USA > Massachusetts > Hampshire County > South Hadley > History of the sesqui-centennial anniversary celebration of the town of South Hadley, Mass., July 29-30, 1903 > Part 5
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
51
report or to separate them from South Hadley. In the meantime, the district had voted not to abide by the decision of the com- mittee and not to pay their expenses, but to go on with the erection of the building, near the meetinghouse. While they were at work on the frame, three of the corner posts were secretly carried away. When the frame was up. a large number of men from the east came and eut the timbers so that they could pull over the entire south side of the building. After having had . these maranders arrested and held for trial, the west side people, to make assurance doubly sure, voted to call a comeil of five ministers to decide whether the lot was binding. The council assembled on March, 1762, and its finding was that the lot was of a sacred nature and could not be departed from.
Before this, however, the General Court had ended the diffi- culty by establishing the eastern part of the district as the : Second Precinet of South Hadley, on February 18, 1762.
The South Precinct resumed work on the church but it was not ready for use until two years later.
There was no service of dedication for either of the first two churches of Sonth Hadley. Such services were, to say the least, unusual in those days, as no sense of sanctity was attached to the building more than to any other town property.
The old meetinghouse was sold to John Chandler, who con- verted it into a dwelling house, upon the site which it now occupies, north of the park.
It would be interesting, did time allow, to imagine how the history of South Hadley might have been affected had the stout fighters of the Second Precinct carried their point and built the meetinghouse on Cold Hill at the corner of the roads, opposite Benjamin F. De Witt's house.
Probably Granby would never have had existence and South Hadley would be a town of more than twice its present territory, with a population one thousand larger and somewhat more enterprising.
But the brow of Cold Hill lacks the ample breadth of Sandy Ilill and could not have furnished space for the broad street, bordered with spacious honse lots, which gives character to South Hadley.
Then, too, the village that would in time grow up around the meetinghouse would have the great disadvantage of being away from the county road between Hadley and Springfield, which was the main thoroughfare of the town.
52
1
Matters being so situated, would Mary Lyon's committee of advising friends have consented that her seminary should be established upon so narrow and side-tracked a ridge as Cold Ilill ?
It must, however, be admitted that the site contended for by the residents of eastern South Hadley was more central than that of the first church.
There was nothing attractive about the site of the first church. It was placed well within the limits of the twenty rods wide Springfield highway, among berry bushes and the untamed growth of nature.
At that time and for many years afterward, there were only three dwelling houses near the meetinghouse. These were the residence of Daniel Nash, the first town clerk, near the site of the present Dwight Hall, the house of Rev. John Woodbridge, known in more recent days as the Dunlap house, and the trans- formed first meetinghouse.
A few rods east of the last mentioned building, about where ITotel Woodbridge now stands, was the only schoolhouse of the district, twenty-three feet long, eighteen feet wide and seven feet between joists, which was voted by the precinct in 1738 and finished by the district in 1754. In 1755 the district voted to have a school kept two months each year in this building, two months on Cold Hill and the same length of time in Falls Woods.
In 1769 the district voted to build a schoolhouse in Falls Woods. A third or south district, at the Canal Village, was voted in 1798 and a schoolhouse was built soon afterwards.
The yearly appropriation for schools, from 1754 to 1761, ranged from eight to twenty pounds and from 1765 to 1777, averaged thirty pounds.
There were no houses on the west side of the Springfield road north of the burying ground nor below, as far as the site of Mrs. Jonathan Burnett's residence, for years after South Hadley was incorporated.
For some reason, the lower part of the hill was the favorite location for innkeepers. Samuel Smith was the first one licensed in South Hadley and was in business during the years 1729, 1730 and 1731. Samuel Kellogg kept an in from 1733 until his death in 1740. After them came William Eastman, a storekeeper as well, who removed to what is now Granby, John Smith and Sherebiah Butt, who was long in business in the house where Charles S. Boynton now lives.
53
Upper Falls Woods, from Stony Brook down, had in 1760 almost as many houses as it can show today and the families occupying them were larger.
The records of the Court of General Sessions of the Peace, for Hampshire County, held alternately at Springfield and North- ampton, give an insight into the manners and customs and moral standards of the time not elsewhere to be found.
