USA > Massachusetts > Hampden County > Springfield > Colonial justice in western Massachusetts, 1639-1702; the Pynchon court record, an original judges' diary of the administration of justice in the Springfield courts in the Massachusetts Bay Colony > Part 23
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 | 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 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45
In the field of law enforcement the Record is not of great value from a statistical standpoint since not all offenses of which cogni- zance was taken were entered therein and, secondly, no substantial volume of any one class of offense appears. However, it is believed that the Record does afford a representative cross section of law en- forcement on the western frontier of the Bay Colony for over sixty years-including the problem of the Indian offender. Such cross
199
CONCLUSION
section of jurisdiction actually exercised must be read against that conferred by law which, particularly, under the Second Charter, clearly contemplated more extensive powers.
The Record itself does not accurately reflect the frequent bind- ing over of serious offenders to the courts on the county level but this defect has been remedied by use of supplemental material from the records of the County Court and, later, the Court of General Sessions of the Peace. In the case of offenders referred back to the Springfield courts the absence of Record entries leaves uncertainty as to the effi- cacy of this method of reference. The Record is of great value in per- mitting evaluation of the various agencies of law enforcement such as the constable, the sheriff, the watch, tithingmen, town presenters, and individual complainants.
The Record can hardly be said to show that the inhabitants of Springfield were at all times afforded easy access to a court and prompt and inexpensive justice. John Pynchon, for instance, had many demands on his time and was frequently away from Spring- field for considerable periods. To state, as some writers have, that procedure on the lower jurisdictional levels was informal is mis- leading. Certainly it was informal by the standards of Westminster Hall, but the procedural norms found in the Record and provided by law were not substantially more informal than those of the County Court for Hampshire and perhaps for other counties.
The Record cannot be approached as one would approach the lengthy annotations in fine print of a modern Civil Practice Act. The entries and the jurisdictional bases for most of the period have to be viewed against a statutory background consisting of the laws and or- ders of the General Court. Such background was the product of leg- islators disinterested in the technical details and niceties of statutory draftsmanship. This attitude of necessity also manifested itself in the administration of justice in the commonwealth. After all, such ad- ministration centered in and was dominated by the magistrates. The Record further indicates that such basic attitude was not extirpated solely by the passage of laws under the Second Charter establishing more rigid criteria of judicial administration.
Puritan pride of intellect in seventeenth-century Massachusetts Bay did not extend to mastery of mundane laws, whether substan- tive or procedural. Many would agree with Cotton's characterization of lawyers as unconscionable advocates who "bolster out a bad case by quirks of wit, and tricks and quillets of law." 1 Accordingly, the
1 See Lechford, Plaine dealing: or, News from New England (ed. J. H. Trumbull, 1867) 68 note.
200
INTRODUCTION
standards of judicial administration revealed in the Record must be viewed against the attitude revealed strikingly in the following ex- tract from the Epistle to the 1662 laws of the commonwealth:
If any shall complain of incongruous expressions or obscurity in some passages, let them be sure it be so, before they affirm it; Considering the Supreme Court (which ought to be honoured) hath perused them, and hath judged meet to publish them as they stand: Neither would the time or their Honour permit them, as Criticks, to call every word to the Tryall before a Jury of Grammarians. Let it suffice that the meaning is intelli- gible, though the dress be not the most polished; nor is it necessary see- ing mens Legis est Lex.
They, to whom these Laws are commended as Rules to which they ought to conform, may find better exercise for themselves by endeavoring to make them live by executing of them, which will add a greater lustre to them, then elegancy of expression: When Laws may be read in mens lives, they appear more beautiful than in the fairest Print, and promise a longer duration, than engraven in Marble. Weaker fences will secure against gentle Creatures, though walls of Brass be unsufficient against forcible Obtruders. If breach of order doth argue violence of men, more than weakness of the Law, it will be every mans prudence to defend the Authority of the Laws, to avoid the censure of Impetuous, and to cover rather than make gaps, whereat the most innocent may enter, and destroy that provision which was made for their preservation.
Some writers have been critical of the oligarchic tendencies inher- ent in the administration of justice under the First Charter which permitted the same person to sit at four levels of the judicial hier- archy-magistrate, County Court, Court of Assistants, and General Court. Such critics have failed to note the virtue of such a system in providing experienced personnel for the courts on the lower juris- dictional levels, in fostering uniformity of administration, and in dis- couraging judicial separatism. It is due in large part to such judicial hierarchy that many common attributes are found in the administra- tion of justice in the purlieus of Boston, in the forests of York County, and on the banks of the Connecticut. Such achievement was of no small value to a colony frequently beset by perils both from within and from without.
