Page:1898 NB Magazine.djvu/335
This action drew forth the following vigorous remonstrance on the part of that gentleman.
Maugerville, 9th December, 1782.
Sir:—I'm not a little surprised at a piece of your conduct that has lately come to my knowledge, which is your trimming my masts, &c, upon the stream of Rushaganes and its vicinity. I had a special order from Government to cut masts, yards, &c. for His Majesty's use wherever I could find them at the time I cut these sticks, which constitutes as good a right in them as could be given. If (by some kind of means) after they were cut, the people you're concerned with got a grant of the lands on which they were, it could not be supposed to extend to a prior right any other person had derived from as good authority. But in the meantime I shall not take the trouble to say any more on the subject than to desire you will from this time desist from meddling with any sticks that have been cut for me and also relinquish what you have already meddled with. I wish to live peaceably, but I have lately experienced so many instances of your most barefaced and wanton oppression to my prejudice, that there's no longer a doubt with me what course I must be under the disagreeable necessity to take that I may obtain redress and do justice to myself and Family.
I shall expect your immediate answer for my future government and am, Sir,
Your Humble Servant,
Wm. Davidson.
Mr. Samuel Peabody.
It is evident from the correspondence of Hayes and Peabody that the people on the St. John river took a lively interest in the quarrel between the rival lumbering concerns. Their sympathies were divided, and strong party feeling prevailed. As a consequence extravagent rumors often filled the air with regard to the actions and intentions of either party. Peabody and Hayes asserted that Mr. Davidson's men cut down trees specially reserved and marked with the "Broad Arrow" by the King's purveyor, also that "injudicious people" were employed to cut sticks all over the country, many of which were destroyed by felling them improperly and others left to rot in the forest. Colonel Francklin very reasonably suggested that these charges should be properly formulated and supported by affidavits before being presented to the authorities, and it appears that when it came to the point there was