USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Newton > History of the early settlement of Newton, county of Middlesex, Massachusetts, from 1639-1800. With a genealogical register of its inhabitants, prior to 1800 > Part 1
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org.
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42
NYPL RESEARCH LIBRARIES 3 3433 08183219 2
DAOZ
Сеогде Валсебя
ICH Ventix acks
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from Microsoft Corporation
http://www.archive.org/details/historyofearlyse00jack
Re
1.Q.M
Teppan & Bradford's Lith.
Joseph Ward
On the 10 th of April 1777. The Continental Congress appointed Joseph Ward Esq. of Massachusetts "Commissary General of Musters with the rank of Colonel". ( See Appendix. )
A
HISTORY
OF
THE EARLY SETTLEMENT
OF
NEWTON,
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, MASSACHUSETTS; ;
FROM 1639 TO 1800.
WITH A
Genealogical Register of its Jny. PRIOR TO 1800.
BY FRANCIS JACKSON, (OF BOSTON,) A NATIVE OF NEWTON.
· BOSTON: PRINTED BY STACY AND RICHARDSON. 1854.
-
perding: to Act of Congress, in the year 1854, -
BY FRANCIS JACKSON, the District Court of the District of Massachusetts.
-
LENOX LIBRAR
NEWY
RAP. (Bdg. Ma) 6/89/02
·
INTRODUCTION.
THE object of this humble effort is to seek and save the earliest and most important historical facts of the Town, especially those relating to its first settlement, in 1639, - the organization of its first church, in 1664, - its separation from Cambridge, and organization as an independent Town, in 1679, -the establishment of its first public school, about 1700, - and all that could be discovered relating to the pioneers of the settlement, with some account of the most interesting transactions of their descendants.
To which is added, a GENEALOGICAL REGISTER, con- taining the names of all persons, as far as known, who were inhabitants of the place prior to the year 1800, with such brief facts concerning them as could be gleaned from the Town and County records, and else- where.
A PLAN OF THE TOWN is also added, showing the approximate location of the homesteads of the early settlers, the dwelling houses they built, and the roads they laid open, from 1639 to 1700, and onward to 1750.
This work does not profess to notice facts, which have transpired since the year 1800 ; in a few instances, how- ever, transactions of a later date have been mentioned.
iv
INTRODUCTION.
Much labor and research has been bestowed upon the work, and yet many deficiencies exist. Some parents neglected to have the births of their children recorded ; many had them partially done. Large numbers of such omissions have been supplied from the records of neigh- boring towns, and from various other sources.
I claim only a diligent and persevering endeavor to collect facts, and multiply copies of them, for safe keep- ing. The book is now published, in the hope that my own leisure, or that of others, may hereafter correct its inaccuracies, and supply its defects.
To my brother, WILLIAM JACKSON, Esq., of Newton, my grateful acknowledgments are due, for the interest he has manifested in the work, and the valuable assist- ance he has rendered.
To the inhabitants of Newton, and to those persons, wherever they are, whose birth place, or that of their forefathers, was in Newton, the work is respectfully in- scribed.
HISTORY OF NEWTON.
THE settlement of Newtown (Cambridge) began in 1631. Its town records were commenced in November, 1632, and the proprietors' records in 1635.
The origin of the name, "Newtown," or rather its appli- cation to the town, grew out of the facts and circumstances attending its first settlement.
Charlestown, Boston, Dorchester, Watertown, Roxbury, and other towns, had become settled, when for greater security from the Indians, it was deemed necessary, for the safety of the Colony, to have one fortified town. For this purpose, the Governor, Deputy Governor and Assistants, examined several places, and finally decided to build the new-town on the north side of Charles river, at the place now occupied by Harvard College, with the intention, or expectation, on the part of many, that it was to be the cap- itol of the Colony, and fortified at the common expense.
In 1631, a thatched house in Boston took fire from the chimney, and was burnt down; whereat, Deputy Governor Dudley observed, that "in our new-town, intended to be built this Summer, we have ordered, that no man there shall build his chimney with wood, or cover his house with thatch."
