USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Groton > Groton historical series. A collection of papers relating to the history of the town of Groton, Massachusetts, Vol III > Part 27
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
JOHN VARNUM was a son of Parker and Dorcas (Brown) Varnum, and born at Dracut, on June 25, 1778. He gradu- ated at Harvard College in the Class of 1798, and studied law in the office of the Honorable Timothy Bigelow, of Groton. He was admitted to the Middlesex bar in September, 1801, and the next year began the practice of his profession at Haverhill, where he was highly successful as a lawyer. On April 5, 1813, as a Federalist, he was chosen a member of the State Senate; and on November 1, 1824, a member of the Nineteenth Congress from the Essex North District, and later of the next two Congresses, serving in that body from the year 1825 to 1831. Soon after his return from Washing- ton, he removed to the new town of Lowell, and thence to Niles, Michigan, where he died, after a short illness, on July 23, 1836.
On October 9, 1806, Mr. Varnum was married, first, to Mary Cooke, daughter of Dr. Nathaniel and Anna (White) Saltonstall, of Haverhill; and, on May 23, 1826, in Washing- ton, D. C., secondly, to Mrs. Mary (Pease) Varnum. The scc- ond wife was an adopted daughter of the Honorable Gideon
317
THE LAWYERS OF GROTON.
Granger, of New York, and the widow of James Mitchell Var- num, son of the Honorable Joseph Bradley Varnum, United States Senator from Massachusetts. She was a daughter of Dr. Augustine and Mary (Austin) Pcase, born at Suffield, Connecticut, on March 5, 1783, and died on September 11, 1847.
LEVI WALLACE is a son of Benjamin and Susan (Spaulding) Wallace, and was born at Townsend, on February 27, 1831. He attended school at Appleton Academy, New Ipswich, during 1857 and 1858 ; and for a short time after this period he was a teacher at the Merrimack Normal Institute at Reed's Ferry, a village in Merrimack, New Hampshire. In the year 1859 he began the study of law in the office of John Spaul- ding, Esq., of Groton, and on April 15, 1862, was admitted to the Middlesex bar. He settled first at Pepperell, but on October 27, 1874, removed to Ayer, where he now resides. On November 5, 1867, he was chosen a member of the Gen- cral Court for the session of 1868 from the towns of Groton and Pepperell ; and on November 7, 1871, a member of the Senate for the session of 1872 from the Fifth Middlesex Dis- trict, and re-chosen to the same office for the following year. On August 15, 1873, he was appointed Special Justice of the First District Court of Northern Middlesex, and on February 3, 1874, Standing Justice of the same court. At Commence- ment, June 30, 1886, Amherst College conferred upon him the honorary degree of A.M.
On September 20, 1863, Judge Wallace was married to Mrs. Hannah Farrar ( Rogers) Blaney, daughter of John William and Martha Farrar (Wallace) Rogers, and widow of Aaron Blaney, of Pepperell.
GILES HENRY WHITNEY was a son of Abel and Abigail (Townsend) Whitney, and born in Boston, on January 18, 1818. He fitted for college at the Boston Latin School, and graduated at Harvard College in the Class of 1837. He studied law in the office of George F. Farley, Esq., of Groton, and in 1842 attended a course of lectures at the Harvard Law School. He was admitted to the bar during that year, and began the practice of his profession at Westminster, but after-
318
THE LAWYERS OF GROTON.
ward lived at Templeton, and subsequently at Winchendon, to which town he removed in 1855. He was a member of the State Senate in 1851, - at that time a resident of Tem- pleton, - and a member of the House of Representatives in 1864, 1866, and 1881. For twenty-five years he acted as Moderator at the town-meetings, and in every way was a most useful citizen. Though modest and retiring in his hab- its, he was firm and positive in his convictions, and con- scientious in the performance of every duty. He died at Winchendon, on January 12, 1888.
On November 28, 1850, Mr. Whitney was married to Lydia Ann, daughter of Joseph, Jr., and Mary (Wood) Davis, of Northborough.
FREDERICK AUGUSTUS WORCESTER was a son of Jesse and Sarah (l'arker) Worcester, and born at Hollis, New Hamp- shire, on January 28, 1807. His parents had fifteen children, nine sons and six daughters ; and of the sons five graduated either at Harvard or Yale, and two others entered Harvard, of whom one died in college, and the other left during his Junior year. Joseph Emerson Worcester, the distinguished lexicographer, was one of these brothers. Frederick fitted for college partly at Pinkerton Academy, Derry, New Hampshire, and partly at Phillips Academy, Andover, and graduated at Harvard College in the Class of 1831. Immediately after- ward he began the study of law under the instruction of Ben- jamin M. Farley, Esq., of Hollis, where he remained about a year. He then attended the Harvard Law School for one term, finishing his professional studies in the office of George F. Farley, Esq., of Groton. After his admission to the bar he began the practice of his profession at Bangor, Maine, where he lived less than a year. In the summer of 1836 he removed to Townsend, which continued to be the place of his permanent abode, though during the last fifteen years of his life he also had an office at Ayer. He was a Representative to the General Court during the session of 1856.
