USA > Massachusetts > Worcester County > Historical collections, Vol. I > Part 25
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
The former value of an ounce of silver was six shillings and ten and a half pence, and these bills were now so much depreciated in value that it required sixly shillings to pur- chase an ounce. It required eleven shillings in this depreciated currency, in 1747, to buy one shilling of English exchange. But Mr. Bollan succeeded in obtaining a bill for the entire amount of this expenditure: £183,649 2s .. 742d .. 1le arrived in Boston, September 19, 1748, with 653,000 ounces of silver, and ten tons of copper, about the specie value of $800,000. The currency debt at this time of depreciated bills of credit was about £2,100,000 lawful currency, which, at $3,333 per pound, is $6,999,300; about $7,000,000.
The question now arose as to the application of this specie; the currency debt of the colony was now about £2, 100,000, and by allowing this entire specie to be applied-£1,980,000, at its currency value-left but a small balance-£120,000-of this depreciated money. The Legislature finally passed an act for this purpose, which was approved by the gover- nor. This bill also included an act for the purchase of the balance of this currency as above, to be paid during the year 1749. For the future it was established that English bul- lion should be received for the payment of debts at six shillings and eight pence the ounce, and milled dollars at six shillings each.
This operation in finance paid off all the indebtedness of the province, and relieved the people from this depreciated currency. And it was further enacted that the bills of credit of the other New England colonies should not be received in payment in the business trans- actions of the province, thus bringing back the trade of Massachusetts to'a specie basis. There was great opposition at first to reducing the currency to specie; many prophesied ruin and bankruptcy in business; but it had the contrary effect : business revived, and all were pleased with the result.
29
WOODSTOCK.
with the two other towns before named, began to consult to- gether and to make efforts for their reception into the colony of Connecticut, and under the government which that colony's charter and laws afforded.
It has been represented by Rev. Benjamin Trumbull, in his " History of Connectient," " that the three towns here referred to and affected, as has been stated, by the line of 1713, were opposed to the arrangement which left them in Massachusetts as they previously had been, and that they had always con- tinned to be dissatisfied with this arrangement, and 'it was a matter of great grievance to their inhabitants that they were so left in that colony, and this feeling continned until Con- nectient received and assumed government over them, and they were admitted to the civil and religious liberty of the other inhabitants of this colony."
Mr. Hollister, in his more recent history, has repeated the same idea. He says :
"They were determined to throw off their allegiance to a govern- ment to which they had been annexed without their consent."
But, on the other side, there is the statement of Governor Hutchinson, as given in his papers, published in the third volume of his " History of Massachusetts," from manuscripts, by his grandson in 1828, as follows :
"The inhabitants of these towns thought themselves happy under the government of Massachusetts, until they felt a greater proportion of burden from charges of the war, than they would have done under Connecticut."*
Massachusetts continued to tax these towns their propor- tion of the expense of the provincial government, but it does
* See Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts, vol. II, pp. 363 to 396, giving an account of the Spanish and French war, and expedition and capture of Cape Breton; also, the reim- bursement, etc .; also see Hutchinson, vol. III, pp. 6, 7, aud 8.
See Trumbull's History of Connecticut, vol. II, chap. 10; and, see llollister's History of Connecticut, vol. II, p. 463.
298
WOODSTOCK.
not appear that they ever paid any of such assessments. This tax was probably more for the assertion of a right than for enforcing the amount of such tax. It is true that Massachu- setts was much the most populous and powerful province-not only in New England, but among all the English colonies then in America-and continued so until some time after the war of the Revolution ; but at this time the English government manifested inch jealousy of her exhibition of power and the spirit of republicanism that submitted to no encroachment upon her rights. She was pressing her claim for indemnity for the expense of the Cape Breton expedition, and her spirit of forbearance at this time was, probably, somewhat caused by a recent decision against her by the English crown, in re- lation to her north boundary line, for which she felt much aggrieved and disappointed .*
Also, a commission had recently decided adversely to her
* The several colonies that were expected to furnish quotas of troops for the expedition to Cape Breton fell much short of the number required, except Massachusetts. The number of men the several colonies voted to furnish were as follows:
Massachusetts voted, 3,500 men; furnished, 3,250 men.
