USA > Massachusetts > Essex County > Haverhill > The history of Haverhill, Massachusetts, from its first settlement, in 1640, to the year 1860 > Part 34
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70
Samuel Davis,
Lewis page,
Robert Hastings,
Samuel Davis Junr.
Caleb Currier,
Joseph Kelly,
Jacob Chase,
Robert Hastings Jun,
Ephraim Davis,
John Swett,
Georg Hastings,
Simeon Brown,
Ebenezer Whittier,
Joseph Kelly Jun, John Sanders,
June 1, 1743, the above petition was read in the House of Represen- tatives, and the petitioners were ordered to serve the first parish with a copy of the petition, "that they may shew cause (if any they have) why the prayer thereof should not be granted."
June 9th, a meeting was called to consider the matter, and Joshna Bayley and Captain James Pearsons were chosen a committee to make answer to the General Court in behalf of "the old parish." The fol- lowing is their answer :-
"To His Excellency William Shirley Esqr Governor and Com- mander in Chief in and over His Majesties Province of the Massa- chusetts Bay in New England : And to the Honorble His Majesties Conncil and Honorable House of Representatives in Generall Court assembled at Boston June ye 14th 1743 .-
The answer of the first or Oldest Parish in the Town of Haverhill, to the Petition of the Inhabitants of the Easterly part of said Parish, humbly sheweth .-
That we dont pretend to deny but that the Meeting House in said Parish was erected in ye year 1699, and was then Suitable to ac- comodate the whole Inhabitants who were Settled, tho it was by no means near the center of the Town: We are also ready to own that a great part of Methuen was taken out of the Westerly Part of Haverhill, in ye year 1724 .-
41
322
HISTORY OF HAVERHILL.
That in the year 1730 an other Parish was set off by the name of the North Parish, And in the year 1734, an other Parish was set off by the name of the West Parish, the said Parishes being north and west of our Meeting house.
But that they have petitioned the Parish for ease in the affair and could obtain no help we absolutely deny, for that it may please your Excellency and Honours they were at their requests in the year 1734 set off into a distinct and Separate Parish by a vote of the Parish & a line afixt between us as they desired, but many of the Inhabitants on the Easterly 'side of that line being against being a Parish. When the others petitioned this Great & Honourable Court to be vested with the powers and priviledges of a Parish it was denyed them, & they were turned back to the old Parish againe.
We would farther humbly suggest to your Excellency and Honours that such persons who live in the Easterly part of the Parish & have made proper application, have been eased of their Burthen & charge.
We your Respondents begg leave further to add that in the month of May last there was a vote passed to divide ye Parish, and a line was fixt which we hoped might make a peace in the Parish (tho at the same time we are humbly of opinion that the whole Parish will make but Two very lean Parishes when divided ) & we set off all such persons and their estates who ware desirons to go to the new proposed Parish, Except two or three mentioned below, all tenants but one, but we could not but think it a verry great hardship to force any from us who were desirous to tarry with us, more espetially if they must go farther to the new Meeting-house then to come to the Old One, and we are yet Humbly of the same Opinion & think they had no ground for such complaint. May it please your Excellencies and Honours, it appears to us that we have been tenderly thoughtful in what we have done relating to a divisional line, having set off near one half of the Land & near Sixty Families, yea all that have desired it except two or three men which by our own Act may go with their estates to the new Parish if they please.
Upon the whole we hope that your Excellencies & Honours will not think it needful to send up a Comittee or to force any from the Old Parish that cannot be willing to be parted from it.
We beg that your Excellencies and Honours will be pleased to have a tender regard to the Old Parish that was once the Center of a verry large Town is now become (by the loss of almost all Methuen & three separate Parishes) to be verry small. We would further observe to your Excelleneies & Honours that altho the East- erly part of old Parish was set off in the year 1734 & a line fixt
323
HISTORY OF IIAVERIIILL.
nearer to the old Meeting House than the dividing line fixt in May last, which was occationed by the West Parish (not then set off) Joyning with the Eastermost part of the said old Parish & affixed the line where they pleased which had not been done had the West Parish been set off first. On the whole we humbly begg that your Excellencies & Honours will be pleased to do that for us which in your great wisdome shall be thought best for us, and your humble Respondents as in duty bound shall ever pray &c.
