History of Bristol County, Massachusetts, with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men, Part 47

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton) ed
Publication date: 1883
Publisher: Philadelphia, J. W. Lewis & Co.
Number of Pages: 1818

USA > Massachusetts > Bristol County > History of Bristol County, Massachusetts, with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men > Part 47

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).

The inquiry naturally suggests itself, What were the prominent causes which led to this settlement ? It might have been due in part to the spirit of emi- gration and change of locality which displayed itself even in those days as a trait in the New England character; it might have been the rich and fertile soil in the valleys of our rivers, fertile certainly when compared with the sand-hills around Plymouth, en- ticing to agricultural labors; it might have been the accessible and capacious harbors of the Acushnet and Apponegansett, and the safe and sheltered anchorage they afforded, giving promise of future commercial importance; and attractions, perhaps, were found in the winding beauties of the Paskamansett and Acoak- sett. However much these and kindred influences may have contributed to the early settlement of Dart- mouth, there is, in my opinion, a cause beyond them all, and which a careful reading of the records of the colony and the town forces me to adopt as the chief reason for the removal from Plymouth to Dartmouth. I have said our fathers were Puritans. They were more than that,-they were the Protestants of the Pu- ritans. They were in sympathy with the established government at Plymouth in everything except the

one matter of compulsory taxation for religious pur- poses. Fully believing in freedom of conscience, they had early conceived a strong aversion to the arbitrary imposition of taxes by the civil power for the support of a ministry with which they were not in unison, and over which they had no control. The early ree- ords of the town, imperfect and fragmentary as they are, in connection with the history of the colony, plainly tell us how earnestly and even bitterly this controversy was waged, and how for many years it was the source of discord and of persecution. The Plymouth Colony court annually apportioned to the town a tax for the support of ministers in addition to the province tax, but the Baptists and Quakers of Dartmouth were inflexible in their resistance to it, and while the province rates were faithfully met, those for the maintenance of ministers were refused. It also troubled our good rulers at Plymouth that our fathers were so negligent in providing stated preach- ing according to the established Puritan faith.

We find this order of the court, passed in 1671,-

" In reference unto the town of Dartmouth it is ordered by court, that whereas a neglect the last year of the gathering in of the sum of fifteen pounds according to order of court to be kept in stock towards the sup- port of such as may dispense the word of God unto them, it is again or- dered by the court that the sum of fifteen pounds be this year levied to be as a stock for the use aforesaid, to be delivered unto Arthur Hatha- way and Sergeant Shaw, to be by them improved as opportunity may present for the ends aforesaid."

But this order, like others, seems to have been of no avail, for three years afterwards, when the inhab- itants of Dartmouth had met together for the settling of the bounds of the town, the occasion was seized upon for haranguing the people, "at which time the Governor, Mr. Hinckley, the treasurer, Mr. Walley, Lieut. Morton, and John Tomson did engage to give meeting with others to propose and endeavor that some provison may be made for the preaching of the word of God amongst them."

Even the calamity which came among them at this time from the violence and cruelty of the Indians, in the destruction of their homes and the loss of their property, did not soften the displeasure of the gov- ernment at Plymouth, but rather served as an oppor- tunity for renewed complaint and upbraiding. This appears by the order of court, passed in October of the following year :

" This court taking into their serious consideration the tremendous dispensation of God towards the people of Dartmouth in suffering the barbarous heathen to spoil and destroy most of their habitations, the enemy being greatly advantaged thereunto by their scattered way of living, do, therefore, order that in the rebuilding and resettling thereof that they so order it as to live compact together, at least in each village, as they may be in a capacity both to defend themselves from theassault of an enemy, and the better to attend the public worship of God, and ministry of the word of God, whose carelessness to obtain and attend unto we fear may have been a provocation of God thus to chastise their contempt of His gospel, which we earnestly desire the people of that place may seriously consider of, lay to heart, and be humbled for, with a solicitous endeavor after a reformation thereof, by a vigorous putting forth to obtain an able, faithful dispenser of the word of God amongst them, and to encourage them therein ; the neglect whereof this court, as they must and God willing, they will not permit for the future."

