USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Watertown > Historical sketch of Watertown, in Massachusetts, from the first settlement of the town to the close of its second century > Part 10
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13
The following obituary notice of Mr. Adams, which is believed to do no more than justice to his memory, appeared in Edes's Boston Gazette for September 28th, 1778.
" From Watertown we have the melancholy news of the death of the Rev. Daniel Adams, who, after a most distressing illness of six weeks, resigned his val- uable life into the hands of that God who gave it, with the most pious submission, in the 33d year of his age, after having been settled in the ministry only
* One of these is Daniel Adams, Esq., of Medfield, who has obliging- ly furnished me with most of the abovementioned particulars respect- ing his father.
111
five months. He was the only son of Elisha Adams, Esq., of Medway, who for a long time represented that town in the Great and General Court. Those, who knew the deceased, knew his many virtues. His publick and private character were such, as did hon- our to mankind, to the holy religion he professed, and to the sacred order to which he belonged. From his first appearance, as a preacher, he was almost univer- sally admired. He never puzzled his own nor his hearers' minds with nice metaphysical disquisitions in polemick divinity, but preached and enforced, with peculiar energy, the well known acknowledged pre- cepts of the New Testament, with such meekness and simplicity as became a disciple of the blessed Jesus. His genius for vocal musick was extraordinary ; and in that part of divine worship, his harmonious voice was heard from the sacred desk with a degree of rap- ture. The inexpressible grief of a fond wife, mourning the loss of a most agreeable partner ; the parental distress of elderly worthy parents, bemoaning the fate of their most engaging only son ; the undissembled sorrows of a whole town, lamenting the bereavement of their much respected pastor, demand a sympathet- ick tribute of sorrow from every humane and feeling heart. He has left a little son, too young to feel his irreparable loss.
To him 'tis given to die : to us 'tis given To live ! Alas, one moment sets us even. Mark ! how impartial is the will of Heaven."
In November 1778, the town ordered an investigation to be made into the doings of the committee, who were chosen in 1755 to sell the old parsonage and the farm in Princeton, near Wachusett. The persons appointed to inquire into the affair made a report to the town in March, 1779, which was ordered to lie on file. This report I have not been able to find, and consequently cannot state the result. Whatever might have been the circumstances, which led to the inves-
112
tigation, no further discussion of the subject seems to have taken place. At the last mentioned meeting, a committee was likewise chosen, to join with some of the inhabitants of Newton in a petition to the Gener- al Court to annex them to Watertown.
In conformity with a resolve of the General Court relating to a new Constitution of government for the State, the town on the 24th of May, 1779, took the subject into consideration, and voted by a large ma- jority against having a new form of government at that time .* At the same meeting, the fishery was brought under discussion, and the town seem to have been in doubt what might be the nature and extent of their rights respecting it. Persons were appointed to inquire whether the town had power to let out the fishery ; if they had, it was to be leased for one year ; if not, the committee were to petition the General Court to grant the power in question, for the benefit of the town. From this notice, we may presume, that the fishery had not been let out before. It prob- ably began to be leased annually about the time when the inquiry, which has just been mentioned, was insti- tuted.
The well known depreciation of the currency at this period was the cause of much embarrassment and alarm. The perplexity and distress occasioned by it are still fresh in the remembrance of many. On the 7th of July, 1779, a meeting was held in Watertown on the subject, and a committee appointed to take the mat- ter into consideration. They reported in favor of acting in accordance with the resolutions that had re- cently been passed in Boston, and of sending delegates to a Convention to be held at Concord, the next week, for the purpose of devising some means of relief.
* A majority of the votes in the State were in favor of calling a Con- vention for this purpose. Delegates were accordingly chosen, and met the next September at Cambridge. See Bradford's Hist. of Mass. from 1775 to 1789, p. 177
113
Other measures were recommended, and the report was accepted. After the meeting at Concord, prices were fixed by a committee, on all the most important articles of traffic, produce, labor, &c. ; and no depart- ure from these prices was to be allowed .*
August 23d, 1779, the town appointed two persons to represent them in the Convention, which was to be held on the first of the ensuing September at Cam- brige, in order to frame a new constitution, or form of government. Subsequently, instructions were given to these delegates respecting their attendance at the Convention. At the same meeting, delegates were chosen to appear at a meeting to be summoned at Concord on the first Wednesday of the next October, in order to institute further regulations concerning the currency and the prices of articles.
