George Wolf, the seventh Governor of Pennsylvania, was born in Allen Township, Northampton County, August 12, 1777, and died March 11, 1840.

He attended a classical school established in the county by a society formed for the purpose, which was presided over by Robert Andrews, A. M., a graduate of Trinity College, Dublin. Here he acquired a good knowledge of the Latin and Greek languages and of the sciences usually pursued in a liberal education. Leaving school he took charge of his father’s farm and also acted as principal of the academy in his native township. Before his majority he acted as clerk to the prothonotary, at the same time studying law under the direction of John Ross.

He early espoused the political principles of Thomas Jefferson, and when the latter became President he appointed Mr. Wolf Postmaster at Easton, and shortly after Governor Thomas McKean appointed him Clerk of the Orphans’ Court of Northampton County, which office he held until 1809.

In 1814 he was elected a member of the Legislature, and in 1824 he was elected a Representative in Congress, a position he acceptably filled for three terms.

In 1829 he was chosen Governor of Pennsylvania over Joseph Ritner.

Mr. Wolf was not an active aspirant for the office of Governor and received the nomination without knowing that any considerable strength in the convention was in his favor. He accepted the nomination, abandoned his lucrative practice and entered vigorously into the campaign.

At this period there began to be a change in the political horizon of the state. A fearful crusade was made against secret societies, which were denounced as tending to subvert government.

Commencing in the New England States, the reported abduction of a traitor to the Freemasons in Batavia, New York, assisted to spread rapidly the contagion, and party lines were almost equally drawn in the State of Pennsylvania. The Federal party lost its identity, and the Anti-Masons sprang up like mushrooms. Their candidate, Joseph Ritner, was defeated at the first election by seventeen thousand and at the second by only three thousand out of a poll of almost two hundred thousand.

When Governor Wolf came into office the financial affairs of the Commonwealth, owing to the extensive scheme of public improvements, then progressing at a fair rate, were in deplorable condition. There was but one course to pursue which would maintain the credit of the State and that was to push the works to rapid completion. This was done and in a few years he with others had the proud satisfaction of beholding how far these needed improvements went towards developing the great natural resources of Pennsylvania.

But the most substantial and enduring merit of Governor Wolf was evinced in his advocacy of a system of popular education.

James Buchanan, in a speech delivered at West Chester previous to the election of the Governor, had said: “If ever the passion of envy could be excused a man ambitious of true glory, he might almost be justified in envying the fame of the favored individual, whoever he may be, whom Providence intends to make the instrument in establishing Common Schools throughout the Commonwealth. His task will be arduous. He will have many difficulties to encounter and many prejudices to overcome; but his fame will exceed that of the great Clinton, in the same proportion that mind is superior to matter. Whilst, the one has erected a frail memorial, which like everything human must decay and perish, the other will raise a monument which shall flourish in immortal youth, and endure whilst the human soul shall continue to exist. ‘Ages unborn and nations yet behind’ shall bless his memory.”

To Governor George Wolf that honor was accorded.

The Governor, in his annual message, December, 1831 said in reference to this subject: “It is cause for no ordinary measure of gratification that the Legislature, at its last session, considered this subject worthy of its deliberations, and advancing one step toward the intellectual regeneration of the State by laying a foundation for raising a fund to be employed hereafter in the righteous cause of a practical general education. It is no less gratifying to know that public opinion is giving strong indications of having undergone a favorable change in reference to this momentous measure, and by its gradual but powerful workings is fast dispelling the groveling fallacies, but too long prevalent, that gold is preferable to knowledge and that dollars and cents are of a higher estimation than learning. I would suggest for your consideration the propriety of appointing a commission, to consist of three or more talented and intelligent individuals, known friends of a liberal and enlightened system of education, whose duty it should be to collect all the information and possess themselves of all the facts and knowledge that can be obtained from any quarter having a bearing upon or connection with the subject of education, and arrange and embody the same in a report to the Legislature.”

In compliance with this wise recommendation, Senator Samuel Breck, of Philadelphia, was made chairman of the committee, which reported a bill, embodying what were believed to be the best features of those systems which had been most successful in other States, and at the session of 1834 it passed both branches of the Legislature with a unanimity rarely equaled in legislation. The bill was approved by the Governor April 1, 1834.

Although the school bill was adopted with comparative unanimity, it was at once attacked by a storm of opposition in certain sections of the State. The opposition was well crystallized when the Legislature convened in the fall of 1834.

Governor Wolf’s message was firm, but the members had been flooded with petitions for the repeal of the measure.

