USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > Boston > The memorial history of Boston : including Suffolk County, Massachusetts, 1630-1880. Vol. I > Part 38
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
The trade between Massachusetts and Virginia, of which Boston after- ward had the principal share, appears to have begun with Salem. In May, 1631, Winthrop records the arrival at Salem of "a pinnace of eighteen tons, laden with corn and tobacco. She was bound to the north, and put in there by foul weather. She sold her corn at ten shillings the bushel." 8 It was probably some irregularity in the sale of this cargo which induced the General Court, at its next session, to order "that no person whatsoever shall buy corn or any other provision or merchantable commodity of any ship or bark that comes into this bay, without leave from the governor or some other of the assistants."9 In the beginning of 1632 a bark arrived here from Virginia, having been to the northern settlements and to Salem to sell corn. She remained in the harbor for nearly a month, when she
1 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, i. 60. 6 Plymouth Col. Records, vi. 259, 260.
2 Ibid. p. 67.
8 Ibid. pp. 91, 92.
? Hutchinson, Hist. of the Col. of Mass. Bay, PP. 405-407. 8 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, i. 56.
4 Ibid. ii. 308.
G Mass. Col. Records, ii. 162 ; Winthrop, Hist. 9 Mass. Col. Records, i. SS.
of New England, il. 298, 299.
277
BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.
sailed again for Virginia, with Mr. Maverick's pinnacc.1 Not long afterward Captain Peirce arrived from England in the ship "Lion," and after discharg- ing his cargo and leaving his passengers, some of whom became prominent among the leading men in the Connecticut colony, he sailed for Virginia. In less than a week from the time of sailing his vessel was wrecked at the mouth of Chesapeake Bay, to the serious loss of Boston and Plymouth. "Plymouth men," says Winthrop, "lost four hogsheads, nine hundred pounds of beaver, and two hundred otter skins. The governor of Massa- chusetts lost, in beaver and fish, which he sent to Virginia, &c., near £100. Many others lost beaver, and Mr. Humfrey, fish."2 In the spring or sum- mer of 1644, after the great Indian massacre of that year, a considerable number of persons emigrated from Virginia to Massachusetts. The most conspicuous man among them was Captain Daniel Gookin, a name which will always be remembered in connection with the Christian Indians, of whom he was a steadfast friend. He is supposed to have arrived in Boston on the 20th of May, was made a freeman only nine days later, and was the last major-general in the colonial period.3
In May, 1642, about seventy persons in Virginia wrote to Boston, "bewailing their sad condition for want of the means of salvation, and earnestly entreating a supply of faithful ministers, whom, upon experience of their gifts and godliness, they might call to office." These letters were publicly read at the Thursday lecture; and subsequently it was agreed that the ministers who could be spared best were Mr. Phillips, of Water- town, Mr. Tompson, of Braintree, and Mr. Miller, of Rowley, as cach of
these churches had two ministers. Various difficulties, however, arose, but finally Mr. Knowles, of Watertown, and Mr. Tompson, agreed to go, and in October they left for their new home, intending to embark at Narragan- sett.4 Here they were wind-bound for several weeks, but in the mean time they were joined by another minister, - Mr. James, of New Haven; and after a long and perilous winter voyage they reached Virginia in safety. "There," says Winthrop, "they found very loving and liberal entertainment, and were bestowed in several places, not by the governor, but by some well- disposed people who desired their company." They were soon silenced, however, by the Virginia authorities, because they would not conform to the Church of England, and were ordered to leave the colony. They reached home in the summer of 1643.5 Puritanism could not thrive in Virginia under the shadow of Sir William Berkeley's administration.
With North Carolina also Boston had early and intimate relations. Thirty years after the settlement of the town, just as the first generation had passed away, a party of emigrants, desirous, perhaps, of finding a more genial climate,6 established themselves at the mouth of Cape Fear River.
1 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, i. 72.
2 Ibid. p. 102.
3 Ibid. ii. 165, and Mr. Savage's note. [See Dr. Ellis's chapter on "The Indians of Eastern Massachusetts."- ED.]
4 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, ii. 78. 5 Ibid. p. 96; Hubbard, Hist. of New Eng-
land, in 2 Mass Hist. Coll., vi. 411.
6 [Savage, Winthrop's New England, i. 118, has a note on the changes of climate. - ED.]