Since the death of the Rev. Mr. Adams, the care of supplying the pulpit had been entrusted to a commit- tee. Among those, whose services were procured at this time, were Mr. Laban Wheaton, who afterward studied the profession of law, and the now venerable Dr. Prince, the present senior pastor of the First Church in Salem, to whom the cause of science among us owes so much, and who is permitted to enjoy the bland and happy old age of the Christian scholar. On the 13th of March, 1780, a meeting was called to make choice of a minister. Mr. Richard Rosewell Eliot, who had officiated in the pulpit during the win- ter, was unanimously chosen. As nothing is said of any concurrence between the church and society, as separate bodies, on this occasion, perhaps they acted together by one vote. Mr. Eliot, having signified his acceptance of the invitation, was ordained June 21st, 1780. The Rev. Mr. Cushing of Waltham preach- ed the sermon on this occasion : the names of those, who performed the other services, are not remembered.
* See Appendix K.
15
114
It may give us some idea of the state of the currency, at that time, to learn that the town appropriated £1600 to defray the expenses of the ordination.
In April, 1781, the town agreed to establish a poor- house upon the south bank of the river, above the bridge. A building was purchased for this purpose, and a vote was passed to remove it to the place designated. It would seem that this was the first poor-house in the town. So long before as May, 1761, it had been determined to erect a work-house : at that time, however, it was not effected ; and when, in January, 1768, the proposal was renewed at a pub- lic meeting, it was rejected, and nothing more is said of any similar undertaking till the date above stated. At an adjournment of the same meeting, it was voted "That their representative be directed to use his endeavour in the General Court that the Tender Act, which was lately repealed, be revived so far as it con- cerns the Tender." The vote was taken by yeas and nays, and the names of the voters on each side were entered on the town records.
Another attempt was made, in March, 1782, to have a part of Newton annexed to Watertown. A committee was appointed to confer with the people at Angier's Corner on the subject, and to join with them, and other inhabitants of Newton, in a petition for this purpose. Nothing appears to have been effected by this movement.
In 1784, a notice occurs of a lottery granted in aid of a plan for enlarging the bridge ; and on the 20th of September, in that year, the town gave the follow- ing pledge : " Whereas the General Court have voted a lottery to enlarge the great bridge over Charles River 12 feet, - Voted, that we, the inhabitants of Wa- tertown, will engage to indemnify and save harmless our managers, and that they will agree to take on their own risque, their proportionable part of those tickets, that may remain unsold after the expiration of the
115
term of time that hath or may be allowed by the General Court ; provided the managers account with the town for the expenditure of the money raised by said lottery." The attempt to raise money in this way proved a failure; the tickets were not sold, and . the lottery was given up. The matter lingered along till 1791, when the town chose a committee " to look into the affairs of the Watertown Bridge Lottery, and see what losses the managers have sustained "; and soon after they appropriated money to compensate them for these losses, to redeem the tickets, and to pay the charges.
On the 20th of September, 1784, the town voted " to choose a committee to join with the several towns, who are desirous of petitioning the General Court for a repeal of a late act, empowering, or allowing, the town of Boston to exact a toll of persons that supply their market with the necessaries of life." This refers to " An Act for regulating the market in Bos- ton," passed February 18th, 1784, and repealed Feb- ruary 11th, 1785. The Act was opposed and com- plained of by many of the towns in the country .* In December following, Watertown appointed another committee " to apply, in behalf of the town, to the . Corporation of Harvard College to lower the price for passing the ferry between the towns of Charlestown and Boston."
