History of Essex County, Massachusetts : with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men, Vol. II, Part 233

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton) ed
Publication date: 1888
Publisher: Philadelphia, J. W. Lewis & Co.
Number of Pages: 1672

USA > Massachusetts > Essex County > History of Essex County, Massachusetts : with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men, Vol. II > Part 233

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).

To add to the distress of the Haverhill people, small-pox, then an enemy terrible in fact and horrible in imagination, broke out among them. A pest- house was established on the hill east of the house where Joseph Bradley formerly lived. Only a few died-Mirick says six.

June 16, 1691, John Robie was killed by the In- dians in the North Parish. His wife dying a few days before, leaving him with seven children, the oldest not quite eleven years old, he took the little motherless creatures to a house of refuge. Returning with cart and oxen and his boy Ichabod, he had ar- rived midway of the present North Parish burying- ground, near the spot where the Clement house stands, when he was shot. Ichabod was taken pris- oner, but escaped and got back safely. Saltonstall wrote Major Pike, of Newbury, "June 15, 1691, 12

at night," that Robie was killed about two hours be- fore sunset, "near the woods near Bradley's." He probably refers to Joseph Bradley's garrison.

In the same foray Nathaniel Ladd was shot and soon died of his wounds.

Ilutchinson, in his history, says that in October of this year " a family was killed at Rowley and one at Haverhill." The name of the latter is not known. July 18, 1692, Hannah Whittiker, wife of Abraham, was killed.

In August John Keezar was mowing in the Pond Meadow, when an Indian, who had possessed himself of his gun, which he had left beside a tree, mockingly took aim at him: "Me kill you now." Neverthe- less, Keezar, plucking up courage from desperation, ran toward him with loud cries, brandishing the glit- tering scythe. Unaccustomed, probably, to such an offensive weapon, the Indian dropped the gun and fled, swiftly pursued by Keezar, who, overtaking him, plunged the scythe in his bowels. John doubtless thought the only good Indian was a dead Indian.

In response to an urgent call late in the season, Sir William Phipps, the first royal Governor under the new charter, ordered, November Ist, twelve soldiers

1947

HAVERHILL.

to be sent from Newbury to Haverhill. Happily, there were no assaults that year.

A new era came in with the second charter. The form of town government became more complicated, new officers were created, the name of town recorder was changed to town clerk. It will be profitable, therefore, to repeat the roll of town officers chosen at this election in 1692,-

"Lt. John Johnson, Moderator ; Nathaniel Saltoustall, Town Clerk ; Ensign Thomas Eatton, Cornet Peter Ayer, Sergt. Robert Ayer, Sergt. John Page, Nathaniel Saltonstall, Selectmen; Robert Swan, Sen., Samuel Currier, James Sanders, Ensign John White and Sergt. Josiah Gage, Ilighway Surveyors ; Michael Emerson, Leather Sealer ; Ensign Thomas Eatton, Sealer of Weights and Measures ; Sergt. Josiah Gage, Lieut. Samuel Ayer, Sergt. John Haseltine, Captain George Browne, William Starlin and Joseph Johnson, Sen., Tythingmen ; for viewers of fences, for the west side of the Sawmill River, Ensign Samuel Hutchins, Onesiph. Marsh, Sen. ; between the west bridge and Mill Brook and northward as far as Ephraim Gild's, John John-on, Samuel Emerson; between the Mill Brook and Great Plain, Eph Roberts, Israel Hendricks ; for the Great Plain and fields below that, to the extent of Haverhill bounds, on that quarter to the eastward, Amos Singletery, John Whittier; for the northern farms abunt William Stalin's and in that quarter, Josepb Johnson, Sen., Christopher Bartlett ; Steven Dow Sen., Grand Juror ; Daniel Lad, Jun., for Jury of Trials."

Joseph Peaseley, by vote, was permitted to put up a saw-mill " at the head of East Meadow River, upon the stream by or near Brandy Brow." This was the second Joseph Peaseley. The mill he built and its successors have always been known as "Peaseley's Mills," and almost always owned by persons of that family.

Only one person, Jonathan Franklin, appears to have been killed by the Indians in the town this year.