New Hampshire « 500 6
304 «
Connecticut 66 1,000
516 “
4,070
Rhode Island voted, 300 men; sent this number too late, 300 men.
New York
1,600 “ furnished ten field cannon, no men.
New Jersey
500 4 nothing.
Maryland
300
Virginia -
105 «
66 Pennsylvania
400 “
In addition to the 4,070 men furnished, mostly by Massachusetts, there were furnished twelve small armed vessels. Of the three largest, two carried twenty guns each, and one twenty-four guns. They were commanded by Captain Edward Tyng, who made the heaviest armed vessel the flag-ship.
Commodore Sir Peter Warren, commander of the English naval force in America, de- clined his aid in this expedition at first, having no special orders from his government; but having been ordered afterward, did join with it. The principal credit for the success of this enterprise is due to General Sir William Pepperell, Governor Shirley, and the Massa- chusetts forces. See Hutchinson, vol. II, pp. 364-396; also Minot's Massachusetts, vol. I, pp. 73-83; and vol. 1, Mass. Hist. Collections, 1st series, pp. 5-60; and Bancroft's Ilistory of United States, vol. III, pp. 457-463.
See Belknap's New Hampshire, vol. II, pp. 101-103. Massachusetts did not obtain near so favorable a line against New Hampshire as that colony had previously offered to her. This decision was March 5, 1740.
299
WOODSTOCK.
claim for her boundary line against Rhode Island .* She, no doubt, felt humiliated by these adverse decisions, and did not feel quite safe in pressing any disputed question at this time.
The smaller colonies of New England were not ignorant of this state of things, and were disposed to take advantage, by attempting to press all points against her, as by her superior power she had before been accustomed to assert her rights and claims somewhat arbitrarily against them.
The first town meeting held in Woodstock for effecting this change of jurisdiction was May 7, 1747, at which time Colonel Thomas Chandler and Henry Bowen were appointed to take charge of the business.
Another meeting was called on the 8th of June following, to hear the report of their committee. It appears that the towns of Enfield and Suffield were acting jointly in this mat- ter, and the committees from the three towns co-operated in their efforts. On the 16th of June following another meet- ing was held, when Colonel Chandler was continued as their agent in this affair.
A joint memorial was now framed by the agents from these three towns, and presented to the General Assembly of Con- necticut, the substance of which was as follows :
" That they had, without their consent or ever having been consulted in the matter, been put under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts; that, as they were within the limits of the royal charter of Connecticut, they had a just and legal right to the government and privileges which it conferred, and that they were deprived of their rights by that charter ; that the Legislature had no right to put them under another government, but that the charter required that the same protection, government, and privileges should be extended to them which were enjoyed by the other inhabitants of the colony. For these reasons they prayed to be taken under the colony of Connecticut, and to be admitted to the liberty and privileges of its other inhabitants."
* See S. G. Arnold's History of Rhode Island, vol. II, pp. 130-134. Again Massachusetts lost several towns she had claimed as a part of Plymouth colony, granted to her by the char- ter of William and Mary. This decision was in June, 1741.
Also, see Hutchinson's Massachusetts, vol. II, pp. 342-348. Here the facts in these cases are stated, no doubt very impartially.
300
WOODSTOCK.
The Legislature admitted the principle set forth in the peti- tion from these towns, and favored the request ; and to effect this object appointed a committee to unite with a similar committee to be appointed by Massachusetts, if that province agreed to this mode of adjustment.
This committee was Jonathan Trumbull, John Bulkley, Benjamin Hall, and Captain Roger Wolcott.
The province of Massachusetts declined to accept the mode of adjustment proposed by Connecticut at this time, regarding the former adjustment of 1713, as conclusive. They considered these three towns, by the agreement of 1713, as towns of that province, and that there was no question about the matter to settle, and nothing for commissioners to do in the matter of jurisdiction.
Again, in May, 1749, the Assembly of Connecticut, with a view to an examination of the correctness of line of 1713, to be certain of the true location of these towns, as to the charter limits of the two colonies, appointed Jonathan Trumbull, John Bulkley, Elisha Williams, and Joseph Fowler, Esq., to join like commissioners from the goverment of Massachusetts to ascertain and fix the line ; but should Massachusetts not agree or refuse to appoint commissioners, that then the matter should be referred to their agent in London, with the direction to lay the case before his majesty, and pray that he would appoint commissioners for fixing this line.
