USA > Massachusetts > Norfolk County > Needham > History of Needham, Massachusetts, 1711-1911 : including West Needham, now the town of Wellesley, to its separation from Needham in 1881, with some reference to its affairs to 1911 > Part 12
USA > Massachusetts > Norfolk County > Wellesley > History of Needham, Massachusetts, 1711-1911 : including West Needham, now the town of Wellesley, to its separation from Needham in 1881, with some reference to its affairs to 1911 > Part 12
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
Nearly all of the Hunnewell estate is in this section, and the Church in the West Precinct gained Dr. Morrill and the others who then dwelt on the land now owned by the Hun- newell family. Prior to 1797 the geographical centre of the West Parish was a point in the middle of the road, Centre Street, between Morse's and Bullard's Ponds ; later it was near where the meeting-house stood.
Liability for all town and parish grants already voted was maintained in the bill of 1797, and the next January the General Court decreed that the inhabitants transferred by the Act of 1797 should continue, apparently indefinitely, to pay their State and County taxes to the town from which they had been separated. The dispute about taxes in 1793 between the East and West Parishes had left the people irritated, and those in the West rarely neglected an oppor- tunity to refer to it.
The Precinct of Dover instructed its selectmen on January
of
e
1
1
I54
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
8, 1801, to petition the General Court to change the boun- dary in order that certain inhabitants who lived three miles from the Dover meeting-house, and were within one mile, more or less, of the meeting-house in the West Precinct of Needham, might have their estates annexed to Needham. This petition was presented, but referred to the next Gen- eral Court.
THE WEST PRECINCT PETITIONS TO BE MADE A TOWN
The year 1801 is memorable as witnessing the first of the many attempts of West Needham to be a town, distinct from East Needham, and which culminated in the incorporation of Wellesley in 1881. In May, 1801, the Town of Needham by Colonel Kingsbery, its agent, and the First Parish, repre- sented by five of its members, protested against granting a petition which David Smith, Jr., had presented to the General Court asking that the West Precinct with parts of Natick and Dover should be incorporated as a town or dis- trict. Mr. Smith's petition is not now on file. In February, 1802, the First Parish again protested against the proposed new town, and informed the General Court that there were but 226 rateable polls in Needham, that seventeen had joined the West Precinct from Natick, for ecclesiastical purposes, and that with its many bridges, each district recently supplied with a "Convenient Schoolhouse", a loss of more territory would render Needham too poor to send a representative to the General Court; this was signed by Silas Alden, Jonathan Gay, John Tolman and Amos Fuller, Jr., on behalf of the First Parish. The Town of Natick also remonstrated against the scheme for another town. At this period several plans were proposed to the West Parish by the East Parish, with a view to union and reconciliation, but without result. Smith's petition was referred to the next General Court. See Senate files 2880, I and 2, 2881, 1-3.
On June 9, 1802, the West Precinct petitioned to be made a
155
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
town together with part of Natick, including those of the latter town who had "signed" to Dover for Church privileges.
The substance of this petition was:
I. Natick persecuted those who had signed to the West Precinct.
2. They were in two towns, and a minority in each; also in two Counties.
3. Their militia had been weakened by the annexation of The Leg to Natick and by other causes.
4. Their minister was denied his right to perform the marriage ceremony.
This petition was referred to the next General Court.
Under date of June I, 1803, a well written and able protest on behalf of Natick was signed by William Fariss and Wil- liam Goodenow, the petition of the West Precinct again being before the General Court. As this remonstrance con- tains facts of historical value the substance is given briefly:
I. Needham claimed to have acquired but 4042 acres from Natick in 1797, ignoring 148 acres of water, but counting an equal area of water gained by Natick as if it were land, thus making a total of 1656 acres.
2. Needham Leg never belonged to the West Parish, but always to the East.
3. "We do not conceive that the respectability of a Militia consists wholly in numbers".
There is also an undated statement of valuations, in sub- stance as follows:
The East Parish has 126 polls, 83 dwelling-houses, real estate by tax bills $742.02 The West Precinct and others have 121 polls, 85 dwelling- houses, real estate by tax bills $742.02 The rest of Natick has 131 polls, 86 dwelling-houses, real estate by tax bills $690.94 "Valuation of the Needham Leg set to Natick as by Needham Valuations" $160.78
10,
as
of
nd
OS
d
er he
1
t
d
e
d
f
a
L
156
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
Polls in the Needham Leg set to Natick 27, dwelling- houses 19.