On April 11, 1835, Thaddeus Stevens, by a memorable speech and a remarkable parliamentary effort, swayed the opposition, and by a vote of 55 to 30 successfully defended the schools when threatened with destruction.

Thus public education in Pennsylvania was saved; but Governor Wolf, who had advocated it so strenuously, was defeated for a third term by Joseph Ritner.

Retiring from the gubernatorial chair, he was appointed by President Jackson in 1836, to the office of First Comptroller of the Treasury. After holding this position for two years he was appointed by President Van Buren to be Collector of the Port of Philadelphia, which he held until his death on March 11, 1840.

The soldiers of the Pennsylvania Line who served in the War of the Revolution were by act of legislation entitled to wild lands of the State and a large area of the northwestern portion of the State north of the depreciation lands and west of the Allegheny River was set apart and surveyed to the officers and soldiers.

As early as March 7, 1780, while the war for the independence of the American colonies was still in active progress, and being vigorously waged by the hostile armies in the field, the General Assembly of Pennsylvania, by resolution, made a promise of “certain donations and quantities of land” to the soldiers of the State, known as the “Pennsylvania Line,” then serving in the Continental Army.

This resolution provided that these lands should be “surveyed and divided off” at the end of the war, and allotted to those entitled to receive them according to their several rank. In order to comply with the letter and intention of the resolution, an act was passed by the General Assembly on March 12, 1783, by the provisions of which certain lands were set apart to be sold for the purpose of redeeming the certificates of depreciation given to the soldiers of the Pennsylvania Line. It also provided that a certain tract of country, beginning at the mouth of Mogulbughtition Creek, now known as Mahoning Creek, in Armstrong County; then up the Allegheny River to the mouth of Cagnawaga Creek, in now Warren County; thence due north to the northern boundary of the State; thence west by the said boundary, to the northwest corner of the State, thence south, by the western boundary of the State, to the northwest corner of lands appropriated by the act for discharging the depreciation certificates; and thence by the same lands east to the place of beginning, “which said tract of country shall be reserved and set apart for the only and sole use of fulfilling and carrying into execution the said resolve.”

The territory thus set apart comprised parts of the present counties of Lawrence, Butler, Armstrong, Venango, Forest and Warren, all of the counties of Mercer and Crawford and that portion of Erie County which lies south of the triangle.

This territory was a wild and unbroken wilderness, except at the few places fortified by the French and later occupied by the English and Colonists during the Revolution.

The officers of the First and Second Battalions of the Province of Pennsylvania in the French and Indian War petitioned for and received twenty-four thousand acres of land along the West Branch of the Susquehanna River, and these officers and their families thus became pioneer settlers in that picturesque valley, and now the veterans of the Revolution were given homes in the northwestern section of the State and there planted the settlements which have grown into the most important industrial centers of the Western Hemisphere.

The act of March 12, 1783, gave a clear title to the land, for under Section 6, all rights, titles, or claims to land within the described bounds, whether obtained from the Indians, the late Proprietaries, or any other person or persons, were declared to be null and void, thus reserving the entire tract from sale or settlement until after the allotments to the soldiers were duly made and their claims fully satisfied.

By the following section of the act the officers and enlisted soldiers were to be allowed two years after the declaration of peace in which to make their applications, and in event of death occurring before any veteran made his application, an additional year was allowed his heirs, executors or administrators to make application. Thereafter the unlocated tracts were to be disposed of upon such terms as the Legislature might direct. This period for making applications was many times extended, so that no veteran was deprived of a fair opportunity to obtain his tract of the donation land.

The authorities of Pennsylvania were even more thoughtful of these Revolutionary veterans, for the General Assembly passed an act which exempted from taxation during lifetime the land which fell to lot of each veteran unless the same was transferred or assigned to another person.

Then followed the great purchase of October 23, 1784, and then the Act of March 24, 1785, which directed the manner in which the allowances of land were to be distributed to the troops, and provided for legal titles, vesting in them the right of ownership.

A section of the act described the persons who should be entitled to land, and Section 5, in order to comply with a previous resolution of the General Assembly, included the names of Baron Steuben, the German patriot drill master of the Continental Army, who was to receive a grant equal to that of a major general of the Pennsylvania Line, and Lieutenant Colonel Tilghman a grant equal to his rank.

Complete lists of all soldiers entitled to land were furnished by the Comptroller General to the Supreme Executive Council, and these claimants were divided into four classes.

Upon application of the officers of the Pennsylvania Line, General William Irvine, the commanding officer at Fort Pitt, was appointed agent to explore the lands, as he was well acquainted with all the land appropriated for donation purposes.

