USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > Chelsea > Documentary history of Chelsea : including the Boston precincts of Winnisimmet, Rumney Marsh, and Pullen Point, 1624-1824, vol 1 > Part 10
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 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65
67
THE INDIANS AT WINNISIMMET
CHAP. IV]
this. by Petition agayne, he brought vs before owre Honored Magistrates . at a Cowntie Cowrt at Boston . who after hearinge all that he could aledge, & some that pleaded for him, it was determined . that they saw no right he had, nor any Just grownd of his molestations . but that he ought to be qwict, wth wch we thought he had bine fully satisfied, and that we should neuer haue heard more of it, yet the Last Cownty . Cowrt at Boston, he served vs all agayne by way of Action, wher after we had attended all that Cowrt, we at Last Nonsuted him, & had costs granted vs. And yet he still threttens vs wth farther sutes.
Vpon all wch growndes, as alsoe becawse this is not owr Case alone, but the Case of many other Townes, & soe by Conscqwence of the whole Cuntrye; for if he can preuayle to draw vs to any Composition, or to pt wth any of owr Land . then he intends to doe the Like to Lyn. &c/ as he hath threatened. And accordinge to his successe other Indians wilbe incoraged to lay clayme, not only to the ffarmes belonginge to other Townes, but to the Townes them selues, as some haue bine forward enough to expresse them selues that way
Therfor yor Petitioners pray this Honored Cowrt to take it into there wise Consideration and to prouide some way by some Order of Cowrt, that no Indian shall make clayme nor any of the Eng- lish shall tender composition, after soe many years qwiet posession as some other Cowrts haue done, or how else you in yor wisdomes shall Judge . best, that soe not only yor Petitioners may hauc Indemnitie agaynst such continuall and vniust molestations (haue- inge no other way to helpe ow" selues . for if we recouer any thinge - they have nothinge to pay) but alsoe the whole Cuntry may be cleared from such pretended Titles . wch if not timely prevented may proue of very bad Conseqwenc to diuers Towneshipes - if not to the whole Cuntry . by the said effects there of
And yor Petitioner's shall euer pray : &c/. (The Deputs thinke meete to graunt this peti- tion Pvided that the petition's Lay out forty Acers of good plantinge Land in some conven- ient place such as this Court shall approue off for Sagamore George to make vse of, wth Reference to the Consent of or honou.'d mag- ists hereto William Torrey Cleric.) 23
Robert Keayne
John Cogan John Newgate
James Penn
Samuelle Cole George Burden
The Magistrates agree to the Deputies returne, if insteed of 40; 20 be granted · & if George Sagamor shall sell it to any other
2 [The vote enclosed in parentheses is cancelled in the original.]
68
HISTORY OF CHELSEA
[CHAP, IV
that the Petition's shall haue the refusall thereof. And if the Petitionrs shall not yeald to lay out 20 acres good planting ground as in the returne is specified then the said Sagamor is pmitted the benefitt of the law to recouer what right he hath to the Land. if their bretheren the deputs Consent heereto.
Edward Rawson Secrety
The Deputs Consent to or honord magists hereto
Wm Torrey Cleric.24
Sagamore George brought actions in which he was defeated, and pestered the General Court by petition until, out of patience, it declared, May 19, 1669, " that his clajme men- coned in his petition concernes not the Generall Court to determine, but leaue him to the proprieto's of the land to give him as they & he shall agree." 25 I have given on another page all that is known of his later life.
There is abundant evidence that the colonists as a whole, acting from their own impulses, as well as upon explicit and repeated instructions from the Company in England, treated the Indians fairly well. They purchased their lands at prices deemed equitable by both parties; they gave them equal pro- tection with the whites before the law; and they honestly endeavored to bring them under the influences of civilization and Christianity, but with little success. Regular industry was distasteful to the savage, and the restraints of his new mode of life galling. He soon found that even a partial occu- pation of the lands which he had sold to the white settlers interfered with his hunting and fishing, and he regarded exclusion from any part of the soil, over which he roamed at will, as unjust. The General Court made many enactments between 1630 and 1640 to secure his rights as well as the safety of the colonists. Samples are these: [No one could employ or, if it was in his power to prevent, permit an Indian to] use a gun on any occasion or pretext under penalty of fine. and imprisonment unless, as was provided after some
24 Mass. Archives, xxx. 26. [The original petition with endorsements.] There is no date to this petition; but the order of the General Court thereon, October 23, 1651, refers it to that time. See Mass. Col. Rec., iv. Pt. i. 68; also iii. 252. [See the appendix to this chapter for the re- mainder of this note.]
