USA > Massachusetts > Nantucket County > The history of Nantucket County, island, and town : including genealogies of first settlers > Part 9
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 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91
From that sentence Capt. Gardner appealed, his appeal being addressed to "Mr. Thomas Mayhew and Gentlemen all such as are his Majesties Lawfull and Rightfully Established Officers," and setting forth that "Whereas, I haue ben twice feched out of my House by Warr't under the Name of a Generall Corte, and highly charged with contempt of his Majesties Athority, the which I am so far from offering the Lesst Countenance vnto; that I desier not Longer to Lieue than to be Ready to Sacrefice my Liufe and Fortains for the maintaining of it, but as to my Actuall Obedience to a Generall Corte, I dow not vnderstand of aney ther can be heare at this Time; by Reson of the Persons hear of our Iland that tack vpon them the Gouernment at this Time hauing not aney Lawfull Athority Acording to his Excelecies the Gouernors In- structions, so far as I can vnderstand so to dow." Captain Gardner gives as his reasons for considering that there is no court-First, Mr. Macy's alleged usurpation of authority; second, that many allege that Nathaniel Barnard did not have a majority vote; thirdly that he did not understand how Peter Coffin could legally be elected an assistant. If, however, the Governor determines the Court to be regular and lawful he addresses his appeal to the Court of Assizes at New York.
maintain his Majestie's Authoritie in this Court, espetially with rela- tion to the Heathen among whom it was vulgarly Rumored that there was no Gournment on Nantuckett and haueing good Cause to suspect, the same to proceed originally from some English instigating them, or by their practice incouraging them in the same, to the great Danger of causing Insurrection :
This Court Respecting the same, saw Good to send for Capt. John Gardner, who had at the Quarter Court, refused to appear being sum- moned, and had refused to assist the Constable in the Execution of his office, vppon his Command, to make his Appearance to Answer the same, in pursuance whereof, the Court sending the Marshall twice for hin with a Warrant refused to come, the Marshall afterwards fetching him by Force, when he came to the Court, demeaned himself most irrever- ently. sitting down with his Hat on, taking no Notice of the Court, be- haveing himself so both in Words and Gestures, as declared great Con- tempt of Authoritie of this Court, tending to the great dishonour of his Majesties Court Authoritie the Incouragement of others, and espetially the Heathen who being before by some evil Spiritt persuaded that there was no Authoritie, were hardly diswaded from using Violence; the Com- poseing whereof was the principall Cause of the Court present Setting; this Court haue therefore thought good for upholding and maintaining the Peace and Tranquillitie of this Place, which is so greatly indan- gered by such a President of such Note, and at such a time, by such a Practice to discountenance such Practices, and deterring others from the Like, haue Resolved and do therefore order: That Capt. John Gard- ner shall pay a Fine of ten Pounds in Money, or Something equivalent thereto into the Treasurie and is disfranchised also:
This is a true Coppie Taken out of the Record of the General Court houlden at Nantucket, June the 5th, 1677, By me
MATTHEW MAYHEW."
63
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
The appeal of Capt. Gardner was considered by the Governor and Council and on August 3d it was ordered-First, that Mr. Thomas Macy continue Chief Magistrate; second, that proceedings against Captain Gardner upon the complaint of the constable for contempt of the Court, as well as the complaint of Tristram Coffin and John Swaine regarding a deed burned or destroyed* be sus- pended until further order to be taken before winter, or as soon as may be" during which Time all Persons to forbear Intermedling Speeches or Actions or any Aggravations whatsoever, at their Perills." The action on the complaint against Peter Folger was likewise suspended until further order.
On the 21st of September Governor Andros issued another order to the same effect addressed to "the Magistrates of the Particular and Generall Court att Nantuckett." In the order Gov- ernor Andros declared the proceedings of the Court, so far as they related to John Gardner, to be "illegall, beyound your Authority, and only peculiar to, if in the Power of the highest Judicature in these Parts."; In the case of Peter Folger it was ordered that if the case did not come before the next Court of Assizes it should be remitted to the Governor and Councill by the first convenient opportunity for action. All parties were bound over to answer when called and in the meantime if "they or any other should misbehave themselves, they may be further proceeded against ac- cording to law."
To this order the local Court does not seem to have given much heed. The criticism of Franklin B. Hough, regarding this period, that the "orders of the New York Governors appear to have been obeyed or disregarded according as they favored or opposed the Views of the Parties in Power," seems to be justified.} At the same time it must be admitted that in some respects the attitude of the New York government was vacillating, and the First Pur- chasers seem only to have protected their clearly defined rights.
