USA > Massachusetts > Plymouth County > Abington > Historical sketch of Abington, Plymouth County, Massachusetts. With an appendix > Part 6
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
1826. Ruth, widow of Noalı Gurney, 91
1828. Deborah, widow of John Porter, 88
James Dyer, 85
1829. Joseph Shaw,
87
Rachel Bates,
91
1830. David Torrey, 85
1831. Mary, widow of Joseph Shaw,
91
1832. Thomas Tirrill,
86
David Jenkins,
85
1833.
Sarah, widow of John Pool,
85
1834. Jacob Pool,
93
Abigail, widow of Jacob Dyer, John Puffer, 87
89
1835. Benjamin Vining, 88
Susanna Askins, 94
1837. Meriam Hersey, 88
12
MANUFACTURES.
Meeting-House Bells were cast in Abington probably as early as at any other place in the country. About 1769, a deserter from the British Army, by the name of Gallimore, a bell founder, came to Abington and was employed by Col. Aaron Hobart, in this business. The air furnace, in which the bells were cast, was a little back of Samuel Dyer's house.
Col. Hobart, about the commencement of the revo- lutionary war, began the manufacture of cannon and cannon-balls, and was the first person in the country who introduced and carried on this branch of business. At first, owing to a want of experience, and the prac- tice of moulding in sand instead of clay, he was unsuc- cessful and sustained great losses ; but in process of time, the business was better understood ; and he then car- ried it on largely and profitably. The cannon were cast hollow and afterwards bored to make the inner surface true and smooth. At the present day, it is thought the better way to cast them solid.
The manufacture of cut nails and tacks originated in Abington over sixty years ago. The first attempts, as is common with all great improvements, were very im- perfect. Old iron hoops and afterwards rolled iron plates were cut into angular points, with lever shears. The points were then taken up one by one, by hand,
91
put into a common vice and headed with a hammer. Mr. Ezekiel Reed, a native of the town, made an im- portant improvement. Instead of putting the points into a vice, he put them into dies set in the two upper and inner sides of an iron frame, somewhat in the shape of an oxbow. The dies were brought together so as to gripe the points, by a lever, moved by the foot. In the former mode, one person could make about 1,000 nails or tacks in a day and about 8,000 in the latter.
These machines have been superceded, for more than twenty years. Those now in use, are very excellent and perfect specimens of mechanical ingenuity, and do much credit to the inventive genius of the country. They are the combined inventions of Col. Jesse Reed, of Marshfield, son of the above named Ezekiel Reed, Thomas Blanchard, of Milbury, and Samuel Rogers and Melvil Otis, of East-Bridgewater. With one of these machines, on which the nail or tack is perfectly made at one operation, a single individual will turn out from 100 to 150 thousand, a day. In 1837, the capital in- vested in the manufacture of tacks and brads was 57,- 000 dollars. The number of these articles manufactur- ed in one year ending 1st of April, 1837, was 1832 millions, valued at 82,000 dollars .*
For several years past, the shoe business has been carried on to a great extent, and given employment to a large portion of the inhabitants. In the year ending as above, 526,208 pairs of shoes and 98,081 pairs of boots were made, the value of which was about 746,-
+ For a more particular account of the manufacture of tacks, brads, &c .; in Abington, see a statement of Benjamin Hobart, Esq. to Willard Phillips, pub- lished in the Plymouth Old Colony Memorial, 23d June, 1832.
92
000 dollars. The recent embarrassments in the trade of the country, mainly occasioned as many suppose by over action in almost all departments of business, the natural consequence of excessive issues of bank-paper, and other facilities for the acquisition and enlargement of credit, have been sensibly felt in this business, and also in the manufacture of tacks.
MILLS.
The first mill was built on the dam across Hersey's River (so called) a few rods above the bridge, between Benjamin Hobart's and Dr. Champney's. The time is ascertained from the records of the Proprietors of Bridgewater. They record the laying out of 13 acres of land, by Samuel Edson, jr., 'the latter end of the Summer in 1693-when John Porter's saw-mill was raised.' In 1696, this mill is mentioned as belonging to 'Josselyn and Porter.' A few years afterwards it became the property of William Hersey, and was for many years known as 'Hersey's saw-mill at Little Comfort.'
The second mill, a saw-mill, was on the same stream above, and near Daniel A. Ford's, erected probably about 1700. The original owners were Lieut. Jacob Naslı and Joseph Pool, of Weymouth.
