written document and because I am a gatherer
of facts and not a writter and it is a hand typed document I decided I
would be very remiss not to include it in most of it's entirety.
The Confiscation of John Chandler's Estate by Andrew McFarland Davis
John Chandler, Loyalist (cont'd)
His son John, the forth of that name, was the refugee. He was born
February 26, 1720-21. To quote again from the paper of Hon. Horace Davis,
"He was Selectman, Town Treasurer, Town Clerk, County Treasurer, Sheriff,
Judge of Probate, and Representive to the General Court. He was also Colonel
of the Worcester Regiment, and in 1757 saw active duty in that capacity.
"Up to 1774," adds Mr. Davis, "Chandler's life had been one of almost
unbroken prosperity, but when the storm of rebellion against England broke
out, his loyalist sentiments brought him into angry opposition to popular
feeling, and he was compelled to leave home and family and retire to Boston
When Boston fell into the hands of the Continental Army, he fled to Halifax
and thence to London, where he spent the rest of his life, twenty-four
year~ This experience gave him in Worcester the nick-name of 'Tory John',
while in England he was called the 'Honest Refugee', because of the modesty
of hi~ claims against the British Government for losses sustained by reason
of his loyalty". In addition to the offices above enumerated, Colonel Chandler
was for many years a member of His Majesty's Council, and held at the time
of the outbreak a commission in the Court of General Sessions of the Peace.
In the fall of 1774, when the bitterness of feeling engendered by the
political contest then going on between the tories and those who subsequently
were denominated the "patriots" became so strong that discussion was
abandoned and threats against, and sometimes personal violence upon, the
weaker party were substituted, John Chandler was living in comfort in his
spacious homestead in Worcester. Up to that time his life had been not
only uniformly prosperous, but entirely free from serious trouble. From
his father he must have inherited considerable property. The various offices
which he held furnished revenue, and in addition, he was interested in
a store, the profits of which increased his income. He owned several farms
in the immediate vicinity of Worcester, all of which, under the circumstamc
of life existing in Worcester County, were easily to be rented. One of
these farms he retained for his own use, and from it he could readily supply
his household with a large part of the food necessary in an establishment
conducted upon so generous a scale. His daughter says in the letter communicated
to the American Antiquarian Society that he distributed his bounties among
those of his fellow citizens who needed help, including, indeed, among
the beneficiaries some of those who afterwards joinedin making life in
Worcester impossible for him. There can be but little doubt making life
in Worcester impossible for him. There can be but little doubt that if
he had died before the crisis came, he would have left behind him the reputation
of an honored citizen who was well beloved by his friends and neighbors.
From the letter referred to above, we learn that there were about fifteen
beds to be made up each day in the Chandler household. In a.petition presented
by Chandler to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, the statement is
made that the petitioner left behind him sixteen children. The oldest of
the sixteen children was then a man upwards of thirty years of age, and
while it is clear that most of the children were then living at the old
home, it is not probable that all of them were. Be that as it may, the
household was evidently a large one, and though it is quite certain that
in a New England country home the younger members of the household would
have been called upon to assist in taking care of the house, still so large
a family required servants. The actual staff is stated in the letter to
have been a good cook , a second woman for chamber work, a girl to tend
the youngest child, and a black girl trained to table service and household
work. The house was liberally furnished, as is evident from the inventory
made at the time of the appraisal of the personal personal prope even though
the plate, the linen, and the library, previously concealed, do not appear
in it. These things were undoubtedly sent to Boston. Sabine, says in his
Loyalists that Colonel Chandler derived his means of support while in Boston
from the sale of the silver.) Mrs. Chandler had lawns and laces, and a
special woman to care for them and for the linen.
These facts, gathered from the letter, furnish us with an idea of the
character of the home to which the father of the family was accustomed
to come each day to his midday meal, and to which he returned every afternoon
at the close of his labors. We can also from the same source obtain a glimpse
of the household life, and can see the colonel, as he was generally styled,
seated by the fireside smoking his pipe and caressing his little daughter.
His daily after-dinner glass of wine recalls the customs of the times,
and hints at the possibility of more copious indulgence when the hospitable
dinner-table was surrounded by guests. From various sources we have evidence
of the affectionate and confiding nature of the ties which bound the family
together, and of the tender relations which existed between the refugee
himself and his wife.