Captain Gardner, who seems to have been a prolific writer, under date of March 16, 1677-8, gives his version of what occurred when he presented the order of the Governor to Mr. Mayhew. He writes **- "Three Days after hee came to my lodging in as great passion as I judg a man could wel be Accu (s)ing me hyly whering I was wholy Innocent, and not proued though endeauoured. Mr. Mayhew taking this opportunity to vent himselfe as followeth, Tel- ing me I hav bin at York but should loose my Labour, that if the
*It was claimed that an important deed given to Mr. Gardner to have recorded had been lost or destroyed.
¡It is difficult to quite reconcile this with the order issued by Gov- ernor Andros November 7, 1674, authorizing the General Court "to call to Account and Punish according to Law, all such Persons as have been Ringleaders or Capitall Offenders, and Transgressors against the Es- tablish't Government under his Royal Highnesse, the Crime not extend- ing to Life, Limbe or Banishment." (Papers relating to Nantucket p. 65.) it would appear that the Governor considered that the sentences against Gardner and Folger were out of proportion to the offenses and had been carried to the point where they were vindictive rather than punitive.
#Papers relating to the Island of Nantucket p xvii.
** New York State Archives Secys Office. Hough p. 115.
64
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
Gouernour did unwind he would wind, that he would make my fine and disfranchizement too abide on me do the Gouernour what he could; that he had nothing against me neither was angry but that I had spocken against his Interest and I should doune, with maney more Words of like Nature, but to loung hear to ensert; and when I came Home to Nantucket, I found the same Mind and Resolution there also." I delivered Mr. Coffin your Hon's letter, who the next day shewed me your Hon's Order that he had red: speaking fayerly to me, and say'd what was Reason should be don. But I soone found a great chang, Mr. Coffin teling mee he had spoken with the Rest concerned: And that they were Resolued to try it out with the Gouernour, and that they would bring it to the Court of Asize which was aboue the Gouernour and Counsel so he vnder- stood them: I then demanded what he vnderstood then by the Gouer- nours order, he answered that it was nothing at all but two or three darke words and that my disfranchizement and fine should be continued."
Captain Gardner further states that the authorities had taken from him to secure his fine of £10, eight cattle and one fat sheep, "near duble in vallew were I obnoxtious to such a fine." Two of the cattle had been killed since the order was received. Peter Folger's fine and disfranchisement were continued. Captain Gard- ner also complains that "John swayn and William Worth put for Assistants though twice not excepted by your Hon'r and truly I cannot but beleiue it was don in opposition to your Honours order."*
Mr. Gardner soon after (December 5, 1678) addressed another letter to the Governor apologizing if in anything it "should appeare he hath misbehaued himselfe," and stating that no attention had been paid to the Governor's orders, and praying "such further ord'r may be taken herein yt yo'r peticoner may not still remain soe greate a sufferer under s'd Judgment. t
The status of affairs as shown by the letters and petitions to the Governor and by the several votes of the Town is very peculiar. Drastic action had been taken against Gardner and Folger and so far as that went there seemed to be no intention to modify it even when ordered to do so by the Governor. On the other hand the Town, on June 8, 1678, disclaimed any intention to meddle with anything appertaining to the Duke of York.# Capt .Gardner had been disfranchised in June 1677 and yet a grant to build a mill for the Town was renewed to him February 13, 1677-8 to hold good until the last of September, 1678 .** In June 1678 Capt. Gardner, James Coffin and Nathaniel Starbuck were chosen Pru- dential Men.
Even more peculiar was the action taken by the Town at a meeting held January 6, 1678, at which it was "Voted by the Town that whereas Capt. John Gardner and Peter Folger were by an
* This letter does not seem to have been written by John Gardner, though signed by him. The penmanship and spelling are better than in other letters more clearly written by Capt. Gardner. It was more like- ly written by Peter Folger.
¡N. Y. Colonial M. S. S. xxviii Secy's Office, Albany. ĮTown Records.
** Town Records.
65
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
order of the Town bareing date the 16th, I mo., 1676, prohibting them to act in the public conserns of the Island at New York or Elsewhere either by word or Riteing* this is to manifest and declar that the Intent of the Town in that order was not to seclude either the persons aforementioned or any other person from Town Meeting nor to act therein as Townsmen, and this hath proved since in that they have bin warned to Town Meeting as other men and this is further to declare that if any sentence or clause in the said order may be Strayned by Interpretors to such a Sense namely to seclude or prohibit them or any other either from coming to Town Meeting or to act therein as Townsmen, Contrary to the Intent of the Town-it is hereby made utterly voiad and null."
