USA > New Hampshire > Rockingham County > Hampton Falls > History of the town of Hampton Falls, New Hampshire : from the time of the first settlement within its borders, 1640 until 1900 > Part 18
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
MASON'S SUITS.
Suits were instituted against all the principal land holders in the province, who, following Waldron's example, never made any de- fense. Some, chiefly of Hampton, gave in writing their reasons for not joining issue. which were Mason's refusal to comply with the direction in the commission, the impropriety of a jury deter- mining what the king had expressly reserved for himself. and the incapacity of the jury, they all being interested persons, one of whom had said he would spend his estate to make Mason's right good. These reasons were irritating rather than convincing to the court. The jury never hesitated in their verdicts. From seven
188
HISTORY OF HAMPTON FALLS.
to twelve cases were dispatched in a day, and the costs were multi- plied from five to twenty pounds. Executions were issued of which two or three only were levied, but Mason could neither keep pos- session of the premises or dispose of them by sale, so that the owners still occupied and enjoyed them.
In 1683, Governor Cranfield brought an action against John Sanborn of Hampton for saying, "I question whether the king ever heard of his [the said Edward Cranfield's] commission or patent." Damages were laid at £500.
In case depending between Edward Cranfield, Esquire, plaintiff, against John Sanborn, defendant, "The jury now find for the plaintiff, Five hundred pounds damage, and costs of Court, Or to make a public acknowledgment, in all four towns both, in matter and form, as this Court shall direct. Then he so doing shall pay but ten pounds and costs of Court." The costs were £1 10s. Capt. Samuel Sherburne of Hampton was prosecuted, in an action of slander, by Robert Mason for saying "He brings nothing but blanks, and coppeys, without seals both here and in England to prove his cases." He was sentenced to pay £20 damages and to make open acknowledgment in Hampton and in Great Island (Portsmouth) on two public days, otherwise he was to pay £100. The acknowledgment was made by his confessing that he had done "very evilly, and simply both to the person and cause of Robert Mason."
The witnesses in Mason's cases were always some of the jury. Benjamin Moulton and William Fifield prove possession given Mason of Sanborn's house and lands and of the imprisoning of Sanborn. The costs in these actions were raised from 20s. to £6. Goods were not taken. In case of Partridge's costs, goods were tendered as before but refused, and Partridge imprisoned. He was forbidden to work in prison, and forced to live on his friends' charity. John Smith testifies the same of Christopher Hussey, who was 86 years old.
Jacob Perkins and Timothy Hilliard testify that seeing how others were dealt with by Mr. Mason, by imprisonment for want of money to pay court charges, they were forced to yield to Mr. Mason's demand.
The General Assembly ordered pieces of 8 rial valne and dollars to pass at 6s. Sd. per oz., Troy weight. Governor Cranfield and his council ordered that these pieces should go at 6s. apiece, without respect to weight; some dollars not worth 3s. by weight to pass for
189
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES.
6s. William Sanborn swears he lost 16s. in receiving €5, Spanish money, by reason of the above order: Jacob Brown, that he lost a sixth part of £5, Spanish money, by the same order.
One Joseph Dow and other jurymen, passing by the governor's house, were invited in and friendly received, but on asking the question whether they might not when sworn (as before they had done) hold up their hands instead of kissing the book, the gover- nor fell into a rage and asked them how they came there, to whom Dow replied "at your honor's invitation." Mr. Cranfield eom- plained of this matter to the next court as a riot. Dow was forced to give £100 bonds for his appearance next session. When Dow appeared nothing was alleged against him, he was discharged, and his arms restored; but at another session, after Dow was called again on the same bond, and the penalty was enforced against him, he was forced to flee out of the province with his wife and nine children, leaving his house and goods, with the corn in the ground, to the governor. This Mr. Vaughan and Mr. Weare can also prove.
September 16, 1684, Vaughan was committed to prison until he gave security for his good behavior, by Mr. Barefoote and others. John Foulsome and Nathaniel Batehelder swear that "in July last the governor said he would fine all the petitioners £100 cach and that it should be the last toll that can come to his mill." The petitioners referred to were those who signed Weare's petition to the king.