At the annual meeting in 1694 the town refused to elect tythingmen, as well as a hayward, culler of staves, field-drivers and house-officers; but a few weeks afterwards a town-meeting was held, " by the order of the Sheriff," to choose a deputy to the Gen- eral Court and tythingmen. Probably the tything- men were chosen regularly afterwards. It was their duty to keep order in church, and their office was fre- quently no sinecure. The old records in many of the towns are full of references to the choice of officers to keep the boys in order at meeting. The tything- man was usually armed with a long stave to reach and punch the heads of unruly youngsters. There are people still living here who remember the tything- men.

July 30th a meeting was held, by " command of the country," to choose assessors; and Capt. Simon Wainwright, Ensign John White and Cornet Peter Ayer were chosen and sworn-being the first board of assessors. Previously, a commissioner had been chosen to act with the selectmen in making valua- tions. All the town officers were this year sworn to perform their duties faithfully, for the first time.

The Indians had now made little disturbance for two years, but they made many desperate attacks the present season. September 4th, Joseph Pike, of New- bury, deputy sheriff of Essex, travelling with one

Long, between Amesbury and Haverhill, in the exe- cution of his office, fell into an Indian ambuscade, near the north of Pond Plain, and was killed with his companion. "The enemy lay in a deserted house by the way, or in a clump of bushes, or both."

In 1695 the annual meeting was held the first Tuesday in March, according to an act of the Great Court. A town treasurer was chosen for the first time. Lieut. Samuel Ayer was the person thus hon- ored. Mr. Rolfe, now married, asked for wood and the town voted him fifteen cords a year, for three years. John Gild offered the town sixteen pounds for " the side hill adjoining Great Pond," which they voted to take. He agreed to pay "one-third current money, one-third good Indian corn and one-third good, fat neat cattle, fit for slaughter." This shows an advance in the condition of the town.

For a variety, there was a little dispute about Amesbury bounds. But the people were tired of that subject, and directed the selectmen to see that the matter was settled forthwith.

Ax we have seen, the recorder formerly made an entry that a motion to build a new meeting-house was voted down, improperly and fraudulently. The old meeting-house had become entirely inadequate to hold the people, notwithstanding all expedients to accommodate them. Doubtless, the Indian troubles had much to do with the indisposition to move in the matter.

This year it was voted at an adjourned meeting that the meeting-house " be forthwith repaired so far as is necessary for our present use of the place ; till we be better fitted and provided with a new one." Then the question was put, " whether, when the town builds a new meeting-house, it shall be set in the same place where the old house stands?" The town voted no. The question was then put, " whether the new meeting-house for this town, when built, shall be set upon the common land, near John Keyzar's and Lieut. Johnson's new dwelling-places." This was decided "plentifully in the affirmative," only Captain Browne, John Whittier and Samuel Currier dissenting. It was then voted that "a new meeting- house shall be built forthwith, with what speed may be," and a committee was appointed to treat " with men abroad " about doing the work, and to report their proposals to the town. But in May, 1696, a meeting was called to see if the town would build or repair. It was voted to build, and a new committee was chosen "to look out a workman that can and will engage to do the work by the lump or great, for money." They were " to look and view some meet- ing-houses for dimensions," and then propose the work to undertakers, at home or abroad.

July 28th the committee reported that they had " been abroad at several towns, taking dimensions of several meeting-houses, and taking an account of the cost of them," and " after bartering with divers workmen," they had found Sergeant John Haseltine,

1948

HISTORY OF ESSEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS.

the most inclinable to build of any one. "Haseltine offered to build a house fifty feet long, forty-two feet wide and eighteen feet stud, finishing the same within and without, with seats, pulpit, galleries, win- dows, doors, floors and stairs," after the pattern of the Beverly meeting-house, and doing the sides after the style of the Reading meeting-house, finding all material, for four hundred pounds in money. After long debate about the site, and the price pro- posed, the dimensions recommended were approved and the meeting ended.

A special meeting was next called for April 10, 1697, when it was voted that " there be a meeting- house forthwith framed," and " chose a committee to agree with Sergeant John Haseltine, or any other man, about the work." They should agree for every- thing, even " to the turning of the key," for four hun- dred pounds in money. There should be a " turret for a bell," and it was agreed the house should stand " at the place by Lieutenant John White's and Mr. Samuel Dalton's."

Everything was now settled. But nothing was settled. In June there was another meeting when, " after much discourse and difference about the place where the new meeting-house should be erected," it was voted to call another meeting, which was held, accordingly, July 5th. Upon the matter of location " paper votes were called for," with the following result : " For the old place that now is 25. For the Common land near Keysar's 53." A new committee was chosen to go on with the work, within the money limit formerly agreed on. Captain Samuel Ayer, Corporal Peter Ayer and Ensign John Page consti- tuted it.

