Norfolk County, Massachusetts - Chapter 12: The Town of Brookline, 1918

Chapter 12: The Town of Brookline

LOCATION, BOUNDARIES AND EXTENT - TOPOGRAPHY - THE HOOKER GRANT - ALLOTMENTS OF LAND - FIRST MOVE FOR SEPARATION FROM BOSTON - INCORPORATION

Present

Brookline is the most northeastern town of Norfolk County. When the county was established in 1793, its territory was continuous from the Charles River at Charlestown to the Rhode Island line. Since then the towns surrounding Brookline have all been annexed to the city, leaving the town segregated from the main body of Norfolk County and bounded on all sides by the City of Boston. Its greatest length from northeast to southwest is nearly four and a half miles, and its average width from southeast to northwest is a little less than two miles.

Topography

Like most of the country near the sea coast in Eastern Massachusetts, the surface of Brookline rises gradually from the side next to the shore line toward the interior. On some maps are shown a line of elevations marked "Brookline Hills." The highest of these is Lyman's (or Cabot's) Hill, the summit of which is 336 feet above high-water mark. Next comes Hyde's Hill, which rises to a height of 309 feet above the .high-water line. Near the old standpipe of the Brookline Waterworks is another elevation 306 feet high, and Walnut Hill has an altitude of 283 feet. Other hills, of less altitude, but equally beautiful and picturesque, are Goddard Heights, Aspinwall's, Fisher's, Corey's, Bradley's, Babcock and Chestnut Hills, all except the last mentioned deriving their names from early owners. From the top of these hills a fine view of the surrounding country may be obtained, and the diversified surface of Brookline, its location, and other attractions have made the town a favorite resort for the suburban residents of Boston.

The principal stream is the Charles River, which now merely touches the town on the northeast. When the Town of Brookline was first incorporated in 1705, the Charles River formed the boundary line for some distance on the north, but that portion of the town was subsequently annexed to Boston. Muddy River has its source in Jamaica Pond and forms a portion of the boundary line between Brookline and the city. The early settlement, known as ''Muddy River Hamlet," took its name from this stream. In early days vessels of considerable tonnage could ascend the Muddy River with cargoes of goods for the inhabitants, deliver-

The Hooker Grant

The first organized effort to plant a settlement along the shores of Muddy River was made in the autumn of 1634. Two years prior to that time Rev. Air. Hooker and forty-six members of his congregation at Mount Wollaston were granted permission by the General Court to remove to New Town (now Cambridge). In May, 1634, these same people complained of a scarcity of land, especially meadow, in New Town and requested permission to look for and remove to a new location. The request was granted and messengers were sent out in different directions to seek a site for a new settlement. Those who went to Connecticut brought back flattering reports of the conditions there, and on September 4, 1634, a petition was presented to the General Court praying for permission to remove to Connecticut. Fifteen of the deputies expressed themselves in favor of granting the petition, but the other ten were opposed. The governor and two assistants also favored the proposition to allow the people to depart from New Town, but other officials took the opposite view. The matter was finally compromised by Mr. Hooker's company accepting the enlargements of land granted by Boston and Watertown, viz: "What are now the towns of Brookline, Brighton and Newton, excepting that portion which had previously been assigned to individuals. These donations of land to New Town were made upon condition that Mr. Hooker's company should not remove from the colony, as is shown by the record of September 25, 1634, to wit:

"Also it is ordered, that the ground aboute Muddy Ryver, belonging to Boston & vsed by the inhabitants thereof, shall hereafter belonge to Newe Towne, the wood & Timber thereof groweinge & to be groweinge to be reserved to the inhabitants of Boston; provided, and it is the meaneing of the Court, that if Mr. Hooker and the congregacon nowe setted here shall remove hence, that then the aforesaid meadowe ground shall returne to Waterton & the ground att Muddy Ryver to Boston."

In April, 1635, the General Court appointed Ensign William Jennison to run and mark the line between New Town and Roxbury. His report was as follows : "The line between Roxbury and New Town is laid to run southwest from Muddy River near the place called 'Nowell's Bridge' a tree marked on four sides, and from the mouth of the River to that place ; the south side is for Roxbury and the north for Newtown."

Apparently the lands at Muddy River were not to the liking of Mr. Hooker and his associates and the records do not show that they made any serious attempt to found a settlement at that place. Early in 1636 the entire congregation, numbering about one hundred people, led by Mr. Hooker and Mr. Stone, went to Connecticut and laid the foundation of the City of Hartford. After their departure the land at Muddy River reverted to Boston, in accordance with the proviso included in the grant of September, 1634. William Spencer, Nicholas Danforth and William Jennison were appointed to locate the boundary lines between New Town and Boston and made the following report in April, 1636: the bounds of the New Town upon Charles River, do agree that the bounds of the town shall run from the marked tree, by Charles River, on the Northwest side of the Roxbury bounds, one and a half miles North east, and from thence three miles northwest, and so from thence five miles Southwest ; and on the Southwest side of Charles River, from the Southeast of Roxbury bounds, to run four miles on a Southwest line, reserving the proprieties to several persons, granted by special order of the Court."

