USA > Massachusetts > Essex County > Newbury > Ould Newbury: historical and biographical sketches > 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 | 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
60
OULD NEWBURY
Court. It is left to three magistrates to Give Longer time for ye repair- ing of it than is above Expressed, if they shall think fit; and in case ye bridge fall downe, then ye ferry shall return as at present to Newbury & Salisbury untill such time as ye bridge be built again.
GEORGE CARR. THO. BRADBURY.
Entered in ye County Court records for Norfolke, page 13th THO. BRADBURY, Rec" .*
The capital and labor necessary for the building of a float- ing bridge of the dimensions given in the decree of the court were not easily procured in those early days. The work seems to have progressed slowly, but steadily, until early in the summer of 1655, when the bridge was nearly completed. Opposition to the enterprise found expression in the shape of a petition to the General Court setting forth the difficulties and dangers that might result from the proposed obstruction to the free navigation of the river ; and May 29, 1655, the court passed the following order : -
In ansr to the peticon of seuerall inhabitants of Salisbury, itt is ordered that the bridge George Carr is building & providing for one part of Sallisbury Riuer, being in such forwardnes, should contineu, and may be improved for publicke good, and the next County Court at Hampton is heereby impowered to order the same, so that the transpor- tacon of the peticoners may be obstructed as litle as maybe, and that the sajd bridge be lett fly for the month of September, that so the peti- coners may haue due time to transport theire hay wthout any lett or hin- derance during that tjme; and the sajd George Carre is to keepe a sufficient ferry boate on that side .- Massachusetts Colony Records, volume 14, Part i., page 231.
When the bridge was completed, Mr. Carr invited a com- mittee of his townsmen to inspect the work, and report upon the same; and, accordingly, June 29, 1655, this committee signed a certificate stating that the bridge "was finished according to the covenant made between the court held at Salisbury and the said George Carr." A few days later the presiding magistrate of the court of old Norfolk county,
* Suffolk Court Files.
61
THE FERRY AT CARR'S ISLAND
on his way home to Ipswich, with his attendants all mounted, passed over this bridge, and were entertained at the house of Mr. Carr on the island. Previous to his departure the fol- lowing certificate was prepared and signed by the judge : -
5th month, 5th day, 1655 .- Upon this day upon my return from the courts of Dover and York, I came with divers other horsemen that were with me over the float bridge of Merrimack River which George Carr hath built, and I find it fully sufficient for passage both for man and horses, so that the former order of Salisbury Court in reference to the bridge to be built by the said George Carr, and especially the last order of the General Court considered, I do clearly apprehend that the usual benefit of the ferry on either side doth of right henceforth belong unto him, and, therefore, the other ferryman is hereby required to cease his ferriage usually unless he be employed by the said George Carr and for his use. I conceive it is not amiss that you acquaint the selectmen of Newbury and Salisbury with this, that so they may be assistant to the Court order if occasion shall require.
SAMUEL SYMONDS.
This official announcement was evidently an event of unusual interest and importance. If the little group of spectators gathered there, the solemn judge with his retinue of mounted horsemen, and the bridge itself floating lazily on the tide, could be reproduced on canvas, the picture would be stately and imposing. Possibly some competent and skilful artist, in days that are to come, will exalt and glorify that picturesque scene, and restore from out the dim and shadowy past the life and pageantry of that memorable midsummer morning.
It is worthy of note that this bridge, built in compliance with the terms imposed by the General Court, was probably the first floating bridge in America. Certainly, no other equal to it in size and importance is mentioned in the early colonial records ; and its prompt acceptance by the county court must have been a source of gratification and pride to the builder. The success of the undertaking was assured ; and, as a token of their appreciation of Mr. Carr's services to the country, the General Court passed the following vote : -
62
OULD NEWBURY
This Court doth Grant the Inheritance of Ramme Iland to Mr Georg Carr & his heirs for euer, the Magists haue past this wth Ref- erence to the Consent of theire brethren, the deputs hereto :
22 November 1655 EDWARD RAWSON, Secret.
Consented to by the deputyes
WILLIAM TORREY, Cleric.
In October, 1660, the bridge was exempted from assess- ment for the "County and town rates," and Mr. Carr was also granted " one hundred & fiffty acres of land to enjoy during the bridge standing & its being maintained." In the month of May following (May 22, 1661) an explanatory order was passed, fixing the valuation at which the bridge should be assessed for the maintenance of the ministry.