25 Mass. Col. Rec., iv. Pt. ii. 428.
[
69
THE INDIANS AT WINNISIMMET
CHAP. IV]
years, with leave of the General Court. No one could sell him silver or gold, or powder or shot; or, without leave, " intertaine any Indian for a servt." If an Indian wished to trade peltries or other commodities, he could not go from house to house, but must repair to the " trucking howse." No white man could " sell, or (being in a course of tradeing,) giue any stronge water to any Indean "; or buy his land without leave of the Court, or repair his gun. Towns had power to "keepe away all strange Indians, & to restraine Indians by them from pphaning the Lords day." Care was taken to prevent, and to give satisfaction for, trespasses against them. In all places the English were to " keepe their cattle from destroying the Indians corne in any ground where they have right to plant; & if any corne bee destroyed for want of fencing,or hearding, the towne shalbee liable to make satis- faction, ... & the Indians are to bee incuraged to help towards the fensing in of their corne feilds." 26
In 1685 the Indians about Boston were few and were neither useful nor respectable. Efforts for their improvement had disappointed their friends; and ten years before, on October 13, 1675, the General Court, doubtful as to their conduct in the apprehended war with King Philip, ordered " that all the Naticke Indians be forthwith sent for, & dis- posed of to Deare Island, as the place appointed for their present aboade." Neither they nor their successors took kindly to English ways. It was necessary to place them under guardianship, and deny them the rights of citizens; and to-day the only representatives of the once powerful tribes which inhabited these shores are an inconsiderable number of mixed breeds lately, if not now, the wards of the Common- wealth. Unlike the Latin Catholic races, Teutonic Protestants were unable to incorporate the native tribes into their political and social systems. Extermination, if not the law, was the fact. In 1685 the colonists in their distress turned to the remnant of the miserable race to save them from impending disaster. The story will be told in the next chapter.27
26 Ibid., i. 76, 83, 96, 106, 112, 127, 209, 293, 294.
27 For some account of the Indians of Winnisimmet and of their mode of life, about 1686, see John Dunton's Letters from New England (Prince Soc. ed.), 163.
70
HISTORY OF CHELSEA
[CHAP. IV
APPENDIX
THE names of these petitioners remind the people of Revere of traditions of former owners of estates defined by boundaries now easily determined. It is noticeable that the petitioners claimed estates in what is now Revere. Neither the Winnisimmet nor the Pullen Point people seem to have been troubled, though the deposition appended to the petition of Sagamore George asserts that he was devisee of " the Ground about powder horne hill." Why Governor Bellingham, who owned that hill, was not plagued by the Sagamore, does not appear.
The estate next northerly of Bellingham's was the Sir Harry Vane allotment including land northerly of Chelsea Creek, east- erly of Everett, southerly of an east and west line across Fenno Hill, and westerly of Beach Street. Nicholas Parker, who heads the petition, became its owner, and he sold the westerly part of it, including the modern Prattville, to George Burden, retaining the easterly part, later known as the Fenno farm.
John Newgate's estate included the Governor Winthrop allot- ment, the northerly part of Fenno Hill, and was bounded westerly by Malden, northerly by the Oliver Pratt estate, and easterly by the old county road. [The Newgate farm bounded east on the Cole and Tuttle farms. On Plate P, Vol. IV, of Hopkins' Atlas of Suffolk County, the south and west lines of the land of O. Foster, and the extension of the latter line to the Shurtleff estate, represent the eastern bounds of the farm. See infra, chap. vi. appendix.] Also a narrow strip of land which reached to the Creek near the old Newgate house still standing (1892).
Captain Robert Keayne owned a little farm, the Dudley farm, on which the old house still (1892) stands; the land now belongs in part to the Shurtleff, and in part to the Oliver Pratt, estate; and a great farm bounded northerly by the Pines River; westerly by Malden; easterly by the Dewing and other estates, and south- erly by the Cogan, or Hugh Floyd, estate. The principal later owners of the Keayne great farm are Squire, Hall, Blodgett, Cope- land, Derby, and Peirce.
John Cogan also had his little farm, known later as the Hugh Floyd farm, and the great farm, which was bounded
-
71
APPENDIX
CHAP. IV]
westerly by Keayne, northerly by the Pines River, easterly by the sea, and southerly by a line not now easily defined, but in general terms, by Beach Street. The southerly part of his estate became a part of the Tuttle farm. [There is no record of a transfer from Cogan to Tuttle. The southern boundary of Cogan was the northern boundary of Tuttle as given infra, chap. vi.]
