The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Bay State Monthly, Volume I. No. VI. June, 1884, by Various This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org Title: The Bay State Monthly, Volume I. No. VI. June, 1884 A Massachusetts Magazine Author: Various Release Date: October 16, 2004 [EBook #13761] Language: English Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BAY STATE MONTHLY, *** Produced by Joshua Hutchinson, Josephine Paolucci, the PG Online Distributed Proofreading Team, and Cornell University, THE BAY STATE MONTHLY. A Massachusetts Magazine VOL. I. JUNE,1884. No. VI. Ben F. Butler BENJAMIN FRANKLIN BUTLER. There is a belt extending irregularly across the State of New Hampshire, and varying in width, from which have gone forth men who have won a national reputation. From this section went Daniel Webster, Lewis Cass, Levi Woodbury, Zachariah Chandler, Horace Greeley, Henry Wilson, William Pitt Fessenden, Salmon P. Chase, John Wentworth, Nathan Clifford, and Benjamin F. Butler. BENJAMIN FRANKLIN BUTLER was born in the town of Deerfield, New Hampshire, November 5, 1818. His father, Captain John Butler, was a commissioned officer in the War of 1812, and served with General Andrew Jackson at New Orleans. As merchant, supercargo, and master of the vessel, he was engaged for some years in the West India trade, in which he was fairly successful, until his death in March, 1819, while on a foreign voyage. In politics he was an ardent Democrat, an admirer of General Jackson, and a personal friend of Isaac Hill, of New Hampshire. Left an orphan when an infant, the child was dependent for his early training upon his mother; and faithfully did she attend to her duties. Descended from the Scotch Covenanters and Irish patriots, Mrs. Butler possessed rare qualities: she was capable, thrifty, diligent, and devoted. In 1828, Mrs. Butler removed with her family to Lowell, where her two boys could receive better educational advantages, and where her efforts for their maintenance would be better rewarded, than in their native village. As a boy young Butler was small, sickly, and averse to quarrels. He was very fond of books, and eagerly read all that came in his way. From his earliest youth he possessed a remarkably retentive memory, and was such a promising scholar that his mother determined to help him obtain a liberal education, hoping that he would be called to the Baptist ministry. With this end in view, he was fitted for college at the public schools of Lowell and at Exeter Academy, and at the early age of sixteen entered Waterville College. Here for four years, the formative period of his life, his mind received that bent and discipline which fitted him for his future active career. He was a student who appreciated his advantages, and acquired all the general information the course permitted outside of regular studies; but his rank was low in the class, as deportment and attention to college laws were taken into account. During the latter part of his course he was present at the trial of a suit at law, and was so impressed with the forensic battle he then witnessed, that he chose law as his profession. He was graduated from the college in 1838, in poor health, and in debt, but a fishing cruise to the coast of Labrador restored him, and in the fall he entered upon the study of the law at Lowell. While a student he practised in the police court, taught school, and devoted every energy to acquiring a practical knowledge of his profession. MILITIA. While yet a minor he joined the City Guards, a company of the fifth regiment of Massachusetts Militia. His service in the militia was honorable, and continued for many years; he rose gradually in the regular line of promotion through every grade, from a private to a brigadier-general. LAW. In 1840, Mr. Butler was admitted to the bar. He was soon brought into contact with the mill-owners, and was noted for his audacity and quickness. He won his way rapidly to a lucrative practice, at once important, leading, and conspicuous. He was bold, diligent, vehement, and an inexhaustible opponent. His memory was such, that he could retain the whole of the testimony of the longest trial without taking a note. His power of labor seemed unlimited. In fertility of expedient, and in the lightning quickness of his devices to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, his equal has seldom lived. For twenty years Mr. Butler devoted his whole energies to his profession. At the age of forty he was retained in over five hundred cases, enjoyed the most extensive and lucrative practice in New England, and could at that age have retired from active business with an independent fortune. POLITICS. Despite his enormous and incessant labors at the bar, Mr. Butler, since early manhood, has been a busy and eager politician, regularly for many years attending the national conventions of the Democratic party, and entering actively into every campaign. Before the Rebellion he was twice elected to the Massachusetts Legislature: once to the House in 1853, and once to the Senate in 1859; and was a candidate for governor in 1856, receiving fifty thousand votes, the full support of his party. In April, 1860, Mr. Butler was a delegate to the Democratic convention held at Charleston. There he won a national reputation. In June, at an adjourned session of the convention, at Baltimore, Mr. Butler went out with the delegates who were resolved to defeat the nomination of Stephen A. Douglas. The retiring body nominated Mr. Breckinridge, of Kentucky, for the Presidency, and Mr. Butler returned home to help his election. It may be here stated that Mr. Breckinridge was a Southern pro-slavery unionist. Mr. Butler was the Breckinridge candidate for the governorship of Massachusetts, and received only six thousand votes. In December, 1860, after the election of Abraham Lincoln was an established fact, there was a gathering of politicians at Washington, Mr. Butler among the rest. South Carolina had passed the ordinance of secession, and had sent commissioners or embassadors to negotiate a treaty with the general government. Mr. Butler told his Southern friends that they