General Irvine entered upon his duties promptly and seemed to have exercised good judgment. An interesting report of his notes and observations was transmitted to President John Dickinson of the Supreme Executive Council in a letter dated at Carlisle, August 17, 1785. The streams, boundaries and other natural terrain were carefully described, and the general gave a most comprehensive narrative of his every act while on this important tour of duty.

Section 8 provided minute directions for the distribution of the tracts by lottery.

The drawing of the lottery commenced October 1, 1786, and was to continue one year. The committee of the Supreme Executive Council selected to superintend the drawing consisted of Captain John Boyd, Jonathan Hoge, Stephen Balliet and William Brown, to which was shortly added Peter Muhlenberg and Samuel Dean.

The time of the drawing was subsequently extended until under various laws the last limit of time was fixed as April 1, 1810, and from that day the offices were closed against any further applications for donation lands.

Matthew Smith was the eldest son of Robert Smith, and was born March 13, 1740, in Paxtang, then Lancaster County, but since March 4, 1785, a part of Dauphin County. At the age of fifteen he was a soldier under Colonel Henry Bouquet, serving in the final campaign of the French and Indian War. During the interim between that war and the Revolutionary War he was an active leader among the early settlers in what are now Dauphin, Cumberland and Northumberland Counties, a leader in the struggles against the Indians and a respected and brave frontiersman.

Late in 1763 the Indians, especially the Conestoga, caused much suffering in the lower Susquehanna region and the territory between Harris’ Ferry and the Schuylkill. The terrible incursions perpetrated and the many murders committed by these savages resulted in having the provincial authorities place these Indians under their care in Lancaster, Conestoga and Philadelphia.

This protection so incensed the settlers, who had lost many of their kin through the perfidy of the so-called friendly Indians, that an appeal was made to the authorities against this support and protection, but no attention was given the frontiersmen.

These settlers continued to suffer until their patience was sorely tried. They then took matters in their own hands and banded together as the “Paxtang Boys,” under the leadership of Captains Matthew Smith and Lazarus Stewart, and they made a clean job of their design.

The “Paxtang Boys” marched to Lancaster, December 27, 1763, broke into the workhouse, and before their anger could be suppressed the last of the so-called “Conestogas” had yielded up his life. After this no other murder was committed by the Indians among the settlers in this vicinity.

Captain Matthew Smith, as one of the actual leaders, seems to have borne the lion’s share of the blame for the act.

February 13, 1764, a lengthy declaration was prepared for presentation to the General Assembly, then meeting in Philadelphia, signed by two of the citizens, Matthew Smith and James Gibson. The petition stated, however, that they signed it “on behalf of ourselves and by appointment of a great number of the frontier inhabitants.” This petition was one of the most important ever presented to a Pennsylvania Legislature and caused much heated debate.

A long and exciting siege in the Assembly was enacted by the leaders. On one side were Benjamin Franklin, Israel Pemberton, the Quaker leader, and Joseph Galloway, and on the popular side, or that of the people and the “Paxtang Boys,” were the Rev. John Ewing, the Rev. Gilbert Tennent, Dr. David James Dove and many others.

As a stronger act in supporting their position the “Paxtang Boys” planned a march to Philadelphia and started in a body under Captain Matthew Smith. Great consternation was witnessed in the capital city. The militia was called out and all business was suspended. But the delegation was not warlike and totally unaware of the anxiety felt in Philadelphia or of the military preparations made to receive them. Proudly bearing their declaration, approved by fifteen hundred of the frontier inhabitants, with many letters from prominent personages, they were met by commissioners sent out by the Governor, to whom they made known their intentions. Captain Smith presented their declarations to the Assembly, which was termed in the minutes of that day as “The declaration of the rioters and the petition of the back inhabitants.” During the long debate the main body of the party returned home and thus ended the “Paxtang Boys’ Insurrection.”

At the very outbreak of the Revolution Captain Smith organized a company of riflemen, which was assigned to Colonel Thompson’s battalion. After a tedious march overland from Dauphin County to Boston, the company joined the Continental Army at that place and on September 5, 1775, his company was detached to General Arnold’s command for the expedition to Canada.

He survived the hardships of the march through the Maine woods, the disastrous assault at Quebec December 31, and the brief confinement as a prisoner of war which followed, when he joined his regiment together with the few survivors of his company, but he soon thereafter resigned his commission on December 5, 1776. Captain Smith’s services were, however, much appreciated and he was promoted to full rank of major, September 27, 1777, and assigned to the Ninth Pennsylvania Regiment.