At the sitting held in May, 1763, the town of Pelham, which had been indicted for failure to settle a minister of the gospel, obtained a continuance of the case on promise that a suitable minister should be settled before the next sitting of the court.
At the same sitting the grand jury found a bill of indict- ment against John Lombard of Belchertown, "for that he did on the first Sabbath or Lord's Day in April, 1762, and on all of the Sabbaths or Lord's Days for one whole month then next following, at said Belchertown, unnecessarily and without any reasonable exeuse, absent himself from the public worship of God there, although the same was upheld and maintained there the whole of said time and although he, the said John, for the whole of said time was a person of sound body and not otherwise detained." The record continues, "he says he will not contend with the King and prays leave of the Honorable Court to offer something which may show the court that he did not unneces- sarily absent himself from the publie worship of God as afore- said, and it is granted. After a full hearing it appears to the court that the said John has offered no reasonable excuse for absenting himself from the public worship aforesaid." He is, therefore fined ten shillings lawful money for the use of the parish of Belchertown and costs of court.
At the same sitting, John Butler of South Hadley and Daniel Button and Isaiah Button of Stafford, Connecticut, were each indieted, "for that on the thirteenth day of February, 1763, the same being the Sabbath or Lord's Day, he did mmecessarily travel from a place called Skipmuck, in the township of Spring- field to said South Hadley, a distance of ten miles, and then and there, to wit at Springfield, did exercise the business of hunting after wild deer and then and there did, with his gun, snowshoes and dogs, labor and exercise himself in hunting and then and there sported himself in the chase of the deer aforesaid and pursued such deer with his dogs on said day in the woods at said South Hadley and at Springfield, more than ten miles." Upon
54
trial each was found guilty and fined fifteen shillings for un- necessary travel and ten shillings for unnecessary labor, both to the use of the poor of South Hadley, and costs of court.
It was fortunate for them that they had no success in hunt- ing that Lord's Day.
At the same sitting John Rugg and Elisha Taylor, both of South Hadley, and Daniel Button and Elisha Button, above mentioned, were indicted. It was alleged that John Rugg "on the last day of January last past did hunt and kill two wild deer and then and there had in his possession the flesh and raw skins of two deer killed since the twenty-first day of December last." He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a fine of twenty pounds, one-half to His Majesty and one-half to Joseph Ashley, the informer, and fifteen shillings and five pence of costs. Hle protested to the court that he could not pay the fine and the court made further order that the defendant make satisfaction for the offence by service and that he be disposed of to any of His Majesty's liege subjects for the space of four months, to commence from the time of his discharge for the commitment for the costs aforesaid. The record ends "sold accordingly for four pounds, which was paid and the costs likewise."
Elisha Taylor for killing one deer on the same day was fined ten pounds and costs and was sold, for two months, for forty shillings ; Daniel Button for killing two deer on the same day was fined twenty pounds and costs and was sold for four months, for twenty shillings: while Isaiah Button. for the same offence was senteneed to the same fine and costs and brought thirty shillings for four months' service.
At the preceding March sitting, Noah Goodman of South Hadley, then a licensed retailer of spiritnous liquor and after- wards a very eminent citizen, pleaded guilty to the killing of a deer that same JJannary and was sentenced to a fine of ten pounds and costs and, in default of payment, to be sold to service for two months. The record of the case ends, "said Noah was sold for forty-five shillings."
. It may justly be suspected that, in many instances, this plea of poverty and sale to service were merely a shrewd method of evading payment of the heavy fine and that the "lege subjeet of His Majesty" who became the successful bidder paid the court officer money which came from the convict. In this way, also, the detested informer's share of the plunder was reduced to a minimum.
55
-
John Worthington of Springfield was, at this time, the able and efficient King's attorney and doubtless, in the crowd of reso- Inte patriots who, some dozen years later forced him, on his knees, before Springfield courthouse to foreswear his king and pledge himself to uphold the cause of liberty and independence, was many a one of the scores of deer slayers whom he had relentlessly proseented.
