USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > East Boston > History of East Boston; with biographical sketches of its early proprietors, and an appendix > Part 18
USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > East Boston > History of East Boston : with biographical sketches of its early proprietors, and an appendix. > Part 18
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 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72
These conditions had been in force about fifty years, and Mr. Shrimpton had complied with them during the twelve years he had now been in possession of the Island. But in 1682, in answer to a petition to that effect, he was freed from them by the payment of thirty pounds sterling. His petition, and the answer of the court, are as follows : -
199
RELEASE OF RENT.
1682.]
" To the Honorble Generall Court Assembled in Boston 7th February Aº 1682.
" The Petition of Samuel Shrimpton
" Humbly sheweth
" That Whereas vpon the grant of Noddles Island in the yeare 1633 vnto Mr. Samuel Mauericke to enjoy to him & his heires for euer (which said Island is now by purchase become the propriety of your Petitioner) he and they being to yeild and pay yearely at the Generall Court to the Governor for the time being either a fat weather a fatt hogg or forty shillings money, which hath hitherto been Complied with : But forasmuch as there may very great damage & Inconvenience happen to you", Petitioner and his heires by hauing the said Island lye vnder the obligation of a yearely acknowledgment, and will be of no benefit or advantage to the publique which doth not exceed ten shillings at most Anned if your Petitioner please it being in his choice to pay either the fat weather Fat hogg or forty shillings. " Wherefore he humbly prayeth
" That you would please to take of and release the said yearely payment and to accept a smale sume of money in leiu thereof, as may be Judged Answerable to such an acknowledg- ment, which you" Petitioner will readily pay to such use as this Honnoured shall please to direct.
" And as in duty bound he shall humbly pray," etc.
" In answer to the petition of Mr. Samuel Shrimpton for the release of the quitt-rent & incumbrance upon Nodles Island, in the payment of forty shillings or otherwise annually, as in the sajd petition is expressed, this Court hath consented, & doe hereby for euer release & set ffree the sajd island from the sajd duty & payment, or what euer other incumbrance the sajd island and lands thereof is by the sajd grant chardged with ; and that the same be holden by the sajd Samuel Shrimpton, his heirs and assigns, for euer in ffee, wthout any incumbrance whatsoeuer, vpon no other condition but the payment of thirty pounds money sterling of England to Joseph Dudley & John Richards, Esqrs., our agents in England, or either of them ; and their receipt, wth coppy of this grant, to be his discharge accord- ingly." 1
1 Archives, lib. 45, fol. 186; Mass. Records, Vol. V. p. 413.
.
200
HISTORY.
[1687.
Mr. Shrimpton complied with these terms, and, by the pay- ment of the £30 required, became the first person who owned Noddle's Island free from all the incumbrances of the original grant, and thus held it an indefeasible estate in fee-simple.
In 1685-6, there were matters of difference between Mr. Peter Sergeant Shrimpton and Mr. Peter Sargeant ; 1 the causes and particulars of which are not manifest from the records. These were times of great political excitement in the colony, caused by the repeated changes in the ministry, and the consequent changes in the colonial laws and officers. Mr. Shrimpton was a leading man in the province, and, with his love of religious and civil liberty, it was naturally to be ex- pected that he would come in collision with the arbitrary authorities of his time, and this was the case in more than one instance.
In 1686, among the last causes which came before the court of assistants, in an indictment brought against Mr. Shrimpton, it was alleged, " that he, at the county court sitting in Boston on the 22d of March last, in a tumultuous, violent, and seditious manner, and with a loud voice, and in open court, did say that he was brought there by Mr. Sargent's order, and not by the court, and that he denied any such thing in being as governor and company of this colony, and that he stood there to testify it, and denied their power, and that they might send him to prison if they pleased; which words in the same manner he re- peated, and sundry other seditious words and expressions, as by the evidence will and may appear, thereby defaming the gen- eral court and the county court, and caused such a turmoil in the court as evidently tended to the high breach of his Majesty's government," etc.
He was arrested upon this indictment ; but, from the changes which soon took place in the government, no trial was ever had of the case.
He was afterward, in 1687, one of the judges of the superior
1 Mr. Sargeant was afterward one of the judges of the special court of Oyer and Terminer, for the trial of witches, in 1692.
201
1687.]