The Record stands forth as a monument to the labors of William and John Pynchon in establishing and maintaining a judicial system in western Massachusetts in substantial conformity with that existing in the more settled portions of the Massachusetts Bay colony.
THE PYNCHON COURT RECORD
EDITED BY
JOSEPH H. SMITH OF THE NEW YORK BAR
The original manuscript of this Judges' Diary has been in the Treasure Room of the Harvard Law School for the past thirty-three years. For twenty-eight years prior thereto, it was owned by Goodspeed's Book Shop, in Bos- ton, and by Mr. Sumner Hollingsworth, of Boston. For many years prior to 1899, it appears to have been in the possession of Judge Henry Morris, an historian, of Spring- field, Massachusetts.
ffelinary the 14th. 1630
To the Ingabitanted of quan oppon Quinnofferof ta brige inte corporation to: maniforts incombeniente that may fulcropon not for many of fame fit magiffany aring. bo trys now By your provisture falleninto 15: Eine of the MEapportant Inspiration: & il finning of to apayer foto » pure raptó el iftira ad may offen fafe out among, not Doe transfor tenkeit mate by a generale roupa & note to antame (Like me varius frutta divertiont from fy yeniance Tourt ni the manparquet 230g) m" william PITT to igerute too office of a magistrate mi thit over plantation of dagaam biz
Do vive orter to tonof table or millitary officer to Direct passauted, bots procent operations & ferimentos, to grast & cpamist me formenext to Dopost motricité & roppon offer of proficimenos to : feit a spirale youngEment, and rozipping for free ty. Grunge in the poate, or you'd bequemen. limi raped to ruquier question, & if two offire quise to toritto priblil & m default gla romancier j'aiponto roma= -
inquinta to flergangs of forer fit per our plows his suffire may oppb , the Tryall of actions for life ou text fought to & of wantister fragments, verational: & noget over oft may to E2. Enige speare & the manifestation of our fidelity to be: my fan fiction & the in training of any that fall morale
of an apliplant withemanatingtt
It is also agreat nexpon By a mutual somport hat miraf? rtion of life our trippays be to Be trying: fange a funny of telteh rannot Bread at giftet among ob. Entre priser ale Bo chum & pin "first feny to try any action the - 1
& by ronon roulant [all after teil number of fund furcan or face Bo obor wife divorce from this yearvale tout in
oratory offre of a chowyhabe ni thiplass for a ye ar of file andlia.
THE PYNCHON DIARY, PAGE 2
The Pynchon Court Record
[*2] February the 14th 1638 [1639].
We the Inhabitantes of Agaam uppon Quinnettecot takinge into consideration the manifould inconveniences that may fale uppon us for want of some fit magistracy amonge us: Beinge now by Godes providence fallen into the line of the Massachusets Jurisdiction: and it beinge farr of to repayer thither in such cases of justice as may of- ten fall out amonge us doe therefore thinke it meete by a generall consent and vote to ordaine (till we receive further directions from the generall court in the Massachuset Bay) Mr. William Pynchon to execute the office of a magistrate in this our plantation of Agaam viz
To give oathes to Conestables or military officers to direct war- rantes, both processe executions and attachmentes, to here and ex- amine misdemenors to depose witnesses and uppon profe of misde- menor to inflict corporall punishment, as whipping stockinge byndinge to the peace, or good behaviour, and in some cases to re- quier sureties, and if the offence requier to commit to prison and in default of a common prison to comit delinquentes to the charge of some fit person or persons till justice may be satisfied, Also in the Tryall of actions for debt or trespasse, to give oathes, direct juries depose witnesses, take verdictes and keepe Records of verdictes, Judgmentes executions: and what ever else may tend to the Kinges peace, and the manifestation of our fidellity to the Bay Jurisdiction and the restraininge of any that shall molest Godes lawes: or lastely whatsoever else may fall within the power of an assistant in the Mas- sachuset.
It is also agreed uppon by a mutuall consent that in case any ac- tion of debt or trespasse be to be tryed: seinge a Jury of 12 fit per- sons cannot be had at present among us: That six persons shall be esteemed and held a sufficient Jury to try any action under the some of Ten pounds till we shall see cause to the Contrary and by com- mon consent shall alter this number of Jurors or shall be otherwise directed from the Generall Court in the Massachusets.
John Cable is chosen and sworne to execute the office of a Con- stable in this place for a year or till another shall be chosen in his roome.