The first mill on the seite, where Beal's corn mill now stands, was a saw-mill built by - Thaxter, of Hingham, in 1703. The mud-sill of this original mill is under the present mill. When the latter was built in 1793, the date of the erection of both was cut in a board and nailed to this sill, then in a state of per- fect preservation.
The first mill on Beaver Brook was built in 1729, by Samuel Pool, John Pettingell, Thomas Tirrill,* Jacob
* In the written agreement to build, Tirrill is described as an Innholder. He lived near where Zibeon Packard now lives.
94
Porter, Obadiah Reed and Samuel Noyes, of Abington, and John Kingman, jr. of Bridgewater.
A mill on the stream by Benjamin Hobart's was built in 1731, by Mathew Pratt, Ephraim Spooner, Isaac Hobart, Joseph Gurney, Joshua Pratt and Nathan Gurney. The agreement between them was 'to build a dam and a saw-mill, on a brook near unto and easter- ly from the Dwelling-House of Elisha Lincoln.'
.
OLD COLONY LINE.
The Charter of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, granted by Charles 1st, 1628, describes the south line of the colony as a straight line, from a station distant three miles from the south part of Charles River and any and every part thereof, to another station three miles to the southward of the southernmost part of Mas- sachusetts Bay.
This line, which was the north line of Plymouth Colony, was a long time the subject of animated con- troversy, and particularly in that part between Abing- ton and North Bridgewater, on one side, and Braintree (now Randolph) and Stoughton, formerly part of Dor- chester, on the other.
In 1640, Gov. Endicot and Israel Stoughton on the part of Massachusetts, and Gov. Bradford and Edward Winslow on the part of Plymouth, were appointed to run the line of the colonies. From the mouth of a brook (called by them Bound Brook) they run directly ' to the middle of a great pond, that lay on the right hand of the upper path or common way that led be- tween Weymouth and Plymouth, close to the path as they went along which was formerly named (and still they desired might be called) Accord Pond ;' and ' from thence with a straight line to the southernmost part of Charles River and three miles southerly inward into the country.' It is not so stated in their report but the
96
fact is said to be, that when the Commissioners arrived within about three miles of the most northerly part of Plymouth Colony on the easterly side of Rhode Island, they found their course would carry them far south of the true station. Under these circumstances, instead of rectifying their whole line, they made an angle and run so far north as to reach the intended point. At the angle there stood a white oak three, which from that circumstance was called Angle Tree .*
The doings of this commission were not confirmed, and the line excepting that part between the pond and bay remained unsettled.
In 1664, another set of commissioners, consisting of Cornet Robert Stetson, Constant Southworth and Josiah Winslow, appointed by Plymouth, and Joshua Fisher, Roger Clapp and Eleazer Lusher by Massachusetts, met to run the line ; and finally agreed, that a right line from Accord Pond to Angle Tree should be the di- viding line of the colonies. From the pond westerly, they run out and marked a line for about seven miles, to what was then called the path from Bridgewater to Braintree, as part of a line which if produced would, as was supposed, strike Angle Tree, and there in the path set up a stake and heap of stones,t but continued their bound marks no farther.
As it had been discovered in 1704, in running the line between what were then the towns of Taunton
* In 1790, a Stone Monument fourteen feet high and two wide was by order of the State erected on the spot where this tree stood. On the south side is in- scribed ' Plymouth Colony,' on the north ' Massachusetts Colony.'
t This stake and heap of stones was on the present main road from North Bridgewater through Stoughton (corner) to Randolph, a little over half a mile southerly of the present dividing line of the two former towns.
-
97
and Bridgewater, on one side, and Dorchester, on the other, that the stake and heap of stones were not in a straight line between the Pond and Tree, but a consid- erable distance south of such a line, and of course still farther south of a line from the pond to a station* three miles south of every part of Charles River, it was easy to foresee, that difficulties would arise in regard to grants of land adjoining the line, and also in regard to the jurisdiction of the counties and towns bounded upon it.
Plymouth Colony, in 1665, had granted Peregrine White 200 acres of land, 'at the path that goes from Bridgewater to the Bay, adjoining the Bay line.' White sold this grant, describing it as containing 400 acres, to a Col. Searl, of Dunstable, through whom, in 1703, it came into the hands of Thomas Snell, senior, John Howard and Ephraim Howard. Opposite to this grant on the Massachusetts side, were grants to the town of Dorchester and to the town of Boston. Con- troversy soon began in regard to these grants.f
Snell and the Howards in 1709 brought an action in Plymouth Court, against one Daniel Waldo, to recover 200 acres of land, bounded westerly on the Braintree and Bridgewater road-southerly on the line of 1664 -easterly on Trout-brook, and northerly on Half-way brook.
