USA > New Hampshire > Cheshire County > Surry > History of the town of Surry, Cheshire County, New Hampshire : from date of severance from Gilsum and Westmoreland, 1769-1922, with a genealogical register and map of the town > Part 3
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 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106
17
INDIAN HISTORY
Keene; the savages were beaten off, but in their retreat they killed many cattle, burned several buildings and captured Benjamin Twitchell.
In the meadows, west and north of Deacon Wilder's (later the Sun Tavern), the Indians killed several oxen, a horse and colt-the latter was cut up and the best pieces of meat carried off. Mr. Twitchell was conducted up the river and probably spent his first night in captivity lashed to four stakes driven in the ground on the meadow in the south part of Surry, on the farm formerly owned by Edmund Woodward. In due course of time Mr. Twitchell was ran- somed, later being put on board a vessel for Boston. He was taken sick, set on shore and died in a few days.
"Peter Hayward was well known to the Indians as a dangerous foe. In later times of quiet, a friendly Indian said that he lay at one time concealed in the bushes where he saw Mr. Hayward and his dog pass by on a log. He aimed his gun first at one and then at the other, but dared not fire, knowing that if he killed either the other would certainly kill him. It is remembered, that, after the Revolutionary war, an Indian was lurking around for some time, and made inquiries for Col. Smith, and it was understood at the time that Col. Smith killed him, as his only means of saving his own life." -Gilsum History.
This Col. Smith was none other than Col. Jonathan Smith, Jr., who lived for many years on the farm where George Crehore settled in 1827, now (No. 24) owned by Merrill D. Carpenter. More than sixty years ago Mr. Crehore related an incident, which doubtless refers to the above Indian, approximately as follows :
Soon after the Revolutionary war an Indian was discovered concealed under the bridge at the foot of the hill south of where Edward H. Jos- lin now (1920) lives. It was understood he came from a tribe in New York state to avenge some deed that has not come down to us. One evening soon after an Indian-supposed to be the same man-appeared at Col. Smith's and opening the barn door fired a shot at the owner, but missed his mark. Knowing his life was in danger the colonel immedi- ately set a watch and shot the red-skin, and buried his body near the bank of Smith brook, a few rods north of the present buildings, (No. 24 map).
Mr. Crehore in tearing his barn down to rebuild in 1854 (?) discovered a lead bullet imbedded in one of the rafters in the old barn. It was generally thought at the time, to have been a ball shot by the Indian.
Another tradition states that not many years after Capt. Thomas Harvey settled on his farm (No. 177 map), his daughters in going to the barn early one morning discovered three or four Indians just leaving, having spent the night in the hay-loft. They were, however, peaceable and caused no trouble.
* In October 1854, Amherst Hayward of Gilsum collected and placed in a small book some data concerning his grandfather, Peter Hayward of Surry, a portion of which reads as follows:
*This "small book" is now the property of Mrs. Caroline E. (Hayward) Smith, the wife of John A. Smith of Gilsum and a grand-daughter of Amherst Hayward, and came into the hands of the compiler of this work after the mss. had been written.
2
18
HISTORY OF SURRY
"Peter Hayward (my grandfather) was the first man that began a settlement in that town (Surry). This was soon after the close of the French and Indian War and before the Indians had done coming from Canada to plunder, kill and burn the defenceless settlers of New Eng- land in consequence of this, the families of Keene and vicinity had re- peatedly to fly to the fort in that town for protection from these cruel savages. Thus we find this family though five miles off were hurried there in the year 1755 by an alarm of Indians in the neighborhood who passed through Keene and killed one woman near the gate of fort. Peter Hayward was with a company of men hunting them as they passed into Swanzey, but the Indians escaped by them in the woods and took one man prisoner in Keene and carried him to Canada."
A more full account of Peter Hayward and Ebenezer Day's (his neighbor) escape to the fort is given in the History of Keene.
CHAPTER III
EARLY HISTORY AND CHARTER
The town of Surry was chartered in 1769, and comprised territory severed from the towns of Gilsum and Westmoreland.
Surry received about one-third of her territory from that part of the latter town formerly known as "Westmoreland Leg," about two-thirds from Gilsum; taking that part of the town west from the top of the mountain.
In order to more fully appreciate the conditions which led up to the forma- tion of this town, we must go back and review briefly a somewhat earlier his- tory of this region. The following facts afford an explanation, without which, much that is of interest in the granting, settlement and early history of Surry will fail to be understood.