COL. SHRIMPTON A JUDGE.
court. The bench was filled by Joseph Dudley, chief justice, William Stoughton, Simon Lynde, Samuel Shrimpton, Charles Lidget, associates. The relative rank which was held by these distinguished persons may be ascertained from the manner in which they were seated on the bench, and which is thus stated in Sewall's Diary : "1687, April, Tuesday 26, Court sits, Presi- dent (Dudley, Chief Justice) in ye Governor's Seat ; Mr. Stough- ton at his right hand, Col. Shrimpton next him ; Mr. Lynde at his left hand, Major Lidget next him." In the same year, by the same reliable authority, we find him officiating as judge at the court of quarter-sessions. Says the Diary : " 1687, June 8. This day the Quarter Sessions is held at Boston, Col. Shrimp- ton, Judge. . Judge Shrimpton sat in the Governor's seat."
Thus it appears that the son of a mechanic, and himself also one of the number, by his own exertions and by the exercise of those qualities implanted in him by nature, rose to be a man of distinction, and to occupy the governor's seat in his official ca- pacity as judge.
Upon the accession of James II. to the throne, in 1685, proc- lamations were issued to be published in New England, and letters from those high in authority were sent to gentlemen of distinction in the colony, ordering them to " proclaim ye King." 1 It is supposed that " this was done lest ye Government should have neglected to doe it." Mr. Blaithwait wrote to the gov- ernor, recommending the proclaiming of King James, and " ad- vising that it would be best early to doe it," but insultingly told him, he did not write as to a government, the charter being va- cated. This same question respecting the charter was, a few years later, one of the principal causes of the overthrow of Governor Andros, and in which Col. Shrimpton was a promi- nent actor.
Among the men to whom letters were written to " proclaim ye King," was " Saml Shrimpton, Esqr.," an incidental fact show- ing his public character and position.
The vessel bringing these "orders to the several colonies "
1 Hutchinson's Hist. Mass. Bay; Sewall's Diary ; Drake's Iist. Boston, etc.
202
HISTORY.
[1685.
arrived at Boston, April 16, 1685, and the proclamation was made, with great ceremony, on the 20th of the same month.
Owners of land in Boston and vicinity had much to appre- hend, as the charter was declared to be "vacated," and they had serious forebodings as to the character of the government which was to be put upon them.
It is not necessary, nor would it be advisable, to enter upon the questions concerning the charters, as it would only be enter- ing upon a long course of litigation, which is scarcely ended at the present time. The original grantors of land in the " New World " appear to have had no idea of the position or extent of the various tracts which they granted to companies and indi- viduals ; and north, east, south, and west were most strangely confounded, and the royal charters give us amusing instances of the then ideas in respect to North American geography. The charter given to one company would thus overlap the one given to some other company or individual, and conflicting claims to the same land would arise, both parties contending that their respective charters secured to them the contested land, and in this opinion both parties were not unfrequently right.
" Indeed," says Dr. Baird, " considering the descriptions con- tained in their charters, it is marvellous that the colonies should ever have ascertained their boundaries. Looking at the charter of Massachusetts, for example, and comparing it with that State as laid down on our maps, we are amazed to think by what possible ingenuity it should have obtained its existing bounda- ries, especially that on the north-east. Still more confounding does it seem, that Massachusetts should have successfully claimed the territory of Maine, and yet have had to relinquish that of New Hampshire." 1
The difficulties arising from the incorrect laying down of boundaries were many and great, and have even extended to our own time, being a prolific source of lawsuits and conten- tions.
It was also as difficult to ascertain what powers and civil and
1 Religion in America, by Robert Baird, p. 58. The ninth chapter of this able work has much interesting matter pertaining to the early charters.
203
ADVERSE CLAIMS.
1683.]
religious liberties were granted under the charters, as it was to determine the just limits of their land jurisdiction.