were hastening on a war; that the North would never consent to a disunion of the States, and that he should be among the first to offer to fight for the Union. He counselled the administration to receive the South Carolina commissioners, listen to their communication, arrest them, and try them for high treason. Mr. Butler foresaw a great war, and on his return to Massachusetts advised Governor Andrew to prepare the militia for the event. This was quietly done by dropping those who could not be depended upon to leave the State, and enlisting others in their stead. Arms and clothing were also prepared. On April 15, 1861, a telegram was received by Governor Andrew from Senator Henry Wilson asking for troops to defend the capital. A little before five o'clock, Mr. Butler was, trying, a case before a court in Boston, when Colonel Edward F. Jones, of the sixth regiment, brought to him for endorsement an order from Governor Andrew to muster his regiment forthwith on Boston Common, prepared to go to the defence of Washington. Two days later Mr. Butler received the order to take command of the troops. IN THE WAR. General Butler's command consisted of four regiments. The sixth was despatched immediately to Washington by the way of Baltimore, two regiments were sent in transports to garrison Fortress Monroe, while General Butler accompanied the eighth regiment in person. At Philadelphia, on the nineteenth of April, General Butler was apprised of the attack on the sixth regiment during their passage through Baltimore, and he resolved to open communication with the capital through Annapolis. At Annapolis, General Butler's great executive qualities came into prominence. He was placed in command of the "Department of Annapolis," and systematically attended to the forwarding of troops and the formation of a great army. On May 13, with his command, he occupied the city of Baltimore, a strategic movement of great importance. On May 16, he was commissioned major-general, and on the twenty-second was saluted as the commander of Fortress Monroe. Two days later, he gave to the country the expressive phrase "contraband of war," which proved the deathblow of American slavery. A skirmish at Great Bethel, June 10, was unimportant in its results except that it caused the loss of twenty-five Union soldiers, Major Theodore Winthrop among the number, and was a defeat for the Northern army. This was quickly followed by the disastrous battle of Bull Run, which fairly aroused the North to action. On August 18, General Butler resigned the command of the department of Virginia to General Wool, and accepted a command under him. The first duty entrusted to General Butler was an expedition sent to reduce the forts at Hatteras Inlet, in which with a small force he was successful. Early in September, he was authorized by the war department to raise and equip six regiments of volunteers from New England for the war. This task was easy for the energetic general. Early in the year 1862, the capture of New Orleans was undertaken, and General Butler was placed in command of the department of the Gulf, and fifteen thousand troops entrusted to him. After innumerable delays, the general with a part of his force arrived, March 20, 1862, at Ship Island, near the delta of the Mississippi River, at which rendezvous the rest of the troops had already been assembled. From this post the reduction of New Orleans was executed. On the morning of April 24, the fleet under command of Captain Farragut succeeded in passing the forts, and a week later the transport Mississippi with General Butler and his troops was alongside the levee at New Orleans. On December 16, 1862, General Butler formally surrendered the command of the department of the Gulf to General Banks. What General Butler did at New Orleans during the months he was in command in that city is a matter of history, and has been ably chronicled by James Parton. He there displayed those wonderful qualities of command which made him the most hated, as well as the most respected, Northern man who ever visited the South. He did more to subject the Southern people to the inevitable consequence of the war than a division of a hundred thousand soldiers. He even conquered that dread scourge, yellow fever, and demonstrated that lawlessness even in New Orleans could be suppressed. The new channel for the James River, known as the Dutch Gap, planned by General Butler, and ridiculed by the press, but approved by the officers of the United States Engineer Corps, remains to this day the thoroughfare used by commerce. The fame of General Butler's career at New Orleans, and his presence, quieted the fierce riots in New York City, occasioned by the drafts. General Butler resigned his commission at the close of the war, and resumed the practice of his profession. He is now, and has been for many years, the senior major-general of all living men who have held that rank in the service of the United States. IN CONGRESS. In 1867, Mr. Butler was elected to the fortieth Congress from the fifth congressional district of Massachusetts, and in 1869 from the sixth district. He was re-elected in 1871, 1873, and in 1877. He was a recognized power in the House of Representatives, and with the administration. In 1882, he was elected Governor of Massachusetts, and gracefully retired in December, 1883, to the disappointment of more than one hundred and fifty thousand Massachusetts voters. Mr. Butler is a man of vast intellectual ability—in every sense of the word a great man. He possesses a remarkable memory, great executive abilities, good judgment, immense energy, and withal a tender heart. He has always been a champion of fair play and equal rights. As an orator he has great power to sway his hearers, for his words are wise. Had the Democratic party listened to Mr. Butler at the Charleston convention, its power would have continued; had the South listened to him, it would not have seceded. Mr. Butler is a man who arouses popular enthusiasm, and who has a great personal following of devoted friends and admirers. Books have already been written about him—more will follow in the years to come. He is the personification of the old ante bellum Democratic party of the Northern States—a party that believed in the aggrandizement of the country, at home and abroad; which placed the rights of an American citizen before the gains of commerce; which fostered that commerce until it whitened the seas; and which provided for the reception of millions, who were sure to come to these shores, by acquiring large areas of territory. This hastily prepared sketch gives but a meagre outline of this remarkable man, whose history is yet by no means completed. THE BOUNDARY LINES OF OLD GROTON.