USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Groton > Address delivered at Groton, Massachusetts, July 12, 1905, by request of the citizens, on the celebration of the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of its settlement > Part 2
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 (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8
Less than one generation passed between the time when the Charter of Charles I. was given to the Colony of Massa- chusetts Bay and the date when the grant of Groton Planta- tion was made by the General Court. The Charter was given on March 4, 1628-9, and the grant of the town was made in May, 1655, -the interval being a little more than twenty-six years. At that period scarcely anything was known about the geography of the region, and the Charter gave to the . Governor and other representatives of the Massachusetts Company, on certain conditions, all the territory lying between an easterly and westerly line running three miles north of any part of the Merrimack River and extending from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific, and a similar parallel line running three miles south of any part of the Charles River. Without at- tempting to trace in detail, from the time of the Cabots to the days of the Charter, the continuity of the English title to this transcontinental strip of territory, it is enough to know that the precedents and usages of that period gave to Great
19
Britain, in theory at least, undisputed sway over the region, and forged every link in the chain of authority and sover- eignty.
At the time of the Charter it was incorrectly supposed that America was a narrow strip of land, - perhaps an arm of the continent of Asia, -and that the distance across from ocean to ocean was comparatively short. It was then known that the Isthmus of Darien was narrow, and it was therefore thought that the whole continent also was narrow. New England was a region about which little was known beyond slight examinations made from the coast line. The rivers were unexplored, and all knowledge concerning them was confined to the neighborhood of the places where they emptied into the sea. The early navigators thought that the general course of the Merrimack was easterly and westerly, as it runs in that direction near the mouth; and their error was perpetuated inferentially by the words of the Charter. By later explorations this strip of territory has since been lengthened out into a belt three thousand miles long, and stretches across the whole width of the continent. The cities of Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, Detroit, and Mil- waukee all lie within this zone, on territory that once belonged to the Massachusetts Company, according to the Charter granted by King Charles.
The general course of the Merrimack, as well as its source, soon became known to the early settlers on the coast. The northern boundary of the original grant to the Colony of Massachusetts Bay was established under a misapprehension; and this ignorance of the topography of the country on the part of the English authorities afterward gave rise to consid- erable controversy between the adjoining Provinces of Massa- chusetts and New Hampshire. So long as the territory in question remained unsettled, the dispute was a matter of lit- tle practical importance; but after a while it assumed grave proportions and led to much confusion. Grants made by one Province clashed with those made by the other; and there was no ready tribunal to decide the claims of the two parties. Towns were chartered by Massachusetts in territory claimed
---
----
20
by New Hampshire; and this action was the cause of bitter feeling and provoking legislation. Massachusetts contended for the tract of land " nominated in the bond," which would. carry the jurisdictional line fifty miles northward, into the very heart of New Hampshire; and on the other hand, that. Province strenuously opposed this view of the case, and. . claimed that the line should run, east and west, three miles. north of the mouth of the Merrimack River. In order to set- tle these conflicting claims, a Royal Commission was ap- pointed to consider the subject and establish the contested line. The Commissioners were selected from the councillors of the Provinces of New York, New Jersey, Nova Scotia, and Rhode Island,-men supposed to be free from any local prejudices in the matter, and impartial in their feelings; and without doubt they were such. The board, as appointed un- der the Great Seal, consisted of nineteen members, although only seven served in their capacity as Commissioners. They met at New Hampton, New Hampshire, on August 1, 1737; and for mutual convenience the Legislative Assemblies of the two Provinces met in the same neighborhood, -the Assem- bly of New Hampshire at Hampton Falls, and that of Massa- chusetts at Salisbury, places only five miles apart. This was done in order that the claims of each side might be con- sidered with greater dispatch than they otherwise would re- ceive. The General Court of Massachusetts met at Salisbury, ยท in the First Parish Meeting-house, on August 10, 1737, and .continued to hold its sessions in that town until October 29. inclusive, though with several adjournments, of which one was for thirty-five days. The printed journal of the House of Representatives, during this period, gives the proceedings of that body, which contain much with regard to the contro- versy besides the ordinary business of legislation. Many years previously the two Provinces had been united so far as to have the same governor,-at this time Jonathan Belcher, -but each Province had its own legislative body and code of laws.