Joshua Bayley ) Committee for & behalf of the James Pearson S old Parish in Ilaverhill.
June 14th, these petitions were read in the House of Representa- tives, and in Council, and a committee was appointed to visit Haver- bill, view the parish, hear the parties, and report.
September 9th, the committee reported in favor of the petitioners for the new parish, and it was accordingly set off. The dividing line was the same as the present
The town having been divided into parishes, a proposition was made to divide the parsonage lands among them, but it was not agreed to.
The following interesting paragraphs, relating to the easterly part of the town, we copy from Mirick :-
"The house of Dr. H. Brown, at Holt's Rocks, was destroyed by fire on the 22d of January (1743), and his daughter, aged 23 years, and a young man who was then living with him, a son of D. Currier, were burnt to death. Their remains were interred in a field, now overgrown with trees, owned by John Johnson Esq., and grave- stones erected to their memory. But they are thrown down and so broken and defaced, that the letters are nearly illegible. With the assistance of Mr. Johnson, we found them, lying flat on the ground, and nearly concealed from view. It is a very romantic situation, on the side of a hill covered with young sycamores, and which slopes gently until it reaches the Merrimack. This gentleman also informs us that other persons, principally infants, were buried in the same place ; but no monuments were erected to their memory, and the mounds have totally disappeared.
The little village at the Rocks, increased very slowly. We were informed by Mr. Phineas Nichols, a venerable gentleman, 94 years of age, that there were but four houses in 1750, and that he could distinctly remember them. They were owned and occupied by Dr. Brown, John Swett, Joseph Burrill, and Mr. Nichols's father. Dr. Brown moved to Fryburg, Maine, soon after."
324
HISTORY OF HAVERIIILL.
From the proprietor's records, of Nov. 21, 1743, we learn that Ed- ward Flynt had leave granted him "to finish a vessel he had put up on the banks of the river near his house," and also to put up any others during the proprietors' pleasure. This is the first mention we find of ship-building since the petition of Springer, ten years before.
From the same records, we learn that John Ayer had recently built a "tan-house," on land given him by the proprietors for that purpose, "in the rear of his father's garden,"* and had also built a bridge across the stream near it. In consideration that he would forever keep the bridge in repair, the proprietors granted him the piece of land west of his tan-house.
By a vote of the town, the parsonage land was, in 1744, divided into lots. A highway, two and a half rods wide, was laid out through the lots "to near the mouth of Little River, and over said river." The expense of the bridges was to come out of the sale of the lots. This highway was that now called Merrimack Street. The lots were laid ont on the north side of it, and numbered from east to west, the lot cornering on Merrimack and Main Streets, (known these many years as "White's Corner,") being "Lot Number One."
The width of the highway through these lots forms a striking con- trast to that of the road from Sander's Hill to the Merrimack above Holt's Rocks, which was laid out among the first in the town. The latter was twelve rods wide. This extreme width, however, became in time the cause of a deal of trouble to the town, and about the time of which we now write, the "twelve rod way" was almost continually before the town meetings. It was finally (1754) narrowed down to four rods in width, and the surplus, amounting to nineteen acres and eighty-two rods, sold to various persons along the line of the road.
The setting up of ship-builders in town seems to have been fol- lowed, as a matter of course, by the establishment of more blacksmiths. Thus we find that, soon after Springer was allowed to set up the busi- ness, in 1733, John Gage petitioned the proprietors for liberty to set up a blacksmith's shop near the river, - which was granted; and no sooner had Flynt received permission to establish a ship-yard, than Edmund Greenleaf applied for liberty to set up a blackmith's shop near the same,-which was also granted.
