USA > Massachusetts > Dukes County > Marthas Vineyard > The history of Martha's Vineyard, Dukes County, Massachusetts, Volume I > Part 25
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
255
History of Martha's Vineyard
from a charitable fund" for his support.1 How long this had ceased is not known, but we may assume as early as 1770, the time of the Boston Massacre. Mr. Mayhew continued his labors, however, throughout the war period, with what support he could procure from the religious and charitable societies. For a period of eleven years after 1775, when hos- tilities broke out, the old "New England Company" made no contributions whatever for the missionary work in this region, but in 1786 diverted its revenues to New Brunswick. In 1794 another society with similar objects was contributing to the support of Rev. Mr. Mayhew and Rev. Joseph Thaxter for services as missionaries.2 By this time, through inter- marriage with negroes, the native population had increased to 440, of whom the larger part lived at Gay Head, and the work was not lessening as far as numbers were involved. Zachariah continued this work until his death, which occurred on March 6, 1806, in the eighty-eighth year of his age and the thirty-ninth of his ministry.3 He was the last of his name to pursue this unique vocation, which had been a family distinction for one hundred and sixty-three years, a record practically unpar- alleled in the history of our country.
His successor was the Rev. Frederick Baylies, son of Frederick Baylies of Taunton, Mass., where he was born in 1774, and about 1810 came to this island to take up the missionary work. Of him a contemporary visitor records the following opinion: "He was a true-hearted man and highly useful in the sphere allotted to him. He labored diligently among them for some twenty-five years. The first time I visited the Island he was hale and vigorous, devoted to his work and much interested in the furtherance of liberal views of Christianity. His salary was about 550 dollars, a portion of which he expended for the support of Teachers among the Indians on the Vineyard, Nantucket, and Cape Cod. Under his instruction and preaching the Indians have a good deal improved."4 Mr. Baylies died suddenly on a canal boat,
1He was joined in this petition by Rev. Gideon Hawley, missionary to the Mashpee Indians. The request was granted.
2Brief account of the Society for Propogating the Gospel among the Indians and others in North America, 1798. This society was incorporated in 1787, and was known as the S. P. G. The other was called the S. P. C. K. Several "small schools for Indian children" on the Vineyard were also maintained by this society.
3Hallock, " The Venerable Mayhews," etc., p. 61.
4Devens, "Sketches of Martha's Vineyard," 28. Mr. Baylies became much inter- ested in the history and genealogy of the island and its people, and left numerous papers on the subject, some of which have been of use to the author of this work.
256
REV. FREDERICK BAYLIES 1774-1836
MISSIONARY TO THE INDIANS
The Missionary Mayhews
while traveling in New York State, Sept. 30, 1836, having an apoplectic stroke, in the sixty-third year of his age.
Since the death of Mr. Baylies there has been no regular missionary to the Indians of the Vineyard. The Society for Propagating the Gospel Among the Indians and Others in North America has intermittently made donations to the church at Gay Head, and owns the present church and par- sonage. The annual gift to the mission is $150, and has been continued for the past twenty years.
The religious faith of the worshippers, however, is Bap- tist, and the clergyman in charge is of that faith. For this reason the mission has received annually from the Massachu- setts Baptist Missionary Society a grant of $roo for the sup- port of the minister.1 The present missionary is the Rev. W. H. Whitman, and regular services are maintained under his supervision.
1 The society, since its first contribution in 1855, has given a total of $3910.84 to the Gay Head mission,
257
History of Martha's Vineyard
CHAPTER XX.
COUNTY OF DUKES COUNTY.
ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION.
On the first day of November, 1683, the Provincial As- sembly of New York divided the province into several counties and incorporated them by name, including Kings (now Brook- lyn), Queens (Long Island), and Dukes, the last being decreed to "conteine the Islands of Nantuckett, Martin's Vineyard, Elizabeth Island, and Noe Man's Land."1
Laws were made at the same time, regulating the times of holding courts; but "Dukes County was referred to the Governeur and Counsell." The following also was then passed: "And forasmuch as there is a necessity of a high sheriffe in every county thro' the Province, Be it enacted by the Governor, Counsell, and Representatives in General As- sembly met, and by the authority of the same, that there shall bee, yearly, and every year, a High Sheriffe constituted and commissionated for each county; and that each Sheriffe may have his under-sheriffe, deputy or deputies."