Does anybody suppose the matter was now finally settled ? He is much mistaken. July 4, 1698, an- other meeting was called "by warrant from a justice of the peace," on petition of eight inhabitants, who asked that a committee be raised "to hear all pleas on both sides, and determine where the new frame should be raised." Thirty-three others joined in this request. Then the moderator called for the names of those opposed to such a committee, "which was drawn and brought in," numbering sixty-three: whereupon the moderator declared that the vote was against raising such a committee, and the meeting dissolved. The work going on, a meeting was called late in the year by the selectmen, to consider " wheth- er the people should meet this winter at the old meeting-house or at that which is of new, erected at Widow Keyzar's." John Keyzar has evidently been called from earth during this protracted controversy. The heroic tanner will relate his exploit with the scythe no more. "Votes were called for by personal appearance and entering their names." Something like modern practice at political conventions when suspicion of fraud prevails. "Thirty-four persons entered their names for meeting at the new house as soon as the glass windows are finished & set up,"

while eighteen voted for continuing in the old meet- ing-house, "till a new meeting-house be quite fin- ished."

The selectmen were appointed "to determine the places and what room shall be allowed to such as shall desire to have pews in the new meeting-house : and to whom it shall be allowed : they being at the cost for the making of them for their own use as is usual in other places : any other form for seats form- erly thought of notwithstanding." The clerk records that "much discourse was held about pulling up the seats in the old meeting-house to set up at a new place for the present meeting-house ; but it was fully opposed and reasons given & therefore not put to vote.'

Notwithstanding the vote to move to the new meeting-house as soon as the windows were in, it was not in fact done. A meeting was called for October 24, 1699, "for the further consideration and settle- ment of the affairs belonging to the new meeting- house." The committee last chosen (selectmen) re- ported that room had been allowed eight persons to make themselves pews in the new meeting-house at their own cost. These were Captain Simon Wain- wright, Captain Samnel Ayer, Nathaniel Saltonstall, Sergeant John Haseltine, Lieutenant John White, Widow Hannah Ayer and son, Ensign John Page, Sergeant Josiah Gage.

Seventy-eight persons had voted upon the great test question of locality-probably very near the full voting strength of the town. Those who voted for the old lot by the Mill Brook, were naturally mostly those who lived on Water Street and in the East Parish, like Saltonstall, the Whittiers, Peaseley, San- ders, the Curriers, and so on. Those who voted for the new location more to the westward and on the Common, now the present City Hall Park, were fargely those living nearer to Main Street, to the west, over Little or Sawmill River, and in the out- skirts of the town, like John Johnson, the Ayers, Marshes, Emersons. One or two of the most impor- tant men in the town, like John White and Simon Wainwright, did not vote at all. Chase has printed these lists, which are of value. Twenty persons, headed by Nathaniel Saltonstall, protested against further proceedings after the question of location was decided against them.

At the meeting October 24th a committee was chosen to go and inspect the new meeting-house and report whether it was done according to agreement, and whether the town ought to accept of it. The committee were Nathaniel Saltonstall, Simon Wain- wright, John White, John Whittier, Daniel Ela. Saltonstall and Ela had been against the location of the new house. Wainwright and White, to some extent, neutral. The committee's report, presented to the same meeting, will be found in Chase. The report was drawn np by Saltonstall. The committee reported that the dimensions were all greater than

1949

HAVERHILL.

the contract called for : that the outsides were " well fitted and comely." ... "We cannot but say, we like and well approve of the work; and therefore we humbly propose to the town, now assembled, to ac- cept of the same as to the work and workman's part, in said covenant, his additions being much for the better." . .. "And we again do pray that the town will accept of his work with thankfulness to him for his care & pains, & take care that the Town's part for payment be also faithfully & reasonably per- formed." Upon reading this report "The town by their unanimous vote, without any one voting to the contrary, granted their acceptance of the committee's return, above written, and of a new meeting-house accordingly." It was then formally voted that the new meeting-house should be the place where the people should "meet and attend for the constant worship of God." November 20th a meeting was called to choose a committee "to place or seat the people in the new meeting-house, that they may know where to sit & and not disorderly crowd upon one another, and be uncivil in the time of God's wor- ship." A committee was then chosen to seat the first committee, "so that there may be no grumbling at them for picking for and placing themselves." But suppose there should be a little log-rolling be- tween the two committees ?

