USA > Massachusetts > Norfolk County > Quincy > History of old Braintree and Quincy : with a sketch of Randolph and Holbrook > Part 44
USA > Massachusetts > Norfolk County > Braintree > History of old Braintree and Quincy : with a sketch of Randolph and Holbrook > Part 44
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
The second iron works were erected on the Monatiquot river in Braintree, between the years 1682 and 1684, by Mr. John
462
IRON WORKS.
Hubbard, a merchant of Boston, who had purchased the iron com- pany's lands in this vicinity. No doubt that when the iron com- pany purchased this tract in Braintree, they contemplated build- ing there; but from some cause or other, they did not. It is very evident that when Mr. Hubbard purchased this estate, in 1682, there had never been a furnace or forge built on this river, as in the deeds of conveyance to him there is not the least sug- gestion or intimation that they had ever existed in this locality. After he had made his purchase of Savage and Penn, he went to work and improved these lands by building a saw mill, fur- nace and forge. This improvement enabled Mr. Hubbard to more readily dispose of this estate in small parcels to various individuals; which he did as a matter of speculation. The most important circumstance contained in his deeds of conveyance, is the settlement of the vexed question of the time, and by whom the forge was erected on the Monatiquot river, which the following conveyances will illustrate-two of them being made in one day, viz :-
"Hubbard to Dummer. In consideration of a valuable sum of money to me paid, I, John Hubbard, of Boston, County of Suffolk, sold to Jeremiah Dummer, of Boston, goldsmith, of said County of Suffolk, one-sixth part of all that plotte or parcel of land scituated, lying and being in Braintrey, within the County of Suffolk, near the road or highway leading from Braintry to Weymouth, which I purchased of William Penn by deed, 18th of October, 1682, which land is bounded on the county road to an elm tree standing near the landing place, and from the elm tree running southeasterly to low-water mark; and bounded northerly with Monotoquod river; bounded westerly with a runell of water issuing from a swamp commonly called the soap- house swamp, and as a speciall appertenance and priviledge annexed thereunto, as much more land adjoyning, and bounded by the river, as the said Hubbard shall have occasion to fflow. The parcel of land is commonly known by the name of William Penn's Upper Landing place, where the saw pitts are, with the priviledge of a river for the setting up of a mill, and ingress, egress and regress, way and passage to and from the same; also the just sixth part of all the land and rights, liberties and privi-
463
IRON WORKS.
ledges, I purchased of Joseph Alleine, of Brantery, upon the northwest side of Monotoquod river, as may appear by deed upon record bearing date the 26th of December, 1682, together with one-sixth part of the Iron Works, Forge, Dam and Pond, fume and Saw Mill, by Me Erected and Made, now standing, or near the river, and all housing, ediffices and buildings what- soever, upon the land. 1684, 13th Dec."-Lib. 14, fol. 361.
" Hubbard to Samuel White, of Boston." Mr. Hubbard sold to Mr. White on the same day, one-sixth part of this estate. The bounds being the same as the former conveyance, we shall not repeat it.
" Hubbard to Addington. Mr. Hubbard sold to Isaac Adding- ton, of Boston, the full moiety of one-half part of a fforge and other buildings belonging thereunto, with the ground it stands on, (scituated, standing and being, within the Township of Braintery, on the south-east side of the Monotoquod river, near adjoyning the fforge lately built by said Hubbard, particularly the Wheel, Shaft, Bellows, Hammer's and Anvill, with what may be erected on the same, with all priviledges and advantages thereunto belonging. Each building with a wharf adjoyning is now in hands with and to be built and finished by Ephriam Hunt, of Weymouth, and Robert Potter, of Lynn. To have and to hold half the said land, buildings and wharf belonging to them, after they are finished, with all the priviledges and appurtenances thereunto belonging. 1685, 13th Oct."-Lib. 13, fol. 491.
Mr. Hubbard, after having erected his forge, made a contract with parties at Nahant to supply him with iron ore at three shil- lings per ton. In 1720, Mr. Nathaniel Hubbard, son of John, finally sold to Mr. Thomas Vinton the land on which the iron works stood. Soon after Mr. Vinton purchased this estate, the contention began between him and the town in reference to the dam obstructing the fish from freely passing up the river. It will be seen by the town records for years that this question was brought before them at their annual meetings, until it was finally settled, in 1736, when the iron works dam was demolished by a committee chosen by the town for the purpose. The following persons constituted this committee :-
464
IRON WORKS.