This useful court also granted yearly licenses to innholders as well as to retailers of spirituons liquors at dwelling houses, "there to be spent out of doors," or, as our modern statute has it, "not to be drunk on the premises." Each licensee was made to recognize to the king in ten pounds, with two sureties, to observe the laws respecting persons so licensed and also to recog- nize in fifty pounds, with sureties, to keep and render the accounts and pay the duties by law required of them.
The standard of these licensed vendors had been somewhat lowered since the ancient time when no one under a deacon or the worthy widow of a deacon was deemed fit to be entrusted with the responsible and profitable service. But in these years before the Revolution the men and women who received licenses were respectable business persons and owners of property. To such an extent was this true, that it was quite the proper thing for licensees to become sureties on one another's recognizances. .
This court also licensed traders to sell tea, coffee and china- ware out of their stores for a year at a time, upon a recognizance of twenty pounds, with suroties, for keeping and rendering the accounts and paying the duties required by law.
To this court, also, were made returns of the service of "cautions" issued by town authorities to undesirable newcomers, as in this instance of one served upon a son of Hadley: "Pur- suant to a warrant under the hands of the seleetmen of Spring- field, bearing date the nineteenth day of April last, Joseph Crow- foot and his wife, Sarah Crowfoot, and their children, viz. : Joseph, John and Sarah, also Peter, on the twenty-second day of said April were warned to depart from and immediately leave the said town by Moses Alvord, constable of Springfield, who returns that, to the best of his knowledge, the said Crowfoot has no property in said town and that said persons came from a place called Ware River."
John Pynchon died before his grant at the south bounds of Hadley had been surveyed. In 1726 his heir, William Pyn-
56
chon, sold two-thirds of the five hundred acres to John Taylor of Hadley, for twenty shillings or one dollar and forty-five cents an acre. Later, John Taylor became possessor of the remainder of the grant. He was a man past fifty years old when he removed to his new possession and brought with him a family of five sons and two danghters. April 16, 1730, was undoubtedly a festive occasion in the new home by the Great Falls as the two daughters were married, Hannah to Nathaniel Hitchcock and Mary to James Brownson. -
On March 26, 1745, he deeded in parcels to his five sons five hundred and forty-five aeres of land and died soon afterwards.
The Pynchon Farm or Taylor Field as it was more com- monly called, had in 1765 six or eight houses occupied by Tay- lors and a few more in which families of other names lived.
Titus Pomeroy of Northampton, before 1763 had established himself on the rude pathway leading from the Springfield road to the river, which followed probably the old Indian trail and was the predecessor of the present Granby road. His house stood at the bend of the road near where Patrick Kilkelly now lives.
In 1767 he became the first innholder of Taylor Field and, after his death, his widow, Mary, and son, Simeon, continued the business into the next century.
Taylor Field lay at the lower end of a series of rapids by which the river descended fifty-three feet in the course of two miles and a half.
It was a very quiet place in 1765, except during the months of May and June, when people gathered from far and near to the harvest of the river.
The most valned fish were the salmon, which ran in great munmbers. They were caught in seines in the eddy at the foot of the falls and in scoop nets at places in the rapids to which the bolder fishermen forced their boats. Near the mouth of Stony Brook and above Bachelor's Brook, against Cook's Hill, were also noted places for salmon fishing. Near Stony Brook, at one hanl, twenty-four of the fish were taken, ranging from six or eight to forty pounds in weight.
But far more abundant were the shad. Partly because they were so plentiful and party because the Indians were so inordi- nately fond of them, there was long a prejudice among the white people against the toothsome shad and it was only some thirty years before the Revolution that shad eating became reputable.
57
At Taylor Field, the river, in the season, was full of shad and, in rowing, the oars often struck the fish.
They were caught in seines and scoop nets. In a boat fastened up the falls, a man could scoop two to three thousand shad a day. In the eddy below, from twelve to fifteen hundred were often taken at a time and hauls of from three thousand to thirty-five hundred were reported by old fishermen.
Acts of Parliament prohibited, in the colonies north of Pennsylvania, the entting on publie or crown land of pine trees fit for masts, which were twenty-four inches in diameter at a height of twelve inches from the ground.