Samuel Cole's estate had Newgate's on the west; the sea on the east; the Creek [and Newgate] on the south. In 1654, Lieu- tenant William Halsey (otherwise Hasey) purchased this estate, on which is land given by his descendants for the church, which is now Unitarian. [James Penn owned what was later known as the Sale farm. Infra, Appendix 13 to chap. vi.]
I do not attempt to locate the haunts of the Indians on these estates. Their rude cultivation of the soil was subordinated to hunting and fishing. There are, however, historical memoranda and a few traditions which, in a general way, indicate some places of their temporary abodes. As early as 1641 (Mass. Col. Rec. i. 340), Mount Washington in Everett was known as Sagamore Hill; a name one might wish it had never lost, as it implies that on, or near it, the Indians had one of their seats. Many years ago, Isaac Pratt, then in his eighty-third year, told me he thought their principal abode was not far from his house in the pleasant valley which slopes gently to the sun, from Woodlawn to the foot of Mount Washington, or Sagamore Hill. He has found the remains of an old fort near a brook, beside which he has dug up clam shells, mortars, pestles, axes, and other Indian implements, which he shows to visitors. Besides this fort, there are marks of two others: one on the top of Fenno Hill, and the other on Powder Horn Hill. Between 1806 and 1810, Mr. Pratt says, some Leominster Indians visited Sagamore Hill, and occu- pied a house of the late Robert Pratt's father, near the residence of Dr. Cheever (corner of Franklin Street and Fremont Avenue). Their chief man was Comanche Brown. On excavating a mound near Winnisimmet Street and a short distance from the residence of the late Edward Bassett, there were found, about thirty years ago, fifteen skeletons, which indicated an Indian burial-place.
72
HISTORY OF CHELSEA
[CHIAP. V
CHAPTER V
INDIAN DEEDS
THE following Indian deed and others of the same period have sometimes been aeeepted as evidence of the eolo- nists' desire to do justice, though late, to the remnant of those tribes whose lands they had acquired; but the fact is other- wise. Title to their lands rested upon the grant to a land company by the Crown of England; and from that company or its assignees, they took their deeds. The object of this company was profit by the sale or lease of lands and their adjacent waters. It was not their purpose, nor within their authority, to set up a foreign state; for their powers were limited to those needed for the management of their property. What they possessed, and no more, they eould assign to their grantees, the colonists, many of whom came with those motives which now induce people to leave old and thickly settled countries for those new and sparsely settled, where the struggle for existenee is less fieree.
But Winthrop and his fifteen hundred Puritans became interested in the Company from motives widely differing from those of their predecessors, except the Pilgrims. It is now evident that their purpose, though not at the time distinetly avowed, was to set up in the new world a eivil and ecclesias- tieal state essentially different from what they left behind, wherein they might worship God as they would, however it might be with those of different opinions. Their purpose was distinctly avowed in their records; and their Charter, whatever may have been the intention of the King who granted it, was so drawn as not to prevent the accomplishment of this purpose, nor should this be forgotten.1
.1 The nature of the First Charter, and the powers granted by it, have been the subject of controversy. The English government regarded it as a corporation in the kingdom for trading in the territory described in the instrument, with the power of making rules for that purpose, accord-
e
{
73
INDIAN DEEDS
CHAP. V]
This purpose they pursued with Puritan zeal and con- stancy; but they found within their granted limits earlier comers, reinforced by later, to whom this purpose was not agreeable, - still less those measures by which its accom- plishment was attempted. Civil and ecclesiastical contention ensued, and the Puritans were reported to the King as aim- ing at an independent State and church, which, though dis- avowed, was essentially true. Consequently, in 1635, the King was asked by the malcontents to suppress the new repub- lic by revoking its charter; but not effectually, for the colo- nists had powerful friends, who not long after began the contest between Charles and his Parliament which cost him his life and gave the colonists a respite.
But it was only a respite; for on the restoration of Charles the Second, in 1660, the old question was revived and was settled temporarily, October 23, 1684, by the Charter's abro- gation, - consummated December 20, 1686, when, after the short Presidency of Joseph Dudley, Sir Edmund Andros set up a new government for New England. This period, from 1684 to 1686, and even later, was one of intense anxiety to the colonists. Andros 2 claimed that the abrogation of the Charter, on which the precedent patent and titles rested, annulled both, and that they reverted to the Crown with all the improvements made during fifty years of resolute labor.
