USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Littleton > Proceedings of the Littleton Historical Society, No. 1 1894-1895 > Part 3
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
Eliot was past seventy years of age, and though he exerted himself all that was possible in behalf of the poor Indians, it was largely in the face of a howling mob, so enraged against the Indians that they would listen to no appeals in their behalf, and met the friends of the Indians with insult. The good work was overthrown.
1
33
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
It only remains to speak a few words of John Eliot's old age. He must have had a people worthy of him at Roxbury, for they seem to have sustained him loyally to the last ; telling him when he asked for a colleague and proposed to relinquish his salary since he could do no more work, that they would pay as long as they could see his face.
A story of his benevolence is told.
So well known was his propensity for giving, that his treasurer when paying him on one occasion a considerable sum, to make sure that he should give away none of it on his way home, tied the money into a handkerchief with a great number of knots. But on the way home the good pastor called upon a widow. When about to leave, his heart prompted him to make a donation, and he began to fumble at the knots in his handker- chief, but they would not untie, so he remarked, " The Lord must mean it all for you," and left the handkerchief and con- tents behind.
His wife died three years before his own death, and stand- ing by her coffin he said to his people, " Here lies my dear, faithful, pious, prudent, prayerful wife. I shall go to her, but she shall not return to me."
LITTLETON LAND MARKS IN PROPRIETORS' DEEDS. Read at a Meeting of the Society, November 2, 1894, by George Augustus Sanderson.
The earliest recorded deed from the committee of the proprietors of Littleton is dated January 13, 1716, the latest is dated August 11, 1760. All of these conveyances, excepting the last seven, were made before 1726. Jonathan Prescott, Joseph Buckley of Concord, Isaac Powers of Littleton, Eleazur Lawrence of Groton and Nathaniel Wilder of Lancaster were the grantors named in the earliest deeds, and were the first committee of the proprietors.
The only way, which is referred to as a street, is "King street." Land bounding on this street was bought as follows : In 1716, by Isaac Powers, mentioned above as proprietor (the third child of Walter Powers and Trial (Shepard) Powers,) who is said to have lived on the George Whitcomb place, next west- erly from the centre store; in 1719 by Benjamin Shattuck, the first minister of Littleton who lived on the Eliza Hartwell place and owned land both sides of King street, the land on the north side running east to a tree near the burying place; in 1724 by Samuel Corey, whose house-lot was south of King street, and bounded on Chelmsford (now Westford) line and Powers farm; in 1719 by Jonathan Prescott of Concord on the north side of King street and bounding on Chelmsford line; in 1725 by Jonathan Prescott, Jr., the lot on which he then dwelt on the south side of King street near the meeting-house; in 1719 by William Barrett, on the north side of King street and bounding
35
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
on Mr. Shattuck's land, and on the high-way that leads from King street to "Bever" brook.
The other roads mentioned are the road that leads from King street to "Bever" brook, the Nashoba old road, the Groton road to Stow, and some highways not particularly described.
Powers farm is referred to in the deed of Samuel Corey, above mentioned. His east line ran north on Walter Powers line and on Chelmsford line to King street. This reference gives us the northwest corner of Powers farm, then a part of Concord, and annexed to Littleton in 1725, and also the point where Concord, Chelmsford and Littleton then met. The deed to Jonathan Prescott, Jr., above mentioned, joins Corey on the south and bounds on Powers farm. Following the line of Powers farm towards the south, we come next to an eighty- acre lot conveyed to Paul Dudley of Boston, bounding north- east on Powers farm; then to an eighty-acre lot conveyed to John White of Boston, probably the Fletcher place, bounding northeast on Powers farm; then to the eighty-acre lot of Addington Davenport of Boston, probably the old Reuben Hoar place, bounding north on Powers farm.
Benjamin Barron undoubtedly owned a lot between the Davenport lot and the lot next referred to, but his deed does not appear among the recorded conveyances from the proprietors.
The next recorded deed from Proprietors bounding on Powers farm is that to Thomas Blanchard which bounds east on Powers farm and south on Indian land and begins at the northeast corner of Indian land. The Indian land here referred to was laid out soon after the town was incorporated, as a part of the act of incorporation. It consisted of five hundred acres in the southeast corner of the town and the east line of this Indian land bounded on Powers farm and was three hundred poles long. The northeast corner of Indian land was probably the northeast corner of the Walker farm now owned by George
1128715
36
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
H. Cash. These bounding lots give the continuous line between Powers farm and Littleton, from the Chelmsford or Westford line at the north to the Acton (then Concord) line on the south.