Proposed to be joined from Natick to the West Precinct, Natick valuation, $162.47
Polls from Natick 24, dwelling-houses 22
Value of the Needham Leg by Natick valuation $111.91 "The afsefsors of Natick lowered the Leg about one quarter in their valuation".
There are also two undated protests on behalf of the Town of Needham signed by John Tolman, and these documents deny the alleged hostility of the East Parish to the West, and call attention to the following facts:
Two, and often three, of the five selectmen, as well as the town clerk, are of the West Precinct, where one third of the annual town meetings are held, although the East Meeting- house is more central. The West Precinct, according to these papers, has taken unfair advantage of the omission of the words "heirs & asfigns" from the Act of 1778, for the persons affected have contributed towards building the meeting-house, and have "erected Chaise houses".
THE CONTROVERSY AS TO THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ACT OF 1778
As this difficulty had much to do with the attempts to divide the town, an explanation of it is offered here, although it is to some extent a digression from the main topic.
The question was raised by the officers of the West Pre- cinct in 1793, and was contested eight years, and when set- tled left much hard feeling. When the West Precinct was created in 1778 the Act allowed persons resident on the west side of the line to retain their connection with the "old parifh" by filing in the office of the Secretary of State, within twelve months, a declaration of their desire to do so, and a similar privilege was granted those living on the
I57
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
east side, but preferring the new West Precinct. This proved to be largely in favor of the "old parifh", and in 1793 it was discovered that the declarations, which people claimed to have filed with the Secretary of State, were missing, and that the Act did not contain the words "heirs & afsigns". In the West it was asserted that the privilege of choosing between the parishes was personal, did not attach to estates, was never intended to be perpetual, and that it was imma- terial that the right had not been resigned. The West Par- ish then proceeded to tax the heirs and assigns of persons who had preferred the East Parish, but were on the west side of the line, and the East Parish voted money to resist, and offered the General Court a list of 1793, which Michael Metcalf and others successfully petitioned the Court to accept, and to give it the force of an original record. On a petition of Benjamin Slack and others, dated June 9, 1800, the questions were re-opened, and the Supreme Judicial Court decided in favor of the West Precinct. This decision did not prove to be final as the Standing Committee on Parishes of the General Court voted in February, 1801, by a majority of one, to allow those opposed to the settlement made by the Supreme Court to bring in a bill.
In opposition the West Precinct was represented by Major Hezekiah Broad, David Smith, Jr., Nathaniel Bullard, Lieut. Daniel Ware and Lieut. Nathan Dewing, who informed the General Court that their delay in settling a minister was due to the "Revolution with Great Britton", and to the depreciation of the currency, and asserted that the East Parish was hostile, and had induced men to sign over to it by offering twelve or fifteen years exemption from taxes. They expressed indignation at the attempts made in 1793 to obtain a new Act including the words "heirs and assigns".
This document was signed by Messrs. Smith, Bullard and Ware, and their opposition to the bill defeated it, but from time to time there were petitions to the General Court asking that one or more estates might be transferred to one parish
e
1
158
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
or the other; usually the petitioners had "leave to with- draw". See Senate files 2419, 1-4, 2715, 1-6, 3026, 1-7, 3779, I.
The family of Col. Jonathan Kingsbery was much involved in this controversy, as its members wished to belong to the East Parish, and their home, which was where the Wellesley Country Club is now, was but a short distance from the line on the west side.
PROTESTS AGAINST DIVISION OF THE TOWN RESUMED
To return to the Tolman protests:
They declare that far from it being true, as alleged by the petitioners in behalf of the West Precinct, that those of that Precinct had eight times been obliged to defend their rights, the facts were that eight times the East Parish had been compelled to resist their "Aggrefsions". These Tol- man documents call attention to the fact that Needham has a new school-house in each district, emphasizes the often repeated statement that Needham Leg was never at any time a part of the West Precinct, and states that another division would make Needham a very small town.
The whole matter continued to be referred to the "next General Court" until 1805, when the petitioners had leave to withdraw. Senate files 3327, 1-15.
At the May meeting in 1804 an article in the town warrant in favor of a new town to be formed of parts of Needham and Natick was dismissed, and the same month George Fisher, Samuel Pratt and Captain Tolman, agents for the Town of Needham in reference to the question of division, were to meet at Luther Dana's.1
On September 22, 1817, at a town meeting held in the East meeting-house it was voted to "have the west Parish In- corporated into a new town or District", but this vote was reconsidered on October 27, and a committee consisting of
1 Early in the last century Luther Dana, and later his heirs, were taxed for land in Needham formerly owned by Sir Peter Warren.