This report was signed by all three of the commissioners and their intention was to restore the Muddy River territory, or so much of it as had not been granted to individuals, as set forth in the last clause. The lines recommended by the committee were not accurately established and when the name of New Town was changed to Cambridge by act of the General Court on March 2, 1638, some dissatisfaction arose over the vague condition of the boundary dividing the towns of Cambridge and Boston. The two towns were therefore authorized to appoint members of a joint committee to settle the question. Boston appointed Thomas Oliver and William Collbron, and Cambridge appointed John Bridge, Richard Champney, Gregory Stone, Joseph Isaac and Thomas Marett. The committee was appointed on December 20, 1639, but did not do its work until the following summer, when the line was marked and established as follows:

"We whose names are underwritten being appointed by the towns to which we belong, to settle the bounds between Boston (Muddy River) and Cambridge, have agreed that the partition shall run from Charles River, up along the channel of Smelt Brook to a marked tree upon the brink of said brook, near the first and lowest reedy meadow; and from that tree, in a straight line, to the great red oak, formerly marked by agreement, at the foot of the great hill, on the northernmost end thereof ; and from the said great red oak to Dedham Line, by the trees marked bv agreement of both parties this August 2, 1640."

The establishment of this line restored to Boston the lands along Muddy River almost identically as they had been claimed by the town before the grant to Rev. Mr. Hooker's congregation in 1634. The condition of the lands was then about as described in Wood's "New England Prospect" in 1633, the year before the Hooker grant was made, viz :

"The inhabitants of Boston, for their enlargement, have taken to themselves farm houses in a place called Muddy River, two miles from their town, where is good ground, large timber, and store of marsh land and meadow. In this place they keep their swine and other cattle in the summer, whilst corn is on the ground at Boston ; and bring them to town in winter."

Allotments Of Land

Among the early settlers of Boston the custom prevailed of parceling out the land to families in proportion to the number of members in each family. This was done by a given number of persons selected for the purpose - usually five or seven - who were known as "overseers of the town's occasions," or sometimes "townsmen" or "allotters." Between the years 1634 and 1640, on different occasions, the lands at Muddy River were thus divided and allotted to the citizens. Among the larger grants were 100 acres of upland and 15 acres of marsh to Thomas Leveritt, the same quantities of each to Thomas Oliver, 150 acres to

William Coulborne, ioo acres to Wentworth Day, 80 acres of upland and 20 acres of marsh to Captain Underhill, and to John Cotton "all the ground lying betweene the twoe brooks, next to William Colborne's allotment there and soe to the other end unto the shortest overcut beyond the hill toward the northwest."

Isaac Grosse received fifty acres ; Edward Bendall, thirty-five acres ; Philemon Pormont, thirty acres; George Griggs and Nathaniel Woodward, Sr., twentyeight acres each ; William Pell and Robert Reynolds, twenty-five acres each : Thomas Flint, William Dynely, Richard Tappin and Francis Bushnall, twentyfour acres each ; and Richard Fairbancke, twenty-three acres.

Those who received fifteen acres each in the general allotment were : George Baytes, William Blackstone, Henry Burchall and William Talmage.

Descending the scale, John Mylam and Robert Walker each received allotments of fourteen acres, though the latter was subsequently granted five acres of the marsh land.

Allotments of ten acres each were made to James Davisse, John Cranwell, William Courser, Robert Turner, William Denning, John Arratt, Thomas Snow and William Coulborne, the last named having previously received a grant of 150 acres.

Thomas Savage received seven acres, Isaac Perry a "houseplott," and several grants were made to persons if there was sufficient land to be had. Edward Grubb, Benjamin Gillum, Job Davis and a few others purchased their lands outright, paying therefor ten shillings an acre.

Most of those to whom lands at Muddy River were allotted were residents of Boston, and only a few of the recipients became actual settlers. For about seventy-five years after the settlement of Boston the territory now included in the Town of Brookline was known as "Muddy River," "Muddy River Hamlet," or "Boston Commons," the last name having probably been applied because of the fact that on December 30, 1639, it was agreed that there should be set apart "500 acres at Muddy River for perpetuall Commonage to the Inhabitants there and the towne of Boston, to begin at the outer bounds of Mr. Hibbin's Lott, and soe to goe into the Country, as the Land will afford, before any other allotments are laid outt hereafter."

During this period the inhabitants of Muddy River remained under the "care and jurisdiction of the Town of Boston," and paid taxes to the Boston authorities.

First Move For Separation

The first move on the part of the people of Muddy River for the privilege of acting independently of Boston in any way, was made on March 29, 1686, when they presented a petition to the Boston selectmen for permission to establish a school. In response to the petition "It was voted that the selectmen take this matter into consideration and inquire into the reason thereof and represent it to the next General Towne Meeting what is necessary to be done therein."