William Fifield, Jr .. Richard Sanborn, and Nathaniel Sanborn depose that in October. 1683, being at John Sanborn Senior's house, when Robert Mason, Sherlock, the marshal, and James Leach came to give Mason possession, Sanborn not opening the door, Leach. per marshal's order, broke it open and gave Mason possession,. and Sherlock took Sanborn prisoner, when Mason openly told the people "This is what you shall come to."
Thomas Philbrick speaks of some discourse between him and Henry Green, Esq., about Henry Roby and Nathaniel Boulter. two standing jurymen, having had land from Mason which was worth £100, above the 2d. to be paid Henry Green as one of the judges.
Henry Dow can testify that the 11th of October. 1683, Henry Roby had land measured out to him of one hundred acres upland and marsh, appointed him by Mason, and Nathaniel Boulter and his sons had twenty acres, which he said was too little, in that Mason had promised him thirty. Robert Smith had a piece of 13
190
HISTORY OF HAMPTON FALLS.
marsh land, he claiming the same from Mason. These grounds were part of the unfenced pasture where the milch cows of Hamp- ton's inhabitants used to feed, the loss of which is of great prejudice to the town.
The following extract is from a brief of Cranfield's commission and of the evidence in support of the complaint and against it:
That in order for the trial of Mr. Mason's lands 1st There is a stand- ing jury kept from month to month 2d That by report these jurymen have agreed with Mason for their lands. 3d That several pleas have been refused and the defendants told by judges they would not make record for them, by entering their pleas.
Thomas Thurston the Sheriff, was beaten at Hampton and his sword taken from him. He was then seated upon a horse and conveyed out of the province to Salisbury, with a rope about his neck, his feet tied under the horse's belly-Justice Roby attempted to commit some of the rioters but they were rescued on the way, and both the justice and Sheriff were struck in the execution of their office .- The troop of horse under Mason's command was then ordered out, completely mounted and armed, to assist in suppressing the disorder, But when the day came not one appeared.
Cranfield thus finding his efforts ineffectual and his authority contemptible was obliged to desist.
Jacob Basford, of whom a sketch appears elsewhere, was said to have been the man who bound and conveyed Thurston out of the province. Ten men came to arrest Basford, who was a power- ful man. He charged upon them with a threshing flail and put them to flight. They retreated in great haste, and as their course was through a potato field a great many potatoes were unearthed in their hurried departure. The officers did not trouble Basford any more.
John Sanborn, who was imprisoned by Mason's order, lived on the Sanborn homestead, near the orchard on the Depot road, in Hampton Falls, and was the father of Abner, who died in 1780.
NATHANIEL WEARE.
Nathaniel Weare was born in 1631. He was in Newbury, Mass., in 1656, and came to Hampton as early as 1663. In 1665 he ex- changed with the town ten acres of land. formerly Francis Swain's, one of whose heirs he was. It is not known what the relationship between him and Swain was. Mr. Weare soon became one of the first men in town and was intrusted with much important business.
191
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES.
In 1669, he was chosen to run the south line. This line was always a matter of dispute between the towns of Hampton and Salisbury from the earliest settlement of the towns, and was for many years after it became the dividing line of the provinces. People took advantage of the uncertainty attending it to evade their taxes, and after the separation in 1680, they improved the opportunity to resist the officers of justice of the two provinces.
The difficulty arose from its being exactly three miles due north from the Merrimack, following every bend of the river, which often was shifting, the respective towns sometimes being the losers and sometimes the gainers from the change. The town chose their best men to run this line and it required great exactness. After the incorporation of Hampton Falls they entered into an agreement with the town of Salisbury to tax no further south than Cane's brook. The line was run fifty or sixty rods south of the brook, and there was a meeting-house and several dwelling houses between it and the brook. In 1669 Nathaniel Weare was chosen to lay out the lands lying more than four miles north of the meeting-house. In 1670 he had a grant of eighty acres (No. 55). In 1672 he was chosen to manage a suit brought by the inhabitants of Exeter against the widow Garland, involving the question of the town line, which Hampton defended and carried before the court of assistants, by appeal from the court of quarter sessions.