This claim was not without a show of legal reason then, and the law is probably the same to-day. For the creation of corporations then was, and now is, both in Europe and America, an act of sovereign power. And when the Massa- chusetts Bay Company, itself merely a corporation, usurped the King's prerogative of erecting towns, which are corpo-
ing to the course of other corporations in the realm; while the colonists claimed the power to set up a government proper, and make laws not repugnant to those of Great Britain. Historians, like Minot and Ban- croft, and jurists, like Joseph Story, have taken the English view. But Joel Parker, formerly Chief Justice of New Hampshire, and later profes- sor in the Dane Law School, contends, as the colonists claimed, that the Charter conferred powers of general legislation not repugnant to the laws of England. The question was vastly important, and plausible reasons may be adduced for either view. The First Charter and The Early Religious Legislation of Mass., Lowell Institute Lectures, 357.
2 [Note that both the Indian deeds which follow antedated the appoint- ment of Andros as Governor of the colony.]
74
HISTORY OF CHELSEA
[CHAP. V
rations, such action was not only daring but void. When, therefore, the General Court granted lands to towns, the grant was inoperative because towns had no legal existenee and, taking no title, eould convey none. Nor could they divide such lands among their inhabitants by allotment as they undertook to do. The case was no better when the General Court granted lands by vote, as they often did; for then as now lands could only be conveyed by deed under seal or by livery and seizin. It legally followed that on the dissolution of the Massachusetts Bay Company in 1684 by revoeation of its Charter, all lands, none having been legally conveyed, reverted to the Crown, as would be the ease now. But this was the legal view of the matter. The equitable title of the colonists to lands which they had improved at great cost and labor was strong; but they saw only one way of meeting the legal claims of the Crown, and that was by obtaining from the original proprictors of the soil, an older, and, as they hoped, a better title than that of the King. Hence these Indian deeds, which Andros told them were no better than a " serateh of a bear's paw," - a harsh saying often quoted against him, - but such was the law. The colonists had hoped differ- fcrently and they hunted up the descendants of Sagamore George, the last of the Indian chiefs, and obtained from them the deeds which follow. Neither has been printed,3 and only one is recorded.4
Indian Deed of the Newgate Estate.5
" To all to whome theis presents shall come Joane Widdow and relict of Sagamore George formerly Sachem of Rumlymarish
[Since Judge Chamberlain wrote, the second has been printed in Suff. Decds, L. 13, f. 365.]
4 The original of the first is in the possession of Charles P. Green- ough, Esq .; the second is recorded among Suffolk Deeds. They are his- torically interesting, as showing owners and bounds of the great farms within the limits of Rumney Marsh at the end of fifty years from the planting of the colony. The recital of earlier deeds as lost or mislaid must not be taken literally. Undoubtedly lands were often, perhaps generally, purchased from the Indian chiefs, but their conveyance was seldom by deed. [The death of Sagamore John from smallpox, in 1633, seems to have relieved the settlers at Rumney Marsh of this necessity; their peti- tion to the General Court in 1651 shows that their only defense against the claims of Sagamore George was long and undisputed occupancy.]
5 [Endorsed on the back "Indians Deed - for the confirmation of the
1 1
75
INDIAN DEEDS
CHAP. V]
Linn and those parts adjasent in the Massachusetts Collony in New England. Susanna and Sarah children & daughters of the said Sagamore Georg David the grandchild of the said Sagamore Georg James Rumlymarish alias Quanupskowet and Joan his Mother send greeting Wheras the said Sagamore George with those of his counsill did at the setling of the English in thos parts of Rumblymarish and plases adjoining; give grante and con- firme unto the said English and the respective heires and assignes for ever all those lands meadowes and marishes in and about the said Rumlymarish and received full sattisfaction and payment for the same but in as much as the Deed or writings cannot att present be found whether by mislaying or miscariage Therfore so it is that wee the said Sqaw Sachem Joan Susanna and Sarah Widdow and daugters vnto the said Sagamore George David grandchild vnto the said Sagamore George and James and Joan afore mentioned nearest of kindered and relation to the said Sagamore as well for the reasons and considerations afore inen- tioned and allso for and in consideration of a valluable sume of mony to us in hand well and truely paid by Simon Lynde of Boston in New England Merchant the receipt wherof wee doe here by acknowledg and thereof doe fully aquit and discharge him and his ; Have & hereby doe give grante rattify assure establish and con- firme unto the said Simon Lynde his heires and assignes for ever for and in the behalfe and to the use of the heires of the deseased Mr John Newgate, all that tract of land Meadowes and Marishes situate and lying at or in Rumblymarish aforesaid containing about foure or five hundred acres be it more or less commonly knowne by the name of Mr Newgats farme and by him and his heires and assignes posesed and oqupied about fifty years last past, and remaine still and now at this day peaceably posesed and seised thereof beinge bounded southerly on the River and creak; and Westerly in part by the Land formerly Mr Jonathan Parkers Aron Way and Wm Ireland: and soe runes or trenches away to Maldin bounds northwesterly and on the Easterly side by Let William Haseys, the late M' Cools [Cole's ], Mr Tuttles and others lands; and Northerly by the late Capt Caines [Keayne's] Job Lanes, and others Lands, or how ever otherwise buted or bounded, allso about fifen [fifteen] acres of marish land lying and being part of Hog Island known by the name of Mr Newgats Marish, and a parsell that was formerly Mr Cools; together with all the Howsing fenses trees creaks coves flates priveledges rights
Farme at Rumly Marish wch was honnored father Newgates Aprill 9th 1685 - No (G)." Simon Lynde was son-in-law of John Newgate.]