In July, 1631, "The Court ordered that there be levied out of the several plantations, £30, for making the Creek from Charles river to the New Town."
1*
6
EARLY HISTORY OF NEWTON.
In February, 1632, "The Court ordered a rate of £60 to be levied out of the several plantations, towards making a palisado about the New Town."* Thus it was spoken, written, and recorded; the name grew with the project. The fortification was actually made, and the fosse was dug around the New-Town, enclosing upwards of a thousand acres, "paled in with one general fence, which was about one and a half miles in length; it is one of the neatest and best compacted towns in New England, having many fair structures, with many handsome contrived streets; the in- habitants, most of them, are very rich. Half a mile west- ward of the Town, is a great pond, (Fresh pond,) which is divided between Newtown and Watertown, on the north side of Charles river." t
At the General Court, May, 1634, those of Newtown complained of straitness for want of land, especially of meadow land, and desired leave of the Court to look out either for enlargement or removal.
They soon obtained very large grants of land, north and south, a description of which will be hereinafter stated. On the south side of Charles river, they obtained nearly all of what is now Brighton and Newton. This tract was first called, " The south side of Charles River," and some- times " Nonantum, (the Indian name,) and after religious meetings were regularly held on the south side of the river, about 1654, it was called "Cambridge Village," until 1679.
When Harvard College was established, in 1638, the General Court "ordered that Newtown should henceforward be called Cambridge,"" in compliment to the place where so
* The project of a fortified town seems not to have entered the minds of the first settlers, until sometime after their arrival here. But for this after-thought, Watertown and Charlestown would probably have remained in juxtaposition, for at least two centuries.
t Wood's description, made in the Summer of 1633.
7
NAME OF THE TOWN.
many of the civil and clerical fathers of New England had been educated." *
In 1662, a parish line was established by the Court, between Cambridge and Cambridge Village, about four miles from Cambridge meeting-house.
On the 27th of August, 1679, Cambridge Village was set off from Cambridge, and organized as an independent town, "by virtue of an order of the General Court." After which it was more often called "New Cambridge," until 1691. This name was not given by the Court, nor is there any vote in relation to it, upon the Town or Court records. It appears to have been assumed by the leading inhabitants, and generally acquiesced in by the public. Capt. Thomas Prentice, John Ward, Ebenezer Stone, and other leading men, wrote the name New Cambridge in their deeds and other papers, dated between 1679 and 1691. John Ward was chosen Deputy to the General Court, from New Cam- bridge, in 1689, and so entered on the Court records. This change of name from "Cambridge Village" to "New Cambridge," by the public, was gradual, and never became universal; it produced some confusion, and the inhabitants petitioned the Court, more than once, to give the town a name.
On the 8th December, 1691, the General Court passed the following order. "In answer to the petition of the inhabitants of Cambridge Village, sometime called New Cambridge, lying on the south side of Charles river, being granted to be a township, praying that a name may be given unto the said town, - It is ordered, that it be henceforth called 'New Town,'" very naturally and properly restor- ing the ancient name, which was discontinued by the Court in 1638, for the reason already stated.
* James Savage, Esq.
8
EARLY HISTORY OF NEWTON.
The name stands upon the Court records in two words, one syllable each, precisely as it does upon the Court records of 1631. This form of writing it was gradually altered to one word with two syllables. All the town clerks of Newtown, followed the Court's order in the spelling of the name, until 1766, when Judge Fuller was town clerk ; he always spelt it on the Town records, " Newton." There was no vote-usage in the town and by the public had been seventy-five years preparing the way for him to assume the responsibility of making the contraction, by omitting the " w" from the last syllable.
FIRST SETTLEMENT.