1 " Records of Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations," vol. v. p. 204.

194

HISTORY OF BRISTOL COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS.

However earnestly the Plymouth court were deter- mined to subdue the rebellious and heretical spirit of the early settlers, it does not appear that much suc- cess attended the effort. The Quakers and Baptists of Dartmouth were from the same stern, unyielding stock, and they were animated by a sense of religious duty as sincere and exacting as that which influenced the rulers at Plymouth.

Stringent laws were from time to time enacted, but much of the legislation was inoperative, as the people of the town, while complying with the letter of the law, would give no heed to its spirit. Laws were passed in 1692 and 1695 requiring the towns to provide able, learned, and orthodox ministers to dispense the word of God. Dartmouth did elect a minister, but the question of orthodoxy then arose. In 1704 the town was indicted for non-compliance with the law. At the town meeting held Jan. 4, 1705, this indignant reply was sent back to the court :

" To the quarter sessions to be holden at Bristol the 8th day of January, 1705, we understand that our town is presented for want of a minister according to law, to which we answer that we have one qualified as the law directs, an honest man, fearing God, con- scientious, and a learned, orthodox minister, able to dispense the word and gospel to us."

The name of this minister does not appear upon the records of the town.

In order to meet this question of orthodoxy the Assembly passed a law in 1715, in which the preven- tion of the growth of atheism, irreligion, and pro- faneness is suggested as a reason of its enactment, in which it was provided that the determination of who should be ministers should rest ultimately with the General Court or Assembly. Dartmouth still refused obedience, and claimed the selection of her own min- ister. At the March town-meeting, 1723, in defiance of an act of that year, Nathaniel Howland was chosen minister, receiving fifty-five votes, while Samuel Hunt, a Presbyterian or Independent, and the first preacher of that sect in our town, received twelve votes.

The struggle culminated in 1724. In the year 1722 the Assembly of Massachusetts passed an act to raise one hundred pounds in the town of Dartmouth and seventy-two pounds eleven shillings in the town of Tiverton (then a part of Massachusetts) for the sup- port of ministers, whose selection was subject to the approval of the General Court. These two towns were the only ones in the Province that had not re- ceived any Presbyterian ministers. To blind the eyes of the people this sum was put with the province tax, and was afterwards to be drawn out of the treasury. The spirit with which this was met by the inhabitants of Dartmouth can best be seen by quoting the record of the town-meeting held Nov. 26, 1722. The record says,-

" It being put to vote whether the whole rate of one hundred and eighty-one pounds twelve shillings, called Darfmonth's proportion of our

province tax, be made by the selectmen, it passed in the negative. And it was put to vote whether eighty-one pounds twelve shillings, being as we are informed by our representative to be our just proportion of our province tax, be forthwith made by the selectmen of said Dartmouth. Voted that it shall be made. Thirdly, Voted that the charges arising or set on the selectmen of said Dartmouth, either by execution on their bodies or estates or in appealing to His Majesty for relief, be raised by town rates. Fourthly, Voted that seven hundred pounds be raised on the inhabitants of said Dartmouth by a town rate, for securing the selectmen for not making the rate of one hundred pounds, and also for all expenses arising in our sending to England to His Majesty in the above premises. Fifthly, Voted that the selectmen are to be allowed - shillings, each of them, a day for every day they lie in jail on the town account."

The town was thoroughly in earnest. Only five tax-payers protested against this appropriation of the seven hundred pounds. This sum, large for those days, was to be met by the tax of that year, and was not bequeathed to posterity in the form of a town debt. Prior to this, in 1696, the town had instructed the selectmen not to make the rates sent for by the general treasurer for this purpose, and in the same year it was voted that Recompence Kirby and Mark Jenne should have fifty shillings apiece, part of the money they paid to Capt. Pope, upon the account of their being "pressed ;" and it was also voted that there should be a rate made of twenty-four pounds for a town fund.

