USA > Massachusetts > Franklin County > Deerfield > History of Deerfield, Massachusetts: the times when the people by whom it was settled, unsettled and resettled, vol 1 > Part 49
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 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65
489
THE SEVEN-MILE LINE.
shall agree upon concerning there town bounds aforesaid."
No result of this conference is found. Probably there was no agreement where the line should run. But the matter reached the General Court and was settled in another way, as we see below :-
June II 1717 Upon Reading a Petition of Thomas Wells, Repre- sentative of ye Town of Derefield, setting forth that the General Court in ye year 1673 Granted to said Town an addition of a Tract of land that was to be laid out at the north end of the said Town, and to contain the quantity of Seven Miles Square, weh Land was ac- cordingly laid out & the Bound Marks still to be seen. But upon Searching the Records they cannot find any Entry thereof; Praying that it may now be allowed & confirmed & be of Record to prevent future Trouble.
Wells was directed to make a plan of the tract by the old bounds and present it to the Court at its next session. Pur- suant to the above order, a plan was presented to the House, Oct. 29, 1717, which was accepted. But the Council non-con- curred. Nov. 9th, a committe of Conference was appointed of five from the House, and three from the Council. Nov. 19th this committee reported to the Council,-
That having maturely considered the Evidences and Pleas ther- about, are humbly of opinion, that the Bounds of the Seven Miles Square granted to Deerfield, Shall be and Remain According to Platt now exhibited to this Great and General Court; Provided the line run from the north end of said Tract to the Great River be an East line.
The report was adopted. The objectors were doubtless Northfield people, but the particular points in the controver- sy do not appear. The grant thus accepted and confirmed, covered essentially the territories now occupied by the towns of Greenfield and Gill. The bounds of the Additional Grant of 1712,-
Begin at a large chestnut tree at the Country farm so-called which is the North West corner of the 7 Miles Square, already con- firmed & runs thence West 1670 perch to two large white oak trees standing close together, thence South 19° West 3800 perch to a great hemlock tree with stones heaped about it, thence East 1670 perch to the South West corner of the 7 Mile Square, thence North 19° East 3860 perch to the chestnut tree.
The west line of this grant was thus made parallel to that of the Seven Mile grant. The latter is still known as it was then, as the "Seven Mile Line," and can still be traced from Whately to Colrain.
490
PROPRIETORS OF POCUMTUCK. TOWN LINES.
The Ashfield Line. In 1736 a township was granted Capt. Ephraim Hunt and his company for services in the Canada campaign of 1690. It was to be laid out adjoining Deerfield on the west. A controversy soon arose between the Proprie- tors of Pocumtuck and the Proprietors of "Huntstown " re- specting the boundary line between them. This was settled only after appeals to the General Court and the Judiciary.
In 1736 the town made provision for "Surveying ye River on ye East side of the Town" as a basis for establishing the Seven Mile Line, as all agreed that the west line of the Ad- ditional Grant should be parallel to this, as this must be par- allel to the river. A plan of the whole township was made based on this survey.
May 30 1737, Thomas Wells Esq of Deerfield is chose & appointed in ye name & in behalf of sd Town to appear in ye Great & General Court of this Province, then and there to do any & all things that shall be conducive to get a plat of sd Township confirmed.
The legislature was then in session and Esquire Wells was soon before it with his petition :-
June 29 1737. In the House of Representatives, Ordered, that Col. Chandler, Col. Almy, & Capt Hobson, with such as shall be joined by the Hon1 Board be a Comter to take the plat of the town- ship of Deerfield under consideration, and the papers Accompanying the same, Relating to the lines or boundaries of said Town, that they carefully examine the said plat & consider the said papers & make Report thereon, so far as may relate to the true west line of said Town for the Courts further consideration & order in adjusting the same agreable to the Additional Grant.
The Council added William Dudley and Joseph Wild to this committee. Probably Wells's plan was not found to be sufficiently accurate or comprehensive to base final action up- on, at any rate another town meeting was called.
July 22d, 1737, Thomas Wells, Ebenezer Smead and Elijah Williams were made a committee to "Survey the Township of Deerfield, & get an accurate plan of sd Township to lay be- fore the General Court as soon as may be."
The plan was made, and laid before the General Court, but by some means never understood by the people of Deerfield, the plan disappeared while awaiting legislative action. The whole matter seems to have then dropped until the Proprie- tors of Pocumtuck became alarmed by the proceedings of the Huntstown settlers and took the matter into their own hands.
491
TROUBLE ON THE HUNTSTOWN LINE.
