USA > Massachusetts > Hampshire County > Gazetteer of Hampshire County, Mass., 1654-1887 > Part 18
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 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87
Value of Money .- The mention of Mr. Parsons's salary makes it necessary to speak of the fluctuating value of money in the colonial days. The origi- nal settlers brought with them English standards in money as in all other mat- ters. But in 1652 Massachusetts began to coin "pine tree" shillings and pence. These coins had a pine tree on one side and were made lighter than the English coins of similar name in the vain attempt to keep them from be- ing sent to England. The colonists would purchase English goods and were obliged to pay for them with the lighter coin, which were received by mer- chants at a discount of nearly twenty-five per cent., twenty pine tree shillings be- ing valued at 15s. 6d. sterling. Commerce brought the money of other countries than Great Britain to Massachusetts, and the Spanish dollars especially seem to have circulated. These were first called " pieces of eight," because con- taining eight rials, the Spanish rial being worth about twelve and a half cents. They were worth 4s. 6d. apiece in English money, but in Massachu- setts they passed current at first for five shillings, and after 1672 they were made legal tender for six shillings. In 1704, by proclamation of Queen Anne regulating the value of foreign coins in the colonies, "pieces of eight," or Spanish dollars, Rix dollars (a German coin) and French crowns, of the value of 4s. 6d. each in England, were declared to be of the value of six shillings each in the colonies, smaller change being correspondingly fixed in value. This was already the Massachusetts value of these coins, but receiving thus the royal approval, the money came to be called " Proclamation Money." The value of money was still further unsettled by the issue of paper money, which began in Massachusetts in 1690, to meet war expenses. At first these " bills of credits " passed among traders at a little more than two-thirds of their face value, but they finally rose to nearly par value.
" Province bills" were first issued in Massachusetts Bay in 1702. the excuse for their emission being "scarcity of money and the want of other medium of commerce." The paper money increasing in quantity, values of course decreased accordingly. In May, 1736, the province bills were ordered to be equal to coined silver at 6s. 8d. per ounce. One pound in these bills was to be equal to three pounds in the bills previously emitted. Thus arose the distinction between "old tenor " and "new tenor ;" the latter being three times as valuable as the former where the face of the bills was for the same amount. In November, 1741, a new supply of bills was issued in which one pound was to be equal to four pounds old tenor. These new bills were now
164
TOWN OF AMHERST.
known as "new tenor," and the bills of 1736 were sometimes called " middle tenor." It is therefore necessary to know the standard of value in estimating any accounts kept in the eighteenth century, and the modern reader needs to be on his guard against considering the pounds, shillings and pence of the days preceding the Revolution as so much sterling or English money. The precinct meeting of September 28, 1739, which fixed Mr. Parsons's salary at one hundred pounds with an annual increase until it amounted to one hun- dred and sixty pounds, passed the following votes : "This salary we propose to pay in province bills of the old tenor, or one-third so much in the new, which is to be the only fixed standard until the year 1741. Second, after the year 1741, the salary shall be paid in money, if any be pass- ing, or some commodity which shall be equivalent to mosey upon the footing money now stands; that is to say, if the country makes good the credit of province bills agreeable to promise at the rate of six shil- ling and eight pence new tenor for one ounce of silver or twenty shil- lings old tenor the ounce; then the above said sums to be settled by that standard. But if the country fails of their promise of the value of money above said, then the salary to be settled at the rate of twenty-six shillings the ounce, in old tenor, or a third part so much in new. The true intent of this vote is to set forth the value of money as it now stands and how it shall stand in all future payments." The precinct also voted to pay the salary annually in the month of March. In 1746 the precinct voted to give Mr. Parsons 35s. the ounce for his salary, and the next precinct meeting chose a commit- tee to agree with their pastor upon the value of money, and a similar com- mittee was appointed yearly for some time. In 1750 their agreement is re- corded by a vote that the minister's salary shall be raised from 575. 8d. the ounce to £3 the ounce. In 1754 voted "to add to the Rev'd Mr. David Parsons's salary for this year ninety-two pounds ten shillings old tenor." The same vote was repeated for the following year. In 1756 an addition of £13 6s. 8d. was voted, which was of course in new tenor. In 1757 the addition was £15 "lawful money," or new tenor. In 1759, '60 and '61 the town made the entire salary for each year £66 135. 4d. lawful money. At the proportion of three to one this was much more than the £160 old tenor offered him in 1738 and as the proportion at this time was nearer four to one it shows both the increase of the ability of the people to pay and also their love for their pastor. In 1762 an addition of £13 6s. 8d. was voted to the usual £66 135. 4d. making the entire salary £80, and in 1763 this sum for the pastor's salary was voted. The next year (1764) a committee of sixteen was appointed "to treat with the Rev'd David Parsons respecting the settle- ment of his salary." After interview with this committee Mr. Parsons ad- dressed a letter to the town proposing that his salary should henceforth be £80 lawful money and firewood or £93 6s. 8d. without firewood. The dis- trict accepted the latter proposal apparently without opposition. Mr. Par- sons had stipulated in his letter that if money "should be so scarce as not to
--
165
TOWN OF AMHERST.