Such was the home which fidelity to political principles compelled
Chandler to abandon, and such were the happy circumstances of life from
which he was obliged to tear himself, unless he would give adhesion to
the ideas promulgated by a party with which he had no sympathy. It was
natural that he should be a loyalist. It was inevitable that, as the time
the actual outbreak approached and party lines were drawn tighter and tighter,
the patriots should entertain towards him some of the feelings of abhorrence
with which tories were then regarded. The decline of his popularity with
his fellow citizens could not, under these circumstances, have been avoided.
In his case, however, matters were brought to a crixis by two acts committq
by him, which aroused the indegnation of his fellow townsmen of the revolutionary
party, and in the end brought humilation upon him and upon all who were
associated with him in the commission of these acts. The first of these
was the signing of an address to Governor Gage; the second, the signing
of the famous protest by the Worcester tories, the proceedings of their
fellow citizens of the patriot party espesially against the acts of the
Worcester committee of correspondence.
There was no reason for them to suspect the important results which
would follow from his joining in the address to Gage, but the signing of
the protest carried with it inevitably the consequence that it would irritate
and annoy a preponderant majority of his fellow townsmen, already greatly
excited and in a turbulent mood. Lincoln characterizes this Protest as
"one of the boldest and most indignant remonstrances of the friends of
royal government among the productions of the times."
Clark Chandler, a son of Colonel Chandler, the town clerk, who enrolled
it, upon the records, was compelled publicly to expunge it, and was publicly
admonished for recording it. Not content with this, the revolutionary part
brought the matter before "The Committees of Correspondence and delegates
of the several towns met in Convention," and it was "Voted: That three
persons be chosen a committee to acquaint John Chandler, Esq. and the other
protesters, that they must follow after the judges through the ranges (ranks)
of the body of the people; and that they go immediately after the judges
and read their recantations."
Lincoln describes the enforcement of this extraordinary punishment
in the following words: "The signers of the protest had been informed by
the committee of correspondence that apology for their opposition would
be required from them. Forty-three of them had met the evening previous
(August 21, 1774) to this visitation at the Kings Arms Tavern, and having
subscribed an acknowledgment of error and repentance and recieved an instrument
purporting to restore them to favor, and insuring protection they had mixed
in the crowd, unsuspicious of any insult. Those who appear were collected
by the revolutionary magistrates, and on the arrival of Mr.Paine, were
escorted through the ranks, halting at every rew paces to liste2 to the
reading of their several confessions of political transgression. Having
thus passed in review and suffered some wanton outrage of feeling, in addition
to the humiliation of the procession, they were dismissed."
The same convention which had decreed this degrading ceremonial as
a punishment for the expression, in dignified phrase, of a sit of political
opinions, also voted, on the following day, to accept the acknowledgment
made by six citizens, of whom John Chandler was one, "for aspersing the
people of this county, in a late address to Governor Gage." They also voted:
"That the Justices who address Governor Gage at the last session of the
Court be brought before the convention and make and sign a declaration
in writing, of the inadvertence of their proceedings." The record then
goes on, "Which is done, and the declaration is as follows:- "Whereas the
Committee in Convention have expressed their uneasiness to a number of
the justices of the common pleas and general sessions, now present in the
Convention, who, in an address to Governor Gage, at their session in June
last, aspersed the people of this County: these justices, in the presence
of the Convention frankly declare, that they precipitately entered into
measure: they are sorry for it; and they disclaim any intention to injure
the character of any; and were the same measure again Proposed, they would
John Chandler was, under compulsion, one of the signees of this document
"Most of the protesters had been induced to make a submission. Some
who refused were waylaid and cruelly beaten. A few remained obstinate and
finally retired into exile. Others, unable to separate themselves from
their friends and country and to sacrifice all they held dear, were persecu
into compliance withe the public will, and at length purchased safety for
person and property by soliciting forgiveness in terms more humiliating
in proportion to the time it was deferred."
The condition of affairs portrayed in the events which have just been
described brought vividly before Chandler the impossibility of his remaining
with safety longer in Worcester. His daughteer puts it that he was not
willing to live in altercation with those around him, but this is hardly
strong enough to cover the situation. An officeholder and the son of an
officeholder, who had been bred with thebelief that loyalty was a duty,
he could not permanently sacrifice his ppinions, even though, to escape
violence at the hands of a mob, he had purchased temporary safety by signing
a recantation. He, therefore, in the fall of 1774., sought protection in
Boston, where he remained upwards of sixteen months. While there he was
enrolled in a company of loyalists, and cheerfully did military duty in
defence of the town. When Boston was evacuated, he accompanied the British
troops to Halifax. In July, 1776, he went to England, and from that time
down to November, l776, he remained uninterruptedly in London. During this
interval the possibility of his ever being permitted to return to his family
was removed, by the passage in October, 1778, of the "Act to prevent the
return to this state of certain persons therein named," etc. John Chandler
and Rufus Chandler, his son, were therein named. If they should return
in spite of the act, sheriffs, committees of correspondence, grand jurors,
constables, tithingmen, and other inhabitants of the town to which they
might come were empowered and directed to apprehend them and take them
before a justice of the peace, who in turn was directed to put them in
jail until they could be deported. If they should venture to return a second
time, the penalty was death.
