Genealogical notes of Barnstable families - citizen hylbom blog

226 GENEALOGICAL NOTES OF BAKN8TABLE FAMILIES.
the Revolution they were always in the majority in Barnstable,
and the members of this party were the men who were relied on
to furnish men and money, tlie sinews of war.
The tories were few in numbers in Barnstable. They were
also divided into two parties, the out-spoken and decided, of
whom David Parker,'Esq., and Mr. Otis Loring were the leading
men. The more moderate were such men as Mr. Cornelius
Crocker and his son Josiah. Among the tories were men of
wealth, of respectability, and influence. They were citizens, and
so long as they did not give aid or comfort to the enemies of the
country, and contributed their share to the public expenses, they
were entitled to the protection of the laws, though their political
opinions might not have been in accordance with the views of a
majority of the people. Such protection the moderate among the
whigs were willing to concede ; but for making this concession,
some of them were persecuted with more bitterness of feeling
then were the open and avowed tories. Edward Bacon, Esq.,
who had been chosen a representative to the General Court, was
denounced as a tory, and an enemy to his country. A remonstrance
embodying these charges was presented to the Legislature
and published in a newspaper at Watertown, July 8, 1776, and in
consequence the seat of Mr. Bacon was declared vacant. He
returned home. A town meeting was duly notified and held, and
the town meeting resolved, with great unanimity, that the charges
preferred against him were false and slanderous.
Capt. Samuel Crocker, to whom unintentional injustice was
done in the notice of the cutting down of the liberty pole in
Barnstable, was also persecuted with a malignity of feeling that is
not creditable to those who took an active part therein. He was
one of the most intelligent and active men of the whig party,
conservative and tolerant in his opinions. His position was unfortunate
; but it was not one of his own seeking or making, and
for which he was in no way responsible. His father and brothers
were classed among the loyalists, whether rightfully or wrongfully,
to him belonged neither the censure or the praise. He was
responsible for his own acts, not for those of others. Natural
affection would dictate to him that he ought not to deal harshly
with those who were bound to him by the ties of consanguinity.
His position entitled him to sympathy ; but there were those who
irreverantly said that he should forsake "father and mother and
wife and children," for the cause of his country. His brother,
Cornelius, was not a decided politician, though he generally acted
with the whig party, and therefore could not be classed among the
tories. He did not possess the commanding talents of his brother
Samuel, or the learning of his brother Josiah, but in his own way,
he denounced, with perhaps too much severity, the excesses of the
day. Such a course exposes a man to the censure of both parties.