The first settlers of Cambridge Village did not come into the place in a body, as was the case in the first settlement of many of our New England towns, but they came in one after another, from England, and from the neighboring towns so gradually, that from the first permanent settler, in 1639, to its separation from Cambridge, in 1679, a period of forty years, only forty-two freemen came into the village as permanent settlers. During those years, thirty of their sons had arrived at, or past the age of twenty-one years ; five of those settlers had deceased, and two removed. So that at the erection of the village into an independent town, in 1679, the number of freemen was about sixty-five.
John Jackson bought of Miles Ives, of Watertown, a dwelling house and eighteen acres of land. This lot was very near the present dividing line between Newton and Brighton, twenty-four rods wide upon Charles river, and extending southerly one hundred and twenty rods. Same year, Samuel Holly owned a like lot and dwelling house, adjoining Jackson's estate, and Randolph Bush owned a like lot and house, adjoining Samuel Holly's estate, and Wil-
9
FIRST SETTLERS.
liam Redson or Redsyn owned four acres and a dwelling house, adjoining Bush's estate, and William Clements owned six acres and a dwelling house, adjoining John Jackson's, west, and Thomas Mayhew owned a dwelling house near the spot where Gen. Michael Jackson's house stood. These six dwelling houses were in the village in 1639, and perhaps earlier. Samuel Holly was in Cam- bridge in 1636, and died in 1643, but left no descendants in the town. We cannot tell who occupied the houses of Mayhew, Clements, Bush and Redson ; they were transient dwellers there, and were soon gone. Edward Jackson bought all these houses, and the lands appurtenant, before 1648, and all, except Mayhew's, were in what is now Brighton.
John Jackson's purchase is recorded upon the proprie- tors' records, in 1639. His son John's grave stone, still standing, records his death, October 17, 1675, aged 36, which makes his birth the same year of his father's pur- chase. He had five sons and ten daughters, and at the time of his decease, about fifty grand-children. We there- fore begin our list of settlers with John Jackson, senior.
Date of Settle't.
Age at Set.
Names.
Where From.
Time of Death.
Age.
1639
39
1. Dea. John Jackson,
London,
1675
75
1639
2. Samuel Holly,
1643
1640
30
3. Dea. Samuel Hyde,
London, 66
1689
79
1643
42
4. Edward Jackson,
1681
794
1644
33
5. John Fuller,
England,
1698
87
1647
21
6. Jonathan Hyde,
London,
1711
85
1647
7. Richard Park,
Cambridge, Mass.
1665
1649
29
8. Capt. Thomas Prentice,
England,
1710
89
1650
27
9. John Ward,
Sudbury,
1708
82
1650
10. Thomas Hammond,
Hingham,
1675
1650
35
11. John Parker,
1686
71
1650
12. Vincent Druce,
1678
1650
21
13. James Prentice,
England,
1710
81
1650
14. Thomas Prentice, 2d,
1654
15. Thomas Wiswall,
Dorchester,
1683
10
EARLY HISTORY OF NEWTON.
Date of Settle't.
Age at Set.
Names.
Where From.
Time of Death.
Age.
1658
53
16. John Kenrick,
Boston,
1686
81
1661
23
17. Isaac Williams,
Roxbury,
1708
69
1662
34
18. Abraham Williams,
Watertown,
1712
84
1664
28
19. James Trowbridge,
Dorchester,
1717
81
1664
28
20. John Eliot, Jr.
Roxbury,
1668
33
1664
34
21. John Spring,
Watertown,
1717
87
1666
22. Gregory Cook,
1691
1667
23. Humphrey Osland,
1720
1669
24. Daniel Bacon,
Bridgewater,
1691
1670
27
25. Thomas Greenwood,
1693
50
1672
26 26. Samuel Trusedale,
Boston,
1695
49
1673
27. Joseph Bartlett,
Cambridge, (?)
1702
Hingham,
1712
64
1674 1674
29. Joseph Miller,
Charlestown,
1697
1674
30. Henry Seger.
Watertown,
1732
83
1675
30
32. John Mason,
66
1730
85
1678
33. Isaac Beach,
66
1736
90
31
34. Stephen Cook,
Charlestown, (?)