Colonel Chandler was accompanied in his exile by his son, Rufus. In
178 he wrote to his daughter, Lucretia, "Your brother Rufus lives in my
neighborhood. We dine together every day. It is acomfort to me." This letter
is full of tender grief for his lost wife, whose death had taken place
about six months before, and of gratitude to his sons for their care of
his daughters. It closes with a paragraph which will bear the interpretation
that, not withstanding the "Act to prevent the return," etc., he still
had a faint hope that he might be permitted some day to rejoin his family.
"I long," he says, "for the happy day when I may see all my dear children,
but whether I am to be so happy, time must determine. Pray God bless, keep,
and preserve you. My love to all my near and dear connections."
On the 25th of July, 1786, he received permission from the commissioners
for inquiring into losses by American loyalists to receive for a period
of twelve month his allowance for temporary support, during absence from
Great Britain. Fortified with this assurance that his only means of livelihood
would not be jeopardized by the step, he went to Nova Scotia, where he
arrived in No.~,ember, 1786. The permit to receive the allowance while
absent from Great Britain was for twelv~zmonths only. In May, 1787, being
then in Halifax, he petitioned for an extension of the permit for another
twelve months. In this petition he states, "That being an old man aged
more than sixty-six years, he did not leave England with any intentior
of doing business, and wishes to remain in Nova Scotia only for the purpose
of being with his children, having two sons in that province and a daughter
married to a Mr. Putnam of New Brunswick."
His son Rufus accompanied him on this transatlantic trip. The dependent
condition of the father and son being distasteful to them, they went to
Halifax, expecting that Rufus would be able to open a lawyer' s office
and earn a living. By this time (May, 1787) they had made up their minds
that this was impracticable, and were about to start for Annapolis to see
what chance there was in that place.
A letter from Colonel Chandler dated Annapolis Royal, August 30, 1788,
a copy of which is given hereafter among the London transcripts, shows
that if they went to Annapolis when they expected to, they stayed there
upwards of fifteen months. Shortly after this they must have returned to
London, as the extension of the permit to receive the allowance during
absence from Great Britain, which was granted upon petition, was limited
to the 10th of October, 1788.
Colonel, or as he was sometimes called Judge, Chandler died in London,
September 26, 1800, and was buried at Islington. His death called forth
the following obituary in the "Gentleman's Magazine" for October, 1800:
"In Edgeware Road, John Chandler, Esq., an American loyalist, who from
his attachment to the good order and peace of society, and affection to
the British Constitution, left his country, a numerous family, and affluent
estate, and took refuge in Great Britain. Fully convinced of the truth
and propiety of an observation of an ancient writer: 'Fear thou the Lord
and the King, and meddle not with them that are given to change,' he exemplified
it by a pious and loyal, a peaceful and inoffensive conduct; and died,
at eighty, an honest man, a good member of society, and a pious Christian."
Peter Whitney, when he published his "History of the County of Worcester"
in 1793, was too close to the Revolution to say anything in favor of Tory
John, who was still alive, but he thus speaks of the family: -"The Town
of Worcester in particular and the County of Worcester at largE were originally
greatly indebted to the Hon. John Chandler Esq. of Woodstock, the first
judge in the County, and his son, the first Col. John Chandler of Worcester,
who, in Process of time succeeded his father in all his offices, titles
and honors, for their address, activity and enterprise And their names
ought to be held in grateful remembrance."
Just prior to the appointment in London of commissioners to investigate
the claims of American loyalists, the Board of Treasury made an independent
investigation. In their decision of Chandler's case they say: "This gentle-man
was in a most respectable situation in life and has been spoken well of,
by overt one who has spoken of him at all." This opinion was based upon
the certificates to character and losses filed with the Board. They were
furnished by ten well-known men, among whom were Governor Hutchinso, General
Gage, Thomas Flecher, at one time secretary of the Province, Thomas Oliver,
and Robert Auchmuty. The certificates of these gentlemen, whth others,
may be found in the London transcripts, post.