278
THE MEMORIAL. HISTORY OF BOSTON.
The enterprise met with little success, and in May, 1667, the General Court passed an order for the relief of the unfortunate settlement. "Upon the perusal of a letter sent from Mr. John Vassall, and the people with him at Cape Fear," the order recites, "directed to Major-General John Leverett, desiring that they may have some relief in their distress, and having infor- mation that the honored governor, deputy-governor, and some others of our honored magistrates encouraged a contribution for the relicf of those peo- ple, the which contribution hath been made in many places, and hath been committed to the care of Mr. Peter Oliver and John Bateman, of Boston," - the Court ordered the said Mr. Peter Oliver and John Bateman to carry on the contributions, empowering them to receive the same ; and further order- ing them " to keep exact accounts of their receipts and disbursements, that they may render the same when they are called thereto by this Court." 1 This was one of the carliest, if not the earliest, of the contributions by which Boston and Massachusetts have afforded relief to other communities in times of sickness, famine, or disaster.
In spite of the extreme aversion with which the settlers of Massachusetts regarded the Romish Church, there was some friendly intercourse with Maryland. In August, 1634, Winthrop records the arrival at Boston of a pinnace of about fifty tons "from Maryland upon Potomac River, with corn to exchange for fish and other commodities. The governor, Lconard Cal- vert, and two of the commissioners, wrote to the governor here, to make offer of trade of corn, etc., and the governor of Virginia wrote also on their behalf, and one Captain Young wrote to make offer to deliver cattle here. Near all their company came sick hither, and the merchant died within one weck after."2 At a still later period, in July, 1642, there was another arri-
val at Boston on a similar errand. "From Maryland," says Winthrop, " came one Mr. Ncale with two pinnaces and commission from Mr. Calvert, the governor therc, to buy mares and sheep, but having nothing to pay for them but bills charged upon the Lord Baltimore, in England, no man would deal with him. One of his vessels was so eaten with worms that he was forced to leave her."3 Even more suggestive is a record which appears in October of the following year: "The Lord Baltimore being owner of much land near Virginia, being himself a Papist, and his brother, Mr. Cal- vert, the governor there, a Papist also, but the colony consisted both of Protestants and Papists, he wrote a letter to Captain Gibbons of Boston, and sent him a commission, wherein he made tender of land in Maryland, to any of ours that would transport themselves thither, with free liberty of religion, and all other privileges which the place afforded, paying such annual rent as should be agreed upon ; but our captain had no mind to further his desire herein, nor had any of our people temptation that way." 4 It would have been strange, indeed, if our Puritan ancestors could have so far overcome their aversion to Romanism as to leave a Puritan colony in
1 Mass. Col. Records, vol. iv. pt. ii. p. 337. 3 Ibid. ii. 72.
2 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, i. 139.
4 Ibid. pp. 148, 149.
279
BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.
order to seek new homes in a colony founded and governed by Catholics. In spite of the ungenial climate and sterile soil of New England, there does not seem to have been much disposition among the first settlers to forsake Massachusetts for more attractive places. The removals from Cambridge and Dorchester to Connecticut are scarcely an exception to this statement ; and the number who went to the West Indies, to Long Island, or back to England, after the triumph of Puritanism there, was not large.
Massachusetts had relations with the Swedes on the Delaware River at an early date, but an account of these relations belongs to the annals of the New England Confederacy rather than to the history of Boston.1 So early as 1641 New Haven had established a trading-house there, near the Swed- ish fort, by the governor of which the New Haven people were badly treated. They made complaint to the Commissioners of the United Colo- nies, who wrote a letter to the Swedish governor, and sent an agent to treat with him for redress of grievances.2 Subsequently "the Swedes denied what they had been charged with," says Winthrop, "and sent copies of divers examinations upon oath taken in the cause, with a copy of all the proceedings between them and our friends of New Haven from the first ; and in their letters used large expressions of their respect to the English, and particularly to our colony." 3 Early in 1644 a pinnace was sent from Boston to the Delaware to trade; but the voyage proved unsuccessful, partly through the refusal of the Dutch and Swedish governors to allow them to trade with the Indians, and partly through the drunkenness of the master. On the return of the pinnace the adventurers brought an action against the master, both for his drunkenness, and for not proceeding with the voyage as he was required to do by his charter. They recovered two hundred pounds from him, "which was too much," says Winthrop, "though he did deal badly with them, for it was very probable they could not have proceeded."# In the autumn a bark was sent from Boston, with seven men, for the same purpose. They remained near the English settlement all win- ter, and in the spring fell down the river to trade. In this they were so successful that in three weeks they had obtained five hundred fur-skins and other merchandise, when they were suddenly attacked by the Indians, who killed the master and three men, plundered the vessel, and carried away another man and a boy. Finally, the survivors were recovered by the Swed- ish governor, who sent them to New Haven. From that place they were brought to Boston.5
With the Dutch at New York there were various relations of trade and hostility. So early as September, 1642, the former had become so large that the General Court found it necessary to pass an order determining the value of Dutch coins; and they accordingly, "considering the oft occasions we have of trading with the Hollanders at the Dutch plantation, and other
1 [Cf. Frederic Kidder's paper on the Swedes on the Delaware, and their intercourse with New England, in N. E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg., Jan- uary, 1874, p. 42. - ED.]