Having erected a meeting-house, and settled a minister, the East Parish immediately applied to the town for some land for a parson- age, which was granted the following spring (1745). The land thus laid out to them was valued at "£1200 old tenor."
Thomas Cottle petitioned the town, in 1745, for liberty to estab-
* Near the west end of Ayer's (now Plug) Pond.
325
HISTORY OF HAVERIIILL.
lish a ferry near his house : and as he represented that the ferry might "be sarvicable to the town and other travailers," and offered to ferry the town's people one-fourth cheaper than strangers, his petition was granted. This made the number of ferries across the Merrimack at that time, between the village and Holt's Rocks, no less than five, viz :- Swett's, at Holt's Rocks ; Cottle's at the mouth of East Meadow River (Cottle's Creek) ; Pattee's, near the present house of David Nichols; Mulikin's, where the chain ferry now is, and Griffin's, near- ly opposite the foot of the present Lindell Street, at the village.
In 1746, the town voted to exempt the first, or "old" parish, from paying anything for any other school in town, provided they would keep a grammar school constantly in their own parish, at their own expense.
At this period, the rates, or taxes, were made out in "lists," and placed in the hands of collectors, who were nsnally constables .* As each man paid, his name was checked, and sometimes, (if he was par- ticular to require it) he also received the collector's written receipt. The amount on each collector's book, or list , was charged to him, and he was obliged to pay the whole amount into the treasury, within a reasonable time, whether he had collected it or not. The only way in which he could dispose of a hard customer's tax, was, either to col- lect it in some way, or pay it out of his own pocket, or induce the town, by a special vote, to "forgive" him the amount. At first, the collec- tors were not allowed any pay whatever for their services ; and it was not until 1780 that a regular commission was given them. It was then voted to allow them a "Poundage of Four Pence on Twenty Shillings."
That the office was no sinecure, is seen from the fact that for more than a hundred years the town's rule was, that if a man was chosen constable, he must either "stand," procure a substitute acceptable to the town, or pay a fine of five pounds, unless he was "excused," which was not common. We could probably fill an entire page with the names of those who took the last-named horn of the dilemma.
After the town was divided into parishes, each parish collected its own minister tax, in its own way. The First Parish frequently col- lected its minister tax in the following manner :- A contribution, as it was called, was taken every Sabbath afternoon, when any per- son who wished to pay his tax in this manner, had liberty to pay such a sum as he pleased. Each person was ordered to fold his money in a paper, and write his name and the amount within. A person was
*For many years there was only one constable, or collector, in the town. Afterward, two were chosen-one for the portion east of the Little River, the other for that on the west. Still later, one was chosen for each Parish.
.
326
HISTORY OF HAVERHILL.
yearly appointed to receive these monies, and pass the amount to the credit of the name within written. If no name was written within the paper, it was considered as a free gift to the minister, and was disposed of as such. In the early days of the Colony, the contribu- tion was usually made by each going up to the "Deacons' seat," and depositing his offering. The magistrates and the chief men led off, and the others followed in order, down to the youngest, and the hum. blest. This custom declined about 1665.
The following brief list of names of persons residing in this town, in 1747, with the trade or occupation of each, is compiled from vari- ous papers in the State Archives, and is not without interest. We introduce it, as we introduce many other lists of names, principally for the purpose of aiding those who may be interested in tracing the genealogy and history of families :-
James Pecker, an a Potacary, Jonathan Webster, Hatter, Edmond Mors, a Shoomaker or Cord- Andrew Frink, Shipwrite, winder,
Daniel Appleton, Joyner,
Mr Trask, Brick-Layer,
James Parson, Husbandman. John Byenton, Blacksmith,
Ebenezer Hale, Cordwinder,
William Hancock, farmer.
grant Webster, Marchant,
Nathaniel Knolton, Tayler,
The year 1748, was another year of trouble in our town affairs, as will be seen from the array of documents which follow.
