USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Sudbury > The history of Sudbury, Massachusetts, 1638-1889 > Part 4
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
In the early years of the town's history, the Indians in and about the place were on friendly terms with their pale-faced brethren. As has been noticed, on several sides of the town were Indian mission stations, from which wilderness outposts went forth the voice of prayer and praise. Influences so sal- utary not far from the borders of Sudbury might be expected to reach into the town itself, and tend to bring its people to a right way of life. These stations were, to an extent, made up of people gathered from various parts. It was so at Natick. Mr. Eliot gathered the natives from different directions, and fostered with fatherly care those who sought at his hands the truth, until he fell, as has been stated by another, "like a great tree in the stillness of the woods." Truly it might be expected that such influences, radiating like light through the dark shadows of the unenlightened land, would bring peace to the people, and that a loving, neighbor-
23
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
like spirit would pervade the life of both the Indian and his white benefactors. Such natural results did prevail prior to Philip's war. But that war and the death of Mr. Eliot were sad blows to the poor aborigines : by the latter they lost a friend, and by the former they were called to turn their backs on the graves of their fathers, knowing not what the end was to be. Allured, perhaps, by designing men of their race to join Philip, and ordered from their homes to another locality, it is not strange if some were demoralized, and that the Indi- ans should become a weak and broken band. It is said that at one time about three hundred Indians gathered at Natick on a training occasion. But, as years passed on, they grew rapidly less, even at this their old mission home. The last family hereabouts has long since disappeared, their name is unspoken, and their very graves are unknown: They have been gathered to their fathers, with little to tell the stranger where once they dwelt. The streams still sparkle, but not for them; the hills are crowned with our corn; in the valley our gardens smile; our grain makes yellow the plain. The town's natural outlook, in a measure, remains unchanged, but a race has vanished, and the customs, language, and life of another race is here.
" Like leaves on trees the race of man is found, Now green in youth, now withering on the ground ; Another spring another race supplies, These fall successive, and successive rise. So generations in their course decay, So flourish these when those have passed away."
It is true the Indian is still in the land, but how neglected and lone ! As another has said : -
" His eye rests on the earth, as if the grave Were his sole hope, his last and only home.
His pride is dead ; his courage is no more ; His name is but a by-word. All the tribes Who called this mighty continent their own Are homeless, friendless wanderers on earth."
But while this race is passing, let us cherish what is good
24
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
in their history, and in charity excuse what we reasonably can of their faults. Above all, let us present to them the truths that their great apostle, Mr. Eliot, so long and so suc- cessfully used.
CHAPTER III.
Origin of the Sudbury Settlement. - Why it was formed. - Names of Early Settlers : Residents of Watertown, Emigrants from England. - Passenger List of the Ship " Confidence."- Tradition about John Rutter. - Character of the Settlers. - Biographical Sketches.
And that pale pilgrim band is gone, That on this shore with trembling trod ; Ready to faint, yet bearing on The ark of freedom and of God.
PIERPONT.
IN passing from the early condition of the territory of Sudbury, and its aboriginal inhabitants, we will next notice who they were, who became possessed of this territory as settlers, and so changed its condition ; whence they came, their names, and their character.
The town was settled by Englishmen. The plan of set- tlement originated at Watertown, which was settled a few years previous by Sir Richard Saltonstall and Company, who came to America in the ship " Arbella." Mr. Saltonstall's party landed at Salem, went from there to Charlestown, and thence about four miles up Charles River, where they founded Watertown. Few, if any, colonial places were better pros- pered than this. It rapidly grew in strength and importance, and soon parties went out from it to form new settlements. Some went to the places now Dedham and Concord, and
25
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
some as far off as Wethersfield, Conn. In fact, emigration from Watertown helped form some of the best towns of the period.
