USA > Massachusetts > Essex County > Newbury > History of Newbury, Mass., 1635-1902 > Part 14
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
Seven Miles to the Southward of Hampton is Meromack River on the Mouth of which on the North side is seatted a Large Towne called Sallisbury, and 3 miles above it a village called old Salisbury where ther is a Saw Mill or two. The commodities this Towne affords are Corne, Cattle, Boards and Pipe Staues.
Four leagues up this River is Haverell, a pretty Towne & a few miles higher is the Towne of Andouer, both these Townes subsist by Hus- bandry.
At the mouth, on the southside of Meromeck and upwards, is seated the Towne of Newbury. The Houses stand at a good distance from each other, a feild and Garden between each house, and so on both sides the street for 4 miles or therabouts; betweene Salisbury and this Towne the river is broader than the Thames at Deptford, and in the sumer abounds with sturgeon, salmon, and other ffresh water fish. Had we the art of takeing and saveing the sturgeon it would prove a very great advantage, the Country affording vinegar and other materialls to do it withall. In this Towne and old Newbury adjoining are 2 meeting- houses .* 1
DIVIDING LINE BETWEEN NEWBURY AND ROWLEY.
A farm of three hundred acres was granted Edward Wood- man, in 1660, by the General Court ; but it was subsequently claimed that the land had previously been granted to the in- habitants of Newbury, that it was wholly within the limits of the town, and that the order of the court should be reconsid- ered and repealed.
The order, adopted October 16, 1660, reads as follows :-
In anwsr to ye petition of Mr Edward Woodman, humbly desiring the favour of this Court in graunting him a parcell of land lying betweene Rowley & Newbury lynes, the Court judgeth it meete to graunt him three hundred acres there.t
May 21, 1661, the subject was again brought to the atten- tion of the General Court, and the following order was then passed : -
* New England Genealogical Register, January, 1885, P. 33.
t Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part I., p. 440.
168
HISTORY OF NEWBURY
In answer to the petition of the inhabitants of ye toune of Newbury, the Court, having heard the petitioners in behalfe of the toune of New- bury & Mr Woodman, relating to Newbury ljne & this Courts grant of a farme of three hundred acres of land in October last, finding that the ljne of Newbury bounds being, for at least twenty years, lajd out ad- joyning to Rouley ljne & perambulated according to order of this Court, shall be & remajne to Newbury wthout any farther challenge or clajme from any toune or person, and that Mr Woodman's grant as to yt place is heerby declared null & vojd, Mr Woodman hauing consented thereto, yet are willing to allow Mr Woodman his three hundred acres formerly granted in any free place not formerly graunted & not hindering a plan- tation .*
At a meeting of the selectmen of Newbury, held May 3, 1669, it was voted "that ffrancis browne & John Emery, Jun', shall go next Munday to meet Rowley men at Rowley Mill to go with John Knight or John Poore to run the lyne between our bounds & Rowley."
John Peirson, sr., and Philip Nelson, who were appointed April 9, 1672, by the inhabitants of Rowley, to run the line between that town and Newbury, " did so do on Monday, April 15, 1672." +
PENNACOOK, N.H., AND WOODBRIDGE, N.J.
Although land in Newbury was abundant, the soil fertile, and the " upper woods " undivided until the close of the year 1686, many of the early settlers were induced, by various considerations, to remove with their families to places more or less remote, where they could unite with others in the organization and development of new towns. They were prominently identified with the settlement at Salisbury, at Hampton, at Rowley, at Haverhill, and at Andover, previous to the close of the year 1645. In 1659, they obtained the right to establish a town "at a place called Pennecooke," now Concord, N.H .; and the same year they were granted, condi- tionally, a tract of land large enough for a township on the banks of the Saco river.
The petition for liberty to settle at Pennacook reads as follows : -
* Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part II., p. 7.
t Town of Newbury Records.
-
1
THE SETTLEMENT AT MERRIMACK RIVER
169
TO THE HONERED COURTE NOW ASSEMBLED AT BOSTON :
The humble petecyon of us whose names are underwritten, beinge inhabytant of this jurisdiction, and beinge senseable of the need of multiplyinge of towneshippes for the inlargemeant of the contrey and accommodateinge of such as want opportunity to improve themselves, have taken into consideration a place which is called Pennecooke, which by reporte is a place fit for such an one. Now the humble request of your petitioners to this honred Courte is, that we may have the grant of a tracke of land there to the quantity of twelve miles square, which, being granted, we shall give up ourselves to be at the cost and charge of vewinge it, and consider fully about it, wheather to proceed on for the settlinge of a towne or noe, and for that end shall crave the liberty of three yeares to give in our resolution; and in case that wee doe pro- ceed, then our humble request is, that we may have the grant of our freedome from publique charge for the space of seaven yeares after the time of our resolution given into the Honerd Courte for our encourage- ment to settle a plantation soe furr remote as knowinge that many will be our inconvenyences (for a long time) which we must expeckt to meet with, all which desires of ours beinge ansered, your petetioners shall ever pray for the happyness of this Honred Courte, and rest your humble petitioners.