Hon. Leonard Vassal, Mr. Benj. Neal, Mr. Richard Faxon, Mr. John Holbrook and Mr. William Penniman. This com- mittee was chosen Aug. 23d, 1736.
At a meeting held Oct. 4th, 1736, " the town voted that three hundred pounds in Bills of Credite (which at that time had greatly depreciated), shall be paid to Mr. Thomas Vinton, in case the said Vinton will give to the Town a good Deed of Re- lease or Quit-claim, of all his right in the iron works river ; Pro- vided also, that he makes no further demands on the Town, nor prosecute any person or persons on account of anything already done relating to the pulling down of the dam that lately stood across the said River."
This offer was accepted by Mr. Vinton, and the old forge, fifty- six years after its construction, ceased to exist, with apparently no greater success than its predecessor on the Furnace brook.
In connection with this subject of the iron works, we give the following ingenious and reasonable conjecture in reference to the workmen who came here, and the origin of the name of Scotch Woods, from the address of Mr. James M. Robbins, deliv- ered in 1862, in commemoration of the two hundredth anniver- sary of the incorporation of the town of Milton :-
" A certain locality within our present borders has long been known, without any data as to the origin of the name, as Scotch Woods. The explanation I am about to give is unsupported by any record, and is entirely conjectural with myself. In 1643, John Winthrop, Jr., came from England, and brought £1000 worth of stock and divers workmen to begin an iron work. IIe had formed in England a company for this purpose. The Gen- eral Court of Massachusetts encouraged the enterprise, by grant- ing a monopoly for twenty-one years, freedom from taxes and trainings of the laborers, and a very liberal grant of the Colonial lands to be made when the works were completed. The town of Boston was greatly interested in the undertaking, and the location of the works at Braintree was encouraged by a grant of three thousand acres of land, still belonging to Boston at that place. This tract is the same land which was purchased seventy years afterwards, in 1711, by Manasseh Tucker, Samuel Miller, Moses Belcher and John Wadsworth of Milton, and divided by
465
IRON WORKS.
the Court, between Braintree and Milton. The fifteen hun- dred acres attached to our jurisdiction forms the present Scotch Woods settlement. In 1651, two of the largest stockholders of this iron company, residing in London, viz :- John Beex and Robert Rich, chartered a large ship bound to Jamaica, to touch at Boston and land there two hundred and seventy-two Scotch prisoners, taken from a lot of eight thousand prisoners captured by Cromwell, Sept. 3d, 1650, at the battle of Dunbar. The ship arrived at Boston in May, 1651, and landed the prisoners, con- signed to the agent of the iron works, and their names are all recorded in the Boston records.
"In July, of the same year, the Rev. John Cotton wrote a letter to Cromwell, as follows :- ' The Scots whom God delivered into your hands at Dunbarre and whereof sundry were sent hither we have been desirous (as we could) to make their yoke easy. Such as were sick of the scurvy or other diseases, have not wanted physic and chyrurgery. They were not sold for slaves to per- petual servitude, but for six, seven or eight years, as we do our own ; and he that bought the most of them, (I heare), buildeth houses for them-for every four an house-layeth some acres of ground thereto, which he giveth them as their own, requiring three days in the week to worke for him (by turns) and four days for them themselves, and promiseth as soon as they can repay him the money he laid out for them, he will set them at liberty.'
" I infer from these circumstances that Becx and Rich, for themselves or the company, thinking to get some income from their land, which without laborers was unproductive and incon- vertible, embarked in this speculation, and the mode of dispos- ing of the prisoners mentioned by Cotton, was only a form necessary to satisfy the public mind in the matter, and the men were employed on this land belonging to the freighters of the ship in the way described in the letter; and thus originated the name Scotch Woods, ever since attached to the spot. This sup- position is confirmed by an act of the General Court A. D. 1652, ordering that all Scotchmen and Negroes shall train-referring, doubtless, to their first law exempting the laborers of the iron company from this duty. These persons may have been em-
60
466
IRON WORKS.
ployed in cutting wood or collecting bog ore for the iron com- pany. The result of this operation was, that after a large outlay of capital it was found that every pound of iron made, cost more than two pounds imported from Europe; the company failed, the sheriff seized their effects, and their laborers were dispersed and mixed up with the general population of the country."