In 1614 the famous Capt. John Smith-an Englishman and founder of Vir- ginia-appeared off the coast of New Hampshire, but it was not until 1623 that the first settlement was made by Edward Holton and his brother William at Cocheco, now Dover, and about the same time David Thompson settled in the vicinity of Portsmouth. The territory on which these early settlers lo- cated came under the authority granted to the company of Laconia by the Council of Plymouth in England. About 1622 Sir Ferdinando Gorges and Capt. John Mason were high in office in this council, and procured a grant to "all lands situated between the rivers Merrimack and Sagadahock." Some years later this land was divided, and Gorges had the region east of the Pis- cataqua river, while that west of said river, extending back some sixty miles, went to Mason; the former received the name of Maine, and the latter was called New Hampshire, after the County of Hampshire in England, where Mason formerly resided.
Capt. Mason's land extended southward to the Msasachusetts Bay grant, or to a point three English miles north of the river called Monomack, or Merrimack, or "to the northward of any and every part thereof." He claimed as far west as near the middle of Cheshire county,-from east to west. An early grant describes the north boundary line of Massachusetts as beginning near the mouth of the Merrimack river then running west parallel with the river to the South sea, or Pacific ocean.
The Merrimack river at that time had been explored only a few miles in- land, and its true course was unknown. The English authorities supposed the general course to be easterly from source to its mouth. Had they known of the angle in the river a few miles west of the present city of Lowell, Mass., where its course turns suddenly almost due north, it would have saved much discord and bitter strife in later years. Moreover, this "angle" in the river probably affects, indirectly, the granting and formation of every town in Cheshire county, as will subsequently appear.
From 1628 until as late as 1691 grants of land were being made in New England which clashed with former grants and not infrequently covered por- tions of the same territory. Evidently the king and his advisers cared very
20
HISTORY OF SURRY
little about the true facts, nor did they make any effort, at least in some in- stances, to rectify previous errors.
The boundary line between New Hampshire and Massachusetts was for a long term of years disputed, and in fact not until about 1740 was it finally settled, and then in favor of the former state. §
"The New Hampshire grantees, following the language of their grant, claimed that the 'Southern Boundary of Said Province should begin at the end three miles North from the Middle of the Channel of Merrimack River where it turns into the Atlantic Ocean, and from thence should run on a Straight Line West up into the Main Land until it meets with His Majesty's other government.' That line starting at a point on the shore three miles north of the mouth of the Merrimack, would cross that river a little south of Reed's Ferry, pass north of Mount Monad- nock, south of Keene, and strike the Connecticut river in the northern part of Chesterfield." *
It would appear from the description given in the above grant that New Hampshire's claim for her southern boundary line, was just and equitable, yet to this, her sister state to the south would not acquiesce.
An early grant described the north boundary line of Massachusetts as "beginning at the Sea three English miles north from the black Rocks So called at the Mouth of the River Merrimack as it emptied it Self into the Sea Sixty years ago thence running Parralel with the River as far Northward as the Crotch or parting of the River, thence due North as far as a certain tree Commonly known for more than Seventy Years past by name of INDICOT'S TREE Standing three English miles Northward of said Crotch or parting of Merrimack River, and from thence due West to the South Sea!" *
Upon the aforesaid description, the boundary line between New Hampshire and Massachusetts was finally established, substantially as at present. "Upon that description the Massachusetts grantee claimed that the line beginning three miles north of the mouth of the river was intended to run along that side of the river, at the same distance from it, to the source of the main stream; which gave them a strip three miles wide on the east side, as well as one on the north side of the river." *
In 1652 the General Court of Massachusetts appointed a commission to survey the boundary line between the two provinces. That commis- sion, consisting of Capt. Simon Willard of Concord, Mass., and Capt. Edward Johnson, with guides and assistants, accompanied by a com- mittee of the general court and escorted by a squad of soldiers, sur- veyed as far north as the "Weares," near the outlet of Lake Wini- pisiogee. They there marked, at the head of a small island in the chan- nel, what they claimed to be the northeast corner of Massachusetts, by chiseling on the face of a rock-still to be seen-the initials of the
§ In settling the dispute New Hampshire was given a tract of land fifty miles in length by fourteen in breadth more than she had claimed.
*History of Keene.