be a common sufficient medium of trade " then he would accept grain and other necessaries of life at the following rate : wheat 3s. 7d. I far. per bushel and rye at 2s. 5d. per bushel.
Minister's Firewood .- By the terms of Mr. Parsons's settlement he was to receive his firewood in addition to his regular salary. And even before his settlement the precinct voted "yt each head and teame be Improved to get firewood for Mr. Parsons." This was during the winter preceding his settle- ment. In 1742 it was voted that one load of wood should be valued at eight shillings and that the minister's wood should be proportioned upon polls and estates ; that is, each one was to furnish wood according to his wealth, and that, as a basis of determining the amount due, each load should count as if a tax of eight shillings had been paid. In 1742 the precinct provided sixty loads of wood. To make sure that the minister lost nothing by carelessness, a committee was appointed "to observe ye loads. In 1743 the wood supplied to Mr. Parsons was seventy loads, the next winter it was eighty, and it had risen in 1749 to ninety loads, and in 1751 to one hundred loads. The his- torian of Hadley (Mr. Judd) declared, " I never found in any records a min- ister who consumed as much wood as Mr. Parsons." He estimates each load to have been from two-thirds to three-fourths of a cord. Usually the pre- cinct voted a sum of money for the procuring of this wood, the different sums appropriated indicating rather the fluctuating value of money than any change in the price of wood. In 1742 and '43 the wood was valued at eight shillings per load. In 1750 the value was three shillings per load, the former price being in old tenor, the latter in new tenor or lawful money. In 1763 the price was fixed at eighteen shillings per load, old tenor. In 1745 the precinct appropriated £40, old tenor. In 1747 Dea. Ebenezer Dickinson was given £36 for providing this wood; the next year Nehemiah Strong sup- plied the wood and received £51. In 1749 the precinct appropriated £122 Ios. for the minister's firewood while a year later the appropriation was £13 Ios. "lawful," thus bringing into sharp contrast the different values of old and new tenor. The town ceased to supply the minister's firewood in 1764 as recorded above.
First Meeting House .- The first vote after choosing officers at the first precinct meeting was to hire a minister. The second was " to Build a Meat- ing House, forty-five foot in Length and thirty five in Bredth." There seems to have been quite a difference of opinion as to the best place for locating this house of worship. The meeting which voted to build decided to " Set sd house upon the Hill East of Jno. Nash's House," and appointed a build- ing committee. The next month the precinct voted to change the location of the house and also chose a new committee. A month later a third loca- tion was assigned, but apparently little or nothing was done (although in March, 1737, it was voted to frame, raise and cover the meeting-house "this year ensuing"), for a special meeting of the precinct, held November 14, 1738, voted to set the house in the place designated by the first meeting held more
12*
1
I66
TOWN OF AMHERST.