This interpretation seems to be out of line with the sentence of the General Court, the purpose of which would seem to have been to prevent either Gardner or Folger from any participation in the Town's affairs, whether domestic or with the government at New York. As there does not seem to be any record of dissent to this vote it may not be unfair to assume that even those most strongly opposed to the disfranchised men believed that the sentence may have been unduly severe.
There were still other matters between Capt. Gardner and the First Purchasers that were provocative of ill feeling. One of these is indicated by a vote of the Town passed February 13, 1676, under which "John Swain, Stephen Hussey and John Coffin are Desired to Demand of Capt. Gardner in behalf of the Town those Deeds of Land the Deed of Coature and pocommo and the plains which were Delivered to Mr. Mayhew to be Recorded." Just how this affair terminated is not clear from the records .; If the deeds referred to are those given to Edward Starbuck and assigned by him to the First Purchasers the ownership seems legitimate enough.
In a letter to Governor Andros dated May 31, 1677,į John Gardner writes that an Indian was intending to go to New York to complain to him regarding a deed which he claimed to be illegal. Evidently Captain Gardner for some reason sided with him, for he writes "there is on thing mor I would Enforme your
* At a Legal Town meeting in Sherborn ye 16, January 1676 ,Voted by the Town that whereas Capt. John Gardner was chosen by the Town to go to New York to negotiate som public causes of the Island and Peter Folger to assist him as appears by the Record on the Town's Book, the Town doth now Repeal and Revoke the order aforesaid and do forbid the said Capt. Gardner and Peter Folger or either of them medel at all hence forward in any of the Town's concerns either at York or Elsewhare under any colour or pretence whatsoever-the true In- tent and Meaning is that they 'have no allowance to act either by word or writeing." March 18, 1674 the Town voted to send John Gardner and Peter Folger to New York on business concerning the Charter. This is what the vote of January 16, 1676 refers to.
tJanuary 3, 1660. Sachem Nickanoose deeded to Edward Starbuck, as he said, "out of my free Volentory Love" to the said Edward Star- buck, "all that parcel of Land called Coretue with all the privileges or Benefits." August 30, 1668, Edward Starbuck assigned this property to the First Purchasers. The original deed, signed and sealed by the In- dian grantors, the assignment signed by Edward Starbuck and the date of record by Matthew Mayhew, June 14, 1677, are among the papers left by the late Mrs. Eliza Barney. The date of record would seem to indi- cate this to be the deed referred to by Capt. Gardner.
ĮN. Y. State Archives, Secy's Office. Other letters seem to indicate the Indian to be one Obadiah. It would seem as though the deed which Mr. Gardner mentions was the one it was claimed was burned or de- stroyed.
66
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
Honor of which is that the deade ov Indian purchas which Mr. Mayhew brought to yourk when he reciueued the patent for the town of Governor Louelas: and now stands on Record at yourk is A falce thing as will apear it being nether signed nor sealed . I sepose it was of mr. Mayhews one making being much moar in it then was ever bought as will Aboundandly Apeare but Mr. Mayhew sayth it is the Copy of A dead that was procuered of the Indians to prevent others from purchasing: but now It is Aserted to be An onest thing and as I vnderstand they intend to mayntain it. to be a true thing: as yet the Indians vnderstand it not of it but should thay before it be Recktyfied as I dout not but it will when your Honor haue the hearge of it." * I haue the paper that * was Recorded and Am Resolued not to deliver it except to your Honor or your Honors spetial Order, for nothing but it seluef can prove it falce." It was doubtless the controversy regarding this deed which led to the action of the Governor and Council on August 3d. There is nothing to show that Governor Andros made any order or decision on the merits of the counter claims regarding the deeds.
In Captain Gardner's position, the situation on its face does not seem especially creditable, since he was intrusted with the deeds as a messenger and it looks much as though he had no particular desire to pacify the Indians who were beginning to be restive over the legitimate acts of their own sachems. It does not appear that any among the First Purchasers made any claim to land which was not legitimately his and for which a proper deed could not be shown. If the deeds Captain Gardner refers to applied to Coatue the fact that they were given by sachems unquestionably competent to give them, and given to Edward Starbuck, who was held in high esteem by the natives, seems sufficiently good evidence of their genuineness.