21
EARLY HISTORY AND CHARTER
names of the commissioners and the full name of "John Endicott Gov." ¡ A line running "due west" from that point strikes the Connecticut river near the south line of Lebanon, N. H .*
The grantees and provincial authorities of Massachusetts clung tenaciously to this version of the grant, while the New Hampshire authorities persistently held fast to the wording in their grant, and the controversy between the two provinces continued year after year for a long period while the English au- thorities refrained from acting. The inconsistency of the king in making certain grants of land was certainly unfortunate. In this instance he granted about 2000 square miles of land in southern N. H. to Capt. John Mason, and a later grant gave Massachusetts her authority to also hold the same territory.
The feeling on the part of New Hampshire, at length became so in- tense for ascertaining definitely her territorial jurisdiction, that it was determined in 1733, to present a petition to his majesty, George II, praying for the appointment of commissioners, whose duty it should be to ascertain the respective boundaries of the two provinces. Accord- ingly on February 9, 1736 His Majesty and Council, directed that com- missioners should be appointed to mark out the dividing line between the Provinces of the Massachusetts Bay, and New Hampshire, giving Liberty to either Party therein who thought themselves aggrieved to appeal therefrom to his Majestie in Council.
¿ In establishing the boundary line it was the opinion "That the Northern Boundries of the Massachusetts Bay are and be a similar curve line pursuing the Course of Merrimac River at three Miles Dis- tance from the North side thereof, beginning at the Atlantic Ocean, and ending at a Point due North of a Place, in the plan returned by said commissioners, called Pautucket Falls, and a straight Line Drawn from thence due West crossing the said River till it meets with His Majesty's other Government." This report was probably submitted in 1738; both Provinces appealed to His Majesty in Council.
The final decree of his Majesty fixing the boundary line, bears date March 5th, 1740 .**
During the time the petition of New Hampshire for the appointment of a commission was pending in England, the General Court of Massachusetts, in 1735-36, granted over thirty townships between the Merrimac and Connecti- cut rivers, which, afterward fell within the Province of New Hampshire. The haste which the General Court of Massachusetts made, in granting in one day about thirty townships, in this section, leaves no doubt of her purpose to hold this land in that way, as a large majority of the grantees were from Massa-
¿The location of this chiseled rock-now called "ENDICOTT ROCK"-was unknown for about 200 years. Twenty-five or thirty years ago the State of New Hampshire built a substantial granite covering to protect this historic rock,-near the Weirs. *History of Keene.
#A point three miles "due North" of a place "called Pautucket Falls" in the Merrimack River, from where "a straight Line Drawn from thence due West" was at a point where a "Pine Tree", called, "INDICOT'S TREE" was standing "for more than Seventy Years past" in the south-east corner of the present town of Pelham, N. H. and also in the north line of Dracut, Mass.
** Abridged from History of Charlestown.
22
HISTORY OF SURRY
chusetts. Each town had the contents of six miles square. Under a penalty of forfeiture of their right, each settler was required to:
Build a Dwelling House of Eighteen feet Square and Seven feet Stud at the Least on their Respective Home Lots and Fence in and Break up for Plowing, or clear and Stock with English Grass Five acres of Land within Three years next after their admittance and cause their Respective Lots to be inhabited, and that the Grantees do within the Space of three years from the time of their being Admitted Build and finish a Convenient meeting House for the Public Worship of God, and settle a Learned Orthodox Minister. Furthermore, each grantee shall "give Security to the Value of Forty Pounds to Perform the Condi- tions," etc .**
A list of towns in this vicinity are given in the following table, present name, date of incorporation, first called name, later name, etc .:
Acworth Sept. 19, 1766
Burnet, Dec. 28, 1752.
Alstead
Aug. 6, 1763
Newton, or New Town, Dec. 28, 1752.
Charlestown
July 2, 1753
Number 4, Dec. 31, 1736.
Chesterfield Feb. 11, 1752
Number 1, Nov. 30, 1736.
Gilsum July 13, 1763
Boyle, Dec. 30, 1752, also called "Gillsom."
Keene
Apr. 11, 1753
Upper Ashuelot, Feb. 21 (?) 1734.
Langdon
Jan. 11, 1787
Taken from Charlestown and Walpole.
Marlow Oct. 7, 1761
Addison, Jan. 1, 1753.
Roxbury Dec. 9, 1812
Taken from Keene, Marlboro and Packers- field .*
Stoddard
Nov. 4, 1774
Monadnock No. 7, and later Limerick.
Sullivan
Sept. 27, 1787
Taken from Keene, Gilsum, Stoddard and Packersfield.
Surry
Mar. 9, 1769
Taken from Gilsum and Westmoreland.
Swanzey
July 2, 1753
Lower Ashuelot, 1734.