In the spring of 1778 he was elected by the citizens of the central part of the Province as a member of the Supreme Executive Council. October 11, 1779, he was elected vice president of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, but resigned shortly after assuming the responsible duties of his high office.

When the intelligence of the capture and total destruction of Fort Freeland, on Warrior Run, in Northumberland County, reached Paxtang, Matthew Smith marched to Sunbury with a volunteer militia of fifty men raised by his own efforts and made a hurried march to overtake the British commander, Captain McDonald, and the retreating British invaders, including their Indian allies.

This distinguished statesman-soldier-patriot established himself in a fine residence, in what is now the Fourth Ward of Milton and became its most influential and revered citizen.

The following obituary appeared in Kennedy’s Gazette, published at Northumberland, under date July 30, 1794:

“Died, the 22d inst., about sunset at Milton, Colonel Matthew Smith, aged fifty-four years, being one of the first patriots for liberty; went to Canada in the year 1775, and suffered extremities. He was once prothonotary of Northumberland County. Was interred 23d inst., attended by a large number of his friends and acquaintances, together with a volunteer company of light infantry from Milton, conducted by Major Pratt, and commanded by Captain James Boyd, who, marching about six miles to Warrior Run burying ground and shedding a tear over the old patriot’s grave, deposited his remains with three well directed volleys and returned home in good order.”

Linn’s Annals of Buffalo Valley is authority for the statement that these soldiers actually carried the body the entire distance of six miles to the old cemetery, where his bones now repose. The dust of this patriot, soldier and statesman lies within a few rods of the very fort he rushed from Paxtang with his brave militiamen to protect. His grave is unmarked and few have knowledge that he is buried there.

In 1798 the Federal Government enacted a direct tax law, which became known as the “house tax,” and was unpopular in many parts of the country, especially in some of the counties of Pennsylvania, and it led to an insurrection known in history as “Fries’ Rebellion.”

The story of this insurrection, as told in “Pennsylvania Colonial and Federal” by Jenkins, is as follows:

“The troubles between the United States and France at this time assumed the form of active hostilities, and James McHenry, Secretary of War, began to organize an army. The President was given authority to borrow $5,000,000, and $2,000,000 more was to be raised by a new and odious tax. This tax was direct, and fell upon houses, lands and slaves.

“For every slave between the ages of twelve and fifty years, fifty cents was to be required of the owner. For every house valued at from $200 to $500, twenty cents per $100 was required, while the tax was thirty cents per 100 on houses valued from $500 to $1000.

“There were but few slaves in Pennsylvania, and as a result the tax fell mainly on houses and lands. The value of the houses was determined by counting the number and measuring the size of the windows. Houses with but few and small windows were rated lower, and in order to save the tax the farmers usually had small windows in their houses. Pennsylvania’s share of the tax was $232,177.72.”

The assessors and collectors of the tax found very little difficulty and opposition until the eastern part of the State was reached. It was in the counties of Bucks, Montgomery and Northampton, almost within sight of the Federal capital, that the opposition became alarming, arising from the fact that the German people did not understand the law. Many a farmer knew nothing of the tax until the assessor came around. The people remembered the old hearth tax of Germany, and they thought this tax was a revival of it.

Women set dogs on the assessors, and poured scalding water on them when they tried to measure windows. This fact has also given the name “Hot Water War” to the affair. In a number of townships, associations of the people were formed in order to prevent the officers from performing their duty.

In many places, violence was actually used and the assessors were taken and imprisoned by armed parties. The insurrection rose to such a height that it became necessary to compel the execution of the laws, and warrants were issued against certain persons and served upon them. Headquarters were appointed for the prisoners at Bethlehem but a number of persons marched there and demanded the release of the prisoners. The operations of the mob were so hostile that the marshals could offer no resistance, so the prisoners were released.

The leading spirit in the opposition to the Government was John Fries, a farmer’s son, born in Hatfield Township, Montgomery County, in 1750. He learned the cooper trade and in 1779 married Mary Brunner, of Whitemarsh Township. In 1775 Fries removed to Lower Milford Township, Bucks County. He saw service in the Revolution. He also helped to put down the Whisky Insurrection in Western Pennsylvania.

After settling in Bucks County, Fries became a traveling auctioneer and journeyed from village to village in this employment. He and his dog, Whiskey, were familiar figures in every country store. He could speak German fluently and in his rounds had excellent opportunities to denounce the tax.

