USA > New Hampshire > Rockingham County > Exeter > History of the town of Exeter, New Hampshire > Part 6
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
And in consideration hereof the inhabitants of the town who have cattle are to pay or cause to be paid unto the said Gowen Wilson the sum of eleven pound, to be paid by every man's equal proportion according to the number of their cattle in manner as followeth, viz. : at the first entry to have a peck of corn a head for all and every the milch cows, and a pound of butter a cow, suddenly, after his entry upon the said work, as he shall have occasion to use it. And the rest of the aforesaid (11 1.) is half of it to be paid in good English commodities at price current, about the beginning of August next, and the other half of the pay to be paid in corn at harvest at 3 8 a bushel.
Witness to this agreement the hands of us,
GOWEN WILSON, JOHN LEGAT, JAMES WALL, HENRY ROBY.
This writing discloses to us some facts of interest about the condition of the settlement and its people at that period. The cattle were compelled to gather their subsistence "in the woods," because so little of the surrounding country was as yet cleared from the forest growth. A cow-herd was necessary to keep them from straying ; therefore it is clear that there was an absence of enclosures. " The town street " implies that as yet there was but a single thoroughfare, doubtless along the line of the present Water street. The fact that the herd was to be driven to pasture only " every third Sabbath," shows the respect entertained by the people for the Lord's day. And the mode in which compensation was to be made, in corn, butter and English commodities, without a particle of cash, reveals the extreme scarcity of money among the people. Indeed, for long years afterwards, much of the
51
HISTORY OF EXETER.
business of the place was carried on by barter, or "country pay," as it was termed, and would have been practicable in no other method.
Up to the year 1650 the General Court had at intervals made appointments of local magistrates to end small canses in the town. In 1645 they were Anthony Stanyan, Robert Smith and John Legat; in 1646 Anthony Stanyan, Samuel Greenfield and James Wall. But when in May, 1650, the inhabitants made application for another similar appointment, it was refused by the General Court upon the ground that there was no need of such commis- sioners, as Captain Thomas Wiggin, an Associate, lived so near. But the town were allowed the privilege of choosing a constable, provided the person of their choice should be approved by the county court " as fit for the place."
The fathers of Exeter early learned the need of a system of supervision of the conduct of their publie servants. As early as Angust 26, 1650, a vote was passed that one of the duties of the townsmen should be to " call to account" their predecessors in office. And this, or some equivalent mode of auditing the accounts of the receiving and disbursing officers of the town, was maintained with great regularity afterwards, from that time to the present.
THE STAPLE COMMODITY.
The manufacture of lumber was, for more than a century, the chief source of revenue to the inhabitants. There was everywhere an abundance of the fittest oaks and pines that had survived their weaker brethren, and were truly monarchs of the forest. The land was owned in common, and a long period elapsed before much of it was divided. The lumber, therefore, cost the inhabi- tants nothing but the necessary labor in getting it out. Naturally, some secured much more than others ; there was a great deal of waste ; and non-residents did not hesitate to help themselves from the bounteous supply. To remedy these troubles, and to insure something like equality or equity among the inhabitants in the enjoyment of the products of their common domain, as well as to prevent strangers from encroaching thereon, the town from time to time adopted regulations ; a brief summary of which will be presented.
On the first of October, 1640, the felling of timber within half a mile of the town, except on one's own particular lot, or for
52
HISTORY OF EXETER.
building or fencing, was prohibited under a penalty of five shillings per tree ; and it was provided that none but inhabitants or town dwellers should have liberty to fell or saw any pine, oak or other timber under a like penalty to the offender.
On the fourteenth of January, 1642, " upon the great complaint of the great destruction and spoil of timber about the town," it was ordered that the inhabitants who had felled timber for pipe staves or bolts, should have a year's time to work it np, except that those who had timber lying for a year unwrought, should have but six months more ; after which if still unwrought, it should be forfeited.
On the sixteenth of February, 1647, it was required that every inhabitant should cease felling timber for the present till further order. Such as had timber felled had liberty to work up so much of it as would complete their proportions formerly granted or legally purchased ; and what they had felled more than their shares, they were to leave to the town's use. Every inhabitant should give an account to the townsmen what shares he had pur- chased and what timber he had already used. They who had not made up their proportional shares might fell timber and work it up, to the amount of their said shares. A penalty of five shillings was imposed " for every tree that any man shall transgress in." John Legat and Thomas Pettit were appointed cullers of pipe staves for the town, and sworn according to the order of the court.