In 1682 arose the famous dispute with Mason and Governor Cranfield, concerning the title of the inhabitants to their land. Mr. Weare was dispatched to England as the agent of the province. He went twice on this business, and gave great satisfaction to the inhabitants by his prompt and faithful discharge of the trust re- posed in him. Belknap's History of New Hampshire has a full account of the services performed by him. which we have not room to copy. The expense of his mission was defrayed by the inhab- itants of the different towns. The Ilampton people had a sub- scription and afterward, June 19, 1689, voted to raise £75 as their proportion. This was to be raised equally upon the shares, payable in five months.
Mr. Weare, previous to his going to England, took possession of the Hampton records and carried them to Boston, for fear of their falling into the hands of Mason and Cranfield.
The following writ has been found in consequence of this trans- action:
192
HISTORY OF HAMPTON FALLS.
N. hamp. ss. In his Maj. Name you are hereby required to attach ye goods or for want of them, of ye body of Nathaniel Weare Jr. of hampton yeomn and take bond of him of five hundred pounds to th sufficient security for his appearance at ye Court of Pleas, to be held by adjournment, at Grett Island ye ninth day of March next insuing, to answer to an information on his Majs behalf, for imbeselling ye records belonging to ye town of hampton aforesd, wch Lately were in his custody .- Fail not and make your return according to law .- Dated ye 2d day of March, 1685
by order R. CHAMBERLAIN Prothon.
To Thomas Thurston Provst MarshIl-Willm godso Marshall or either of ye deputies.
This is a true Coppy as attest THIOs THURSTON Provst Marshall
We have not seen any account of the result of this complaint. The occasion of his absence in England was improved by Cranfield's. agents, by his order to distress Mr. Weare's family as much as pos- sible.
In 1689, he was chosen commissioner to agree upon some form of government. In March, 1690, it appears from a letter of his to Robert Pike that he was opposed to being taken into the Massa- chusetts government. The allusion in that letter to the "frenzy leader" undoubtedly referred to Col. Josiah Smith, who abont that time took a major's commission, and during the remainder of his life was opposed to him in politics.
Ile was appointed one of the council in 1692. He withdrew vol- untarily, in January, 1699, upon the admission of Usher to a seat in the council, not deeming that he (Usher) had any right to the office.
In 1689, he was a representative, and a selectman in 1667, 1670, 1612, 1678, 1682, 1699, 1200, and 1701. He took a warm interest in procuring the organization of a church in Hampton Falls in 1111, and was a leading member. He died May 13, 1218, uni- versally respected through a long life.
In a letter from Stephen Bachiler to his brother, Nathaniel Bach- iler of Hampton, dated London, April 13, 1685, he says of Mr. Weare, "He is much of a gentleman & ye good friend. God grant he may arrive in Safety."
His wife was named Elisebeth. Her other name may have been Swain. She was admitted to the church July 14, 1699, but was dead in 1211.
Tradition says that Mr. Weare brought three elm trees from Eng- land, one of which he planted near his own house; another was set
193
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES.
near his son Peter's house, and a third near Capt. Benjamin Swett's house, whose wife was a sister of Mr. Weare. These trees are all now in existence and are of great size. One of them is near the house of the late Enoch Chase, at Fogg's Corner; one near the residence of the late David F. Boyd in Seabrook, and the third near the house of Miss S. Abbie Gove in this town.
His children were as follows:
PETER, born November 15, 1660; died in 1747.
ELIZEBETHI, married Thomas Cram, December 20, 1681.
MARY, born July 23, 1663; died September 1, 1682.
SARAH, born June 17, 1666.
NATHANIEL, born June 29, 1669.
HANNAH, born June 17, 1672.
ABIGAIL, born July 13, 1676.
MEHITABLE, married Benjamin Hilliard, April 20, 1702.