than three years previously, October 8, 1735), and accordingly the first nieet- ing-house was erected near the site of the present college observatory. The location being finally determined, rapid progress was made for a time. De- cember 15, 1738, the precinct voted nineteen pounds to Thomas Temple for framing the meeting-house, and three pounds seventeen shillings to Evene- nezer Kellogg "for Rum & Sugar," which indicates that there had been " a raising." After this the work apparently dragged. A building committee was annually chosen, and in 1740 " ye former Commity " was instructed " to go on wt ye work." In 1741 a committee was appointed to proceed in finish- ing the meeting-house " so farr as thay think best," and in March, 1742, the meeting house was "so farr" completed that a precinct meeting was held in it. March 25, 1743, it was voted to provide fastening for the meeting-house doors, and to secure the windows ; also "to Aaron Warner thirty shillings to sweep the Meeting House and to give a Signe when to go to Meeting for one yeare." A year later ten shillings old tenor was appropriated for sweeping and twenty-eight shillings old tenor " to Sound ye Signal." November 3, 1744, it was voted to finish the outside of the meeting-house. Six years later (1750) " Voated to provide Glass to Mend ye Meeting house windows," and December 2, 1751, thirteen years after the raising, it was voted "to finish ye Meeting House this yeare Ensuing," and a committee of five was appointed " to se sd House finished." Apparently the work was now accomplished for January 23, 1753, the precinct appropriated ten pounds lawful money to pay for " finishing the meeting house."
An annual appropriation was required for sweeping the meeting-house and " to give ye signel when to meet upon ye sabbaths and Lectures." What this " signel " was is shown by the vote in 1746 " to Give John Nash forty shillings to sound ye Kunk for this year." " Ye Kunk " was of course a conch shell, and the appropriation for blowing it varied as the value of money changed. In 1748 it was twenty-eight shillings old tenor, the next year thirty shillings, the next forty shillings, while in 1750 it was two pounds fifteen shillings ; in 1751 it required £4 in old tenor "to blow the Kunk," and fifteen shillings more to sweep the meeting-house. In 1752 the appropriation was ten shillings eight pence, while in 1754 it was seven pounds old tenor for sweeping and giving the signal.
Pews and Seating .- The first recorded mention of a pew in this meeting- house is in the vote of March 16, 1741, when it was " Voated to build a Pue for ye Minister's Wife, whare ye Rev'd Mr. David Parsons Shall chuse." Pews were considered aristocratic, and their introduction into many churches was violently opposed by the common people, who sat upon benches in assigned seats during the services. November 3, 1744, the precinct voted to build two pews, one on the women's side and one on the men's side, and a limited per- mission to build pews at their own expense was given " to sum particular per- sons." Probably this vote excited some feeling, for a month later both these votes were revoked. It was, however, voted to build pews round the sides of
167
TOWN OF AMHERST.
the meeting-house, and four years later the meeting voted to raise one hun- dred pounds toward building pews.
It is possible that this vote was not carried into effect, for August 9, 1753, it was voted to make four pews "where the hind seats are," and the next spring Ebenezer Dickinson, John Nash, Jr., and Joseph Church were given " Liberty to Build a pue whare the two hind seats are, in the front gallery on the mens side upon thare own charge." March 20, 1759, five persons were allowed to build a pew " over the stairs in the gallery on the mens side, if it didn't hinder passing in the attics and up and down stairs," and December 19, 1763, a limited permission was given to twelve men, six of whom wrote " Jr." after their names, to build a pew "in the place of the two hind seats in the upper, Teer in the Gallery." This is the last recorded permission to indi- viduals to build pews in the old meeting-house.
Amherst was no exception to the rule of heart-burnings, jealousies and diffi- culties caused by attempts to "seat the meeting-house." The attempt to assign persons to certain seats, an attempt apparently made in every one of the ancient churches, could not fail to provoke human nature into some mani- festation of dissatisfaction. The feeling in Hadley Third Precinct upon this matter is not recorded; but that there was bitter feeling no reader of the records of the town can doubt. The first vote on this subject was passed August 3, 1749, when it was " Voated to Seate ye Meeting House, and to Seate ye Males togethr and Females together, except ye two pues next ye East End the Pulpit. Voted 2ª that the seators are Guided by the following Ruels, that is to say: by Age, Estate and Qualifications ; and for Estates to be guided by the Last year's List. Voted 3ª to Make Choise of five meat Par- sons to seat ye Meeting House." It was, however, three weeks later before the precinct proceeded to choose the " five meat Parsons " who should say where each individual should sit in the house of God. The next January the precinct voted to seat the meeting-house " A Nue," and added four more to the committee of five appointed the previous August, instructing them to assign the seats according to " Estates, Age and Qualifications." By the first vote the choice of seats would go to the aged, by the new vote they were to be given to the heaviest tax payers, and which should have precedence, gray hairs or a large tax bill, was long a standing question in the precinct meet- ings. July 5, 1753, another seating was ordered, and a new committee chosen, who were to assign seats by "men's age, estate and qualifications." The next precinct meeting increased the committee from seven to eleven, but made no change in the rules, but the efforts of the eleven did not apparently satisfy the town, for at the March meeting it was voted "that the Late Seators of the Meeting House to Consider if they Can Resonably make any alteration in seating the Meeting House," and a year later the same commit- tee were instructed to " Make Sum alterations," and the next precinct meet- ing voted " that the Seaters last made choise of-Make sum alteration whare sd seators think proper." In 1760 a committee to make a new assignment of
168
TOWN OF AMHERST.