The Commissioners heard both sides of the question, and agreed upon an award in alternative, leaving to the king the
---
21
interpretation of the characters given respectively by Charles I. and William and Mary. Under one interpretation the de- cision was in favor of a Mssachusetts, and under the other in favor of New Hampshire; and at the same time each party was allowed six weeks to file objections. Neither side, how- ever, was satisfied with the indirect decision; and the whole matter was then taken to the king in council. Massachusetts claimed that the Merrimack River began at the confluence of the Winnepesaukee and the Pemigewasset Rivers, and that the northern boundary of the Province should run, east and west, three miles north of this point. On the other hand, New Hampshire claimed that the intention of the Charter was to establish a northern boundary on a line, run- ning east and west, three miles north of the mouth of the Merrimack River. In this controversy Massachusetts seems to have based her claim on the letter of the contract, while New Hampshire based hers on the spirit of the contract.
The strongest argument in favor of Massachusetts is the fact that she had always considered the disputed territory as belonging to her jurisdiction; and before this period she had chartered twenty-four towns lying within the limits of this tract. These several settlements all looked to her for pro- tection, and naturally sympathized with her during the con- troversy. As just stated, neither party was satisfied with the verdict of the Royal Commissioners, and both sides appealed from their judgment. The matter was then taken to England for a decision, which was given by the king, on March 4, 1739-40. His judgment was final, and in favor of New Hampshire. It gave to that Province not only all the terri- tory in dispute, but a strip of land fourteen miles in width lying along her southern border, - mostly west of the Mer- rimack, -which she had never claimed. This strip was the tract of land between the line running east and west three miles north of the southernmost trend of the river, and a simi; lar line three miles north of its mouth. By this decision many townships were taken from Massachusetts and given to New Hampshire. The settlement of this disputed question was undoubtedly a great public benefit, but at the time it
22
caused a good deal of hard feeling. The new line was estab- lished by surveyors officially in the spring of 1741.
In regard to the divisional line between the two Provinces lying east of the Merrimack, there was much less uncertainty as, in a general way, it followed the bend of the river, and for that reason there was much less controversy over the juris- diction. Many of you, doubtless, have noticed on the map the tier of towns which fringe the north bank of the Merrimack, between the city of Lowell and the mouth of the river; and. perhaps, you have wondered why those places, which from a geographical point of view belong to the State of New Hamp- shire, should come now within the limits of Massachusetts. The explanation of this seeming incongruity goes back to the date of the first Charter, now more than two hundred and seventy-five years ago.
I have given an account of this dispute in some detail as the town of Groton was a party to the controversy and took a deep interest in the result. It was by this decision of the king that the town lost all that portion of its territory which lies now within the limits of the city of Nashua; but it did not suf- fer nearly so much as our neighbor, the town of Dunstable, suffered by the same decision. At that time she received a staggering blow, and her loss, indeed, was a grievous one. Originally she was a large township containing 128,000 acres of land, situated on both sides of the Merrimack; and she was so cut in two by the running of the new line that by far the larger part of her territory came within the jurisdiction of New Hampshire. Even the meeting-house and the burying- ground, both so closely and dearly connected with the early life of our people, were separated from that portion of the town still remaining in Massachusetts; and this fact added not a little to the animosity felt by the inhabitants when the disputed question was settled. It is no exaggeration to say that throughout the old township and along the line of the borders from the Merrimack to the Connecticut, the feelings and sympathies were wholly with Massachusetts.