No report was made by the selectmen and after waiting for several months the inhabitants of Muddy River grew somewhat impatient. A petition asking for exemption from town rates and the privilege of establishing a school was presented to the General Court, where the records show it was disposed of as follows :

"In answer to the petition of ye inhabitants of Muddie River, prayinge to have libertie to erect a school &c upon the hearinge thereof, the President and Councill doe order, That henceforth the said Hamlet of Muddie River be free from Towne rates to ye Towne of Bostone, they maintaininge theire owne high waves and poore and other publique charges ariseinge amongst themselves, And that within one yeare next comeinge they raise a school house in such place as the two next Justices of the Countrie (upon a publique hearinge of the Inhabitants of said Hamlet) shall determine as also maintaine an able readinge and writinge Master there, from and after that day, and that the Inhabitants annuallie meete to choose three men to manage theire affaires.

At a full meeting of the inhabitants of Muddy River on January 19, 1687, the above order was accepted by a unanimous vote, and Andrew Gardner, Thomas Steadman and John White, Jr., were chosen to "manage theire affaires" for the ensuing year, Provision was also made at this meeting for the maintenance of a schoolmaster. The minutes of this meeting constitute the first entry in the Muddy River records. For about two years the people of Muddy River congratulated themselves upon the acquisition of the privilege to control their own affairs, but at a town meeting in Boston on March 16, 1689, it was "Voted, that Muddy River Inhabitants are not discharged from Bostone to be a hamlet by themselves, but stand related to Bostone as they were before the yeare 1686."

This action on the part of Boston was a direct attempt to deprive the people of Muddy River of the rights and privileges granted them by the General Court and reopened the whole question of town rates, etc. During the next few years the population of the hamlet increased and in 1698 the following petition was presented to the General Court :

"To the Hon. William Stoughton, Lieutenant-Governor of Massachusetts, the Honorable Council, and the Representatives in General Court assembled, 25th May, 1698:

''The humble petition of the inhabitants of Muddy-river humbly showeth - Whereas in the year 1686, the Honorable Joseph Dudley, President, William Stoughton, Deputy President, and the Council, in answer to the petition of the inhabitants of Muddy-river, praying liberty for a school among them, &c, did order, that the Hamlet of Muddy-river be free from Town rates to the Town of Boston, and other privileges, as in said grant, on the other side, may more at large appear;

"We, your petitioners, do humbly pray that the said granted privileges may be confirmed unto said Hamlet, with the addition that the inhabitants may choose such officers amongst themselves, as may assess the inhabitants their due proportion, as may be thought sufficient and expedient for defraying such necessary charges to said school, and other things ; and that one constable may be chosen, who may be sufficiently impowered to collect the rates for the County and the Hamlet ; and your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall every pray.

Upon this petition the General Court failed to take any action, or at least no record of any action can be found, and the relations between the Town of Boston and the settlement at Muddy River continued without change for about two years longer. Then, the population of the hamlet having increased to such an extent that the people felt able to support a town government oi their own, decided to take such steps as might be necessary for their separation from Boston.

Incorporation Of Brookline

"Upon the Petition of the Inhabitants of Muddy River to be a District or Hamlet, separate from the Town of Boston for these reasons, following, viz., the remoteness of the situation, which renders them incapable of enjoying equal benefit and advantage with other of the Inhabitants of Publick Schooles for the instruction of their children, relief of their Poor, and Repairing of their Highways.

"Their petition being read and reasons given therein debated, It was voted in the negative, and that though they had not for some years been rated in the Town rate, yet for the time to come, the Selectmen should vote them in the Town Tax as the other Inhabitants, and as formerly they used to be, and for their encouragement it was voted that the Selectmen should provide a schoolmaster for them to teach their children to read, write and cypher, and order him his payment out of the Town Treasury.

That the people of Muddy River were greatly disappointed at this reception of their petition may be easily imagined, and doubtless some ill-feeling was developed among them. Matters were allowed to drift along without change for about three years, when the inhabitants of the hamlet decided to appeal to a higher power for relief. Accordingly the following petition for presentation to the General Court was prepared and circulated for signatures :

"The humble petition of the Inhabitants of Muddy River, Humbly Sheweth, That they are a Hamlet belonging to Boston, have been lately settled there and sometime since in the year 1686 being grown to a good number of inhabitants represented to the Government then in being, praying to be acquitted from paying duties and taxes to the Town of Boston, being then willing to bear their public charges of Bridges, Highwaies and Poor, and were accordingly then released and ordered to maintain a Reading and Writing Schoole as the order annexed will show, which accordingly we have ever since done, and now further humbly pray that being grown to a greater number of good settled inhabitants we may be allowed a separate right to have Selectmen, and all other rights belonging to a Township, which may further encourage us as we are able to settle a minister and other benefits amongst us, and we shall ever pray."