The meeting-house is mentioned in the deed dated 1717 to Jacob Powers, who was the eighth child of Walter and Trial (Shepard) Powers, and lived on highway from King street to "Bever" brook, conveying forty-two acres bounding on Mr. Shattuck's land. The deeds to Davenport, Dudley and White, above mentioned, locate the land conveyed as being about one mile south of "the present meeting-house."
The deed to Samuel Davis describes the house-lot as bounded easterly by highway that goes from Jonathan Hart- well's to the meeting-house. James Burbeen's lot bounded on Long pond, and on the highway leading from meeting-house in Littleton toward Concord.
Samuel Corey's home-lot was east of the meeting-house, and Jonathan Prescott, Jr., bought a lot of one hundred and fifty-two acres near the meeting house, and dwelt thereon in 1725.
The title to Powers farm goes back to Lieut. Joseph Wheeler, of Concord, who received it by grant from the state, and conveyed it to Ralph Shepard. It contained six hun- dred and ten acres, and bounded northeast on the Chelms- ford line; southwest on Nashoba Township; and southeast upon a great pond called Nagog, and so lying in a triangle with the point of said triangle northwest.
Walter Powers bought a part or all of this from Ralph Shepard and heirs of Isaac in 1666 and 1695.
In 1724 Samuel Corey bought eight acres of land, which began at the northeast corner near the pound, and bounded north on the "Improvement," west on Mr. Shattuck's land, and east on a road.
37
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
The hills mentioned in these deeds are the Great Pine Hill, in deed to John Buttock conveying land near the north line of the town. Rocky hill in deed to Samuel Davis; Rattlesnake hill in deed to Jacob Powers, describing two acres of meadow on the south side of this hill, and in deed (1719) to John Thatcher; Brown hill, in deed to William Power, the first child of Walter.
Isaac Powers and Benjamin Shattuck owned land in Turkey swamp. Isaac Powers and Samuel Corey owned a part of Little Rattlesnake meadow. Thomas Blanchard had land in a meadow called "Newton." A part of Samuel Corey's land was in Plain meadow. John Buttrick, Robert Robins and and James Harwood bought land in Sandy meadow.
John Wheeler, Thomas Blanchard and Jonathan Prescott bought parts of Great Indian meadow. Reedy meadow was sold to John Wheeler, John Farr, Caleb Taylor, Samuel Davis, Moses Whitney, Samuel Dudley, Samuel Corey and Jonathan Prescott, Jr.
Flaggy meadow was owned by Eleazur Lawrence and Robert Robins. Long meadow brook ran through land bought by Eleazur Lawrence; Fort Pond brook and Heathen meadow brook, through land of Jonathan Prescott, and "Bever" brook is mentioned in deeds to John Wheeler, Jeremiah Woods, Isaac Powers, Thomas Farr, Benjamin Shattuck, John Parlin, John Daby, Caleb Taylor, Robert Robins, Moses Whitney, Samuel Dudley, Samuel Corey, Jonathan Prescott, William Barrett and Peter Bulkley.
The deeds to John Perham, William Powers, Eleazur Law- rence, William Barrett and James Harwood bounded on Groton line, and the deed to Robert Robins on the west line of the plantation.
Samuel Dudley, Deacon John Merriam of Lexington, and James Burbeen of Woburn, bought land bounding on Long
-
38
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
pond. The lots described in deeds to Paul Dudley, John White and Addington Davenport, bounded southwesterly on highway near Long pond.
Samuel Dudley, Abel Prescott, Samuel Corey and Jonathan Prescott bought land on Fort pond.
GEORGE AUGUSTUS SANDERSON.
AN INCIDENT OF KING PHILIP'S WAR CONNECTED WITH THIS PLACE.
Read at a Meeting of the Society, November 2, 1894, by Herbert Joseph Harwood.
The war led by Philip, of Mount Hope, against the English was the most severe struggle of the Massachusetts and Plymouth Colonies, and one which imperiled their very exist- ence. Philip was a man of great ability and power, well worthy of the title of king, and had succeeded in uniting nearly all the various Indian tribes of southern New England against the English who, owing to a peace of about thirty years preceding, were none too well prepared for war.