On the twenty-second of April, 1650, it was ordered " by the freemen and some others, chosen for the ordering of the sole affairs of the town," that every inhabitant should pay for every thousand of pipe staves made by him, two shillings, for the mainte- nance of the ministry ; for every thousand of hogshead staves one shilling and six pence ; and for every thousand of bolts, sold before made into staves, four shillings.
On the twenty-sixth of August, 1650, it was voted by the town that none but settled inhabitants should have the privilege upon the Common to fell or use timber, and not future comers into town until they should be accepted for inhabitants ; all others were prohibited. Only one person to each house lot was to enjoy the privilege, and he must build a good, habitable house thereon within six months.
On the first day of May, 1657, it was voted that "for the preser- vation of pipe-stave timber, and that there might be some propor-
53
HISTORY OF EXETER.
tion [fixed], that some might not have great [share] of timber and some none," it was ordered that from that time forward there should not be above one person in a family at one time employed in making of pipe staves, hogshead staves or bolts, or in any other work concerning white oak timber, except it be for saw-mills or building of houses or fencing stuff, on pain of forfeiture of ten shillings for each transgression, one-half to him who should give notice, and the other half to the use of the town. This order applied to work upon the Common, and on all ground not laid out.
It was voted June 28, 1654, that the order theretofore made, debarring strangers from coming into town to fell timber and make staves, should be still in force ; and that for time to come no man living in another town, should, under any pretence whatsoever, fell timber or make staves or bolts or any timber work, unless he became a settled inhabitant, approved of by the town, and resident three months in the town before he should make any improvement of timber.
On the first day of December, 1664, " the town having taken into consideration the worth of masts, and that every year they may be still of greater consequence, and that his majesty for his own shipping may cause some to be transported from hence ; for the preservation of such timber as may make masts, " ordered that John Folsom be authorized to mark such trees as he thought fit for masts ; to impose a penalty of twenty shillings upon any one felling a tree so marked ; and to sell such trees for the benefit of the town, at the following prices : "for those of thirty inches [diameter] and upwards, thirty shillings each ; between thirty and twenty-four inches, twenty shillings ; between twenty-four and twenty inches, ten shillings."
At a town meeting March 3, 1673-4, it was ordered that thence- forth every single person who was legally admitted into the town should have liberty to make one thousand white oak pipe staves within one year, or the value of them in hogshead or barrel staves, red or white, and no more ; and every family of less than four, servants excepted, three thousand ; provided, that neither single persons nor families should sell their privilege to any other, but might hire men to work out their proper proportions.
Samuel Leavitt and John Wedgewood were empowered to " seize upon " any transgressor of the order, and to have for their pains, one-half the overplus of his proper share ; the other half to go to the town.
54
HISTORY OF EXETER.
On the twentieth of April, 1652, the town agreed to pay to the Rev. Samnel Dudley twenty shillings for the use of his two bulls. Mr. Dudley, in addition to his qualifications as a religious teacher, was a notable man of affairs. He acquired numerous tracts of land, was interested in mills and in agriculture, was employed to keep the town books, was the general conveyancer and attorney of the place, and now seems to have added to his other cares the desire to improve the breed of the cattle of the town.
The early records of Exeter are made up pretty largely of the elections of officers and of grants of land, but an occasional entry is met with which apparently must have had in its time a special significance. Such a one is a vote passed November 9, 1652, that the town book should be kept in Thomas King's house, and should not go therefrom unless there should be special occasion, and that by consent of the major part of the town ; and that any person warned to be at a town meeting who should not be there at half an hour after the time appointed, should pay for the use of the town two shillings ; and John Robinson was appointed to " gather up " any fines incurred for violation of this order. Curiosity is naturally excited to learn the occasion of such action. Had any unscrupulous hand attempted to tamper with the records? Hlad some obnoxious vote been prematurely sprung upon a town meet- ing? We ask these questions in vain. Interesting as the infor- mation might be, no clne to it has reached to our time.
In the lumber business many transient persons were employed. If disabled by sickness or accident, there was danger that the town would be made liable for their support. To guard against pauperism from this source, the following vote was passed April 3, 1665 :
Ordered that what person soever shall hire any servant for more or less time, if it happen that he that is hired shall be lamed or any ways unserviceable made in work during that time [he] shall be kept by the charge of him that hires him, if he be not able to keep himself, that so the town may be freed from such charges.