The petition was signed by Samuel Aspinwall, Thomas Gardner, Sr., Samuel Sewall, Jr., Thomas Steadman, Sr., Benjamin White, Joseph White, John Winchester, Sr., and Josiah Winchester. It came before the General Assembly on June 17, 1704, when it was ordered "That the Selectmen of Boston have a copy of this petition and be heard thereon at ye next Session of this Court." On November 1, 1704, the Council ordered "That the Selectmen of Boston bee notified to attend on Saturday morning, the fourth, current, November 4, 1704." It is not certain that the Boston selectmen obeyed the summons, probably because they were not ready to present their side of the case, and the petition was continued to the next session.

At a meeting held in the Boston Town Hall on March 12, 1705, Elisha Cook, Joseph Bridgham, Ephraim Savage, Bezour Allen and Oliver Noyes were appointed a committee "to consider and draw up what they shall think proper (on behalf of this Town) to lay before the General Court at their next session relating to a petition of sundry of the Inhabitants of Muddy River, that the said District be dismist from the Town of Boston and be admitted to be a Town of themselves."' Following is the report of that committee :

"Upon perusal of the said petition (we) observed that several sessions of the General Court have passed after the time set for the hearing thereof, and that consequently the matter then fell; however, if it be again revived by any new petition or order, we think it proper to lay before the Court the unreasonableness of their demand, they having been hitherto supported by the Town while they were not able themselves to defray their necessary public charges, now increasing upon us and the body of ye town abounding with poor, and such as are not capable to defray, but rather greatly increase the charges for the Inhabitants of Muddy River at such a time, and being themselves now grown more oppulent and capable to be helpful to ye town, to be sent from us seems most unreasonable, and in them very ungrateful and may be a bad example to others to endeavor the like, and to cutt the town into such shreds, as will best suit themselves without any due regard to ye public Intrist, the charge of the Road upon ye neck is great and is still growing and ye petitioners and Inhabitants of Muddy River have had more benefit and do more to increase the charge of that way than all the rest of the town. Several other things might be instanced which the Selectmen are well acquainted with and we think they ought (if the General Court see cause to proceed on the petition) to pray to be heard therein."

On June 15, 1705, the petition came up in the Council and it was ordered that the selectmen of Boston be given an opportunity to be heard on the 19th. The House concurred in this action and the next mention of the matter is found in the journal of the House for June 20, 1705, when it was "Resolved that since the time of hearing of ye premises before this Court is Slipt, there should be a hearing thereof on fryday next at three of the Clock in ye afternoon, and that ye Selectmen of Boston be notified thereof."

"The Answer of ye Selectmen and ye Committee of ye Town of Boston, to ye Inhabitants of Muddy River, Humbly Sheweth, That they have been as easy in this Town as they could in reason desire. That they have not urged anything in their petitions to the contrary. This Town has never called on them to support the ministry of the town as is usual in like cases in ye Country. They have not been enjoined to watchings and wardings, either stated or occasionally, which has layn heavy on ye body of the Town. That they have constantly had ye nominations of their own officers ye towne has usually confirmed. Upon ye desire and Regular motion for a Schoole in that part of ye Town, it has bin allowed them. That lately there has not been more levied on them (and not always so much) as would defray the charges incident in that Part of ye Town and when, as they mention in ye petition, it would in them in time to support the charge of a stated ministry thereby importing ye present inability, which seems a very preposterous arguing.

"The law requiring a settled ministry thereby as one qualification for a Township and some of the subscribers since ye signing have declared ye contrary Intentions. And that which makes this desire the more unreasonable is that they have hitherto been supported by ye Town, while they were not able themselves to defray ye public charges in too many instances to be enumerated. That it may be a precident of ill consequences to ye public to divide Townships into small slips of land rendering them weak and every charge a Burden, tending to starve learning and religion out of ye countrey, especially when no reason of state requires. Ye consideration of which we submit to this honorable Court.

"We humbly offer further to this honorable Court that such a separation is contrary to ye undoubted right and interest of Boston, there being 500 acres of land common in that part of the Town, which is the Town's right, but on a separation can be of no service to the Town. That the Town is very much straightened in its present boundaries by our former too easy concessions as was that of the Neck to Dorchester, or the Lane to Newtown and Cambridge, and the whole Townshipp of Braintree, and would so much more if Muddy River so near us should be separated from the Town. Rumney Marsh, &c, would have a precident to desire the same so that Boston would only be confined to this Isthmus of a mile long which was never thought sufficient bounds for a Townshipp, especially at this time when Boston is daily ye centre of all foreign poor, of saviors widows, and the refuge of our distressed neighbors from ye frontier who Insensibly grow upon us, so that upon the whole we hope your Excellency's honorable Court will not grant said petition.''