It broke out in June 1675, and at first was confined prin- cipally to Plymouth Colony. After various engagements during the summer and fall, the great Swamp Fight took place on December 19, in which, after hard fighting, the Indians were defeated and the stronghold of the Narragansetts captured. This was the turning point of the war, but, unfortunately, the success was not followed up. Philip and the Narragansetts retreated north into the Nipmuck country, now Worcester county, where the Nipmucks made common cause with them. The English forces pursued into the woods between Marl- borough and Brookfield whence, unfortunately, they returned to Boston, early in February, for supplies. This was a fatal blunder, as it left Philip's forces between the Connecticut river towns and those in the eastern part of the colony, in a position
40
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
in which they could strike in either direction, an advantage of which the Indians were not slow to avail themselves, and a series of disasters followed.
On February 1, the Eames family were attacked in Framingham, and ten persons killed or carried captive by Netus, a Nipmuck chief, and his band. On February 10, Lancaster was burned, and about fifty people killed or captured, including Mrs. Rowlandson, and on February 12, the Shepard family living in what was then Concord Village, now a part of Littleton we call Nashoba, was attacked. At this time the Nashobah Indians, about forty-eight in all, of whom about twelve were men, had been removed from their home, and, according to orders of the Council dated November 19 and December 9, put under the care of John Hoar, of Concord, who lived, as Gookin says, "about the midst of the town and very nigh the town watch-house."
Of the Shepard family, Ralph, at some time and perhaps as early as this, lived on the Pickard place. His son Isaac was married, had three children-Isaac, Mary and Samuel-and lived on the south side of Quagana hill, near and probably in the rear of Mr. Jeffrey's. Jacob Shepard was a younger son of Ralph and probably married. Abraham, probably the oldest son was married, and as his place was the Charles Houghton farm, now Mr. Brown's, he may have been living there then. Walter Powers had married Traill, daughter of Ralph Shepard, and as he had bought land of his father-in-law and taken posses- sion of it in 1666, he had, no doubt, built and was living in the garrison-house near by.
Ralph Shepard came to this country in the "Abigail," from Stepney Parish, London, in 1635, at the age of twenty-nine, with his wife Thanklord, or Thankslord, aged twenty-three, and daughter Sarah, aged two. They probably first lived in Water- town, afterwards in Dedham, Weymouth, Rehoboth and Malden,
41
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
where he was a deacon in the church, before coming to this neighborhood where he bought, of Lieut. Joseph Wheeler, of Concord, six hundred and ten acres lying in the form of a triangle between the Indian plantation of Nashobah, and that part of Chelmsford which is now Westford. Nagog pond formed the base of the triangle, and the apex was two miles, one quarter and sixty rods north from the southwest end of Nagog pond, which would bring it to a point on the Westford line, on or near the Deacon Manning farm, but south of the road.
The children of Ralph and Thanklord Shepard were:
Sarah, born in England, 1633.
Abraham, married January 2, 1673, Judith Philbrook.
Isaac, born June 20, 1639 ; married 1667, Mary Smeadly.
Triall, born in Weymouth, December 19, 1641; married January 1, 1660, Walter Powers.
Thankful, born February 10, 1650; married at Chelmsford, December 13, 1669, Peter Dill.
Jacob, born June, 1653. (Perhaps) Ralph, who died January 26, 1711-2, aged 56, at Dedham. (Perhaps) Daniel. Mary, born about 1660-1662.
Neither Isaac or Jacob had education and signed their names with a mark.
At the time of the attack by Indians, February 12, 1675-6, the ground was covered with snow; it had been so deep that snow shoes had been worn by an Indian spy, Job Kattenanit, who arrived in Cambridge February 9, from New Braintree, to warn Major Gookin of the attempt on Lancaster, and on February II more snow fell, as related by Mrs. Rowlandson.
February 12, came on Saturday. Isaac and Jacob Shepard were threshing in their barn, which tradition places on the south side of the lane to Mr. Pickard's house and near the road.
ยท
42
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
Mary, their sister, had been stationed on Quagana hill nearby to watch for Indians, and a tradition told me by Charles W. Reed, places her on a boulder on the southerly side of the hill near the top. While putting very little value on tradition as compared with records and contemporary writings, yet, I will say for this spot that it seems to me a very probable place for a person on the watch, as it would be sightly and at the same time easy to be brushed clear of snow, in order to sit or stand on its flattened top. It is probable the Indians approached from the northerly side of the hill and while Mary, who was a girl of about fifteen years, looked perhaps with longing eyes toward the house, or found it pleasanter to face the south, rushed up and caught her unawares. Amos Leighton, now seventy-nine years of age, gives a tradition to the effect that the chief of the band held Mary while the others made the attack.