—II. By THE HON. SAMUEL ABBOTT GREEN, M.D. The report of the Comitty of the Honble Court vpon the petition of Concord Chelmsford Lancaster & Stow for a grant of part of Nashobe lands Persuant to the directions giuen by this Honble Court bareng Date the 30th of May 1711 The Comity Reports as foloweth that is to say &ce That on the second day of October 1711 the sd comitty went vpon the premises with an Artis and veved [viewed] and servaied the Land mentioned in the Peticion and find that the most southerly line of the plantation of Nashobe is bounded partly on Concord & partly on Stow and this line contains by Estimation vpon the servey a bought three miles & 50 polle The Westerly line Runs partly on Stowe & partly on land claimed by Groton and containes four miles and 20 poll extending to a place called Brown hill. The North line Runs a long curtain lands claimed by Groton and contains three miles, the Easterle line Runs partly on Chelmsford, and partly on a farm cald Powersis farm in Concord; this line contains a bought fouer miles and twenty fiue pole The lands a boue mentioned wer shewed to vs for Nashobe Plantation and there were ancient marks in the seuerall lines fairly marked, And sd comite find vpon the servey that Groton hath Run into Nashobe (as it was showed to vs) so as to take out nere one half sd plantation and the bigest part of the medows, it appears to vs to Agree well with the report of Mr John Flint & Mr Joseph Wheeler who were a Commetty imployed by the County Court in midlesexs to Run the bounds of said plantation (June ye 20th 82) The plat will demonstrate how the plantation lyeth & how Groton coms in vpon it: as aleso the quaintete which is a bought 7840 acres And said Comite are of the opinion that ther may [be] a township in that place it lying so remote from most of the neighboreng Towns, provided this Court shall se reson to continew the bounds as we do judg thay have been made at the first laieng out And that ther be sum addition from Concord & Chelmsford which we are redy to think will be complyed with by sd Towns And sd Comite do find a bought 15 famelys setled in sd plantation of Nashobe (5) in Groton claimed and ten in the remainder and 3 famelys which are allredy setled on the powerses farm: were convenient to joyn w sd plantation and are a bought Eaight mille to any meting-house (Also, ther are a bought Eaight famelys in Chelmsford which are allredy setled neer Nashobe line & six or seven miles from thir own meeting house JONATHAN TYNG THOMAS HOW JOHN STEARNS In the Houes of Representatives Novm 2: 1711. Read Octo. 23, 1713. In Council Read and accepted; And the Indians native Proprietors of the sd Plantacon. Being removed by death Except two or Three families only remaining Its Declared and Directed That the said Lands of Nashoba be preserved for a Township. And Whereas it appears That Groton Concord and Stow by several of their Inhabitants have Encroached and Setled upon the said Lands; This Court sees not reason to remove them to their Damage; but will allow them to be and remain with other Inhabitants that may be admitted into the Town to be there Setled; And that they have full Liberty when their Names and Number are determined to purchase of the few Indians there remaining for the Establishment of a Township accordingly. Saving convenient Allotments and portions of Land to the remaining Indian Inhabitants for their Setling and Planting. Isa ADDINGTON Secry. In the House of Representatives Octor: 23th: 1713. Read [Massachusetts Archives, cxiii, 600.] The inhabitants of Groton had now become alarmed at the situation of affairs, fearing that the new town would take away some of their land. Through neglect the plan of the original grant, drawn up in the year 1668, had never been returned to the General Court for confirmation, as was customary in such cases; and this fact also excited further apprehension. It was not confirmed finally until February 10, 1717, several years after the incorporation of Nashobah. In the General Court Records (ix, 263) in the State Library, under the date of June 18, 1713, it is entered:— Upon reading a Petition of the Inhabitants of the Town of Groton, Praying that the Return & Plat of the Surveyor of their Township impowered by the General Court may be Accepted for the Settlement & Ascertaining the Bounds of their Township, Apprehending they are likely to be prejudiced by a Survey lately taken of the Grant of Nashoba; Voted a Concurrence with the Order pass'd thereon in the House of Representves That the Petitioners serve the Proprietors of Nashoba Lands with a copy of this Petition, That they may Shew Cause, if any they have on the second Fryday of the Session of this Court in the Fall of the Year, Why the Prayer therof may not be granted, & the Bounds of Groton settled according to the ancient Plat of said Town herewith exhibited. It is evident from the records that the Nashobah lands gave rise to much controversy. Many petitions were presented to the General Court, and many claims made, growing out of this territory. The following entry is found in the General Court Records (ix, 369) in the State Library, under the date of November 2, 1714:— The following Order pass'd by the Representves. Read & Concur'd; viz, Upon Consideration of the many Petitions & Claims relating to the Land called Nashoba Land; Ordered that the said Nashoba Land be made a Township, with the Addition of such adjoining Lands of the Neighbouring Towns, whose Owners shall petition for that End, & that this Court should think fit to grant, That the said Nashoba Lands having been long since purchased of the