This answer was signed by three members of the committee appointed the preceding March - Savage, Allen and Noyes - and "By order of the selectmen it was spread upon the records of the town on June 22, 1705. It is interesting now, in that it shows what a plea of poverty and hardship Boston, now the wealthiest and most populous city of New England, could make two hundred and twelve years ago. So far as the people of Muddy River were concerned, the plea fell on deaf ears, as they redoubled their efforts to bring about a separation. At the fall session of the General Court another petition was presented, to wit :

"The humble petition of the Inhabitants of Muddy River sheweth, That at a session of this honorable Court, held at Boston on 13, August, 1704, the said Inhabitants exhibited their humple petition praying that the said Muddy River might be allowed a separate Village or Peculiar, and be invested with such rights and powers as they may be enabled by themselves to manage the general affairs of said place. Which petition has been transmitted to the Selectmen of the Town of Boston, that they may consider the same ; since which your humble petitioners, not having been informed of any objection made by the Town of Boston, aforesaid, we presume that there is no obstruction to our humble request made in that petition.

"Wherefore we humbly beseech your Excellency, that this honorable Court will be pleased to proceed to pass an Act for the establishing of the said place a separate Village or Peculiar, with such powers as aforesaid, and your petitioners shall ever pray."

On November 2, 1705, this petition came before the House of Representatives and on the 9th that body ordered that the prayer of the petitioners be granted.

On the ioth the petition and order passed by the House were read for the first time in the Council, where the .action was concurred in on the 13th. Following is the full text of the order :

"At a Great and General Court or Assembly for her Majesty's Province of the Massachusetts Bay in New England begun and held at Boston upon Wednesday the Thirtieth of May, 1705, and continued by several Prorogations unto Wednesday the Twenty-Fourth of October following, and then mett Tuesday November 13, 1705, In Council:

"The Order passed by the Representatives upon the Petition of the Inhabitants of Muddy River, a Hamlet of Boston read on Saturday last, viz. :

"Ordered, That the Prayer of the Petition be Granted and the Powers and Priviledges of a Township be given to the Inhabitants of the Land commonly known by the Name of Muddy River, The Town to be called Brookline, who are hereby enjoyned to build a Meeting House and Obtain an Able Orthodox Minister according to the Direction of the Law, to be Settled amongst them within the space of Three Years next coming. Provided, That all Common Lands belonging to the Town of Boston lying within the bounds of the said Muddy River not disposed of or allotted out shall still remain to the proprietors of the said Lands.

The first town meeting in Brookline was held in the old school house on Monday, March 4, 1706, and the first thing to come before the meeting was the election of town officers. Thomas Gardner, Samuel Aspinwall, John Winchester, Josiah Winchester and Samuel Sewall were chosen as selectmen; Josiah Winchester, Sr , clerk ; Samuel Aspinwall, Joseph Gardner and Roger Adams, assessors (Mr. Adams declined to serve and John Winchester was chosen in his place) ; Daniel Harris and Samuel Clark, tithingmen ; Eleazer Aspinwall, Benjamin White, Jr., and Robert Harris, surveyors of the highways; John Winchester, Jr., and Edward Devotion, fence viewers ; Thomas Stedman, Jr., and Daniel Harris, overseers of the common lands; Nathaniel Holland and William Sharp, field drivers.

At the same meeting it was voted that a burying place should be established in the town and that it should be "on a spot of land on the south side of the Hill in Mr. Cotton's farm pointing between the two Roads if it can be attaind." The meeting declined to take any action toward the erection of a meeting house and the settling of a minister as required by the organic act, but voted that twelve pounds be levied by tax upon the people of the town "for repairing the school house and the support of the school for the present yeare."

Adjusting The Boundaries

When the Town of Brookline was established, the little stream known as Smelt Brook formed the boundary line between the new town and Brighton, and it is said that from this fact the town of Brookline derives its name. Early in the year 1825, Josiah Quincy, then mayor of Boston, and John Robinson, chairman of the board of selectmen of Brookline, joined in a petition to the General Court asking that the boundary line between Boston and Brookline be established as follows :

"Beginning at a point (marked 'a' on the annexed plan) 1,123 feet distant westerly from the westerly side of the filling sluices of the Boston and Roxbury mill-dam; thence running northwesterly from said point 'a' at an angle of 1150 from the mill-dam until it strikes the center of the channel of Charles River; and also running from said point 'a' southerly at an angle of 1030 40' until it strikes the center of the channel of Muddy River, at a point where the respective boundaries of Boston, Brookline and Roxbury meet each other."

The petition was granted by the passage of a bill which was approved on February 22, 1825. Section 1 of the act established the boundary line as described in the petition, and Section 2 modified the boundary lines between the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk to conform to the new line as given in the preceding section.