On January 21, 1854, Mr. Worcester was married at Townsend to Jane McAfee, daughter of Charles and Try- phena (Hubbard) Kellogg, of Amherst, Massachusetts.
1
APPENDIX.
GROTON AS A SHIRE TOWN.
ON May 10, 1643, the Colony of Massachusetts Bay was divided into four counties : namely, Middlesex, Suffolk, Essex, and Norfolk; though the Norfolk County of that period did not comprise in any respect the same territory now known by that name.
Middlesex is therefore one of the oldest counties in the Commonwealth, as it is one of the largest in population. In the year 1729 an attempt- was made to divide it and form a new county from the northwestern section. The subject is referred to in the Reverend Wilkes Allen's History of Chelms- ford (p. 44), where the author says that a committee was ap- pointed by the town of Chelmsford in 1729, and the next four years, to meet with committees from other places in order to carry out the plan. He then gives a list of the towns which were to be embraced in the new county, as follows : Groton, Townsend, Pepperell, Dunstable, Merrimack, Dracut, Litchfield, Chelmsford, Westford, Littleton, Concord, Bedford, Billerica, and Tewksbury. At that time Merrimack and Litchfield were considered as belonging to Massachusetts ; but after the new Provincial line was settled in the spring of 1741, both these towns fell on the New Hampshire side of the boundary. It is a mistake, however, to include Pepperell in the list, as that place was not incorporated for many years after this period, either as a precinct or a district. Both Bedford and Westford were set off as towns on September 23,
.
320
APPENDIX.
1732, and Townsend was granted on June 29, 1732; but, being new settlements, and expecting soon to be made towns, they were interested in the scheme. Tewksbury was incorporated on December 23, 1734, and probably took no part in the movement.
Rufus Campbell Torrey, Esq., in his " History of the Town of Fitchburg, Massachusetts " (1836 edition), refers to the same subject, and says that the inhabitants of Lunenburg in the year 1729 chose Captain Josiah Willard as their agent " to join with others to consider what may be best in order to divide the county of Middlesex." The scheme resulted, on April 2, 1731, in the formation of Worcester County, which took eight towns out of Middlesex, besides others from Suf- folk and Hampshire; though it was not the same affair as the one mentioned in the History of Chelmsford. Mr. Torrey furthermore says : -
In a little more than two years after this, attempts were made to form a new county out of the counties of Worcester and Middlesex, of which Groton was to be the shire town. These attempts in a short time were abandoned (page 35).
Further particulars of this movement are given in extracts from the printed Journal of the Massachusetts House of Rep- resentatives, under the respective dates of June 15 and 17, 1736, as follows : -
On a motion made and seconded by divers Members, Ordered, That the House will enter into the consideration of the Petition of Benjamin Prescot, Esq ; and Capt. Joseph Blanchard, for them- selves and others, praying for a division of the Countys of Middlesex and Worcester on Thursday next the 17th. currant in the forenoon (page 49).
According to the order of Tuesday last the House enter'd into the consideration of the Petition of Benjamin Prescot, Esq ; and Capt. Joseph Blanchard, Agents for Groton, Dunstable, &c. praying for a new County to be erected partly out of Middlesex and partly out of Worcester Countys, as entred the 18th. of June last, and 26th. of March and referred ; the same being read, with the respective
321
APPENDIX.
answers thereto, and some debate being had, the following Vote passed, vis. In answer to the within Petition, Ordered, That the prayer thereof be so far granted as that the Towns of Groton, Dun- stable, Littleton, Wesford, Dracut, Nottingham, Townshend, Lunen- burgh, and Harvard, with the Towns lately granted, and lying Northerly and Westerly of the Towns afore enumerated, and not already included in any County, be and hereby are erected into a seperate and distinct County by themselves, to all intents and pur- poses in the Law, and that the Petitioners have leave to bring in a Bill accordingly. Sent up for Concurrence (page 51).
The question of dividing the county does not appear to have been brought forward again for nearly thirty years. In the Journal of the House of Representatives, June 6, 1764, the following entry is found : -
A Petition of Capt. Abel Lawrence and others, Agents for several Towns in the County of Middlesex, praying that sundry Towns in the County of Middlesex and Worcester as mentioned, may be erected into a seperate County.