The effect of these laws was to combine the separate jurisdictions of the Vineyard and Nantucket and to add another office or two to the civil list, which was promptly filled by Matthew Mayhew, who seemed to feel that nothing was too small for his attention from chief magistrate down to register of deeds. Nantucket heretofore had been conducting its own affairs under a local autonomy subject to a certain suzerainty of the Mayhew proprietary government, while the outlying Elizabeth Islands with Noman's Land were under the jurisdiction of the Lord of Tisbury Manor. The county now being organized the officials met at Nantucket and passed the following order respecting the courts on Sept. 21, 1686: -
Its ordered by the Court that henceforward the Court shall be held the last Tuesday in May at Nantucket, and the last Tuesday in September at Mathews Vinard.
Sept. 21, 1686, The Court is adjourned to this day senit or till Mr. Mayhew come.2
IN. Y. Col. Mss., Vol. XXXI.
2Nantucket Records, II, 38. "Senit" is an abbreviation of Sennight, or seven nights, meaning a week.
258
County of Dukes County
This county organization continued to exist as outlined during the few remaining years of its connection with the province of New York, until by the charter of William and Mary it became on Oct. 7, 1691, a constituent county of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
At the time of the incorporation of Dukes County there were only four counties in Massachusetts, namely: Essex, Middlesex, and Suffolk, which were each incorporated May 10, 1643, and Hampshire, May 7, 1662. Next came Barnstable and Plymouth, June 2, 1685, followed by Bristol on June 21, I685.
The people of Nantucket did not desire to have further connection with Martha's Vineyard, after the separation from New York, and wished to dissolve the county organization and become a separate county by themselves. Requests for this arrangement were made to the General Court of Massachu- setts in 1694, by the leading men of Nantucket. The follow- ing communication from Matthew Mayhew, acting for the governor and council, to the petitioners shows the progress of the matter at that date: -
Gent.
Mart: Vineyard Sept'r: 28: 1694
on motion to the Governor and Counsell of the province of the Massa- chusetts Bay in New England intimating the present state of that part thereof formerly Dukes County, through some misinformation, to be abridged of the libertie of subjects to the Crown of England the further consideration is remitted till your selves appear at Boston there to them render your reason for your urgent desier of your seperation out of s'd County, my self being desired to give you notice that his Excellency Sr William Phips in Councill will hear the same in their Convention begin- ning tusday the 16 of October next when it will bee expected you should therefore render your reasons therefore. I am gentl. Your humble servant
MATTHEW MAYHEW
To the worship:
John Gardner James Coffin & William Geyer Esqrs on Nantuckett.
"If I may adventur," wrote Simon Athearn to the General Court on March 12, 1694-5, "to shew my opinion concerning marthas vineyard & Nantucket being a County as when under York - It will be uneasy to the Inhabitants, and disturb peace and Trad, But it will be most easy for each Island to keepe their particular sessions at home & in case of appeale to sum superior Court: Besides it will be a province Charge
259
History of Martha's Vineyard
to heire a vessel onc a year to Carry the Justices of the Su- pearior Court to Marthas Vineyard or Nantucket."1
This suggestion was effective. Nantucket continued to be a part of Dukes County until the seventh year of the reign of William III. On the 29th of May, 1695, the following act was passed by the General Court of Massachusetts: -
AN ACT FOR THE BETTER SETTLEMENT OF THE ISLANDS OF MARTHA'S VINEYARD, AND ISLANDS ADJACENT.
Be it enacted by the Lieutenant Governour, Council, and Representatives convened in General Court, or Assembly, and by the authority of the same: That the Islands of Martha's Vineyard, Elisabeth Islands, the Islands called Nomans-Land, and all the Dependencies formerly belonging to Dukes County, (the Island of Nantuckett only excepted) shall be, remain and continue to be One County, to all intents and purposes; by the name of Dukes County:
It was further provided that appeal of cases should be to the Superior Court at Plymouth and jurors be summoned from both counties. There was also a provision for
The Island of Nantuckett to remain and continue under the same Form of Government as is already there settled: And Appeals from the Judgments given or to be given in the Inferiour Court of Pleas within the said Island, to be heard and tryed in the Superior Court of Judicature to be held at Boston within the County of Suffolk, as is by law provided.2
Whether intended or not this statute created a county "by the name of Dukes County" instead of "Dukes," and in consequence all legal phraseology used in connection therewith has always read "County of Dukes County" and it so continues down to the present day.3
This reduction of the limits of the county to Martha's Vineyard alone was not entirely satisfactory to the people of this island, as it threw the management of affairs back into the family "ring," and the old agitation began once more. Simon Athearn again wrote a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr. James Converse, June 23, 1699, in which he voices the sentiment of the opposition: -
Wee in our discors, by the way, have thought it well that duks County was annext to barnstabl County, only it would increst a perpetuall Charg.