On November 23, 1869, James Bartlett, Thomas Parsons, William J. Griggs, Edward S. Philbrick and Horace James, selectmen of Brookline, and James F. C. Hyde, George E. Bridges, D. C. Sanger, Willard Marey, Joseph Walker and Thomas Rice, Jr., selectmen of Newton, acting under authority conferred upon them by the General Court, fixed the boundary line between those two towns as it exists at the present time.

The boundary line between Brookline and West Roxbury was established on December 2, 1869, by the selectmen of the two towns, viz. : James Bartlett, Thomas Parsons, William J. Griggs and Edward Philbrick on behalf of Brookline, and Aristides Talbot, Charles G. Macintosh, John E. Blackemore, Nathan B. Prescott and Jeremiah E. Williams on behalf of West Roxbury.

On the same day the above named selectmen of Brookline and B. F. Pierce and H.-W. Baxter of Brighton fixed the boundary line between the two towns. The line as established by the selectmen was made legal by an act approved on June 18, 1870.

Town Hall

The early town meetings of Brookline were held in the old school house. The first mention of a town house to be found in the records is in the minutes of the meeting of May 10, 182 1, when it was "Voted, that the Town build a two-story building, the basement to be entirely above ground, that the building be of wood 48 by 28 feet, and that the town treasurer be authorized to borrow a sum of money sufficient to complete said building."

Some delay was evidently experienced in the erection of the building, as the records show that "On Saturday evening, January 1, 1825, the New Town Hall was dedicated by Prayer and Sacred Musick." On that occasion John Robinson presented a chandelier for lighting the hall. On August 17, 1843, the town hall was ordered to be remodeled for a high school building, which was done at a cost of $281.67, and on November 13, 1843, the following was adopted by a town meeting: the use of the public high school, and of the destruction of the Engine House by fire the past summer, it is both expedient and necessary that measures be taken at this time for providing a new Town Hall and store house for the Fire Engine ; and that a committee of five citizens, selected from different parts of the Town, be now appointed to look out and decide upon some suitable location, ascertain the price for which it can be obtained, procure from an architect a plan of building suitable for the accommodation of the Town, get an estimate of the whole expense, and make a report of their proceedings to our annual meeting in March next, and that Samuel Philbrick, Abijah W. Goddard, Charles Stearns, Jr., Daniel Sanderson and Timothy Corey constitute said committee."

The report of this committee is dated January 30, 1844, and states that the committee had obtained the refusal of three sites. The town voted to purchase the lot fronting on Washington Street 205 feet and 180 feet deep from James Bartlett, for the sum of $935.82, and Samuel Philbrick, Bela Stoddard and Charles Stearns, Jr., were appointed a building committee to superintend the erection of the new hall. The building was dedicated on the evening of October 13, 1845, witn music and a historical sketch of the town 'by Rev. John Pierce. The total cost of lot and building was $6,285.32.

Edward Atkinson, Charles D. Head, Charles U. Cotting, Alfred Kenrick, William S. Spencer, Amos A. Lawrence and Abijah W. Goddard were appointed a committee on March 18, 1867, "to consider the expediency of adding accommodations to the present Town Hall for a reading room and library." No report from this committee can be found, but the members apparently did not regard the project with favor, for on March 28, 1870, the following committee was appointed to consider the subject of a new town hall: William A. Wellman, Charles U. Cotting, John C. Abbott, Charles W. Scudder, Augustine Shurtleff, William Aspinwall, William K. Melcher, William Lincoln and M. P. Kennard. The committee reported in favor of the new building and the town voted an appropriation of $100,000, which was placed at the disposal of the committee. Fifty thousand dollars were subsequently added to the appropriation and bonds were issued for the whole amount. S. J. F. Thayer's plans were accepted and bids were advertised for, which resulted in the contract for the masonry being awarded to Adams & Barstow of Boston, and for the carpenter work to William K. Melcher of Brookline. The corner-stone was laid on May 23, 1871, and the structure, which occupies the site of the old town hall, was dedicated on February 22, 1873, with appropriate ceremonies, Robert C. Winthrop delivering the historical address. At a special meeting held on the 27th, William Aspinwall, Charles D. Head and William A. W'ellman were appointed a committee "to compile and print the proceedings, speeches," etc. of the dedication. The total cost of the building was $150,010.

At the annual meeting held on .March 20, 1865, it was voted "That the representative from this town in the General Court be requested and instructed to use his utmost endeavors to have inserted in the 'Bill to authorize the City of Boston to build an additional reservoir,' now before the House of Representatives, a provision that the city may distribute the waters of Lake Cochituate through the said Town of Brookline, and shall make and establish hydrants therein in the same manner it now may throughout the City of Boston and if the Legislature shall, upon a respectful request therefor refuse to make such provision, that our representative be instructed to remonstrate and protest, in behalf of the inhabitants of Brookline, against so much of the bill as authorizes the City of Boston to lay pipes through the streets of Brookline."

