USA > Vermont > Orange County > Newbury > History of Newbury, Vermont, from the discovery of the Coos country to present time > Part 7
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
Few are aware how near Haverhill once came to becoming the seat of one of the foremost colleges in the country, in which case the history of Newbury as well as of that town would be very different from what it is.
In 1740, Rev. Eleazer Wheelock was pastor of a Presbyterian church at what is now Columbia, Conn., and to eke out his small salary kept a private school. To this, in 1743, was admitted an Indian named Sampson Occum, who became a preacher of considerable fame, both in this country, and in Great Britain. In 1765, Joshua Moor, a farmer of Mansfield, Conn., gave a small property "for the foundation, use and support of an Indian Charity School," and additional funds for its maintenance were gathered in the colonies, and in England and Scotland. For many reasons it was desirable to remove the school to a new site, and Governor Wentworth secured its location in New Hampshire, and granted a charter for an institution of learning, which, in honor of the principal benefactor, was called Dartmouth College. But as yet no site had been fixed upon for its location, and Haverhill was one of several towns which made efforts to secure so desirable an acquisition, a place which seems to have been preferred by
4
50
HISTORY OF NEWBURY, VERMONT.
Wentworth himself. The prominent men of Newbury and Haverhill at once saw what a great advantage it would be to Coös to have the new college located there, and engaged in the laudable attempt to secure it, with a public spirit which might well be emulated by the present generation. Newbury as a site was out of the question, as the town had passed under the authority of New York, by that time, but a spot was selected just above North Haverhill, on the plain, directly opposite the eastern extremity of the Ox-bow. They employed Elijah King, a surveyor, to lay out the land, and started a subscription paper, to which Jacob Bayley and John Hazen subscribed 1000 acres each, and Timothy Bedell 500 acres. Bayley went to Connecticut and laid their plans before Dr. Wheelock, and to Portsmouth to secure the cooperation of Wentworth. He gave a bond to convey to the college, if located in Haverhill, a part of the Ox-bow, which is now the east end of the farms of James Lang, Henry W. Bailey and Richard Doe. Colonel Asa Porter, a graduate of Harvard College, who had recently settled upon Horse Meadow, offered a valuable part of what is now called the Southard place. It was also agreed to sell to the college, at the cost of the improvements, the whole of the Little Ox-bow in Haverhill, on which was a framed house and a large barn. Dr. Witherspoon was appealed to, and responded with an offer of 1000 acres in Ryegate. In all about 6000 acres of the best lands in Newbury, Haverhill, Ryegate and Bath were promised. Mr. Powers exerted his influence with the people to promote the good cause. Gen. Bayley also agreed to put up the frame for a building two hundred feet long, to begin with. He went to Newburyport and enlisted the aid of the Littles in the enterprise.
Governor Wentworth wrote to Dr. Wheelock his express desire that the college should be located either at Haverhill, or at Landaff, which had been granted to it. There is nothing in our town or proprietors' records to show that any action was taken by either, in behalf of the college, but Haverhill took action by its proprietors in voting a mill lot to the college, in North Haverhill, and fifty acres of adjacent land. These negotiations lasted through several months, and the Haverhill party believed the prize already within their reach, when in August, 1770, they were astounded to learn that Wheelock had decided to locate the college at Hanover. The disappointment of the people at Coös was great, and so was it at several other places which had hoped to secure it. But his disappointment did not prevent Gen. Bayley from writing Wheelock a very kind letter.
We can only conjecture what might have resulted to Newbury had Dartmouth College been placed so near its bounds. In many respects the Haverhill location is superior to the one at Hanover. It has been said, and probably is in a measure true, that Dr. Wheelock feared the influence of certain men at Coös would
5I
EARLY EVENTS.
weaken the personal control which he wished to establish over the institution. But there is no reason to suppose that he acted dishonorably in any way. It was certainly not the fault of the chief men of Newbury and Haverhill that Dartmouth College was not established in the latter town.
Before 1771, New Hampshire was all one county, and when its division into five counties was made, Vermont had become part of the province of New York, and Albany county extended its jurisdiction over all that is now Vermont. In 1768, Cumberland county, which comprised the present counties of Windsor and Windham, with part of what are now Rutland and Washington counties, was formed, and in 1770, Gloucester county, which was to include all the east half of the state, north of Cumberland, was erected.