In 1637, it was proposed that a company proceed westerly, and settle at what is now Sudbury. The reason for starting this settlement was, as the petitioners state in their paper, " straitness of accommodation, and want of more meadow." Going westerly, they could obtain both these objeets ; for, bordering on the mother town was a territory through which ran a large stream, with abundance of fresh water marsh. But though the plan of settlement originated in Watertown, not all of those who carried it into effect were inhabitants of that place. To a large extent, the settlers came direct from Eng- land. Bond, the historian of that town, says, " Only a small proportion of the names of the early grantees of Sudbury are on the Watertown records ; and some who went there returned. Some, whose names are on the records of both places, were either residents of Sudbury but a very short time, or, it may be, never lived there at all." The explanation of this may be, first, that the plantation was not proposed because all the petitioners designed to make it their permanent home, but that it might be an outlet to an over-populous place. Water- town, it was considered, had too many inhabitants. The emigrants of ship after ship, as they arrived at these shores, went to the older places ; and this led to what was called "straitness of accommodation." New land would present greater allurements to the new comers, and the earlier settlers would thus be left undisturbed in their original estates. Secondly, speculative purposes may have led some to engage in the scheme for the Sudbury settlement. More or less doubtless enlisted in the enterprise designing to transfer their titles to others, as fresh emigrants came to the country. Sharing with the residents of the settlement the expense of the undertaking, they had a right to convey the lands that were allotted them, and receive such compensation therefor as their increased value might bring. Thus, while the plan of the settlement of Sudbury originated at Watertown, and some of the settlers came from there, yet largely, as we have said, it was settled by emigration direct from England. Most
26
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
or all of the names of the earlier settlers have been preserved, and are repeatedly given in connection with land divisions prior to the close of 1640.
From the town records we have compiled the following list of the early grantees or settlers, who went to the Sud- bury Plantation about 1638 or 1639 : -
Mr. William Pelham,
John Parmenter, Senior,
Mr. Edmund Browne,
Edmond Rice,
Mr. Peter Noyse,
Henry Rice,
Bryan Pendleton,
Wyddow Buffumthyte,
Walter Haine,
Henry Curtis,
John Haine,
John Stone,
John Blandford,
John Parmenter, Jun.,
Hugh Griffyn,'
Jolın Rutter,
Edmond Goodnowe,
John Toll,
Robert Beast,
Henry Loker,
Thomas Noyse,
John Wood,
Thomas Browne,
John Loker,
Robert Darnill,
Widow Wright,
William Browne,
John Bent,
Thomas Goodnow,
Nathaniel Treadaway,
John Freeman,
Robert Hunt,
Solomon Johnson,
Widow Hunt.
William Ward,
John Maynard,
Richard Newton,
Joseph Taintor,
John Howe,
Robert Fordum, or Fordham,
Anthony Whyte,
Richard Sanger,
Andrew Belcher,
Richard Bildcome,
John Goodnowe,
Robert Davis,
John Reddock,
Henry Prentiss,
Thomas Whyte, Wm. Kerly,
John Knight,
Thomas Hoyte,
William Parker,
Thomas Flyn.
George Munnings,
Thomas Joslyn, or Jslen,
The following are names of persons who were at the set- tlement soon after it began : -
Thomas Axdell, John Moore, Thomas Read, Thomas Bisbig,
1
27
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
Thomas Plympton,
John Waterman,
Hugh Drury,
Goodman Witherell,
Philemon Whale,
John George,
Wm. How,
Thomas King,
John Smith,
Peter King,
Thomas Buckmaster,
Jonas or James Pendleton,
John Grout,
John Woodward,
Thomas Cakebread,
Shadrach Hapgood,
John Redit,
Edward Wright.
Of the Sudbury settlers who once lived in Watertown, we have the following names: Robert Betts (Beast), Thomas Cakebread, Henry Curtis, Robert Daniel (Darnell), John Grout, Solomon Johnson, John Knight, George Munnings, William Parker, Bryan Pendleton, Richard Sanger, Joseph Tainter, Anthony White, Goodman (John) Wetherell, Na- thaniel Treadaway, John Stone.