Thus cut in twain, there were two adjoining towns bearing the same name, the one in Massachusetts, and the other in
1
23
New Hampshire; and thus they remained for nearly a cen- tury. This similarity of designation was the source of con- siderable confusion which lasted until the New Hampshire town, on January 1, 1837, took the name of Nashua, after the river from which its prosperity is largely derived.
By the same decision of the king one other adjoining neigh- bor, Townsend, -for at that time Pepperell had not as yet . taken on a separate municipal existence, -was deprived of more than one quarter of her territory; and the present towns of Brockline, Mason, and New Ipswich in New Hampshire now are reaping the benefit of what she then lost.
Enough of the original Groton Plantation, however, was left to furnish other towns and parts of towns with ample material for their territory. On November 26, 1742. the west parish of Groton was set off as a precinct. It comprised all that part of the town lying on the west side of the Nashua River, north of the old road leading from Groton to Townsend, and now known as Pepperell. Its incorporation as a parish or precinct allowed the inhabitants to manage their own ecclesiastical affairs, while in all other matters they continued to act with the parent town. Its partial separation gavethem the benefit of a settled minister in their neighborhood, which in those days was considered of great importance.
It is an interesting fact to note that in early times the main reason given in the petitions for dividing towns was the long distance to the meeting-house, by which the inhabitants were prevented from hearing the stated preaching of the gospel. At the present day I do not think that this argument is ever urged by those who favor the division of a township.
On April 12, 1753, when the Act was signed by the Gov- ernor, the west parish of Groton was made a district. - the second step towards its final and complete separation from the mother town. At this period the Crown authorities were jealous of the growth of the popular party in the House of Representatives, and for that reason they frowned on every attempt to increase the number of its members. This fact had some connection with the tendency, which began to crop out during Governor Shirley's administration, to form dis-
24
tricts instead of towns, thereby withholding their representa- tion. At this date the west parish, under its changed politi- cal conditions, took the name of Pepperrell, and was vested with still broader powers. It was so called after Sir William Pepperrell, who had successfully commanded the New Eng- land troops against Louisbarg; and the name was suggested. doubtless, by the Rev. Joseph Emerson, the first settled min- ister of the parish. He had accompanied that famous expe- dition in the capacity of chaplain, only the year before he had received a call for his settlement, and the associations with his commander were fresh in his memory. The hero of the capture of Louisburg always wrote his surname with a double "r"; and for many years the district followed that custom, and like him, spelled the name with two "r's," but gradually the town dropped one of these letters. It was near the begin- ning of the nineteenth century that the present orthographic form of the word became general.
In the session of the General Court which met at Water- town, on July 19, 1775, Pepperell was represented by a mem- ber, and at that time practically acquired the rights and privi- leges of a town without any special act of incorporation. Other similar districts were likewise represented, in accord- ance with the precept calling that body together, and thus they obtained municipal rights without the usual formality. The precedent seems to have been set by the First Provincial Congress of Massachusetts, which met in the autumn of 1774, and was made up of delegates from the districts as well as from the towns. It was a revolutionary step taken outside of the law; and the informality led to a general Act, passed on August 23, 1775, which legalized the change.
Shirley, unlike Pepperell, was never incorporated as a pre- cinct, but was set off as a district on January 5, 1753, three months before Pepperell was set off as one. In the Act of In- corporation the name was left blank, -as it was previously in the case of Harvard, and soon afterward in that of Pepperell,- and " Shirley" was filled in at the time of its engrossment. It was so named after William Shirley, the Governor of the Prov -. ince at that period. It never was incorporated specifically as
25
a town, but became one by a general Act of the Legislature, passed on August 23, 1775. While a district it was represented in the session of the General Court which met at Watertown, on July 19, 1775, as well as represented in the First Provincial Congress of Massachusetts, and thus tacitly acquired the dignity of a town, which was afterwards confirmed by the Act, just mentioned.