Richard Leader was the first superintendent of the iron works both at Lynn and Braintree. He appears to have been a skilful artisan and a shrewd business man, but a bluff and free-spoken person ; caring little for the Colonial Government or the Church of the Puritans, as he is said to have defamed it, and slandered the town and Commonwealth, for which misdemeanors he was tried, convicted and fined fifty pounds, and if he did not make sufficient and satisfactory acknowledgment and recantation to the Court, he should be obliged to pay a fine of two hundred pounds. The sincerity of a forced acknowledgment, for an opinionated wrong is doubtful, and generally not of permanent duration.
" Whereas, Mr. Richard Leader, an inhabitant in this Com- monwealth, has been accused, that contrary to the law of God and the laws here established, he hath threatened, and in a high degree reproached and slaundered the Courts, magistrates and Government of this Commonweale, and defamed the town and Church of sin, also, affronted and reproached the constable in the execution of his office ; all which the Court hauinge heard, together with evidence prouinge the same, doe judge, for punish- ment of his great offense, that he shall make acknowledgement of his offense unto the Court before the breaking up hereof, when this Court shall appoint, and also giue sufficyent security for his good abearing hereafter, and be fined the sum of fifty pounds, to be payed before the next session of this Court, towards the de- fraying of the charges expended by the country in hearing the case, but in case Mr. Leader's acknowledgement doth not answer the expectations of the Court in the way of satisfaction for his offense, that then this Court doth order that Mr. Leader shall pay to the public treasurer, as a fine for his offences, the sum of two hundred pounds, to be payd before the next session of this Court. And further it is ordered by this Court, that whatsoeuer
467
IRON WORKS.
fine hath been imposed upon Mr. Richard Leader by this Court for his miscariage, shalbe secured by band or otherwise, and in the mean time that his person bee responsible for the fine."
The following is the character of Mr. Leader's acknowledg- ment to the court :-
" Whereas, there is certayne testimonyes in writing exhibited agaynst me to the General Court, accusing me for speaking evill agaynst the gouernment, magistrates and churches of this Col- ony, as by the said testimoneyes in writing may more largly appeare, I do acknowledge and confesse that in case I should bee at any time left to speake these words, I should not only have broken the rules of christianyty but of morallity and civil- lity, desiring to be condemned justly of all christians and just, civill, honest men, for which I should condemne myself, being these things that in my judgement and practice, I hate and do detest and abhorre, leaving what I now say together with what is testified agaynst me, to the rightious judge of heaven and earth, which in his due time will manyfest the truth, and aquite the inocent, and reward the guilty according to their deserts, but the thing being testified by two witnesses, the Court hade course to proceed agaynst me. Richard Leader, May 22d, 1651."
" This acknowledgement of Mr. Leader the Court did accept of, provided he be still liable to pay the fifty pounds imposed uppon him in his sensure, and bee of good behavior, as is there expressed and that it bee left wholely to the wisdome of our honored magistrates to take what band they think fitt of Mr. Leader, respecting those things before mentioned."-Mass. Rec., Vol. III, pp. 227, 228.
The note below will illustrate the stringent poverty of the time, and the great want of money in the Colony. The Colo- nists, in their humble manner, understood the laws of political economy as well as the business men of this day, but were una- ble to carry it out for the want of funds.1
1. The following letter from the authorities will better illustrate the Leader controversy, and more fully give the questions involved in the subject :-
"Gent,-Wee received your letter of May, 1646, concerning your affaires in the iron works, whereby wee percieve your discontent with the last agreement wee made with your agent, Mr. Leader, and under the provocation (as you seen
468
IRON WORKS.
