Early New England towns : a comparative study of their development

Front matter

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT

BY

ANISE BUSH MACLEAR, A. M.

Preface

The purpose of this work is to give in some detail an account of the institutional life of a Massachusetts town of the seventeenth century by means of a comparison of the institutions of five of the earliest of these towns, — Salem, Dorchester, Watertown, Roxbury and Cambridge.

To accomplish this, it was found necessary to omit many of the more picturesque features connected with the settlement and early years of these towns and to confine this investigation to the institutions and to their development during the century. This was the more easily done since the former phase of town history has been so well treated already that it seems impossible to improve upon the accounts we now have.

No attempt is made here to reproduce exactly the spelling, form of expression or punctuation of the records quoted. In many cases these are almost unintelligible, and in all instances they are so difficult to decipher that it does not seem wise to demand from the reader the effort necessary to read them.

I wish to thank Dr. Herbert L. Osgood, of Columbia University for his many kindnesses to me during the years I studied with him, and, also, for his valuable suggestions in regard to this work.

Anne Bush MacLear.

New York, March, 1908.

7] 7

Chapter I Page

THE TOWN AS A WHOLE

Definition of an early New England town 13

Settlement of Salem, Dorchester, Watertown, Roxbury and Cambridge 16

Control of General Court over the towns 20

Additional land grants made to the towns 26

Formation of new towns from the original ones 28

The settlement of these towns typical group settlements 33

Representation of the towns in the General Court 38

Extinguishing of Indian titles 40

CHAPTER II Control of the General Court over the local courts 44

The formation of inferior courts 45

The law of the colony 46

The meeting of the selectmen a police court 47

The commissioner of small causes 49

The clerk of the writs 51

The jury 51

The method of adjusting difficulties between inhabitants of different

towns » 53

CHAPTER III Method of raising money needed by the town 55

The town rate 57

Increased power of selectmen over town finances 58

Definition of "town rate " 60

Method of determining value of taxable property 61 lO CONTENTS [I0

PAGE

Exemption from paying rate 62

Method of taking invoices 63

Taxation of trades and other occupations 66

Method of collecting rates 68

The constables and their duties 69

Payment in kind 72

The colony rate 74

The county rate 78

CHAPTER IV Method of assigning land 81

The home lots 81

Division of arable and meadow lands 82

Illustrations from Salem, Watertown, Dorchester, Roxbury and

Cambridge 83

Common fields 87

Stinted pasturage 92

Town commons 93

Conditions attached to grants made from the land common to all

the town 94

Commonage of wood 95

Common herds 96

Highways 98

Classes of inhabitants based upon ownership of land 101

CHAPTER V The town meeting 106

Different classes of town meetings 114

The selectmen 116

Supervision of the selectmen by the town 117

Payment of the selectmen 125

Constables 126

Minor town officials 129

Methods of publishing town orders 131

Admission of new inhabitants 132

Town regulations 135

Care of the town for welfare of its inhabitants 136

Il] CONTENTS II

PAGE

CHAPTER VI Importance of church 137

Agreements made by the company with ministers 138

Method of organizing a church 139

The pastor and the teacher 142

Control exercised over the churches 143

Method of choosing a minister 145

The meeting-house 153

Assignment of pews 156

Importance of minister 157

Religious instruction 158

CHAPTER VII Importance of schools 161

Meaning of "free" schools 162

Payment of the teacher 162

Methods of supporting schools 164

Management of school matters 168

Curriculum of the schools 174

Instructions to the schoolmaster of Dorchester 174

Length of the school session 177

The school-house 178

Salary of the schoolmaster 179

Town supervision of education 180

CHAPTER I The Town in General

The New England town of the seventeenth century was a village community settled for purposes of good neighborhood and defense. Its most characteristic features resulted from the topography of the country, and from the ideas of the nature of a town which the colonists brought from England. Forced by the geographical features of New England and by the necessity of protection, the colonists, already acquainted, settled in groups, and at once began organizing their settlements in accordance with the type familiar to them — the old English manor. Between this and the New England town many analogies may be drawn, showing the Germanic origin, not only of the government with its democratic features, but of the form of settlement — a compact town with outlying fields — and of the land system, with " the houses and home lots fenced in and owned in severalty, with common fields outside the town, and with a surrounding track of absolutely common and undivided land used for pasturage and woodland under communal regulations."