The many adverse claims to land, each claim apparently well supported by charter and special grant, gave rise to many and grievous disputes, and great care and prudence was neces- sary in adjusting these troubles. The royal commissioners of whom Maverick was one, were appointed to hear and deter- mine all matters of complaint between the colonies, as has already been shown in the appropriate place (Chap. VI.). Their duties included the settlement of all disputes relative to titles of land, but their actions were so interpreted and impeded by the colonial government, that little was accomplished, and im- portant points were left unsettled. For instance, Rhode Island and Connecticut both laid claim to the " Narraganset country ;" Carr, Cartwright, and Maverick had been on the ground, and passed orders (without Nichols, who was always to constitute one of the quorum), and had taken the disputed territory from both colonies until the king's pleasure should be known. When this came to the knowledge of Nichols, he reversed the orders, and declared them null and void. Time passed on, and the question was undecided. The king was addressed by the inter- ested parties, agents were sent across the water, and the dis- pute became complex, the papers voluminous, and the whole subject unpleasant, and one that was gradually assuming a real importance to the welfare of the colonies.
In order to settle this controversy, Charles II., on the 17th of April, 1683, the thirty-fifth year of his reign, appointed a board of commissioners, consisting of Edward Cranfield, Esq., lieu- tenant-governor and commander-in-chief of New Hampshire, William Stoughton, Joseph Dudley, Edward Randolph, Samuel Shrimpton, John Fitz Winthrop, Edward Palmer, John Pynchon, and Nathaniel Saltonstall, Esquires. Any three of these, Cran- field or Randolph being of the number, should constitute a quorum ; and their duties were to inquire into the claims and titles of his majesty, or any persons or corporations, to the juris- diction or propriety of soil to the king's province or Narragansett country. The commissioners convened on the 22d of August at the house of Richard Smith (in Rochester, Narragansett country), and again at Boston on the 3d of September.
204
HISTORY.
[1685.
A long and minute report was made, which, after a critical exposition of the whole subject, declared that the province belonged to Connecticut; and that the propriety of soil, as derived from Winthrop and Major Atherton, was vested in the heirs and assigns of Winthrop, etc. This report was made on the 20th of October, 1683, and signed by Edward Cranfield, William Stoughton, Samuel Shrimpton, John Pynchon, Jr., and Nathaniel Saltonstall.1
The appointment of Shrimpton on this important commis- sion is good evidence of the trust and confidence reposed in him as a public man, and officer of the king. He appears often in responsible stations, and in positions where eminent abilities are required to insure success.
In the Massachusetts Records, we find the general court recognizing his public services on a particular occasion in a very complimentary manner. The record reads as follows : -
"1685, July 8. - The Court, being sencible of ye good service donne for the country by Joseph Dudley, Esq. and Mr. Samuel Shrimpton, in their late journey to New York, doe order that their expenses and disbursements in sd journey be by the coun- try Treasurer dischardged, & that the thankes of this Court be returned to the sajd gente for their great pajnes & good service ; and as a further testimony of our respect & acceptance of the services of the sajd gentn, doe order the Treasurer to pay unto Mr. Dudley twenty pounds in money, & to Mr. Samuel Shrimp- ton, tenn pounds in money, out of the first country money in his hands." 2
The particular business upon which Mr. Dudley and Mr. Shrimpton were engaged does not fully appear; but that it was a matter of importance is evident from the character of the men engaged in it, and the mention made of it by the legisla- ture. As this was at a time when the question of surrendering the charter was being agitated, and the titles to lands were imperilled, it is more than probable that the mission upon which they were sent was upon this subject; this seems the more likely, as Mr. Dudley had just returned from his agency in Eng- land; and both he and Colonel Shrimpton had experience in
1 Mass. Hist. Coll. Vol. V. p. 232, etc.
2 Vol. V. p. 490.
205
SIR EDMUND ANDROS.
1686.]
land questions. Mr. Dudley is the same who was appointed to the government of New England in April, 1685. At the time of this appointment, Randolph warmly espoused the interest of Dudley, and, in letters to Colonel Shrimpton, expresses the highest confidence in his merit, loyalty, and ability. Dudley, however, soon grew cool towards Randolph, who, in turn, was as active in vilifying him as he had been before in praising him.1 Dudley had been previously associated with Mr. Shrimp- ton in the settlement of the difficulties respecting the " Narra- ganset country," and this subsequent connection in public affairs shows that their services were satisfactory, and that the two men must have been upon intimate terms.
Immediately on the accession of James, a plan had been ar- ranged for procuring the surrender of all the patents of the New England colonies, and for dividing the whole northern part of America into twelve provinces, with a governor-general over the whole. This plan had for its object the consolidation of power in the person of the king, and was probably devised by his ambitious and unprincipled advisers, and was of such a nature as to please James, who was a narrow-minded and un- just monarch. The plan, however, failed in its full execution, but the particulars do not come within the design of our book.
