USA > Massachusetts > Worcester County > Princeton > History of the town of Princeton in the county of Worcester and commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1759-1915, Volume I > Part 26
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
Petition for Relief. Ten years after the event, feeling almost impoverished by the large expenditures he had been obliged to make in the search for the child, he petitioned the General Court of the Province, hoping to receive some measure of relief. In this petition he briefly tells the story of his efforts in behalf of his child.
"Province of the
Massachusetts Bay
To his Excellency Francis Barnard Esq'. Captain Gen- eral and Governor in Chief in & over said Province the Honourable his Majestys Council & house of Representa- tives in General Court assembled May 29th, 1765.
Humbly shews Robert Keyes of Princeton in ye County of Worcester that in ye year Seventeen hundred & fifty five he lost one of his Children & was Supposed to be taken by the Indians & Carried to Canada when it was first lost it was apprehended to be in the woods wandring about & your Petitioner was at great Cost & trouble In Searching the woods for it but to no good purpose; after this he hears It was at Canada and that he could get further Informa- tion thereof at Porchmouth In New-Hampshire on hearing that He went there and also sent to Canada. afwards (sic) He advertised said Child In the New York papers; * he had an account of Such a Child's being among the Mohawks and determined to go after his Child the last fall but has heitherto been prevented by reason of Sickness & deaths in his family. And the Cost he hath been at In Searching for sd Child is so Great being about one hundred pounds lawful money, that he is not able to bear it being in a new plantation, and as their is within Sixty rods of his door some Province land laying on ye Watchusett Hill which would be some advantage to him provided he could have it. Therefore your Petit humbly prays the Honoble Court to take his Case In your Compationate Concidera-
* The writer has examined the New York papers from 1755 to 1764, but failed to find this advertisement.
332
History of Princeton
tion & make him a grant of ye Easterly half of said Wat- chusett hill & your Pet as in duty bound will ever pray. Rocert Keyes.
Rejection. For reasons which do not appear this peti- tion was rejected, and Mr. Keyes was thrown back upon his old resources for the support of his family. He had sold in 1759 a part of his farm, the proceeds of which were doubtless used in meeting the expenses of the search for the missing girl. But his farm could yield him only a little ready money for this purpose. In 1767 he sold to his son-in-law Samuel Mossman, 4} acres of the farm; in 1770, 42 acres to William Dodd, and in 1773, 40 acres to his son Jonas, leaving but about 50 acres for himself.
Mrs. Keyes died August 9, 1789, and her husband March I, 1795. Both were probably buried in the old graveyard on Meeting House Hill, but the gravestone of the wife alone remains.
This simple story of the loss of the child and the search made for her was told by one to another, and rehearsed by parents to their children, and would have gone down through the generations unchanged but for an incident which occurred at the Centennial celebration of Princeton in 1859. The poet of the day, Prof. Erastus Everett of Brooklyn, N. Y., having made reference in his poem to the loss of the child, was subsequently shown a letter written in 1827 by a native of Princeton, which placed the matter in an entirely different light. Interested in the new de- velopments, he, by correspondence, succeeded in finding the writer of the letter, who confirmed the statements pre- viously made, and the substance of her narrative with some comments by Mr. Everett were printed with the proceed- ings of the Centennial.
The letter of 1827 I have never been able to find, although I have made diligent inquiry for it, and in fact I have not learned of any one who remembers it, except Mr. Everett, who only recalls the fact that at the time he saw it, it was in a dilapidated condition, but he does not remember who
333
Wachusett Legends
handed it to him, or what became of it. Through the courtesy of Mr. Everett, however, I have a copy of the second letter, which is given in full: -
Rockford, Bourbon Co., Kansas Territory, December 8, 1859.
"Erastus Everett, Esq.,
Dear Sir :- A letter of inquiry, dated at Brooklyn, with your signature, after being remailed at different points, reached me quite recently, and I hasten to reply. To give publicity to the confession of a crime, with mere supposition for its basis, demands an abler pen than mine, while to stigmatize the dead or give unnecessary pain to the living betrays a character more abandoned than I wish to possess. You say the account given in a letter of 1827 to my sister, Mrs. Hager which I supposed had been given to the winds or the flames long ago, was to you "A mys- tery, that is incomprehensible." Perhaps the organ of marvellousness is more fully developed in my head than in yours. Be that as it may, I believe the circumstances, as narrated to me in 1827, to be authentic; nor have I heard anything since by which I have doubted their au- thenticity. I gave more credence to the report from the fact that all the years of my girlhood were spent within half a mile of Mrs. John Gleason of Princeton, whose name previous to her marriage was Patty Keyes, sister to the child "Lucy," and one of the "Two sisters who went to the pond for sand"; and I have many times listened as she related the sad story of the child's disappearance, to- gether with other incidents that in my opinion corroborated the truth of Mrs. Anderson's statement. Mrs. Anderson, of Deerfield, N. Y., witnessed the confession, told it to Mrs. Whitmore and she gave it to me. Mrs. Whitmore has been dead more than thirty years. Mrs. Anderson I never saw, and whether she is still living I do not know.