Walpole
Feb. 13, 1752
Westmoreland
Feb. 12, 1752
Number 3, also Great Falls and Bellows- town. Number 2, 1738 (?), also called Great Meadows.
Nov. 30, 1736 the General Court of Massachusetts accepted plots of four townships laid out upon the east side of Connecticut river, which a little later were numbered to correspond to the several forts. Chesterfield was called No. 1, Westmoreland No. 2, Walpole No. 3 and Charlestown No. 4.
The following were appointed to call the first meetings of the proprietors of the above four townships, viz: Samuel Chamberlain of Westford for No. 1, Nathaniel Harris for No. 2, John Flint for No. 3, and Thomas Wells for No. 4. A map of this region made prior to 1760 shows these four towns in form differing somewhat from the so-called "Blanchard and Langdon map" of 1761.
** Abridged from History of Charlestown.
*The name of Packersfield was changed to NELSON, Oct. 1, 1814.
23
EARLY HISTORY AND CHARTER
In the spring of 1741, embarked in four large canoes, the first settlers of No. 2 (now Westmoreland), came slowly up the Connecticut river from North- field, Mass. They were, Daniel How, Jethro Wheeler, Philip Alexander and Thomas Cressen, all of whom settled in the Connecticut valley, or in that vicinity. The old Indian trail ran up the river to No. 4 at this time, but to the east, it still was an almost unbroken wilderness to the Merrimack river valley.
The boundary line between Massachusetts Bay and the Province of New Hampshire having been established in 1741, township No. 2 with others, fell under the jurisdiction of the latter territory. Number 2, or Great Meadows as it was then called, was intact as originally surveyed. The first settlers who, on account of the Indian trouble had left the town in 1744-5 were now (1750) returning and they, like others, found it necessary to secure a new charter from the New Hampshire government for their township.
It may be noted, in not a single instance was the original name of a town- ship in this vicinity retained in granting the new charters. Many of the towns were named in honor of English friends of the Provincial Governor, Benning Wentworth, Esq., of Portsmouth, N. H. In the case of Number 2, the charter was granted Feb. 12, 1752, being incorporated under the name of Westmoreland, in honor of Lord Westmoreland, an intimate friend of Gov. Wentworth. The petition for this new charter, signed by Daniel How, Thomas Chamberlain and forty others, is dated, "January 30th, 1750." ±
Owing to the unsettled condition of the times, the depredations of the In- dians, and other causes, the grantees were unable to fulfill the conditions of the charter, and it was extended to June 11, 1760. In the meantime the town was re-surveyed and a plan made which was completed March 18, 1752-five weeks after the town was incorporated. This survey was made by Caleb Willard under the supervision of Josiah Bellows of Walpole and Josiah Wil- lard of Winchester-all kindred (so said) of Col. Benjamin Bellows, usually called, the founder of Walpole.
This new "Bellows-Willard" survey discloses a plan of Westmoreland nearly identical to that of the present, except the "Leg" which was taken off in the chartering of Surry-1769-and instead of following, it was doubtless a wide departure from the original survey of Number 2, which her citizens had ex- pected. The new survey was not only of great moment to Westmoreland, but also a contributive factor in the granting and formation of the town of Surry.
April 29, 1752, the following petition was forwarded to the Governor, by the inhabitants of Westmoreland, but without avail:
* May it please your Excellency with the Honourable Counsil to Con- desend to hear the humble Petition of the Propriators and Inhabitents, of the Town of Westmoreland.
The Province of the Massachusetts Enjoying the land on this part of this River (Connecticut) which they then Claim'd as their property, con-
¿None of the grantees under charter No. 2, were in any way ever connected with the territory which later became Surry. In fact, the east line of No. 2 was probably no farther east at that time, than Mine Hill.
*From Westmoreland, in D. Hamilton Hurd's history of Cheshire and Sullivan Counties -1886.
24
HISTORY OF SURRY
sonant with which supposed Title wee petetioned for this Township, and being granted, wee immediately proceeded to a Settlement about Four- teen years since, when by the Running the Line of the Provinces wee fell within the Limitts of your Excellencys Government, and by Renewed Petition made to Your Excellency for a Renewed grant of the Land, wee have been favour'd with the same, but as wee Suspect not according to the Intention of Your Excellency and Honourable Counsil, for Major Willard and Mr. Bellows hath not Conform'd to our Original Grant from the Massachusetts nor according to our Intention, which was to abide by our Original Lines, which are at present destroy'd, for the upper line is removed nearly Two milles lower down the River from whence our grant first took place, in which lay our Meadows or entervails, with our second divisions and all our Improvements on them whith the best part of our land and extending our line two milles lower down Includeing barren and Rockey Hills, no ways commoding the town, and then stretch- ing the Line upon the north side of the Upper ashawhelcok, (now Keene) which leaves us the barren mountains betwixt us, which Lyeth so far distant from the Body of the Town, that will never Commode the same, and these our Grievances wee fear will disable this town, either for the maintaining the Gospel, or sufficient Inhabitants to withstand the Indians, now wee prayeth for the Restoration and Confirmation of our Original Lines.