The order reads as follows : -
Att the request of Mr George Carre, as an explication of this Courts graunt to him in October, 1660, this Court declareth that the liberty graunted him of being rate free for the bridge ouer Salisbury Riuer is to be understood & taken as freeing him from any tax relating to toune & country by reason of the benefitt that accrueth to him from the sajd ferry & bridge, the maintenance to the ministrye there excepted, so as the bridge be not accounted in value to that rate aboue thirty pounds, & that the minister of Salisbury & his family, from time to time, be ferry free & that the graunt of one hundred & fifty acres of land, during the bridges standing, is and shall be vnderstood & taken, yt the sajd George Carre shall enjoy the propriety of one hundred & fifty acres of land, to him, his heires & assignes, vntill such time as he or they shall vtterly relinquish or neglect the repaire and maintenance of the sajd bridge .- Massachusetts Colony Records, volume 4, Part ii., page 5.
In the month of October, 1668, Mr. Carr petitioned the General Court, asking that the ferry recently established be- tween Newbury and Amesbury, without his knowledge and consent, should be abolished, or placed in his care and control, in compliance with the agreement made at the Salisbury court in 1650. In answer to this petition the deputies advised the county court "to confer the keeping of the new ferry upon the said Carr, he keeping of It upon as equall termes as any other will doe."
63
THE FERRY AT CARR'S ISLAND
The next year (May 19, 1669) the General Court passed the following order : -
In ansr to the petition of George Carr, the Court, having heard his allegations & pervsed seuerall Court orders referring to the Case, doe declare that the peticoner ought to haue his couenant made good, according to the order of Salisbury Court, gmo, 1650, to haue the whole dispose of the sajd fferry on both sides of the ryver, there being no Complaint of deficiency of the bridge, or of Carr's attendance by boat or otheruise, but, contrarywise, desires from from seuerall selectmen of the continuance thereof in his hands, & therefore can see no ground to allow of the setting vp of another fferry there, but judge liberty may be granted to sett a ferry or ferryes in other places on that riuer, vse full for the country, the said George Carr having the refusall of keeping the fferry at or about Powwaws Riuer, he keeping & attending on it for the ease of the country, & on the same termes that it was granted to him that now keeps it, by order of the County Court at Hampton or Salisbury, liberty of magistrates & deputjes to passe free, as it was by law setled before the agreement the sajd Car made about the sajd fferry, which he accepted not then against .- Massachusetts Colony Records, volume 4, Part ii., page 429.
In 1670, Mr. Carr again applied to the General Court for permission to keep the ferry between Newbury and the new settlement at Amesbury, and also requested that "two small Islands, Called by the name of Deere Iland and Eagle Iland," should be granted him in part payment for one hundred and fifty acres of land previously voted. The court considered that the first part of this petition had already been settled, and postponed action in regard to the grant of the islands named until the town of Salisbury could be heard in relation thereto.
Two years later (May 15, 1672) the subject was finally disposed of by the following order : -
In ansr to the petition of the inhabitants of Salisbury, as also that of Mr George Carrs, it is ordered that Deare Island and Eagle Island, petitioned for as to the propriety, remajne the countrys, the timber & trees to be for Georg Carr for the vse of the bridg, till this Court take further order. The herbage of them, wth liberty to cutt doune brush & vnderwood to make pasture for sheepe, to be to & for the vse of the sajd toune of Salisbury .- Massachusetts Colony Records, volume 4, Part ii., page 530.
64
OULD NEWBURY
The importance of keeping the ferry established at Carr's Island open for the transportation of troops and ammu- nition during the progress of King Philip's war was well understood and carefully provided for by the following order, passed by the General Court May 5, 1676 :-
In answer to the request of George Carr, Señ, who keepes the ferry over Merrimack Riuer, the securing whereof for the Comon passage of poasts, souldiers, & travellers, & variety of other occasions, is of very great concerment vnto this colony, which, if neglected, may proove eminently pjudicial & dangerous to the country in generall, for pre- venting whereof it is heereby ordered by this Court that the sajd Carr, shipwright, shall haue a garrison, & the full number not exceeding seven men, free from impresse, prouided the sajd Carr doe mainteyne his garrison & the sajd men at his oune propper & peculiar charge, and those seven men be constantly kept for the security of the ferry, & the names of those persons so improoved to be returned in to the major of that county .- Massachusetts Colony Records, volume 5, page 89.