1Mass. Col. Archives, CXIII, III.
2Province Laws, Vol. I, c. 7, Act of May 29, 1695.
3The words "County of Dukes County" are used in the Land Records, viz :- the first time in Vol. I, p. 160, Feb. 24, 1702; Vol. II, p. 3, Oct. 29, 1703; Vol. II, p. 238, Mar. 20, 1706; Vol. IV, p. 273, Oct. 2, 1707, and Vol. II, p. 160, Mar. 3, 1707-8.
260
County of Dukes County
But duks County want able Larned men to Ingaig such a subtell serpent who is headgd about with so many relations thats its thought theres scarse a Jury to be found to try suit against him or his. . . . . 1
As the Elliment of fier would have all fier so have Major Mayhew and his have used all means to have all Rule in his house except a Cifer to make the summ. Its probable being annext to Barnstabl County may be a remedy.2
Athearn further said that he had thought of preferring a petition "in Consideration of these and other things," but it does not appear that this was done. Matters did not improve, but the atmosphere was different under Massachusetts rule from the old New York oligarchy.
This changed political condition encouraged the oppo- nents of the existing official family, which had gradually re- gained its power, to further efforts to shake off the continued yoke of family judges on the bench. Of the four justices at this time three were Mayhews (with Richard Sarson), and the minority member was James Allen of Chilmark. Under the lead of Simon Athearn of Tisbury, in all probability, the fol- lowing vote was passed in that town in 1701, to influence the sentiment for the termination of this condition: -
october 2d: 1701 it is voted by the maiger part of of the freeholders at a Leagall town meeting that Tisbury do pettion to the General Court that Dukes County may be anext to the County of barnstable with . . . not to attend the Courts Except nessasary ocation ariseth from amongst us and that the Register of Lands of the Island be kept on marthas vin- yerd.3
Nothing came of this however, but it was the early begin- ning of a long struggle, continuing for nearly two centuries, to remove the courts from Edgartown, and to keep them at that time from family management and influence.
From this time until the year 1717, Nantucket Island alone constituted Nantucket County. In that year it was
Ordered, that Tuckanuck is . ... to be accounted a part of Nantucket . ... and the Justices and all other officers of Dukes County are com- manded to take notice of this Resolve. This was the result of repeated efforts asking for annexation.4
1This refers to Matthew Mayhew. 2Sup. Jud. Court Files, No. 4605. (8)
3Tisbury Records, p. 43.
4June 5, 1711, James Coffin, Tristram Coffin, and others, petitioned the General Court that Tuckanuck be annexed to Nantucket County .- (Mass. Archives, Vol. XXXI, page 85.) Later on, June 6, 1713, James Coffin, of Nantucket, petitioned the General Court "that Tuckanug be annexed to Nantucket township." -- (Nan- tucket Records, Vol. I, page 79.)
261
History of Martha's Vineyard
These were not the only attempts of the people to enlarge their county bounds. At a legal town meeting of the town of Sherborne, on Nantucket, June 6, 1771,
Voted, That a petition be preferred to the General Court to desire and request that the islands of Muskekit and Gravelly Island me be an- nexed to this County.
Voted, That Abishai Folger, Esq., Zaccheus Macy, Frederick Folger, Josiah Barker, and Timothy Folger, in conjunction with the Selectmen of the town, be a committee, in behalf of the town, to draw up said peti- tion, and send the same to the General Court.
At a town meeting in Edgartown, Sept. 4, 1771, it was
Voted, That an answer should be made to a petition put into the General Court, by the town of Sherborne relative to the Island of Mos- kekett and the Gravelly Islands adjacent.
Voted, That there should be a committee chosen consisting of five men: and Voted, That John Norton, Esqr., Mr. John Pease, Jr., Mr. William Jernegan, Mr. Beriah Norton, and Mr. Ebenezer Smith, Jr., be a committee to make answer to the said petition.
V'oted, That Enoch Coffin and John Worth, Esqr., be added to this committee.1
At a town meeting in Sherborne on the Island of Nan- tucket, Sept. II, 1771,
Voted, That a remonstrance be sent to the Governor to lay the state of inoculation before him in a true light, and to desire him to sign a bill to annex Muskeket and Gravelly Islands to this County, by a majority of 114 voices against 4.