The bold and defiant attitude taken by the town could not be overlooked by the province rulers. The refusal of the selectmen to assess the tax was followed by their imprisonment in Bristol jail, where they re- mained about eighteen months. The persons who were imprisoned were Philip Taber and John Akin, selectmen of Dartmouth, and Joseph Anthony and John Sisson, selectmen of Tiverton, a part of whom were Baptists and a part Quakers. An embassy was sent to England. Thomas Richardson and Richard Partridge, who were Quakers, interceded in their be- half. Their petition, addressed to the King in Council, was an able document, and nobly did it plead for freedom of conscience and security of religion, civil liberty, and property. The petition was considered at the court of. St. James on the 2d day of June, 1724, when were present the King's most Excellent Majesty and all the lords of the Privy Council, and it was ordered that the obnoxious taxes be remitted, and that Philip Taber and his fellow-sufferers be im- mediately released from their imprisonment, and the Governor and all other officers of the province of Massachusetts Bay were notified to yield obedience to these orders.1

This brief but brilliant record of the sacrifices and sufferings, the persistent fidelity and the triumphant success of the humble fathers of the old town of Dartmouth in the great struggle for the rights of con- science, which is still going on throughout the Chris- tian world, entitles them to a high place in the ven- eration and gratitude of their posterity. They share,

1 Gough's History of the Quakers, vol. iv. p. 219. Benedict's Baptists, vol. i. pp. 503-4.

195

DARTMOUTH.

with Roger Williams, the exalted honor of declaring to their rulers and to the world that, having fled from ecclesiastical oppression in the Old World, they would resolutely maintain their resistance to it in the New ; and that through the confiscation of their goods, the incarceration of their persons, amidst all the hardships of a new settlement in the wilderness, and under all the horrors of savage warfare, they would never falter in the assertion and maintenance of the great prin- ciple of "perfect liberty in all matters of religious concernment."

The larger portion of the early settlers were Friends, and we find them recognized as a religious body in the town as early as 1683. Their first meeting-house was built in 1699, and was located upon the spot now occupied by them at Apponegansett. Their influence as a sect can be plainly seen and felt even now, and much of the high-toned morality, generous and prac- tical philanthropy, and pure-minded Christianity which have blessed and developed our people is owing to their religious teachings.

Next to the Friends in numbers and influence stood the Baptists. John Cooke, whose name we meet with on the first and on nearly every page of the early records of the town as a deputy and a se- lectman, filling various offices of trust and honor, was a Baptist minister for many years. But this same town official, Oct. 29, 1670, was fined ten shillings " for breaking the Sabbath by unnecessary traveling thereon." If the record of the case had been pre- served it would have appeared, we think, that Elder John Cooke was not a Sabbath-breaker, but traveling upon his circuit as a Baptist preacher.

Nowhere upon the face of the globe has the prin- ciple of self-government, the capacity and right of men to make laws for themselves and regulate their municipal affairs, been so fully illustrated as in the early history of New England. The most perfect democracies that mankind has ever known are found in the early New England towns. Their town-meet- ings were the places where the whole body of the citizens met, and where were discussed with equal freedom by every one all topics of importance, whether local or national, moral or political. Here they learned to understand their rights and privileges as citizens, and acquired moral and intellectual strength to defend them. In those days there was no centralization of official duties and responsibilities as now, the government did not rest upon a few, but every man was compelled to give his time and judg- ment to the administration of the town affairs. In order to secure that full and prompt attendance upon the deliberations of the town which the business re- quired, Dartmouth voted, in July, 1674, ten years after its organization, "that all town-meetings shall begin at ten o'clock and continue until the modera- tor duly release the town, not exceeding four o'clock. Also that all such persons as do neglect for a year all the town-meetings shall forfeit to the town sixpence

apiece, and for coming to the meeting too late, three pence an hour."