Indians by Mr Bulkley & Henchman one Half, the other Half by Whetcomb & Powers, That the said purchase be confirmed to the children of the said Bulkley, Whetcomb & Powers, & Cpt. Robert Meers as Assignee to Mr Henchman according to their respective Proportions; Reserving to the Inhabitants, who have settled within these Bounds, their Settlements with Divisions of Lands, in proportion to the Grantees, & such as shall be hereafter admitted; the said Occupants or present Inhabitants paying in Proportion as others shall pay for their Allotments;. Provided the said Plantation shall be settled with Thirty five Families & an orthodox Minister in three years time, And that Five hundred Acres of Land be reserved and laid out for the Benefit of any of the Descendants of the Indian Proprietors of the said Plantation, that may be surviving; A Proportion thereof to be for Sarah Doublet alias Sarah Indian;. The Rev. Mr. John Leveret & Spencer Phips Esqr. to be Trustees for the said Indians to take Care of the said Lands for their Use. And it is further Ordered that Cpt. Hopestill Brown, Mr. Timothy Wily & Mr. Joseph Burnap of Reading be a Committee to lay out the said Five hundred Acres of Land reserved for the Indians, & to run the Line between Groton & Nashoba, at the Charge of both Parties & make Report to this Court, And that however the Line may divide the Land with regard to the Township, yet the Proprietors on either side may be continued in the Possession of their Improvements, paying as aforesaid; And that no Persons legal Right or Property in the said Lands shall [be] hereby taken away or infringed, Consented to J DUDLEY The report of this committee is entered in the same volume of General Court Records (ix, 395, 396) as the order of their appointment, though the date as given by them does not agree with the one there mentioned. The following Report of the Committee for Running the Line between Groton & Nashoba Accepted by Representves. Read & Concur'd; Viz. We the Subscribers appointed a Committee by the General Court to run the Line between Groton & Nashoba & to lay out Five hundred Acres of Land in said Nashoba to the the [sic] Descendants of the Indians; Pursuant to said Order of Court, bearing Date Octobr 20th [November 2?] 1714, We the Subscribers return as follows; That on the 30th. of November last, we met on the Premises, & heard the Information of the Inhabitants of Groton, Nashoba & others of the Neighbouring Towns, referring to the Line that has been between Groton & Nashoba & seen several Records, out of Groton Town Book, & considered other Writings, that belong to Groton & Nashoba, & We have considered all, & We have run the Line (Which we account is the old Line between Groton & Nashoba;) We began next Chelmsford Line, at a Heap of Stones, where, We were informed, that there had been a great Pine Tree, the Northeast Corner of Nashoba, and run Westerly by many old mark'd Trees, to a Pine Tree standing on the Southerly End of Brown Hill mark'd N and those marked Trees had been many times marked or renewed, thô they do not stand in a direct or strait Line to said Pine Tree on said Brown Hill; And then from said Brown Hill we turned a little to the East of the South, & run to a white Oak being an old Mark, & so from said Oak to a Pitch Pine by a Meadow, being an other old Mark; & the same Line extended to a white Oak near the North east Corner of Stow: And this is all, as we were informed, that Groton & Nashoba joins together: Notwithstanding the Committees Opinion is, that Groton Men be continued in their honest Rights, thô they fall within the Bounds of Nashoba; And We have laid out to the Descendants of the Indians Five hundred Acres at the South east Corner of the Plantation of Nashoba; East side, Three hundred Poles long, West side three hundred Poles, South & North ends, Two hundred & eighty Poles broad; A large white Oak marked at the North west Corner, & many Line Trees we marked at the West side & North End, & it takes in Part of two Ponds. Dated Decemr 14. 1714. HOPESTILL BROWN TIMOTHY WILY JOSEPH BURNAP Consented to J Dudley. The incorporation of Nashobah on November 2, 1714, settled many of the disputes connected with the lands; but on December 3 of the next year, the name was changed from Nashobah to Littleton. As already stated, the plan of the original Groton grant had never been returned by the proprietors to the General Court for confirmation, and this neglect had acted to their prejudice. After Littleton had been set off, the town of Groton undertook to repair the injury and make up the loss. John Shepley and John Ames were appointed agents to bring about the necessary confirmation by the General Court. It is an interesting fact to know that in their petition (General Court Records, x, 216, February 11, 1717, in the office of the secretary of state) they speak of having in their possession at that time the original plan of the town, made by Danforth in the year 1668, though it was somewhat defaced. In the language of the Records, it was said to be "with the Petitioner," which expression in the singular number may have been intentional, referring to John Shepley, probably the older one, as certainly the more influential, of the two agents. This plan was also exhibited before the General Court on June 18, 1713, according to the Records (ix, 263) of that date. The case, as presented by the agents, was as follows:— A petition of John Sheply & John Ames Agents for the Town of Groton Shewing that the General Assembly of the Province did in the year 1655, Grant unto Mr Dean Winthrop & his Associates a Tract of Land of Eight miles quare for a Plantation to be called by the name of Groton, that Thoms & Jonathan Danforth did in the year 1668, lay out the said Grant, but the Plat thereof through Neglect was not returned to the Court for Confirmation that the said Plat thô something defaced is with the Petitioner, That in the Year 1713 Mr Samuel Danforth Surveyour & Son of the abovesaid Jonathan Danforth, at the desire of the said Town of Groton did run the Lines & make an Implatment of the said Township laid out as before & found it agreeable to the former. Wh. last Plat the Petitioners do herewith exhibit, And pray that this Honble Court would allow & confirm the same as the Township of Groton. In the House of Representves; Feb. 10. 