2 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, ii. 140; Plymouth Col. Records, ix. 13.
8 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, ii. 157.
4 Ibid. p. 187. 5 Ibid. pp. 203, 204.
2So
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
wise," ordered "that the Holland ducatour, worth three guilders, shall be current at six shillings in all payments within our jurisdiction, and the rix dollar, being two and one half guilders, shall be likewise current at five shillings, and the real of eight shall be also current at five shillings." 1 At a still carlier period, in August, 1634, we have Winthrop's testimony as to the extent and character of this trade. "Our neighbors of Plymouth, and we, had oft trade with the Dutch at Hudson's River, called by them New Netherlands," he writes. "We had from them about forty sheep, and beaver, and brass pieces, and sugar, &c., for sack, strong waters, linen cloth, and other commodities. They have a great trade of beaver,-about nine or ten thousand skins in a year."2 In May, 1653, during the war between England and Holland, the General Court passed an order pro- hibiting all persons within their jurisdiction "from carrying provisions, as corn, beef, pease, bread, or pork, &c., into any of the plantations of Dutch or French inhabiting in any of the parts of America," under penalty of a fine of three times the value of the provisions carried in violation of the order.3 This prohibition remained in force until August, 1654, when the Court ordered that "the law made in May, 1653, prohibiting trade with the Dutch, be henceforth repealed." 4
When the Royal Commissioners sent over by Charles II. in the summer of 1664 visited Boston, one of the questions submitted to the General Court was whether the Colony would send any men to assist in the expedi- tion against the Dutch of New Netherlands. This question having been decided in the affirmative, the Court, at the special session, August 3. ordered that there should be "voluntary soldiers raised in this jurisdiction for his Majesty's service against the Dutch, not exceeding the number of two hundred, to be ready to march by the 20th of this instant."5 Accord- ingly officers were selected for "such forces as shall be raised in this juris- diction," and a committee was appointed to see if Mr. Graves would "dis- pense the word of God to such as are intended for this expedition." The volunteers were also to be allowed "an able chirurgeon, such as they can get, furnished with all things necessary for such service."6 Whether any volunteers actually enlisted in Boston under these and the other orders passed at the same time does not appear; but the Royal Commissioners, when they left Boston, were accompanied by representatives from Massa- chusetts, and the Dutch did not venture to resist the force which shortly afterward appeared before the little fort on Manhattan Island. The Dutch settlements came under English control; and at a somewhat later period Boston and New York had the same governor.
Both the colony of New Haven and the colony of Connecticut were set- tled in part from Massachusetts, and their relations with Boston were always more or less intimate; but these relations, on one occasion, at least,
1 Mass. Col. Records, ii. 29.
" Winthrop, Hist. of New England, i. 138.
3 Mass. Col. Records, vol. iv. pt. i. pp. 120,
+ Ibid. p. 197.
5 Ibid. vol. iv. pt. ii. p. 120.
6 Ibid. p. 121. [See Mr. Deane's chapter in the present volume. - ED.]
121.