No wonder that with such rules our early munic- ipal affairs were ably administered. True, some of the legislation of the town may seem to us trivial, for example, that every householder shall kill twelve blackbirds between the months of January and May or pay a penalty for the neglect, and that a crow should count for three blackbirds, but yet every in- habitant became most thoroughly a part of the town and identified in its prosperity and well-being.

This close attention to public business, as might be supposed, was at times annoying and irksome, and efforts were sometimes made by individuals to avoid these duties. In 1751 this article was inserted in the warrant of the annual meeting : " Whereas the East- erly and Westerly villages in said town, experience teaches, have often neglected and omitted their duty in coming to said meetings to help carry on and man- age the affairs of said town, especially in the difficult seasons of the year and foul weather (and not in dan- ger of being chosen to troublesome offices), and so have at such times trusted and almost entirely re- lied and depended on the Middle village, of which the body of the people therein inhabiting live remote from said house, to do all the business of said town, which said Middle village is obliged to do though a hardship, otherwise said town would have incurred many a fine for neglect of duty, the want of grand and petit jurymen, and other ways suffered."

In order to meet this difficulty it was voted to move the town-house. But the removal of the town-house did not remedy the evils complained of, or, if this end was attained, new evils arose, for the next year the selectmen inserted an article in the warrant, " To see if the persons who carried away the town-house will bring it back again and set it up in the same place where they took it from, in as good repair as it was when they took it away, and for the town to act on the affair as they should think proper."

This town-house I infer was the one voted in 1739 to be built, the dimensions of which were to be " nine feet between joints and twenty-two feet wide and thirty-six feet long, with a chimney at one end, with a suitable roof and windows at the same."

The mode of conducting the town business was similar to that now adopted, but the style of some of the warrants would not be tolerated in these days. It was customary for the selectmen in calling a town- meeting not only to state the business to be consid- ered, but also very elaborately to discuss the several subjects, thereby furnishing to the people not only the question but the arguments in favor of or against it. It might have been that this full presentation of the merits of the case and the reasons for action elicited more attention, and, in the language of the old town clerks, was productive of "large debate." As an illustration of this peculiar and amusing fea- ture, let me quote from the records.

196

HISTORY OF BRISTOL COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS.

The sixth article in the selectmen's warrant for the March meeting, 1741, reads thus,-

" That whereas such course does much abound within said town, many running about from house to house to supply their own present want, miserably neglecting their families at home, which is the only cause of many's suffering who are not capable of labor, which practice is to the great detriment of that part of the inhabitants that are industrious and laborious, which pernicious practice, together with spending idly what they have or earn, is a great if not the only cause of scarcity of bread in said town, now to pass a vote at said meeting for the building a work- house in said town for the setting and keeping to work all such persons who misspend their time as above stated, which said vote is thought by all those that request the same cannot be spoken against, except by those which are in danger of breaking into said house themselves."

Another example of this presentation of reasons in the warrant of the selectmen occurs in 1746, when an effort was made to divide the county or create a new county-seat. This question both before and after this date engaged the attention of the people of Dart- mouth for many years. At one time it was proposed to divide the county and join Tiverton and Little Compton with us as a new county. At another time it was proposed to change the county-seat to Assonet as more central than Taunton. The question was finally settled in 1828, after an agitation of over one hundred years, by making New Bedford a half-shire town. The article in the warrant for the town-meet- ing held in 1746 is as follows :

" To consult and vote something with respect to petitioning the Gen- eral Court that we may have a county taken off or made on this side of Assonet River, otherwise we must unavoidably be expressed to go and our children after us, for what we know, to Taunton, which will be up- wards of thirty-five miles distance for many of said inhabitants, which will be in the journey extremely tedious and expensive, it being too far to set out from our homes to get there before the court setts, as likewise the largeness of the county aggravates the case by reason that one case must wait for another, and is at times the occasion of adjourument. In the whole, it will be tedious and expensive to plaintiff, defendant, jurymen, and evidences, but more especially to poor widows, who are oft- times obliged to go several times before an estate can be settled with the judge of probate."