This was the first move on the part of the people of Brookline to secure a supply of water for the town. The Legislature failed to grant the request and the next mention of the subject in the town records is in the minutes of the meeting of December 7, 1869 when Amos A. Lawrence offered a resolution "That George M. Dexter, Francis P. Denney and E. C. Cabot be a committee to ascertain whether it is expedient to purchase the property of the Jamaica Pond Aqueduct Company, or any other supply of water, for the town, and to report at a future meeting to be called by the chairman of the committee."

The resolution failed of adoption and nothing further was done until the meeting of May 2, 1871, which voted that the moderator appoint a committee of five to take into consideration the subject of supplying the town with water and report at a future meeting. George F. Homer, the moderator, appointed John W. Candler, William Aspinwall, Amos A. Lawrence, Charles D. Head and Edward S. Philbrick, and the meeting voted to add Mr. Homer to the committee. On January 23, 1872, Edward S. Philbrick reported for the committee three plans that had been considered: 1st, to obtain a supply of water from the City of Boston ; 2nd, to erect waterworks in connection with the Town of West Roxbury ; 3d, to construct independent works on the part of Brookline. The first proposed method failed because the water board of Boston reported that the city had no water to spare, the second also failed because it was learned that the Charles River, from which it was proposed to take the supply for Brookline and West Roxbury, was claimed by the City of Boston. With regard to the third method the committee recommended the purchase of the springs upon the land of the Brookline Land Company, which showed an average daily capacity of about three hundred and fifty thousand gallons. The committee reported that nine acres of the land could be bought for $50,000, and estimated the cost of the works at $165,968. The report was accepted, the committee was continued with instructions to confer with the Jamaica Pond Aqueduct Company.

On March 26, 1872, the committee reported that the City of Boston was applying to the General Court for permission to take the waters of the Charles and Sudbury rivers and recommended that the selectmen of Brookline be instructed to have a bill introduced allowing Brookline to take water from the Charles River. Later at the same meeting Mr. Philbrick reported that the city had withdrawn its application. The instructions to the selectmen were then changed by a resoluion setting forth that as Boston had for twenty-five years used the streets of Brookline for water mains, the selectmen ask the General Court to order Boston to supply the town with water, otherwise to pass a bill giving the town permission to use the waters of the Charles River. On the 10th of April following the selectmen and committee presented a petition to the General Court asking that the town be allowed to take water from the Charles River. A bill to that effect was passed and was accepted by a town meeting on May 7, 1872, by a vote of 185 to 90.

At the annual meeting on March 31, 1873, Charles K. Kirby, Charles H. Drew and William Aspinwall were elected as the first board of water commissioners, and on October 28, 1873, the town passed an ordinance appropriating $400,000 for the construction of the works. Under this ordinance the plant was commenced. Subsequently, "scrip" to the amount of $75,000 was issued to complete the waterworks, but even this addition was insufficient, and on April 21, 1876, it was voted to borrow $25,000 in addition to the $475,000 previously appropriated. By the act of November 8, 1888, the town was authorized "to issue notes, scrip or certificates of debt, to be denominated 'Brookline Water Scrip,' to an amount not exceeding $500,000, in addition to the $700,000 which said town has been heretofore authorized to issue." With the funds thus provided the capacity of the plant was increased to 3,000,000 gallons daily, giving Brookline one of the best waterworks systems in the state.

Fire Department

The first mention of anything in the nature of protection against fire to be found in the town records is in the minutes of the town meeting of March 17. 1788, when "Col. Aspinwall and Lieut. Croft were chosen Firewards." Some time after this (the records are not plain in the matter) an arrangement was made with the Town of Roxtmry to establish jointly a system of fire protection. In the records of the town meeting of March 9, 1795, is the entry: "Voted to pay one-half the expences of the Repairs of the Fire Engine in futer." Two years later, May 18, 1797, it was "Voted that this Town will beare one-half the expences of the new Waggon for conveying the Fire Engine." This partnership arrangement with Roxbury continued for a number of years. In 1828 a new engine called the "Norfolk" was purchased for $475, of which Brookline paid $325 and Roxbury $150. On April 6, 1829, it was "Voted, That a committee be chosen to see what amount the Town of Roxbury have allowed for the purchase of Hose and Buckets for the New Engine Norfolk, and that this Town meet them in any expense not exceeding Fifty Dollars."

In 1842 the "Norfolk" was sold for $297.40 and the money was divided between the two towns in proportion to what each had paid fourteen years before. The Town of Brookline then established a department of its own. An engine and a supply of hose were purchased and on May 23, 1855, the sum of $1,500 was appropriated for the erection of a hook and ladder house. In the spring of 1864 the question of purchasing a steam fire engine was referred to the selectmen, who reported that it was "inexpedient to purchase at present, owing to a scarcity of accommodations for obtaining a supply of water."