The Assembly of Connecticut in October, 1752, passed a resolve for accepting these three towns, Woodstock, Suffield, and Enfield, and also the town of Somers, which had been taken from Enfield in 1726, and called " East Enfield," and by an act of the General Court of Massachusetts, in 1734, incor- porated as the town of Somers.
This colony now regarded these four towns as a part of their territory, and were determined to hold them, as a right, by the limits of their charter.
301
WOODSTOCK.
Under this state of the matter, Connecticut proposed joint commissioners to run the boundary line ; but in this proposal they had no respect to the settlement of 1713, or the equiva- lent she had received in lands for the territory in these towns that was south of the said line.
The proposal in this form Massachusetts rejected, but, instead of their proposition, made an offer to treat upon ways and means in general for preventing a controversy between the two governments.
This course did not answer the purpose of Connecticut : she acknowledged the receipt of the equivalent, but urged that the inhabitants had an inalienable right to the jurisdiction of Connecticut, by charter, which the Legislature of Connecticut could not take from them, and which the act of the inhabi- tants in 1713 could not take from the inhabitants of 1749. Upon this pretense Connectient supported its claim, and kept her jurisdiction over these towns.
Mr. Hutchinson remarks that,
" It would at least hare been decent in the Connecticut Assembly to offer to return the equivalent which their predecessors had received."
The Assembly of Connecticut further resolved,
" That, as it did not appear that even the agreement between the colony of Connecticut and the province of Massachusetts for establishing the boundary line of 1713 between these colonies had received the ratifica- tion of his majesty, so it never ought to receive the royal confirmation : and that as the respective governments could not give up, exchange, or alter their jurisdictions, so the said agreement of 1713, so far as it res- pects jurisdiction, is void ; and therefore this assembly do declare that all the said inhabitants who live south of the line fixed by the Massa- chusetts charter are within, and have a right to the privileges of this government, the aforesaid agreement notwithstanding."
* See Trumbull's Connecticut, vol. II, pp. 295-298 ; also see Hutchinson's Massachu- setts, vol. III, pp. 6-8; likewise see Hollister's Connecticut, vol. 11, pp. 463-464; also, the Colonial Records of Connecticut and Massachusetts, referring to the adjustment of this boundary line. Something respecting the settlement and controversy about this line will be given in another place. See Trumbull's Connectient, vol. 11, 296.
302
WOODSTOCK.
Both colonies applied to the crown to sustain their construc- tion of right in this unhappy affair between them; but this last occurrence happened about the time of the breaking out of the last great French and English war in America, and immediately following the close of this war came those acts of the English Parliament for taxing the American colonies, which brought on the war of the Revolution. The absorbing interest which these greater objects demanded put aside this smaller concern, and these towns, having remained under the jurisdiction of Connecticut for over thirty years, when the Revolutionary war closed in 1783, it was no doubt deemed best by all parties concerned to suffer that matter to rest free from further disturbance. It does not appear that there ever was a hearing on the question of this boundary line before his majesty's council ; and the subsequent independence of these colonies and separation from the crown of England closed forever (and not to be regretted) that right of appeal.
The territory of Woodstock, when the grant was made in 1683, was within the limits of Suffolk county, in Massachu- setts, but, in the formation of the county of Worcester in 1731, it became part of that county ; and now, after being accepted under the jurisdiction of Connecticut, she had new associa- tions to form to enter upon her career as a town of that colony.
It now became necessary to conform to the laws and customs of Connecticut. To secure what is called the rights of free- men, it was necessary to conform to a law of that colony enacted for that purpose.
To do this, a town meeting was called, September 12, 1749, at which time was read publicly the law of the colony relating to freemen and the freeman's oath, by order of Andrew Durkey and Ebenezer Payne, constables of the town.