Fries was present at a meeting in February, 1798, at the house of Jacob Kline, near the point of union of the four counties of Montgomery, Bucks, Lehigh and Berks. Fries assisted in drawing up a paper in opposition to the tax, which received fifty-five names. He also pledged himself to raise 700 men to resist the tax. His expressions against the law were very violent, and he threatened to shoot one of the assessors, Mr. Foulke, through the legs if he proceeded to assess the houses. Fries and his partisans followed and persecuted a number of the assessors, chasing them from township to township.

Fries was armed with a large horse pistol, and a man named Kuyder assisted him in command. Learning that the marshal had taken a number of prisoners, the rioters determined to rescue them. Fries drew up a paper at his own house, setting forth their design, and the next morning more than twenty followers appeared in arms. They then set out for Bethlehem to release the prisoners. The marshal was intimidated and the imprisoned rioters were released.

The Government became greatly alarmed at these proceedings. The President issued a proclamation commanding rioters to disperse. He also called upon the Governor and militia of Pennsylvania to assist in maintaining order. Governor Mifflin issued a proclamation March 14, 1799, and on March 20 the cavalry from Philadelphia, Chester, Montgomery, Bucks and Lancaster Counties was called out and encamped at Springhouse, Montgomery County. Here General MacPherson issued a proclamation to the rioters. Proceeding to Quakertown, the army began to make arrests and to scour the country in search of rioters.

After releasing the prisoners at Bethlehem, Fries returned to his old employment, but was arrested while holding a vendue. At the cry of the soldiers he leaped to the ground and fled to a swamp. He was arrested for treason, and with some thirty others taken to Philadelphia for trial.

The case of Fries was called up in Federal Court at Philadelphia on April 30, 1799. His lawyers were Alexander J. Dallas and Messrs. Ewing and Lewis. Messrs. Rawle and Sitgrave were the counsel for the United States. The verdict was guilty, but as it appeared after the verdict that one of the jury, previous to being empaneled, had expressed the opinion that Fries ought to be hanged, a new trial was granted. The second trial was called April 29, 1800. At the former trial Fries’ lawyers argued at great length that the offense was only riot and not treason. They cited many cases in support of their view. But the Court relied upon the definition of treason in the Constitution.

Fries’ counsel then refused to appear further in the case. He was again declared guilty, the Friday for the hanging was named and the sheriff’s posse was selected.

The cause of Fries was espoused by the old Republican Party and by a number of newspapers throughout the State. The Aurora denounced the action of the officers and charged that the Army lived in free quarters on the inhabitants. The Adler, a German paper published in Reading also condemned the course of the Government and claimed that the troops imposed upon the people as they marched through the country. Discussion on the subject became so bitter that it entered into National and State politics and became an important issue.

In the meantime National political affairs were so developing that President Adams was led to pardon Fries.

The bloody record of the Mollie Maguires during the decade 1865 to 1875 marks the darkest and most terrible period in the history of the anthracite coal regions of Pennsylvania.

This was a secret organization, composed of lawless Irishmen, who resorted to murder in its most cowardly form, to attain their ends and satisfy their revengeful feelings toward mine owners, superintendents and bosses, and also justices of the peace and borough officials who had the integrity to administer justice, and not cringe before these criminals, when under arrest.

The members of this organization became unusually active and bloodthirsty in 1865. On August 25 of that year David Muir, a colliery superintendent, was cruelly murdered in Foster Township, Schuylkill County; January 10, 1866, Henry H. Dunne, superintendent of a colliery and one of the leading citizens of Pottsville, was murdered on the public road, near his home.

There were other crimes committed by the members of this organization, but those which most aroused the indignation of the public were where prominent men were killed from ambush for no apparent reason than that they held responsible position in a coal company.

October 17, 1868, Alexander Rea was murdered near Centralia, Columbia County, and this crime was the most heinous up to this time. Arrests were made, and a strong chain of circumstantial evidence made out by the Commonwealth against them. One of the accomplices even gave out the facts which caused the apprehension of the others.

Separate trials were granted by the Columbia County Court, and Thomas Donahue was tried first. He was defended by Messrs. Ryon, Freeze, Strouse, Wolverton and Marr. He was acquitted February, 1869. The others, Pat Hester, Peter McHugh, and Pat Tully, were not then placed on trial.

But the next and most important outrage committed by the Mollie Maguires was the murder of William H. Littlehales, superintendent of the Glen Carbon Coal Company, in Cass Township, Schuylkill County.

This crime occurred March 15, 1869, on the main highway leading from his home to the mines. The act was witnessed by several persons, but the assassins escaped.