At the annual meeting, March 1st, Nathaniel Peaslee was declared chosen moderator, whereupon Samuel White and fifteen others, pro- tested against his officiating, on the ground that "he was not chosen according to Law." After vainly attempting to have the proceed- ings conducted "according to law," the disaffected retired from the meeting, and those who remained proceeded to choose the other officers, and transact the other business of the town.
The "bolters" did not, however, rest quietly under the new admin- istration, but immediately petitioned the General Court, in substance, as follows :-*
The meeting of March Ist was called to order by Nathaniel Peaslee, one of the selectmen for the previous year, who ordered votes to be
* The petition is dated March 3d, 1748, and signed by fifty-nine of the inhabitants.
327
HISTORY OF HAVERIIILL.
brought in for a moderator, and was himself elected, or chosen by a majority of two rotes. The petitioners claimed that several votes were cast illegally, and more than seven of them at the time "re- quested that the vote might be decided by the Poll, but the Modera- tor refused to allow it," and declared that the law of deciding votes by the Poll did not take place till after a moderator was chosen. The petitioners claimed that persons were allowed to vote at the meeting who were not qualified by law-were not "Inhabitants nor Freehold- ders in said Town of Haverhill, nor even in the Province of Massa- chusetts Bay, but in New Hampshire," and that the votes of some who were qualified were refused. The petitioners therefore prayed that some one might be appointed by the Court to look into the matter.
The following are the names of the petitioners :-
Henry Springer,
Edward Flint,
John Cogswell, Jacob Sanders,
Joseph Badger,
James Pecker,
Nathaniel Walker,
Nathaniel Johnson,
John Sanders,
Abner Kimball,
Richard Harriman,
Nathll Sanders,
Richard Emerson,
Stephen Huse,
Samuel Ayer,
Abraham Kimball,
Stephen Harriman,
Thomas Haynes,
John Pecker,
Joshua Sawyer,
John Hinkley,
James McHard,
Richd Hazzen,
David Ayer,
Will hancock,
James Chase,
Nathaniel Knowlton.
Grant Webtser,
Nathaniel Rolfe,
Ebenezar Buck,
John Sawyer,
Nathll Balch,
Jonathan Simones,
Samuel White,
Andrew frink,
Daniel Davies,
Benja Gale,
Peter Ayer,
Edmund Greenleaf,
Joseph Patten,
Jacob Ayer,
Symonds Greenough,
Samll Appleton,
Ithamor Emerson,
William Greenleaf,
Samll White Jun,
Simon Ayer,
Ebenezer Hale,
Edmd Mooers,
Samuel Hasaltine,
Nathan Haseltine,
Daniel Appleton,
Joshua Page,
Jonathan Webster,
John Smylie,
John Gage,
Andrew Mitchel.
Samuel Johnson,
Moses Clements,
From a certificate attached to the petition, it appears that the pe- titioners held a meeting, and chose John Sanders and Peter Ayer to present their petition to the General Conrt.
Accompanying the petition, they sent fourteen depositions, signed by twenty-eight of the other inhabitants of the town, in further sup- port of their charges.
Other reasons for declaring the doings of the meeting of March 1st illegal are contained in a deposition of Joshua Sawyer, and others, under date of September 17, 1748, of which the following is an ex- tract :-
"There was not any List of Valuation Read nor any List of Non Vo- ters nor any Wrighting of what name or nature Soever by which the
328
HISTORY OF HAVERHILL.
Selectmen did Pretend to Shew who was qualified by Law to Vote in Town affairs nor who was not qualified to vote in Town affairs until after the second time of Voting for the Moderator nor until some Con- siderable time after Mr Nathaniel Peasle Had taken the Seat of and Officiated as Moderator by Calling to the People to Bring in their Votes."