Some of these men were prominent and valuable citizens of Watertown. Bryan Pendleton was one of its early Se- lectmen. Nathaniel Treadaway and John Stone were sons-in- law of Elder Edward How. Robert Betts had a share in the Great Dividend Allotment, and the Beaver Brook "plow lands." Of those who came direct from England, we have on a single ship's list of passengers the names of some of the most prominent persons in the Sudbury Plantation, namely :
" The list of the names of the Passengers Intended for New England in the good shipp the Confidence of London of C C. tonnes John Jobson Mr And thus by vertue of the Lord Treasrs warrt of the xjth of April, 1638. Southampton, 24° Aprill 1638.
" Walter Hayne of Sutton Mandifield in the County of Wilts Lennen Weaver 55 Eliz : Hayne his wife
Thomas Hayne their sonnes
John Hayne under 16
Josias Hayne yeares of age.
Sufferance Hayne their
Mary Hayne S daughters
28
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
John Blanford
their
27
John Riddett
26
Rich Bildcombe
$
servants
16
Peter Noyce of Penton in the
County of South" (Southampton) yeoman 47
Thomas Noyce his sonne
15
Eliz : Noyce his daughter
Robert Davis
his
30
John Rutter
22
Margarett Davis servants 26
Nicholas Guy
( Upton Gray, Co. of ( carpenter 50
Southampton
Jane his wife
Mary Guy his daughter
Joseph Taynter servants
Robert Bayley
John Bent of Penton in the County of South" Husband- man 35
Martha Bent his wife
Robert Bent
William Bent,
their children
Peter Bent,
all under ye age
John Bent of 12 years
Ann Bent
John Goodenowe of Semley of Welsheir Husbandman 42
Jane Goodenowe his wife
Lydia Goodenowe } their Jane Goodenowe § daughters
Edmund Goodenowe of Dun- head in Wilsheire Husbandman 27 Ann Goodenowe his wife
their sonnes
John Goodenowe
4 years and
Thomas Goodenowe under
Richard Sanger his servant
29
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
Thomas Goodenowe of Shasbury § 30
Jane Goodenow his wife Thomas Goodenowe his sonne Ursula Goodenowe his sister
Edmond Kerley ) of Ashmore 22 William Kerley ( Husbandmen "
It is not certain that the young men mentioned in this ship's list as " servants," or " hired men," ever came in that capacity. John Rutter was by trade a carpenter; Richard Sanger was a blacksmith ; one had a family when he came ; two others were afterward sons-in-law of the persons in whose employ they ostensibly came ; and all of them took their place among the substantial men of the settlement.
It was a tradition among the descendants of John Rutter, without their having a knowledge that this ship's list was in existence, that their ancestor came to this country disguised as a servant.
The state of the times and the strictness of English laws at that period, with regard to ships and emigrants coming to America, might be a reason why some might come in disguise. If this was so in the case of one, it might have been so with regard to the rest.
In connection with the names of the settlers, it is appropri- ate to state something of their character. In attempting this, perhaps we can do no better than to say that they fitly represented the noble element that came to the New England shores at that period. They were Puritans both in theory and practice ; and afar from the conveniences and luxuries of their native land, sought in a new country a home remote from ecclesiastical and political strife. They embarked for America at a time when England was in an unsettled condi- tion, and when ship after ship was bringing to these shores some of her purest and stanchest citizens. As we pass along, we shall see that they were a practical people, and possessed of energy equal to the emergencies incident to pioneer life ; and that they began the settlement as men who . could forecast what a substantial and prosperous community would require. The whole trend of their conduct is indica-
.
30
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
tive of self-reliance, though recognizing all proper authority. What the common weal required they took hold of with zest; and in their adherence to what they thought suitable, they showed a perseverance truly commendable. Their proceed- ings in town-meeting, and the manner in which the records were kept, indicate that the education of a part of them at least was good for the times ; and the measures enacted for the common convenience and welfare show common sense and sagacity.