It was this act which caused Hon. Franklin B. Gowen, President of the Philadelphia and Reading Railway Company, and the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company to send for Mr. Allan Pinkerton, and engage his services in dispersing this murderous crew.

Mr. Pinkerton accepted the employment offered him and assigned to the principal task a young man named James McParlan, a native of Ireland, aged twenty-eight years.

McParlan set out on his mission Monday, October 27, 1873, in the disguise of a vagabond Irishman seeking employment in the mines, and as a criminal who was seeking refuge from crimes committed in the vicinity of Buffalo, N. Y.

He assumed the name of James McKenna, and as such won his way into the confidence of the Mollies, joined their organization and became known as the most desperate Mollie in all the anthracite region.

Many others were murdered after McParlan arrived in the region. He prevented murder when it was possible to do so. He warned those who were to be victims through Mr. Franklin, superintendent of the Philadelphia and Reading Coal Company, with whom he kept in daily contact by clever correspondence.

Up to the hour that James McParlan arrived in Schuylkill County, no information had been obtained concerning the identity of those who murdered Littlehales, nor had it been possible to convict a single Mollie Maguire in any court where they were brought to trial.

Another crime which McParlan was sent to investigate was the murder of Morgan Powell, at Summit Hill, Carbon County, which occurred December 2, 1871. These were enough to occupy the time of a man even as clever as Detective McParlan alias James McKenna.

During the more than two years that McParlan lived among the Mollies he did not learn the murderers of Littlehales but succeeded in bringing to justice many other murderers.

The arrests quickly followed one another when once begun early in 1876. The trials began in Mauch Chunk in March. While McParlan did not testify in the first case he furnished very valuable information, and greatly assisted the prosecution.

Then followed the arrest and trial of others in Pottsville, Mauch Chunk and Bloomsburg with the conviction of many.

McParlan went upon the stand in the trial of James Carrol, Thomas Duffy, James Roarty, Hugh McGehan, and James Boyle, for the murder of B. F. Yost, which occurred at Tamaqua, July 6, 1875. This trial was held at Pottsville, before a full bench of Hon. C. L. Pershing, D. B. Green and T. H. Walker. James Kerrigan, a Mollie, was a witness for the Commonwealth.

The trial of Thomas Munley in June, 1876, in the same court, for the murder of Thomas Sanger and William Uren, brought Mr. F. B. Gowen into the case and the delivery of his wonderful speech, which will ever remain one of the greatest in the history of the criminal courts of our State.

The Mollies were convicted of murder in the first degree and paid the extreme penalty on the gallows.

Many other Mollies were hanged, and on May 21, 1877, Governor J. F. Hartranft issued warrants for the execution of eight of the Mollie Maguires, which brought to an end the bloody record of this nefarious organization.

David Wilmot, of Pennsylvania, retired from Congress after six years of service, March 4, 1851, with his name more generally involved in the political discussion of the country than that of any other of our statesmen. He was born in Bethany, Wayne County, Pennsylvania, January 20, 1814, and died in Towanda, March 16, 1868.

After acquiring an academic education wholly by his own efforts he was admitted to the bar in Wilkes-Barre in 1834. He at once located at Towanda, the county seat of Bradford, where he commenced his career and to which place he brought great and lasting honor.

He took a leading part in the support of Van Buren for the presidency in 1836, and in 1844 he was elected to Congress from the TwelfthTwelfth District, then composed of the Counties of Bradford, Susquehanna and Tioga.

At that time there existed much friction with Mexico over the boundary line, also ominous signs of a determined effort to extend slavery beyond its then existing limits, tariff agitation, trouble with Great Britain in the Oregon region, and other grave questions of national import.

The admission of Texas as a State, March 1, 1845, which was favored by Wilmot and his party, was followed by the war with Mexico a year later.

A bill was introduced August 8, 1846, which authorized the placing of $2,000,000 at the disposal of President Polk for the purpose of negotiating peace with Mexico and the crucial hour in our history had arrived. The prospect of the erection of future slave States out of Mexican territory aroused the anti-slavery sentiment of the North, and among the most pronounced of the dozen or more anti-slavery Democrats was David Wilmot.

At a conference of anti-slavery Democrats was presented what became known as the Wilmot proviso, of which the text was a repetition of the Jefferson proviso to the ordinance of 1787, except that it was framed for the present situation. The following is the full text: “Provided, that as an expressed and fundamental condition to the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States, by virtue of any treaty that may be negotiated between them, and to the use by the Executive of the moneys herein appropriated, neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of such territory, except for crime whereof the party shall be first duly convicted.”