On the 4th of April, 1772, an ordinance was passed by the Council of New York, directing the courts of Common Pleas and General Sessions of the Peace to be held at Newbury, on the last Tuesday of February and August, "during the space of seven years." The first session of the General Assembly of Vermont, 1778, merged the two counties of Cumberland and Gloucester into one, bearing the former name. But in February, 1781, what had before 1778, been Gloucester county was formed into Orange county, and Newbury was made the shire-town. In 1792, Essex and Caledonia counties and a part of Orleans county were taken from Orange county. In 1810, several other towns were taken from it, to form Washington county. The county-seat was removed to Chelsea in 1796.
Courts for Grafton county were established at Haverhill and Plymouth in February, 1773. Col. John Hurd, of Haverhill, was Chief Justice, and Col. Asa Porter, an Associate Justice. The first court-house stood upon the plain above North Haverhill, on the site which, a short time before, had been selected as the location of Dartmouth College.
In 1793, a court-house was built at Haverhill Corner, and the courts were held there, but the old building at North Haverhill was standing as late as 1820.
CHAPTER IX.
THE NEW YORK CHARTER.
WENTWORTH GRANTS .- THE KING'S ORDER IN COUNCIL .- NEW YORK OPPRESSIONS .- "THE GREEN MOUNTAIN BOYS."- GEN. BAYLEY IN NEW YORK .- THE NEW CHARTER .- ITS CONDITIONS .- THE GRANTEES .- DEED TO GEN. BAYLEY .- APPREHENSION OF INHABITANTS .- "DAVID JOHNSON VS. HARRISON BAYLEY."
TN the Proprietors' Book is the following: "May 1, 1765, The Proprietors met to consult what measures to take in conse- quence of the King's Proclamation Declaring the West Bank of the Connecticut River the Dividing Line between New Hampshire and New York." They voted, "To send Agents to New York to acknowledge their jurisdiction," and that "Jacob Bayley, Moses Little, and Benjamin Whiting should be the agents to act together or singly as occasion served, consistent with each other." This is the first mention on our records of a great controversy, which lasted twenty-seven years, out of which came the state of Vermont.
Up to the year 1764, the authorities of the province of New Hampshire had supposed the western boundary of their province to be a line drawn from the northwest corner of the province of Massachusetts Bay, to the southern extremity of Lake Champlain, thence up the middle of the lake to Canada. On the 3d of January, 1749, Governor Wentworth chartered the first township in what is now Vermont, that of Bennington. This action brought on a correspondence between Wentworth and the New York authorities, who claimed that the eastern line of their province, north of Massachusetts, was the west bank of Connecticut river. Wentworth insisted on his right, and in 1750, granted Halifax. In the next year he granted two towns, in the next, seven, and so on, till by the end of 1764, he had made grants of one hundred and eighty towns between Lake Champlain and Connecticut river. This in despite of the continual remonstrance of New York.
In 1764, the conflicting parties, by their agents, laid their claims
53
THE NEW YORK CHARTER.
before the King in Council. The representations, or the influence of the representatives of the New York claimants, proved the stronger, and on the 20th of July an order was made declaring the west bank of Connecticut river from the province of Massachusetts Bay to the 45th parallel of north latitude, to be the boundary line between the provinces of New York and New Hampshire, and a proclamation to that effect was issued. The people on the New Hampshire Grants were surprised but not alarmed at this order, which they regarded as merely extending the jurisdiction of New York in future over their lands, and had no apprehension that it could, in any way, affect their title to them. They continued to settle and cultivate their farms as before. But in the two little words to be lay a great deal of mischief. "The government of New York contended," says Mr. Slade, "that the order had a retrospective operation, and decided not only what should hereafter be, but what had always been, the eastern boundary of New York, and that, consequently, all the grants made by the Governor of New Hampshire were void." The settlers in the Grants were called upon to surrender their town charters, the authority under which they held their lands, and re-purchase those lands under grants from New York. "New grants of those who refused were made to others, in whose name actions of ejectment were commenced in the courts at Albany." These measures met with determined resistance, and a convention was called which chose Samuel Robinson to go to London, and lay their grievances before the King. Mr. Robinson plead their cause so well that a second Order in Council charged the Governor of New York, under penalty of His Majesty's displeasure, not to make any grant of any part of the land described in the report until further orders.