1717. Read, Read a second time, And Ordered that the Prayer of the Petition be so far granted that the Plat herewith exhibited (Althô not exactly conformable to the Original Grant of Eight Miles quare) be accounted, accepted & Confirmed as the Bounds of the Township of Groton in all parts, Except where the said Township bounds on the Township of Littleton, Where the Bounds shall be & remain between the Towns as already stated & settled by this Court, And that this Order shall not be understood or interpreted to alter or infringe the Right & Title which any Inhabitant or Inhabitants of either of the said Towns have or ought to have to Lands in either of the said Townships In Council, Read & Concur'd, Consented to Samll Shute [General Court Records (x, 216), February 11, 1717, in the office of the secretary of state.] The proprietors of Groton felt sore at the loss of their territory along the Nashobah line in the year 1714, although it would seem without reason. They had neglected to have the plan of their grant confirmed by the proper authorities at the proper time; and no one was to blame for this oversight but themselves. In the autumn of 1734 they represented to the General Court that in the laying out of the original plantation no allowance had been made for prior grants in the same territory, and that in settling the line with Littleton they had lost more than four thousand acres of land; and in consideration of these facts they petitioned for an unappropriated gore of land lying between Dunstable and Townsend. The necessary steps for bringing the matter before the General Court at this time were taken at a town meeting, held on July 25, 1734. It was then stated that the town had lost more than twenty-seven hundred and eighty-eight acres by the encroachment of Littleton line; and that two farms had been laid out within the plantation before it was granted to the proprietors. Under these circumstances Benjamin Prescott was authorized to present the petition to the General Court, setting forth the true state of the case and all the facts connected with it. The two farms alluded to were Major Simon Willard's, situated at Nonacoicus or Coicus, now within the limits of Ayer, and Ralph Reed's, in the neighborhood of the Ridges; so Mr. Butler told me several years before his death, giving Judge James Prescott as his authority, and I carefully wrote it down at the time. The statement is confirmed by the report of a committee on the petition of Josiah Sartell, made to the House of Representatives, on June 13, 1771. Willard's farm, however, was not laid out before the original plantation was granted, but in the spring of 1658, three years after the grant. At this time Danforth had not made his plan of the plantation, which fact may have given rise to the misapprehension. Ralph Reed was one of the original proprietors of the town, and owned a fifteen-acre right; but I do not find that any land was granted him by the General Court. It has been incorrectly supposed, and more than once so stated in print, that the gore of land, petitioned for by Benjamin Prescott, lay in the territory now belonging to Pepperell; but this is a mistake. The only unappropriated land between Dunstable and Townsend, as asked for in the petition, lay in the angle made by the western boundary of Dunstable and the northern boundary of Townsend. At that period Dunstable was a very large township, and included within its territory several modern towns, lying mostly in New Hampshire. The manuscript records of the General Court define very clearly the lines of the gore, and leave no doubt in regard to it. It lay within the present towns of Mason, Brookline, Wilton, Milford, and Greenville, New Hampshire. Benjamin Prescott was at the time a member of the General Court and the most influential man in town. His petition was presented to the House of Representatives on November 28, 1734, and referred to a committee, which made a report thereon a fortnight later. They are as follows: — A Petition of Benjamin Prescot, Esq; Representative of the Town of Groton, and in behalf of the Proprietors of the said Town, shewing that the General Court in May 1655, in answer to the Petition of Mr. Dean Winthrop and others, were pleased to grant the Petitioners a tract of Land of the contents of eight miles square, the Plantation to be called Groton, that in taking a Plat of the said tract there was no allowance made for prior Grants &c. by means whereof and in settling the Line with Littleton Anno 1715, or thereabouts, the said Town of Groton falls short more than four thousand acres of the Original Grant, praying that the said Proprietors may obtain a Grant of what remains undisposed of of a Gore of Land lying between Dunstable and Townshend, or an equivalent elsewhere of the Province Land. Read and Ordered, That Col. Chandler, Capt. Blanchard, Capt. Hobson, Major Epes, and Mr. Hale, be a Committee to take this Petition under consideration, and report what may be proper for the Court to do in answer thereto. [Journal of the House of Representatives, November 28, 1734, page 94.] Col. Chandler from the Committee appointed the 28th. ult. to consider the Petition of Benjamin Prescot, Esq; in behalf of the Proprietors of Groton, made report, which was read and accepted, and in answer to this Petition, Voted, That a Grant of ten thousand eight hundred acres of the Lands lying in the Gore between Dunstable and Townshend, be and hereby is made to the Proprietors of the Town of Groton, as an equivalent for what was taken from them by Littleton and Coyachus or Willard's Farm (being about two acres and a half for one) and is in full satisfaction thereof, and that the said Proprietors be and hereby are allowed and impowred by a Surveyor and Chain-men on Oath to survey and lay out the said ten thousand eight hundred acres in the said Gore, and return a Plat thereof to this Court within twelve months for confirmation to them their heirs and assigns respectively. Sent up for Concurrence. [Journal of