Measures were adopted in town meeting, in 1792, to prevent the spread of the small-pox. Houses were
* The Hon. Mr. Savage has furnished me with a copy of the follow- ing " order of notice " on this subject :
"Tuesday, 9 Nov. 1784. Upon the petition of the agents of the towns of Roxbury, Braintree, Stoughton, Dedham, Newton, Weston, Brook- lin, Watertown, Needham, Lexington, and Walpole, -- Ordered, that the petitioners serve the Selectmen of the town of Boston with an at- tested copy of this order by leaving the same with some one of the said Selectmen, 14 days at least before the next setting of the General Court, to appear on the 2d Wednesday of the said next setting of the General Court, to make answer to the said petition if they see cause." In the margin it is said, " Relative to the Market Act."
116
provided, to which persons infected with that disease by inoculation were to be removed; and in case they refused to remove themselves, or their families, to the places thus designated by a committee, then the committee were directed to prosecute them, as offen- ders, at the expense of the town.
The bridge over Charles River had been supported by the joint contributions of Watertown, Waltham, and Weston, the two last mentioned towns having, from the time of their incorporation, borne their share in this expense. In 1797 and 1798, they both made an effort, by petitions to the Legislature, to be liber- ated from this burden. These petitions were opposed by the people of Watertown, who appointed agents to meet and answer them before the General Court. The relief, which these towns claimed, seems not to have been obtained. But on the 2d of March, 1798, the General Court passed an Act, authorizing the inhabitants of Weston and Waltham, as well as of Watertown, to regulate the fishery "within the limits of the said towns " ; and the proceeds accruing from this source were to be divided among the three towns, according to the proportion which each town bore in the expenses of the bridge. This Act, which made the right in the fishery in each town a joint concern of the three towns, appears to have been considered by the people of Watertown as unjust and oppressive. At a meeting on the 20th of January, 1800, they voted " to appoint a committee to make serious enquiry into the constitutionality of the Act empowering Wes- ton and Waltham to lease the fishery in Watertown." This vote, however, they reconsidered ; and in March, of the same year, they proposed, through a committee, to Weston and Waltham, to refer the determination of the question respecting the constitutionality of the Act of March 2d, 1798, to the Judges of the Supreme Court, and to bind themselves to abide by the decision of the Judges. This proposal, it would seem, failed
117
of success ; for in May following, the same committee, who had been appointed in March, were empowered and directed by Watertown to bring an action against Weston or Waltham, which might be the means of putting to test the constitutionality of the disputed Act. In August, however, the people of Watertown · voted to make a proposition to Weston and Waltham for " a settlement or compromise respecting the bridge and fishery "; and the committee designated for this purpose were empowered, in March, 1801, to give to Weston and Waltham a complete and sufficient dis- charge for ever from any further expense in maintain- ing the bridge over Charles River, provided those towns would give up to Watertown all the privileges in the fishery, which were granted to them in common with Watertown by the Act of March, 1798. On the basis of these conditions a mutual agreement, or obli- gation, was drawn up with great formality and precis- ion, and signed by the agents of the three towns re- spectively. This agreement was read to the people of Watertown at a public meeting on the 15th of March, 1802, when they voted to accept the contract, and place it on record. The dispute was thus adjusted satisfactorily to all parties, and their subsequent pro- ceedings were governed by this contract for several years. At length, by an Act of the General Court, dated February 3d, 1816, the right in the fishery was secured and appropriated to Watertown within the limits of the town, and Weston and Waltham were discharged from any further cost or charge towards the support of the bridge over Charles River in Water- town. This is the footing, on which the matter now stands.