This vote was supplemented by a rule promulgated by the select- men, August 30, 1671, as follows :
Ordered that no man shall receive any person or persons into town without the consent of the selectmen, or security to free the town from any charge that may ensue thereby, upon twenty shillings a month forfeiture; and that no man shall come to
55
HISTORY OF EXETER.
inhabit, by purchase or otherwise, without the consent of the selectmen, upon the same penalty.
PROJECT FOR A CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT.
For nearly a quarter of a century after the death of John Mason, the patentee of New Hampshire, in 1635, little had occurred to remind the inhabitants that his representatives still claimed the title to the soil. They lived in England, and Robert Tufton Mason, to whom his grandfather's American estates descended, did not become of age till 1650. He was attached to the estab- lished church and the royal government ; therefore it would have been idle for him, during the protectorate of Cromwell, to expect any aid from the ruling powers in regaining the lands of which he alleged that Massachusetts had dispossessed him. But upon the restoration of Charles II. to the English throne, in 1660, he peti- tioned his majesty for the restoration of the lands. The king's attorney general, to whom the subject was referred, reported that Mason had a good and legal title to the province of New Hamp- shire. Though no immediate action resulted therefrom, yet we shall see that this movement of Mason was destined ere long to produce momentous consequences.
Until 1664, the king did nothing ; but on April 25, of that year, in consequence of other complaints and petitions, respecting matters of dispute in New England, he commissioned Colonel Richard Nicholls, Sir Robert Carr, George Cartwright and Samuel Maverick to visit the several colonies of New England ; to deter- mine all complaints ; to provide for the peace and security of the country according to their discretion and to such instructions as they should receive from the king; and to report to him their doings.
This commission was exceedingly obnoxious to the rulers of Massachusetts, who were conscious that it was especially aimed at themselves and their conduct, and who claimed that it was an interference with rights vested in the colonists by their charter. The commissioners, however, pursuant to their instructions, visited the several colonies of New England, and their inquiries caused little friction, except in Massachusetts and her dependencies. They determined that the assumption of that colony to include within her charter limits and jurisdiction the New Hampshire settlements, was an act of usurpation ; and gave the people of those settlements to understand that they would release them from the rule of Massachusetts, if that were their desire.
56
HISTORY OF EXETER.
Accordingly a petition was drawn, addressed to the King of England, purporting to represent the wishes of the towns of Ports- mouth, Dover, Exeter and Hampton, expressing their great joy that his majesty had sent over the Commissioners, and sorrow at their ill treatment by the Bay government ; and praying that the king would take the petitioners (towns) into his immediate pro- tection, that they might be governed by the known laws of Eng- land ; and that they might enjoy the sacraments they had been so long deprived of. This petition, so far as known, contained but nine signatures, two of them of Exeter men, Edward Hilton and John Folsom. The former was a moderate church of England man, the latter, who apparently was concerned in circulating the paper, was of a high and somewhat turbulent temper. There is no doubt that there was a party in New Hampshire disaffected to the government of Massachusetts, and had there been a reasonable probability that they would have bettered themselves by a demon- stration against it, a considerable number of names might have been obtained for that end. But the reflecting part of them had little confidence in the present movement, and prudently kept clear of it.
The General Court of Massachusetts in their turn appointed a committee to inquire into the disposition of the New Hampshire towns towards their government. Respecting that of Exeter they interrogated the Rev. Samuel Dudley, who replied as follows :
Concerning the question that is in hand, whether the town of Exeter hath subscribed to that petition to his majesty for the taking of Portsmouth, Dover, Hampton and Exeter under his immediate government, I do affirm to my best apprehension, that the town of Exeter hath no hand in that petition directly or indirectly.
It is sufficient for our purpose to know that the action of the royal commissioners led to no change of government, but rather to a demonstration in favor of Massachusetts. The several New Hampshire towns united in a general collection to aid in building a new hall for Harvard College, to replace that which had been recently destroyed by fire. For this laudable purpose the town of Exeter contributed ten pounds.
In connection with this subject it is worthy of mention that Samuel Maverick, one of the king's commissioners, had about the year 1660, made a brief report to his majesty, Charles II., respect-
57
HISTORY OF EXETER.
ing the several settlements in the New England colonies, which he was, by his early and long residence in this country, well qualified to do. This paper, after lying unknown to historians for more than two hundred years, has recently come to light. Every scrap of information of that early date, is of interest. Maverick's notice of Exeter, therefore, meagre though it is, is entitled to a place here :
Exeter. Above this (the saw-mill on Lamperell creek), at the fall of the river Pascataqua, is the town of Exeter, where are more saw-mills ; down the south side of this river are farms and other straggling families.