The initiative in founding a town was usually taken by the General Court. It fixed the boundaries of the town and gave the land within these bounds "to men of good repute" upon condition that within two years " they should erect houses for habitation thereon and go on to make a town there." 1 In 1635, the court decreed that "the maior part" of

1 Edward Johnson, Wonder Working Providence, p. 176. 13]

i4 EARLY NEW ENGLAND TOWNS [I4

the magistrates should have power from time to time to dispose of the 44 sitting down of men" in any new plantation and that none should go without leave from them;1 and, that same year, it was ordered in accordance with this law. that there should be a " Plantation set about two miles above the falls of Charles River, on the north east side thereof, to have ground lying to it on both sides the river, both upland & meadow to be laid out hereafter as the court should appoint." 2 Another example of this method of founding a town is given in the records of the court for 1 688. Then several petitioners were granted liberty "to begin a plantation at Winnacunnet," several men being appointed " to assist in setting out the place of the town " and in proportioning the " several quantity " of land to each man.3 The men to whom the land had been granted by the General Court had, in their turn, power " to give and grant out lands to any persons who were willing to take up town dwellings within these precincts and to be admitted to all the common privileges of the town " the said town giving them " such a supply of meadow and upland as they shall need for their present and future stock of cattle." 4

The majority of the early towns of the seventeenth century passed through two stages of development, — that of a plantation begun by the express permission of the court, and that of a self-governing town. While in the plantation stage, the towns were more or less under the supervision of the General Court which directed the laying-out of their lots, and, in extreme cases when the requirements of the grant were not being fulfilled, took the direct control of the plantation into its own hands. In 1638, for example,

* Wonder Working Providence, p. 176.

1 5] THE TOWN IN GENERAL I5

permission was given by the General Court to several petitioners to settle a plantation at Winnacunnet; 1 in 1642, to settle one at Nantasket; 2 and in 1645, "upon the petition of the undertakers for the plantation at Nashaway," the court agreed that any three out of five men who were mentioned in the order by name should have " power to set out lots to all ye planters provided that they set not their houses too far asunder . . . and that no man shall have his land confirmed to him before he hath taken the oath of fidelity before some magistrate." 3 As the grantees in this case did nothing about laying out the plantation, the court took the matter into its own hands deciding that it would look after " ye placing and ordring of it " until other men who would do it could be found.4 At another time permission was given by the General Court to twelve men to start a plantation of ten miles square forty or fifty miles west of Springfield, if they would do it in eighteen months.5

The change from a plantation to a self-governing town was made by authority of the Court, a change of name usually accompanying the change of status. In 1639, the plantation Winnacunnet was allowed to become a town with " power to chose a constable & other officers & to make orders for the well ordering of their town, & to send a deputy to the Court." Three men were appointed to act as commissioners of small causes for that year and the laying-out of land was left to those " expressed in the former order." 6 In 1653, tne Nashaway plantation was allowed to change its name to West Town, and the court ordered " that the new plantation by Concord shalbe called Sud-

K, EARLY NEW ENGLAND TOWNS [x6

berry; Winnacunnet shalbee called Hampton; the other plantation beyond Merimack Shalbee called Colchester — " afterward Salsbery. 1

Though the statements in the paragraph above are true of the majority of the Massachusetts towns in the seventeenth century, they do not apply to the original towns within the jurisdiction of that colony, among which were Dorchester, Cambridge, Salem, Roxbury, and Watertown — the towns which form the basis of this study. These were founded without any supervision from the General Court, and were never plantations in the sense that the latter towns were, though one of them, Salem, passed through a plantation stage.