After the conquest of Canada, great numbers of logs began to float down the river and lodge along the banks, especially in times of freshet. Benning Wentworth, governor of New Hamp- shire' and Surveyor General of the King's Woods. had agents stationed along the river who seized logs of the prohibited size and marked them with the broad arrow of the admiralty. alleg- ing that the trees from which they came had grown on the King's domain, in New Hampshire and the Hampshire Grants, as Ver- mont was then called, and, if left standing, might have been used "for the masting of the British royal navy." All who claimed an interest in the logs were notified to appear in the Admiralty Court at Boston and show cause why the timber should not be declared forfeit.
In May and June, 1763, three hundred and twenty-six logs, measuring from fourteen to thirty-six inches in diameter, were seized near the mouth of Stony Brook and in that part of North- ampton which we call Smiths Ferry. In December, 1764, one hundred and forty-three logs, measuring from twelve to forty- four inches in diameter, were seized in South Hadley. This seizure of logs was very unpopular. In April, 1764, of three hundred masts and logs seized at Northampton all but thirty- seven were retaken by the people and in October, 1765, there was a riot in staid old Hadley "on account of logs."
Eleazar Bort and Elijah Lyman were Governor Wentworth's agents at Northampton and, in April, 1764. after the people had retaken so many of the logs they applied in vain to magistrates Samuel Mather of Northampton and Israel Williams of Hatfield for warrants to impress men to help retake the King's timber.
On the contrary, the courts favored individuals who claimed to own the logs. Thus, in May, 1763, Elijah Alvord of South
58
Hadley and a Shutesbury man, sued Elijah Lyman and Elijah Clark for the conversion of seven white pine logs of the value of forty shillings, at Northampton. The case was brought before Justice Samuel Mather. The defendants pleaded that the justice had no jurisdiction because the trees from which the logs had been eut grew on His Majesty's land and only the Court of Ad- miralty at Boston could deal with the case. The plea was over- ruled and Esquire Mather gave the plaintiff's judgment. The defendants then appealed to the Inferior Cont of Connon Pleas and at the next August session, after the same plea as to the jurisdiction had been overruled, the jury found a verdict for the full amount of damages elaimed by plaintiffs.
Doubtless many other enterprising South Hadley men besides Elijah Alvord spent winters in cutting mast timber in the great King's Woods at the north.
After the Revolution pine logs floated down the river un- molested.
Some rafts of boards and sawed timber were brought down the river before 1755 but not many, until after the peace. of 1763. They could safely pass over the rapids at Willimansett and at Enfield, Connecticut, but all lumber and shingles had to be carted around the great falls at South Hadley.
In February, 1754, the Court of Sessions was petitioned to lay a road for the transportation of Imber around these falls but the youthful town opposed the petition and it was not granted.
At the next annual meeting the town voted that Elijah Alvord might make an agreement with persons to cross their lands with himber, in Falls Field and Taylor Field.
In 1765, the court appointed a committee who laid out a highway from the Springfield road, south of Leapingwell Brook past the Clancy place, as we know it, over Brainerd hill, up the long rise to Harry Brainerd's house, southward past the Griffin, Strong and Judd farms as far as the road leading to "the head of the canal," up this road to the riverside at the head of the fall and back again, then through what is now the Lamb farm to North Main street, thence to Main street, down Main street to Lamb street and from there to the river's edge, where they laid out a "publie landing," twenty-five rods along the river and ten rods inland.
The portion of this highway from the head of the falls to the Publie Landing was long called the Board Road and the hill
59
from the head of the falls to Main street was known as Carriage ITill, because of the carrying of lumber over it.
For more than thirty years many Falls Woods' farmers made a business of hauling limber and other merchandise around the falls. When navigation was unusually brisk, farmers from other parts of the town helped them out. Of course their farms suf- fered from neglect.
It is said that Deacon Enoch White, who then lived in what is now known as the Paoli Lathrop house, on Lathrop street, and owned a farm of one hundred and eighty acres stretching west- ward to the river and embracing much of the best land of the Field street market farmers, kept a horse and yoke of oxen to do this hauling but could not ent hay enough on his farm to feed the team.
Some rafts of lumber and all boats from the north tied up at the mouth of Stony Brook and the boards and other freight were carted from there to the landing in Taylor Field or in Willimansett. Almost all the freight that came upstream was carted to Stony Brook and from there was carried by boats to the river towns above.