Taxation was probably no more agreeable to property holders in former times than it is at present. In February, 1672, the selectmen gave notice to the inhabitants to bring in a list of their estates, both of outlands and all else, to one of the selectmen, together with an account of all debts due them from the town, on or before the next sixth day of March; under the penalty of forfeiting what was due them from the town, upon their neglect to bring in an account thereof, and of the payment of two shillings by every one who should not bring in a list of his estate to make a true rate by. We can imagine that this rule would cause the exhibition of all claims against the town ; but whether it would bring to light all taxable property, might depend much on the amount which the rate payer would be liable to be assessed.
The year 1675 was made memorable by the fierce outbreak of Indian hostilities known as King Philip's War. The loss of life with which Exeter was visited, is related in detail in another chapter. To defray the growing charges of the Indian war the General Court of Massachusetts on the thirteenth of October levied upon the New Hampshire towns seven single country rates. The proportion of Exeter was eight pounds, eight shillings for a single rate, and the entire tax required of the town was twenty-five pounds, four shillings in November, 1675, and thirty-three pounds, twelve shillings in March, 1676. Happily, the war was of brief duration.
On the eleventh of March, 1679, Edward Smith, Edward Gilman and Peter Folsom were appointed by the town a committee to ascertain the town debts and the legality of the same. It thus appears that we have an early precedent for inenrring a town debt ; and the report of the committee having fortunately been preserved,
ยท
58
HISTORY OF EXETER.
is given here, as an example of the formal manner in which agents of the town performed their functions two hundred years ago.
Theis may certifie all whome it may concerne that whereas wee underwritten, at a Towne meeting ye 11th of March 1678 [9] were appointed a comittee to examine ye Towne Debts & ye legallity thereof, and ye Towne standing to ye same as wee should bring in o' Judgmts, doe declare & informe as followeth ; that wee under- written as aforesd haveing tryed & examined ye accounts, charges and disbursments of Capt". John Gillman, doe find for & allow unto him, Errors excepted, - 771. 198. 001.
The last Barr" of powder weh Capt". Gillman bought for ye Towne stock is not included in ye Snme aboue written.
EDWD SMITHI. EDWARD GILMAN PETER X FOLLSHAM.
Exeter continued under the laws of Massachusetts between thirty-six and thirty-seven years, until New Hampshire, in 1680, was erected into a royal province. The rule of the sister colony was on the whole equitable and beneficial ; and the little town exhibited marked improvement, both in respect to material advan- tages, and in the temper and harmony of the people.
NUMBER AND NAMES OF INHABITANTS.
The population made but a very gradual increase, as was to be expected, for there was little in the frontier settlement to attract new comers. It was those who were content to endure hard work and hard fare, in the faith of securing better things in the future, who were the bone and sinew of Exeter. Yet there was a gain in numbers. On the twelfth of October, 1669, the General Conrt appointed John Gilman lieutenant of the military company, at the same time declaring that there were "abont sixty soldiers in Exe- ter." This, if the usual ratio holds good, would imply that there were abont three hundred inhabitants of all classes. A fair pro- portion of the early settlers had passed their lives in the town, and were succeeded by their children. Others had come in, some for a temporary, others for a permanent residence. The new names that appear upon the town records between 1640 and 1680 will be given here, together with others derived from other sources. No
59
HISTORY OF EXETER.
complete list is to be found, on the books of the town, or else- where, and it is probable that the fullest that can now be gathered, is quite imperfect.
NAMES FIRST ON THE TOWN BOOKS BETWEEN 1640 AND 1680.
John Barber,
April 1,1678
John Bean, .
January
21,1660-1
Thomas Biggs,
September 5, 1643
Nathaniel Bolter,
May
6, 1645
Robert Booth,
February 10, 1647-8
Richard Bray,
October 10, 1664
William Bromfield,
September 5, 1643
Philip Cartee,
January 21, 1664-5
Philip Chesley,
August
29,1661
Jeremy Connor,
January 12, 1648-9
Christian Dolloff,
June
10, 1644
Nathaniel Drake,
April
22,1649
Teague Drisco,
April
1,1678
Samuel Dudley,
May
13, 1650
Theophilus Dudley,
December
1,1664
Eleazer Elkins,
March
3, 1673-1
Ephraim Folsom,
April
1,1678
Israel Folsom,
October
10, 1664
John Folsom,
November
4, 1647
John Folsom, Jr., .