204
PYNCHON COURT RECORD
[*3] November 14. 1639.
A meetinge to order some Towne affaires and to try causes by Jury.
The Jury Henry Smyth, Jehew Burr, Henry Gregory, John Searl, Samuell Hubbard, Samuell Wright.
The Action. John Woodcoke complaines against John Cable in an action of the case for wages due to him for certaine worke he did to a house that was built on Agawam side for the Plantation.
The verdict The Jury findes for the defendant: But withall they find the promise that John Cable made to the plaintife to see him paid for his worke firme and good But as for the 5 dayes in Com- ming up with John Cable we find them not due to be paid for he came not up purposely but in his Comminge he aimed at a lotte which end of his he did attain. Moreover we agree that John Cable is ingaged to the plaintife for worke don about the house: [page torn] we also Judge that John Woodcoke is fully satis[fied] in regard he hath had the use of the ould [page torn] ground and of the howse all that Sommer [so] far as John Cable had himselfe.
November 14. 1639.
William Pynchon complaineth against Thomas Merricke in an action of the Case for not delivering back the Boards he lent him.
The Jury Henry Smyth, Jehew Burr, Henry Gregory, John Searle, Samuell Hubbard, Samuell Wright.
The Jury find for the plaintife viz that the defendant is to make good 3 such like boards as we find not yet delivered with the rest.
[*4] December 12 1639.
William Pynchon complaineth against Thomas Horton in an ac- tion of the Case for taking away certaine plankes from the Maine Masse [?] at the mill and carieing them away to his house.
The Jury Jehew Bur, Henry Smyth, Thomas Merick, Samuell Hubbard, John Searle, Samuell Wright.
The Jury returne this verdict That they cannot agree how to determine the Case as yet till the whole worke be finished and till it shall be vewed and judged by indifferent men whether it be don or no according to bargaine and therefore desyre that the matter in difference may be deferred till then and then we shall be the better able to determine the case.
Thomas Merick complains againste Thomas Horton in an ac- tion of the Case for 3 boards that the said Thomas Merick wantes, for he saith that Thomas Horton made use of some of the boards which he tooke without leave and knowes not of the redelivery.
205
PYNCHON COURT RECORD
The Jury find for the Plaintife that the defendant shall restore the said three boards or three shillings in mony.
John Woodcock beinge sommond by warrant to answer Mr. George Moxon in an action of slander for reporting that he tooke a false oath against him: The said John desyred that this difference might be tried by a private hearinge below in the River: Mr. Moxon referred himselfe to the Judgment of the plantation present [*5] present whether it were fitter to be heard by a private refference be- low in the River, or tryed here publikly by a Jury. The generall voa[t] of the plantation is that seeing the matter is publike it should be publikly herd and tryed her by a Jury: Liberty is granted to John Woodcoke to produce his witnesses against this day fortnight being the 26 of December. Also at the said tyme John Woodcoke is warned to answer for his laughinge in Sermon tyme: this day at the Lecture.
Also he is then to answer his misdemenor [of] idlenesse.
The meeting on the 26 of December is deferred till the 2d of Jan- uary 1639 [1640].
1639 [1640] January 2d.
George Moxon complai[nes] against John Woodcoke in an action of slander that he saith that John Woodcoke doth report that he tooke a false oath against him at Hartford and he demandes of John Woodcoke for the said sland[er] 9£ 19s.
The Jury. Henry Smyth, Jehew Burr, Robert Ashly, Thomas Merik, John Searle, Samuell Hubbard.
Mr. Moxon produces thes witnesses Thomas Horton, John Cable, Robert Ashly, Henry Smyth, Samuell Hubbard.
The Jury find for the Plaintife damages 6£ 13s. [Page torn.]
When Mr. Moxon gave the Constable the warrant [*6] to dis- traine for the said damag the said John Woodcoke answered that he ought Mr. Moxon no mony nor none he would pay him.
Also John Woodcoke said that he had showed Mr. Moxon more respect and reverence than ever he would againe. Witnesse Henry Smyth, Samuell Hubbard and Thomas Horton
February 13 1639 [1640].
The Jury Henry Smyth, Jehew Bur, Robert Ashly, John Leon- ard, Samuell Hubbard, Samuell Wright.
Thomas Horton complaines against Thomas Mericke in an 1 action of the case for not doinge a sufficient dayes worke for the wages of a day.
2 the said Thomas Horton Complaines against Thomas Mericke in an action of the case for taking away certaine planks or boardes.