When offered by Wilmot the proviso produced the utmost consternation in the House, as many members had become alarmed at the anti-slavery sentiment in their districts. The House was in committee of the whole, and to the surprise of both sides the proviso was adopted by a vote of 83 to 64, the Democrats of the North supporting it with but three exceptions.

An effort was made in the Senate to remove the proviso, but the last day of the session the gavel fell while the proviso was being debated, the first instance in which a bill was defeated by speaking against time in the Senate.

Wilmot was vehemently assailed by most of the leaders of his party, but the growing anti-slavery sentiment in the North only served to inspire Wilmot in his great battle, and he developed wonderful power as a public disputant.

Wilmot’s contest for re-election in 1848 attracted the attention of the whole Nation, and his triumph did much to strengthen the anti-slavery movement throughout the North.

Opposition to the Wilmot Proviso was finally forced as a cardinal doctrine of the party. When Wilmot came up for re-election in 1850 he was nominated at the Democratic primaries, but the newspapers opposed him and his defeat was regarded as one of the first duties of those who desired the success of the Democracy against him, and it appeared as if a Whig was sure to be elected.

Conservative Democrats suggested that both the Democratic candidates withdraw and select another upon whom all could unite. Wilmot promptly agreed on condition that the one nominated would sustain his anti-slavery faith and be personally acceptable to himself. He was asked to suggest a man, and he named Galusha A. Grow, then a young member of the bar in Susquehanna County, who had studied law with him.

Grow was found by a committee in his mountain retreat and hurried back to make his battle. He was elected and became the Speaker of Congress in the trying days of the Civil War.

The year Wilmot retired from Congress he succeeded Hon. Horace Willston on the bench of the judicial district then composed of Bradford, Susquehanna and Sullivan Counties, and ably served in that capacity until 1857, when he resigned to become a candidate for the governorship against William F. Packer, by whom he was defeated. After his defeat, Wilmot, by appointment of Governor Pollock, resumed his place on the bench and served until 1861.

When Wilmot cast his lot with the Republican Party he was recognized as a leader in the first national convention in 1856. He was tendered the nomination as Vice President on the ticket with Fremont, which was declined. He was chairman of the Committee on Resolutions and to him belongs the honor of drafting the first platform of the Republican Party.

In the campaign of 1860 Wilmot was a delegate at large and was honored by being selected as the temporary chairman of that historic body that nominated Abraham Lincoln.

Wilmot was a candidate for Senator in 1861, but Simon Cameron held the balance of power in the contest, and gave the victory to Edgar Cowan. Later during the same session when Cameron resigned his seat in the Senate to enter the Cabinet of President Lincoln, as Secretary of War, Wilmot was chosen to succeedsucceed him.

At the end of his two years’ term the Democrats had carried the Legislature by one majority and made Charles R. Buckalew, of Columbia County, the Senator. Soon thereafter he was appointed by President Lincoln Judge of the Court of Claims, which position he held until death terminated his remarkable career.

His vigor was much impaired during the last few years of his life by steadily failing health, and he was finally able to give but little of his time to his judicial duties, and March 16, 1868, he quietly passed away in his home at Towanda.

In the beautiful suburbs of the town may be seen Riverside Cemetery, and near the public road stands the simple marble headstone of the grave of David Wilmot, with his name and date of birth and death on the inner surface, and on the outer surface, where it can be seen by every passerby, is inscribed the text of the Wilmot Proviso.

March 17, 1684

The first excise tax in Pennsylvania was imposed by the Assembly of the Province March 17, 1684, in an act entitled “Bill for Aid and Assistance of the Government.”

This act seems to have been prompted by a record in the minutes of the Assembly for February 20, 1684: “The Govr. & Provll Councill have thought fitt. from the Exteriordinary in the Case, to place Patrick Robinson as administrator to Benj. Acrods Estate, and to have a recourse to this board from time to time.

“Wheras, the Verdict of the Coroner’s Jury was, that Benj. Acrod killed himselfe with drinke, wch might give the Province a pretence to his Estate therin. The Propor & Govr. Relinquished all his Claime thereunto in Council, and desired ye Council to take Care that some person be appoynted to take Care of ye Estate of ye sd Acrod, for ye paymt of his debts, and the remaineder to be disposed of according to Law, &c.”

At the session held on March 26 a bill was read that it should be left to the Governor and Provincial Council to discuss with Indians matters concerning the use of rum among them. Another bill was read which prohibited bargains being made “when People are in Drinke.” This bill was passed.