William Tryon became Governor of New York, and, notwith- standing this express prohibition, continued to make grants and writs of ejectment. When these actions came to trial, the settlers were not allowed to plead the roval order made to the Governor of New Hampshire, or of the charters made in pursuance of them, in defense. It is hard to see how Tryon dared to venture upon such a proceeding, in defiance of the royal order. But he was a tyrant by nature, and as the troubles between the crown and the colonies had begun, he was able to venture upon actions which, in quiet times, would have cost him his place. Besides, he was avaricious, and the fees, which were considerable, received for the charter of each new town, enabled him to accumulate wealth very rapidly. In addition to the fees, each charter secured to Tryon the five hundred acres in each township, which had been reserved before to the Governor of New Hampshire. Thus he might, in a few years, roll up an immense fortunc, and there were plenty of people who did not scruple, under cover of law, to eject settlers and
54
HISTORY OF NEWBURY, VERMONT.
possess themselves of the farms upon which they had expended years of toil.
There was nothing left for these settlers on the Grants, who werc forbidden any legal redress, but to resist by force, and officers sent to carry out the orders of New York were seized and "chastised with the twigs of the wilderness." This resistance was met by still further oppression, and armed bodies of troops were sent into the Grants to dispossess the settlers. They met with determined opposition, and military associations of men were formed, who called themselves the "Green Mountain Boys," whose exploits will forever be associated with the name of the state. Ethan Allen, Seth Warner, Remember Baker, and others, became very famous for their exploits, and impressed such terror that few New York constables had the temerity to venture into the region. A state of almost civil war raged in the southwest part of the state, which put a stop to its development for some years.
Of course all these things looked, and still look, very different from the New York side, and Mr. McMaster may not be far wrong in saying, "For seven years their treatment of each other would have delighted two Indian tribes on the war-path. Their history during this time is a shameful record of wanton attack and reprisals, of ambuscades laid in the dead of night, of murder, arson and bloodshed."
The settlers at Newbury probably felt no great alarm for several ycars, as they then had only little intercourse with the towns west of the Green Mountains. But reports came to them of the violent measures which were being taken against those who had not complied with the demands of the New York authorities. Blood had been shed; settlers had been ejected from their homes; families had been driven into the wilderness. Rumor magnified the danger, and the people believed that their farms were soon to be taken from them also. So great was the anxiety, that Gen. Bayley, after consultation with the principal men, went to visit the scene of the troubles and had an interview with Allen and the other leaders. Allen wanted Bayley to join with them in resisting the encroach- ments of New York. But he thought it best to go on to New York and find if there were any terms on which he could obtain security for the people at Newbury. They were, he said, few and poor, far from aid, and could not well, from their remoteness, act in concert with the people in the southwest part of the state.
It would appear that Allen and his associates were satisfied that it was Bayley's duty to secure peace if he could, as there is no record of any remonstrance made by them to the course taken by him and the proprietors of Newbury. At New York, Bayley met with Dr. Witherspoon, whose influence was great, and with Clinton, whom he had known in the French war. He was assured that he could obtain upon favorable terms a new charter, which would
55
THE NEW YORK CHARTER.
