USA > Massachusetts > Essex County > Salem > The history of Salem, Massachusetts, vol 1, 1924 > Part 22
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
The first colonial court held in New England under Winthrop was that of the court of assistants, on board the ship Arbella, at Charlestown, Aug. 23, 1630. No assistant from Salem was present. It was ordered that the governor and deputy-governor should be ex-officio justices of the peace. Governor Endecott and three others were also appointed justices, "in all things to have like power that justices of peace hath in England for reformacon of abuses and punishing of offend's, and that any justice of the peace may imprison an offendor, but not inflict any corporall punishmt, w out the psence & consent of some one of the Assis- tants." It was also ordered that in all civil actions the first process or summons should be directed by the governor, deputy- governor or one of the assistants, who was a justice of the peace ; the next process was to be a capias, in the discretion of the court. At a court of assistants held at Boston July 5, 1631, it was ordered that every assistant should have power to grant warrants, sum- mons and attachments, as occasion should require.
At the meeting of the court of assistants, held at Charlestown Sept. 7, 1630, the times for holding the court were fixed, and also fines for members who did not appear at its sessions.
The first general court was held at Boston Oct. 19th, when "For the establishinge of the goum' It was ppounded if it were not the best course that the ffreemen should haue the power of chuseing Assistants where there are to be chosen, & the Assistants from amongst themselues to chuse a Goun' & Deputy Goun" whoe wth the Assistants should have the power of makeing lawes & chuseing officers to execute the same. This was fully assented vnto by the genall vote of the people, & ereccon of hands." This
1Life and Letters of John Winthrop, volume II, page 36.
195
SEAT OF GOVERNMENT REMOVED FROM SALEM
order was explained at a general court held at Boston, May 18, 1631, "with full consent of all the comons then psent, that once in euy yeare, att least, a Genall Court shalbe holden, att which Court it shalbe lawfull for the comons to ppounde any pson or psons whome they shall desire to be chosen Assistants, & if it be doubtfull whith' it be the great" pte of the comons or not, it shalbe putt to the poll. The like course to be holden when they, the said comons, shall see cause for any defect or misbehave to remoue anyone or more of ye Assist's ; & to the end the body of the comons may be pserued of honest & good men, it was likewise ordered and agreed that for time to come noe man shalbe admitted to the freedome of this body polliticke, but such as are members of some of the churches within the lymitts of the same." This was changed at a general court held at Boston, May 9, 1632, when "It was genally agreed vpon by ereccon of hands, that the Goun', Deputy Goun", & Assistants should be chosen by the whole Court of Goun", Deputy Goun", Assistants, & freemen, and that the Goun" shall alwaies be chosen out of the Assistants."
The influence of the ministers upon politics is manifest when it is remembered that, at this time, no one could vote unless he was a freeman; that no one could be a freeman unless he was a member of the church ; and that no one could be a member of the church except with the consent of the minister.1
In order that the solidarity of the people might be as perfect as possible, an order was made April 1, 1634, by the court that every person, of twenty or more years of age, who had been or thereafter would be, for six months, a householder or sojourner within the colony, and had not been disfranchised, in order to remain in the colony, should take before the governor, deputy- governor or two of the assistants, a prescribed oath to obey the laws and government. The form of the oath was as follows :-
I doe heare sweare, and call God to witnes, that, being nowe an inhabitant within the lymitts of this jurisdiccon of the Massachusetts, I doe acknowledge myselfe lawfully subject to the aucthoritie and gouermt there established, and doe accordingly submitt my pson, family, and estate, to be ptected, ordered, & gouerned by the lawes & con- stitucons thereof, and doe faithfully pmise to be from time to time obedient and conformeable therevnto, and to the aucthoritie of the Goun', & all other the magistrates there, and their success's, and to all such lawes, orders, sentences, & decrees, as nowe are or hereafter shalbe lawfully made, decreed, & published by them or their success's. And I will alwayes indeav™ (as in duty I am bound) to advance the peace & wellfaire of this body pollitique, and I will (to my best power & meanes ) seeke to devert & prevent whatsoeuer may tende to the ruine
1Winthrop's Journal, volume I, page IOI.