Feb. 2d, 1741, at a Proprietors meeting Thomas Wells was again called to the front and " Appointed to procure a Plan of the Township forthwith," and a committee was chosen " to run the west side of the town & see the same well marked."
The plan made under the above vote was probably the one presented to the General Court by Elijah Williams, the rep- resentative from Deerfield, in July following. With this plan he offered this memorial in behalf of the town.
Some years ago, a plat of sª Township was presented to this Court for Confirmation, but so it was, that either said plat was taken from the files, or was mislaid so that it could never be found to this Day & the sd Town have at great charge and trouble procured another plan of sd Town & the sd Town labors under many inconveniences for want of having the bounds of sd Town confirmed & established :
Therefore your Memorialist Humbly prays that a consideration of the s" affair may be had and the plat now presented passed upon by this Court & your petitioner as in Duty bound shall ever pray.
ELIJAH WILLIAMS.
This memorial was referred to a committee consisting of Samuel Jackson, Joseph Blanchard, and Adam Cushing. They reported favorably, and the plan was confirmed. Nov. 2d at a meeting of the Proprietors :-
Voted that Missrs Elijah Williams, Thomas Wells Esq, & John Catlin, the second, be a Comitee or agents for the proprietors to sue or prosecute any person or persons, who have, or shall hereafter trespass on the Lands of ye proprietors, by any way or means what- soever, on the west side, or else where in our propriety, who are also hereby empowered to Substitute one or more attorneys to manage or carry on any actions of trespass for the proprietors as sd Com'ttee shall see fit.
Voted that Missrs Elijah Williams, John Hawks and John Catlin 2 ond be a Com'tee to provide a Surveyr to run the line on the west side of ye Town & see the same well marked.
Voted that Missrs Elijah Williams, Thomas Wells 2ºnd and David Field be a Com'tee to go and fence and clear a peace of Land for the proprietors on the West side of the Mill Brook joining near the south line the Township. and empowered if they think it will be for the benefit of the proprietors to lease out ye aforsd land to any person who will appear to take the same for five years, & the proprietors hereby oblige themselves to defend & save said Com'tee or those to whom they may let said land, free from any cost or charges that may arise by reason of their or his being anyway mo- lested or Disturbed by any person or persons whatsoever in their or his Improvment or possession as aforesd.
All this action is aimed at the Huntstown people. They had run their east line, and were pitching their tents on land
492
PROPRIETORS OF POCUMTUCK. GRANT OF 1712.
claimed as being within the bounds of the Additional Grant. The ground to be cleared and fenced was doubtless on the disputed territory. The evidence as to the merits of the con- troversy is scanty. Both parties were agreed that the west line of the Pocumtuck grants should be nine miles from the river; and they also agreed that the starting point from which to measure the nine miles should be the place where the line between Deerfield and Hatfield struck Connecticut river. [Whately was not then.] The disagreements appear to be, the course from the starting point, and the course from its western terminus, to the northward. Hunt's party claimed that the line from the river should be measured on the Hat- field line nine miles. One line is marked on an old plan, probably used in this case, as running "North 87º 23' East." The Deerfield men would run from the river at right angles to it, which would carry them about two or three hundred rods farther west. From this western terminus, when once fixed, both agreed that the line northward should be straight, and parallel to the river, which was the east bound of the town.
The battle was thus necessarily fought upon this river line. The difficulty was, the river was crooked. To average this, and form a base from which to lay off its west line, the Proprietors ran a line from the agreed southeast corner, northward through the mouth of Fall river, which gave a course of north 17º 45' east. The other party starting at the same point, would run north 20° 50' east, crossing the Con- necticut a mile and a half east of Fall river ; and run their east line parallel to that, nine miles westward. This would cut off above nine square miles claimed under the Pocumtuck grants. The evidence tends to show that the Hunt party failed in this attempt, but succeeded as to the south line of measurement from the river. But the end was not yet.
In March, 1742, Maj. Adam Cushing, in behalf of the Pro- prietors of Huntstown, petitioned the General Court, that a committee be appointed to settle the line, claiming :-
I. That when they went to lay out their Grant, Deerfield people refused to go and show them their west line 'Minding that we should so lay out the Grant so as to leave a gore between said towns to be swallowed up unknown to the Province' * * We searched and * found the Grant made to Deerfield in the petition of Rev. John Wil-
493
THE COURTS MUST SETTLE THE QUESTION.
liams in 1712 which extended nine miles West. We began at the river and ran on the Hatfield and Deerfield line 9 miles, then ran parallel to the river 7 miles for our East bounds.