The name of the man, to whom allusion is made, was Littlejohn. His first name, his age, and the precise time at which he died, I disremember, if I ever heard. I can- not recollect how, or what I wrote in 1827, but probably some things were mentioned at that time fresh in my mind that the lapse of thirty-two years have effaced from my memory. However, the main points I recollect distinctly and will give them. I was told that Mr. Littlejohn was thought to be dying for three days- at length he arose in
334
History of Princeton
bed and speaking audibly, said he could not die until he had confessed a murder that he committed many years before - said he was formerly a neighbor to Robert Keyes of Princeton, Mass., there was misunderstanding between the families. Mr. and Mrs. Keyes felt unpleasantly to live thus and went to Mr. L's to effect, if possible, a recon- ciliation, which having been apparently accomplished and mutual pledges of renewed friendship exchanged they Mr. K. and wife returned home. But the enmity of Mr. L. had not subsided. He sought revenge, and afterward seeing their little daughter alone in the woods, to avenge himself on the parents, killed her by beating her head against a log, and then placed her body in a hollow log, and went to his house. When the neighbors were solicited to assist in searching for the lost, he was among the first, and being familiar with the forest, he volunteered to lead the party, carefully avoiding the hollow log till night. After dark he went to the hollow log, took the body and deposited it in a hole, which had been made by the over- turning of a tree.
The log had been cut from the stump, leaving only it and the roots, which he turned back in its former position and thought all safe. He said, the next day as a party were passing the hollow log, they found a lock of hair, which the family identified as that of Lucy's and he knew it to be hers, for as he was taking the body in the dark her hair caught and in his hurry he left this lock. After the search was given up as fruitless, he felt ill at ease there and some- time after left the town. He gave the locality of the stump, the particular kind of wood of which the tree was once composed, and requested some one present to write his confession to Princeton, adding that he believed that the stump might then be in existence and, by digging, the bones of the child might be found.
This appeared more incredulous to me at that time than anything else, and I may have omitted to write it then, but as you have particularly requested so, I have given you all the particulars in my possession at this late day."
Of the man charged with the crime we know something and although not so much as we may wish, yet it is more than it might at first be supposed could be learned about one living a quiet life in a thinly settled community so many years ago.
335
Wachusett Legends
Variation in Name. Mrs. Brown refers in her letter to Mr. Littlejohn, Mr. Harlow in his sketch to John Littlejohn (which I believe he acknowledges to be an error) and Mr. Marble to Tilly Littlejohn. As the latter was, so far as can be learned by private or public records or by tradition, the only man bearing the name of Littlejohn who lived in Princeton, and he was once a neighbor of Mr. Keyes, and is regarded by Princeton people as the man concerned in this tragedy, we assume that he is the one alone whose char- acter has been brought out so prominently in connection with Lucy Keyes.
Tilly Littlejohn was the son of Thomas * and Mary Lit- tlejohn, and was born in Lancaster in 1735. After the death of the father, who was killed at Louisburg when Tilly was about ten years old, the mother and the children appear to have continued their residence in Lancaster or Bolton for some years. On the 23d of April, 1755, at which time he appears to have been in the service (probably an apprentice, of Jonathan Wilder, Tilly enlisted in the com-
Thomas Littlejohn the father of Tilly is said to have come to this country from Scotland and soon after went to Lancaster, where he is found as early as 1725, when he enlisted in the service of the Province in Capt. Blanchard's company. On the 17th of January 1726-27 he married Mary Butler, and they had five children, four of them recorded at Lancaster.
MARY, May 10, 1728, died Dec. 14, 1748.
THOMAS, July 27, 1730. SARAH, - -- , died 1817, in Bolton.
SIMEON.
TILLY, May 26, 1735.
During the French War Mr. Littlejohn again enlisted in his Majesty's ser- vice, and was among those who in 1745 were killed at Louisburg. His widow Mary died in Bolton in 1768, leaving quite a little property. By her will she gave to her sons Thomas, Simeon and Tilly five shillings each ("which is all I give them") and the balance of her estate to her daughter Sarah. Tilly was appointed executor, but he declined to serve.