196
HISTORY OF SALEM
or damage thereof, or of ye Goun', or Assistants, or any of them or their success's, and will giue speedy notice to them, or some of them, of any sedicon, violence, treacherie, or oth" hurte or euill wch I shall knowe, heare, or vehemently suspect to be plotted or intended against them or any of them, or againsts the said Comon-wealth or goumt estab- lished. Soe helpe mee God.
March 4, 1634-5, the minimum age at which residents should take the oath was reduced to sixteen years; and all of that age and over had to take the oath.
May 14th, several laws and orders were passed for the pur- pose of establishing the political life of the colony. The former oath of a freeman was abolished, and a new one adopted, as follows :-
I, A. B., being, by Gods providence, an inhabitant & freeman within the jurisdiccon of this comonweale, doe freely acknowledge my selfe to be subiect to the govermt thereof, & therefore doe heere sweare, by the greate & dreadfull name of the euerlyveing God, that I wilbe true & faithfull to the same, & will accordingly yeilde assistance & support therevnto, with my pson & estate, as in equity I am bound, & will also truely indeav' to mainetaine & preserue all the libertyes & previlidges thereof, submitting my selfe to the wholesome lawes & orders made & established by the same; and furth", that I will not plott nor practise any evill against it, nor consent to any that 'shall soe doe, but will timely discover & reveale the same to lawfull aucthority nowe here established, for the speedy preventing thereof. Moreouer, I doe solemnly bynde myselfe, in the sight of God, that when I shalbe called to giue my voice touching any such matter of this state wherein ffree- men are to deale, I will giue my vote & suffrage, as I shall iudge in myne owne conscience may best conduce & tend to the publique weale of the body, without respect of psons, or favr of any man. Soe helpe mee God, in the Lord Jesus Christ.
It was agreed that the general court alone had power to choose and admit freemen, make and establish laws, elect and remove governors, deputy-governors, assistants, treasurers, secretaries, captains, lieutenants, ensigns, etc., and determine their duties and powers, raise money and levy taxes.
John Humphrey1 and John Endecott were among the assis- tants chosen at this time.
1Col. John Humphrey was one of the six gentlemen to whom this region was granted in 1628. He was chosen deputy-governor, in England, as the government was about to be transferred to America, but declined the office as he was not prepared to remove to New England. He came in July, 1634, and lived in Lynn until his return to England Oct. 26, 1641. He married Lady Susan, daughter of Thomas Clinton, Earl of Lincoln, and sister of Lady Arbella Johnson; children: I. Ann, born in England; came to New England with her parents; married, first, William Palmes of Ardfinan,
197
1
SEAT OF GOVERNMENT REMOVED FROM SALEM
The general court was ordered to be held quarterly. The freemen in each place chose two or three of their number, shortly before each session of the court, to confer together and prepare such public business as they thought fit to consider at the court ; and such persons were made deputies to the court, with power to bind the freemen in their respective towns by their votes in making and establishing laws, granting of land and in all affairs of the commonwealth, except the election of magistrates and other officers, wherein every freeman was personally to act. Every such deputy or assistant, who was absent in time of public business, was liable to a fine.