As a religious people, they in no way lacked what we ascribe to the historic Puritan. Although compelled by cir- cumstances to economize all their resources, and to make the most of time, talents and strength to meet the demands of every day life, yet they found time to serve their Creator, and praise and adore Him in their forest home. Their Chris- tianity manifested itself in their steadfast adherence to the Christian faith, in their reliance on God, and their love for His holy law.
Industry was a prominent characteristic. From the minis- ter down to the humblest citizen, each had a share in the manual work of the settlement. Though the minister's sal- ary was in part paid in produce, yet he was assigned lands and attended to husbandry. Another characteristic trait of the settlers seems to have been their desire for territorial enlargement and possession, and for the pioneering of new places. To such an extent did this spirit prevail in Sudbury and its neighboring town, Concord, that the following law was passed by the Court in 1645 : -
" In regard of the great danger that Concord, Sudbury and Dedham will be exposed unto, being inland Townes and but thinly peopled, it is ordered that no man now inhabiting and settled in any of the s'd Townes (whether married or single) shall remove to any other Town without the allowance of the magistrates or the selectmen of the towns, until they shall obtain leave to settle again."
The settlers of Sudbury were young men, or in the prime of stirring manhood : they were not patriarchs near the close of their pilgrimage. Even those with whom, because of their prominence, we most associate dignity and gravity were com-
.
31
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
paratively young men when the settlement began. By the passenger-list of the "Confidence" it will be noticed that only Walter Haine had reached the age of 55, and John Rut- ter was only 22; Robert Davis, 30; John Blandford, 27 ; John Reddet, 26; Peter Noyes, 47; John Bent, 35: John Goodenow, 42 ; Edmund Goodenow, 27 ; Thomas Goodenow, 30. These ages are doubtless correct, as we have in 1666 a deposition made by one of them, Edmund Goodenow, in which he alleges that he is about fifty-five years old. Rev. Edmund Browne was in about the prime of life when he came to the plantation ; and Edmund Rice was about thirty- four. In fact, we find in an old petition presented at the close of Philip's war in 1676, from a dozen to a score or more of names that may have belonged to the early grantees. Probably from a quarter to a half century passed before there was a generation of old men in Sudbury. Having noticed thus much of the character of the Sudbury settlers collec- tively, we will give a few facts concerning them individu- ally. These facts will serve the purpose not so much of genealogy, as an introduction of these ancient worthies, with whom the history of our town is so closely connected.
WILLIAM PELHAM came to this country in the fleet with Winthrop, and may have been a brother of Herbert and John Pelham. Savage states that he lost the passage with the "Govenor's son Henry, by going ashore at Cowes from the ' Arbella,' and trusting fortune for another ship." It is recorded in the Colonial Records, 1645, that " Mr. William Pelham being recommended to this Court by ve town of Sudbury for the Captaine, and Edmund Goodnow as the Ensign, were both accepted and confirmed in their places by this Court." In 1645-6 he was selectman, and representa- tive in 1647. He returned to England, and was there in 1652.
EDMUND BROWNE. (Sce chapter on First Minister, Meeting-House, etc., and period 1675-1700.)
PETER NOYES came from England in the ship " Confi- dence," 1638. He is called " yeoman " in the ship's passen- ger list, but is repeatedly mentioned in the records of this
32
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
country as "gentleman ; " and the term "Mr." is often applied. After a short stay in America, he returned to England, but came back the next year in the ship "Jona- than," with, it is supposed, other children, viz., Nicholas, Dorothy, Abigail and Peter ; also the servants John Water- man, Richard Barnes and William Street. Mr. Noyes was a freeman May 13, 1640, a selectman eighteen years, and rep- resented the town at the General Court in 1640, '41 and '50. He died Sept. 23, 1657. Three years before his death he gave his estate in England to his son Thomas. The day before his death he made a will in which he made his son Thomas his executor, and named the following other chil- dren : Peter, Joseph, Elizabeth (wife of Josiah Haynes), Dorothy (wife of John Haynes), Abigail (wife of Thomas Plympton), his daughter-in-law Mary (wife of his son Thomas), and his kinsman Shadrach Hapgood. The Noyeses have lived in various parts of the town. The mill on the west side was built by them. (See period 1650-75.) Promi- nent members of the family are buried in the Old Burying- ground, Wayland.