Indeed, the settlement of these five towns — Dorchester, Watertown, Cambridge, Salem, and Roxbury — was totally unlike that of the typical Massachusetts town.2

The settlement of Salem was entirely unique, for no other town in the colony passed through so many phases as did this the first town within the Massachusetts borders. Beginning as a fishing station on Cape Ann, and, upon the failure of those interested in its success, removing to its present location, it became a plantation of the newly organized Massachusetts Bay Company. For the two succeeding years — 1628-30 — Salem was a plantation of the early proprietary type — like Virginia under the London Company — the joint proprietors of which were the patentees of the Massachusetts Bay Company. During these years, Cradock, the president of the company, speaks of it again and again as " our Plantation." On April 17, 1629, for in-

2 For the history of the settlement of these towns, see Essex Institute Collections ; vol. 34 of Reports of Boston Record Commissioners ; Paige, History of Cambridge; Felt, Annals of Salem; Memorial History of Boston; Henry Bond, History of Watertown.

ly] THE TOWN IN GENERAL iy

stance, he says that " we have ordered the government there to consist of thirteen persons among whom we are content that the old planters within our Plantation shall chose two ;" 1 at another time, he speaks of his aim in " settling the plantation ;" and, in sending Endicott to America in 1629, the company informed him that he was elected " Governor in our plantation." 2 The next phase in the development of Salem was introduced by the removal of the Massachusetts Bay Company to America. The arrival of Winthrop, Dudley, the assistants, and the majority of the company changed the settlement from a plantation owned and governed by people at a distance into a corporate colony, while the subsequent dispersion of the members of the company and the formation of other settlements made Salem only one of the many towns within the bounds of the colony.

While Watertown, Roxbury, Dorchester, and Cambridge do not show in their manner of settlement the unique features of Salem they, too, differ in their origin from the typical Massachusetts town. Watertown, Roxbury, and Dorchester were among the first towns settled by those members of the company who came over with Winthrop. They were founded simultaneously, under the pressure of necessity, and without any guidance from the general court. It had been intended that Salem should be the main settlement of the colony, but land there was already becoming scarce, so that those who came with Winthrop thought it best to seek new places for their settlements. There was no time to wait for permission from the company or to ask for grants of land. Wherever a location offered those things for which the settlers were looking, — wood, water, pasturage, protection from enemies, — there the group

1 Young's Chronicles of Massachusetts, p. 144.

2 Ibid., p. 142, and Hazard Collections, vol. 1, p. 239.

iS EARLY NEW ENGLAND TOWNS [x8

settled and began laying out the town. Dudley, writing to the Countess of Lincoln, March 12, 1631, says, " We began to consult of the place of our sitting down; for Salem, whore we landed pleased us not. And to that purpose some were sent to the Bay, to search up the rivers for a convenient place . . . we found a place [that] liked us better, three leagues up Charles river; and thereupon unshipped our goods into other vessels and with much cost and labor brought them in July to Charlestown, but there receiving advertisement by some of the late arrived ships from London and Amsterdam, of some French preparations against us many of our people brought with us being sick of fevers and the scurvy, and we thereby unable to carry up our ordnance and baggage so far we were forced to change counsel, and for our present shelter to plant dispursedly. This dispersion troubled some of us but help it we could not, wanting ability to move to any place fit to build a town upon, and the time too short to deliberate any longer lest the winter should suprise us before wre had builded our houses." 1

The first settlers at Dorchester came from Dorchester, England, many of them being members of Mr. White's church. They left Plymouth in a special vessel, " The Mary and John," and reached Nantasket May 30, 1630, before the Arbella, which was bringing Winthrop and his company, arrived. The captain refusing to take them farther, they were forced to land at Nantasket, where they would have fared badly had they not secured a boat of some old planters there into which they loaded their goods and, well armed, went in her to Charlestown, where they found some grain and one house.2 After an exploring trip