To the above mentioned petition, the selectmen of 1747 and 1748, and others of the inhabitants, made reply in substance, as follows :-
The petition of Sanders and others contained false and abusive as- sertions ; the petitioners were a number of uneasy persons, the greater part of whom came lately from other towns to reside among them, and were continually stiring up contentions in the town ; that lately inany of them were engaged in a vile riot in town, for which some of them were to appear before the Hon. Judge Berry, at Ipswich, on the day of the annual meeting, had they not agreed with the man whom they had chiefly abused, for a considerable sum of money ; that they took advantage of the great depth of snow, and consequent in- ability of those living in the remote parts of the town from coming to the meeting, to gain some advantage to themselves ; that John Sanders was greatly prejudiced against moderator Peaslee, because the latter had exposed and prevented the former from obtaining more money from the Province than belonged to him, by a false account ; the moderator was duly and legaly chosen, and had the Rev. Mr. Bar- nard open the meeting with prayer ; and many of the petitioners were not qualified to vote, and some were not even residents of the town.
The petition is dated March 28, 1748, and signed by
John Ladd,
Jonathan Marsh,
Thomas Dustin,
Barachias Farnham,
Selectmen for ye yr A Dom 1747
John Ladd, Thomas Johnson, William Ayer,
Selectmen for the Year A Dom 1748
Reuben Currier, Wm mitchel, Jona mitchel,
Ebenezer Colby,
Amos Peaslee,
John Chase,
Joseph Grele,
William George,
Humphrey Chase,
Thomas Eatton,
Daniel Ela,
Israel Ela,
Joseph Haseltine,
Lewis Page,
Joseph Whittier,
Nathaniel Chase, Daniel Lad Jun, Joseph Merrill, Richard Bayley,
Thos Cottle, moses Davis,
Gideon George,
Jacob Ela,
Joseph Tyler,
Ephraim Marsh,
George Hastings,
John Haseltine,
James Pike, Jonathan Haynes,
Samuel Peaslee, Edward Carleton,
Ezra Chase,
Stephen Webster Jun.
Daniel Johnson, Samuel Webster, John Gorge, Samuel Whiticker, David Whiticker,
John Eatton, Town Clerk James Gild,
Samuel Guild,
Abraham Page,
329
HISTORY OF HAVERHILL.
Joseph Hutchins,
Stephen Whiticker,
Cornelius Johnson,
Jeremiah Bayley,
Edward ordway,
Saml Shepard,
Timothy Emerson,
Micah Emrson,
James holgate,
Ebenezer Bayley,
Samuel Emerson,
Ebenezr Whittier,
Thomas Page, John Emerson,
Nehemiah Bradly,
Jonathan Emerson,
Robart Hunkin jr,
Amos Bayley,
James Eatton,
John morrison,
Jonathan Emerson Jun, Daniel Meerie,
benjamin greely,
James Haseltine,
Jonathan Marble,
Peter Green,
John marbel,
Nathaniel Webster,
Maverick Johnson,
Under date of March 29th. 1748, we find a petition signed by twenty- seven of the " freeholders & inhabitants," who therein deelare that they were not present at the annual meeting, on account of the great depth of snow, but had heard of the proceedings, and prayed that the petition of Sanders, and others, be not granted. The following names are attached to this petition : -
John Edwards, Jonathan Duston Ju,
Nathll Clement, Thomas Corlis,
Joseph Kelly,
John Corlis,
James Sanders,
Joseph Bradley,
Joseph Dow,
Robart Hunkins, Benjamin Clement,
Joseph Kelley Jr,
Samuel Ela, Joseph Emerson,
Samuel Davis Jr,
Timothy Eatton,
William Johnson,
Moses Eatton,
Phillip Haseltine,
Samuel Clements,
Samuel Gage,
John Smith, Daniel Lad,
John Corlis Ju,
Nathan Webster,
Thomas Bayley,
Moses Hazzen.