These two townships, Pepperell and Shirley, were the first settlements to swarm from the original Plantation. With the benediction of the mother they left the parent hive, and on all occasions have proved to be dutiful daughters in whom the old town has always taken a deep pride. In former years, before the days of railroads, these two towns were closely identified with Groton, and the social intercourse between them was very intimate. If the families of the three towns were not akin to one another, in a certain sense they were neighbors.
The latest legislation connected with the dismemberment of the original grant, --- and perhaps the last for many years to come, -is the Act of February, 14, 1871, by which the town of Ayer was incorporated. This enactment took from Groton a large section of territory lying near its southern borders, and from Shirley all that part of the town on the easterly side of the Nashua River which was annexed to it from Groton, on February 6, 1798.
Thus has the old Groton Plantation, during a period of two hundred and fifty years, been hewn and hacked down to less than one half of its original dimensions. Formerly it con- tained 40,960 acres, while now the amount of taxable land within the town is 19,850 acres. It has furnished, substan- tially, the entire territory of Pepperell, Shirley, and Ayer, more than one half of Dunstable, and has contributed more or less to form five other towns, -namely, Harvard, Little- ton, and Westford, in Massachusetts, besides Nashua and Hollis, in New Hampshire.
The early settlers of Groton, like all other persons of that period of time or of any period, had their limitations. They were lovers of political freedom, and they gave the largest
W
26
liberty to all, -so far as it related to their physical condition; but in matters of religious belief it was quite otherwise. With them it was an accepted tradition, -perhaps with us not entirely outgrown, -that persons who held a different faith from themselves were likely to have a lower standard of mo- rality. They saw things by a dim light, they saw "through a glass darkly." They beheld theological objects by the help of dipped candles, and they interpreted religion and its rela- tions to life accordingly. We living two hundred and fifty years later can bring to bear the electric light of science and modern discovery. We have a great advantage over what they had, and let us use it fairly. Let us be just to them, as we hope for justice from those who will follow us. Let us re- member that the standards of daily life change from one cen- tury to another. Perhaps in future generations, when we are judged, the verdict of posterity will be against us rather than against the early comers. More has been given to us than was given to them, and we shall be held responsible in a cor- respondingly larger measure. It is not the number of talents with which we have been entrusted that will tell in our favor, but the sacred use we make of them. In deciding this ques- tion, two centuries and a half hence, I am by no means sure of the judgment that history will render. Do we as a nation give all men a square deal? The author of the Golden Rule was color blind, and in its application he made no difference between the various races of mankind. The rule applied to the black man equally with the white man. Do we now give our African brotlier a fair chance? It is enough for us to try to do right, and let the consequences be what they will. "Hew up to the chalk line, and let the chips fly where they may," once said Wendall Phillips. We hear much nowadays about the simple life, but that was the life lived by the settlers, and taught to their children, both by precept and example. Austere in their belief, they practised those homely virtues which lie at the base of all civilization; and we of today owe much to their memory. They prayed for the wisdom that cometh from above, and for the righteousness that exalteth a nation; and they tried to square their conduct by their creed.
27
The early settlers were a plain folk, and they knew little of the pride and pomposity of later times. To sum up briefly their social qualities, I should say that they were neighborly to a superlative degree, which means much in country life. They looked after the welfare of their neighbors who were not so well off in this world's goods as they themselves, they watched with them when they were sick, and sympathized with them when death came into their families. In cold weather they hauled wood for the widows, and cut it up and split it for them; and when a beef " crittur" or a hog was killed, no one went hungry. When a man met with an ac- cident and had a leg broken, the neighbors saw that his crops were gathered, and that all needful work was done; and after a heavy snow-storm in winter, they turned to and broke out the roads and private ways with sleds drawn by many yoke of oxen belonging in the district. Happily all this order of things is not yet a lost art, but in former times the custom was more thoroughly observed, and spread over a much wider region than now prevails. . When help was needed in private households, they never asked, like the lawyer of old, "And who is my neighbor?" They always stretched out their hands to the poor, and they reached forth their hands to the needy.