RICHARD WALDERNE
JOHN BAYLEY JOHN CHEINEY
VALL: HILL
PETER COFFIN
NATHANIEL WEARE
his
ROBARD COKER
JOHN X HIRD mark JOHN POORE WILLIAM FFURBUR ROBERT ROGERS
ROGER PLAISTEED EDWARD WOODMAN
EDWARD RICHARDSON
WILLIAM COTTON
JOHN PIKE JOHN WOLCOTT
ABRAHAM TOPPAN
JOHN BOND
BENJA : SWETT GEORGE LITTELL
WILLIAM TITCOMB *
.
May 18, 1659, a committee consisting of Thomas Danforth, Edward Johnson, and Eleazer Lusher reported in favor of granting the petitioners a plantation eight miles square, pro- vided they report to the General Court in October, 1660, their resolution to carry on the work, "and that within two years then next ensuing there be 20 families there settled." The deputies and magistrates accepted this report, "and consented
* Massachusetts Archives, vol. cxii., pp. 117, 118. Richard Walderne, Vall : Hill, Peter Coffin, John Hird, William Furber, and Roger Plaisted, who signed the above petition, were from Dover, N.H. : the other petitioners were from Newbury.
170
HISTORY OF NEWBURY
thereto"; but the conditions imposed upon the petitioners were not complied with, and the grant was subsequently de- clared forfeited. Concord was not settled until nearly seventy years later. January 17, 1725-6, the General Court of Mas- sachusetts, " William Dummer, Lieut Governor, consenting thereto," appointed a committee of nine to lay out a township at Pennacook " where Contocook river falls into Merrimack river." Rev. Enoch Coffin, son of Nathaniel Coffin, of New- bury, accompanied the committee as chaplain, and encamped with them at a place called "Sugar Ball plain " Friday, May 14, 1726, and on the Sunday following "performed divine service both parts of the day." House lots were laid out and surveyed, and in 1727 they were assigned to proprietors who had previously been appointed or elected by the committee. February 27, 1733-4, the plantation was incorporated "a separate and distinct township by the name of Rumford."
In 1740, the northern boundary of Massachusetts was defi- nitely fixed and established, by the king and his council, " beginning at a point three miles north of the Merrimack river at its mouth and thence following the course of that river to a point due north of Pawtucket Falls." By this decision the town of Rumford, now Concord, fell within the limits of the province of New Hampshire.
Among those who received six acres or more in the first division of land made at Pennacook, in 1727, were the follow- ing men from Newbury : Rev. Enoch Coffin, Rev. Bezaleel Toppan (son of Rev. Christopher Toppan), Thomas Coleman, Joseph Hale, Andrew Mitchell, Henry Rolfe, and Samuel, son of Samuel, and grandson of Dr. Peter Toppan .*
A petition in regard to a new plantation on the Saco river was granted by the General Court November 12, 1659, as fol- lows : -
In ansr to the peticon of Mr Edward Woodman & other inhabitants of Newbury, humbly craving the favor of this Court to graunt them a new plantation on Saco River westward of the bounds of Saco &c. the Court judgeth it meete to graunt the petitioners eight miles square in the place desired, provided they giue in theire resolutions, as is exprest in theire peticon, in one year ensuing this date.t
* History of Concord (Bouton), pp. 57-140.
t Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part I., p. 402.
1
171
THE SETTLEMENT AT MERRIMACK RIVER
May 31, 1660, Mr. Edward Rishworth and Robert Booth were authorized to lay out and determine the bounds of the new plantation ; and the petitioners were freed from the pay- ment of taxes for six years, " provided that they have twenty families & an able minister, such as shall be approved of by this Court, setled there in fower yeeres." *
March 12, 1664, King Charles II. issued a royal decree granting to James, Duke of York, a large tract of land now known as New Jersey. February 10, 1664-5, Philip Carteret was appointed governor of the territory ; and every freeman who settled there was given one hundred and fifty acres of land, provided he brought with him six months' provision, a good musket, ten pounds of powder, " and not less than twenty pounds of bullets, twelve bullets to the pound."