* In 1642, this station was attempted to be fixed by Massachusetts. It was called Woodward and Saffery's station, from the names of the surveyors ap- pointed to ascertain it.
t A particular account of the controversies between the proprietors of these grants in the courts of law and before the Legislature, from 1709, down to 1787, would fill volumes. The sharpest and longest one (it lasted from 1747 to 1754,) was between Robert and Daniel Howard, of Bridgewater, and John Windell, Esq., of Boston.
13
98
This tract was claimed by the Plaintiff's as part of the White grant, and by the Defendant as part of the common lands of Dorchester, which he had occupied several years as their tenant. The Plaintiffs recovered, but the lands still continued in dispute, for Dorchester immediately brought ejectment for their recovery in the County of Suffolk. This suit was continued in court until 1713, when judgment was rendered against Dorchester. In the mean time the parties had a hear- ing before the whole court, which resulted in the ap- pointment of Col. Samuel Thaxter, of Hingham, and Capt. Jacob Thompson, of Middleborough, to run out and mark the whole line from Accord Pond to Angle Tree. This service they performed in May, 1713, and the line then run, called the new Colony line, in contra- distinction from that run in 1664, called the old Colony line, was ratified and established by the court. Among the bound marks set up by the committee, was a stake and heap of stones near a Beach tree in the line be- tween Dorchester (now Stoughton) and Braintree (now Randolph). From the pond westerly, this line run northerly of the old line, and at the Bridgewater and Braintree road was over half a mile distant from it, so that there was between the two lines a large gore of land extending easterly to Accord Pond.
This gore, by a Resolve of the Legislature, passed 1720, on the Petition of the Representatives of Hing- ham, Weymouth, Braintree and Dorchester, was order- ed to be continued in the County of Suffolk-provided however, that ' no man's right of property in the lands adjacent should be thereby infringed.'
About the same time another resolve passed, 'that
99
the old Colony line (the line of 1664,) be and is here- by declared to be the southerly bounds of the town of Dorchester and of the grant made to the town of Bos- ton, and that the lands lying between the old Colony line southerly and the new Colony line northerly, from the dividing line between the Boston grant and Wey- mouth easterly, and the stake and heap of stones wes- terly, be and hereby is confirmed to the town of Dor- chester and the assigns of the town of Boston respec- tively-provided it interfere not with any former grants, and that the remainder of the said lands to the west- ward of said stake and heap of stones be to the use of the Province.'
The line, still continuing in a state of uncertainty, be- came the occasion of much difficulty, in settling the line of towns bounded upon it, and especially between Abington and Braintree. The Selectmen of the lat- ter town, in 1734, represented to the General Court, that they had requested the Selectmen of Abington to perambulate the line between the towns, meaning the southerly line, and as they had refused to do so, peti- tioned the court to pass an order to compel Abington to conform to that line. After a hearing, the court dis- missed the Petition, because Braintree ' had a remedy in the common course of law.' Braintree thereupon commenced an action against Abington, but what the result was has not been ascertained.
Abington, in March, 1735, Voted, ' to stand a trial in the law with Braintree,' but afterwards re-considered the vote and appointed a committee to agree with that town. The issue seems, however, to have been in favor of Braintree, as the Selectmen of the two towns after-
100
wards in the same year perambulated the line, begin- ning at the east end and ending at 'Sturdy Oak,'* and the same line was perambulated again in 1741.
Abington however did not long acquiesce in the line to Sturdy Oak, and determined to have the controversy settled in a judicial way. Accordingly, Ephraim Spoon- er, Daniel Reed and John Noyes, Selectmen of Abing- ton, by order of the town, commenced an action of debt on the statute, against John Adams,t Thomas Allen and Samuel Bass, Selectmen of Braintree, for neglect- ing and refusing, after notice, to run and mark the di- viding line of the towns. Abington employed Jere- miah Gridley, one of the ablest, most learned, and re- spected lawyers of that day, as counsel. Upon a trial had before the Superior Court at Plymouth, July Term, 1754, a verdict and judgment was rendered in favor of Abington for £30 damages and £13 13s. 11d. costs of suit. This decision settled the matter so far as Abington was concerned, as the Selectmen of both towns, on the 8th of October following, perambulated the line run by Thaxter and Thompson in 1713, as the true line be- tween them. The judgment of court having been ac- quiesced in, Abington very honorably relinquished the £30 damages, the object being merely to ascertain the right in dispute.