Read and Ordered, That the Petitioners insert Copies of this Petition in all the Boston News-Papers three Weeks successively, that so the several Towns in the Counties of Middlesex and Worces- ter, may shew Cause, if any they have, on the second Wednesday of the next Session of this Court, why the Prayer thereof should not be granted. Sent up for Concurrence (page 39).
The petition is given in " The Massachusetts Gazette. And Boston News-Letter," August 23, 1764, and sets forth the reasons for the division. It is as follows : -
Province of the
Massachusetts-Bay. S
To His Excellency FRANCIS BERNARD, Esq; Captain- General and Governor in Chief in and over His MAJESTYS said Province ; and to the Honorable His Majesty's CoUNCH., and House of REPRESENTATIVES, in General Court assembled at Boston, December, A. D. 1763.
-
322
APPENDIX.
T HE Petition of the Subscribers, Agents for the several Towns and Distriets, viz. of Groton, and District of Shirley, and Pepperrell, as also the Towns of Westford, Lyttleton and Townshend, in the County of Middlesex, and the Town of Lunenburg, and the Township of Ipswich-Canada [Winchendon ], and Dorchester-Canada (so called) [Ashburnham] in the County of Worcester,
Humbly sheweth,
THAT Your Petitioners and their Predecessors, inhabiting the several Towns and Districts aforesaid, from the first Settlements of said Towns and Districts have, and still do labour under great Difficulty and Burthen, by Reason of the great Distance they live from the usual Place of holding the several Courts of Justice within the Counties aforesaid, as well as the Courts of Probate in the same Counties ; many of the Inhabitants living fifty, some forty, and few less than thirty Miles from the Courts of Probate aforesaid, which renders it at all Times very difficult, and sometimes impossible, for poor Widows and others to attend the l'robate Courts, and other Courts of Justice, without great Expence ; by Means whereof, many times Actions are and necessarily must be continued, to the great Cost and Charge, oftentimes, to poor Orphan Children, and others who are necessarily obliged to attend said Courts ; and this almost inconceivable Difficulty and Burden daily increases, in Proportion to the Increase of the Inhabitants of said Counties, which are now so large, that the Inferior as well as Superior Courts are frequently obliged to adjourn over Sundays, in order to finish the necessary Business of said Courts, to the great Cost and Damages of many poor Witnesses and Jurymen, and others who are obliged to attend, &c. Wherefore Your Petitioners, in behalf of themselves and the several Towns and Districts aforesaid, most earnestly pray Your Excellency and Honors to take their difficult Case under your wise Consideration, and pass such Acts and Laws, as that the Towns and Districts aforesaid, together with the Towns of Chelmsford, Dracut, Dunstable and Stow, in the County of Middlesex, and the Towns of Harvard and Leominster, in the county of Worcester (or such of said Towns and Plantations, or any others, as Your Excel- lency and Honors shall think fit) may be erected and incorporated into a separate and distinct County, and that the same may be in- vested with all the Privileges that other Counties have and enjoy in this Province ; or otherwise grant Relief as Your Excellency and Honors, in Your known Wisdom and Goodness shall see meet, and
323
APPENDIX.
Your Petitioners in behalf of themselves and the several Towns they represent, as in Duty bound, shall ever pray.
AIbel Lawrence Oliver Prescott Jonas Cutler James Prescot Josiah Sartell
Agents for Groton.
Jonath. Lawrence Thomas Warren Joseph Harwood
Agents for Lyttleton.
Jonas Prescott William Fletcher Yabes Reep | Keep] Benjamin Brooks
Agents for Westford.
. Agent for Townshend.
William Prescott
Agent for Pepperrell. 1
Hezekiah Sarotell 1 Agent for Shirley.
In the House of Representatives,
JUNE the 14th, 1764.
R
EAD, and ordered, That the Petitioners insert Copies of this Petition in all the Boston News Papers, three Weeks succes- sively, that so the several Towns in the Counties of Middlesex and Worcester may shew Cause (if any they have) on the Second Wednes- day of the next Session of this Court, why the Prayer thereof should not be granted.
Sent up for Concurrence, Tnos. CLAPP, Speak'r Pro Tempr.
IN COUNCIL, Fune 14. 1764, read and concurred. .1. OLIVER, Sed'ry.
It will be seen that the spelling of some of the names of these towns differs from the modern method. Lyttleton, Townshend, and Pepperrell were formerly common ways of writing them. It is somewhat doubtful how Littleton got its name; but Townsend was so called from Viscount Towns- hend, a member of the Privy Council ; and Pepperell from Sir William Pepperrell, the hero of the capture of Louisburg, who always wrote his surname with a double " r." While, therefore, these forms were correct more than a century ago, long and good usage has now decided against them.