The seating committee were subsequently allowed six shillings each for the discharge of that duty.

It was finally voted that " Capt. Samuel Ayer and Nath. Saltonstall be, and are hereby empowered to the best advantage they can, to dispose of our old meeting-house, for the public benefit of said town, for the use of a school-house, or a watch-house, or a house of shelter, or shed to set horses in, for all or any one or more of them, as they can meet with chapmen." And thus passed away the glory of the first meeting-house, which had also been during its period of usefulness, the only publie edifice of Haverhill. The erection of the new-a building of large cost and importance for that day-undoubtedly taxed severely the resources of the town. It will have been observed that all pro- ceedings about it had been taken by the municipality as such. The town was the parish, as yet. It is not surprising that there should have been differences of opinion as to the location of the new house. Since religious societies were entirely separated from the towns, such troubles have not been unknown. Piety, in former times, was frequently insufficient to resist the temptation to discord, which the building of a new house for public worship presented. The old ministers used to pray for unity, and were very fervent in thankfulness when they got it.

It will be remembered that eight pews had been built by some of the wealthiest and most substantial citizens of the town. The committee for seating did not interfere with these. They assigned places only upon the "long seats," the rude common henches. But there was a good deal of choice in locality, never-

theless, as to warmth, light, convenience of hearing and proximity to the minister, and people were seated according to their age, importance and social stand- ing. Once seated, they kept their places, under pen- alty of a fine. When service lasted from nine o'clock in the morning to four or five in the afternoon, with only an hour's intermission, it was important, espe- cially to old folks, whether they could hear and whether they sat in a draught.

There is an interesting view of the second meeting- house in Chase's history. The building near it, was probably, he says, one erected in 1723, for a watch- house and school-house. The account he gives of the view, is the following : It was painted after a steeple had been added to the meeting-house, probably be- tween 1750 and 1766, upon a panel over the mantel- piece in the front room of the " Harrod House," a famous tavern in its time, which stood a little north of the present City Hall. The panel was cut out to preserve the painting and is supposed to be still in the possession of a descendant of the family, unfortu- nately not a resident of Haverhill. The " Harrod " will be again mentioned in another connection.

The building of the new meeting-house undoubt- edly gave Haverhill. in 1701, an importance among the neighboring towns of Essex it had not before en- joyed. It was a great effort, and showed the growing prosperity of the young town. It was very fortunate that after so much discussion and dissension, all should have ended in harmony and good feeling. All honor to Sergeant John Haseltine, the first great master builder of Haverhill, who, in the language of the committee of inspection, " appeared to be honest and honestly faithful to his word."

CHAPTER CLIV.

HAVERHILL-( Continued).

Indian Attacks-The Great Descent-Effects of Indian Warfare.

THE Indians made a foray upon the town in August, 1695, when two persons were wounded. It is said they were children of Abraham Whittaker, whose wife, Hannah, was killed by the Indians in 1692. In 1705, the town directed the selectmen to pay Dr. Bradstreet for the cure of Whittaker's chil- dren, and another person " for digging a grave for some of the said Whittaker's family, which were killed by the Indians."

In this foray the Indians carried away two boys, Isaac Bradley, aged fifteen, and Joseph Whittaker , aged eleven, who were at work in the field, near Joseph Bradley's house, in what is now the North Parish. Whittaker lived on the Derry road, west from Brad- ley's. Isaac was small in size, active and shrewd.