The following extracts are from a letter from William Vaughan, Esq., to Nathaniel Weare, Esq., at London, dated at Portsmouth, February 14, 1684:
Grete bluster at Hampton about the petition Some weaklings ware whedged into a confession and they discovered the persons who car- ried the petition. They ware by Justices Green & Roby bound over to the quarter sessions. But last Saturday night (on what grounds I know not) Mr. Green burnt their bonds and told them they must appear when called for
It is said that Justis Green is much afflicted for what he has done, But Roby not. [In a note attached to the foregoing, Mr Moody in the church record remarks thus on his judges: "Not long after Green repented and made his acknowledgments to the pastor, who frankly forgave him Roby was excommunicated out of Hampton church for being a common drunkard, and died excommunicated and was by his friends thrown into a hole near his house for fear of an arrest of his Carcass .- He was buried near the large rock back of the Town meeting house. Rev. Seaborn Cotton's prophesy, respecting him was, That when he died, he would not have so honorable burial as an ass Mr. Cotton has come home from Boston, Grete offence taken here at a sermon he preached in Boston on Acts 13-3, Tho pleasing to his hearers." |
Mathews & Thurston were sent to Hampton to levie Executions, and serve attachments, and warn jurymen for the Court in May. They arrested seaven, amonge which Captan Sanborn was one. Warned the ould jurymen-Executed upon Wm Sanborn took four oxen which were redeemed by money Drove away seven cows from Nath1 Batchel- der-Went to your house met your son Peter going with his four oxen
194
HISTORY OF HAMPTON FALLS.
into the woods, commanded him to turn the oxen home, he would not. They eursed, Swore and drew upon him, threatened to run him through, Beete him, but he did not strike again. They came to your house, ware shut out. Your wife ferefully seared for fere of her son, who was out with them-At length she let them in, laid three pounds on the table, which they took, and then levied on several young cattle. but released and left them. Your son eame hither to advise but complaint is bootless, Such a dismal ease are we in. They took away two bedds from ould Perkins-But his son offered his person, and they took it, and quitted the others what more they did we as yet hear not
The following is a letter from Nathaniel Weare to Major Robert Pike:
Maj. Pike
Honored Sir. The many revolutions and changes that have hap- pened abroad is very wonderful, and almost amazing. Besides what has happened among and upon ourselves is very awful, and things look very dark, the consideration therof so oppressive that I cannot but seke for some cause. And I know no better way (as to man) than to communicate some things to your honor from whose prudent dis- cretion I may receive much satisfaction and shall therfore erave the boldness to offer a few lines to your consideration not to medell with thyngs further off .- I shall as brief as I may ofer von what has happened in this province of New Hampshire and more partiquerly, in the town of Hampton.
Sir, it is no new thyng to tell you how that him that was both gov- ernor in your colony and also in our province was seazed and the occasion therof, Whereupon we had only the Justiees and inferior oficers left, The superior commanders being laid aside. Then great questions arose whether Justiees retayned their power or any eap- tain or other oficer deriving his authority from him so seazed. My opinion I shall altogether waive in that matter, But so it was for the most part concluded of, That we have no governor, or authority in the province, So as to answer the Ends of government, and to command and doe in the defence of their Majesties subjects, against the common Enemy. Therfore many asayer was maid in this province to make some government, till these majesties should take further order .- But all proved ineffectual-At first there was in the severall towns in the province persons chosen to manage the affairs of government, in this juncture of time. But that was for some reason laid aside, afterward there was in the town of Hampton 3 persons ehosen to meet with the Commissioners of the other towns if they see eause to appoint any to debate and conclude of what was necessary at this time to be done, in relation to some orderly way of government, and to make their return to the several towns for approbation or otherwise. But the inhabitants of Portsmouth met and made choice of some per- sons to meet with the commissioners of the other towns to debate and
195
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES.