BRYAN (or Brian) PENDLETON came from England in 1634, and became a freeman Sept. 3, 1634. He went to Sudbury from Watertown, where he was a grantee of ten lots of land, which he sold when he left the place. He was one of the prominent petitioners for a plantation at Sudbury, and his name is on the town records as one of the foremost busi- ness men of the place. He was early appointed to lead the " train band," and was one of the early selectmen. A hill in the centre of the town still bears the name of " Pendleton Hill." (See chapter on Cemeteries. ) Mr. Pendleton did not live long in Sudbury, but returned to Watertown, which place he represented in the Colonial Court for several years. About 1642 he moved to Portsmouth, of which he was repre- sentative some years, and from thence went to Saco. At the close of the Indian war of 1676, he returned to Portsmouth, where he died in 1681, leaving a will which was made Aug. 9, 1677, and probated Aug. 5, 1681.
WALTER HAYNES (Hayne or Haine) came to America from England on the ship "Confidence," in 1638. (See
33
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
ship's passenger-list. ) He was a freeman May 13, 1641. He represented the town in the General Court in the years 1641, '44, '48 and '51, and was a selectman ten years. Mr. Haynes was probably one of the first grantees to erect a house on the west side of the river, which house was probably the "Haynes Garrison." He died Feb. 14, 1665. In his will, Thomas is mentioned as being away from home, and Sufferance as being the wife of Josiah Treadway, and Mary as the wife of Thomas Noyes. One piece of property disposed of in his will was a tenement in Shaston, Dorsetshire, Eng. The Haynes family has been well known and quite numerous in Sudbury. Mem- bers of it have lived in various parts of the town, and held prominent offices, both civil and military. Capt. Aaron Haynes commanded a Sudbury company that marched to Concord on the memorable 19th of April, 1775, and partici- pated in the stirring events of that day. Dea. Josiah Haynes was slain in that contest at the age of eighty, and Joshua Haynes was killed at the battle of Bunker Hill. (See Revo- lutionary period. ) One of the descendants was Capt. Israel Haynes, who represented the town in the Legislature at the session when Charles Sumner was first elected United States Senator. (See chapter on Pantry District.) A descendant now living in town is Hon. C. F. Gerry, who has served both in the House of Represenatives and the Senate of Massachu- setts, and whose wife, a great-granddaughter of Judge Fos- ter, the first representative in Congress from New Hampshire, was a well-known authoress.
JOHN HAYNES, son of Walter, came with his father, in 1638, in the "Confidence," at the age of sixteen. We hear of him about 1658, with other Sudbury parties, in possession of lands in the territory of Worcester. (See chapter on Colonists from Sudbury.)
JOHN BLANDFORD came from England in the ship " Confi- dence," in 1638, at the age of twenty-seven. He came in the employ of Walter Haynes, and, it is supposed, brought with him Mary, his first wife, who died Dec. 4, 1641. He married for his second wife Dorothy Wright. He had at least four children, all born in this country, Sarah, Hannah, John and Steven. He made a will, dated Oct. 21, 1687, pro-
34
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
bated Nov. 23 following before Sir Edmund Andros. His widow received all of the estate for her life.