The objectionable features of the first excise bill passed by the Assembly were soon after repealed and not again renewed until the year 1738, when the Provincial Assembly, August 14, heard a bill “sent by the House of Representatives, entitled an Act for laying an Excise on Wine, Rum, Brandy and other Spirits.” This bill was passed without amendments and signed by Lieutenant Governor George Thomas, August 25, 1738.

This bill proved to be very unpopular, and it remained in force only a few months.

In 1744 this subject was again revived when at the session of the Provincial Council held May 25 Lieutenant Governor Thomas in a message sent to him by the Assembly was advised among other things that “We are also of the Opinion that it will be for the Interests of Our Constituents to make further Provision concerning the Excise Act and we have a bill before us to this Purpose; and we hope these Bills, and such others as shall be truly useful to the Province, when offered, will meet with the Governor’s assent. And we, on our Part, shall then Cheerfully make Provision for his Support for the Current Year, equal to any granted for the like Time to either of his immediate Predecessors.”

This bill proposed an excise tax as a means of providing money without resorting to a general tax, not only to be used to purchase arms and ammunition for defense, but as well to answer such demands as might be made upon the inhabitants of the Province by his Majesty for distressing the public enemy in America. This bill, like the former ones, was not long in operation.

March 31, 1764, a bill was passed by the Assembly and Council and signed by Lieutenant Governor John Penn, which tended to suppress “Idleness, Drunkenness, & other Debaucheries, within this Government.”

The attention of the Assembly was once more called to the excise as a productive source of revenue on February 24, 1772, when Lieutenant Governor Richard Penn laid before the Council a bill sent to him by the Assembly, entitled “An Act for the support of the Government of this Province making the Excise on Wine, Rum, Brandy, and other spirits more equal, and preventing Frauds in the Collecting and paying the said Excise.”

That a considerable portion of the money expended in the Provincial Government was raised by excise is evidenced from a report made by Governor John Penn June 26, 1775, which was an account of the several amounts of the excise tax collected for the years 1771, 72, 73 and 74, the total amount of which, after deducting the commissions to the Treasurer and collectors exceeded £28,000. Together with this report was another indorsed “State of the Bills of Credit struck on the Excise for several years, laid before the Governor with the bill for the support of Government & paymt of public debts.”

In the Act of 1722 a duty was levied on domestic and foreign spirits. At first, however, as to home-distilled spirits it was not executed, and, indeed, hardly any steps were taken for the purpose particularly in the older counties. But, during the Revolutionary War, the necessities of the State and a temporary unpopularity of distillation, owing to the immense amount of grain consumed, when the troops so much needed it as a food, rendered the collection of duties both necessary and practicable, and a considerable revenue was thereby obtained. Toward the end of the war the act was repealed.

In 1780 Congress resolved that an allowance of an additional sum should be made to the army, to compensate the troops for the depreciation in their pay. This was distributed among the several States for discharge. Pennsylvania made several appropriations for the purpose, but the revenues so applied turned out to be unproductive.

The depreciation fund was always favorably regarded, and upon an application of officers of the Pennsylvania Line, another effort was made, the revenue arising from the excise remaining uncollected was appropriated to this fund, and vigorous measures were taken for its collection.

Great changes, however, had taken place in the disposition of the people since the first imposition of these duties. The neighboring States were free from the burden, and in New Jersey, where a law had been passed for the purpose, its execution had been entirely prevented by a powerful combination. The Pennsylvania law, therefore, met with great opposition, especially west of the Allegheny Mountains and there is no evidence that the excise was ever paid in that section.

The excise law of Pennsylvania, after remaining for years a dead letter, was repealed, and the people were to submit to a similar law passed by the Congress of the new Federal Government March 3, 1791. This laid an excise of fourpence per gallon on all distilled spirits.

The members of Congress from Western Pennsylvania, Smilie, of Fayette, and Findley, of Westmoreland, stoutly opposed the passage of the law, and on their return among their constituents loudly and openly disapproved of it. Albert Gallatin, then residing in Fayette County, also opposed the law by all constitutional methods.

The majority of the people in the western counties of the State were of Scotch-Irish descent. They had heard of the exaction and oppression in the Old Country under the excise laws—that houses were entered by excise officers, the most private apartments examined, and confiscation and imprisonment followed if the smallest quantity of whisky was discovered not marked with the official brand. They also remembered the effective resistance to the Stamp Act, that those who forced the repeal of the odious law were the real factors in bringing about the independence of America. Holding these opinions, it is not to be wondered at that the more hot-headed resorted to threats of violence and precipitated the riotous proceedings known in Pennsylvania history as the Whisky Insurrection.