Isaac and Jacob were killed, the house burned and Mary carried away captive. That only one house was burned as related in the "Old Indian Chronicle," compiled from tracts of the time, leads me to think that perhaps it and the garrison- house were the only ones then standing, and that the garrison was strong enough to resist the attack. It also occurs to me, that perhaps this fire accounts for the construction, at or near the garrison, of the underground shelter. It was nothing unusual in those days for several families to huddle together for safety in one house, and the two dwellings may easily be imagined to have held all the persons I have mentioned and perhaps others.
Just where the Indians took Mary Shepard, or how long she was absent, I am unable to state. Traditions say that she escaped during the night of the same day, and reached home by early morning; also there is a tradition related by a lady who believes herself descended from Mary Shepard, Mrs.
43
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
Adolphus Merriam, of South Framingham, to the effect that the horse on which she escaped was a mare belonging to the Shepards which was taken by the Indians leaving her colt behind, and that she came home rapidly to find her foal, and announced her arrival by a "whinny." Mr. Joel Proctor adds the tradition that the horse was a pacer.
In this connection it may be interesting to mention a record of horseflesh, in the possession of the Shepards, which I found at the Registry of Deeds in East Cambridge, Vol. II, page 387. It is as follows :
"July 2, 1674. Abram Shepard of Concord hath in his custody a stray mare abt. 7: years old, sorriel, Branded A on the ne'r (near) Buttock, a starr in her forehead."
Was this the animal on which Mary Shepard made her escape? Unfortunately for this interesting story of the family mare, we have contemporary history of a trustworthy kind to disprove it. Hubbard in his "Narrative of the Indian Wars," written about a year after, says of Mary Shepard that she "strangely escaped away upon a horse that the Indians had taken from Lancaster a little before." This would indicate that her captors were among those who attacked and burned Lancaster February 10. Hubbard also says that it was probably Netus and his band who attacked the Shepard family, and there is nothing inconsistent in the two suppositions, but I will speak of Netus later.
Mr. Foster says: "Tradition says that this girl was carried by the savages to Nashawa, now called Lancaster, or to some place in the neighborhood of it." To me it seems certain that she was carried beyond Lancaster, because the notes of Samuel Gardner Drake to the "Old Indian Chronicle" say that Mary Shepard was the girl who escaped and gave intelligence to Capt. Mosley that the Indians were in three towns beyond
44
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
Quoboge, (also spelled Quabaug,) that is Brookfield. The "Chronicle" says :
"Upon this the Governor of Massachusetts sent out about Five hundred or Six hundred Men under the Conduct of Major Thomas Savadge and Captain Mosely as next in Command to him, who having Intelligence by a girl that had made her Escape that the Indians were in three Towns beyond Quoboge, marched thither, whence they joined Major Treat with the Connecticut Forces; but the Enemy were fled : only skulkingly out of the Woods, they shot one of Capt. Mosely's Men and wounded one or two more. But their main Body being closely pursued despersed and ran into Woods and Swamps, so that it was impossible for our Men to come up with them and there- fore marched away for Hadley and Northampton," etc.
This agrees with Mrs. Rowlandson's account of the con- sternation of the Indians and their hurrying her away in an unexpected direction, soon after which she learned that the troops nearly overtook them. As Mary Shepard was no doubt carried beyond Lancaster, it is possible that the tradition of the mare and foal is true to the extent that the colt was left in Lancaster and the mare hurried back there to it, or possibly the colt followed to the Shepard's and was left there.
Mr. Foster continues in relating the tradition, "That in the dead of night She took a saddle from under the head of her Indian keeper when sunk in Sleep increased by the fumes of ardent Spirit, put the Saddle on a horse, mounted on him, swam him across Nashawa river, and so escaped the hands of her captors and arrived safe to her relatives and friends." Mrs. Rowlandson says, however, that the only time during her captivity when she saw any intoxication was just before her release, when John Hoar had given her master some liquor as part of the ransom and he got drunk on it.
Amos Leighton has the tradition that the saddle was under
45
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
Mary Shepard's own head, the chief having given it to her for a pillow, and a blanket to cover her. However the saddle may have been placed, she escaped, and Netus, if he were her captor, must be credited with killing one less person than he might. His career of butchery was soon brought to an end by a death similar to those he had caused, for in the very next month, on March 27, at Marlborough he was killed by a party of English under command of Lieut. Jacobs and his wife was sold. Another of his band, Annecoeken, was dead before the close of summer. Others are mentioned in a warrant for their arrest issued by Thomas Danforth, Magistrate, August II, as follows: "Joshua Assatt, John Dublet Son-in-law to Jacob, William Jackstraw and two of his sons, the name of the one Joseph, also Jackstraw's wife, all of them late of Moguncog Indians."