The manner in which the property in the pews had been disposed of when the meeting-house was finish- ed in 1755, proved the occasion of some difficulty, after the lapse of nearly fifty years. The pews had not been purchased by those who occupied them, but
118
had been assigned to the individuals by the town, according to the proportion each one had borne in the whole cost of the meeting-house. This mode of conveying the pews to the individual owners appears to have been vague and informal ; and in process of time cases occurred, which gave rise to the question, whether the property in the pews obtained in this way . was of such a nature that it could be transmitted by inheritance, or whether it was limited to the lifetime of the original owner. The difficulty growing out of this question was probably before the town in May, 1795, when they voted " to take council concerning the state of the pews in Watertown meeting-house." The committee chosen at that time were directed to consult Mr. Parsons and Mr. Dexter, and to obtain a written opinion from them on the subject. " Some other gentlemen at the bar " were likewise to be con- sulted. From some cause the business seems to have proceeded very slowly ; for it was not till March, 1799, that Mr. Parsons and Mr. Dexter communicated their written opinion, in which they said that the original manner of assigning the pews did not appear to them to have the forms "necessary in deeds to create an estate of inheritance," and that the votes of the town alone "could not be legally construed as giving an estate beyond the life of the grantee." In conse- quence of this opinion from such high sources, and in order to obviate all future uncertainty and difficulty, the town passed a vote, whereby they " give, grant, and confirm " to the original proprietors, and to their heirs and assignees for ever, the pews which they severally drew or held in the meeting-house, excepting those pews which had reverted to the town; and these were in like manner confirmed to the individuals who had purchased them of the town, and to their heirs, &c. This vote was in April, 1800.
In 1811, a proposal to build a new meeting-house for the town was under discussion. But the commit-
119
tee, to whom the subject was referred, reported against the project, and it was abandoned.
The site of the United States' Arsenal in Water- town was selected early in 1816, by Major Talcot, who was stationed in the vicinity for the purpose of taking the charge of the establishment. In June of the same year, the State of Massachusetts ceded to the United States the jurisdiction usual in such cases over an extent of territory, which should not exceed sixty acres. The work was begun immediately after this cession ; and in 1820, the buildings were com- pleted. Mr. Alexander Parris of Boston was employ- ed as architect ; and the whole was finished under the superintendance of Major Talcot, the first commander of the post. At present, somewhat more than forty acres of land are in possession of the United States at this place. A new magazine has been erected during the last year. The two magazines are of stone, and of the best construction; the other buildings are of brick. There are two large storehouses, two buil- dings for officers' quarters, two barracks, two work- shops, and a few other small buildings. They are placed on the four sides of a parallelogram, which face the cardinal points, the spaces between the buildings being filled by a wall fifteen feet in height. The area enclosed is about three hundred and fifty feet by two hundred and eighty feet. The magazines are placed at the distance of several hundred feet from the other buildings. This establishment is both a depôt and an arsenal of construction .*
In May, 1817, two hundred dollars were assessed, in addition to the usual tax, for the supply of the pulpit during the ill state of the Rev. Mr. Eliot's health.
The name of Dr. Marshall Spring was so much and so long connected with public interests, both in his pro- fession and in civil affairs, that the notice of it may
* These particulars respecting the Arsenal were communicated by Major Craig, the present much respected commander of the post.
120
with propriety belong to this narrative. He was born in Watertown, February 19th, 1741-2, was graduated at Harvard College in 1762, and died on the 11th of January, 1818, aged 76 years. After leaving college, he selected the profession of physic and surgery, to the study of which he devoted himself with assiduity. He resided for a short time at St. Eustatia, and then returned to Watertown, where he spent the remain- der of his life. He received great assistance from Dr. Josiah Converse, his maternal uncle, and after- ward inherited his property. Dr. Spring became one · of the most distinguished physicians in the country ; and perhaps no one can be mentioned, in whose judg- ment and skill a more unreserved confidence was placed. His practice was very extensive, and his house was the resort of great numbers of patients from the neighbouring and from distant towns. He was remarkable for a peculiar sagacity of mind, and for acute observation of human nature. These qualities influenced his medical practice, which is said to have been, in many respects, original, and so different from established modes as sometimes to draw upon him obloquy from his professional brethren. But the extraordinary success, which so often attended his mode of treating diseases, served to vindicate his judg- ment, and secured for him confidence. His strong good sense, and directness of mind, gave him a dis- gust for whatever savoured of pedantry, or of empty formality, in the profession. It was the fortune of Dr. Spring to be somewhat connected with political affairs. At the time of the Revolution, he was a decided tory, and thought the attempt of the colonies to gain independence entirely rash, and inexpedient. He despaired of success in an enterprise, which to the timid or prudent seemed so hopeless, and which even the sanguine acknowledged to be full of perilous uncertainty. He avowed his opinions on this subject so freely and fearlessly, that it is supposed he would
.