206
PYNCHON COURT RECORD
3 the said Thomas Horton complaines against Thomas Mericke in an action of the case for felling of two trees in the lot of Thomas Horton.
4 for changing of 4 bushells of corne after it was delivered.
1 Thomas Merick complaines against John Woodcoke in an ac- tion of debt of 2s 6d.
Also in another action of the Case for two bushells of corne 2 that was delivered into his possession: and about two bushells more that he is to be accountable for.
[*7] June 19 1640.
1 John Leonard complaines in an action of the Case against Henry Gregory for taking more recompense for driving home of certaine stray sowes then his share comes to: and for taking of more pigges with his sows then his share comes to.
2 William Warrener complaines against Henry Gregory in an action of the case for layenge false imputations of money dealinge in taking of those pompions that Richard Everit gave to both of them which Henry Gregory affirmes to be contrary to the appointment of Richard Everit.
The Jury. Henry Smyth, Samuell Hubbard, Samuell Wright, Rowland Stebbing, John Dible, John Cable.
The .1. action the Jury find for the plaintife: viz the defendant is to make restitution the some of 8s to [be] paid to the plaintife to be devided amongst the rest that tooke like [paines] in bringing home of the said [sows] accordinge to [ Int between them:
[The remainder of the page is damaged.]
And for the dif[ ] the Divisions of the pigg[es] the Jury find
[ ] life: for it was proved that the defend[ ] but 5 teates drawen and yet go to [ ] sixt pigg he [ ] manner: Thị ] neighbors: and [ ] for the [ ] halfe to [ ] that had [ 1
to be paid [
] The 2d [
] proved [
] John Sear [
1
[*8] The 10 day of September 1640.
Henry Gregory complaines against John Woodcoke in an action of the case for fower poundes fowerteene shillinges.
The Jury. Samuell Hubbard, Samuell Wright, Thomas Mer- icke, John Leonard, Robert Ashly, Rowland Stebbinge.
The Jury find due to the plainetife fower poundes seven shil- linges three pence and for costes three shillinges.
The execution is respited because John Woodcoke pleades that there is an error in the Arbitration for part of that that mony that he was awarded by the Arbitrators to pay: and so by consent of both parties they referr themselves to a new tryall to the former Jury.
207
PYNCHON COURT RECORD
John Woodcoke complaines that there is an error in the former Arbitration and Henry Gregory is content to put it presently to a new tryall to the former Jury.
[The remainder of the page is damaged.] 1 The Jury [ Jendant in the matter [ ] in damages for
his [ ] shillings and costes 3s [ Įrmer damages of ten [ The
Arbitrators [ ] about the pigg [ ] of the hogges [ ]ber we
want some [ ] saith he can produce [ Jen him to bring [*9] in what further proof he can on this day fortnight or else then the Jury is to give in their verdict and so it is agreed by mutuall con- sent of all parties to referr the conclusion till this day fortnight.
Sept. 24: 1640.
Accordinge to the former order by consent of the plaintife de- fendant and Jury this day they are all mett to determine the matter of Cheatinge: and Henry Gregory after 14 dayes to bring in what new evidence he can is present to certifie the Jury.
The Jury find for the plaintife about the pigg and gave to John Woodcoke in damages Twenty shillings and costes 4s.
For the last action about the double ingagment of the hogges we find for the plaintife in damages Two and Twenty shillings and in costs five shillinges.
Henry Gregory after the verdict was much moved and said: I marvill with what consi[deration] the Jury can give such damages: Seeinge in the case of John Searles I had of him but Twenty shillinges for three slanders: and he added: But such Juries: he was about to speake more But Mr. Moxon bid him take heed take heed, and so gave him a grave admonition: presently after the admonition Henry Gregory acknowledged his fault and earnestly craved pardon and promised more care and watchfulnesse for tyme to come: and so all the Jury acknowledged satisffaction in hope of reformation.
[*10] Sept. 28 1640.
John Woodcoke comminge to me for a warrant to warne Henry Gregory to answer him in 2 actions of slander: I then demanded of him why he did not satisfie Mr Moxon for the action of slander that he had recovered against him by way of action: he Answered that he purposed to have a new hearing of the matter: for he said that Mr. Moxons testimony to the Jury proved the things that he affirmed: Thereuppon I tould him that I would undertake that Mr. Moxon should put the matter to a refference of indifferent men any where in the River provided that he would put in security to answer such damages as should be laid uppon him if the Arbitrators saw cause: or else I put him to his choyse if he would he should have the matter
208
PYNCHON COURT RECORD
tried againe by a new Jury here: and he should have a writ of error to try it againe: and also should have liberty to except against any of the jury if he could shew any reason for it: and I gave him tyme from this day till Thursday after to choose eather of thes courses or else if he refused to take any of thes courses Then I tould him if he did not presently pay Mr. Moxon the some of six poundes 13s and 4d accord- ing as the Jury did formerly damnifie him for the slander: Then I would delay no longer but I would deliver a warrant to the [*11] the Constable to attach his body or goods for the said debt.