The answer to this by Elijah Williams is that so far from refusing to show the line, a messenger was sent in the night to Northampton to get a copy of the survey, but the papers could not be found : and that three pounds value of provisions were furnished to the Proprie- tors, by the town, to their surveyors, while searching for the West line. If a gore was left one town would be as likely to swallow it up as the other.
2ondly When the Proprietors settled a site for the Meeting House, it was near the easterly bounds so as to be near our Deerfield neigh- bors & now we are clearing & settling on lands Deerfield claims by virtue of their plan, which was confirmed this year & they will not enter upon the land so we can sue them nor sue us but by way of banter tell us to clear as fast as we can, that hereafter they shall get it from us, whereby many of us are discouraged & drawing off. Further I beg leave to observe that the critick that they lay hold of is, that to run 9 miles at right angles is about west north west in- stead of running west according to Hatfield and Northampton do, which is the occasion of their falling upon our grant and we desire the line settled so that we can be certain of clearing our own lands.
Williams answered, This question of ownership can only be settled at common law & it is trifling with the great and General Court to bring personal banter, and jesting of particular persons before it. In regard to a committee to look up the bounds he says, a commit- tee was appointed last year, but we do not object to another if they will bear the expense and not Deerfield.
Commissioners cant settle the line. The Gen Court has made the Grants and if a dispute arises the law must settle it. Last year Samuel Jackson Joseph Blanchard and Maj Cushing [the present petitioner] were appointed, (upon my memorial respecting Deerfield plat being confirmed, which is herewith presented) who reported they were of opinion that the plat contained the just quantity of the grant, and is laid out with most conveniency, so as not to prejudice the Town, or adjoining lands, and most conformable to the grants to Deerfield, and that it should be accepted and confirmed.
March 25th, 1742, the General Court ordered that the Se- lectmen of Deerfield be notified to appear on the first Tues- day of May next, and show cause, if any they have, why the petition should not be granted. "In council June 2, 1742, Deerfield not having timely notice, the case is postponed to Thursday the 24th, if the Court be then attending, if not to the first Thursday of the next setting, and notice to be given Deerfield."
A town meeting was called June 19th, 1742, and "Thomas Wells and Samuel Barnard Esqs, & Mr Elijah Williams chose a committee to make answer to the Gen. Court." At the final
494
POCUMTUCK PROPRIETORS. GRANT OF 1712.
hearing it appeared that Huntstown people had encroached on Deerfield 5362 acres.
It does not appear why their grant was not extended west- ward and relocated ; but instead, an equivalent of eight thou- sand acres was granted them "to lie northward on Deerfield bounds to Boston Townships No. I & No. 2."-Charlemont and Colrain-This grant was held to include the falls in the Deerfield river at Shelburne Falls, and March Ist, 1743, the General Court "ordered that the salmon Fishing Falls in Deerfield River, so called, be reserved for the use of the pub- lic, with twenty acres around them for conveniency of fish- ing."
Even this, however, does not appear to be the conclusion of the whole matter. In 1763, Conway was laid out to the several owners of commons. Soon after by a judicial de- cision it was found the west tier of lots was encroaching on Huntstown. From the data accessible it would appear that a diagonal piece, averaging about 100 rods wide, was cut off, and annexed to that town. To compensate the thirteen losers by this change, an equivalent of 1259 acres undivided land was given them by the Proprietors of Pocumtuck, and laid out to them on both sides of the river, at Hoosac. The farm of 371 acres thus awarded Consider Arms is still held, or was recently, by his descendants. Other changes in the bounds of the town will be noticed in a subsequent chapter.
The status of the Proprietors of Pocumtuck was never changed. Its meetings were held and records kept, for one hundred and thirty-five years and until the entire property was disposed of by grant, division or sale. All titles to land in Conway, Shelburne, Greenfield, or Gill, are derived from this body; and all in Deerfield, with the exception above noted. On the union of interests in 1674, the " Town " and the " Proprietors" became identical ; but with the influx of new settlers, their authority and functions grew to be separate. Until about 1718, however, the jurisdiction of both seem to have been concurrent in several particulars. Each legislated in regard to laying of roads, the control of the water power, the regulation of the wood lands, the running of town lines, the granting of land to settlers and the care of fences to pro- tect the Common Field. The "Town" chose town officers, established schools, controlled ecclesiastical affairs, raised
495
STATUS OF TOWN AND PROPRIETORS.