At this time, and for many years after, the only route from Boston to the eastern frontier was by way of this ferry at Carr's Island. Largely patronized by the settlers in this immediate vicinity, by soldiers engaged in various expeditions against the Indians, and by traders and travellers of every description, the income derived from "the great ferry on both sides of the island, and the bridge and privileges there- unto belonging," rapidly increased the estate of Mr. Carr. At his death, which occurred April 4, 1682, his real and per- sonal property was valued at nearly fourteen hundred pounds, - a very large estate for those early days.
In the division of this property, made by a committee ap- pointed by the county court, and recorded Sept. 25, 1683, in volume 4, pages 128-130 of the Probate Records, the bridge and ferry were assigned to Richard and James Carr, sons of the intestate, George Carr.
They continued in undisturbed possession for several years ; but the growth of the town of Newbury in a south- easterly direction, and the remoteness of the ferry from the direct line of travel, led Captain John March, who had opened a tavern near the river opposite to Ring's Island, to petition
65
THE FERRY AT CARR'S ISLAND
Sir Edmund Andros, recently appointed governor-in-chief of all New England, for the privilege of setting up a ferry near his place. This petition was read in council Sept. 23, 1687, and was finally referred to the justices of the peace in the county of Essex, with instructions to report to the council " what they conceive to be most suitable and conven- ient for Travellers and the publique service of the Country."
Notwithstanding the earnest protestation of James Carr, acting for himself and his brother Richard, the committee reported in favor of granting the petition ; and the governor and council, at a meeting held at the council chamber in Boston, Oct. 25, 1687, passed an order approving this deci- sion, and providing that John March should have the privi- lege of keeping the new ferry in case James Carr should refuse to undertake it.
As the building of a new causeway and the providing of boats for the accommodation of passengers would necessarily involve a large expenditure of money, and the care and man- agement of the new ferry would be inconvenient and burden- some to Mr. Carr, he did not promptly accept the offer ; and Captain John March was authorized to take charge of the new enterprise and carry the proposed plans into effect.
Not satisfied with these proceedings, and still claiming that he was entitled to certain exclusive rights and privileges under the contract made by the General Court in 1650 with George Carr, he appealed to the governor and council to aid and protect him in the assertion of these rights. The records show that this petition was taken into consideration and finally acted upon May 20, 1691 ; and the petitioner was " referred to seek his remedy by Course of Comon Law."
Long and tedious litigation followed, with varying success to each of the contestants, until at length the deputies, in General Court assembled Dec. 5, 1693,
Voted that all suits and actions now depending between any persons and the said Capt. John March, referring to any matter or controversy about the ferry or ferries over the river of Merrymack, between New- bury and Salisbury, be suspended; and that the court of Salem be directed to continue any action or actions so depending there until the
66
OULD NEWBURY
general assembly have determined and resolved upon the settlement of the said ferry or ferries ; and that the heirs of George Carr be notified that they may appear on the sixth day after the begining of the next sessions of the general assembly, and there offer what plea and objec- tions they have to make against the confirmation of the said ferry to the said Capt. John March.
Those who are interested in the details of this prolonged controversy will find in the notes to volume VII. of the Acts and Resolves of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, pages 398 to 409 inclusive, a full and particular account of the proceedings up to this date. In volume VIII., appendix IV., of the same work, soon to be published, will be found addi- tional papers and documents relating to the final settlement of the case. By the kind permission of Abner C. Goodell, Jr., Esq., who has the editorial care and supervision of this work, the most important of these papers have been copied, and are incorporated in this sketch. They tell the story so clearly and concisely that no words of explanation will be required.
For more than twenty years after the General Court sus- pended the suit brought against Captain John March by the heirs of George Carr, no definite action seems to have been taken by either side for the settlement of the controversy. In December, 1715, Richard Carr presented a petition, as one of the heirs of George Carr, 'again urging his claims to the exclusive rights and privileges granted by the court in 1650. This petition, and the order of the court thereon, reads as follows : -
ORDER appointing A HEARING at the next SESSION of the GENERAL Court ON the PETITION of RICHARD Carr OF SALISBURY praying a SETTLEMENT of the FERRY over the LOWER part of Merrimac river and for SERVING the TOWNS of NEWBURY and SALISBURY with A copy of SAID PETITION.