April 15, 1673, Governor Lovelace issued a license to Richard and John Gardner, who, as he says, have "Declared unto mee their Intent of undertaking the Designe of a ffishing Trade upon the Island of Nantuckett and Parts adjacent, if they may have License to buy and make Purchase of some Land by the Sea-Side or else-where of the Indyan Natives Proprietors for their Accomoda- tion," "for an Encouragement unto them I have thought fitt to give and grant * * * unto the said Mr. Richard and Capt. John Gardner and their Associates to buy and make Purchase of some convenient Quantity or Tract of Land for the Use aforesaid * * * not yet made Purchase of by the Rest of the Inhabitants," for which, when the proper return was made a Patent of Confirma- tion would be issued. * This was eight months after Captain Gardner had been granted a half share by the First Purchasers for the same purpose and six months after the Town had granted him liberty "to set a house upon the highway at Wesko going down to the Landing-place." This so-called license of the Gov- ernor, therefore, seemed not only superfluous but involving a conflict of authority in respect to the rights claimed by the First
*Papers relating to the Island of Nantucket, pp. 53-54.
67
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
Purchasers. It does not appear that the Gardner brothers ever availed themselves of this grant, but that it was a disturbing element is evident for on the 6th of the 11th month, 1678, the Town voted* that Tristram Coffin, William Gayer, John Swaine and Stephen Hussey should be a committee to interview Richard and John Gardner regarding this grant. There seems to be no further report in the Town Records concerning the matter and it is reasonable to infer that the question was satisfactorily settled.
So far as Captain Gardner and Peter Folger were concerned the matters in dispute with the Town seemed gradually to adjust them- selves and a more harmonious condition to prevail. With the General Court, however, it was a different affair. The Court had disfranchised Captain Gardner and was not inclined to remove that disfranchisement notwithstanding the orders of Governor An- dros. Under date of December 5, 1678, Captain Gardner addressed another petition to the Governor in which he sets forth "That yo'r Petition'r was att ye Generall Court held at Nantucket from ye fifth to ye 16th of June for a pretended Erreuerent behaviour in said court fined ye sum of 10 lb. & disfranchised allsoe, as by ye Records & Judgement of the said Corte may appear, a coppy whearof is herewith sent; whereupon yo'r Petitioner Applyed him- selfe to yo'r Honor to . disfranchisement taken of or remitted conceueing himselfe . . farr guilty to deserue such a punishment as by such judgment is Imposed on him however (as now he doth) & did acknowledge and crave yo'r honors Pardon for any thing wherein it should appeare he hath misbehaued himselfe; upon which Applycation and Adress yo'r hono'r in Councell ye 3 of Agust following was Pleased to order that all further proceedings aganst ye Peticoner thereupon should be suspended till further ord'r as p'r the said Ord'r may appeare: but before ye said ord'r could be shewed to ye Magistrats Execution issued forth on the said Judg- ments and 8 head of yo'r Petition'rs Cattle by vertue thear of seized on to satisfie ye said fine (which amounted to a farr greater sume then ye fine was.)} & yo'r Peticon'r stil remained disfran- chised soe the same tooke noe effect, upon which yo'r Peticoner made his further addresse to yo'r hono'r and yo'r hono'r was pleased ye 21st of (Sept.) following to send another ord'r by advice of yo'r Councell direckted to the Magistrats of ye p'ticuler & Generall Court at Nanttucket which was produced & considered of by them at their next Generall Court where in steade of p'forming what is thearin ordred they quibled thereat and have Evaded the Com- plyance there with on pretence that ye said Judgement was not giuen on ye account menconed by y'r Hon'r in ye said Ord'r and
*Town Records.
It is quite a problem just what the position of Governor Andros was at times in this controversy. He issued orders affecting Gardner and Folger and reversing the findings of the General Court but seemed to make no effort to enforce them. Under date of September 16, 1677, Governor Andros notified the Town that "an undue or illegal returne of the Chief Magistrate of Nantucket hath been made two year suc- cessively from thence, the one being by Law wholly incapable there- of." (Town Records). The Town Records contain no report of any meet- ing for several years about this time at which the Town voted to send the name of anyone.
¿An inventory of the estate of Tristram Coffin returned to the Pro- bate Court in October 1706 enumerates, among other items, these: 2 Heifers, £4.0; 2 Oxen, £9.0; 2 Steers, £3.10. Captain Gardner does not specify just what kind of cattle were seized.