159
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
eleven was named, viz., Capt. Elisha Lyon, Major McIntosh, George Fisher, Capts. Artemas Newell and Jonathan Gay for the East, Daniel Ware, Esq., Maj. Chester Adams, Peter Lyon, Capts. George Smith and Jonathan Fuller for the West; they were to select a non-resident as the eleventh man, but do not appear to have done so.
As Captain Lyon was a Justice of the Peace and "Squire Ware" a military officer the array of talent on either side appears to have been exactly equal. They reported unani- mously in favor of division at an adjourned meeting at two o'clock on November 24, and it was a friendly and equitable report. The East was to have the School Land in Dover to offset the excess of bridges to be maintained, and the "Am- munitions in the Town magazine - Camp Utensils", and other town property, was to be sold at auction and the proceeds divided; the "present Parish line" was to be the dividing line.
As the result of a petition dated January 12, 1818, and signed by Daniel Ware, George Smith and Chester Adams "Agents for the Inhabitants of the Westerly part of Need- ham", a committee of the General Court viewed the pro- posed line, and approved of it, but the East Parish protested against the division of the town, and was represented by Dr. Samuel Gould, Enoch Fuller and Lemuel Kingsbury. The three last named denied that the town was nine miles long, and asserted that it was but seven and a half, and its breadth, north and south, four and one half miles. As to the inconvenience to the people of West Needham in at- tending town meetings, one third were held there, and then certain inhabitants of the East had to travel fully six miles; moreover the East Meeting-house was within half a mile of the line. They further call attention to the following facts: The West had the representative at least half of the time, always two or three of the five selectmen, the town treas- urer for twenty-five years, and in 1818 all of the selectmen, as well as the town clerk and treasurer.
nd
1 e e
t 1- S of
160
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
The statement that the East "is freely consenting" is un- true, as there are not more than six persons, perhaps only four, in that section who favor division, and in the West there are people opposed to it.
"There factories cheifly consist of two paper mills" one of them more than twenty-five years old, and in a decade, 1800-10, the population of the town had increased but twenty-five.
"it seems to be their design, in a sense, to trepan the Legis- lature", as this attempt to divide Needham is preliminary to a demand for a part of Natick. The petitioners suggested no name for the proposed town, and, although the situation seemed to favor them, they received leave to withdraw in February, 1818.
The whole matter was gone through again in 1819, Peter Lyon, Jonathan Fuller and David Smith then representing the West, and Dr. Gould, Asa Kingsbury, 2d, and Calvin Gay the East; the three last named called attention to the fact that the residents of the West Precinct had to cross the East Parish to reach the Shire town. The General Court appointed a committee to view the territory at the expense of the West Precinct, and the subject was referred from one General Court to another until February, 1822, when after five successive years of controversy the peti- tioners had leave to withdraw. Senate files 6862, 1-13.
There is a reference under date of June II, 1821, to a peti- tion of Seth Lyon and others, which may indicate a secon- dary petition not now on file. Early in 1824 the West Pre- cinct, by its agents Benjamin Slack and Jonathan Fuller, again petitioned the General Court for division, and Jona- than Ellis, Israel Whitney, Jonathan Gay, Jr., Artemas Newell and Ebenezer McIntosh, representing the East Parish, protested that the "main roads from Dedham to Worcester" were not "crofs roads", nor impassable at seasons, but that the reverse was true.
They asserted that the boundary between the parishes did
16I
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
intersect many "Settlements", and denied the statement of the West "that the Inhabitants of the east Parish have at times been overbearing and pursued measures disrespect- ful to the West Precinct".
In twenty-one years the West had elected sixty-five select- men and the East but forty, and the town clerk and the town treasurer have been of the West twenty-four years, as against eighteen years when these officials resided in the East Parish. The protest reminds the General Court what the real dimensions of the town are, and of the fact that the East Parish has more bridges and a larger number of poor to maintain than the West Precinct. Leave to with- draw was given the petitioners on February 13, 1824. Senate files 7145, 1-4.
In April, 1823, the town had voted against division 76 to 45, but on May 23, 1825, the vote was in favor of it, as was a report signed by Elisha Lyon, Esq., Benjamin Slack, Esq., Amraphel Smith, Capt. Jonathan Fuller, George Fisher, Colonel Rice, Lieut. Curtis McIntosh, Aaron Smith, Esq., and Capt. Reuel Ware. The tenth member of this committee was Artemas Newell, Esq., but he did not sign the report.