We would advertise your Excellency and the Honble Counsil that when Mr. Bellows went with a Petetion for Nobr 3 Called walpole, he enter'd a number of names leaving out the names of the Old propriaty of that Town, and particularly them that had Cleard part of their land, and built also, Offering them but Eaqual Encouragement with others never labouring there, and depriving them of their labour with- out satisfaction for the Same, and he went in with his Petition which being granted him, he is suppos'd to have purchas'd of them whose names were inserted for a Small Consideration, and now will give but the small Encouragement of fifty Acres of Upland to each Settler, without any Entervail, and this Prejudices people against settleing there, having before interrupted the former propriarty in their Settleing and now discouraging them after great expence, which wee fear will be Very detrimental to the Sittleing of his and our Town-
Neither petetion we for the additional grant of any other land par- ticularly the farm formerly granted to Lieutenant Govr Taylor but only for the bair Lines which wee Enjoyd until the late Lines were Ran by the fore mention Gentlemen-
"We would further Certifie Your Excelency and the Honble Counsil that we ware the first petetioners for land on this River, and have suf- fer'd the greatest Losses from the enemy by fire and Sword, and have hitherto stood the Heat and burthen of the day, and at last to be un- done without the knowledge of Your Excellency together with the honble Counsil, who if truly knowing and fully understanding the same, wee hope from your now Goodness and Clemency will redress these our pres- ent difficulties which wee groan under and which is submitted By Your
25
EARLY HISTORY AND CHARTER
Excellencys humble Petetioners, who as in duty bound will ever Con- tinue to pray for you .-
"In the name and by the ] Consent of the Inhabitants & proprietors on the Spot,
DANIEL HOW,
JETHRO WHEELER.
"Benjamin Aldridge
Joshua Chamberlin
Amos Davis
Jedediah Chamberlin
Thomas Chamberlin
Caleb How
Daniel How Junr
Samuel How
John Warner Edward How
Jethro Wheeler Junr Abner How
Herrodiam Wheeler
Simeon Alexander
Isaac Chamberlain
Phillip Alexander
P. S. Mr. Bellows hath Layd out his Town about Nine Milles long on the River but four milles wide at the Lower end, and but three milles wide at the upper end-
And the four milles wide, & Two Milles in length is run down in to our town that is the Occasion of our Grief-
"Westmoreland, April the 29th, 1752."
The injustice which led to this petition was clearly set forth and their prayer should have been granted, yet their appeal was in vain, owing doubt- less to the friendship between Col. Bellows and Gov. Wentworth. The pro- prietors, grieved over the new boundary lines, cared little for that part of Westmoreland, called the "Leg," which a few years later was severed in the granting of Surry. In fact, so far as known, no objection whatever was made when the latter town was incorporated. They, however, had all the meadow land measured during the summer of 1752 at which time they, "computed one acre on the 'Great River' (Connecticut), to be equal to two on the Ashuelot river," with the "barren land and mountains betwixt."
In taking up that part of Surry which was severed from the town of Gilsum we must first revert to the formation of the township originally called Boyle. A petition was drawn up by William Lawrence, Thomas Read, and fifty-six others at Groton, Mass., on March 16, 1752, and presented to Gov. Benning Wentworth and his Council, praying for a charter of a tract of land yet un- granted "which Lyes Northerly of the Upper Ashuelot (Keene) and West- moreland and Easterly from Walepool Adjoyning to those towns, and extend Eastward to make the Contints of Six miles Square." The Council unani- mously advised the governor to make the grant, and Boyle was the name given. The town, however, was not settled under this charter, and no record has been found of any meeting of the grantees having been held and none of them settled in this vicinity, so far as can be ascertained, and with the single exception of Theodore Atkinson, the colony secretary, they all disappear from the records of the town with this document. The depredations of the Indians was the principal reason for the failure of the proprietors to fulfill the con- ditions of the charter, and finally it was forfeited.
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.