Thomas, Jr. went to Halifax, Nova Scotia, thence to the neighborhood of Portland, Me., where he died leaving a large number of descendants.
Simeon, according to the statements received from his brother Thomas, set- tled in one of the southern states, but I have not been able to learn if he had a family.
The descendants of Tilly are scattered throughout the United States, some of them occupying positions of honor and trust.
336
History of Princeton
pany of Capt. Asa Whitcomb, and marched one hundred and sixty-five miles to Albany on the expedition to Crown Point. This company was in the " bloody morning fight," but Tilly escaped without injury, and after a service of six months was discharged on the 25th of October.
The roll of Capt. Whitcomb shows that Mr. Littlejohn received for his services of twenty weeks and four days £8. 17/2, allowance for mileage being made of Is. 6d. per day of fifteen miles travel. Under the head of " names of Fathers and Masters of Sons under Age and Servants " appears the name of Jonathan Wilder against that of Littlejohn, indicating that the latter was an apprentice at that time.
On the Ist of December, 1757, he married Hannah Brooks, in Lancaster.
At what time he removed to Princeton I cannot defi- nitely state, but he purchased from Mr. Keyes for £27, a portion of his farm on the easterly side of the mountain, by deed dated January 22, 1759, at which time he may have been living in that vicinity, although he is simply described as of the " same county and province " as the grantor .* It may be reasonably inferred that he was there in the fall of 1758, as the birth of his son Levi on the 2d of October of that year is not recorded in Lancaster, but does appear upon the Princeton records, although the entry was not made at the time, as the District records were not commenced until October, 1759. It is not unusual, how- ever, to find at Princeton the records of births which oc- curred in other towns.
The tract which Mr. Littlejohn purchased was 67} acres (almost one-third of the whole) on the westerly side, and Mr. Keyes reserved a right to " pass and re-pass " by " an open road to Watchusett Hill at the usual place of going up said Hill," while Mr. Littlejohn had also a right to pass
* The witnesses to this deed were Jonathan Wilder of Lancaster (Tilly Littlejohn's former master), and Zachariah Harvey, who was living on the "Ebenezer Parker" place in the east part of the town. The deed was not acknowledged until December 2, 1760, and not recorded until Sept. 16, 1764.
337
Wachusett Legends
through Mr. Keyes' land to " ye eastward." The accom- panying sketch shows the approximate location of the whole tract with the present roads indicated thereon. The location of Mr. Littlejohn's house is supposed to have been on the easterly side of his farm, near the road now known as the Roper road, and quite near Mr. Keyes' house.
Of Mr. Littlejohn's six children, two lived to maturity, both of them married and removed to New York State during the time of the great emigration thither from Mas- sachusetts.
In 1764 he, with others, joined in the formation of the church in Princeton, being dismissed from Lancaster Sec- ond Church, now Sterling. He remained in town more than twenty years, during which time he added to his pos- sessions by the purchase of a small lot of land at the corner of the Lower Westminster road and the Sterling road, west of the " old Russell place," on which spot he may have had a dwelling-house, although there is no record evidence of it.
About the year 1777 he removed to that part of Lan- caster adjoining Princeton, which was afterwards incor- porated as Sterling, where he bought a farm. He was dis- missed from the Princeton to the Sterling church in 1786, and died in the latter town November I, 1793, of " asthma and consumption," according to the church records. His gravestone, now to be seen in the old burying-ground, bears the following inscription: -
Memento Mori Erected In Memory of Mr. TILLEY LITTLEJOHN who departed this life Nov. 1, 1793, aged 58 years and 5 months. O ye whose cheek the tear of pity stains, Draw near with pious reverence and attend; Here lie the loving husband's dear remains, The tender father and the generous friend.
338
History of Princeton
His will dated Nov. 19, 1790, was signed by him, and the signature is identical with that of his appended to the church covenant in 1764.
His estate, including his land in Sterling, was valued at £555. The following chronology will show how I have followed him from the cradle to the grave, and enable the reader more clearly to understand the statements pre- viously and subsequently made.
CHRONOLOGY TILLEY LITTLEJOHN
1735-May 26. Born at Lancaster, Son of Thomas & Mary (Butler) Littlejohn.
1755- Apr. 23.
1755 -Oct. 25.
1757 - Oct. 20.