From this time to 1772, there appears to have been some abatement of the controversy. Litigation having then recommenced, several individuals interested, peti-
* Sturdy Oak stood 260 rods easterly from the stake and heap of stones in the line of 1664, and at a point therein which would be intersected by ex- tending the line between Abington and Braintree, (now Randolph,) southerly from Beach Tree.
t Father of the first President Adams.
101
tioned the' Legislature to ascertain the line and estab- lish it by a law. Some of the reasons assigned were, that different lines had been established at different times by the Superior Court-that several suits were then pending and that there was no prospect of an end to litigation, without the interposition of the Legisla- ture. The court thereupon appointed Artemas Ward, Esq., Col. Whitcomb and Maj. Fuller, a committee, to be assisted by John Child, jr., as surveyor, to run the line from Accord Pond to Angle Tree. In the con- cluding part of their report they say-' your committee find, to run from the monument aforesaid at Accord Pond west 202 degrees south, will lead on to many of the bounds said to be made by Col. Thaxter and Capt. Thompson, in the line run in 1713, and strike the tree aforesaid. And your committee are of opinion, that the return of the doings of the committee in the year 1664, is vague and uncertain, and that the line run in 1713, is the only line that has been properly run out and marked.'
After a full hearing of all parties concerned before the whole court, an act passed 6th March, 1773, ' for establishing a line of jurisdiction between the county of Suffolk and the counties of Plymouth and Bristol, so far as the line heretofore described shall extend.' The act provided ' that for the future, a line beginning at a certain heap of stones on the west side of and within five or six feet or thereabouts of a pond called Accord Pond, being a known and anciently reputed bound between the town of Hingham and the town of Abington, and running from said monument west 202 degrees south, leaving the towns of Weymouth, Braintree, Stoughton and Wrentham adjoining on the north, and Abington,
102
Bridgewater, Mansfield and Attleborough on the south, to a certain old white oak tree anciently marked, now standing and being a boundary between the towns of Wrentham and Attleborough, by some called Station Tree and by others Angle Tree, shall forever hereafter be the bounds between the county of Suffolk and the counties of Plymouth and Bristol, so far as said line extends, any law, usage or custom to the contrary not- withstanding.' The act concludes with a proviso- that nothing therein should have any effect in determin- ing the right of property in the lands bounded on the line of 1664.
The account here given illustrates the importance of accurate surveys-precise descriptions and fixed and permanent bound marks, particularly in the early set- tlement of a country. The want of these, not only in regard to this line, but also in very many instances to the dividing lines of towns, legislative grants, and the adjoining lands of individuals, has been the frequent oc- casion of conflicting titles, vexatious litigation-im- mense waste of time and money, and what is of higher consideration, the destruction of the quiet and peace of individuals and neighborhoods.
FRENCH WAR.
During the seven years' war between Great Britain and France, which terminated in 1763, Massachusetts contributed largely to the various expeditions fitted out for the defence of the colonies, and the conquest of the dominions of France, on this continent and in the West Indies. In 1758, she raised by enlistment, or, when that failed, by impress,* and had actually in the field, 6925 men, besides a large number of artificers, seamen and others already in the service-a force equal to about one third of the entire effective strength of the Prov- ince. Her whole military and naval expenses, that year, were £140,200. During the war they amounted, exclusive of the cost of many forts and garrisons, and premiums for enlistments, to £1,039,390. The monies received from the mother country, by way of reimburse- ment, fell short of these expenditures by over £400,000.+
The Province was stimulated to these great and dis- proportionate exertions, by jealousy and hatred of the French. On the ocean, they were our rivals in the
* March 23d, 1748. Nicholas Shaw and Peleg Stetson, it is said, ' were im- pressed into the king's service to the eastward, but were released on paying a certain sum, and agreeing each one to pay £7 10s. more the next impress.'
t See ' a brief statement of the merits and services of the Province of Mas- sachusetts Bay, their exertions and expenses in the common cause,' drawn up by Thomas Hutchinson, chairman of a committee of the Legislature, and for- warded by their order, 17th December, 1764, to Jasper Maudit, agent of the Province in England.
104
fisheries, while on the land, all our frontier settlements from Nova Scotia around to the Lakes, were subject, through French influence, to constant anxiety and alarm ; and sometimes to all the horrors and calamities of a barbarous Indian warfare. These causes of enmity were strengthened by long standing and deep rooted prejudices against them, on account of their religion.