Sir Edmund Andros was appointed the first governor- general, and was a fit tool to carry into effect the designs of Etneros his royal master. He landed in Boston on the 19th of De- cember, 1686, was escorted by "sixty red coats" to Mr. Gibb's house on Fort Hill, and immediately assumed the government.
The better to accomplish his purposes, and to centralize the government as much as possible, Andros called about him men of influence in the colony, and those of different political prefer- ences. He may have been influenced in this selection by a desire first to conciliate the colonists, and in this way take ad- vantage of their good-will, and perhaps he thought that the men thus chosen to office and taken into his favor, would, for
1 Hutchinson, Vol. I. pp. 341, 351.
18
206
HISTORY.
[1687.
that reason, stand by him under any and all circumstances. Samuel Shrimpton was then a prominent person in the colony, a man of property, of character and influence ; he had recently been before the public as one of the royal commissioners on the contested land question, was known to the public as a magis- trate having sat upon the bench, and was a man whose good- will and services it would be desirable to secure. Early in the following year (March, 1687), Andros gave him a commission as lieutenant-colonel in the militia. He was also appointed one of the governor's council,1 an appointment which shows his position in the colony, and the estimation in which he was held by the ministry.
At the commencement of his administration, Andros made great professions of regard for the public good; and,
" So smooth he daubed his vice with shew of virtue,"
that the colony took great encouragement, and from so favor- able a beginning began to hope for a good administration. But
- "one may smile, and smile, and be a villain ;"
and his fair promises were soon broken, and the hopes of the people were destroyed; for in a short time he assumed great dignity and authority, and commenced a series of measures of a most tyrannical character. As an instance of this, he went, in October , of this year (1687), to Hartford with a company of soldiers, when the assembly was in session, and demanded the surrender of their charter. Here he was received with great respect, and the subject was discussed until evening. The char- ter was then brought forward and placed upon the table around which the members were sitting. Andros was about to seize it, when the lights were extinguished. At this moment a loud huzza was made by the concourse of people outside, and many persons rushed in. When the candles were relighted, the char- ter was not to be found, and no one could give any account of
1 See Instructions to Andros in N. Y. Col. Hist. Vol. III. p. 543 ; Sewall's Diary ; Hutchinson, Vol. I. p. 354, note. Hutchinson does not appear to have examined the commission or instructions to Andros, as his note referred to shows.
207
COL. SHRIMPTON A COUNCILLOR.
1687.]
it. Capt. Wadsworth, of Hartford, had seized and concealed it in the hollow trunk of an oak tree, which, from that circum- stance, took the name of the "Charter Oak." This tree, the protector of the liberties of the colony, lived to a green old age, notwithstanding storm and time, until, having seen the colony whose charter it so safely guarded grown into a powerful re- public and a component part of a mighty nation, it bowed its head to the blast, on the 21st of August, 1856. Thus Andros failed in the object of his visit, and the colony retained their charter, which remained in full force after the overthrow of the unpopular and unjust governor.
Col. Shrimpton, in his official capacity of councillor, soon made manifest his opposition to the tyrannical acts commenced by Andros; and in this opposition he was supported by other members of the council. Most of them preferred the old form of government.1 An extract from a letter from Edward Ran- dolph (a prominent member of the council, and supporter of Andros, who had made himself very obnoxious to the people) to William Blaithwait, May 21, 1687, illustrates this.
" His Excellency has to do with a perverse people. Here is none of the council at hand, except Mr. Mason and myself, Mr. Brockholt, and Mr. Usher, who appear lively for his Majes- ty's interest." 2 Had " His Excellency" shown even-handed
Ed. Randolph Cotto
justice to these "perverse people," the destruction that awaited him in his political career might have been averted.
Randolph was not inappropriately called the " evil genius" of New England, and was one of the most inveterate and untiring of those intriguing men who found access to the ear of Charles II. with their complaints against the colonies. In nine years he made no less than eight voyages across the Atlantic on this business. He was zealous to promote Episco- pacy and to destroy the New England churches, and was the
1 Hutchinson's Hist. Mass. Vol. I. p. 353.
2 Ibid. p. 354, note.
208
HISTORY.