Joseph Willard, in his address before the members of the bar in 1829,
speaks of the distinguished family of the name of Chandler "who had had
extensive and almost unbounded sway in the County, ab primo origine."
William Lincoln, in his "History of Worcester," says of John Chandler:
"He was cheerful in temperament, engaging in manner, hospitable as a citizen
friendly and kind as a neighbor, industrious and enterprising as a merchant,
and successful as a man of business."
Jonathan Poole Dabney, in the "Christian Examiner," in July, l847,
said: "The Hon. John Chandler of Worcester, whose sons and daughters were
as numerous as these of his royal master, and with whose family every other
leading family of the region was proud to entwine itself by marriage alliance
sleeps far away from the town and shire of whose honors he had almost the
monopoly, and the very name had there died out, as we learn from Lincoln
a full generation ago."
Lorenzo Satine, in his "Loyalists," says: "The late President Dwight
spoke of Colonel Chandler and his family as distinguished for talents and
The American Antiquarian Society possesses a portrait of Colonel Chandler.
A steel engraving of this portrait was prepared for Dr. Chandler's family
genealogy, and the same plate was used for the illustration of Hersey's
reprint of Lincoln's"History of Worcester." The engraving bears the date
of l761., and gives Chandler's age as fifty-three. Without stopping to
analize these figures, I assumed in my paper before the American Antiquarian
Society at the 0ctober meeting, 1900, that they were correct, and said
that although the portrait depicted a man whose career theretofore had
been absolutely free from care, whose relations with his family were shown
by the repeated references in his daughter's letter to the affectionate
manner in which he treated her sti1l the impression derived as to the state
of mind of the subject from the con-templation of the portrait was that
of sadness. To this I added, "If the picture had been painted a few years
later, one could understand this, for the time came when his loyalty to
the government converted this wealthy officeholder into a proscribed fugitive,
whose right to tread Massachusetts soil was by special legislation denied
him, while his wife, if she would avail herself of the dower rights set
out from his property for her support was compe1led to remain within the
limits of the United States." I have since been informed by my frother,
Hon. J. C. Bancroft Davis, that the picture was painted in London. This
of Course fully accounts for the sad expression which it bears. An examination
of the inscription on Dr. Chandler's engraving shows that there is an error
of ten years either in the date or the age. Judge Chandler was born February,
1720-21, and his fifty-forth year would have fallen in 1774, a year full
of troubles and not a time for portrait painting.
We have followed the course of the exile to the end. A word remains
to be said concerning the fortunes of the family. For a little over two
years it would seem that they were left in Possession of the estate. Then
the personal property was seized, and possession was taken of the real
estate in the vicinity of Worcester by the local committee of correspondence
and inspection. A portion of the household goods was assigned to the use
of the family, and the remainder was sold at auction. How galling to them
this was may be inferred from the comments in the letter of Mrs. Bancroft,
where, speaking of her mother being present at the sale, she says: "While
her fur-niture was sold in her own house, and the very chair on which she
sat bid off from her purchase. She bore it well, and never put herself
down by losing dignity." In the ultimate division of the property, enough
real estate, including the homestead, to make up one third of the total
appraised value of estate was assigned to Mrs. Chandler for use during
her life, provided she remained within the United States. While this was
sufficient to protect the family from want as long as she should live,
their entire relations to life were changed. In place of luxury and ease,
they now had to work and to economize to make both ends meet.
The death of Mrs. Chandler raised a new set of questions. All rights
of the family in the real property ceased with that event. This was partially
rectified by special legislation, through which the children remaining
at home were put in possession of a part of the property, the details concerning
which are given further on.The social prestige of the family, which is
alluded to in some of the notees which have been quoted, was doubtless
due in part to the wealth accumulated during successive generations of
peaceful prosperity,. Stripped of that wealth, the posterity of the refugee
no longer held claim for social position on that ground. Yet it cannot
be said that Chandler's descendants have, for that reason, failed in their
hold upon the esteem of their fellow citizens. The daughter whose letter
has called forth this investigation married Aaron Bancroft, a clergyman,
who became a recog-nized leader in the Unitarian denomination, and was
president of the American Unitanian Association from 1825-1836. He wrote
a life of Washington which has gone through several editions and has been
quite recently republished.
In the next generation, George Bancroft the historian is to be found,
who filled many public offices with great distinction, but whose name is
better known through his literary work as the author of the "history of
the United States." Two of the granddaughters of the refugee were married
to men, both of whom were members of Congress and governors of Massachusetts,
one being in addition a United States Senator. The male descendants of
the next gener-ation furnish the names of several who achieved distinction
in public life, and others who acquired renown in the army and in the navy.