money by taxation, ordered its expenditure, fixed the time for closing and opening the Common Field, established the price of provision, and of labor, and regulated municipal af- fairs generally. The "Proprietors" were owners of the soil. Although small grants of land were often voted by the Town for convenience of parties, or for service performed, no grant was valid until ratified by the Proprietors. With a clerk, as- sessors, and treasurer of their own, the Proprietors raised money by taxation-always so much to the cow-common- and expended it by vote, at will. It shows the intimate rela- tions of the two bodies, that their records were kept in the same book, and for many years the Proprietors' meetings were called by the selectmen of the town; the Proprietors' clerk, under their direction, posting the warrant on the "sign post " five days before the date of the meeting. But beyond that, after 1718, the two bodies had little or nothing in com- mon. During the wars and the struggle of the infant colony for existence, transfers of land were carelessly made, with lines loosely defined, bounds indefinite, and landmarks tem- porary and uncertain. Evidence of ownership was not care- fully preserved, and there came to be a conflict of claims, and confusion of titles. On the Peace of Ryswick, some advance was made in an attempt to remedy the evil.
Aug. 31st, 1699, seven men were chosen "to Settle the lines between Neighbour & Neighbour whose bounds are not evident,"-the agreement of any four to be binding. Again, at the close of Queen Anne's War, when the settlers were able to cultivate the soil in comparative security, special pains were taken to define the lines of divisions and establish individual ownership.
Dec. 21st, 1714, a committee was chosen to "Settle Green River Lands as neere as they can wth ye towne plat and ye other Lands to ye former laying out and make Return what they have done, to ye clerk of ye proprietors."
Provision was made for landless men. In 1714 it was voted "that any of ye inhabitants of this town whomsoever shall haue Liberty to improue Lands on ye West hills for ye space of 6 years in Such places where ye Comtee shall Lay it out, not exceeding 6 acres in a place."
Down to 1718, the following divisions had been apportioned
496
PROPRIETORS OF POCUMTUCK. GRANT OF 1712.
to the holders of cow-commons, and were held in fee by in- dividuals.
I. The Town Plat, in 1671.
II. The First Division of Plow Land, 1671.
III. The Second Division of Plow Land, 1671.
IV. The mowing land. This was laid out about the time with the above in two Divisions; no record of the transac- tion is found, but a fragment of the original plan has been recently discovered. These Divisions lay on both sides of the river, west of the Town Plat and First Division of Plow Land.
V. The First Division of Wood Land south of Long Hill. This covered the territory between the road to Hatfield by the Bars Long Hill and the Sugar Loaf range. Turnip Yard lies within this Division, as do the houses and lots on the east side of Bloody Brook street, north of the Lathrop monu- ment.
VI. The Second Division of Wood Land at Long Hill. This lay west of the Hatfield road and extended westward to the Seven Mile Line. Mill river and nearly all Bloody Brook are built on this Division, which extended south nearly to the present Whately line. Both Divisions were drawn in 1688.
VII. The East Mountain Division of Wood Land. This took both ranges, from the river at Cheapside, and ran three and a half miles south.
In all these tracts the lines of divsiion ran easterly and westerly. The same is true of all later divisions, with the exception of the First and Second Divisions "North of Cheapside and East of Green River." Those were "choice" or "pitch lots;" and there the law of irregularity fairly ran riot, in their forms, especially the lots in the second drawing. Some of the recorded plans suggest a pile of carpenter's tools thrown down at random ; others might fairly represent a col- lection of modern agricultural machines grouped for close storage.
In 1712, on the petition of Rev. John Williams, the west bounds of the town were carried west from the Connecticut nine miles into the woods, and it added about sixty-two square miles to our township, covering essentially the terri- tory now occupied by Conway and Shelburne. This grant, the "seven square mile grant," and the Cheapside and Great
497
RE-EXAMINATION OF TITLES.
River additions, are soon after for the first time spread upon the town records, and there arose doubtless much discussion as to whom this land belonged. There seems to have been an attempt by the Town about this time to absorb the Propri- ctors and take all the landed territory into its own hands.
Since 1698, town business had been transacted each year, "at a Legal Town Meeting in Deerfield ;" but March 3d, 1717- 18, "a Legal Meeting of the Inhabitants of Pocumtuck " was called. At this meeting town officers were chosen, the usual municipal business of the annual March meeting transacted and Samuel Barnard was chosen Proprietors' clerk. Then followed votes which implied a full control, not only of the Additional Grant, but of all the undivided land in the town- ship, and action was taken to divide the whole among the "Inhabitants of Pocumtuck." Minute arrangements were made for the disposition of the lands at Green River and for the examination and establishment of all titles and claims to ownership in the township.