A committee was chosen to prepare and present it.
The petition of Abishai Folger and others was presented in July, 1771. A bill passed both branches making the an- nexation prayed for, but the governor refused his assent. In other words, using the language of these latter days, he vetoed it.
On Oct. 19, 1805, the town of Chilmark, at a special meeting, voted that a committee of three persons, Benjamin Bassett, Matthew Mayhew, and Allen Mayhew, be authorized to petition the General Court "to alter the name of Dukes County to that of Mayhew."2 It is not known whether this was expressive of any general sentiment among the people of the Vineyard, but it may be assumed to the contrary as no other town took similar action, and there is no further record of this in the archives of the Commonwealth.
1Edgartown Records, I, 295.
2Town Records, Chilmark, loc. cit.
262
County of Dukes County
EARLY JUDICIAL AFFAIRS OF THE COUNTY.
The organization of an Anglo-Saxon community is incom- plete without definite provisions for the administration of justice between man and man and for the application of laws for the protection of the community by wise and honorable men. That such machinery was established on the Vineyard early must be accepted as a fact, without the recourse to our records which are silent on the subject for a decade after the settlers came hither. The first suit at law was heard in Decem- ber, 1652, but before whom does not appear, but the next entry states that "the town hath ended the case between John Pease and Edward Sales," and from this we may suppose that it was a sort of neighbor's court which settled differences between the townsmen.1 It will be remembered that their number was few, and probably did not exceed by many an ordinary jury of adult males at that period. Doubtless these improvised "courts" were presided over by Thomas Mayhew, Senior, as patentee. Early in 1654 a "Verdict of the Court" is mentioned, and on June 6, that same year, seven men were chosen "to end all controversy, except member, Life, and Banishment, and to keep a meeting quarterly namely four times in a year."
A further provision was made "that Mr. Mayhew senior shall have power in his hands to end any debt or controversy to the order of five shillings between any in this town."? In 1655 a chief magistrate and four assistants were chosen "to attend all Controversies that shall arise in the town," and determine them at quarterly courts held on the last Tuesdays of March, June, September, and December. If they could not arrive at a unanimous decision, "then such cases are to be referred to the town to end; that is such as are admitted to be townsmen.''3 Each magistrate could settle a case involving five shillings or under. In 1656 the number of assistants was further reduced to two, with Thomas Mayhew still continuing as presiding justice. In 1659 a case is entered where two arbitrators were chosen by each side, "and those four persons have liberty to choose an umpire to end the case in case they cannot agree."4 It will thus be seen that the early court pro- ceedings were of the simplest kind, beginning with a sort of
1Edgartown Records, I, 149. 2Ibid., I, 122. 3Ibid., I, 137. 4Ibid., I, 142.
263
History of Martha's Vineyard
neighborhood jury or town meeting, wherein all had a voice in deciding between litigants, and gradually adopting the forms which obtained in other communities. The following rule in relation to the sessions of the General Court were adopted in I660: -
The time of meeting att Court is at Nine of the Clock in the morning and all meetings are to continue till they are Disolved by the major part of the freemen. The fine for not coming in season is 12d. and for going away before the meeting is Dissolved.1
In March, 1658, we find the first reference to a trial by jury on the town records of Edgartown, fifteen years after the settlement of the island, as follows: -
It is ordered by the town that all cases are to be ended this present year by the magistrate with an original jury which shall be chosen by the town consisting of such a number as the town shall judge needful for the end of all such cases as shall be presented to be judged and determined: that is to say all cases within the compass of life members and banish- ment: and this jury is to be chosen at the town meeting which are to be four times a year according to the former order by the major part of the freemen.
Moreover in all cases which shall exceed the value of five pounds being first here ended and the Plaintiff or Defendant remaining unsatisfied either of them have liberty to redress himself by an appeal to (a) bigger Court and that the estate of him which maketh the appeal shall stand bound to answer all of the charges which shall be occasioned by the re- moval of the suit if he be cast in the suit.2
What was meant by a "bigger court" is not clear, whether a larger jury or a court in the Province of Maine, to which it was possible to appeal under the proprietary rights of Gorges, may be left to our surmises. It is, however, of record that in 1662 a case was heard by the Plymouth Courts which was certainly "bigger" than the Vineyard Court, but its jurisdic- tion was only by courtesy of a reference. As it was a suit in which Thomas Mayhew was personally interested and involved, the Plymouth justices were requested to hear it "by joynt con- sent of both partyes."3
In 1663 there is a record of a verdict "assented unto by Thomas Mayhew," possibly as presiding justice, or in his as-
1Edgartown Records, I, 147.