The committee to whom these several petitions were referred, re- ported " that the town meeting held on the first day of March be sett a side, & that the selectmen for the year 1747 grant a new Warrant for the Choice of all ordinary Town officers that Towns by Law are Ena- bled to choose ; " the meeting to be held sometime in April. The report was accepted.
A town meeting was accordingly convened, on the 26th of April, at which the officers chosen March Ist, were all re-chosen, except, that Thomas Duston was chosen a selectman in the place of Moses Clement. This was not, however, in the opinion of "John Pecker and others," done " according to law," and they promptly " dissented."
Soon after, (May 25, 1748,) Richard Saltonstall, and forty-one others, presented a memorial to the General Court, in which they set forth that " the affairs of the second meeting were conducted with more wickedness partiality and premeditated corruption than the first; " that the select- men, (who were also assessors) "to cure their great Neglect in not Valueing the Estates and faculties of the Inhabitants," had, after their 42
John Green,
330
HISTORY OF HAVERHILL.
term of office had expired, made a pretended valuation, by which they disqualified some of the opposite party, and admitted others who were clearly not entitled to vote, - all for the purpose of carrying their own points in governing the choice of officeis; that the cause of all the un- casiness among the inhabitants, was the belief that the selectmen, or some of them, had combined with the Town Treasurer, (who was also Town Clerk) "to Imbezell large sums of the publick money & apply it to their own use." They therefore prayed for a new meeting, to be presided over by a disinterested moderator, and that the transactions of the last meeting be set aside.
The following names are attached to the memorial : ---
Richa Saltonstall,
Will hancock,
Richard Emerson,
Joshua Bayley,
Joshua Page,
Grant Webster,
John Pecker,
Jacob Sanders,
Peter Ayer,
John Sanders, Jno White,
Joseph Badger,
Nathll Sanders,
Samll Appleton,
Ithamar Emerson,
John Ayer, Benja Gale,
Nathaniel Knowlton,
Jonathan Simonds,
Edmund Greenleaf,
Andrew frink,
Joseph Patten,
Edmund Mooers,
John Boynton,
Richd Hazzen,
Nathaniel Walker,
Stephen Huse,
Nathel Balch,
Jacob Ayer,
Moses Clements,
Jas Pecker,
Nathaniel Rolfe,
Ebenezer Hale,
Win Brady,
Jonathan Webster,
John Smylie,
Simon Ayer,
James McHard,
Nathan hesseltine.
Abraham Kimball,
Samuel White,
The General Court ordered the petitioners to serve the selectmen and moderator with a copy of their petition, and June 15th was assigned for a hearing of the parties." On account of the sickness " of divers of the principal persons," who subscribed the last mentioned petition, the hearing was postponed to the next day, when a committee was appointed "to hear the parties who are now in Town," and report .; The consideratien was, however, again postponed to September, when the committee rercited that the proceedings of the second meeting be set aside and declared null and
" The Soleetmen in their response to the General Court, on the memorial of Saltonstall, and others, deny any attempt at partiality in accepting or refusing votes; leave the Town Treasurer to vindicate I'mself; declare that all their own transactions in town affairs are open for the town to examine; and close by declaring the memorial false and vexations.
t We find a paper, dated Boston, June 17, 1748, and signed by the Seleetmen on the one part, and Nathaniel Sanders and Joseph Patten for the memorialists on the other part, agreeing for peace on the following conditions :
The memorialsts are to drop their petition on condition that a new town meeting be held, and that a disinterested committee be chosen to settle with the Town Treasurer, on which committee no selectman or member of a former committee should be placed.
331
HISTORY OF HAVERHILL.
void, and a new meeting be called; and as no valuation had been taken the present year, " according to Law," that the valuation of 1747 be the rule for regulating the votes. The Court adopted the report, and appointed John Choate, Esq., to be moderator of the meeting.
Accordingly, a meeting was holden on the 22d of November, when Mr. . Choate" presided. and the same persons were for the third time chosen toun officers ! But this time they were chosen " according to Law "!
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.