In 1834 Gen. Rice, Benjamin Fuller, Dr. Noyes, William B. Parker, the Rev. Mr. Kimball and Royal McIntosh were a committee "respecting Changing the name of said town", but it does not appear what name was proposed or what this committee recommended; the matter was dismissed on November 10th.
In 1852 there was another agitation for the separation of the West from the East, and for the fifteenth time, beginning with 1801, a petition for such division was before the Great and General Court.
General Rice and Emery Fiske, Esq., were prominent in this movement, and, at the March meeting, the latter pro- posed:
Ist. To "sell the town Farm and the personal property thereon and pay all debts". 2d. The West to yield all
fid
as st to at
r,
-
162
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
claims to the School Land in Dover. 3d. The West to pay the East $1000 per year for five years, provided the oppo- sition to the division ceased.
All of these suggestions were adopted on March 8, by 155 yeas to 118 nays, but the General Court was adverse. The name then suggested for the new town was Oakland.
In 1859 was issued the printed report of a committee ap- pointed to propose terms of division. It contains a val- uable account of the condition of the town at that time, and its tone is amicable, and its recommendations just. The committee had been named on November 8, 1859, and con- sisted of three from each side :- Artemas Newell, Lauren Kingsbury and Galen Orr for the East, and William Flagg, John W. Shaw and George K. Daniell for the West. They reported to the town on December 6, and on the 27th their report was adopted by a vote of 74 to 48, but the General Court did not grant division.
THE TOWN OF WELLESLEY INCORPORATED, AND THE SEVEN- TEENTH ATTEMPT AT DIVISION SUCCEEDS
The Civil War engrossed the attention of the citizens, and the time was not favorable to divisions, but in 1880 plans were carefully and quietly matured in the West, and, after an apparent slumber of twenty years, although constantly in the minds of those most interested, the issue of the divi- sion of the town was revived. The division was contested before the General Court, and the residents of East Need- ham held meetings, appealed to friends throughout the State to assist them by influence, and secured the Honorable Charles R. Train to appear for them at the Legislative hearings. The petitioners had retained the Honorable Josiah G. Abbott, a resident of Wellesley Hills, then Grantville, and also the Honorable Patrick A. Collins.
On April 6, 1881, the Town of Wellesley was created, and Needham lost more than half of its population, a still greater proportion of the valuation, and about four ninths of its
163
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
area. The line between the old town and the new one corresponds with the ancient Parish lines, with the excep- tion of slight deviations in favor of Wellesley at both ends. Needham received about $30,000 from Wellesley, and was freed from the town debts, but the town hall and the town farm were acquired by Wellesley.
The history of the later efforts to divide the town, which were successful, has been prepared by Capt. Joseph E. Fiske, who had a prominent part in effecting the division, and whose father, Emery Fiske, Esq., had been a leader in a similar movement nearly thirty years before. The first board of selectmen of the Town of Wellesley consisted of Lyman K. Putney, John W. Shaw and Walter Hunnewell. Mr. Putney and Mr. Shaw were both leaders in dividing the town, and the latter was active in the campaign with the same object in 1859.
TURTLE ISLAND TAKEN FROM NEEDHAM
On June 21, 1803, Turtle Island in the Charles and one- quarter of a mile "below the upper Falls so called in said River, being the same Island, upon which the Newton Iron Works Company have erected their Manufactury", was taken from Needham and annexed to Newton. See Acts of 1803, Chapter 32. This island is shown on the map of I794, and is a short distance west of Cook's Bridge. The town at its May meeting had appointed Lieut. Jonathan Gay, Capt. John Tolman and Samuel Pratt to answer the petition of Rufus Ellis, the agent of the Newton Iron Works, and also that of Daniel Ware and others, who were seeking to divide the town.
d
-
ly
vi- ed ed- the ble ive ible hen and ater f its
Division of the County of Suffolk
The prejudice against "the Boston Clique" seems to have flourished long ago, as on October 3, 1726, the town voted to "have the County divided from Bofton", and on March 1, 1731/2, chose Captain Cook a committee as to a "New County diftinct from Bofton". In 1735 and again in 1738 Needham favored the division, Boston to be a separate county or district.