March 20th, 1718, a meeting of the Proprietors was held. There is frequent allusion to the meeting of the Inhabitants, on the 3d, as an "illegal meeting," but the matters canvassed there, were fully gone into, and most of the votes repeated, and the relation of the land owners to the commonage was defined. A committee was chosen to,-
Consider ye Sircamstances of those men who haue not in yr pur- chases of Land Bought ye Common Rights, provided that Eury of ye aboue sd inhabitants do giue Suffitiant Security *
* that if they shall at any time herafter purchace the Common Rights that belong to their sd home lots or medow lands that they will draw for sd Common Rights no more than to make this grant up equal to other Common Rights provided also that if upon examination of ye deed of sd meadow and home lot lands it appeare that Common Rights be excluded such deed or inhahitant shall haue no benefit by this vote * * Capt. Jonathan Wells, Dean Thomas french Mehuman Hinsdel were chosen for a Comtee to view each proprietors deeds & to pass Judgment on them as to ye legal power of Draft in the undi- vided lands and so find out what each proprietor can draw accord- ing to the Rules agreed to and voted by ye proprietors.
This vote probably brought harmony to the Town; as those who had home lots or meadow land without common- age would now share equally with the others in the undivid- ed lands. An elaborate examination of titles was made and the ownership traced back to the original cow-commons.
498
POCUMTUCK PROPRIETORS. GRANT OF 1712.
Five years later the committee laid before the Proprietors a minute report of the exact proportion each held in the com- mon land. This report became the basis of all future divisions.
At a meeting of the Proprietors May 8th, 1723, the report of the committee chosen in 1718 to find out,-
The rights and interests by commons in the 8000 acres formerly granted to Dedham [was made, ] and having Considered the List of Commons or Common Rights of each Inhabitant as Presented to Them by the Committee, which was accepted by the Proprietors with some amendments and is as followeth, viz. :
Names.
Commons. Acres.
Rods.
Joseph Atherton,
5
7
80
Edward Allen, Jr.,
5
7
So
Jn. Allen & Edw'd Allen, Sen.,
17
7
SI
John Arms,
17
I
0
Daniel Arms,
13
12
So
John Amsden,
3
O
0
William Arms,
II
II
So
Samuel Bardwell,
7
12
0
Daniel Belden,
II
4
O
Hannah Beamon,
6
O
0
Daniel Beamon,
6
O
0
John Beamon,
2
O
O
Capt. Samuel Bernard,
44
5
91
William Belden,
3
O
O
Joseph Brooks,
3
0
O
Ebenezer Brooks,
S
3
40
Nathaniel Brooks,
3
O
0
Samuel Childs,
6
9
120
John Catlin's Heirs,
15
12
60
John Catlin, Joseph's Heirs,
3
0
O
Timothy Childs,
I3
3
88
Thomas French, Jun.,
3
O
0
Samuel Field,
3
O
O
Nathaniel Frary,
IO
0
O
Mehuman Hinsdel,
103
6
II
Dec'n Eliezer Hawks,
28
4
60
Jonathan Hoit,
13
IO
100
David Hoit's Heirs,
7
0
O
David Hoit ye 2d's Heirs,
7
0
70
Benjamin Hastings,
3
IO
6.4
Jonah Holms,
2
O
0
Benjamin Mun.
15
O
156
Isaac Mattoon,
3
O
O
William Mitchel,
2
O
Michael Mitchel, Jun.,
2
O
O
John Nyms,
13
I
131
Ebenezer Nyms,
3
O
O
Moses Nash,
3
0
O
John Shelden Second's Heirs,
16
2
O
Ebenezer Shelden,
9
O
0
Samuel Smeed,
3
O
0
Ebenezer Smeed,
25
O
89
John Smeed's Heirs,
5
12
100
Joseph Severance,
12
8
I
John Stebbins, Jr.,
23
I
50
Joseph Stebbins,
2
O
0
Samuel Dickinson,
I2
5
20
Thomas French, Sen.,
9
7
144
499
GREEN RIVER GRANTS LAID OUT.
Commons. Acres.
Rods.
Samuel Taylor,
15
0
120
James Tule,
2
O
0
Lieut. Thomas Wells,
46
9
12
Ebenezer Wells,
9
7
60
Jona Wells, Esq., & Jona Wells, Jun.,
27
12
28
Thomas Wells, Jun.,
S
2
130
Joshua Wells,
2
0
O
Mr. John Williams,
IS
2
120
Zebediah Williams' Heirs,
3
0
0
Judah Wright,
3
0
O
James Cors, [added later]
2
O
O
Under the practice of the Proprietors, in granting land to encourage settlers, and in payment of services, the number of cow-commons had increased from five hundred and twen- ty-three to the six hundred and eighty-seven represented in this list. This increase indicates a corresponding decrease of value in each right. Although this list gives the exact pro- portion of each in the undivided land, it does not necessarily indicate the amount already held in severalty. It probably does this substantially.
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.