1710
36. N. McDaniel, (Scotsm'n) Roxbury,
1694
1678
37. John Alexander,
1796
1678
38. David Mead,
Waltham.
1678
39. John Parker, (South,)
Watertown, Roxbury.
1678
56
27
41. P. Stanchet, (or Hanchet)
42. William Robinson.
1680
58 43. Nathaniel Wilson,
1692
70
1680
44. Daniel Macoy,
66
Brookline,
1695
54
1682 1686
25
47. John Knapp,
Watertown,
1733
72
1686
24
48. Ebenezer Stone,
1754
92
1686 1687 1688
30
51. John Staples,
1740
82
1688
30 52. Nathaniel Healy,
Cambridge, 66
1734
76
1689
53. Thomas Chamberlain,
38 54. Joseph Bush,
1723
1692
56. Abraham Chamberlain,
Brookline.
1693
57. Nathaniel Parker,
Dedham.
58. William Tucker,
Boston.
59. John Foot.
60. Andrew Hall,
1756
1695
61. William Brown.
1695
62. Jonathan Green,
1696
63. Sebrean Carter.
Malden,
1736
91
1678 1678 1678
40. Simon Ong,
1678 1678 1679
1681
40 45. John Clark, 46. John Mirick,
Charlestown, (?)
1706
49. Nathaniel Crane.
50. William Thomas,
1697
1692 1692
55. Ephraim Wheeler.
1694 1694 1695
26
28. Nehemiah Hobart,
1675
26
31. John Woodward,
1738
35. Daniel Ray,
11
FIRST SETTLERS.
Date of Settle't.
Age at Set.
Names.
Where From.
Time of Death.
Age.
1696
64. John Smith,
1697
65 Ebenezer Littlefield,
Cambridge, (?) Dedham, Watertown.
1728
1698
24
66. John Holland,
1700
67. Jacob Chamberlain, 68. John Grimes.
1700
69. Samuel Paris.
1700
40
70. Jonathan Coolidge,
Watertown.
1700
24
171. Nathaniel Longley,
1732
56
1771
1700
The foregoing are all the names of the male settlers in the town, found upon the records, previous to the year 1700, where they came from, the time of their settlement here, their ages at that time, the time of their decease, and their several ages at that time, as far as known.
EARLY GRANTS AND BOUNDARIES.
The first considerable accession to the New Town, (Cambridge,) appears to have been in August, 1632, when the Braintree company, which had begun to settle at Mount Wallaston, by order of the Court removed to the New Town. These were Mr. Hooker's company ; their names, forty-seven in number, are entered in the proprietors' records, in 1632. It appears evident that these settlers entertained strong hopes that the New Town would be the metropolis of the Colony; that the canal from Charles river to the town, would give commercial facility ; the forti- fication, safety from enemies ; and the beauty and regularity of its streets, would be strong inducements for emigrants to settle within its walls. But, however sanguine they may have been, of securing these advantages, it soon became more and more apparent, that however beautiful their new town may have been in theory, in practice, their canal and palisado were worthless. The shoal waters of the river
12
EARLY HISTORY OF NEWTON.
and the canal were no match for the deep water and easy access of Boston harbor.
In May, 1634, they complained to the Court of straitness for want of land, and desired leave to look out either for enlargement or removal, which was granted; whereupon they sent men to examine Ipswich, the Merrimack and the Connecticut rivers. The report of their messengers, who went to examine Connecticut, was very flattering, and pro- duced a strong influence among them ; and at the session of the Court, in September, they asked leave to remove to Connecticut. This question of their removal was a very exciting one, and was debated by the Court many days. On taking the vote, it appeared that the Assistants were opposed to their removal, and the Deputies were in favor of it. Upon this grew a great difference between the Gover- nor and Assistants, and the Deputies. "So when they could proceed no further, the whole Court agreed to keep a day of humiliation in all the congregations," and Mr. Cotton, at the desire of the Court, preached a sermon that had great influence in settling the question. The public senti- ment, at that time, appeared to be against their removal. Boston and Watertown had offered them enlargement, and the congregation of Newtown accepted these offers, and concluded not to remove.