Under date of 1630, the colonial records give a list of names of persons who had signified their desire to become freemen, and in this list occur the names of Samuel Sharp, Thomas Graves, Roger Conant, John Woodbury, Peter Palfrey, William Clerke, Roger Williams, Charles Gott, Henry Harwood, George Phillips, Samuel Skelton, Lawrence Leach, John Balch, William Trask, Henry Herrick, William James, William Allen and Samuel Archer. In a list entitled "The Names of Such as tooke the Oath of Freemen"1 May 18, 1631, appear the names of George Phillips, Roger Conant, Thomas Graves, Charles Gott, Lawrence Leach, John Horne, John Woodbury, Francis Johnson, William Clarke, William Noddle, William Agar, Robert Moulton, Peter Palfrey, Roger Williams, John Balch, John Moore, Henry Herrick, Roger Mowry, William Allen, Samuel Skelton and Anthony Dixe; ! March 6, 1631-2, John Black ; July 3, 1632, Elias Stileman, Samuel Sharp and John Moore; March 4, 1632-3, Henry Harwood, William Curtis and John White; Nov. 5, 1633, Francis Weston and John Holgrave; May 14, 1634, Thomas Goldthwaite, Thomas Hale, George Williams, Edward Gyles, William Dixy, George Norton, Thomas Eborne, Daniel Wray, Jacob Barney, Thomas Lowthrop, Jeffry Massy, Richard Brackenbury, Peter Wolfe, William Hathorne, Richard Raymond and Francis Dent; Sept. 3, 1634, John Sibley, Moses Maverick, Richard Davenport, Ralph Fogg and John Hardy; March 4, 1634-5, Richard Hutchinson ; May 6, 1635, John Blackleach, John Legg and Robert Cotty ; Sept.
Tipperary County, Ireland, gentleman; he died, and she married, second, Rev. John Myles of Swanzey, Mass .; and was the only surviving child of the family in 1681; 2. Dorcas, born in England about 1633; came to New England with her parents; aged nine in 1642; 3. Sarah, born in England about 1635; came to America with her parents; aged seven in 1642; 4. Theophilus, baptized in Salem Jan. 24, 1636-7; 5. Thomas, baptized in Salem Aug. 26, 1638; 6. Joseph, baptized in Salem April 5, 1640; 7. Lydia,' baptized in Salem April 25, 1641. Savage says that there was probably a son named John. See about the abuse of his daughters Dorcas and Sarah in Records of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, volume II, page 12.
1Massachusetts Bay Colony Records, volume I, page 366.
198
HISTORY OF SALEM
2, 1635, Richard Adams, Townsend Bishop, Philip Verrin and Thomas Scruggs; March 3, 1635-6, Edmond Batter and Hugh Peter; April 17, 1637, Thomas Browning, William Dodge and Nathaniel Porter ; May 17, 1637, Thomas Olney, Thomas Gardner, Joseph Pope, William Bounde, Henry . Bartholomew, Joseph Grafton, Francis Skerry and Edmond Marshall; Nov. 2, 1637, Mr. John Fiske; March -, 1637-8, Thomas Spooner, James Moulton, James Haynes, Henry Skerry, Joseph Bachiler, John Symonds, John Gedney and Thomas Flint; May 2, 1638, Ralph Tomkins ; March 14, 1638-9, Edward Burcham; May 22, 1639, John Alderman, Benjamin Felton, Jarvas Garford, William Os- borne and Hugh Laskin; and Sept. 6, 1639, Job Swinerton, William Lord and Lawrence Southwick.
The deputies1 from Salem for the sessions of the general court were as follows: May 14, 1634, Robert Moulton, John Holgrave, Roger Conant and Francis Weston; March 4, 1634-5, John Holgrave, Charles Gott and Peter Palfrey; May 6, 1635, John Holgrave, John Woodbury, Robert Moulton and William Hathorne; Sept. 2, 1635, William Trask, John Woodbury and Jacob Barney; March 3, 1635-6, Townsend Bishop, William Trask and Thomas Scruggs; May 25, 1636, William Trask, Townsend Bishop and John Blackleach; Sept. 8, 1636, William Trask, Townsend Bishop and Thomas Scruggs; Dec. 7, 1636, William Trask and Thomas Scruggs; April 18, 1637, William Trask, Richard Davenport and Robert Moulton ; May 17, 1637, William Trask, Richard Davenport and Edmond Batter ; Sept. 26, 1637, William Hathorne and Thomas Gardner; Nov. 2, 1637, William Hathorne, Townsend Bishop and Edmond Batter ; March 12, 1637-8, John Woodbury and Edmond Batter; May 2, 1638, William Hathorne and Edmond Batter; Sept. 6, 1638, William Hathorne, John Woodbury and Jacob Barney ; March 13, 1638-9, William Hauthorne, John Woodbury and Jeffry Massey ; May 22, 1639, William Trask and William Hauthorne ; and Sept. 4, 1639, Emanuel Downing and William Hauthorne.