[1687.
chief instrument in depriving the people of Massachusetts of their charter privileges. He was conspicuous in the short administration of Andros, and was involved in his fate. On a return to Boston from New Hampshire, he says: "I am received at Boston more like a spy than one of his majesty's servants. . . . They have prepared a welcome for me, by a paper of scandalous verses," etc. These " scandalous verses," which well illustrate that point of character, wit, which, Chancellor Kent once remarked to the writer, was the prominent feature of the Yankees, commenced thus : -
1 " Welcome, Sr. welcome from ye easterne shore, With a commission stronger than before To play the horse-leach ; rob us of our ffleeces, To rend our land and teare it all to pieces : Welcome now back againe; as is the whip, To a ffoole's back ; as water in a ship. Boston make roome ; Randolph 's returned, that hector, Confirmed at home to be ye sharp Collector.
Alas, we would haue Caesar haue his due, But not by such a wicked hand as you.
We doe presume Secundus Carrolus Rex Sent you not here a countrye's heart to vex. Hee gives an Inch of power ; you take an ell. Should it be knowne, he would not like it well," etc.1
It can be easily imagined, that such a welcome as this would not be well pleasing to the haughty officer of royalty, and would not tend to soften his bitterness towards the colonists.
Andros had not been in power long before his government became grievous, as he began and followed up a series of oppressions having for their principal object his own aggran- dizement. Among other abuses, he declared the landholders to be tenants at will, and that, as the people had forfeited their charter, as a consequence they had forfeited their possessions under it; and it was announced, that all who would admit the insufficiency of their titles under the former government by
1 Farmer's Historical Collections, Vol. III. p. 30.
209
TYRANNY OF ANDROS.
1687.]
petitioning for new patents, should be secured in their posses- sions upon reasonable terms. Many were induced to apply for patents for lands they had occupied under the charter for many years, and for these new patents most exorbitant prices were demanded, the fees sometimes amounting to fifty pounds.
On this same point Dummer says :1 " Their title to their land was absolutely denied by the governor and his creatures on two pretences; one, that their conveyances were not accord- ing to the law of England; the other, that if they might be thought to have had something like a title formerly, yet it now ceased by the revocation of their charters. So that they who had fairly purchased their lands and held them in quiet possession for above fifty years, were now obliged to accept new deeds from the governor and pay for them a third part of their value, in order to ascertain their titles, or otherwise they would be seized by the crown."
Says Pitkin :2 " The people were obliged to take new patents for their land and houses, and to pay enormous patent fees, or suffer them to be granted to others, and they themselves ejected from their hard earned possessions. In addition to this, taxes were imposed at the will of the governor-general and a few of his council; nor had the poor New Englanders the privilege of complaining, and claiming the rights of Englishmen, without being liable to fine and imprisonment."
In the book entitled " Revolution in New England Justified," etc., printed at Boston in 1691, and reprinted in 1773, among other causes which led to the overthrow of Andros, the whole subject of land-titles is fully treated. Here it is stated that Andros and his associates in power did not hesitate to declare to the people, " that now their charter was gone, all their lands were the king's, that themselves did represent the king, and that therefore men that would have any legal title to their lands must take patents of them, on such terms as they should see meet to impose."3 And again, those that refused to take confirmation of
1 Defence of New England Charters, by Jeremiah Dummer (reprinted at Boston in 1721), pp. 24, 25.
2 Pitkin's Political and Civil History of the United States, Vol. I. p. 118.
& N. E. Rev. Justified, p. 17.
18*
210
HISTORY.
[1684.
their lands " were declared intruders upon his majesty, and put in fear of having their lands granted unto strangers ;"1 and one of the specified matters of complaint against the new governor was, that he "denied that they had any property in their lands without patent from him," etc.2
In the years 1684 and 1685, there were negotiations between the town authorities of Boston and the Massachusetts Indians relative to " Deare Island, the Necke of Bostone, or any pte thereof," and in consideration of a " valuable sum of money," paid by Samuel Shrimpton and some others, the Indians gave a deed to " warrant, confirm, and defend the above said lands to them and their heirs forever." It has been supposed by some that this bargain was made, and this new deed obtained, in order to give the purchasers a better title to their estates, and in anticipation of the approaching difficulties with the government relative to lands.
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.