Daniel Pierce, Joshua Pierce, John Pike, John Pike, jr., Thomas Blomfield, Thomas Blomfield, jr., John Blomfield, John Cromwill, Samuel Hale, Jonathan Haynes, Elisha Ilsley, Henry Jaques, Henry Jaques, jr., Stephen Kent, Stephen Kent, jr., George Little, Hugh March, Samuel Moore, Matthew Moore, John Smith, Abraham Toppan, Na- than Webster, Obadiah Ayres, Richard Worth, and others went from Newbury to New Jersey, where they laid out and settled the town of " Woodbridge," so called in honor of the Rev. John Woodbridge, assistant minister of the first church of Newbury.t Some of the persons named in the above list took an active part in the organization of the town govern- ment, and were afterwards prominent in the management of its affairs ; but a few, dissatisfied with the apportionment of land and the assessment of taxes, remained there for two or three years, and then returned to Newbury.
The town of Woodbridge still retains the name it received in 1668. It is on the Perth Amboy & Woodbridge Rail- road, in Middlesex County, in the State of New Jersey, about five miles south of Rahway and twenty-four miles southwest of New York City.#
. Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part I., p. 421.
t New Jersey Colonial Documents, vol. i., p. 50; also, Early History of Perth Amboy (Whitehead), pp. 355-367.
# Nearly a century later a township in the Coos country on the Connecticut river was granted Capt. Jacob Bayley for services in the French war. Capt. Bayley was born in Newbury, Mass.,
172
HISTORY OF NEWBURY
OATH OF ALLEGIANCE TO KING CHARLES II.
Oliver Cromwell died September 3, 1658. His son Richard succeeded him as lord protector. In the confusion that fol- lowed the downfall of the government, the resignation of Richard Cromwell and his retirement to private life, Charles II. was proclaimed King of England May 8, 1660. He ar- rived in London May 29, 1660, having left the Hague six days before.
This event occasioned considerable anxiety in the colony of Massachusetts Bay ; and, December 19, 1660, the General Court addressed a letter "To the high & mighty Prince Charles the Second by the grace of God, King of Great Britajne, Fraunce & Ireland, Defender of the Faith &c.," be- seeching him to favor and protect the colony in its chartered rights and privileges, and also a letter " to the Lords & Com- mons in Parliament assembled," urging them to provide for an amicable adjustment of the differences relating to the gov- ernment of the territory between the Merrimack river and Casco bay.
These letters were intended to convey to his Majesty and to Parliament assurances of loyalty and fidelity, and also to explain and apologize for some measures that it had been thought necessary to adopt for the protection and government ' of the colony of Massachusetts Bay. In April, 1661, when it became known that an order had been received from the king for the apprehension of Col. Edward Whalley and Col. William Goffe, two of the judges who signed the warrant for the execution of King Charles I., then supposed to be living in the neighborhood of Boston, the inhabitants of the colony were greatly alarmed.
July 19, 1726. He married Prudence Noyes October 16, 1745, and removed to Hampstead, N.H., two years later, where he organized, in 1756, a company for service in the expedition to Lake George. May 18, 1763, he obtained, by the advice and assistance of his brother-in-law, Col. Moses Little, a grant of land, now in the State of Vermont, on the westerly side of the Connecti- cut river, where he began the settlement of a town to which he gave the name Newbury. He was afterwards prominent in the Revolutionary war, and served as quartermaster-general in the Continental army.
Col. Moses Little, born in Newbury, May 8, 1724, was also an officer in the army during the Revolutionary war. He owned, with others, a large tract of land in New Hampshire, extending fifteen miles along the Connecticut river. In 1784, this land was surveyed, and divided between the towns of Littleton, named for him, and Dalton, named for Hon. Tristram Dalton, of New- buryport, who was also one of the original grantees.