This enlargement of lands given by Boston and Water- town, to quiet Newtown, were what is now Brookline, Brighton and Newton, excepting only the previous special grants to individuals.
At the second Court of Assistants, September 7th, 1630, "The Court ordered that the town upon Charles river be called Watertown." This was but about two months after their arrival in New England. The place was then an un- explored wilderness, and they claimed a large tract on the south side of Charles river, all of which they gave up to
13
EARLY GRANTS.
Newtown, except a strip two hundred rods long and sixty rods wide, enough to protect their fishing privilege, after- wards called the Wear lands. "All the rest of the ground on that side of the river, the Court ordered, was to belong to Newtown." This grant, " all the rest," was the earliest made to Newtown on the south side of the river.
Boston early obtained a grant of Muddy river, (Brook- line,), where the allotters were authorized " to take a view, and bound out what may be sufficient there." In Boston, the lands assigned within the peninsula were of limited extent ; but at Muddy river, and Mount Wallaston, four hundred acres were sometimes given to a single individual. William Hibbins's allotment at Muddy river, was four hundred and ninety-five acres, bounding south-west upon Dedham.
How much Watertown owned on the one side, and Boston on the other, no one can now tell ; probably neither of them ever knew, nor did the Court itself know, as it appears. from its own record, in the case of their special grant to Simon Bradstreet, of five hundred acres of land, on the south side of Charles river, with the condition that "he was to take no part of it within a mile of Watertown Wear, in case the bounds of Watertown shall extend so far on that side the river !" *
* COLONY RECORDS. - "November, 1646. Whereas, the Court hath formerly granted to Deputy Governor Dudley, two hundred and seventy-four acres land, Robert Keayne four hundred, Capt. Perkins four hundred, Richard Parker and John Johnson four hundred and thirty-six, Capt. Jennison and Richard Brown, Lieut. Hewes, Elder Heath, Jno. Johnson, Wm. Parks, and divers others, several parcels of land, granted also by the General Court, between the lands of Dedham and Watertown, and did also appoint surveyors to lay the same out; now in this regard so many are intrusted and few look after it, as also for the want of an orderly way , of proceeding it hath been neglected these many years, to the prejudice of many. It is therefore ordered, that so many of the grantees as shall meet at the house of Richard Fairbanks, in Boston, on December 25th, 1646, and there put in their names with the quantity of lands granted to them, and shall cast lots," &c., &c.
This Note is inserted merely to show the vagueness of many early land grants, and the confusion which often and necessarily followed.
2
14
EARLY HISTORY OF NEWTON.
The extreme vagueness of these two grants, -" all the rest" on the one hand, and " what may be sufficient " on the other, - we may be sure, covered all that is now Brookline, Brighton, and Newton, except the special grants that had been previously made to individuals, and what belonged to the Indians.
However weak these india-rubber grants may have been, in the hands of Watertown and Boston, they became strong enough when transferred to Newtown - as the public senti- ment appeared to be quite ready to acquiesce in very liberal grants to quiet Newtown, as she had set her heart upon being the metropolis of the Colony, and then of going to Connecticut, - two severe disappointments, which were assuaged by large grants of land, conferred upon her in the most liberal manner. On the south, she obtained what is now Brookline, Brighton, and Newton; and on the north and north-west, what is now West Cambridge, Lexington, Billerica, part of Bedford, and part of Tewks- bury, and extending to the Merrimack river. She began the smallest township in the Colony, and soon became the largest. ·
It should be stated, however, that these donations of land, from Boston and Watertown, to Newtown, were made upon the condition that Mr. Hooker's company should not re- move, as appears upon the records of the Court, in Septem- ber, 1634. - "It is ordered, that the ground about Muddy river, belonging to Boston, and used by the inhabitants thereof, shall hereafter belong to Newtown - the wood and timber thereof growing, and to be growing, to be reserved to the inhabitants of Boston ; Provided, and it is the mean- ing of this Court, that if Mr. Hooker, and the congregation now settled here, shall remove hence, that the aforesaid meadow ground shall return to Watertown, and the ground at Muddy river to Boston."