121
have been sent out of the country, under the law made for that purpose in 1776, had he not been too impor- tant, as a medical man, to be spared. In 1789 he was chosen. a member of the Massachusetts Conven- tion on the question concerning the adoption of the Constitution of the United States. Dr. Spring was opposed to the Constitution, because he deemed it deficient in the principles necessary for strength and permanence. In the great political division of the country at the change of the administration in 1801, he took the side of the predominant party ; and when reminded, by a political opponent, of the inconsistency between this conduct and his former toryism, he replied that " the voice of the people was as much the voice of God now, as in 1776." He was, for several years, a member of the Executive Council of Massa- chusetts, and discharged his duties in that station with talent and fidelity. In the sharp encounter of wit, in the ready and pungent repartee of free conversation, Dr. Spring is said to have had very few equals. He was highly respected and beloved till his death, by a numerous circle of friends and associates ; and many there are, who will never forget the benevolence of his character, the playful amenity of his temper, and the charm which he spread over social intercourse .*
The Rev. Richard Rosewell Eliot died on the 21st of October, 1818, aged 66 years, and in the 39th year of his ministry. His funeral sermon was preached by the Rev. Dr. Stearns of Lincoln. He was born at New Haven, Con., October 8th, 1752, and descended in a direct line from the Rev. John Eliot, the memora- ble Apostle to the Indians, whose name and whose praise will never die in the ecclesiastical history of New England. Mr. Eliot was fitted for college under the instruction of the Rev. Mr. Frost of Men- don, and was graduated at Cambridge in 1774, being
* A more ample account of Dr. Spring may be found in Dr. Thach- er's American Medical Biography, Vol. II. p. 98.
16
122
a classmate of Mr. Adams, his predecessor in the min- istry. After leaving college, he taught a school at Woodstock, Con., and at the same time pursued the study of divinity under the direction of the Rev. Mr. Leonard of that place. In 1779, he was appointed a tutor in Harvard College, and held that office at the time when he received and accepted the call to settle in Watertown. He then attracted much attention as an orator, and is said to have been surpassed by few in the gifts and graces of good speaking, a power which the infirm state of his health, and other causes, withheld him from cultivating in the subsequent part of his life. Mr. Eliot's theological views were liberal and enlarged. For the harsh and stern features, which are some- times portrayed as belonging to the countenance of religion, he had no partiality. He dwelt with peculiar pleasure on the benevolence and the paternal charac- ter of the Deity, and considered divine truth as present- ing, in all its aspects, winning encouragement no less than awful solemnity. Metaphysical and ethical sub- jects were among his favorite studies ; and in these, he is said sometimes to have displayed no inconsider- able acuteness and discrimination. His preaching was judicious, evangelical, and for the most part prac- tical; and if his manner generally failed to be inter- esting or impressive, it should be remembered that the very feeble condition of his health precluded, in a great degree, that energy of delivery, which to most hearers is necessary to render even truth attractive. The style, in which his sermons were written, was per- spicuous, easy, and pure, marked by the good taste of the school of Addison, and free from false ornaments and from the artifices of composition. His mind was active, and his feelings occasionally ardent, notwith- standing the depressing influence of a wasted bodily frame ; and he was peculiarly disposed to interest himself in mechanical inventions, and in certain plans
- of improvement. His life might almost be regarded
-
123
as one long disease ; and when we consider with what a leaden weight constant illness hangs upon the spirit, how it paralyzes resolution, and wears away drop by drop, as it were, the interests which men take in the scenes and engagements of life, can we wonder, or can we find no apology, if he did not accomplish so much, or labor with so effectual force, as those may, to whom God grants the blessings of a sound constitution and good health? His virtues and his piety were of a retiring, quiet character ; his disposition was kind and amiable ; and he was a man of sincere and honest heart. He treated with respect and fairness the feel- ings of others, and he bore suffering and disappoint- ment with the submission of a Christian. Mr. Eliot was reluctant to commit any of his productions to the
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.