seats was chosen, who was to give preference to age, but two years later a new committee was appointed and instructed to give precedence to estate. This assignment seems to have held for five years, and when a new committee was chosen for another seating (in 1767), no instructions were given them as to who should have " the chief seats in the synagogue." In 1771 voted " to make sum alterations in seeting of the Meeting Hous," and the warrant for the following meeting (March 5, 1771) includes an article "To see whether the District will accept of the report of the Com'tee Chosen to Seet the Meeting House," and also another "wheather the Destrict will Vote that Every Person Seated Shall Take their Seats where they are Seated & to be esteemed Disorderly if not & be Liable to Such a fine as the Court Judge Proper "-from which it appears that some who were dissatisfied with the action of the seaters, had refused to sit in their assigned places, probably crowding into seats which they preferred, to the great annoyance of those who were assigned there. This was by no means an unfrequent happening in other places. What action was taken under this article can hardly be now known from the brief entry in the clerk's records, "Voted to accept of the Com'tee report in the regulation of the seats in the Meeting Hous." The district had already voted " that all persons that had either Children or Pren- tices, or any under their care that have seats aseined them in the meeting hous, see to it that they take and keep their respective seats unless at any particular time they were for some speatial reason invited into an nother seat by the oner or oners of the same." In 1778 and again in 1780, the town ordered a re-seating of the meeting-house-both times the order of the town was to seat by age, estate and qualifications. The last term doubtless refers to titles and civic honors which a man may have received ; the man who had been appointed to some petty magistracy, or who had received a military title, or the degree of some college, seldom failed to claim precedence over his neighbor who lacked these " qualifications."
Church Troubles, and a New Pastor and Church .- Before the Revolution- ary war broke out, Amherst was already of sufficient population and wealth to lead many to desire the formation of a new church. The "West Street" was seven miles in length and well filled homes along its entire length sent their representatives to the church in the center of the town, some of them travel- ing more than four miles each way on Sunday. In town meetings, when the north and south parts of the town were fully represented, they were often able to outvote those living in the center by a small majority. Those at the ends of the town wished that whenever a new meeting-house became neces- sary there might be two such built, one in the north part and one in the south- ern part of the town. They felt that as the center people had had the church in their midst for more than thirty years, it was no more than right that the people who had traveled for long distances each Sunday should now have their turn in living near the meeting-house and let the Center take its turn in the Sabbath day's journey to the house of God.
1
169
TOWN OF AMHERST.