John Endecott was one of the standing council for life and one of the assistants. He usually attended the court of assistants and the sessions of the general court. John Winthrop was governor from 1630 to 1633 inclusive; Thomas Dudley in 1634; John Haynes in 1635; Henry Vane in 1636; and Mr. Winthrop again from 1637 to 1639 inclusive.
1This list has been compiled from the town and general court records.
CHAPTER XII. LABOR, ETC.
MONG the first questions that the new government here had to contend with was that relating to labor, not so much for the benefit of the laborer as of the public. Labor was a necessary factor in the building of houses and other structures in the new towns, and mechanics and other workmen were quick to take advantage of urgent needs. The only business done at the first meeting of the assistants on board the ship Arbella, in Charlestown Harbor, Aug. 23, 1630, was the determination of prices of labor. It was ordered that carpenters, joiners, bricklayers, sawyers and thatchers, em- ployed about house construction, should be allowed two shillings a day for their services, and sawyers four shillings and sixpence per hundred for boards, at six-score to the hundred, if they had the timber felled and squared for them, and not more than five shil- lings and sixpence if they felled and squared it themselves. On the twenty-eighth of the following month, it was ordered that no master carpenter, joiner or bricklayer should take more than six- teen pence a day for his pay, if they had their meat and drink furnished to them. Laborers should not receive more than twelve pence a day for their work, and if their meat and drink were fur- nished to them, not more than sixpence. Oct. 19th it was ordered that sawyers should not take more than twelve pence a score for sawing oak boards, and ten pence a score for pine boards, if they had the trees felled and logs squared for them.
The restrictions were found to be prejudicial to both employer and employed, and on the twenty-second of the following March, it was ordered that the wages of carpenters, joiners and other artificers and workmen should be as the parties reasonably agree. This was tried through the summer of 1631, but as "great ex- torcon" was "vsed by dyvers psons of little conscience" and "great disorder . grewe herevpon, by vaine and idle wast of much precious tyme," it was ordered, September 27th, that sawyers
199
200
HISTORY OF SALEM
should not receive more than twelve pence a score for sawing boards if they had the trees felled and logs squared for them, and not over seven shillings per hundred if they felled the trees and squared the logs.
The scarcity of workmen and abundance of labor caused a demand for such wages as were excessive. Accordingly those who had commodities to sell advanced prices, sometimes double their cost in England, and this was generally complained of, and under- stood to be the result of the advance in wages. This situation remained for two years when, Oct. 1, 1633, it was ordered that master carpenters, sawyers, masons, clapboard rivers, bricklayers, tilers, joiners, wheelwrights, mowers, etc., should not receive more than two shillings a day without meals, and not more than four- teen pence a day if they receive their board. For a breach of this order, both employer and employed were liable to a fine. The wages of all unskilled workmen were fixed by the local constable and two other inhabitants of the town, whom he appointed for that purpose. The "best sorte" of such laborers were not al- lowed to receive above eighteen pence a day if they boarded themselves, and not more than eight pence a day when they received board. Master tailors could not receive more than twelve pence a day, and inferior tailors not more than eight pence if their board were furnished to them. Prices of goods were also regulated, and it was provided that no commodity should be sold on the ships at an increase of more than its cost for ready money in England. The evils which were resulting were always viewed from the position of the employer, who found it difficult to realize that society owed anything to the laborer. It was argued that many of the laborers spent much time idly, because they could get enough money for their work in four days to support them a week, and that too much time was spent in the consumption of tobacco and strong waters.1
Sept. 3, 1635, these labor laws were repealed, and instead it was ordered that "ill disposed persons who take liberty to oppresse & wronge their neighbrs by takeing excessive wages for worke shalbe punished by ffine or imprisonmt." In the Salem court, Sept. 27, 1636, William Dixie was fined three shillings for taking three shillings per day for his labor; James Smith twenty shillings; and John Stone and John Sibley three shillings each for a similar offence.