£
324
APPENDIX.
It is useless at the present time to speculate on what might have been, if the prayer of the petitioners had been granted. It would have materially changed the destiny of Groton, which was to be the shire town of the new county.
On February 6, 1776, an Act was passed removing the No- vember term of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace and Court of Common Pleas from Charlestown to Groton, presumably on account of the disturbances of the War. Two years later, on September 23, 1778, this November term was transferred to Cambridge, to take the place of the May term, which in turn was brought to Groton, where it remained until June, 1787. The sessions of the Court were held in the First Parish Meeting-house ; and the Court was sitting there dur- ing the famous dark day of May 19, 1780, when candles had to be used.
The following notice adjourning the Court of Common Pleas, appointed to be held at Groton, appears in " The Boston Ga- zette, and the Country Journal," May 12, 1783, and is signed by three Justices of that Court. It is impossible now to learn the circumstances under which the adjournment took place, but they may have been similar to those mentioned in a Re- solve, here reprinted immediately after the advertisement from the newspaper. On the docket at East Cambridge no explanation is given, but under date of May 20, 1783, it is there recorded that the Court, by proclamation of John Tyng, and James Prescott, Esquires, two of the Justices, was adjourned to the first Tuesday of June, which fell that year on the third day of the month.
W HEREAS some Circumstances that must happen will render it necessary that the Court of Common Pleas, by Law appointed to be holden at Groton, within and for the County of Middlesex, on the 3d Tuesday of May Inst. should be adjourned to some future Day : All Persons concerned are to take Notice, that the same Court will be adjourned to the first Tuesday in June next, then to proceed to Business Jurors Parties and Witnesses will govern themselves accordingly.
By Order of Three of the Justices of the same Court.
325
APPENDIX.
N. B. As the Court of Common Pleas will adjourn as above, it is probable that the Court of General Sessions of the Peace will be adjourned in like Manner.
Middlesex, ss ) MIIE Clerk of the within mentioned Courts is
May 9, 1783 ) directed to publish the within Advertisement in the Papers, and to send Copies thereof to the several Parts of the County.
A FULLER, JAMES P'RESCOTT, SAMUEL PHILLIP'S SAVAGE.
A true Copy of the Originals filed in the Office of the Courts abovementioned, May 9 1783.
Attest.
THAD. MASON, Clerk
The following Resolution was passed by the General Court, on May 2, 1787, and is found in the printed volume of " Re- solves " (page 280), where the chapter is numbered XXXI.
Resolve adjourning the Court of General Sessions of the Peace, and Court of Common Pleas in the county of Middlesex, to the fourth Tuesday in May inst.
May 2, 1787.
Whereas by reason of the sitting of the Supreme Judicial Court, at Concord, on the second Tuesday of May instant, the sitting of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace, and Court of Common Pleas, at Groton, on the Tuesday following, may be attended with inconveniences.
Resolved, That the said Court of General Sessions of the Peace, and Court of Common Pleas, by law to be holden at Groton, within and for the county of Middlesex, on the third Tuesday of May in- stant, shall be holden at Groton aforesaid, on the fourth Tuesday of the same month, and that all writs, processes and recognizances, returnable to, and all appeals made to the said Court of General Sessions of the Peace, and Court of Common Pleas, appointed by law to be holden at Groton ; and all matters, causes and things, that have day or that might have had day, been moved or done at, in, or by the said Courts, at the time so appointed for holding the same, shall be returnable to, and may be entered, prosecuted, had, moved and done at, in, and by the said Courts, at the time herein appointed for holding the same. And the Secretary is hereby di- reeted, to publish this resolve, in the two next Adams and Nourse's, Hall's, and Charlestowm papers.
1
326
APPENDIX.
It is highly probable that Shays's Rebellion, which broke out in the summer of 1786, had some connection with the removal of these sessions from Groton. The uprising in Middlesex County was confined exclusively to this neigh- borhood, and the insurgents always felt a bitter spite against the Court of Common Pleas, which they had tried so hard to abolish. The action of the Legislature in making the change seems to have been in part retributive.