Enlisted at Lancaster in Capt. Asa Whitcomb's Co. marched to Albany on the Crown Point expedition. Discharged from service at Lancaster.
1757 - Dec. I. Intention of marriage declared at Lancaster.
Married at Lancaster to Hannah Brooks.
1758-Oct. 2. Son Levi born. Not recorded in Lancaster, but on Princeton records at a later date (died) 1759.
1759 - Jan. 22. Then of "a farm on the easterly side of Wachusett Hill in no town, parish or district, in the county of Worcester," bought of Robert Keyes.
1760 - Jan. 30. Daughter Hannah born in Princeton (died 1764).
1760 - Nov. 2. Admitted to Lancaster Second Church (Sterling).
1760 - Nov. 2. Daughter Hannah baptized in Lancaster Second Church.
1763 - Jan. 16. Son Levi born in Princeton (died 1764).
1763 - Oct. 6. Of Princeton, bought a small lot adjoining his first purchase.
1764 - Aug. 12. 1764 - Aug. 28.
Signed covenant at formation of Church in Princeton. Dismissed from Second Lancaster Church to Princeton Church.
1765 - Feb. 14.
Daughter Mary born in Princeton (died 1776).
1767 - Mch. 12. Daughter Pamela born in Princeton.
1769 -
Son John born in Princeton.
1774 - Feb. 22.
Of Princeton, mortgaged his real estate (including a lot near centre of town, of the purchase of which there is no record). Mortgage discharged Apr. 13, 1787.
1776 - Mch. 23. Daughter Mary died, - buried in Sterling, which in- dicates family residing there at that date.
339
Wachusett Legends
1777-Sept. 29. Of Lancaster, bought land there. (Sterling was in- corporated 1781.)
1778 -Nov. 23.
Of Lancaster, with wife, and John, Jabez & Thomas Brooks sold land in Lexington.
1779 - Mch. - Name not on tax list in Princeton.
1779 - Mch. 7.
Of Lancaster, bought land there.
1781 -Oct. 18. Of Sterling, sold his land in Princeton near the moun- tain.
1784 - Feb. 16. Of Sterling, bought land there.
1784 - Mch. 15.
Of Sterling, bought land there.
Of Sterling, bought land there.
Of Sterling, sold the land in Princeton near centre which he mortgaged in 1774 (where he may have lived before his removal to Sterling).
1786 -Oct.
I. Admitted to the Church in Sterling.
1789 - Apr. 16. Of Sterling, bought land there.
1790 - July 5. Of Sterling, signed his will.
1793 - Nov. I. Died in Sterling, "of asthma and consumption" (church record and grave stone).
1793- Nov. 19. Will proved, wife Hannah, son John and daughter Pamela Priest named. Inventory £ 555.
1794- Jan. 13. Widow Hannah Littlejohn, with son John and daughter Pamela, joined in transfer of real estate in Sterling formerly belonging to Tilly Littlejohn.
It is charged that Mr. Littlejohn, as the result of a quarrel with his neighbor Mr. Keyes, killed the child Lucy on the 14th of April, 1755, and concealed the body, and, when an old man dying in New York State, confessed the crime and desired that the fact should be made known in Prince- ton.
Analysis. Let us see if the facts will substantiate such a charge or admit of a reasonable belief in its truth.
First. Tilly Littlejohn was born in Lancaster, and if we have no proof that he was on the 14th of April, 1755 a resident of Lancaster, we have proof that he was such only nine days later, when he was recorded as servant or apprentice to Jonathan Wilder.
Second. Tilly Littlejohn was not a neighbor, and could not well have quarreled with Mr. Keyes about bounds of land, as he did not own any land near Mr. Keyes or
1784-Dec. 17.
1786 - Jan. 30.
340
History of Princeton
anywhere else, and could not legally have owned any, as he was not of age.
Third. If he had been there, and if he had quarreled with Mr. Keyes, his disappearance nine days later to enlist in the army would have excited suspicion and led to a belief in his guilt, and probably to his arrest.
Fourth. Four years after the loss of the child Mr. Little- john did buy a part of Mr. Keyes' farm, where he lived for a number of years and brought up a family. It is possible, but certainly not probable, that the man who murdered Lucy Keyes on that spot would return and make there a home for his wife and his children.
Fifth. Mr. Littlejohn did not have a family in 1755, as Mrs. Brown states, and did not leave Princeton " soon after " the loss of the child, but remained in the town some twenty years after his purchase of property there in 1759.
Sixth. Mr. Littlejohn was not an old man at the time of his death, as he was but fifty-eight years of age.