76
HISTORY OF CHELSEA
[CHAP. V
benifits and apurtenanses thervnto belonging or in any wise appertaining To have and to hold all and singular the afore- mentioned premises and every part and parsell thereof vnto himn the said Simon Lynde his heires and assignes for ever, to the use and behoofe of the heires of the said M" John Newgate according to the bequests of the said Mr John Newgate and his son Nathan- iell Newgate deceased, And wee the said Sqaw Sachem Joane, Susanna, and Sarah, Widdow and daugters to the aforesaid Saga- more George, David grandson to the said Sagamore George and James and Joane aforementioned doe hereby for us and every of us our and every of our heires excecutors and administrators Renounce Releace discharge and for ever quit elaime any further right title claime Intrest or demand in or vnto the aforementioned premisses or any part therof but are and shall bee by vertue of thes presents wholly and uterly debared and exclueded forever, and wee the said Granters doe herby covenant promise binde and oblige our selves and every of us our and every of our heires excecutors and administrators to warrant maintaine and defend all and every the afore mentioned premises vnto him the said Simon Lynde his heires and assignes for ever against all pson or psons whatsoever anywaies lawfully claiming or demanding the same or any part or parsell therof and sall and will at all time or times bee ready and willing to give and passe more full and ample assurance and confirmation of the premises to him the said Simon Lynde his heires or assignes as in law and equity can be devised advised or required In witnes whereof wee the said Sqaw Sachem Joane Susanna Sarah David James and Joane have here vnto put our hands and seals this Ninth day of Aprill Anno Dom 1685 in the 37th yeare of the reigne of our Soveraigne Lord Kinge Charles the second 6
Memorandum the words ; (in the Massachusetts Colony in New England ; ) Aron Way and Wm Ireland)
(Northwesterly) were Interlyned ; and afterwards was Signed Sealed & Delivered
in presence of us William Stoughton
Signum IIWIII (Seal)
1
Joseph Dudley John Kick
Joanna
Susanna 17 (Seal)
Signed sealed and delivered by the
aboue named Dauid, Grandchilde vnto
6 Died February 6, 1684/5. News of his death does not appear to have reached Boston at the date of this deed.
77
INDIAN DEEDS
CHAP. V]
Sagamore George aboue mentioned ; in the presence of us .
Signum Sarah X Sagamore George his (Seal) daughter
Hezekiah Usher Isª Addington
13. 2mº 85
Signed sealed and delivered by the abouenamed Sarah, Daughter to Sagamore George abouementioned in the presence of us -
Isª Addington 21 : 2mº 85
Sam11 Bridge
Signum David Grandson of Sagamore George (Seal) abovenamed
James Rumny Marsh james (Seal)
Signum
Joane the mother of James rumly Marish (Seal)
Joane the Reliet or widdow of Sagamore George of Rumly Marsh and those parts saehem Susanna his Daughter; James of Rumly Marish alias Quanupskowett and Joane his mother; all appeared Before me; and Did freely aeknowledge this aboue written Instrument to be signed sealed and Delivered by them as their Joint and seuerall Aets and Deeds the 9th Aprill 1685. S : Bradstreet Goûnr
Boston 130 Aprilis 1685.
Dauid Grandehilde vnto the abovenamed Sagamore George; Appeared Before me and acknowledged voluntarily and freely; that he signed sealed and Delivered this Instrument as his Aete and Deed;
Before me John Riehards. Assist
Boston. 210 April: 1685.
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.