Three of them, William Wanuckhow, alias Jackstraw, and his two sons, Joseph and John, were examined by Mr. Danforth August 14, and confessed the Eames murders also accusing two others, Joshua Assatt, alias Pakananunquis, then serving under Capt. Hunting of the English force at Marlborough, and Awassaquah who was sick "at the Ponds." The three were committed to prison and Joseph was indicted, with probably the others who were tried September 18.
Barry's History of Framingham, from which I have taken these facts about Netus' band, says further: "How many of their accomplices, if any, were afterward brought to justice does not appear. Gookin states that 'three were executed about Thos. Eames his burning.' The execution took place September 21. 'Two of the murderers' according to the petition of the Eames Sons, 'Old Jacob a chief man sometime at Natick, and Joshua Assunt returned and were pardoned and lived at Natick many years after.'" Danforth's notes of the Examination mention also "Accompanatt alias James Philip,"
46
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
"Apumatquin alias John," "Pumapene of Quabaug and his sonne about 40 years old," and "- (?) of Nashaway (absent) ye wife of Aquetokush, and is sold already." These were perhaps also members of Netus' gang, though not Mogoncocke Indians. "Apumatquin alias John," was no doubt the same John who was son of Wanuckhow, alias Jackstraw, and probably one of the three executed.
Notice that Awassaquah was said to be sick "at the Ponds." There is nothing to indicate that Justice Danforth understood what place was meant by "at the Ponds," but it is somewhat like the meaning of the Indian word Nashobah, and it may be that he was in hiding at this place, probably occupying one of the vacant dwellings of the Nashobah Indians, who by that time were in captivity on Deer Island in Boston harbor, whence they were forcibly removed by Capt. Mosley from John Hoar's keeping, and very few ever returned to Nashobah.
Thus we see that King Philip's war, in which the Shepard family suffered, also fell heavily on the settlement of praying Indians of this place, and caused the plantation to be practically deserted by them, thereby opening the way for the entry of white people which followed soon after.
HERBERT JOSEPH HARWOOD.
THE ERROR ON THE SHATTUCK MONUMENT.
Read at a Meeting of the Society, November 2, 1894, by Edward Frost.
Dates and References to Public Records Verified by the Committee.
The monument erected, some forty years since, in the old burying ground of the Town of Littleton to the memory of its first settled minister, the Rev. Benjamin Shattuck, bears an inscription, giving as his birth-date May 15, 1684, stating that his death occurred in 1763, giving his age, presumably by com- putation from the above, as seventy-nine, and describing him as son of Dr. Philip Shattuck, of Watertown.
The late Samuel Smith, of this place, whose assiduity and habitual accuracy in matters of antiquarian interest are well known, some years since remarked to the present writer that there was a very serious inaccuracy in this inscription; and gave certain particulars, which I made note of at the time, but have never brought forward until now, affording a clear idea of the way in which the error in the inscription may be presumed to have occurred.
He referred, amongst other sources of information, to the Shattuck Memorials, pp. 89-90 .*
.
Well-known facts as to Rev. Benjamin Shattuck are briefly these: He was ordained (first) minister of Littleton, December 25, 1717. The connection was dissolved August 24, 1730; though his salary was continued till May 15, of the following year; and he continued to reside in this town until his death, which, as the inscription states, probably occurred in 1763.
"I believe he was the son," said Mr. Smith, "of William
48
LITTLETON HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
Shattuck, and was born in Watertown, July 30, 1687, (not as the monument has it, May 15, 1684, and son of Dr. Philip Shattuck). His date of birth, his parentage, and his age at decease are, therefore, wrongly inscribed."
The inscription was not supplied by his contemporaries, but was made out three-fourths of a century after his decease.
And here a misapprehension seems to have occurred. A certain other Benjamin Shattuck, who, as we understand, resided, not in Littleton, but in Cambridge, was mistakenly supposed identical with our Rev. Benjamin Shattuck. So the birth-date and parentage of the Cambridge Benjamin were attributed to his clerical namesake; although not transferred to him with absolute accuracy; as Benjamin, son of Philip, pre- sumably afterwards of Cambridge, was born in Watertown March 15, 1684. The monument reads May 15, 1684.
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.