1950

HISTORY OF ESSEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS

Joseph was over-grown, slow-witted and clumsy of sold to the French for servants. The tradition is movement. The Indians took these boys to Lake Win- that Mary was drawn upon a hand-sled. It is be- lieved she was ransomed the following winter with one hundred pounds of tobacco. Chase says she afterward married John Preston, of Andover, and removed to Connecticut. October 12, 1730, she signed a deed at Windham, in that State. nipiseogee, where they were placed in a family con- sisting of a man, his squaw and several children. Here they became sufficiently acquainted with the Indian language to learn that they were to be taken to Can- ada in the spring, when they determined to escape. Isaac, however, was very ill with fever, recovering only The boys never returned. A deed of 1731 speaks of them as still in Canada. And Chase says that three brothers named Haynes, of Haverhill, who were in the Canada expedition in 1657, found their relatives, the captives, who were identified, though they could no longer speak English, were contented and refused to leave Canada. They must then have been okl men, aged respectively seventy-three and sixty-eight. Mirick says that "Joseph Haynes, a relative," visited the captives. through the care of his squaw mistress, who was kind to both boys, It was consequently April before they were able, on a bright moonlight night, to put their plan in execution. Isaac was naturally leader, by his greater age, intelligence and enterprise. Taking a supply of moose meat, bread and their master's fireworks, they started in a southerly direction, run- ning through the night and hiding in a hollow log at dawn. Pursued by a party of Indians with dogs, they only escaped detection and recapture by the Mirick and Chase do not agree about the names and sex of the children who were carried away, or as to their ultimate fate. It is surprising that both of them assign to Joseph, a little lad of seven, the role of rescning the father in the wilderness. Certainly this feat must have been performed by Thomas, the eldest, and is sufficiently creditable to a sturdy youth of sixteen. Besides, it appears from a petition to the Governor and Council, under date of April 17, 1701, that the following Haverhill captives were still miss- ing : Daniel Bradley, aged seven; Abigail Kimball, aged eight ; Philip Cod, aged six,-all taken March 15, 1697; Jonathan Haines, aged twelve; Joseph Haines, aged seven,-taken August 15, 1696; and Abraham Whittiker, aged eight or nine, taken in August, 1691. friendly shelter of the log and by sacrificing all their meat to the dogs, who were too busy devouring it to betray their presence to the Indians as they passed by. Resuming the journey at night in a different direction from that taken by their pursuers, the boys pressed on their weary way as fast as their strength would permit. When their bread was gone, they ate root«, buds, berries, with such rich morsels as a raw pigeon and turtle. They did not dare to make a fire for fear its smoke would be seen by Indian enemies. Once, indeed, they came suddenly upon an Indian encampment, seeing the savages seated around the fire, and retreating precipitately under cover of the darkness. Coming to a stream, Isaac had the good sense to follow its meanderings, believing it would bring them out to a settlement. Joseph's strength and courage failed him, and Isaac literally drew and car- ried him towards succor. On the ninth night of their flight, they came out at Saco Fort. Isaac found his way back to Haverhill, whilst poor Joseph, seized by raging fever, was long ill at the fort and till brought home by his father after much suffering.

August 15, 1696, Jonathan Haynes, who lived in the westerly part of the town, was reaping in a field near Bradley's Mills, while his four children-Mary, Thomas, Jonathan and Joseph, were picking beans in a field near by, when they were surprised and taken captive hy the Indians. Mary was eighteen years oldl; Thomas, sixteen ; Jonathan, nearly twelve, and Joseph, seven. The Indians took them to Pen- nacook (Concord, N. H.), where they separated, divi- ding their prisoners. One party received Bradley and his eldest son, Thomas, and started for their haunts in Maine. Soon after reaching there Haynes and his son escaped. The father, after two or three day», exhausted by want of food and by fatigue, was unable to continue. Thomas, persevering, reached Saco, where he obtained refreshment, and, returning, was able to revive his parent with the joint stimulus of food and hope. They both returned safely to Haverhill. The children were taken to Canada, and

March 15, 1697, a party of about twenty Indians made a bloody and sweeping attaek upon the west- erly part of the town. Their retreat was as swift as their assault, so that although the rumor of destruc- tion soon reached the village, and an armed party marched forth in pursuit, it was unavailing. Nine houses were plundered and burned, in defense of which their owners were slain. Twenty-seven per- sons were killed, of whom fifteen were children, and thirteen were carried away captive. The following are the names of the killed : John Keezar, his father, and son, George; John Kimball and his mother, Hannah; Sarah Eastman ; Thomas Eaton; Thomas Emerson, his wife, Elizabeth, and two children, Tim- othy and Sarah; Daniel Bradley, his wife, Hannah, and two children, Mary and Hannah ; Martha Dow, daughter of Stephen Dow; Joseph, Martha and Sarah Bradley, children of Joseph Bradley ; Thomas and Mehitable Kingsbury ; Thomas Wood and his daughter, Susannah ; John Woodman and his dangh- ter, Susannah ; Zachariah White and Martha, infant daughter of Thomas Duston.

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 Essex County, Massachusetts : with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men, Vol. II, Part 233

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton) ed Publication date: 1888 Publisher: Philadelphia, J. W. Lewis & Co. Number of Pages: 1672

Author: Hurd, D. Hamilton (Duane Hamilton) ed
Publication date: 1888
Publisher: Philadelphia, J. W. Lewis & Co.
Number of Pages: 1672