To us it seems almost pathetic, certainly amusing, to see how closely they connected their daily life with the affairs of the church. As a specimen I will give an instance found in the note-book of the Reverend John Fiske, of Chelmsford. It seems that John Parker, James Fiske, and John Nutting wished to remove from Chelmsford and take up their abode in this town. The subject of their removal was brought be- fore the church there in the autumn of 1661, when they de- sired the "loving leave" of their brethren so to do, as well as prayers that the blessings of God might accompany them to their new homes. The meeting was held on November 9, 1661, when some discussion took place and considerable feel- ing was shown. Mr. Fiske, the pastor, shrewdly declined to commit himself in the matter; or, according to the record, declined to speak on the question "one way or the other, but
-----
28
desired that the brethren might manifest themselves." At the conference one brother said that there was no necessity or the removal, and hoped that the three members would give up their intentions to remove, and would remain in Chelmsford. Reading between the lines it seems as if this town had invited the three men to settle here; and Brother Parker speaking for them (inthe plural number) said that God's hand was to be seen in the whole movement. The same hand which brought them to Chelmsford now pointed to Groton. Apparently the meeting was a protracted one, and "scarce a man in the Church but presently said the grounds, the grounds." This was another form of calling for the question, -in other words, for the reasons of the re- moval, whether valid or not. While the decision of the con- ference is not given in exact language, inferentially it was in favor of their going, -as they were here in December, 1662. James Parker was a deacon of the Chelmsford church; and perhaps there had been some slight disagreement between him and a few of the other members. Evidently he was one of the pillars of the body at Chelmsford; and at once he became a deacon at Groton. To us now it is amusing to see what a commotion was raised because these three familes proposed to remove to another town. "Behold how great a matter a little fire kindleth." Fortunately for this town James Parker, James Fiske, and John Nutting with their households came here to live, where they all became useful and influential citizens far above the average. In his day James Parker was the most prominent man in Groton, filling many civil and military positions; the next year after com- ing James Fiske was chosen selectman, and later town-clerk ; and John Nutting was appointed surveyor of highways. There are in this audience, doubtless, at the present moment many descendants of these three pioneers who had so many obstacles thrown in their way before taking up their abode here. If these families had not removed hither at that early period, perhaps their descendants now would be celebrating anniversaiies elsewhere rather than here, and might never have known what they lost by the change in their respective
29
birthplaces. Without being able to call them by name or to identify them in any way, to all such I offer the greetings of this gathering on the good judgment shown by their an- cestors.
.
This town took its name from Groton Co. Suffolk, England, which was the native place of Deane Winthrop, one of the original petitioners for Groton Plantation. His name stands at the head of the list of selectmen appointed in 1655 by the General Court; and today we should give him the title of Chairman of the Board. He was a son of John Winthrop who came to New England in 1630 as Governor of Massachu- setts; and it was in compliment to him that the name of his birthplace was given to the town. Without much doubt he was a resident here for a few years; and in this opinion I am supported by a distinguished member of that family, now de- ceased, who some time ago wrote me as follows:
BOSTON, 27 February, 1878.
MY DEAR DR. GREEN, - It would give me real pleasure to aid you in establishing the relations of Deane Winthrop to the Town of Groton in Massachusetts. But there are only three or four letters of Deane's among the family papers in my possession, and not one of them is dated Groton. Nor can I find in any of the family papers a distinct reference to his residence there.
There are, however, two brief notes of his, both dated "the 16 of December, 1662," which I cannot help thinking may have been written at Groton. One of them is addressed to his brother John, the Governor of Connecticut, who was then in London, on business connected with the Charter of Connecticut. In this note, Deane says as follows: -
"I have some thoughts of removing from the place I now live in, into your Colony, if I could lit of a convenient place. The place that I now live in is too little for me, my children now growing up."
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.