The names of the voters were then called and registered,
303
WOODSTOCK.
as they had administered to them the freeman's oath, by James Buckwell, Esq., as follows :
John May,
Abram Perrin,
Caleb Lyon,
Isaac Johnson,
Andrew Durkey,
Edward Ainsworth,
Joseph Peak,
Nathan Abbot,
John Goodall,
Thomas Fox,
Edward Morris,
Nathaniel Sanger,
Ebenezer Payne,
John Child,
Joseph Wright,
Joseph Williams,
Benjamin Bugbee,
Thomas Ormsbee, John Bishop,
Nathaniel Johnson,
Thomas Gould,
Jacob Marscruft,
Jedediah Morse,
Henry Child,
James Ledwidth,
Ephraim Manning,
John Hutchins, John Chaffee,
Nehemiah May,
Silas Bowen,
Nehemiah Lyon,
Benjamin Roth,
Ebenezer Phillips,
Stephen May,
Jacob Child,
Joseph Chaffee,
Nathaniel Child,
John Peak,
David Chikdl,
Jesse Bugbee,
David Bishop,
Timothy Hyde,
Joseph Marcy,
Ephraim Hutchins,
Thomas Bacon, Jr.,
David Holmes,
John Chamberlain,
Samuel Davis,
Jacob Lyon, William Chapman,
Pennel Bowen, Isaac Williams,
Caleb May,
Jonathan Hammond, Samuel Child,
Samuel Harding,
Ebenezer Smith, Jun., Thomas Child,
Ezra Perrin,
Benjamin Child,
Richard Flynn,
James Chaffee,
Ebenezer Smith,
Amos Morse,
James Marcy.
At the same meeting Henry Bowen and Colonel Thomas Chandler were elected to represent the town in the General Assembly of Connecticut, which was to be holden at New Haven. This was the first representation of Woodstock in the General Assembly of that colony. Woodstock was now completely annexed, and became part of Windham county.
In establishing the boundary line, as before stated, in 1713, a portion of the northern part of this town remained north of this line, within the limits of Massachusetts. This tract of her territory ran the whole extent of her north line, seven miles in length, as it is abont half a mile in breadth, its contents being nearly 3,000 acres. So long as this town abided by the agreement for establishing this line, and re-
Benjamin Frissell,
Ebenezer Corbin,
William Child,
Joseph Abbot.
304
WOODSTOCK.
mained in the province of Massachusetts, she retained all her original territory, whether north or south of said line ; but in seceding from that colony and uniting with Connectient, on the plea that her territory and jurisdiction belonged to the colony in the limits of whose charter it was located, it fol- lowed, of course, that she could not take with her that por- tion of her original grant which tell north of said line.
During the interval of time between the running of this boundary line in 1713, and the seceding of Woodstock in 1749, Massachusetts had granted the territory bordering on her north line for other towns: Dudley in 1731, and Stir- bridge in 1729 (but not incorporated until 1738); thus the south bounds of these two towns being fixed by their grants on that town, and the sereding of Woodstock having lost to her all that part of her territory north of the colony line, that land was not within the jurisdiction of any town, and became simply unappropriated province territory, yet within the limits of the county of Worcester. By its middle loca- tion between Woodstock on the south, and Dudley and Stur- bridge on the north, it soon took the name of Middlesex.
This gore of land continued to be known as Middlesex, from 1749 to 1794, a period of about forty-five years; when, by an act of the Legislature of Massachusetts, on the 25th of June of the latter year it was annexed to Dudley and Stur- bridge ; so much as lay opposite their south lines was placed to each of these towns.
But when the town of Southbridge was incorporated in February, 1816, all that part of this gore which had been an- nexed to Sturbridge, 1,700 rods in length, or about five and one third miles long-more than two thirds of the land in said gore, and over 2,000 acres, which had formerly been a part of Woodstock-now became a part of Southbridge, and still con- tinues a considerable part of her territory.
The foregoing sketch of history has briefly traced the pro-
305
WOODSTOCK.
gress of this town up to the time it became a part of Connec- tient, which is as far as was the original design contemplated at the beginning of this work. But as other facts have come to the writer, connected both with its general and ecclesiasti- cal affairs, it is deemed best to add them with a view to their preservation in this connection, but more particularly for their benefit of others who may desire to write a more connected and general history of this ancient and interesting town.
This town established for itself, through the activity of its citizens, a patriotic record during the French war, as well as in the great Revolutionary struggle for their liberty and independence.
While it is known that Woodstock was not excelled by any of the towns of New England, in the number of soldiers it furnished for both the wars above referred to, it is to be regretted that the names of these patriotic individuals did not find a place on its records. But it is believed that this neglect of preserving this roll of honored names is not an exception with this town, as it is a rare instance that the names of those who served in these wars are found anywhere recorded, except in the state departments of the several colonies, and then not by towns separately, but in companies and regiments, in which they served. The members of these companies and regiments are preserved in the adjutant-generals' departments of the several colonies.