Seventh. He never lived in Deerfield, New York, or vi- cinity, if the statement of his grand-children can be relied upon.
Eighth. He certainly did not die in Deerfield, N. Y., but yielded up the ghost in the quiet town of Sterling, Mass., in 1793, where to-day we may see his gravestone with an inscription recounting his virtues " as a loving hus- band, tender father and generous friend," - a case, I have no doubt, where the epitaph tells the truth.
Ninth. Grand-children living to-day who were brought up with Mrs. Littlejohn, (who survived her husband many years,) affirm that they never heard a word of any wrong-doing on the part of their grandfather.
Tenth. Admitting error in some of the details, if, as some have suggested, such a confession had been made by Mr. Littlejohn at Sterling, where he died, it certainly
34I
Wachusett Legends
would have become quickly known throughout the town and the county.
These statements, based so largely upon record evidence, are so contradictory to the alleged confession, that the reader must certainly feel that the case against Mr. Littlejohn is at least " not proven."
Failing to find any evidence to implicate Mr. Littlejohn as a quarrelsome neighbor, I have carefully examined the records to learn who were the owners of land adjoining Mr. Keyes in 1755, who might possibly have disputed with him the boundary lines between their estates. My re- search has resulted in finding that the land on the north, east and south of Mr. Keyes' farm was owned by Benjamin Houghton, Esq., of Lancaster, while the mountain on the west was in the possession of the Province. It is not quite clear whether the northerly corner of lot No. 12 of the " Watertown farms," then owned by Mr. Josiah Coolidge of Weston, bordered on Mr. Keyes' south-westerly corner, but, if at all, it was only for a few rods between Pine Hill and the mountain, and was of no value to any one; neither was there any resident on that lot No. 12 until many years afterwards. There appear, therefore, to have been no families near Mr. Keyes in 1755, and no boundaries to quarrel about, unless we suppose them to be those of Mr. Houghton, a man of substantial worth, well known throughout the county, - a supposition not worthy of consideration.
I have been asked how I reconcile the statements of Mrs. Brown with the facts here referred to, but I have been unable to reach any satisfactory conclusion. The char- acter of the informant and the circumstantial details of the confession make the mystery so much the greater, and the problem the more difficult to solve. Whether she heard aright the story from Mrs. Whitmore, or the latter correctly received the statement from Mrs. Anderson, or whether Mrs. Anderson was at fault, the reader can judge as well as I.
It is possible that some man, whose mind was wandering
342
History of Princeton
in the last hours of his life, may have confessed a crime, and the unknown Mrs. Anderson to whom the story was told may have supplied a name, either by accident or de- sign; or it is possible that Mrs. Whitmore or Mrs. Brown mistook the name of the confessor, or, forgetting the name, assumed that it was Littlejohn, because she remembered that a man bearing that name once lived near the mountain.
We can make many conjectures, but, whatever point we take up to examine critically, we find ourselves in conflict with evidence which seems to demolish any theory con- necting Mr. Littlejohn with the murder.
In publishing these notes I have endeavored to give all the facts that I have been able to gather, and only regret that the mists cannot be entirely cleared away, and the origin or occasion of the mysterious confession be fully made known.
I am indebted to relatives of Mrs. Brown, and also to members of the Littlejohn family, for some suggestions, - the former anxious to assert the trustworthiness of their relative, and the latter equally anxious to remove the stain resting upon the memory of Mr. Littlejohn.
Mrs. Anderson came to Eaton, N.Y., where Mrs. Whit- more resided, met her at the house of a friend, and learning that Mrs. W. was a native of Princeton, gave her the rela- tion above and Mrs.W. requested me to write. Now, Sir, as you seem interested in the matter, and as doubt implied respecting the truthfulness of the confession, allow me to suggest the propriety of ascertaining through some persons at Deerfield, where I think Mr. Littlejohn died, the time of his demise and the facts of his confession.
You say "The substance of my letter will be embodied in a record that the people of Princeton will read." I wish you had been more explicit. I am a Yankee, Sir, and you know the Yankees are proverbial for natural cu- riosity. Am I to understand that a work is to be pub- lished, or is it merely to be placed upon the records of the town? If the former is the case, I hope I may be apprised of it, for whatever may interest Princeton folks will in- terest your humble friend in southern Kansas. Even the name of Princeton falls pleasantly on my ear.
343
Wachusett Legends
"I love her rocks and hills, Her meadows, plains and fields And healthful air: And though far off I dwell, My heart shall ever swell, Her name to hear."
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.