1 Young's Chronicles, p. 312 et seq. '■'Young's Chronicles, Clap's Memoirs, p. 349.

I r>] THE TOWN IN GENERAL Hj

up Charles river the majority of the group decided to settle upon a place called Mattapan because there was a " neck of land fit to put our cattle on." 1 There were then a few other Englishmen in Massachusetts, " at Plymouth and Salem, and some at Charlestown." 2 Watertown was founded by men from Essex County, England, who came over with Winthrop's company and landed at Salem. i;or various reasons the situation of Salem did not suit them, and they accompanied Winthrop to Charlestown which, however, pleased them no better. They complained that the water was too brackish and the site too near the coast. Consequently, they considered it wiser to seek a more favorable location and some of the company led, by Mr. Phillips and Sir Richard Saltonstall, wandered " westward on the Charles River four miles from Charlestown which place they named Watertown." 3 Roxbury owes its founding to this same dispersion of the colonists who came with Winthrop. At the time when Mr. Phillips and his followers wandered to Watertown, another group led by " Mr. Pincheon and several others planted betwixt Boston and Dorchester; which place was called Roxbury." 4 Cambridge in its origin is as unique as Salem, for it alone of all Massachusetts towns was founded by the governor, deputy governor, and assistants for a specific purpose, — namely, to be the capital of the colony and its chief seat of defence. On December 6, 1630, Winthrop, Dudley, and the assistants met at Roxbury to choose a site for a fortified town to take the place of the fort they had at first planned to build.5 They agreed " to build a town fortified upon the neck be-

1 Clap's Memoirs, p. 350.

3 Young's Chronicles, pp. 313-3x4.

ft Ibid., p. 320 et sc<i.

20 EARLY NEW ENGLAND TOWNS [2Q

tween that town, — Roxbury, — and Boston."1 Further discussion, however, seemed to show that this was impracticable and they finally decided, on December 28, that, the " town for the scat of Government should be on the northwest of the Charles River." 2 To insure the success of this scheme, the governor, the deputy governor and all the assistants except Endicott and Sharpe agreed to build in the new town before the spring of 163 1. Although this plan was not fully carried out it led to the founding of Cambridge, and gave that town a certain importance in the colony.

Although these towns were founded without any authorization from the government of the colony, they were not permitted to enjoy their independence for any length of time. Almost immediately after their settlement, the ( General Court began that supervision over them which it continued to exercise throughout the century. The first instance of this control was the action of the colonial authorities in naming two of them — Dorchester and Watertown. This occurred in September, 1630, when the Court of Assistants ordered that " Mattapan shall be called Dorchester, and the town upon the Charles River Watertown." 3 To the central authority Cambridge also owes its name — or, at least, the confirmation of the name chosen for it by its prominent citizens — for in 1636 the court ordered that " New Town should be called Cambridge." Salem and Roxbury did not experience this control, Salem 4 receiving its name in 1629, from the settlers after the arrival of Higginson, and

1 Prince, Annals, vol. 2, pp. 563-564-

2 Ibid.

4 Felt. Annals of Salem, vol. 1, p. 6. In this passage is given a complete discussion of the reason for changing the name to Salem, the meaning of the name, and the date when it was adopted.

2i ] THE TOWN IN GENERAL 2I

Roxbury being named from the character of the land upon which the town was settled.

In many other ways during 1630 did the Court of Assistants cause these towns to realize that they were not independent of its authority. On September 28, it ordered " that there shall be collected and levied by distress out of the seuall plantacons, for the maintenance of Mr. Patricke and Mr. Underhill the sum of 5o£ viz. : out of Charlestown, /£; Boston, n£; Dorchester, y£; Roxbury, $£; Waterton, n£; Meadford, 3£; Salem, 3£;" etc. And on March 22, 163 1 the Assistants again ordered every town within the bounds of the colony to pursue a course of action of which it approved, namely " to take pains to provide every person in the town except magistrates and ministers " with " good and sufficient arms;" and in May, 1631 they ordered every town to provide " comon measures and weights." 1 In 1633 Boston and Roxbury were ordered to make a " cart bridge over Muddy River and another over Stony River."

Instances like those given above could be multiplied indefinitely, but these are sufficient to prove that the colonial authorities from the very beginning considered that the towns which were so independent in origin stood in the same relation to them as the towns for whose inception they were responsible. A few examples will show how this relation continued during the century. In 1639, the General Court decreed that it or any two magistrates could determine any questions about the support of poor persons and could " dispose of all onsettled p'sons into such towns as they shall iudge to bee most fitt for the maintainance of such p'sons and families." 2 No town was allowed to treat the orders of the General Court with disrespect. The well-known controversy with Salem over the letters which she wrote to the other towns to gain their support in the affair of Roger Williams shows most clearly the respect which the magistrates and deputies of the General Court demanded. Not until the majority of the freemen of Salem disowned the letters, " Wherein they have exceedingly reproached & vilifyed the magistrates & deputies of the general court " were the deputies from that town allowed to become members of the General Court.1