On March 10, 1760, the town voted to "join with the Reft of the Country towns in this County in Petitioning the General Court for a Division of the County", and on Decem- ber 26, 1775, chose Colonel McIntosh to sign the petition for it. Ten years later the sentiment of Needham was un- changed, and it was voted "that ye Selectmen Should be the Committee to Conduct the Affair of Dividing the County of Suffolk", but in 1786 the petitioners had leave from the General Court "to withdraw". On May 8, 1788, Robert Fuller, Jr., and Colonel "Mackintafh" were chosen a committee to advocate a new county with Dedham as the Shire town. In October, 1790, the town clerk was directed to sign a petition for division, and on May 8, 1792, Amos Fuller and William Fuller, Esq., were selected to further it. In September, 1793, Capt. Josiah Newell and Amos Fuller were appointed by the town "to meet a Convention of the County at Gays Tavern in Dedham" on "Thirsday" the 12th instant to consider "matters as Refpects Setting of a part of the County of Norfolk to the County Suffolk". The division so long petitioned for had then been made. A convention of the towns in the new County of Norfolk was
165
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
held at Henry Vose's in Milton on May 15, 1794, and Colonel Kingsbery represented Needham.
On March 15, 1898, Needham voted to instruct its repre- sentative in the General Court "to oppose in every legiti- mate way, the scheme known as a greater Boston county, or any other legislation which shall tend to dismember Norfolk county or disrupt its time honored institutions".
CONVENTIONS
On September 20, 1768, Lieut. Amos Fuller and Josiah Newell, Esq., were chosen "to act for them as a Committee in Convention with Such as are Chofen in Boston: and Such as may be Sent to join them: From the Several towns in this Province". This convention was "To Confult what meafures were beft for the good of the Province". Mr. Newell was paid sixteen shillings for his services as a delegate.
On July 4, 1774, the town voted that £1, 9s., 3d. "Should be paid to the Honble Thomas Cufhing Efq! Out of the fine that the General Court have Remitted to Needham for their Not Sending a Reprefentitive in the year 1773. It Being Needham's Proportion of Five Hundred Pounds to pay a Committee that the Court have Chofen to Sett in a Congrefs in One of the Neighbouring Governments".
On August 31 the town chose Capt. Eleazer Kingsbery, Capt. Lemuel Pratt, Jonathan Deming, Samuel Daggett and Capt. Caleb Kingsbery "To attend a County Conven- tion at the Houfe of M: Woodward Inholder in Dedham on Tuefday the Sixth Day of September Next at Ten O'Clock before Noon, To Deliberate and Determine Upon all matters as the Diftrefsed Circumftances of this Province May Require". On September 30 Capt. Eleazer Kings- bery was chosen representative and delegate to the Pro- vincial Congress, which was to meet at Concord the second Tuesday in October. It assembled at Salem October 7, and that day adjourned to Concord.
0 n n 2 in te
eft he m- for in- be the ave 88, n a the cted mos rit. aller the the g of olk" :. A , was
I66
THE HISTORY OF NEEDHAM
The notice, dated December 10, 1774, from the Provin- cial Congress at Concord to the towns to choose delegates to meet at Cambridge on the first day of February, or sooner if necessary, is recorded in our town records, and on January 26, 1775, Capt. Eleazer Kingsbery was chosen delegate, to whom in August £14, 19s., 8d. were granted for attending the County Convention and the Provincial Congress.
On May 29, 1775, Colonel MeIntosh was elected delegate to the Third Provincial Congress to be held at the meeting- house in Watertown, and that day £18, 2s., 8d. were voted "To pay the Committee that Met with County Congrefs: and to pay Cap" Eleazar Kingsbery for his Attending at the Provincial Congrefs'es".
The Third Provincial Congress met on May 31, 1775. On October 29, 1776, the town by vote approved the "Council and Houfe of Representatives, to act as One Joynt Body in forming a New Conftitution of Government", and a year later Colonel McIntosh was granted £5, 13s., 4d. for twenty-five days attendance at the "Provincial Congrefs in 1775", and 6s., 8d. "for a Copy of the Order of Court for Impowering the Town to Chufe a Constable". The delegates to the various Congresses and Conventions were usually paid in currency of fluctuating value.
On May 26, 1777, the town instructed its representative that "by Reafon of the prefent war Still Raging [we] are of the Oppinion that the Honourable Council and Houfe of Reprefentatives Should poftpone Coming into a New form of Government at prefent". On October 19, 1779, Colonel McIntosh was chosen to "Represent the Town in a Con- vention to be held at Cambridge on the Twenty Eighth Day of October Inftant Relating to a form of Government"; he attended twenty-eight days in Cambridge and Boston in 1779 and 1780, and received as compensation £336 in greatly depreciated currency.
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.