September 28, 1668
Nathaniel Folsom,
October
10, 1664
Peter Folsom,
March
30,1670
Samuel Folsom,
October
10, 1664
John Garland,
August 26, 1650
Charles Gilman,
September 28, 1668
Edward Gilman, Sr.,
May 10, 1652
Edward Gilman (Jr.),
November 4, 1647
John Gilman,
January
12, 1648-9
John Gilman, Jr., .
April
1,1678
Moses Gilman,
February 10, 1647-8
Charles Glidden,
March
30, 1674
James Godfrey,
March 16, 1660-1
Alexander Gordon,
October 10, 1664
Samuel Greenfield,
May 19, 1644
William IIacket,
October
10, 1664
Thomas Cornish,
March
30,1668
Abraham Drake, .
December 1, 1664
John Bursley,
March 29,1668
John Clark, .
October 10, 1664
October 10, 1664
Biley Dudley,
60
HISTORY OF EXETER.
Joseph Hall,
October 10, 1664
Samuel Hall,
March
11, 1678-9
Robert Hathersay (Hersey), .
August 5, 1644
William Huntington,
February
27, 1644-5
Edmond Johnson,
August 26, 1650
Thomas Jones,
August 5, 1644
Joel Judkins,
April 2,1675
Duny (?) Kelley, James Kidd,
March
11, 1678-9
John Kimming,
October
10, 1664
Thomas King,
January 16, 1644-5
Nathaniel Ladd,
February 18, 1678-9
Cornelius Lary,
October
10, 1664
Jeremy Leavitt,
March
30,1670
Samuel Leavitt,
September 28, 1668
John Legat, .
October
20, 1642
Nicholas Liston,
January
12, 1648-9
Henry Magoon,
April
2,1664
Thomas Marston,
January
16, 1644-5
Richard Morgan, .
March
29, 1668
Nicholas Norris,
August
30, 1671
George Person (Pearson),
March 18 (about), 1679
Thomas Pettit, Jr.,
May
20, 1652
Robert Powell,
October
10, 1664
Thomas Rashleigh,
Mar
6, 1643
John Robinson, .
April
20,1652
Jonathan Robinson,
March
3, 1673-4
Jonathan Rollins,
October
10, 1664
Thomas Rollins,
March
30,1670
John Saunders,
January
16, 1644-3
Edward Sewall,
April
2, 1675
Jonathan Sewall,
April
1,1678
Robert Seward,
April
1,1678
John Sinclair,
October
10, 1664
John Smart, .
January
16, 1644-3
John Smart, Jr.,
April
22, 1649
Edward Smith,
March
30,1670
Nicholas Smith,
March
4, 1658-9
Francis Swain,
March 31, 1645
Nicholas Swain,
December 16, 1646
Richard Swain,
November
4, 1647
March
30, 1674
Moses Leavitt,
October 10, 1664
David Lawrence,
October
10, 1664
* Probably never came to live in Exeter.
.
April
22, 1649
Robert Smart,
61
1
HISTORY OF EXETER.
Joseph Taylor,
March 4, 1658-9
William Taylor,
June
26,1650
John Tedd, .
November 4, 1647
Jonathan Thing,
January 22, 1659-60
Jonathan Thing, Jr.,
March 30, 1670
Thomas Tyler,
May
20,1652
Robert Wadleigh,
March
15, 1667-8
John Warren,
April
22, 1649
Thomas Warren, .
October
10, 1664
John Wedgewood,
March
3, 1673-4
William Whitridge,
April
3, 1649
Gowen Wilson,
November 24, 1650
Humphrey Wilson,
June 17,1644
John Young,
March
30,1670
In addition to the foregoing, the following names of persons belonging to Exeter within the period referred to, appear on the records of old Norfolk county, to wit :
John Barsham, 1669
John Goddard (?) 1678
Isaac Cole, 1671
Thomas Hithersea, 1650
Henry Lamprey, 1666
Isaac Cross, 1651 David Cushing, 1655
Edward Littlefield, 1651
And the following additional names are extracted from a list of those who took the oath of allegiance and fidelity to the country, November 30, 1677, at Exeter; all, with a few possible excep- tions, inhabitants of the town.
John Clark, Jr. James Daniel Stephen Dudley Mr. Michael French Daniel Gilman
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.