Though these towns were settled without any definite limits being assigned them by the General Court and although for some years, while settlements in the colony were few and scattered, they were allowed to spread over the territory adjoining their original sites without any interference from that body, yet, as soon as the towns grew in population and size so that the bounds of one town approached those of another, the court stepped in, and decided which share of the land in dispute belonged to each town. The first instance of this was seen in the case of Charlestown and Cambridge in March, 1632. It was then agreed " by the parties who were appointed by the court," for the " setting out the bounds of Charlestown & Newe Town, . . . First that all the land impaled by Newe Towne men with the neck there unto adjoining, whereupon Mr. Graves dwelleth shall belong to the said Newe Town, & that the bounds of Charles Towne shall end at a tree marked by the said pale and to pass along from that tree by a straight line midway between the wester most part of the great lot of land of John Winthrop Esq. ... & the nearest part there to of the bounds of Waterton." This line not proving satisfactory to the town, the assistants, on November 7, 1632, referred the matter to other men " to view the ground, wood, & meadow, & so to set down the bounds betwixt them." This committee, however, defined the bounds of the towns in practically the same way as the former one had done.

Watertown's line toward Cambridge was not settled until 1635, by which time it was found necessary to settle the boundaries of the towns in order to keep peace between them. Therefore the court ordered that the line between those towns should run " from Charles River to Great Fresh Pond and from the tree marked by Watertown and New Towne on the southeast side of the pond over the pond to a white poplar tree on the northwest side of the pond and from that tree up into the country northwest and by west upon a straight line and further, that Watertown should have 100 rods in length above the weire and 100 rods beneath the weire in length & three score rods in breadth from the river on the south side thereof and all the rest of the ground on that side of the river to lie to Newe Town." 1 In 1636 and 1638, the western boundary of Watertown was denned. This was found necessary, owing to the settlement of Concord and Dedham.2 The boundary was defined as follows: first, in 1636, that "the bounds of Watertown shall run 8 miles into the country from the meeting house within the limits already assigned her;"3 and, in 1638, that these bounds be " extended upon the line between them and Cambridge as far as Concord bounds give leave, and that their bounds by the river shall run 8 miles into the country." 4 The original eastern bounds of the town are supposed to correspond very nearly with the present Vassal Lane and Sparks St., Cambridge, beginning at the southeast

2 Drake, History of Middlesex County, p. 435.

side of East Bay of Fresh Pond and running to the most northerly point in the bend of the river.1

In [638 a committee was appointed by the court to lay out the bounds between Watertown and Concord, Watertow 11 and Dedham, Watertown and New Town, and to give Watertown its eight miles or to " allow them satisfaction for what they cannot get," with which adjustment they promised to remain satisfied. This committee settled the question by giving Watertown its eight miles.

In 1636 the General Court fixed the bounds of Dorchester, " to run from the outside of Mr. Rossiters farm, next the sea to the foot of ye great hill, from a marked tree to a second marked tree, in a straight line to the top of the Blue Hills, nexte Naponsett southwest and by west, half a point westerly, & all the marsh ground from the southeast side of Mr. Newberrys house along Naponsett River, to Mr. Stoughtons mill, to lie to Dorchester & all the rest of the vpland & marsh from Mr. Rossiters farm to the sea, & so to the mouth of the river beyond Minotiquid River, runing into the country southward & to the west, to lie to Boston onely excepting such land as they have right to by graunt of the court formerly." 2 In 1638 the court defined the boundary between Dorchester and Dedham as far as Plymouth.3

The boundary between Roxbury and Boston was determined before 1632-3, for the court, meeting at Boston March 14, 1632, agreed " that the bounds formly set out betwixte Boston & Rocksbury shall continue, only Rocksbury to enjoy the conveniency of the creek near their vnto." 4 Controversy arose over this line and, to settle the dispute, the