Mr. John Gifford succeeded Mr. Leader as superintendent of the iron works, and was equally, if not more unfortunate, than his predecessor in his business transactions. Mr. Gifford having become embarrassed in financial matters, was, under the rigid and stern statute of the Colonies, imprisoned for debt, and in his petition to the Court for the commutation of his sentence, states that he is in a starving condition, for the want of proper nourishment. He also states that he has now been in prison upon execution four years and seven months, and without relief from the Court, will inevitably perish in prison, for the want of " meet supplizes" for his relief. His petition seems to have been favorably received by the General Court, as in May, 1656, the Court ordered his release, as follows, viz :- " This Court, on peru- sall of a letter directed to the Governor and Councell and Gene- ral Assembley of New England, or who else it may concerne, signed by John Beex, Phebe Frost, Thos. Foley, John Pococke
to apprehend) wee find you still sharpe to your conclusions most peremtory, than rational (as we conceive) but we consider you have binn hitherto loosers, and therefore take leave to speake. For your good affection to our Collony, wee doubt not but it was one principal motion which drew you to this under- taking, and wee desire ever to present a greatefull memory thereof, as mani- fested bothı by this and other forraigne testimonyes, but foreasmuch as these that are neerest the object are best able to discerne the forme and coulour thereof so you may vouchsafe to heare our opinion of such conclusions as you have made to yourselves, where upon you have taken up such hard conceites of our compliance with yow, for the particular grievances you insist upon, wee have declared our forwardness to embrace and nourish your good will by our ready yielding a redresse of most of them, which wee had donne before, if woo had supposed you had reposed so much in them for your advantage as you now seeme to do; ye like we would have donne before by the rest, if they had not much more precured our welfare then your advantage. Wee acknowledge with you, that such a staple commodity as iron is a great mneanes to inrich the place where it is, both by furnishing this place with the commodity at reasonable rates, and by bringing in other necessary comodityes in exchange of iron exported; but as wee use to say, if a man lives where an oxe is worth but 12d, yet it is never the cheaper to him who cannot gett the 12d to buy one, so if your iron may not be had heere without ready money, what advantage will that be to us, if wee have no money to purchase it? Itt is true some men have here Spanish money sometimes, but little comes to our smiths hands, especially those of inland townes, and yourselves well know that so long as our ingate exceeds our outgate, the ballance must need be made by much within such a proportion as it is with us, cann leave us but little money once in the yeere, what monyes our smiths cann gett you maybe sure to have it before any other; but if wee must
469
IRON WORKS.
and William Greenhill, bearing date 27th of Feb., 1655, which also was recorded in the Court's day-books 21st of May, 1656, the same day on which it was brought and presented by Mr. Gif- ford, doe judge meet in answer thereunto, and on their request do order the said John Gifford shalbe, and is hereby released and discharged from being any longer a prisoner, upon the judg- ment of this Court in reference to the said Beex & Company, for which he hath bin and yet is a prisoner, he discharging the charges of the prison."-Colonial Records, Vol. III, p. 406.
John and Henry Leonard were also connected with the iron works in Lynn and Braintree, as hammersmiths. They were from the County of Monmouth, Wales. It is said that they went from Braintree to Taunton, in 1652, where they soon after constructed within the present limits of Raynham the first forge in Plymouth County, and were extensively connected with other works of the same nature. But we find by the following depo- sition, that Henry was in Braintree as late as 1655 :-
want iron so often as our money failes, you may easily judge if it were not better for us to precure it from other places, (by our corne and pipestaves, &c., ) then to depend on the coming of money, which is never so plentifull as to supply for that occasion and for the other benefitt which usually by staple commodityes, itt is true if yourselves dwelt amongst us, such advantage would be very great, but when the proceeds of what shall be exported never return to the country, when shall we expect our advantages? Somewhat indeed will fall by the way, which will be expended upon workmen and provisions; but that will hardly recom- pense the wood and timber which being in the heart of the townes, would have been of some worth to us, if but to save the carriage of fetching it so much father, though our lands should not come into valluation, which yett is known to be of good worth in those townes, where your present workes are; for the other particulars wherein wee have not granted your motion, viz :- The liberty for the whole time to sett up the workes, the reason of our declaring it is, if those 6 workes should take up all our fitt places and when the terme is expired some of ours should have means to erect any such workes, wee should loose the bennefitt thereof, &c., these considerations wee refer to your further thoughts, hopeing that you will so concurr with us therein, as all future differences may be avoyded, which we are very unwilling to entertaine with such of our loving friends (as we accomp you to be) and yourselves in persecution of the reall in- tentions of our advantage, will please to find out so aequill a way whereby our occasions may be comfortably supplyed, and yourselves encouradged and inabled to proceed on in your undertakings by the blessing of the Lord, upon which our poor prayers are not wanting to. So wee remayne &co."-Mass. Rec., Vol. III, pp. 91, 92, 93.
470
IRON WORKS.