During the period when the Courts were held here, Groton was a town much more important relatively, both in size and influence, than it is at the present time. According to the National census of 1790, it was then the second town in pop- ulation in Middlesex County, Cambridge alone having more inhabitants. In that year Groton had 322 families, number- ing 1,840 persons; and Cambridge, 355 families, numbering 2,115 persons, while Lowell had no existence. Charlestown had a population of 1,583; and Newton, 1,360. Reading, with 341 families (19 more than Groton ), numbered 1,802 persons (38 less than Groton ). Woburn then had a population of 1,727 ; Framingham, 1,598; Marlborough, 1,554 ; and Wal- tham, 882. Pepperell contained 1, 132 inhabitants ; Shirley, 677; Westford, 1,229 ; and Littleton, 854.
The Court House at Concord was burned down early on the morning of June 20, 1849, during a session of the Court. The County Commissioners declined to rebuild, and left the matter to the next General Court. On February 13, 1850, Mr. Boutwell, then a member of the Legislature, presented to that body a petition of Nathaniel Pierce Smith and others, that the terms of the Court of Common Pleas ordered to be held at Concord, should be held at Groton ; and the question was duly referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. The sub- jeet was followed up, on March is, by petitions from Pepper- ell, Townsend, Shirley, Littleton, and other neighboring towns, in aid of Mr. Smith's petition, which all took the same course. On March 26 the committee reported leave to withdraw, which recommendation was carried on April 8, after a long debate. One week later the matter came up again in another form, on April 15, when the project for a change was defeated for the last time.
327
APPENDIX.
GROTON PROBATE COURT.
Ar my request, some years ago, the late Ellis Ames, Esq., of Canton, furnished the following account of the Probate Courts held here, which forms a fit supplement to this article.
No statute in the Provincial period regulated the times and places of holding Probate Courts. I suppose the Probate Judges held their Courts at the Court House on days of which they had before given notice to the public.
By the Constitution of Massachusetts, which went into effect on October 25, 1780, the Judges of Probate were required to hold their Courts at such places, on fixed days, as the convenience of the people should demand, and the General Court was required from time to time thereafter to appoint times and places for holding Probate Courts, until which appointments the Courts were to be holden at such times and places as the respective Judges of Pro- bate should direct.
The General Court did not, by any law, fix times or places for holding Probate Courts in Middlesex County until, by a statute passed June 14, 1813, a Probate Court was ordered to be held at Groton on the first Tuesday in March, on the second Tuesday in May, and on the third Tuesday in October.
A change was made in the law by statute passed February 14, 1822, when the Probate Courts in Groton were required to be held on the first Tuesday of May, the last Tuesday of September, and the last Tuesday of December.
By a law passed on March 20, 1832, the Probate Courts at Groton were required to be held on the first Tuesdays of May and Novem- ber, which was continued by the Revised Statutes of 1836.
By statute of 1856, Chap. 273, the first Tuesday of November was changed to the third Tuesday of October. By statute of 1857, Chap. 78, the Probate Courts at Groton were required to be held on the fourth Tuesdays of May and September, which last provision was carried into the General Statutes, and by the statute of March 30, 1866, these two Groton Probate Courts were removed to be held at Cambridge, since which time no Probate Court has been held at Groton.
October 20, 1877.
. During my boyhood the sessions of this Court were held in Mr. Hoar's tavern.
1
328
APPENDIX.
An Act was passed by the Legislature, on June 15, 1821, authorizing the Judge of Probate to hold a special Court at Groton, on the second Tuesday of August of that year. After 1858 all the Groton Probate Courts were held at the " Junc- tion " (now Ayer ), until they were abolished by the statute of March 30, 1866.
MISCELLANEOUS.
TIMOTHY BIGELOW and Luther Lawrence were both Speak- ers of the House of Representatives ; and at different periods, while residents of the town, they occupied the same dwelling- house. It is somewhat singular that the present owner of the place, Governor Boutwell, was himself once the Dem- ocratic candidate for the Speakership, when the Legislature met on January 6, 1847. Timothy Fuller, another Speaker of the House, was afterward a resident of the town for some years before his death, which occurred on October 1, 1835. Ile was the father of Margaret Fuller, otherwise known as Countess d'Ossoli. John Quincy Adams Griffin, also a for- mer resident, was a member of the General Court from Charlestown, during the session of 1855, when he was the Free-Soil candidate for the Speakership. All these names are included among the lawyers of Groton, whose sketches have already been given in this Number.
The town of Groton has furnished seven Mayors for New England cities, of whom five were lawyers, whose sketches appear in these pages. The cities of Boston and Fitchburg cach have had two Mayors, who were natives of the town ; the cities of Lowell and of Gardiner, Maine, each a Mayor ; and the city of Charlestown, a Mayor, who though not a native, belonged to a Groton family, and passed his boyhood and early manhood in the town. Another son of Groton was a mayoral candidate in the city of Bradford, Pennsylvania, ten years ago, when he was defeated by a small majority.
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.