68
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
y't you'r hono'r either is misinformed or did mistake ye Matter and therefore doe hold and Maintaine ye said Judgment on foot; and haue killed some of ye cattle taken from yo'r Peticoner since ye said 2 ord'rs notwithstanding yo'r Peticoner is well satisfied that it was yo'r hono'rs Intention as is in said ord'r menconed y't all ye Proceedings and Judgements should be null & void and what is taken from him on y't account again Returned to yo'r Peticoner: whch they absolutely refuse to doe."* Captain Gardner asks for a more effectual order.
It does not appear any attention was paid to the orders of Governor Andros by Mr. Mayhew and the Court. In the meantime harmony was beginning to brood over the disaffected conditions in Nantucket. The General Court officers asserted as their excuse for their refusal to obey the Andros decision, that it was rendered without a knowledge of the facts. The Town so far opposed the position taken by the Court that Mr. Gardner was chosen an Assistant in 1680 and the Town was cited to appear before the Court to answer for its action. t
About this time another matter absorbed the public interest, both at New York and Nantucket. A ship had been wrecked on Nantucket Shoals in September, 1678. It was the duty of Tristram Coffin, who was then Chief Magistrate, to see that all the property pertaining to her was, so far as was possible, properly salvaged. It appears that portions of the vessel's cargo and appurtenances were being carried away, seemingly contrary to law, and Mr. Coffin was called upon to give an account of his stewardship. It would seem that Governor Andros had directed him to come to New York and explain what had been done, for Mr. Coffin wrote to the Governor, late in July or early in August, 1680, regarding the matter .¿ In his letter he says "Your honers humbell seruant
*N. Y. Colonial M. S. xxviii, Secy's Office. Not only did the Gen- erall Court refuse to abide by the order of the Governor, but, so late as 1680, issued the following summons "To the Constable of Sharbourn greeting. you are Required in his Majesties Name to summons the in- habitants freeholders househoulders of yo'r town to answer their de- fault for that as a town in their election of assistance in gouerment: presumed to elect Capt. John Gardner who was incapacitated to bear such office of trust by sentence of court thare; giue the said Town summons to answer to the same at the next General corte houlden at Nantucket or Marthas Vineyard. By order of the General Court
MAT. MAYHEW, Secretary."
The summons is dated June 9, 1680 and sent to Joseph Gardner, nephew to the Captain, to serve. Colonial M. S. . S. xxix N. Y. Secy's Office) There seems to be no record of any further proceedings in the matter.
¡Mr. Gardner was commissioned Chief Magistrate in Nov. 1680, April 27, 1682, and June 2, 1684. (Hough 116).
¿N. Y. Colonial M. S. S. xxix Secy's Office. The letter is endorsed as received Aug. 6, 1680.
Governor Andros' original order was as follows-"Whereas I am Informed That a great Ship was some time the last Month cast away and remaines a Wreck on Nantucket Shoales, out of which many per- sons have and do Daily fetch some of her Loading or appurtenances Therefore in discharge of our duty & to prevent all Embezlm'ts These are in his Ma'ties name and behalfe to desire and require you together with Mr. John West, authorized and herewith Sent, to take Care That such Lading and Appurtenances of the s'd wreck as hath or shall bee saved, bee brought, a Shore, to vo'r parts, & the same Duely Inven- torved, & secured in some place or places, in Ord'r to a Legall Deter- minacon for the Just Sattisfaccon of the Own'rs, and Savers, And that you make Returne, as Soone as may bee, & from time to time, of yo'r (See next page)
69
HISTORY OF NANTUCKET
as Dutie obligeth me) am willing to giue your hon'r a Trew Account of my not cominge to Appeare Before your hon'r in fort James in March or April last past, as I wrot to your hon'r in October last past) in verite the month of March last with us was very windye & could Raw wether) and I was more weacker then formerly: But in April I went to the vinyard in a cannoe for to hire Mr. Dagget & his sloop to goe to Yorke cittie. But when I came there I mett with a letter y't was sent to the Worshipful Tho. Mayhew Esquire which his son in law way of Boston sent him in which he wrote y't the Deppetie Gouernor of the Mathathusets tould him y't we of Marthas Vineyard and Nan- tucket weare boath vnder or should shortlye be vnder the Matha- thusets government and yt the did Intend very shortly to send to Mr. Mayhew concerninge it: So vpon consideration of it Mr. Mayhew and myselfe thought it most nessesarye not to goe Abroad from home but forbare a few months and if the did not send to vs yt wee would forthwith call a generall court, and then to signify to them yt wee would not doe any Thinge of yt kind without order from your hon'r and hon'rabell Counsell; for wee know them of ould But wee have not yet heard from them, only by ye'r Talk. *
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.