the House of Representatives, December 12, 1734, page 119.] The proprietors of Groton had a year's time allowed them, in which they could lay out the grant, but they appear to have taken fifteen months for the purpose. The record of the grant is as follows:— A Memorial of Benja Prescott Esq: Representa of the Town of Groton in behalf of the Proprietors there, praying that the Votes of the House on his Memorial & a plat of Ten Thousand Eight hundred Acres of Land, lately Granted to the said Proprietors, as Entred in the House the 25 of March last, may be Revived and Granted, The bounds of which Tract of Land as Mentioned on the said Plat are as follows vizt.: begining at the North West Corner of Dunstable at Dram Cup hill by Sohegan River and Runing South in Dunstable line last Perambulated and Run by a Comtee of the General Court, two Thousand one hundred & fifty two poles to Townshend line, there making an angle, and Runing West 31 1-2 Deg. North on Townshend line & province Land Two Thousand and Fifty Six poles to a Pillar of Stones then turning and Ruñing by Province Land 31 1-2 deg North two Thousand & forty Eight poles to Dunstable Corner first mentioned In the House of Representa. Read & Ordered that the prayer of the Memorial be Granted, and further that the within Plat as Reformed and Altered by Jonas Houghton Surveyr, be and hereby is accepted and the Lands therein Delineated and Described (Excepting the said One Thousand Acres belonging to Cambridge School Farm and therein included) be and hereby are Confirmed to the Proprietors of the Town of Groton their heirs and Assignes Respectivly forever, According to their Several Interests; Provided the same do not interfere with any former Grant of this Court nor Exceeds the Quantity of Eleven thousand and Eight hundred Acres and the Committee for the Town of Ipswich are Allowed and Impowred to lay out such quantity of Land on their West line as is Equivalent to what is taken off their East line as aforesaid, and Return a plat thereof to this Court within twelve Months for confirmation. In Council Read & Concurr'd. Consented to J Belcher And in Answer to the said Memorial of Benja Prescott Esqr In the House of Representa. Ordered that the prayer of the Memorial be Granted and the Comtee. for the new Township Granted to some of the Inhabitants of Ipswich are hereby Allowed to lay out an Equivalent on the West line of the said New Township Accordingly. In Council Read & Concurr'd Consented to J Belcher [General Court Records (xvi, 334), June 15, 1736, in the office of the secretary of state.] This grant, now made to the proprietors of Groton, interfered with the territory previously given on April, 1735, to certain inhabitants of Ipswich, but the mistake was soon rectified, as appears by the following:— Voted, That one thousand seven hundred Acres of the unappropriated Lands of the Province be and hereby is given and granted to the Proprietors or Grantees of the Township lately granted to sixty Inhabitants of the Town of Ipswich, as an Equivalent for about that quantity being taken off their Plat by the Proprietors of the Common Lands of Groton, and that the Ipswich Grantees be allowed to lay out the same on the Northern or Westerly Line of the said new Township or on both sides. Sent up for Concurrence. [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 108), January 12, 1736.] Groton Gore in 1884 The record of the grant clearly marks the boundaries of Groton Gore, and by it they can easily be identified. Dram Cup Hill, near Souhegan River, the old northwest corner of Dunstable, is in the present territory of Milford, New Hampshire. From that point the line ran south for six or seven miles, following the western boundary of Dunstable, until it came to the old Townsend line; then it turned and ran northwesterly six miles or more, when turning again it made for the original starting-place at Dunstable northwest corner. These lines enclosed a triangular district which became known as Groton Gore; in fact, the word gore means a lot of land of triangular shape. This territory is now entirely within the State of New Hampshire, lying mostly in Mason, but partly in Brookline, Wilton, Milford, and Greenville. It touches in no place the tract, hitherto erroneously supposed to comprise the Gore. It was destined, however, to remain only a few years in the possession of the proprietors; but during this short period it was used by them for pasturing cattle. Mr. John B. Hill, in his History of the Town of Mason, New Hampshire, says:— Under this grant, the inhabitants of Groton took possession of, and occupied the territory. It was their custom to cut the hay upon the meadows, and stack it, and early in the spring to send up their young cattle to be fed upon the hay, under the care of Boad, the negro slave. They would cause the woods to be fired, as it was called, that is, burnt over in the spring; after which fresh and succulent herbage springing up, furnished good store of the finest feed, upon which the cattle would thrive and fatten through the season. Boad's camp was upon the east side of the meadow, near the residence of the late Joel Ames. (Page 26.) In connection with the loss of the Gore, a brief statement of the boundary question between Massachusetts and New Hampshire is here given. During many years the dividing-line between these two provinces was the subject of controversy. The cause of dispute dated back to the time when the original grant was made to the colony of Massachusetts Bay, The charter was drawn up in England at a period when little was known in regard to the interior of this country; and the boundary lines, necessarily, were very indefinite. The Merrimack River was an important factor in fixing the limits of the grant, as the northern boundary of Massachusetts was to be a line three miles north of any and every part of it. At the date of the charter, the general direction of the river was not known, but it was incorrectly assumed to be easterly and westerly. As a matter of fact, the course of the Merrimack is southerly, for a long distance from where it is formed by the union of the Winnepeseogee and the Pemigewasset Rivers, and