The fourth generation from the refugee has contributed to the public life
of the country, but most of this generation are still too young to have
made their mark. The fifth is represented in this world, but its history
is as yet unwritten. It is indeed true that the voice of the sixth generation
has been heard by a privileged few.
He had 16 children, the eldest is listed as John. In 1787 he was granted
1000 acres in Wilmot near Digby, Nova Scotia. He is listed as from Massachusetts
Bay ( the Digby Township Loyalist List for Nova Scotia).
Nova Scotia Immigrants to 1867 Vol 1 Part1 states that John s/o John
b. 26 Feb 1720/21 ; Loyalist, Boston , Mass. , to Halifax 1776. From Worsester
left Bostton, Mass. to Halifax March 1776.
From The Loyalists of Massachusetts Acadia University Library:
"JOHN CHANDLER (Plate x)
In consequence of his loyalty to his King and attachment to the British
Government, he suffered the greatest indignities and insults from the rebellious
Americans, and was threatened with the deprivation of his liberty unless
he would sacrifice his loyalty and renounce the Worcester Protest, which
he had promoted and signed, and adopt in its stead "a very treasonable
league and covenant." To save himself from a very ignominious death he
fled to Boston in November, 1774, leaving a beloved wife and sixteen children
to the mercy of the rebels. Four sons at the risk of their lives soon afterwards
escaped to Boston, while his eldest son [John] was confined to his house,
and his second son [Clark) was imprisoned in the common gaol at Worcester.
He was for many years a member of His Majesty's Council for Massachusetts,
Colonel of Militia, Judge of Probate and a Magistrate for the county of
Worcester, and as such considered himself as under stronger obligations
to use his influence for quieting the minds of his countrymen and inducing
them to pay a proper submission to the laws and authority of Great Britain,
than if he had been in a private station. The penalty of his loyalty was
the hostility of the people. He received no support from his estate since
September, 1774. (A.O. 53/73.)
John Chandler was shipwrecked and nearly lost his life on a voyage
which he was obliged to take for the recovery of his health, presumably
after arriving at Halifax, Nova Scotia. His income from his real and personal
estate, acquired by his own honest and honourable industry, amounted to
over £1,300 a year. (lb.)
In another memorial he says that he brought forward the Worcester Protest
against the rebellion, and was supported by the principal people of the
town of Worcester, and that to render it more effectual he and his loyal
associates caused it to be entered on the town records and published in
the newspapers. A mob, drawn from all the neighbouring towns, seized him,
and in order to save himself from immediate death he was obliged to renounce
the Protest and subscribe to "a very treasonable league and covenant."
He sailed from Halifax with three sons, and arrived in England in July,
1776. These sons afterwards accompanied the army to New York, and did military
duty or otherwise performed loyal services.
In a fourth memorial, dated Halifax, Nova Scotia, May I, 1787, he expresses
his desire to remain there with his children, having two sons married there,
and a daughter to James Putnam. One of these sons served in the Quartermaster-General's
department for several years, and is so infirm as to be incapacitated from
active life and is dependent upon his father for support.
With these memorials are many certificates and affidavits to John Chandler's
loyalty, including one from Colonel Abijah Willard (who had known him for
more than forty years as a distinguished loyalist and an eminent public
man, who enrolled himself in a company of Associated Loyalists at Boston
and cheerfully did military duty in defence of the town) and another from
Joshua Upham, who was an eye-witness of the scene in 1774 when about 5,000
people assembled in Worcester to prevent the sitting of the Court of Common
Pleas, and to sto the administration of His Majesty's Government. John
Chandler and a few other loyalists were led in triumph through the mob
and compelled to submit to the insolence and humiliating terms of violent
and distracted men. Chandler was of one of the first families in Massachusetts
and possessed of a very large landed estate.
With the Chandler papers are schedules of his real estate, with a full
description, and the names of previous owners and other details; several
certificates as to the sale of his confiscated property, except his mansion
house and certain other property assigned by the State to his wife, Mary
Chandler, for her support during her natural life; a list of the purchasers
of his confiscated estate, with the prices realised and a list of creditors
and his protest against some of the claims; and an inventory of his personal
From his claim of L11,067 13s. for his confiscated property, he received
£7,225 as compensation from the British Government. (A.O. 12/109.)