THE SETTLEMENT AT MERRIMACK RIVER 173
Petitions from Newbury, Ipswich, Sudbury, Boston, and other towns were presented to the General Court, asking for a prompt compliance with the demands of the king. June 10, 1661, the General Court declared, in answer to the petition- ers, that it had not been altogether negligent in providing for the enforcement of the laws against criminals, and therefore desiring the petitioners to rest satisfied with what had been done .*
The same day a special committee, that had been appointed several days before, reported, in regard to the condition of af- fairs in the colony and the rights and duties of freemen, that certain laws and privileges should be asserted and maintained, and also that "Wee further judge that the warrant & letter from the kings majty for the app'hending of Col Whalley & Col Goffe, ought to be diligently & faithfully executed by the authority of this country. And also, that the Generall Court may doe safely to declare that in case (for the future) any legally obnoxious, & flying from the civil justice of the state of England, shall come ouer to these partes, they may not heere expect shelter." *
Intimations having been received from England that the public acknowledgment of the king, in the colony of Massa- chusetts Bay, should be no longer delayed, the General Court at a special session held August 7, 1661, ordered the procla- mation to be made the next day .; August eighth, Edward Rawson, then secretary of the colony, in the presence of the governor, deputy governor, magistrates, deputies, and elders, with " ffower ffoote Companjes, one troope of horse, & mas- ters of shipps in harbor attending," assembled in Boston, pro- claimed and acknowledged submission to Charles II., " laufull King of Great Brittajne, France & Ireland & all other the territorjes & dominions thereunto belonging."
April 25, 1664, Col. Richard Niccolls, Sir Robert Carr, George Cartwright, Esq., and Samuel Maverick, Esq., were appointed by the king to visit the colonies in New Eng- land, to examine and determine all complaints, and hear appeals from all military, criminal, and civil courts. Two of
* Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part II., p. 26. t Ibid., p. 50.
.
174
HISTORY OF NEWBURY
the commissioners arrived in Boston July 23, 1664, and were graciously received by the governor and his council.
The members of the General Court, however, were much disturbed by the appointment of these royal commissioners, and, October 19, 1664, voted to make an address or statement of their grievances, beginning as follows : -
TO THE KINGS MOST EXCELLENT MAJTY
The humble supplication of the Gen'll Court of the Massachusetts colony in New England.
Dread Soueraigne : -
If your poore subjects, who haue remooved themselves into a remote corner of the earth to enjoy peace wth God & man, doe in this day of theire trouble prostrate themselves at your royal feete & begg your favor, wee hope it will be graciously accepted by your majestie, and that as the high place you sustejne on earth doeth number you here among the gods, so you will imitate the God of heaven in being ready to main- teyne the cause of the afflicted & the right of the poore, & to receive their crjes and addresses to that end .*
. After quoting the favorable opinions expressed by his Majesty in several letters addressed to the colony of Massa- chusetts Bay, they beseech him to listen to their grievances and to restrain and limit the power and authority conferred upon the commissioners. They assert that the proposed changes in the administration of justice and the management of public affairs will force his subjects in New England to seek new homes elsewhere, " or sink & faint under burdens that will be to them intollerable." In conclusion they say, "at our request let our government liue, our patent liue, our mag- istrates liue, our lawes and libertjes liue, our religious enjoy- ments liue ; so shall wee all haue yet further cause to say from our heart, 'Let the king liue forever :' and the bless- ing of them that were ready to perish shall come vpon your majesty, hauing delivered the poore that cryed & such as had none to help them."
May 3, 1665, the commissioners presented to the General Court the letters and instructions received from the king in regard to the condition of affairs in the colony of Massachu- setts Bay, and a committee was appointed to examine them
· Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part II., p. 129.
175
THE SETTLEMENT AT MERRIMACK RIVER
and consider what answer should be made. Newbury was not represented at this session of the General Court, and was fined ten pounds for not sending a deputy. Although the freemen of Newbury were evidently reluctant to antagonize the views and wishes of the king as expressed in his instruc- tions to the commissioners, and were anxious to avoid a contest that was likely to prove embarrassing, there is no evidence that they attempted to evade their political duties or re- sponsibilities. At all events, the fine was remitted by the General Court October 16, 1666.
Meanwhile the negotiations between the commissioners and the General Court, having been conducted with considerable vigor for more than twelve months, were abruptly terminated, the commissioners left Boston for the province of New Hampshire, and soon after returned to England. April 10, 1666, Sir William Morrice, secretary of state under King Charles II., notified Richard Bellingham, governor of the colony of Massachusetts Bay, that his Majesty was displeased with the condition of affairs and had decided to recall his commissioners, and request the General Court to elect two or three suitable persons to go with Governor Bellingham and Major William Hawthorne to England, in order to ex- plain to his Majesty why they refused to accept the amend- ments to the charter and the revision of the laws proposed by the commissioners .*
A special session of the General Court was held in Boston, September 11, 1666, to consider this important communica- tion. The elders of the churches were desired to be present and give their advice in the weighty matters under discussion. A letter was prepared and ordered to be sent to his Majesty's secretary of state, criticising the conduct of the commissioners and declining to send representatives to England, having already submitted in writing their objections to the proposed amendments to their charter, "and therefore cannot expect that the ablest persons among us could be in a capacity to declare our cause more fully." +
" Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts, vol. i., Appendix xix.
t Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part II., p. 317.