then it turns and runs twenty-five or thirty miles in a northeasterly direction to its mouth; and this deflexion in the current caused the dispute. The difference between the actual and the supposed direction was a matter of little practical importance so long as the neighboring territory remained unsettled, or so long as the two provinces were essentially under one government; but as the population increased it became an exciting and vexatious question. Towns were chartered by Massachusetts in territory claimed by New Hampshire, and this action led to bitter feeling and provoking legislation. Massachusetts contended for the land "nominated in the bond," which would carry the line fifty miles northward into the very heart of New Hampshire; and on the other hand that province strenuously opposed this view of the case, and claimed that the line should run, east and west, three miles north of the mouth of the river. At one time, a royal commission was appointed to consider the subject, but their labors produced no satisfactory result. At last the matter was carried to England for a decision, which was rendered by the king on March 5, 1739-40. His judgment was final, and in favor of New Hampshire. It gave that province not only all the territory in dispute, but a strip of land fourteen miles in width, lying along her southern border, mostly west of the Merrimack, which she had never claimed. This strip was the tract of land between the line running east and west, three miles north of the southernmost trend of the river, and a similar line three miles north of its mouth. By the decision twenty-eight townships were taken from Massachusetts and transferred to New Hampshire. The settlement of this disputed question was undoubtedly a public benefit, although it caused, at the time, a great deal of hard feeling. In establishing the new boundary Pawtucket Falls, situated now in the city of Lowell, and near the most southern portion of the river's course, was taken as the starting-place; and the line which now separates the two States was run west, three miles north of this point. It was surveyed officially in the spring of 1741. The new boundary passed through the original Groton grant, and cut off a triangular portion of its territory, now within the limits of Nashua, and went to the southward of Groton Gore, leaving that tract of land wholly in New Hampshire. A few years previously to this time the original grant had undergone other dismemberment, when a slice of its territory was given to Westford. It was a long and narrow tract of land, triangular in shape, with its base resting on Stony Brook Pond, now known as Forge Pond, and coming to a point near Millstone Hill, where the boundary lines of Groton, Westford, and Tyngsborough intersect. The Reverend Edwin R. Hodgman, in his History of Westford, says:— Probably there was no computation of the area of this triangle at any time. Only four men are named as the owners of it, but they, it is supposed, held titles to only a portion, and the remainder was wild, or "common," land, (Page 25.) In the Journal of the House of Representatives (page 9), September 10, 1730, there is recorded:— A petition of Jonas Prescot, Ebenezer Prescot, Abner Kent, and Ebenezer Townsend, Inhabitants of the Town of Groton, praying, That they and their Estates, contained in the following Boundaries, viz. beginning at the Northwesterly Corner of Stony Brook Pond, from thence extending to the Northwesterly Corner of Westford, commonly called Tyng's Corner, and so bound Southerly by said Pond, may be set off to the Town of Westford, for Reasons mentioned. Read and Ordered, That the Petitioners within named, with their Estates, according to the Bounds before recited, be and hereby are to all Intents and Purposes set off from the Town of Groton, and annexed to the said Town of Westford. Sent up for Concurrence. This order received the concurrence of the council, and was signed by the governor, on the same day that it passed the House. During this period the town of Harvard was incorporated. It was made up from portions of Groton, Lancaster, and Stow, and the engrossed act signed by the governor, on June 29, 1732. The petition for the township was presented to the General Court nearly two years before the date of incorporation. In the Journal of the House of Representatives (pages 84, 85), October 9, 1730, it is recorded:— A Petition of Jonas Houghton, Simon Stone, Jonathan Whitney, and Thomas Wheeler, on behalf of themselves, and on behalf and at the desire of sundry of the Inhabitants on the extream parts of the Towns of Lancaster, Groton and Stow, named in the Schedule thereunto annexed; praying, That a Tract of Land (with the Inhabitants thereon, particularly described and bounded in said Petition) belonging to the Towns above-mentioned, may be incorporated and erected into a distinct Township, agreeable to said Bounds, for Reasons mentioned. Read, together with the Schedule, and Ordered, That the Petitioners serve the Towns of Lancaster, Groton and Stow with Copies of the Petition, that they may shew Cause (if any they have) on the first Thursday of the next Session, why the Prayer thereof may not be granted. Sent up for Concurrence. Further on, in the same Journal (page 136), December 29, 1730, it is also recorded:— The Petition of Jonas Houghton, Simon Stone, and others, praying as entred the 9th. of October last. Read again, together with the Answers of the Towns of Lancaster, Groton and Stow, and Ordered, That Maj. Brattle and Mr. Samuel Chandler, with such as the Honourable Board shall appoint, be a Committee, (at the Charge of the Petitioners) to repair to the Land Petitioned for to be a Township, that they carefully view and consider the Situation and Circumstances of the Petitioners, and Report their Opinion what may be proper for this Court to do in Answer thereto, at their next Session. Sent up for Concurrence. Ebenezer Burrel Esq; brought from the Honourable Board, the Report of the Committee appointed by this Court the 30th of December last, to take under Consideration the Petition of Jonas Houghton and others, in behalf of themselves and sundry of the Inhabitants