Oct. 28, 1636, the general court ordered "that the freemen of evry towne shall, from time to time, as occation shall require, agree amongst themselves about the prices & rates of all workmen,
1Winthrop's Journal, Boston, 1825, page 56.
20I
LABOR, ETC.
laborers, & servants wages; & evry other pson, inhabiting in any towne, whether workeman, laborer, or servant, shalbee bound to the same rates."
In the course of the next two years, the matter of wages was not improved, and at a general court, March 12, 1637-8, "Whereas there hath beene divers complaints made concerning oppsion in wages, in prizes of comodities, in excessive prizes for the worke of draughts & teames & the like to the great dishonor of God, the scandoll of the gosple & the greife of divers of Gods people," it was ordered that the matter be considered by Mr. Endecott, Mr. Winthrop, jr., Mr. Peters and others, who were to recommend to the next general court a remedy therefor. No report was made.
Governor Endecott, after the death of his wife in the spring of 1629, continued to mourn his loss until the arrival of the Win- throp fleet, when he first met or renewed his acquaintance with Mrs. Elizabeth Gibson of Cambridge, England. They were mar- ried Aug. 17th, the ceremony being performed by Governor Winthrop and Rev. John Wilson, who had been minister of Sud- bury, in the mother country, and, having emigrated on the Arbella, become the minister of Boston.
Thomas Dexter, one of the first settlers of Lynn, who had obtained a release of the title to the peninsula of Nahant from the Indians, was frequently in trouble. He drank to excess, and was punished in the courts for assaults, insolent speeches and car- riage toward others, even to Simon Bradstreet, then an assistant and afterwards governor. In March, 1632-3, he was heavily fined, set in the bilboes and disfranchised for speaking reproachful and seditious words against the government here. In the spring of 1631, Governor Endecott became so provoked at his insolence that he struck him. Dexter brought an action against him to recover damages for the assault. The case was tried before a jury in the court of assistants in Boston, and April IIth Governor Endecott started for Boston, by water, but was compelled by strong opposing winds to return. The next day, he wrote the following letter to Governor Winthrop :- 1
Right Worfhipful,
I did expect to have beene with you in perfon at the court, and to that end I put to fea yefterday, and was driven back againe, the wind being ftiffe againft us. And there being no canoe or boat at Saguft I muft have beene contfrained to goe to Miftick and thence about to Charlef town, which at this time I durft not be fo bold, my bodie being at this prefent in an ill condition to wade or take cold, and therefore I defire you to pardon mee. Though otherwife I could have much de-
1Prince Society's Publications : Hutchinson's Papers, volume I, page 51 (55).