October .1. 1640.
John Woodcoke not appearinge to give satisfaction to Mr. Moxon accordinge to the liberty tendered to him: Therefore I ordaine the execution as followeth.
To John Searles Constable of Springfeild Thes are in his Maj- esties name to require you presently uppon the receite hereof That you attach the body of John Woodcoke uppon an execution granted to Mr. George Moxon by the Jury against the said John Woodcoke for an action of slander: and that you kepe his body in prison or irons untill he shall take some course to satisfie the said George Moxon: or else if he neclect or refuse to take a speedy course to satisfie the said execution of 6£ 13s 4d granted by the Jury January 2d 1639 [1640]. That then you use what meanes you can to put him out to service and labor till he make satisfaction to the said Mr. George Moxon for the said 6£ 13s 4d and also to satisfie yorselfe for such charges as you shall be at for the keeping of his person: And when Mr. Moxon and yourselfe are satisfied, Then you are to discharge his person out of prison: faile not at your perill.
Springfeild this 5 October 1640 Per WILLIAM PYNCHON
[*12] October 9. 1640.
The Examination of Widdow Horton about selling of her hus- bands peice to the Indians.
She saith that she hath not sould it but she confesseth that she lent it to an Indian for it lay spoilinge in her seller, but she saith that the Indian is suddenly to bring it againe and he hath lost about six fatham of wampam in pawne for it: and she saith that she knew of no order against it and doth promise to take it home againe: she cannot tell the Indians name but saith it is an Indian of Agaam.
I tould her if she would speedily get it home againe or else it would cost her dere for no commonwealth would allow of such a misdemenor.
209
PYNCHON COURT RECORD
January the 11 1640 [1641].
It is ordered that John Hobell shall be well whipt by the Con- stable for two misdemenors first for proceeding to get promises of Marriage from Abigall Burt, after that both he and she had been prohibbited by her Father severall tymes, and also for offeringe and attemptinge to doe the act of fornication with her as they both con- fesse though as far as we can discerne by any proofe of Justice the act was not don.
Also Abigall Burt is found guilty in both the said faultes and is also to be well whipt by the Constable for the said faultes:
[*13] February the 15. 1640 [1641].
Robert Ashly complaines against John Woodcooke in an action of the case for a gunn that he bought of him and paid him 22s 6d for it yet the said John Woodcoke did not deliver it to him accordinge to bargaine.
Also Robert Ashly complaines against John Woodcok in an ac- tion of the case for not breaking up of certain ground for planting according to bargaine.
The Jury Henry Smyth, Henry Burt, John Leonard, John Dible, Samuell Wright, Thomas Merick:
In the first action the Jury find for the plaintife 225 6d and in costes 4s.
The 2d action John Woodcoke doth acknowledge it his dew to brake up the said ground and doth bynd over some of the Swine that he hath now in the hands of Thomas Mirick for the performance of the said ground in case it be not don before the first of Aprill, then he doth promise to allow for the damage out of the said swine as two indifferent neighbors shall prise the said swine and so to pay as much as the workmanship of the said ground shall be valued at.
After the Jury had given in their verdict John Woodcoke denied that Robert had paid for the said gunn notwithstanding the action was [illegible] before him and he never denied it: but I offered him a new tryall by a writ of error if he would present it.
Goody Gregory hearing him denie that he was paid testified up- pon oath that she heard John Woodcock say [*14] that he did not owe above as 2s 6d in the plantation she said that she replied thus to John Woodcocke that she heard Robert say that John Woodcock ought him between 30 and 4os Then John Woodcok answered that Robert was a pratinge fellow for he had set of his gunn and now he did not owe him past 7 or 8s: Also Henry Gregory testified uppon oath that he heard him speak the same to his wife.
Goody. Gregory being accused by oath of John Woodcoke and
210
PYNCHON COURT RECORD
Richard Williams for swearing before God I could break her head: she did acknowledge it was her great sin and fault and saith she hath bin much humbled for it:
She is fined 12d to the pore to be paid to Henry Smyth within a month: or if she doe not she is to sit 3 houers in the stocks.
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.