consider of what was to be done in order to the settlement of some government. till their majesties should give order in the matter .- What they did. they ingaged themselves certainly to comply with .- The inhabitants of the town of Hampton began to be very jealous of their friends and neighbors, that they would bring them under sey- erall inconveniences in commanding them, their men and money as they pleased An so were very hard to be brought to anything, But after severall meetings and debates. Did choose 6 persons as commis- sioners with power according to other towns (Viz) Portsmouth, Dover and Exeter and after debate jointly and fully, Every man there pres- ent agreed to such a method as was then drawn up. Then the Sev- erall towns was to nominate and choose meet persons aforesaid, But wheras the town of Hampton meet on warning for that End. The major part, by far, of the said town seemed to be ferful and suspicous of thayer neighboring towns (that) they did not intend to doe as was pretended, But to bring them under. to thayer disadvantage, Which I thought was very ill so to think .- Yet they would give some instance of some former acts which notwithstanding I supposed they were too uncharitable .- And so they made a voat they would not choose any person according to the direction of the Committee, and so all proved ineffectual. After some time the apprehension of the necessity of some orderly way of government, and therby to be in the better method to defend themselves against the common Enemy seemed to inforse them to another assay for the obtaining thereof, and so the inhabitants of Portsmouth drew up and signed. so many as did, a petition as I am informed (for I never saw it) To the honorable the governor and Councill of the Massachusetts Collony to take the prov- ince into their Care and protection and government as formerly. So the other towns Dover and Exeter, complyed with it how generally I know not .- And so brought to Hampton on Wednesday, the 26th of February last past. When the soldiers were there warned to appear for conserns specified in said order, But no intimation given for the End of signing to the petition. So that severall Children and servants made up the number of names, when thayer parents and masters, its said did know nothing of the matter, and I doubt too true-It was quickly after by William Vaughan Esqr and Cpt. John Pickering brought into the province declaring to be accepted by the said governor and Councill-With orders given fourth to meet on such a day for chusing of Selectmen and Constables, and other town ofieers accord- ing to former usage and custom-As appears by order given to Justice Green bearing date March 4th 1689-90, Coppes I Supose your- self have .- What was done on that day I need not tell, Yourself knows verry well But this I shall insert, That chusing of Major, treasurer and recorder was not according to former usage and custom .- It was prest by some to have it voated whither they would in this town of Hampton aquies and comply, with the petition and the returns or words to that effect. Which yourself was pleased to say all would be knoet on the head. at one blow .- Now how contemptible it will bee for
196
HISTORY OF HAMPTON FALLS.
about 50 persons to prescribe the method and way of government for about 200, I shall leave to your honor to consider. For my own part its well known I am for government and so are severall others, whose names are not to the petition and hath a great esteem of and good will to the Massachusetts government, and to those worthy persons that doth administer the same. And with very littall alteration I doubt not but many men would have if they might have their hands to the peti- tion But to have hands in the severall towns to the same petition to be under the government of the Massachusetts Colony as formerly .- Where we are so differently sarcomstanced as som of us know we have been, is hard to draw such a petition and when such a petition is drawn subscribed as it is and accepted of for the subscribers to act contrary to the same is very strange .-
Formerly not to medell with the custom and usage of the gentle- men of Piscataqua, Wee at Hampton had the choice of our magistrates and public officers, as yourself knows .- And how the assistants or Magistrates at Portsmouth can grant any warrants, or exercise the administration of government over Hampton that never chose them, I know not So that upon the whole the government of the Massachu- setts cannot, I suppose, exercise or apoint any governors over us, till they have authority so to doe, from the crowne of England, or we, or the major part in the severall towns, doe pay for it, which at pres- ent is not in Hampton as it plainly appears .- So that to be subjected to a government in the province, and principally at Portsmouth, which has been so much spoken against by so many in Hampton will be very tedious to them. And the chusing of military officers as hath been, to give all due respect to those persons, I shall not say of ex- ceptional qualifications, So well known to yourself, But only say that frensy leaders may happen to have mad followers .- So that to have a government so imposed-What will I fear follow but distrac- tion, hart burnings, disobedience to the deposed commanders, publick declarations, remonstrances, set fourth that may reach as far as England, and so make way for a person to be deputed by the crowne of England, that may under the color of commission exercise his own will, not to speak of declarations of userpations still continued in the Colony .- Some have thought forthwith publiekly to declare them- selves to the governor in said collony, that all may be healed as quietly and as silently as it may be, and I doubt not your wisdom will be exercised in the matter and that we may have peace and unity with you, And at length we may have a happy pleasant settlement, And that the God of peace would by all means give us peace and truth is the desire and prayer of your very humble Servant
Hampton this 15th of March 1689-90.
NATHI WEARE
Major Robert Pike was a leading citizen of Salisbury. He was one of the commissioners and later a magistrate of Norfolk county. He defended the Quakers, and was a friend to those accused of
-
-
RESIDENCE OF JOHN BATCHELDER .- BUILT IN 1712 BY PETER WEARE.
197
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES.
witchcraft. Hle was a man of strong convictions. The General Court disfranchised him for using seditious language in relation to them. Rev. John Wheelwright excommunicated him from his church for differing with him in opinion. He was afterward re- stored to his former privileges in church and state. He died De- cember 12, 1706, at the age of ninety-one years. He was a man whose memory is honored and respected as a bold and fearless advo- cate of human rights.
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.