This eminent loyalist died in London, September 20, 1800, and was buried
in Paddington churchyard, where also his son, Rufus, was buried. His son,
William, was a second lieutenant in the Loyal Associated Volunteers of
Boston under Francis Green . Another son was Gardner .
His portrait is in the possession of the American Antiquarian Society,Worcester,
Footnotes:(McFarland Davis, in New Eng. Hist. & Gen. Reg., April,
1903; Ex inform. Miss Elizabeth H. Chandler; John ChandLer and a few of
his Descendants, by Chandler Bullock, 1922 ; The Loyalist Side of the Amer.
Revolution, by Chandler Bullock, 1925.)
From Canada and the American Revolution by Wrong: pg. 373-4 " The presecution
of loyalists began long before the war broke out....
when as early as in Nov 1774 John Chandler, a judge at Worcester, Mass.
refused to join in the popular agitation about tea, he was under pain,
as he said, "of ignominious Death", forced to leave a beloved wife and
16 children to the mercy of the Rebels," to abandon extensive property
that he never recovered and to take refuge with the British Forces in Boston."
The three leading families of Worcester, Mass. were the Putnames, the
Chandlers and the Paines, all tories and all interrelated.
Among the Boston Evacuees listed as leaving together are John, esquire,
Rufus, lawyer, Nathaniel and William Chandler. This is the list of inhabitants
of Boston who are on the evacuation list by the British in March 1776 and
removed to Halifax with the army. Rufus, William, Gardner, trader and Nathaniel
Chandler were included in the Banishment Act of the State of Massachusetts.
Samuel and Thomas Chandler settled in Annapolis.
Nathaniel and Rufus have requested a grant from New York 22 July 1783
(Digby Township Loyalist List for Nova Scotia).
From The Loyalists of Mass. by E. Alfred Jones: "James Putnam, lawyer
of Worcester, was appointed Lt. Col. in the army 24 Sep 1756 ....drew up
the Worcerter Protest which was signed by William Chandler (s/o John),
Clark Chandler (s/o John), John Cahndler and Rufus Chandler.
Digby Co. History: In the 1784 grant of Digby Co., to Amos Botsford
et al:...William Chandler, Samuel Chandler, and Thomas Chandler.
In the 1783 grant of New Edinburgh, Digby Co.:...Nathaniel Chandler
and Rufus Chandler. ( this grant to natives of Scotland then living at
From The Loyalists of Massachusetts by Wallace Brown:
With some exceptions, notably Georgia, laws were harshest in states
where Loyalists were most powerful, and as the war progressed, the purpose
of the laws changed from conversion to "revenge and hate." 13 Similarly,
enforcement varied, and was. usually severest where danger was greatest
and civil war bitterest.
A prominent Southern Tory reported that in Virginia, where the Loyalists
were weak and little problem, the prop-erty of those who joined the British
army went to their wives and children "on the Spot... as if the Father
was dead," and he noted that his own wife "had never been molested but
on the contrary treated with the utmost Kindness and Re-spect."" Other
Loyalists described being turned off their property with only the clothes
on their backs.
But perhaps more typical was the fate of the Chandler family of Worcester,
Massachusetts. Colonel John Chandler, a very prominent citizen of distinguished
Massachusetts pedi-gree, dubbed "Tory John" and later in England the "Honest
Refugee," fled from Boston with the British army to become a permanent,
proscribed exile. For over two years his wife and family continued to enjoy
their property undisturbed, until the Worcester Committee of Correspondence
began a process that resulted in the confiscation of all but a third of
their real and personal property, which third was reserved for Mrs. Chandler's
use as long as she remained in the United States. Her husband did not return
(he was forbidden to by an act of Oct 1778) and on her death special legislation
was needed to secure her property for her children.
34. Rufus CHANDLER
Nova Scotia Immigrants to 1867 Vol 1 Part1 states that Rufus
s/o John , Loyalist came to Halifax 1776.
Rufus Chandler , Attorney; s/o John; Boston, Mass., to Halifax March
From The Loyalists of Massachusetts:
son of John Chandler (q.v.), was bred to the profession of the law,
and was well established in practice at Worcester, which town he was obliged
to leave in September, 1774, for Boston. He was one of the signatories
to the Worcester Protest. At Boston, and later at New York, he served in
the Associated Loyalists. On june 2, 1783, he was appointed one of the
commissioners for examining the claims of loyalists applying for passages
from New York. With his memorials is a schedule of his professional income
He claimed at the rate of /287 per annum for the loss of his income
during the war, and was allowed L240, and a pension of /120.