of the Eastern part of the Towns of Lancaster, Groton and Stow, praying that they may be erected into a separate Township. Likewise a Petition of Jacob Houghton and others, of the North-easterly part of the Town of Lancaster, praying the like. As also a Petition of sundry of the Inhabitants of the South-west part of the North-east Quarter of the Township of Lancaster, praying they may be continued as they are. Pass'd in Council, viz. In Council, June 21, 1731. Read, and Ordered, That this Report be accepted. Sent down for Concurrence. Read and Concurred. [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 52), June 22, 1731.] The original copy of the petition for Harvard is now probably lost; but in the first volume (page 53) of "Ancient Plans Grants &c." among the Massachusetts Archives, is a rough plan of the town, with a list of the petitioners, which may be the "Schedule" referred to in the extract from the printed Journal. It appears from this document that, in forming the new town, forty-eight hundred and thirty acres of land were taken from the territory of Groton; and with the tract were nine families, including six by the name of Farnsworth. This section comprised the district known, even now, as "the old mill," where Jonas Prescott had, as early as the year 1667, a gristmill. The heads of these families were Jonathan Farnsworth, Eleazer Robbins, Simon Stone, Jr., Jonathan Farnsworth, Jr., Jeremiah Farnsworth, Eleazer Davis, Ephram Farnsworth, Reuben Farnsworth, and [torn] Fransworth, who had petitioned the General Court to be set off from Groton. On this plan of Harvard the names of John Burk, John Burk, Jr., and John Davis, appear in opposition to Houghton's petition. The town of Harvard took its name from the founder of Harvard College, probably at the suggestion of Jonathan Belcher, who was governor of the province at the time and a graduate of the college. To his Excellency Jonathan Belcher Esqr. Capt General and Governour in Chief The Honble. The Council and the Honourable House of Representatives of His Majestys Province of the Massachusetts Bay in New England in General Court Assembled by Adjournment Decembr 16 1730 The Memorial of Jonas Houghton Simon Stone Jonathan Whitney and Thomas Wheeler Humbly Sheweth That upon their Petition to this Great and Honourable Court in October last [the 9th] praying that a Certain Tract of Land belonging to Lancaster Stow and Groton with the Inhabitants thereon may be Erected into a Distinct and Seperate Township (and for Reasons therein Assigned) your Excellency and Honours were pleased to Order that the petitioners Serve The Towns of Lancaster Groton and Stow with a Copy of their said Petition that they may shew Cause if any they have on the first Thursday of the next Sessions why the prayers thereof may not be granted. And for as much as this great and Honble. Court now Sitts by Adjournment and the next Session may be very Remote And your Memorialists have attended the Order of this Honble: Court in serving the said Several Towns with Copys of the said Petition And the partys are attending and Desirous the hearing thereon may be brought forward ye former order of this Honl Court notwithstanding. They therefore most humbly pray your Excellency & Honours would be pleased to Cause the hearing to be had this present Session and that a Certain day may be assigned for the same as your Excellency & Honours in your great wisdom & Justice shall see meet. And your Memorialists as in Duty bound Shall Ever pray. JONAS HOUGHTON SIMON STOON JUNER JONATHAN WHITNEY THOMAS WHELER In the House of Reptives Decr 17, 1730 Read and in Answer to this Petition Ordered That the Petrs give Notice to the Towns of Lancaster Groton and Stow or their Agents that they give in their Answer on the twenty ninth Instt. why the Prayer of the Petition within referred to may not be granted. Sent up for Concurrence J QUINCY Spkr: In Council Dec. 18, 1730; Read and Concur'd. J WILLARD Secry [Massachusetts Archives, cxiv, 6-8.] The next dismemberment of the Groton grant took place in the winter of 1738-39, when a parcel of land was set off to Littleton. I do not find a copy of the petition for this change, but from Mr. Sartell's communication it seems to have received the qualified assent of the town. To his Excellency Jonathan Belcher Esqr Captain General & Governour in Chief &c the Honorable Council and House of Representatives in General Court assembled at Boston January 1, 1738. May it please your Excellency and the Honorable Court. Whereas there is Petition offered to your Excellency and the Honorable Court by several of the Inhabitants of the Town of Groton praying to be annexed to the Town of Littleton &c. The Subscriber as Representative of said Town of Groton and in Behalf of said Town doth hereby manifest the Willingness of the Inhabitants of Groton in general that the Petitioners should be annexed to the said Town of Littleton with the Lands that belong to them Lying within the Line Petitioned for, but there being a Considerable Quantity of Proprietors Lands and other particular persons Lying within the Line that is Petitioned for by the said Petitioners. The Subscriber in Behalf of said Town of Groton & the Proprietors and others would humbly pray your Excellency and the Honorable Court that that part of their Petition may be rejected if in your Wisdom you shall think it proper and that they be sett off with the lands only that belong to them Lying within the Line Petitioned for as aforesaid, and the Subscriber in Behalf of the Town of Groton &c will as in Duty Bound ever pray &c. NATHANIEL SARTELL [Massachusetts Archives, cxiv, 300.] John Jeffries, Esq; brought down the Petition of Peter Lawrence and others of Groton, praying to be annexed to Littleton, as entred the 12th ult. Pass'd in Council, viz. In Council January 4th, 1738. Read again, together with the Answer of Nathanael Sartell, Esq; Representative for the Town of Groton, which being considered, Ordered, That the Prayer of the Petition be so far granted as that the Petitioners with their Families & Estates within the Bounds mentioned in the Petition be and hereby are set off from the Town of G...