HUGH GRIFFIN (or Griffing) was a freeman in 1645, and held the office of the first town clerk in Sudbury. The Col- ony Records state that, in 1645, Hugh Griffin was " appointed clerk of the writs in place of Walter Haynes." He married Elizabeth Upson, a widow, who had one daughter by a former marriage. He died 1656, and left a will in which are men- tioned as his children, Jonathan, Abigail (born Nov. 16, 1640), Sarah (born Nov. 20, 1642), Shemuel (born Jan. 9, 1643, O.S.), and also Hannah, daughter of his wife by her former marriage. Among his descendants was Rev. Ed- ward Dorr Griffin, D. D., who was a professor of Sacred Rhetoric at Andover, a pastor of Park-Street Church, Boston, and third president of Williams College. Dr. Griffin was born at East Haddam, Conn., in 1670, and graduated at Yale Col- lege in 1790.
EDMUND GOODNOWE (Goodnow, Goodinow, Goodenow or Goodenoughi) came in the "Confidence," in 1638. The house-lot assigned to him was on the north street, the third east of the meeting-house, and adjacent to that of John Haynes. He was an early inhabitant on the west side, and probably built the " Goodnow Garrison." (See chapter on Philip's War.) He was a freeman May 13, 1640. He repeatedly represented the town at the General Court, was appointed to lay out land, and was a captain of the town militia. He died April 6, 1688, aged seventy-seven. His wife, Ann, died March 9, 1675, at the age of sixty-seven. Edmund Goodnow and wife were buried in the Old Burying- ground, Wayland. Mr. Haynes brought with him to America his children John and Thomas. Hannah and Sarah were born afterwards. Thomas, it is supposed, died young. Han- nah married James Pendleton, April 29, 1656. Sarah mar- ried John Kettle. The Goodnow family has had a promi- nent position in town from an early date. It has largely dwelt on the west side of the river, and to quite an extent in the south part of the town. One of the descendants was John Goodnow, the donor of the Goodnow Library, who was for many years a well-known merchant of Boston ; as was
35
HISTORY OF SUDBURY.
also George Goodnow, who gave a fund for the aid of the poor in Sudbury. Their father, John Goodnow, lived to be over a hundred years old, and was the last survivor in Sud- bury of those who did service in the Revolutionary War. He was born on the Noah Clapp farm, about half way between Sudbury Centre and South Sudbury, from which he went in early life to lands in Lanham, formerly owned and occupied by Thomas Read and his descendants.
ROBERT BETTS (Best or Beast) came from Watertown, where he owned lands. He died at Sudbury in 1655, bequeathing his estate to his brother-in-law, William Hunt, and other relatives.
THOMAS NOYES. (See sketch of Peter Noyes.)
THOMAS BROWNE was at Concord in 1638, and was per- haps a brother of Rev. Edmund and William Browne. He was a freeman March 14, 1639. His wife's name was Brid- get, who died Jan. 5, 1681, and he had several children. It is supposed he removed to Cambridge. He died Nov. 3, 1688.
ROBERT DARNEL (Darniel or Darvell) came to Water- town, where he was a grantee of five house-lots. He died in 1655.
WILLIAM BROWN, Bond says in his history of Watertown, has been thought to be of the lineage of Christopher Brown of Hawkedon, of the Parish of Bury St. Edmunds, County of Suffolk, Eng. ; but no evidence of it has been discovered. Probably William, Thomas and Edmund Brown were rela- tives, if not brothers, and all perhaps arrived at Sudbury at or about the same time. William Brown was assigned a house-lot on the south street of the settlement, the fourth east of the first meeting-house, adjoining that of Edmund Goodnow. He eventually settled near Nobscot, on a tract of land of two hundred acres, which was granted him by the General Court in answer to a petition presented by him in 1649. (Colonial Records, Vol. III., p. 155.) He was a freeman June 2, 1641, and became a prominent man at the plantation, and at one time captain of the militia. He was the first deacon of the church at Sudbury, and a representa- tive under the new charter in 1692. About 1643 he "was chosen and sworne surveyor of the armes of Sudbury." He
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.