The mouth of Stony Brook was a busy place in those days. There were boats loading and unloading, Imber being hauled ashore and, at times, stored in great piles, while there were always men and teams coming and going.
Elijah Alvord had a warehouse near the Brook in 1765 and kept an inn a mile below, where Horace W. Gaylord now lives. He was the first retailer of liquor in Falls Woods, and in 1754 and in 1755 was licensed as an innholder. Noah Goodman, who lived nearly opposite the present Falls Woods schoolhouse, succeeded him as an innholder in 1770.
The increase of business at Stony Brook demanded better means of communication with the Springfield road and, on April 9, 1770, what was afterwards known as the Lyman road was laid. It began on the west or Northampton side of the river on the east side of the Northampton and Springfield highway, about eight rods south of Elias Lyman's inn, and ran thenee to the river bank, where land for a ferry landing was sequestered. Then it crossed to the South Hadley bank where a landing, four rods along the river and three rods wide was laid out. From there it extended in the course of the present Alvord street to Lyman street, and along Lyman street. past Woodlawn to the
60
-
Springfield road and across the plains to the modern Chicopee Falls. The plains portion of the road probably followed the course of the original Springfield highway.
In August of the same year, Elias Lyman was licensed -by the Court of Sessions to maintain a ferry between the new land- ings and for a quarter of a century it was known as Lyman's Ferry.
On June 24, 1771, a committee appointed by the Court of Sessions laid a highway from the southerly side of the Hadley and South Hadley road and a little east of what is now called Titan's Pier to the river and thence across to the west or North- ampton side, sequestering land on either bank for a ferry landing. This was long afterwards known as Rock Ferry.
The. Second Preeinet of South Hadley was incorporated as the town of Granby June 11, 1768, but had not the right of sending a representative to the General Court until 1774, except as it united with Hadley, Amherst and South Hadley in doing so.
The boundary line between the old town and the new was long a source of trouble. The act incorporating Granby adopted the boundaries of the Second Preeinet. In 1781, the preeinet line between the towns was superseded by the "Goodman Line" as it was called. This was a straight line running north and south, within about half a mile of the west meetinghouse in Granby and gave the new town fourteen thousand six hundred and forty- three acres of land while South Hadley was left with only nine thousand three hundred and sixty-three aeres. The act provided that any one who lived upon or near this boundary should have the right to belong, with his estate, to whichever town he chose, provided he made a return of his name, estate and choice to the secretary of the commonwealth on or before January 1, 1782. As people were negligent about making this return the time for doing so was extended for another year. The effect of this singu- lar law was to make the line anything but straight.
In 1791 the General Court, upon their petition, set off ten men with their respective families and estates and the land of the heirs of Israel Clark from South Hadley to Granby "there to do duty and receive privileges as the other inhabitants of Granby do."
In June, 1824, the legislature repealed the act of 1782 and established a new boundary, extending from the old pine tree which stood on the Springfield line, half a mile west of Stony
61
Brook, "northwesterly, a direet course, to the parting of the roads on the north side of Bachelor's Brook, near the sand banks, so-called," and thence in the same course to Hadley bounds.
In June, 1826, it enacted that the boundary "shall forever be known, fixed and established as follows, " and inserted several angles in the line, much to Granby's enlargement. The statute concluded "and the above described line shall forever hereafter be fixed and established to be the true boundary line between the said towns in all respects and to all intents and purposes. any law or usage to the contrary notwithstanding."
But, alas for the strong words of the statute so favorable to Granby ! Next year South Hadley rallied her forces and in June, 1827, the legislature established the existing line, straight from the pine tree to Moody Corner, with a slight angle at the crossing of Stony Brook.
It is said that citizens of the two towns have several times informally considered the advisability of reuniting the ancient precincts. .
The present boundary lines of South Hadley measure six miles and two hundred and ninety-six rods on the river, three miles and two hundred and two rods on Hadley, one hundred and seventy rods on Amherst, six miles and two hundred and thirty-nine rods on Granby and two miles and one hundred and fifty-six rods on Chicopee.
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.