secure to the proprietors all the rights and privileges which they had held under Wentworth. With this assurance he returned home, and laid the matter before the proprietors, and was commissioned by them to return to New York, and act for them in the best manner he could. In New York, therefore, on the 6th of February, 1772, he presented a petition, as agent for the proprietors of Newbury, praying for the grant of a new charter. We have no account of the motives that were urged by Bayley and his advisers, before the Governor and Council, but he was successful. On the 19th of February, 1772, he received the new charter, which may be seen at the town clerk's office. It is written on parchment, and a leather case was made to keep it in. The specifications and conditions of the New York charter do not greatly differ from that which had been granted by Wentworth. It sets forth that the tract of land which had been granted to Jacob Bayley and others, by a charter from the Governor of New Hampshire, whose bounds had been fixed by the order in council made upon the petition of Benjamin Whiting and others, was re-granted to the following persons :
Jacob Bayley
John Taplin
Stephen Little
Samuel Stevens
Joseph Blanchard
Nathan Stone
Waldron Blaan
James Cobham
Joseph Beck John Wetherhead
Samuel Bayard
James Creassy
John Bawler
John Grumly
Marinus Willett
Richard Wenham
John Kelly
John Shatford Jones Samuel Bayer
James Downer
John Keen
Crean Brush
John Lewis John Taylor
William Williams
It reserved for religious and educational uses, and for the Governor's benefit, similar tracts of land to those which had before been allotted to them. The proprietors were to pay a yearly rent of two shillings and sixpence sterling on Lady Day of each year, for each hundred acres. There are regulations for the choice and succession of town officers, and for the preservation of the standing pine in the township. This charter is recorded in the Book of Patents, No. 16, page 195 etc., at Albany.
It would appear that New York laws required that there should be no fewer than twenty-five grantees to each charter, and so it runs to Jacob Bayley and twenty-four associates. It is not known, or supposed, that more than five of them-Bayley, Little, Taplin, Stevens, and Blanchard, ever visited Newbury, or had any interest here. The latter four may have been in New York when the charter
56
HISTORY OF NEWBURY, VERMONT.
was granted. The others were all New York men, who probably allowed their names to be used, upon solicitation. Some of them afterwards became active upon one side or the other, in the revolu- tionary war. It is a curious circumstance that a son of Marinus Willett, was, many years later, professor of Biblical Literature in the theological department of Newbury Seminary.
Before the charter was signed, the grantees gave a bond to the King of £2,000 New York currency, binding themselves to convey to each proprietor under the New Hampshire charter, a deed of the land he held, or was interested in, upon the payment of fees. On the next day but one, these twenty-four grantees executed a trust deed to Jacob Bayley of all their rights as grantees, he assuming the conditions of the bond. This deed was recorded in the office of the Secretary of State at New York, March 31, 1772, and delivered to Jacob Bayley. The latter kept the document in his own hands for sixteen years, when he left it with Col. Jacob Kent, the town clerk, to be recorded. The paper was mislaid, and was not found again until 1803, thirty-one years after its execution, when it was finally recorded here in Newbury by Isaac Bayley, town clerk at that time.
The expense of the New York charter is not known, but it is believed to have cost Gen. Bayley quite a sum. In his testimony before a master in chancery in a case which will be adverted to later, Isaac Bayley, his son, testified that a short time before the death of the General, a claim of between three and five hundred dollars came on from New York for the expense of procuring that charter, which the witness paid himself. Neither is it known what was paid to those who were influential with the council, but the fact that Clinton, about that time, became the possessor of six hundred acres of Newbury land, which had been ungranted, is suggestive. From that time until his death in 1815, Gen. Bayley, as agent under the new charter, gave quit-claim deeds to all who applied for them, who held lands under the old charter. But many neglected to do this, and after his death there arose, in some manner, a rumor, or apprehension, that the grantees of the new charter still held claim over those lands upon which a deed of confirmation had not been passed by him.
It is within the recollection of some yet living, that people sometimes acquired a title to their own farms, by allowing them to be sold for taxes, and then bidding them in, and paying the tax, received a deed from the collector. But in 1843, a decision of the Supreme Court settled the matter forever, in the following case. At the first division of one hundred-acre lots, No. 55 fell to Jolin Hugh, who in 1770 sold it to Dr. Samuel Hale, who sold it to Col. Thomas Johnson in 1779. At the latter's death, it came into the hands of his son, David Johnson. Gen. Bayley dicd in 1815, but no administration was made of his cstate till 1832, when Tappan
57
THE NEW YORK CHARTER.