Rufus Chandler sailed for Nova Scotia in October, 1786, in the hope
of finding scope for his professional abilities, but that province was
already overcrowded with refugee lawyers, and he eventually returned to
England, where he died in London, October ii, 1824, and was buried in his
father's vault in Paddington churchyard. In his will he left all his real
estate to his daughter and only child, Eliza Putnam Vose, of Augusta, Maine,
and portraits and sketches of himself and his wife to his kinsman, James
Putnam. (Erskine, 346.) He graduated at Harvard College in 1766.
His father-in-law was James Putnam .
From The Return of the Massachusetts Loyalists by Garland:" In Rufus'
absence, the committee for absentee estates disposed of Rufus Candler's
furniture that approximately 40 different individuals snatched up."
From The Return of the Massachusetts Loyalists by Garland: Rufus wrote
in May 1781 "It is now more than 6 months since I arrived in this country,
the westher has been so Extreme Cold that we have continued froze up the
whole time and are heartily tired on Nova Scotia." Rufus found that there
were too many "starved lawyers", and there was no money to be made in the
35. Gardner CHANDLER
From The Loyalists of Massachusetts:
"His confiscated estate was sold for L569 8s. 9d., and the claims against
it were L829 10s. He recanted later, and remained in Massachusetts. He
was the son of John Chandler."
36. Nathaniel CHANDLER
Nova Scotia Immigrants to 1867 Vol 1 Part1 states Nathaniel
s/o John ; Boston, Mass. to Halifax, Mar. 1776.
From The Return of the Massachusetts Loyalists by Garland: "Between
1787-1790 the Mass. Legislature granted citizenship to returned Tory Nathaniel
Chandler... by 24 Mar. 1784 he obtained his licence to return to Boston."
Fom Early Marriages of New Brunswick: 1801- Apr 11. On Monday evening
last by Rev. Dr. Byles, Mr. Nathaniel Chandler to Miss Elizabeth Foucht,
both of St. John.Nathaniel bought a pew in 1804 in St. John Methodist Chapel.
From Digby County History:
(page 321) - NATHANIEL CHANDLER is listed among those "applying for
rights above the Township of Granville, on the River of Annapolis Royal,
on the road to Halifax." The author says that this document was found at
the N.S. Archives, but is not dated, and that
"Calnek supposed this memorandum was written about 1777." Calnek, of
course, being the author of the Annapolis County History.
37. William CHANDLER
Nova Scotia Immigrants to 1867 Vol 1 Part1 states William s/o
John , Loyalist, to Halifax March 1776.
From the Digby County Book: (page 73) - WILLIAM CHANDLER, an unmarried
man, on the Muster Roll of Civilians, at Digby, 1783
In 1784 William had a grant of 1800 acres in Digby and lost 100 acres.
38. Charles CHANDLER
Charles Chandler petitioned for his father's grist mill and
four acres in Wocester , promising to rebuild the mill if the General Court
gave him the property as a gift. Though 181 inhabitants of Worcester supported
his request, instead the legislature sold the estate to Chandler for its
39. Samuel CHANDLER
Nova Scotia Immigrants to 1867 Vol 1 Part1 states that Samuel
Chandler plus one female 16+ and one male -16 ; settled 1749-1752 North
Suburbs of Halifax.
45. Clark CHANDLER
There is a family file on this family at www.familysearch.org
23. Joshua CHANDLER Col.
CHANDLER.-Co1. Joshua Chandler, of New Haven, graduated at
Yale College in 1747. He was a prosperous barrister in New Haven and was
a member of the Connecticut Legislature. Being loyal, he left when Gen.
Tryon, was obliged to evacuate that place. His property was valued at £30,000
sterling, and was confiscated.
He was a member of the Legislature of Conn. 1775. But he was soon suspected
of loyalty, and was sent to North Haven as a prisoner by the Whigs of New
Haven. Later Mr. Chandler and his family went off, and so sudden was the
departure that Governor Baldwin, who was then a boy, said afterward he
remembered going into Mr. Chandler's house on the morning after they left,
and there seeing the table spread for a large company, and the viands all
While on Long Island, 10th Feb., 1792, he with others, addressed Mr.
Rivington, acting Deputy Inspector General of Refuges on the Island, and
stated that 'we were driven from our respective homes, having left our
property in the country, &c.'
His property in and near New Haven, Conn., which he valued at L30,000,
was confiscated under the agency of Charles Chauncey, Esq., of New Haven.