The first vote upon this subject in town meeting was taken January 13, 1772, when the following vote was passed " to Take Sum Measures to divide the District into two Pearishes." Upon a similar vote at the following March meeting there was a tie vote and it was declared lost. It is not known whether this vote was upon some definite "measure to divide the district," or was simply upon a renewal of the proposition voted at the previous meet- ing, but clearly there was ground for much contention when those who clung so tenaciously to their opinions as our fathers were so evenly divided upon so important a question. The question came up again the next year and the district voted "to build two Meeting houses," and refused to grant the petition "of Sundry of the Inheabitants to be freed from the charge of Build- ing two Meeting Houses." Those who lived near the old meeting-house finding themselves in a minority now petitioned the general court ('Iay, 1773) asking the court to decide if a division of the district was necessary, and if it was, to incorporate them into a new parish ; seventy of the people signed this peti- tion for a new parish in the very center of the district. The general court deferred action until the following year, when the opponents of this petition might present their case. Accordingly, the next town meeting voted that a committee should be chosen "to make answer" to this petition, and this com- mittee of seven were given discretionary power to do in this matter "as they shall think best for the town." At the same meeting the majority still fur- ther irritated the minority by voting "to Divide the District of Amherst by an East and west line from the Center of the Meeting house as it now stands." The town records depart from their usual brevity to inform us that this vote was passed "by a large Majority." This would leave the inhabitants of the Cen- ter, whose life had been spent "beneath the eaves of the Sanctuary," on the extreme outside of two parishes. Evidently this vote provoked bitter feeling, and three weeks later (January 26, 1774) another meeting was held, at which the (outside) majority carried a vote to choose two agents to go to the general court and endeavor to get the consent of that body to the division of the district. They also voted that the town should pay the expenses of these men. The minority sent a vigorous protest to Boston, and the general court appointed a committee to visit Amherst and report what was the best thing to be done. Accordingly, another town meeting (March 14, 1774) chose a committee "to wait upon the Courts' Com'tee that is to Repare to Amherst to decide the dispute respecting the Division of Amherst." Still another meeting, May 23, 1774, voted to send Reuben Dickinson to Boston, to hear the report of this committee and to "Conduct the affear as he shall think best for the town." They also voted "to furnish the agent with money," but as only seven pounds was appropriated for this purpose it can hardly be understood as furnishing a precedent for the amount of money sometimes expended in later days to secure a majority in some legislative bodies. The town records speak of no further action on this matter, and the excitement of the opening war with its discussions of great state questions were of evi-
170
TOWN OF AMHERST.
dent relief to those who seemed helplessly in the power of a majority, bent upon dividing the town through its very heart. Of necessity the question was postponed until it was seen what would be the issue of the war.
Before the war closed the first pastor of the "precinct," " district " and "town " had " entered into his rest," dying upon New Year's day, 1781, a few weeks before reaching his sixty-ninth birthday. A town meeting held the week following makes no allusion to his death, but the March meeting chose a committee to settle with his heirs for salaries due. In May the town ap- pointed the selectmen a committee to provide a preacher, and in June, 1781, a meeting to consider church affairs passed several votes concerning "the Resettlement of the Gospel Ministry and Ordnances." The town no longer took upon itself the decision of the whole question of procuring a pastor, but expressed their willingness "to concur with the Church in all proper measures," and to this end they chose a committee to act with this committee of the church giving them the following instructions : "that when occasion requires they shall confer with the committee of the Church and endeavor a union and harmony in all measures." They also directed this committee "to employ Mr. David Parsons to supply the Pulpit for the present." He was the oldest son of the deceased pastor of the church, and had been graduated at Harvard college ten years previous.
In July, 1781, the town voted to pay the executor of the former pastor " the whole of the salaries Due to him on the first day of May, 1781, in gold or silver, with the interest due on the same." But in spite of this vote the debt remained unpaid, for in January, 1784, three years after their pastor's decease, the town " Voted, That the Treasurer call on the Constables to Pay the Debt Due to the Heirs of the Late Rev'd David Parsons for salaries, as soon as may be." Still the debt remained unsettled and apparently the executors brought suit against the town, for May 1, 1786, the town voted to request the continuance until the next term of court of " the action brought by the exe- cutors of the Rev'd David Parsons, Dec'd, against the town." Still another meeting instructed the selectmen " to find how much is Due to the Heirs " of Mr. Parsons, and July 13, 1786, the town appropriated the sum of £250 to pay the debts due to the heirs of the late pastor, which doubtless settled the matter legally if not satisfactorily.
This long delay in settling a salary account was no doubt due in part to the difficulties which attached to all money transactions in the time of the failure of the Continental credit and the depreciated currency of the day. Still more was it due to the feeling that Mr. Parsons's iufluence against the country in the hour of war had forfeited some part of his claim upon the scanty resources of the patriotic and self-denying majority of his people ; but doubtless the debt would have been paid in less than five years but for the complication of church troubles arising with his son and successor.
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.