202
HISTORY OF SALEM
fired it by reafon of many occafions and bufineffes. There are at Mr. Hewfon's plantations 5 or 6 kine verie ill and in great danger, I feer they will hardlie efcape it, whereof twoe are myne, and all I have, which are worfe than any of the reft. I left myne there this winter to doe Mr. Skelton a pleafure to keep his for him here at Salem, that he might have the benefit of their milk. And I underftand by Wincoll that they have been ill tended and he faith almoft ftarved. Befide they have fed on acornes and they cannot digeft them, for that they vomitt exceedinglie and are fo bound in their bodies that he is faine to rake them and to ufe all his fkill to maintaine life in them. I have willed him to be there till he can bring them to fome ftrength againe if it be poffible. And I have given him malt to make them mafhes of licoris and annis feeds, and long pepper, and fuch other things as I had to drench them. I could wifh when Manning hath recovered his strength that you would free him; for he will never doe you or Mr. Hewfon fervice, for when he was well he was as negligent as the worft of them. Mr. Skelton, myfelfe and the reft of the congregation defire to be thankful to God and yourselfe for your benevolence to Mr. Haughton's child. The Lord reftore it you. I prevailed with much adoe with Sir Richard for an old debt heere which he thought was defperate, to con- tribute it, which I hope I fhall make good for the child. I think Mr. Skelton hath written to you, whome he thinkes ftands moft in neede of contribution of fuch provifions as you will be pleafed to give amongft us of that which was fent over. The yeele potts you fent for are made which I had in my boate, hoping to have brought them with mee. I caufed him to make but two for the prefent, if you like them and his prices (for he worketh for himfelfe) you fhall have as many as you defire. He felleth them for 4 fhillings a piece. Sir, I desired the rather to have beene at court becaufe I heare I am much complayned of by goodman Dexter, for ftriking him. I acknowledge I was too rafh in ftriking, underftanding fince that it is not lawful for a juftice to ftrike. But if you had feene the manner of his carriadge, with fuch daring of me with his armes on kembow &c. It would have provoked a very patient man. But I will write no more of it but leave it till we fpeak before you face to face. Only then farre further, that he hath given out if I had a purfe he would make me empty it, and if he cannot have juftice here he will doe wonders in England, and if he cannot prevale there, hee will trie it out with mee here at blowes. Sir, I defire that you will take all into confideration. If it were lawfull to trie it at blowes and hee a fitt man for mee to deale with, you fhould not heare mee complaine, but I hope the Lord hath brought mee off from that courfe. I thought good further to wryte what my judgment is for the difmiffing of the court till corne be fett. It will hinder us that are farre off exceedingly, and not further you there. Mens labour are precious here in corne fetting tyme, the plantations being yet fo weak. I will be with you, the Lord affifting mee, as foone as conveniently I can. In the meane while I committ you to his protection and fafeguard that never failes his children, and reft
Your unfeigned loving friend to command,
Salem, the 12th of April.
Jo : ENDECOTT.
1631.
203
LABOR, ETC.
The trial took place May 3d when the jury returned a verdict in favor of Dexter and assessed the damages at forty shillings.
It is interesting to notice how exigencies of circumstances cause the enactment of laws. Boats or canoes were so common among the dwellers in Salem and Charlestown that they were frequently taken to cross streams and left on the other side. At the first meeting of the assistants at Charlestown, Aug. 28, 1630, it was ordered that no person should use or take away any boat or canoe without leave of its owner, under penalty of a fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the court.
Thomas Gray, a fisherman, probably the first inhabitant of Marblehead, was enjoined Sept. 28, 1630, by the court of assis- tants to appear before that body three weeks from that day to answer several complaints against him and to remove out of the patent before the end of the following March. Whether he ap- peared in the court at Boston on the day stated is unknown, but the court ordered that his "howse att Marble Harbr shalbe puld downe, & that noe Englishe man shall hereafter giue howseroome to him or intertaine him, vnder such penalty as the Court shall think meete to inflicte." He continued to live in Marblehead, and in 1637 was possessed of considerable land there, having been granted thirty acres that year. The next year he was in court again, and "was censured to bee severely whiped, & the former execution of banishment to bee inflicted." He continued to live in Marblehead, however, as late as 1654, at least. In 1639, he was censured, ordered to be severely whipped and fined five pounds "for being drunke, prophaning of the name of God, keeping a tipling house, & drawing his knife in the court."2 He was gener- ally in trouble. He was in court in Salem, March 31, 1640, when he was convicted of drunkenness; and in the court in Boston June 2 following, when he "was censured to bee severely whiped for his drunkennes & other misdemeanors at Marbleheade, weh M' Endecot tooke the care of by undertaking it." Gray petitioned the deputy- governor and magistrates to be forgiven and have his "fine" re- mitted, saying that he "was iustly fined & punished for a great offence in his passion committed by drawing his knife in the Court for weh he hath bin very sorry & is much ashamed of it." This petition was drawn by Thomas Lechford, who practised law in Boston from 1638 to 1641 ; and Lechford notes that Gray after- wards behaved ·himself.3 This was true only while Lechford
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.