1 Drake, op. cit., p. 435.

court in 1633 appointed four men " to set out the bounds betwixte Boston & Rocksbury, which is now in difference betwixte them." 1 This line was finally decided upon in 1636. At that time Roxbury was given " all the rest of the ground between Dorchester bounds and Roxbury bounds . . . easterly of Charles River . . . except the property of the aforesaid towns which they have purchased of particular persons." 2 Roxbury, moreover, was not to extend above eight miles in length from its meeting house. Roxbury and Dedham quarreled continually over their boundary. Finally a committee was appointed to settle this dispute. According to its recommendation, which was confirmed by the General Court in 1638, the boundary line ran " from the south side of Roxbury bounds by a straight northwest line running till it touch upon Charles River." 3 However, changes in this line were made from time to time and it was not definitely located until 1697. 4 The line between Roxbury and Cambridge was laid out in 1635, " to run southwest from Muddy River, near the place which is called Mr. Novell's bridge ... & from the mouth of the ryver to that place, the south side is for Rocxsbury and the north syde for New Town." 5

In March, 1636, after the arrival at Cambridge of Mr. vShepard and his congregation, the General Court ordered that the limits of that town should extend " eight miles into the country from the meeting house," 6 and, in the following year, April 13, 1636, defined its bounds as follows : " from the marked tree by Charles River on the

1 Mass. Col. Rec, vol. 1, p. 113. 2 Ibid., vol. r, p. 176.

4 Report of the Boston Record Commissioners, vol. 34. p. 48.

26 EARLY Mill' ENGLAND TOWNS [26

North west side Roxbury bounds, one mile and a half northeast. & from thence three miles northwest & so from thence five miles southwest, & on the south west syde Charles River from the south east side of Roxberry bounds, to run four miles on a south west line, reserving the properties to the several persons granted by special order of court." 1

The boundaries of the towns were usually fixed by men appointed for that purpose by the General Court. In 1634 that body appointed three men " to settle the difference between Boston and Dorchester, & Boston & Charleston over hounds, and also the difficulties between Cambridge and Watertown." Two men, usually one for each town — though occasionally two from each town were chosen, — were allowed to accompany the committee " to show what ground each town requires," but no one else could go with these commissioners.2

To the grants of land which the towns first received, additions were made from time to time until they all included a much greater area than they do at present. Dorchester included the present towns of Milton, Dedham, Dorchester Heights, Washington Village, Hyde Park, Canton, Stoughton, Sharon, Foxboro, and part of Wrentham, — a strip of territory thirty-five miles in length running to within one hundred and sixty rods of the Rhode Island line. Salem included the present Wentham, Beverly, Middleton, Manchester, Marblehead, Topsfield, and Danvers. Cambridge included Lexington, Newton, Arlington, Brighton, Bedford, Billerica, and probably Tewksbury and portions of Belmont and Winchester. Watertown, at the time of its greatest size, included Waltham, Weston, the greater part of Lincoln, a part of Belmont, and that part of Cambridge east of Mt. Auburn Cemetery between Fresh Pond and

1 Mass. Col. Rec, vol. 1, p. 173. 2 J bid., vol. 1, p. 139-Mi-

27] THE TOWN IN GENERAL 2J

Charles River.1 Roxbury included the present Jamaica Plain and West Roxbury then known as " Jamaica end and Spring Street " and, later, as part of the second parish.2 These additions to the original grants were made by the General Court usually in response to a complaint from a town that it was suffering from lack of room. In 1683 Roxbury petitioned the general court for more land, " knowing the inconvenience that arises from lack of room and that it has already caused removal not only from the town but from the colony." In 1640-41, to prevent removal from the town through its lack of new land, Cambridge was given the " land lying upon the Shawshin Ryver and between it and the Concord River and between it and the Merrimac River." 3 Salem petitioned for more land in 1663, because the town " had given away so much soil it had not enough to support the population." 4 These additional grants of land given by the court to the town were usually made only under certain conditions, the non-fulfilment of which rendered the grant void. The Shawshin grant given to Cambridge, was conditional upon its being made into a village containing ten families within three years;5 the grant of land " about Quatesset in the Nipnuck country " to Roxbury in 1683 depended upon settling " thirty families there within three years " who should be able to support a minister; 6 the grant of Pennicook, a tract on Merrimac River which was given Salem in 1663, required that no less than twenty families be settled there in three years.7 Dorchester was