2Ibid., I, 157.
3Plymouth Col. Rec., IV, 27; VII, 104. The case was John Daggett versus "the towne of the said Vineyard." In 1669 Richard Sarson entered suit at Plymouth against Nicholas Butler for killing a steer that belonged to the widow of Thomas Mayhew, Jr. "The jury saied to this action non liquet." (Ibid.) Nantucket cases were also tried at Plymouth.
264
County of Dukes County
sumption of greater powers under his patent. In the same year there is reference to "the small court" and "the monthly court," which perhaps may mean sessions held by one magis- trate. The jurors by a vote passed in 1664, were to be paid "six pence a fee for every action," equal to about half a dollar of our currency in relative value. In 1665, as elsewhere told, the elder Mayhew appealed a case, which went against him, "unto the Cheif & high Court and Counsell of the Province of Mayne," but it is doubtful if the appeal was ever accom- plished. In 1669 is another reference to a "small court holden," which implies, of course, a "large court;" and of this we have one glimpse indicating an organized bench sitting as a general court in 1670, with Thomas Daggett as clerk. How long it had been established as such does not appear, but on Aug. 3, 1670, it sat to hear a suit for divorce, James Skiff vs. Eliza- beth Skiff, on a charge of desertion, and the plaintiff was awarded the verdict. The proceedings of this "General Court" were certified by Daggett in his capacity as "Clarke to the Court att the Vineyard."1 All these courts had only the status of common acceptance, as the Vineyard was without any jurisdiction, practically, and had no charter or authorized agencies to carry on legal measures. When the Duke of York assumed control order came out of this chaos.
The Fort James Conference of July 6-12, 1671, made definite provisions for the organization of a judicial system. It was enacted by the Governor and Council of New York "that for Tryall and Decision of all Differences of Debt or Damage to the Vallue of Five Pounds, they shall have a Court in their Island wch shall bee composed of the Governor there who shall have a double vote and three Assistants to be Elected annually by the Inhabitants of the two Townes and Plantacons upon the Island, from whose Judgment in any case to the Sume of Five Pounds or under noe appeale shall be admitted." In all actions and cases over five pounds and under fifty pounds hearing was to be had "at the General Court to bee held by them and their Neighbours of Nantuckett, that is to say by the Governor or Chiefe Magistrate of Martin's Vineyard and the first two elected of the three Assistants aforesaid, and by the Chiefe Magistrate of Nantucket and his two Assistants." Governor Mayhew was designated as president of the court as long as he lived, with a double or casting vote. The first ses- sion of the court was ordered to be held at "the Island Martin
1Plymouth Col. Records, V, 33.
265
History of Martha's Vineyard
Vineyard at some convenient Time to bee agreed upon" with the people of Nantucket.1 This was finally arranged between them, but not until the mid-summer of the next year, and on June 18, 1671, the new "general court" held its first session at Edgartown, under the presidency of the Worshipful Thomas Mayhew. By them it was ordered that they should meet an- nually "either upon the first Tuesday in June or upon the first convenient Opportunity in respect of Weather." The pre- siding justice was allowed six shillings per diem, and each magistrate four shillings for attendance upon the general court, and three shillings and two shillings and six pence, respectively, for service at the quarter courts. These local petty courts were to be held on the last Tuesdays of March, June, Septem- ber, and December, for the trial of minor actions of the limit prescribed above, without appeal, and in cases involving the value of five pounds and over, appeal could be taken to the general court constituted of the justices of the two islands. This first general court provided a code of laws for the prose- cution of actions and appeals; the modes of attachments, arrests, and imprisonments for debts, subpoenas, contempt of court, pay of jurors, duties of constables, costs of court, and as a final clause ordered "that in all Actional and Criminal Matters and Cases which fall not under the Head of some of these Laws already made shall be tryed and Judgment or Sen- tence given according to the Laws of England."? This in effect based procedure upon the particular laws enacted by the court, the province laws, or the common law of England, a condition which gave rise to much complaint. "Our condi- tion is such," said Simon Athearn, "the authority took sum laws out of boston & plimmouth Law books to be our law, and made a law that if any Case com to tryell which this law cloth not reach it should be tryed by the law of boston or the law of England: the law of England non of us know: the law of boston rejected as not the dukes law."3
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.