Stevens obtained license to sell whatever land still remained in his name. It was discovered that this lot was one of the few pieces of land left, upon which no deed had passed under the New York charter. After some years Harrison Bailey obtained a quit-claim deed from Mr. Stevens, against the latter's advice, giving his note for fifty dollars, hoping to make his claim good against Johnson. This he expected to do on the plea that the new charter made the old one void, and that no title under the New Hampshire charter was of any value, unless confirmed by a deed under the later one, and began to carry out his purpose by cutting timber upon this lot. Johnson at once secured an injunction to prevent Bayley from removing any more lumber, and commenced a suit for ejectment. The case was heard before a master in chancery, and came before the Supreme Court at the March term of 1843. The decision was, that Johnson's claim to the land upon which he had always paid taxes, never having been abandoned, was a legal claim, and that the New York charter only confirmed the one which had been given nine years before by Benning Wentworth. This ended all the troubles about the charters.
CHAPTER X.
"WHEN WE WERE UNDER THE KING."
PRICES IN 1770 .- POPULATION .- HEADS OF FAMILIES IN 1770 .- SETTLEMENTS AT WEST NEWBURY .- SETTLEMENTS AT WELLS RIVER .- THE SECOND MEETING HOUSE .- COURT-HOUSE AND CHURCH .- THE OLD JAIL.
F the period which intervened between 1769, and the breaking out of the revolutionary war, only a few scanty records survive. But from such annals of the time as have escaped destruction, we may obtain an idea of the condition of the people which may not be very far from the truth. By the year 1770, it is probable that the meadows and much of the upland or plain had been cleared, and the soil brought forth abundantly. A class of people had come into both Newbury and Haverhill, and made their homes, who possessed considerable education and some wealth. Several had seen service in the French war. Three or four possessed the advantage of a college education-Rev. Peter Powers, Col. Asa Porter, Col. John Hurd and perhaps others. Many were well known through the older portions of New England, and gave a certain rank and dignity to the new settlement, causing it to be known far and wide. Frame houses were replacing the log habitations of the pioneers. The towns above and below them were being settled, and, as Newbury and Haverhill had depended upon the settlements sixty miles away for their supplies, in their first years, so the new towns which sprang into existence after they had become established, came, in their turn, to depend upon Haverhill and Newbury, for seed and cattle with which to begin new farms. There was a rcady sale for all the grain and cattle which could be spared. Mr. Whitelaw says that in 1773, the price of wheat was four shillings a bushel, rye about the samc, and corn about three shillings. Beef and mutton were about two pence a pound, pork five pence, butter six pence, and checsc four and a half pence. Apple trees had been planted in both towns in the year 1763,
59
"WHEN WE WERE UNDER THE KING."
and by 1770, their fruit had become quite plentiful, while as yet there were no trees in bearing elsewhere, nearer than sixty miles.
Workmen of all kinds had established themselves at Coös. Young men came, some unmarried, others whose families waited in the older settlements until homes could be prepared for them. Many of these paid for land in work. People were pleased with the country and persuaded their friends to come here and settle. Families which had been related, or previous to their coming, had been acquainted, saw intermarriages among their children. We do not know how many marriages were solemnized in Newbury in those days. Such occasions were generally made much of. The pension application of the widow of Thomas Hibbard, in 1837, mentions the guests at their wedding in 1772, by which it would seem that all the principal people in the neighborhood attended the ceremony. But it was no place for frail people, and the stern conditions of a new country, with the care of the large families of those days, bore hard upon women. Our annals make mention, only too frequently, of many wives who died within a few years after marriage. Only the strong survived, but those who reached middle age commonly lived beyond three score and ten.
We have no precise means of knowing the population of the town in those early days. Haverhill, by the census of 1767, returned one hundred and seventy-two inhabitants, of whom only one was over sixty years of age, and forty-three were under sixteen. In 1773, Haverhill reported three hundred and eighty- seven residents, all under sixty but one. There were at that time in that town one hundred and seven boys under sixteen. Probably Newbury had as many, and the united population was not under three hundred and fifty at the former, and at least seven hundred and fifty at the latter date. In 1767, Orford had seventy-five, and Hanover ninety-two inhabitants, who had increased to two hundred and twenty-eight, and three hundred and forty-two, respectively, at the latter date.
In 1770, a list of heads of families was returned to the Governor of New York, which gives us approximately the whole number of people who were here at that time, and is in many ways a valuable list .* They are as follows :
Jacob Bayley Ephraim Bayley Frye Bayley Samuel Barnet Jonathan Butterfield Thomas Chamberlain
Sylvanus Heath
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.