UPON READING the petition of Richard Carr of Salisbury in the county of Essex, mariner, importing that about the year 1687 the then Governour and Council were pleas'd to grant liberty to Lieu. Colo March to keep a new ferry over the lower part of Merrimack river be- tween Newbury and Salisbury, during their pleasure, wh ferry has been
67
THE FERRY AT CARR'S ISLAND
since continued and of late setled by the quarter sessions of the said county upon the towns of Newbury and Salisbury, both which are in prejudice of a grant formerly made by the General Court to Mr George Car, the petitioner's father, and have been and now are very injurious to his heirs, and humbly prays that justice may be done him, to which end he offers the following particulars, vizt, that there was by order of the general-court a covenant made between the court of Salisbury and Mr George Car, the petitioner's father, about building a float bridge over Merrimack River, &c., and confirm'd by the general court anno 1650 and 1660, and therein an ancient grant of the whole ferry or ferrys between Newbury and Salisbury was conditionally made to the said Car and his heirs; yt the covenant on the said Car's part was fulfilled to the satisfaction of all, as appears not only on record, but also in that there was never any objection made against him, nor can there be justly at this time; that in fulfilling this covenant the said Car was at more than three hundred pounds expence in first building the bridge and other accommodations for the ferry, and that in the settlement of the said Car's estate this grant and privilege was apportioned and apprais'd to his heirs James and Richard (the petitioner) at near four hundred pounds ; that the granting or settling a ferry between Newbury and Salisbury on any others was a breach of covenant on the countrey's part, and contrary to the intention and meaning of the covenanters on both sides, and a manifest illusion to said Car and his heirs; that the said Car would not have been at so great a charge, had he thought that a ferry but a little below him would have ever been granted to any other, which would spoil both the custom and profitt of that which was attended with so great a charge, as it hitherto hath been, almost to the undoing of us to whose lot this part of our father's estate fell, who for being kept out of our right are damnified at least fifty and sixty pounds a year ; that it cannot be supposed the general-court made any reserva- tion to the contrary, but that the true intent and meaning of their grant and covenant was the said Car and his heirs should have the sole bene- fit of ferry or ferrys between the two towns aforesaid, wh is evident, in that the other ferry below was put down as soon as the bridge was finished, and that, when another ferry was thought needful some miles above the ferry, the general court judged it just to give the said Car the offer and grant of it anno 1669, and at the same time declared it was needful so to do to make good their ancient covenant with him, and that, if any other ferrys should be thought useful for the country within the aforesaid limits, the sd Car should have the refusal of keeping them ; that, when the lower ferry aforesaid was first sett up, the offer of it was never made to M' Car's proper heirs of that right, neither had they both the refusal of it; that what ever was proposed to the peti- tioner about it was not refuted, that he only objected against some proposals which he supposed he had just reason for, as being contrary
68
OULD NEWBURY
to the ancient grant and covenant ; that the first grant or permit to keep the lower ferry aforesaid to Coll. March was only during pleasure ; that it can be no prejudice or detriment to the country nor any person what- soever now to grant and settle it on them to whom it of right belongs; that the late settlement by the sessions of a ferry at the same place upon the two towns aforesaid was done without the least offer to either of ye heirs or the said Car or giving them any opportunity of setting forth their right or speaking for themselves, and contrary to the grant and covenant according to which the ferry was not to be kept by New- bury and Salisbury till the aforesaid bridge fell down and then no longer to continue so, but till it should be rebuilt by the said Car or his heirs; that it is of necessity that that ferry should be kept up, where and for which the bridge was built for the publick benefit of the countrey, because it is impossible to keep or pass the lower ferry at all times and very hazardous for a great part of the Winter, tho' it may be convenient in the Summer, when it draw away all the custom and profit of the old ferry; that the petitioner supposes it just and reason- able that he who keeps up the old ferry of necessity for the publick good shd have the benefit and profit of the new ferry, wh is only for the conveniency of some persons and at some times to support and main- tain at an extraordinary charge yt which is kept of necessity; that he humbly offers these considerations to the general-court, humbly praying that the aforesaid ferry over the lower part of Merrimack river may be either wholly put down or settled according to the aforesaid grant and covenant with the said Car and his heirs, or that the refusal of keeping the same at the same price at which it is now kept may be given to the petitioner,-
Ordered, that the petitioner serve the towns of Newbury and Salis- bury with a copy of this petition, that they be heard thereu! before this court, upon the second Wednesday of the session of this court in May next, if they have anything to object why the prayer thereof should not be granted.