Abington contributed largely of her strength to carry on this war. The following persons were in the service, and died therein, or on their way home :
Abraham and Humphries, sons of Capt. John Burrill. Joseph Clark. Peleg Cain.
David, (colored,) son of Anthony Dwight.
Noah, son of Jacob Ford.
James, grandfather of the late Col. D. Gloyd.
Jacob, son of Capt. Elisha Hersey, drowned near Cape Sable Harbor.
Nathaniel Joy.
Noah, son of Gideon Parkman.
Asa, son of dea. Samuel Pool, died at Halifax, 1762. Ichabod, son of Capt. Ebenezer Reed.
Ezekiel, son of John Reed.
Samuel, son of William Sprague.
Job, son of Samuel Tirrill, killed by the Indians, - while crossing Lake Ontario in a Batteau.
Jonathan Torrey, jr.
Robert Townsend, jr. died of a wound received in the Crown Point Expedition.
Jacob White .*
* There are among Mr. Dodge's manuscript sermons, several having special reference to the events of this war. One preached 23d March, 1755, is enti-
105
The following persons survived the service :
Christopher Askins, jr.
George Askins.
Jeremiah Campbell, at St. Johns, N. S. 1759.
Caleb Chard.
Jonathan Chubbuck, at Newfoundland, 1762.
Greenwood Cushing, at Halifax and Newfoundland.
Elisha Hersey, captain of a company in the Western Expeditions.
Edmund Jackson, jr.
Abraham Josselyn.
Peter Nash.
Samuel Noyes.
Jacob Pool, at the taking of Fort Frontinac, under Col. Bradstreet, 1758, and at St. Johns, N. S.
Samuel Pool.
Joseph Richards.
Isaac Stetson, under Gen. Wolf, at the taking of Quebec.
Jacob Tirrell, at Halifax, 1759.
Prince Stetson.
tled-' Sermon on account of 13 of the congregations' going into his majesty's service.' In the conclusion of an appropriate address to the soldiers, he says -' we, your relatives, friends, and acquaintances, by the grace of God, will send up our prayers to the throne of grace, that the God of power and good- ness would encourage your hearts, cover your heads, strengthen your arms, and above all pardon your sins, and save your souls in the day of battle.'
July 3d, 1755, (Fast day,) he preached a ' sermon occasioned by an expedi- tion against divers of the French fortifications on his majesty's territories in North America.'
October 5th, 1759. A ' Thanksgiving sermon, occasioned by the reduction of Quebec, the capital of Canada, and the neighboring villages and country- Laus Deo.'
7th October, 1762. A ' Thanksgiving sermon, upon the reduction of Mar- tineco, and more especially the late surrender of the Havanna to his Brittian- ick Majesty's arms, together with the adjacent villages upon the Island of Cuba.'
14
106
Ezekiel Townsend.
Robert Townsend, ensign of Capt. Benjamin Pratt's company at the westward.
Jeremiah White.
This list is very incomplete, as will appear by the following, extracted from the Journals of the House of Representatives.
December 28, 1763. There was presented 'a peti- tion of Elisha Hersey and sixty others, all of Abington, who had been in his majesty's service in the late wars, praying for a grant of land for a township, eastward of the Penobscot river, in consideration of their services rendered.'
REVOLUTIONARY WAR.
POLITICAL AFFAIRS.
The American revolution consisted in that change in the political relations of Great Britain and her Amer- ican colonies, which grew out of the controversy be- tween them, about the authority of Parliament ; and which resulted in the declaration and final acknowledg- ment of our independence. A very brief, though im- perfect account of some of the grounds of this contro- versy, it is hoped, will not be deemed altogether out of place.
On the side of the mother country, the power of Parliament over the colonies was declared to be su- preme. In support of this claim, it was said-
1. That this country having been taken possession of and settled by British subjects, became a part of the British empire, and as such was under the control of the supreme power of the state, vested in parliament.
2. That the Charter of the Massachusetts colony, by the 1st Charles, in 1628, after confirming the grant of the soil by the council of Plymouth, gave the colony power to make laws in particular cases-provided such laws were not repugnant to the laws of England-also freedom from taxation in New England, for seven years, and on imports from and exports to Great Britain, for
108
twenty-one years-exemptions implying, as was said, a liability to parliamentary taxation afterwards.
3. That the charter gave no power to lay taxes, and that the assumption of the right was one of the reasons why the Court of Chancery, in 1684, declared the charter forfeited.
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.