15
EARLY GRANTS AND BOUNDARIES.
After the question was settled, about the enlargement of Newtown, the Court appointed a committee, consisting of Wm. Colbron, John Johnson, and Abraham Palmer, to determine the bounds between Newtown and Watertown; and Ensign Jennison to set out the bounds between New- town and Roxbury, about Muddy river.
April, 1635. "It is agreed by us whose names are under- written, that the bounds between Watertown and Newtown shall stand as they are already, from Charles river to the great Fresh pond, and from the tree marked by Watertown and Newtown, on the north-east side of the pond, and over the pond to a white poplar tree, on the north-west side of the pond, and from the tree, up into the country, north-west by west, upon a straight line by a meridian compass; and further, that Watertown shall have one hundred rods in length above the Wear, and one hundred rods beneath the Wear, in length, and three score rods in breadth, from the river on the south side thereof, and all the rest of the ground on that side of the river, to lye to Newtown.
WM. COLBRON, JOHN JOHNSON, ABRAHAM PALMER."
April, 1635. "The line between Roxbury and Newtown is laid out to run south-west from Muddy river, near that place called ' Nowell's bridge,' a tree marked on four sides, and from the mouth of the river to that place; the south side is for Roxbury, and the north for Newtown.
WM. JENNISON."
This line was intended to carry out the gift of Boston to Newtown, by which the whole of Muddy river, more or less, became a part of Newtown, and so remained nearly two · years. It was nearly, if not exactly, the same line as that which now divides Roxbury from Brookline ; its length is not stated in Jennison's report, but it is about six miles.
16
EARLY HISTORY OF NEWTON.
Mr. Hooker's company renewed their request to remove to Connecticut, "the strong bent of their spirits was to remove thither." The General Court finally gave them leave to remove where they pleased, "on condition that they should continue under the jurisdiction of Massachu- setts." "Early in the Summer of 1636, Mr. Hooker, Mr. Stone, and about one hundred men, women and children, composing the whole of Mr. Hooker's congregation, left Newtown, and travelled upwards of one hundred miles, through a trackless wilderness, to Connecticut, and drove one hundred and sixty cattle, horses, and swine, over hills, swamps, and rivers, having no guide but their compass. They arrived safe, and laid the foundation of Hartford."
Rev. Mr. Hooker's company were the first proprietors of Newtown (Cambridge). "At their departure, many of them sold out their buildings and lands in Newtown, to those of Rev. Mr. Shepard and his company, who thus en- joyed the advantage which fell to the lot of but few of the early colonists, of entering a settlement already cultivated, and furnished with comfortable accommodations."
The condition upon which Boston gave Muddy river to Newtown having been broken by the removal of Mr. Hooker's company, that territory reverted to Boston, and the Court appointed a committee to settle the boundaries between Newtown and Muddy river, who, in April, 1636, made the following report :-
"We, whose names are underwritten, being appointed by the Court to set out the bounds of the New Town upon Charles river, do agree, that the bounds of the Town shall run from the marked tree, by Charles river, on the north west side of the Roxbury bounds, one and a half miles north-east, and from thence three miles north-west, and so from thence five miles south-west; and on the south-west side of Charles river, from the south-east side of Roxbury
17
BOUNDARIES.
bounds, to run four miles on a south-west line, reserving the proprieties to several persons, granted by special order of the Court.
WM. SPENCER, NICHOLAS DANFORTH, WM. JENNISON."
This description is cloudy, with some errors in the points of compass, which may have been made in copying the report. It differs from the present bounds of Brookline, but was intended to restore Muddy river to Boston, or as much of it as the committee judged expedient.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.