176
HISTORY OF NEWBURY
At the same session of the court, petitions favoring the adoption of conciliatory measures and the repeal of all legisla- tive acts displeasing to the king were presented from several towns in the colony.
"The humble Petition of the town of Newberry " states that the petitioners have been informed that his Majesty has lately sent to the governor and council letters expressing dis- satisfaction with the result of the commissioners visit to New · England, and that he has ordered the governor, with several other persons to be elected by the General Court, to proceed forthwith to England to assist in the discussion and final settlement of the differences relating to the rights and duties of freemen in the colony. In conclusion the petitioners ex- press the hope that conciliatory counsels will prevail, and that it will not be necessary for them "to make their particular address to his majesty, and declaration to the world, to clear themselves from the least imputation of so scandalous an evil, as the appearance of disaffection or disloyalty to the person and government of their lawful prince and sovereign." This petition was signed by
Nicholas Batt Benjamin Woodbridge Daniel Thurston
James Browne
Nathaniel Clark 1 Tristram Coffin
John Atkinson
Stephen Swett Percival Lowle
Joshua Browne James Mirrick Samuel Lowle
John Badger
Joseph Muzzy
John Knight, Sen
Hugh March James Jackman John Knight, Jun
·\ William Chandler
Thomas Hale, Sen Paul White
Thomas Parker Anthony Sommerby Abel Huse
John Woodbridge
Richard Kent
William Gerrish
William Thomas Francis Brown James Kent
Daniel Peirce
Anthony Short John Kent
Richard Lowle Abiel Sommerby
Richard Knight
Henry Short Nicholas Noyes
Thomas Silver *
The General Court, " hauing read & taking into considera- tion the contents of the petitions presented from Newbery, Ipswich, Salem & Boston being for substance but one, & find- ing that the peticoners doe therein vnjustly charge, threaten & reflect vpon this court, to the dishonor of the members
* Massachusetts Archives, vol. cvi., p. 168.
177
THE SETTLEMENT AT MERRIMACK RIVER
thereof, ... ordered, that Captaine William Gerrish, of New- bery, Capt. John Apleton, of Ipswich, M' Edmond Batter, of Salem, Capt Thomas Sauage, M' Tho. Bratle M' Habbacuck Glouer & M' Thomas Deane, of Boston, all of them principall persons in the sajd peticons, some of them persons in publicke trust, all saue one freemen of this colony & members of churches, be by the secretary warned to attend this Court in October next, to answer for the same." *
At the appointed time the petitioners appeared, and made answer to the charges brought against them. The committee to whom the subject was referred, after hearing the testi- mony, reported that there were unwarrantable passages and expressions in the petitions that a well-ordered government could not allow to pass unnoticed, but, inasmuch as the peti- tioners did not intend to transgress the laws, they should be admonished and released, except Capt. John Appleton, of Ipswich, who was censured "for saying that he hoped the Court would not be his judge." The deputies voted that the report of the committee be kept on file and not recorded : " consented to by the magistrates." }
The commissioners from King Charles II., in a communica- tion to the General Court, dated May 18, 1665, complained that the provisions of the charter of the colony of Massachu- setts Bay, requiring the inhabitants thereof to take the oath of allegiance to the king, were not complied with. Edward Rawson, secretary of the colony, replied the next day, "wee shall forthwith order the taking of the oath of allegiance ac- cording as the charter commands." # It is evident, however, from subsequent proceedings, that the order was not strictly enforced, although some of the inhabitants of Newbury were called upon to take the oath in a modified form, as appears from the following record :-
NEWBERIE.
Joseph Coker : John Kent: Israell Webster : Job: Pilsberie, Joseph Bayly : Benjamin Lowell, Nath11 Merrill : Daniell Merrill Abell : Merrill : Jnº Attkinson.
* Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part II., p. 317.
t Massachusetts Archives, vol. cvi., pp. 174-178.
¿ Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv., part II., pp. 200-206.
,
178
HISTORY OF NEWBURY
These men aboue written haue taken ye oath of ffidelitie vnto this gouerment ye 25 of february sixty eight :
before mee Robert Pike Comissr :
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.