[Approved December 20, 1715.]
The hearing appointed for the second Wednesday in May was evidently postponed until June 6. Under date of
June 7, 1716. The following ORDER pass'd in COUNCIL, AND sent down for CONCURANCE DECLARED upon the HEARING had yesterday before this COURT upon the within PETITION of Richard Carr, THAT the setting of Marches Ferry over Merrymack River from Whites Point in Salisbury in the COUNTY of Essex is no infringment to any former GRANT to George Carr, THE PROV- INCE having reserved to themselves the LIBERTY of SETTING up
69
THE FERRY AT CARR'S ISLAND
other FERRYS as should be found needful, AND the PETITION being groundless
Ordered that it be dismiss'd, UPON which the HOUSE of REP- RESENT. pass'd a non-concurrence, vizt.
Resolved that Mr. George Carr, his HEIRS and ASSIGNS, had a RIGHT to the whole Ferry on both SIDES of the RIVER between Newbury and Salisbury by VERTUE of a GRANT of the COURT at Salisbury 1650, being impowered by the GENERAL COURT to make such GRANT, Wh. GRANT was confirm'd by the GENERAL ASSEMBLY May, 1669, AND that no Ferry and Ferrys were to be sett up without his having the REFUSAL of the same, AND altho the GENERAL-COURT reserv'd a LIBERTY to themselves to order a Ferry or Ferrys to be sett up, YET that the said George Carr nor HIS HEIRS never forfeited their RIGHT by any REFUSAL.
The next step seems to have been taken by Richard Carr in a suit brought against Edward Sargent, who had charge of the new ferry, in the absence of Captain John March, who was then engaged in the colonial service at Pemmaquid and elsewhere ; but the Court of Common Pleas, held at Salem June 25, 1717, dismissed the suit.
Two months later an action for trespass was entered by Richard Carr and James Carr against Edward Sargent, re- turnable at Court of Common Pleas at Newbury on the last Monday of September. The declaration of the writ was as follow" -
In a plea of Trespass on ye Case, For that Whereas the Great and General Court of this Province did on May the 7th, Anno Dom 1649, by a second motion of George Carr, late of Salisbury, dece'd, and ffather to the plants as relating to Carrs fferry between Salisbury and Newbury, give order and power to the Court held at Salisbury abovesd to judge and determine of sª motion relating to sd fferry and priviledges and to settle ye same. And whereas on the 9th of the 3 mo: Anno Dom 1650 the sª Carr did settle and confirm unto ye sd George Carr, his heirs and assignes, ye whole fferry and profit thereof on both sides of Merrimack River between sd Towns of Newbury and Salisbury, he performing according to ye conditions set forth in sd act or order, which conditions were performed by sª Carr, as may appear by a Return under ye hands of Samuel Symonds, Esq" entred on Salisbury Town Book of Records, bearing date the 5th day of the 5 mo : 1655, and other evidences as shall more fully appear. And the sª George Carr dying seized and possessed of the sª Ferry and priviledge setled and confirmed unto
70
OULD NEWBURY
him as abovesd and the same after ye decease of ye sª Geo: Carr being lawfully setled upon the plants as portion, as appears by the Division made of ye Estate of ye abovesd George Carr decd by men appointed by ye Honoured Court at Ipswich for that business April Ioth, 1683, as namely Mr. Caleb Moody, Mr Thomas Noyes, Mr Nathan- ael Clark and Mr Henry Short, which did then set out to the plants the abovesd fferry and priviledges, yet notwithstanding ye sª Edward Sar- gent, contrary to all the abovesd grants and settlemts of sd fferry and priviledges, did sometime in the year 1691, on or about ye month of September, keep a Boat and fferry passengers, taking money for ye same over the said River Merrimack from the Warehouse Point, so called, in Newbury to Rings' Island in Salisbury, so called, or near thereabouts, and continued so to do until about ye month of March, 1703, thereby hindring the plts Richard Carr and James Carr of the profits of sd fferry and priviledge, which is to the damage of ye sª Richard Carr and James Carr, as they say, ye sum of six hundred pounds.
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.