It was certainly very convenient for the people to have the arguments all arranged for them before they were called upon to vote. That our fathers took no offense at this course is evident from its constant re- currence.

Early Settlers .- The following is a list of early settlers and proprietors :

Abraham Akin.

Caleb Anthony.

Jacob Akin.

Abraham Ashley.

John Akin.

Jethro Ashley.

Jeremialı Gifford.

Daniel Mosher.

Joseph Gifford.

Hugh Mosher.

Levi Gifford. Robert Gifford.

John Mosher. Jonathan Mosher.

Benjamin Allen.

Benjamin Baker.

William Gifford.

Joseph Mosher.

Ebenezer Allen. George Allen.

Jabez Barker.

John Hammond.

Nicholas Mosher.

Increase Allen. John Allen.

Stephen Barker.

Elisha Hathaway.

Micah Parker.

.Joseph Allen. Josiah Allen.

Richard Beden.

James Ilathaway.

Joseph Peckham.

Sampson Beden.

Jethro Hathaway. John Ilathaway.

Samuel Perry.

John Bennett.

Jonathan Hathaway.

David Petty.

Edmund Pope.

Stoten Booth. Benjamin Borden. Edward Borden.

John Borden.

Thomas Hathaway.

Joseph Borden.

Thomas Hathaway (2d). Jonathan Head.

William Borden.

John Briggs.

Thomas Briggs.

Joseph Hix.

IIenry Brightman.

Thomas Brightman.

Ezekiel Brownell.

Experience Holmes. Abner Howard.

George Brownell.

Mehitable Burrill.

William Howard.

Benjamin Howland.

George Cadman.

William Cadman.

Nathaniel Howland.

Benjamin Chace.

Nicolas Howland.

Zoeth Howland.

Samuel Ilunt.

Valentine IIuttlestone.

Job Jenne.

John Jenne.

John Cornell.

John Jenne, Jr.

Samuel Cornell.

Lettice Jenne's heirs.

Thomas Cornell.

Luther Jenne.

Mark Jenne.

Samuel Jenne.

Caleb Cory's heirs.

Seth Jenne.

Thomas Crandon.

Samuel Joy.

James Kempton.

Consider Crapo. Peter Crapo.

Manasseh Kempton.

Abishai Delano.

Jacob Kenny.

Jethro Delano.

John Kirby.

Jonathan Delano.

Nathaniel Kirby.

Nathan Delano.

Robert Kirby.

Nathaniel Delano.

Isaac Lake.

Seth Delano.

Joseph Lake.

Thomas Delano.

Nathaniel Lake.

Charmont Demoranville.

John Lapham.

Josiah Demoranville.

Nicholas Lapham.

Louis Demoranville.

George Lawton.

Nehemiah Demoranville.

Abial Macomber.

John Dennis.

Ephraim Macomber.

Jeremiah Devoll.

John Macomber.

Mary Devoll.

Samuel Macomber.

William Devoll.

Thomas Macomber.

Akin Durfee. William Macomber.

Benjamin Durfee.

Edmund Maxfield.

Briggs Durfee.

John Maxfield.

Jolını Earl. Timothy Maxfield.

Ralph Earl.

Zadock Maxfield.

William Earl.

Samuel Mendall.

William Earl's heirs.

Jonah Merrihew.

John Fish.

Joseph Merrihew.

Thomas Fitch.

Peter Merrihew.

Edmund Freeman.

Job Milk.

Thomas Getchell.

Lemnel Milk.

Henry Gidley.

Seth Morton.

Benjamin Gifford.

Abner Mosher.

Christopher Gifford.

Benjamin Mosher.

Enos Gifford.

Constant Mosher.

Jonathan Akin. Joseph Akin. Abraham Allen.

Nathaniel Babbitt.

Benjamin Babcock.

George Babcock.

Ebenezer Baker.

Berialı Goddard.

Maxson Mosher.

Joseph Barker.

William Hart. Benjamin Hathaway.

Samuel Mott. Nathan Nye.