" Testimony of Henry Leonard, hammersmith, of the age of thirty-seven or thereabouts. This deponent saith That there was a small Heap of Coles at Brantrey Forge, which was coaled about nine years agoe, and these Coles Lay Rotting, and noe use was made of them before they were spoalyed, and Mr. Gifford, being Agent, was to bring in a new stock, which stock could not be Layed before the Rotten Coles were Removed because the Cat- tle Could not Turne. Whereupon, they being well observed both by Mr. Gifford and myself, Mr. Gifford gave me orders that if Goodman1 Foster, or some other of Braintree, could make any use of them, I should dispose of them. Whereupon, Goodman Foster had about two half Lodes, and some of the rest of the neighbours thereabout fetched some of them, but they were soe bad, they would fetch no more, and Goodman Foster took as much paynes about them as they were worth, and although they would serve his Turn, they would not serve us at the forge, and whereas Goodman Pray saith he gott out of them to make a great quantity of iron, I know the Labour that he and Thos. Billington bestowed about drawing of them was more than they were worth. And whereas Goodman Pray saith he made so much iron of them, he made not a quarter of a Tunn of these Coles, but did cast now and then a Baskett of them among the other Coles, but they were worth nothing to his works. Sworn before me, Daniel Dennis- son, Oct. 27th, 1655."-Hist. Gen. Rec., Vol. XV, p. 146.
It is very evident that this attempt to establish iron works in the Massachusetts Colony never paid, for the reason that it was too great an undertaking for the times. The sparseness of the population and the poverty of the Colonies could not, for the want of sufficient available capital, prosecute this much-needed enterprize with that degree of success that was so desirable to
1. "The application of both official and conventional titles was a matter of careful observance. Only a small number of persons of the best condition had the designation Mr. or Mrs. prefixed to their names; this respect was always shown to ministers and their wives. Most of the Deputies are designated in the records by their names only, without a prefix, unless they were officers of the Church, or of the Militia; in the latter case they received there appropriate title through all the ranks from General to Corporal. Goodman and Goodwife were the appropriate addresses of persons above the condition of servitude and below that of Gentility."-Palfrey's Hist. of N. E., Vol. II, p. 67.
471
IRON WORKS.
its projectors. Though it proved a failure, no doubt this project was some advantage to the community, as the Colonists had be- come somewhat acquainted and instructed in the art and skill so much desired for the manufacturing of iron ware; and it also very probably enabled them, when they removed to more favor- able localities in more auspicious times, to successfully and prof- itably carry on the business of fabricating iron in all its various branches.
In the commencement of this sketch of the iron works we alluded to the apparent discrepancy of authors in reference to the location of the Winthrop grant1 to the said iron company.
1. The following is the original grant of land by the town of Boston to the company of iron works, in Braintree :-
" Granted by the town of Boston unto the Yorn Works, two thousand eight hundred and sixty acres of land, at Brantrey, bounded on the south and the west with Boston Common, on the north by divers Lotts belonging to Boston, on the east by Weymouth lands and Weymouth pond, also one hundred and forty acres of land being bounded on the south, by Mr. Henry Webb's farm, Monotiquit River on the west, and on the north and on the east, with certain lotts of Boston, as appears by the plot drawn up by Joshua Fisher, 16-9-1647, and confirmed by the Selectmen of Boston, 23-9-1647."-Lib. I, fol. 73.
It is somewhat unfortunate that the plans taken of this grant are lost, as we were not able to find them at the City Clerk's or Surveyor's Office, nor at the Register of Deeds.
It will be borne in mind that the original grant was made in 1643, but it will be seen that the land was not laid out by the Selectmen of Boston until somo four years after, or in 1647.
The following is Mr. John A. Vinton's version of the subject :-
"Ephriam Savage and Sarah his wife sold to John Hubbard, merchant, all of Boston in the County of Suffolk, for and in consideration of £500 current money have sold to John Hubbard of Boston, all that tract or parcell of land lying, scituated in Brantery, within the County of Suffolk, commonly called Iron Works Land, containing two thousand and four hundred acres bee it moro or less, and is part of that three thousand acres formerly granted by the Town of Boston for the company of Iron Workes according to a plot thereof drawn and signed by the Selectmen of said Boston, butted and bounded easterly, on the land of John Holbrook, (which was parcel of said land); westerly on Bostou Common Lands; northerly part on Monaticot River; part on Land of John Hull, Esq., and southerly upon Boston Commons, or however else bounded, with trees, timber, wood, underwood, swamps, herbage, feedings, benefits, lib- erties, priviledges, and appurtenances thereunto belonging. It will be seen, at the time this sale was made of the iron company's land, that there was no forge or furnace mentioned as being on Monatiquot river. Dec. 7, 1682."- Lib. XII, fol. 306, Suffolk Deeds.
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.