Joshua Chandler settled at Annapolis, Nova Scotia, on the south Shore
of the bay of Fundy. 'The landing of the Loyalists, May 18,1783,' is one
of the remarkable events noticed in their registers, and that day as it
returns is still celebrated by a salute of cannon firing, at noon.
CoI. Chandler (as above stated) had a large property at New Haven,
which he was forced to leave. He sailed for England to see about a remuneration
for his loss. Commissions were appointed to adjust the claims of the Loyalists.
He returned to Annapolis, and on that fatal March of 1787, he, with his
daughter Elizabeth and son William Chandler, took all their books, papers
and evidence of their colonial property, and sailed across the Bay for
Saint John, New Brunswick, to meet the Commissioners, to prove their titles
and their losses and to get their claims allowed. But the vessel, in a
violent snow storm, missing the harbor, was driven on the rocks at Musquash
Point, within about nine miles of St. John. William, hoping to secure the
vessel, fastened a rope around his body and jumped overboard to swim to
the land, but he was immediately crushed between the vessel and rocks and
was drowned. This was the 9th of March, 1787. CoI. Chandler, his daughter
Elizabeth and others finally got ashore. But they were miles from any dwelling
and the weather was severe. It is said that he urged his daughter to leave
him and make her way to some house, but she refused to leave her father.
He then climbed a high point of the rocks for a look-out, from which being
so benumbed with cold, he fell and soon died. The others, his daughter
and Mrs. Grant, after wandering about in the woods, perished on the 11th
of March, 1787. Their bodies were found and carried to St. John, and buried
in the old burying ground, at the head of King Street.... Years later their
remains were carefully deposited in the lot of Amos Botsford, Esq., in
the 'Rural Cemetery,' the beautiful Woodside grounds, at St. John." (From
History of Sackville New Brunswick by W.C. Milner, 1934)
The British Government allowed the surviving children, Sarah, Mary,
Thomas, Samuel and Charles, each £ 1,000 sterling. Sarah married
William Botsford, father of the late .Judge William Botsford, and grandfather
of Senator Botsford; Mary married Col. Joshua Upham, afterwards Chief Justice
of New Brunswick. Thomas Chandler, M P P, a lawyer of eminence, died at
His wife, Elizabeth Grant, was an aunt of Sam. Slick whose name was
Thomas Chandler Haliburton. Samuel Chandler was also in the Legislature
of Nova Scotia for many years, representing Colchester County. He married
Susan Watson. His eldest son was the late Judge James W. Chandler, of Westmoreland,
his son Charles H. Chandler was Sheriff of Cumberland for thirty-eight
years. Among his children were Sheriff Joshua Chandler, of Amherst, and
the late Lieutenant Governor E. B. Chandler, of Dorchester. The three sons
of Col. Joshua Chandler in the early part of the last century, lived in
the township of Cumberland for a time and conducted a general trading business.
Their brother-in-law, William Botsford, was also a resident of the township
at the same time. (The Chegnecto Isthmus The First Settlers of Cumberland
From The Good American: "Joshua Chandler, formerly a wealthy Connecticut
Gentleman was loathe to go to "the Deserts of Nova Scotia" because "not
one of the Famaly are used to Labour", and he believed that he was too
old to begin again."
Joshua stated in a petition for relief that he was born in Connecticut.
On his death Joshua lost 1800 acres in Digby and 300 in Clements that
he had received in 1784.(from the Digby Township List for Nova Scotia).
47. John CHANDLER
The Poll Tax for 1791-3 in PANS show Charles and Samuel at
Amherst and John at Annapolis. Thomas was probably in New Brunswick and
is not listed. John later returned to his old home in Connecticutt and
died in New Haven. (from Gordon Haliburton's notes)
The IGI lists two John's belonging to Joshua and Sarah Miles so perhaps
one died young.
48. Elizabeth CHANDLER
Died at 27 years old with her father and brother William in
the ship wreck.
51. William CHANDLER
Died unmarried. The IGI gives his birthdate as 1758.
On that fatal March of 1787, he, with his daughter Elizabeth and son
William Chandler, took all their books, papers and evidence of their colonial
property, and sailed across the Bay for Saint John, New Brunswick, to meet
the Commissioners, to prove their titles and their losses and to get their
claims allowed. But the vessel, in a violent snow storm, missing the harbor,
was driven on the rocks at Musquash Point, within about nine miles of St.
John. William, hoping to secure the vessel, fastened a rope around his
body and jumped overboard to swim to the land, but he was immediately crushed
between the vessel and rocks and was drowned. (see father's notes)