William Barker.

Stephen Peckham.

Jeremialı Bennet.

Noah Allen. Noel Allen. Philip Allen. William Allen. Zachariah Allen. William Almy.

Meltiah Hathaway. Seth Hathaway. Sylvanus Hathaway.

Isaac Pope. Seth Pope.

David Chace. Jacob Chace.

Jonathan Clark.

Thomas Coleman.

Hannah Cornell.

Samuel Cornish.

Benjamin Cory.

Gideon Howland. Giles Howland. HIenry Howland.

Abraham Chace.

Gabriel IIix.

Mary Hix. Samuel Hix.

Jonathan Butts.

197

DARTMOUTH.

Ichabod Potter. John Potter.

Walter Spooner, William Spooner. Joseph Stafford.

Nathaniel Potter. Stephen Potter. Stokes Potter.

John Summers.

Jacob Taber. Jacob Taber, Jr.

Eleazer Prait. Jonathan Ricketson. Timothy Ricketson. William Ricketson. Samuel Rider.

John Taber. Jonathan Taber.

Joseph Taber. Philip Taber.

William Rider.

Philip Taber, Jr.

Daniel Rogers. Philip Rogers.

Thomas Taber.

George Rowse.

Thomas Taber, Jr. William Taber.

John Russell, Jr.

Jonathan Tallman. Ebenezer Tinkham.

Joseph Russell. Joseph Russell, Jr. Thomas Russell.

John Tinkham. Peter Tinkhanı.

Elisha Tobey.

Henry Sampson.

Elnathan Tobey.

James Sampson.

Jonathan Tobey.

James Sampson, Jr.

Joseph Sampson.

Stephen Sampson.

Daniel Shearman. Edmund Shearman.

Benjamin Tripp.

Ebenezer Tripp.

Job Shearman. John Shearman.

James Tripp.

Joshua Shearman.

John Tripp.

Peleg Shearman.

Joseph Tripp.

Philip Shearman.

Peleg Tripp.

Samuel Shearman. William Shearman. Daniel Shepherd. John Shepherd.

Timothy Tripp.

Abraham Tucker.

Henry Tucker.

James Sisson.

John Tucker.

Eleazer Slocum.

Joseph Tucker and sons.

Giles Slocumı.

Christopher Turner.

Mary Slocum.

Benjamin Wait.

Benjamin Smith.

Thomas Wait.

Richard Ward.

Eleazer Smith.

Thomas Ward.

Moses Washburn.

Peter Washburn.

Eli Waste.

Hepsibalı Smith.

Nathan Waste.

Hezekiah Smithı.

Joseph Weaver.

Humphrey Smith.

Bartholomew West.

Increase Smith.

Samuel West.

Judah Smith.

Stephen West.

Mary Smith.

Joseph Whalen.

Peleg Smith.

George White.

Amos Snell.

John White.

Benjamin Sowle.

Rogers White.

George Sowle.

Samuel White.

Jacob Sowle.

William White.

John Sowle.

Scipio Wilbour.

Jonathan Sowle.

Stephen Wilcox.

Nathaniel Sowle.

Daniel Wilcox.

Timothy Sowle.

Jeremiah Wilcox.

William Sowle.

Samuel Wilcox.

Benjamin Spooner.

Samuel Willis.

Isaac Spooner.

Joseph Wing. Matthew Wing.

John Spooner, Jr.

Daniel Wood.

Micah Spooner.

George Wood.

Nathaniel Spooner, Jr. Samnel Spooner. Seth Spooner.

George Wood, Jr. William Wood.

CHAPTER XVI. DARTMOUTH .- (Continued.) DOCUMENTARY HISTORY.

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.

History of Bristol County, Massachusetts, with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men, Part 47

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton) ed Publication date: 1883 Publisher: Philadelphia, J. W. Lewis & Co. Number of Pages: 1818

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton) ed
Publication date: 1883
Publisher: Philadelphia, J. W. Lewis & Co.
Number of Pages: 1818