The enlistments for the French war were made through a period of seven years, and those for the Revolution, eight years. They are to be found connected with many different com- panies, which formed parts of many regiments. To trace the names of these soldiers through these commands to the towns from which they enlisted, requires experience with the depart- ment records, and much time for research.
It is well known that soon after the breaking ont of the French war, Israel Putnam, then a farmer of Pomfret, Con-
21
306
WOODSTOCK.
nectient, was commissioned by that colony, captain, early in in the year 1755 .*
He was ordered to raise a company of men to join in a regiment with others from Connecticut, to form a command under Major-General Phineas Lyman. These, with some other New England troops and forces from New York, were to ren- dezvous on the Hudson river, at the head of boat navigation, at the great carrying place, or Fort Lydius, t as then known, where Major-General William Jolinson was to be commander- in-chief, for an expedition, planned to move against Crown Point.#
The chief notoriety of Captain Putnam, previous to this war, was his active pursuit, and tracing to her den at Pomfret, and killing a she-wolf, which had destroyed a large number of his sheep and goats.
His bold and adventurous spirit enabled him readily to en-
* Israel Putnam was born at Salem, Massachusetts, January 7, 1718; married a daughter of John Pope, of that town, for his first wife; removed to Pomfret about 1740, and engaged in farming. This wife died in 1664. His second wife was a Mrs. Gardiner, who died in 1777. He died at Brooklyn, Connecticut, May 19, 1790.
The opening of this war was brought about by a command under Colonel George Wash- ington. "On the 27th of May, 1754, at the Great Meadows in the valley of the Kanawha, Washington, aided by the Mingo chiefs, made an attack upon a French force under the con- mand of De Jumonville. Perceiving the French approach, 'Fire!' said Washington, and, with his own musket, gave the example. That word of command kindled the world into a flame." It was the signal for wresting from France her dominion in America -- a precursor of the war of the Revolution, and the freedom and independence of the English colonies from Great Britain. - See Bancroft.
t Fort Lydius took its name from John Henry Lydius, son of Rev. John Lydius, second minister of the Dutch Reformed church at Albany. He was born in 1693, and began his business career as an Indian trader; resided at Montreal from 1725 to 1730, and there mar- ried Genevieve Masse, of French and Indian lineage, called half-breed. For an interference against the Catholic religion, and carrying on some illicit trade with the English colonies, he was banished from the Canadas. He was a man of ability, and understood the French and English languages, and also could converse with the different tribes of Indians, which called him into constant requisition by the English on missions among the Iroquois and other Indian natives. Governor Shirley gave him a commission as colonel, and employed him as a spy for informing him of the movements of the French, and to negotiate for him among the Indians.
# This movement against Crown Point was part of a general movement against the en- croachments of the French, arranged at a convention of the governors of the English colo- nies, which met at Alexandria, Virginia. April 14, 1755, General Edward Braddock presiding. Three expeditions were planned to move forward at the same time-one by General Brad- dock, against Fort Du Quesne; another by Governor Shirley, of Massachusetts, against Fort Niagara; and a third by Major-General Johnson, as above.
307
· WOODSTOCK.
list the complement of men desired for his command. These were his personal acquaintances in the towns of Pomfret and Woodstock, many from the latter town. This company was united with another, under command of Captain Robert Rogers, of Dumbarton, New Hampshire, and known as the Rangers, whose duty was to scout along the outposts and flanks of the enemy, and keep the commander-in-chief informed of their plans and movements.
The chief operations of these Rangers in the year 1755 were upon the middle ground between the contending forces, extending from Fort Lydius and the south end of Lake Saint Sacrament,* on the south, and Fort Carillon (since Ticonde- roga), on the north, a distance of abont thirty miles.
This range bordered along both sides of what isnow known as Lake Georget (a name given by Sir William Johnson), and on the east side of the mountain range which separates that lake from Lake Champlain and Wood creek.
On these routes the contending armies marched alternately to victory and defeat. Every rod of this pass-way has a his- tory of its own, connected with deeds of daring and heroic adventure.
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.