281
BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.
were subject to colonial regulations which operated to the disadvantage of Boston, though for the general interest of the colony. In May, 1649, the General Court established retaliatory duties on "all goods belonging or appertaining to any inhabitant of the jurisdictions of Plymouth, Connecti- cut, or New Haven," imported into Boston or exported from any part of the bay.1 The occasion of the passage of this order was the approval by the Commissioners of the United Colonies of a duty on all corn or beaver skins belonging to the inhabitants of Springfield, which should pass the mouth of the Connecticut River. This duty was to be applied to the upholding of the fort at Saybrook, and not to be "continued longer than the fort in ques- tion is maintained, and the passage as at present thereby secured."2 Massa- chusetts, not unreasonably, objected that the fort was of little or no use for the purpose intended, and that the duty was continued after the fort was burned down.3 The passage of the retaliatory order must, however, have seriously affected the trade of Boston ; and at the session in May, 1650, in answer to a petition from the inhabitants of Boston for its repeal, the Court passed an order setting forth that "the Court (being credibly informed that the Court at Connecticut will, for the present, suspend the taking of any custom of us, and at their next General Court intend to repeal their order that requires it) do hereby order the suspension of that law of ours that requires any custom of the other confederate colonies until they shall know that Connecticut do take custom of us."4
This was the only instance in which Massachusetts levied retaliatory duties on trade with the other English colonies, and it is the only instance in which Boston appears to have made special complaint. There were, indeed, numerous colonial regulations affecting trade ; but they were almost without exception based on obvious reasons of expediency, or concerned the other towns in the colony quite as much as they did Boston. For in- stance, in March, 1634-35, the Court passed an order forbidding any person to go on board of any ship, without leave of one of the Assistants, until she had lain at anchor at Nantasket, or within some inhabited harbor, for twenty- four hours, under penalty of "confiscation of all his estate, and such further punishment as the Court shall think meet to inflict."5 At the same session it was ordered "that no person whatsoever, either people of this jurisdiction or strangers, shall buy any commodity of any ship or other vessel that comes into this jurisdiction without license from the governor for the time being, under the penalty of confiscation of such goods as shall be so bought, or the value of them."6 The first of these orders was repealed in the following September ; and the other in May, 1636.8 In November, 1655, the General
1 Mass. Col. Records, ii. 269.
2 Plymouth Col. Records, ix. 93.
8 Ibid. pp. 90, 133.
4 Mass. Col. Records, vol. iv. pt. i. p. II. It should not be forgotten that the formation of the third church in Boston, known to us as the Old South, was owing to the invitation extended to the Rev. John Davenport of New Haven to VOL. 1 .- 36.
become the minister of the First Church ; but the account of that important controversy be- longs to another chapter of this history. [See Mr. Foote's chapter. - En.]
5 Mass. Col. Records, i. 136.
6 Ibid. p. 141.
7 Ibid. pp. 159, 160.
8 Ibid. p. 174.
252
THE MEMORIAL HISTORY OF BOSTON.
Court, taking into " serious consideration the great necessity of upholding the staple commodities of this country for the supply and support of the inhabitants thereof," absolutely prohibited the importation of malt, wheat, barley, biscuit, beef, meal, and flour into the colony from any part of Europe, under penalty of confiscation.1
From the circumstances under which Rhode Island was settled, and the distrust with which that colony was regarded by her neighbors, Boston had much less intercourse with the inhabitants of that jurisdiction than with the other colonics ; but an account of the relations of Massachusetts and Rhode Island does not properly fall within the scope of this chapter .? Roger Wil- liams was a resident of Salem when he had leave to depart out of this juris- diction; and the dealings with Gorton's followers, which have been made the ground for much reproach, were in exact conformity with the orders of the colonial authorities or of the Commissioners of the United Colonies. With the settlements in New Hampshire and Maine Boston had more fre- quent relations ; and it was to New Hampshire that Wheelwright and many of his followers betook themselves when they also had license to remove themselves and their families out of Massachusetts. But both New Hamp- shire and Maine were, during a part of the colonial period, under the juris- diction of Massachusetts; and everything relating to them belongs to the history of the colony rather than to the history of the town.