In 1 87 1 the office of fi reward was abolished and the selectmen authorized to appoint a board of fire engineers "in conformity with the General Statutes." The same year an appropriation of $14,000 was made for a new engine house on Washington Street, to take the place of the old one, and the pay of the department members was increased. Two years later A. Kenrick, Jr., Charles D. Head and J. T. Waterman were appointed a committee "to purchase and equip three steam fire engines." The committee reported in favor of purchasing but one engine, which was obtained and placed in commission at a cost of $6,950. Three new reservoirs, in addition to two previously constructed, were ordered built.

After the waterworks were finished, Charles K. Kirby, Horace James, A. Kenrick, Jr., J. T. Waterman and Marshall Russell were appointed a committee "to see if the steam fire engine could be dispensed with," but it was finally decided to keep the engine ready for use in emergencies.

On the last day of April, 1877, the selectmen were instructed to "purchase and place a hose carriage at Longwood, if there is enough left of the appropriation for the Fire Department for that purpose." Longwood is a suburb in the northwesterly part of the town, where a hose company had been organized some time before the above action was taken by the town meeting. On March 20, 1882, an appropriation of $10,500 was made to purchase "a horse and chemical engine for Longwood." The development of the department since that time has been in keeping with the growth of the town, so that Brookline now is well provided with trained men and modern equipment for the extinguishment of fires.

Punch Bowl Tavern

In the fall of 1640 a bridge was ordered to be built at Muddy River and for many years after that time the present Washington Street was one of the principal highways leading into Boston. A great many teams from the country west of the city passed over the road and a stopping place 'became a necessity. To supply this demand John Ellis built the "Punch Bowl Tavern." The original building was a two story frame, with hipped roof, to which additions were made from time to time by purchasing old houses in Boston and removing them to Brookline to form portions of the tavern. Harriet F. Woods, in her Historical Sketches of Brookline, says the house was "a curious medley of old rooms of all sorts and sizes, connected together in a nondescript manner and presenting an architectural style, which, if we might apply a geological term to it, we should call a conglomerate."

The house was located near the corner of Pearl Street. Its sign - an oval board suspended from a high red post - depicted a large bowl and ladle under a lemon tree laden with fruit, some of which lay around the bowl as though fallen from the tree. A bench ran along the front under a porch, where the "sages" of Brookline met to settle the weighty problems of the day. The selectmen of the town used to have annual suppers in this old tavern. About 1833 tne °^ house was purchased by Isaac Thayer and torn down.

An old house on the corner of Washington Street and Brookline Avenue, where the offices of the Brookline Gas Company were afterward located, was then opened as a tavern under the sign of the "Punch Bowl," but it had none of the patronage or prestige of its predecessor. Its patronage was local and inclined to be of the disreputable class. On March 25, 1844, the Brookline Town meeting adopted the following resolutions regarding this tavern :

"Whereas, The recent painful and distressing occurrence in the death of Robert Noyes from Ardent Spirits, and by the verdict of the jury his death was caused 'by liquor obtained at the Punch Bowl and elsewhere,' and

"Whereas, The location of the Punch Bowl Tavern renders it identified in the weal or woe of the Town of Brookline, and by its indiscriminate sale of Ardent Spirits is more clearly identified as injurious to the town, producing consequences that call loudly on the friends of good order and sobriety, therefore,

"Resolved, That a committee of twenty be appointed to repair in a body to the Punch Bowl Tavern and under sanction and authority of the town remonstrate with Mr. J. Sprague, or whoever may have charge, against the indiscriminate sale of intoxicating liquors."

The committee was composed of Samuel A. Walker, A. Ff. Clapp, Daniel Sanderson, David Coolidge, Thomas Griggs, Otis Withington, Moses Jones, Samuel Goddard, Hugh M. Sanborn, James Bartlett, Caleb Craft, Jr., Joshua M. Blanchard, William Hardy, Charles Stearns, Jr., A. W. Goddard, Timothy Corey, James Leeds, Harrison Fay, Samuel Craft and Thomas Kendall. The crusade thus commenced resulted in the closing of the house a little later.

Brookline Of The Present

Brookline is the wealthiest town in Norfolk County and second in population, being exceeded in the latter respect only by Quincy. In 19 15 the assessed valuation of property was $158,297,618. The population in 19 10 was 27,792, and by the state census of 191 5 it was 33,490, a gain of 5,698 in five years. The town has three banks with aggregate deposits nearly ten millions of dollars, two weekly newspapers, gas and electric light, well paved streets, electric railway lines to Boston and the neighboring towns, two lines of steam railway (the Boston & Albany and the New York, New Haven & Hartford), a fine public library, an excellent public school system and a number of beautiful church edifices. But it is as a residential town that Brookline stands preeminent. It is related that many years ago a visiting preacher, in the course of his sermon, said : 'T know not, my friends, how you can help being Christians, for you already live in paradise." The present inhabitants have kept up the reputation established by their ancestors. The broad, well kept lawns, the handsome homes and shade trees all combine to make Brookline one of the most pleasant towns in the Old Bay State.