With the French colonies Boston had so frequent and various relations that the whole colony came to be known as the colony of Boston, or Bas- ton, as the name was commonly written; 3 and the inhabitants of Massa- chusetts, and even of the other colonies, were designated as Boston men, or " Bostonnais." Schemes for its capture more than once formed part of the ambitious designs of the French chiefs at Quebec.+ It was probably to these schemes that we owe at least two of the most interesting of the early maps of Boston.5
Indeed, the relations of Boston and of Massachusetts to the quarrels of two rival French governors of Acadia (La Tour and D'Aulnay) form one of the most curious and interesting episodes in the early history of the town and of the colony.6 The questions growing out of the rivalry of these ambitious and unscrupulous men fill a large space in our colonial annals ; but, as they are questions which originated in the desire of the Boston merchants to increase the foreign trade of the town, they may very properly be treated
1 Mass. Col. Records, vol. iv. pt. i. p. 246.
2 It is worthy of remark, however, that in the Winthrop Papers, in 4 Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi., there are thirty-nine friendly letters from Roger Williams to the elder Winthrop, written after Williams settled at Providence.
3 [This form, Baston, simply preserved the broad French sound (Bawston) as their equiva- lent of the colloquial English pronunciation. The Canadians towards the Pacific coast and the Indians of that region call Americans Bos- tons to this day. - ED. J
4 Parkman, France and England in North America, pt. v. pp. 382-384.
5 Franquelin's map of 1693, of which a helio- lype reproduction has recently been prepared for the Trustees of the Boston Public Library, and his map of 1697, both of which are repro- duced in this volume.
6 The names of these rivals are variously written in the contemporaneous documents. Winthrop frequently wrote D'Aulney; but the weight of authority is in favor of the spelling here adopted.
283
BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS.
here at some length. In the discussion of them, party lines were for the first time drawn between town and country. The course which the colonial government followed was in accordance with the wishes and with the appro- val of the people of Boston, while the remonstrances came from Ipswich and Salem and other places which could expect to derive little benefit from an increased trade with the French colonies. "I must needs say that I fear we shall have little comfort in having anything to do with these idolatrous French," Endicott wrote to Winthrop, in June, 1643.1 In saying this, hc only expressed an opinion very generally entertained away from Boston. Here the drift of opinion was naturally in the opposite direction.
By the treaty of St. Germains, concluded between France and England March 29, 1632, the whole of the French territory in America which had been conquered by England was restored to the former country ; and shortly afterward the Chevalier Rasilli was appointed by the King of France to the chief command in Acadia. The new governor designated as his licutenants Charles de la Tour for the portion cast of the St. Croix, and Charles de Menou, Sicur d'Aulnay-Charnisé, for the portion to the westward as far as the French claim extended.2 The latter is said to have been " a zealous and efficient supporter of the Romish Church ; "3 but " La Tour pretended to be a Huguenot, or at least to think favorably of that religion."4 A belief that La Tour sympathized with their religious opinions no doubt had weight with the colonial authorities in determining the policy to be pursucd with regard to the rivals; but it seems more than probable that he cared very little about what he professed to believe. He was so cautious, or so indiffer- ent to political obligations, that he obtained grants from Sir William Alex- ander, who derived his title from James I., and also from the French gov- ernment.5 The first appearance of either of the rivals in our history is in November or December, 1633, when Winthrop writes that news came of the taking of Machias by the French: " Mr. Allerton, of Plymouth, and some others had set up a trading wigwam there, and left in it five men and store of commodities. La Tour, governor of the French in those parts, making claim to the place, came to displant them, and, finding resistance, killed two of the men and carried away the other three and the goods." 6 The first appearance of the name of D'Aulnay, nearly two years later, is accompanied by equally unpleasant circumstances. In the summer of 1635 he seized the Plymouth trading-house at Penobscot, and sent the traders home with many fair promises, but without making payment for the prop- erty he had taken. This greatly excited the Plymouth colony, - " so as they resolved to consult with their friends in the bay," says Bradford; "and, if they approved of it (there being now many ships there), they intended to
1 Hutchinson, Coll. of Original Papers, 113.
2 Hutchinson, Hist. of Mass. Bay, p. 128.
8 3 MMass. Hist. Coll., vii. 90.
4 Hutchinson, Hist. of Mass. Bay, p. 132. See also a letter from John Winthrop, Jr., in 4 Mass. Hist. Coll., vi. 519.
5 Ilutchinson, Hist. of Mass. Bay, p. 127. See also Slafter's Sir William Alexander and American Colonization, pp. 73-80.
6 Winthrop, Hist. of New England, i. 117. See also Bradford's Plymouth Plantation, in 4 Mass. Hist. Coll., iii. 292.
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.