Boston City (part 30 of 67)

The renowned ministers of the Second Church - the Mathers, father and son - are considered in a later chapter of this work. The son, indeed, has given a fantastic tinge to the name, which clouds over his real claim to honorable memory. Cotton Mather had grave faults, - his conceit of learning, his credulity, his monstrous part in the witchcraft tragedy. But lovers of books ought to judge leniently of the man who wrote more than three hundred I And the part which he played in his later years in the introduction here of inoculation for small-pox, when the fury of the mob imperilled his very life, entitles him to grateful remembrance. When he stood before Andros, only twenty- four years old, his faults were not yet so evident, and his promise seemed to have no limit.

Of the father. Increase Mather, President of Harvard College, - and one of the most eminent who have ever filled that office, - a powerful preacher to the age of eighty-five, agent of Massachusetts at the court of King James II. and at that of William and Mary, his distinguished reception there testifies to the impression which he made on nobles and princes. He lived to be the last possessor of the almost absolute power of the old Puritan clergy. When he faced Andros he was the very incarnation of the Puritan temper. He addressed a town-meeting in Boston when there was question of giving up the charter, in 1683-84, and openly counselled that they should return Naboth's answer when Ahab asked for his vineyard, - that they would not give up the inheritance of their fathers.^

Randolph, who knew men thoroughly, paid Increase Mather the compliment of hating him and fearing him as he did no other man here. " The Bellowes of Sedition and Treason,"' he called him ; and when after the downfall of the Andros tyranny he was safely lodged in prison and had leisure to contemplate the bringing to nought of his fifteen years of busy scheming, he wrote from the " Goal in Boston, May 16, '89," to the Gov' of Barbados, "... They have not yet sent to England, expecting Mather, their Mahomett." »

The Mathers also were quite capable of a hatred which they perhaps thought to be only righteous indignation. Increase Mather, with all his dignity, observed this in his famous letter to Governor Dudley, nearly twenty years later than this time, - in which he raked together all Dudley's political and personal sins in a pile of red-hot coals, by no means of the kind which the apostle commands to heap on an enemy's head. It is not difficult to imagine what was the temper of such men as these, when they saw that the veriest stranger would read inscriptions re- father. Increase Mather, the leader of Massacording where the house stood in which Cotton chusetts Puritans in this great contest. Mather inoculated his own child to prove the * Mather Paper s^ p. 525.

Last of the five ministers was he of the South Church, - Rev. Samuel Willard, son of Major Simon Willard, one of the principal citizens of Concord and prominent in civil and military life. He had been a Fellow of Harvard College and subsequently the second minister of Groton, where his ministry was ended by the destruction of the town by the Indians in ^'U/i£l^S^^ March, 1676, when he had removed to Boston and, being settled as colleague to Rev. Thomas Thacher, was soon left the only minister of the South Church, which place he occupied until Rev. Ebenezer Pemberton 'vas settled as his colleague in 1700. From Sept. 6, 1 701, to Aug. 14, 1707, he filled the office of Vice-president of Harvard College, while retaining his pastorship. He died Sept. 12, 1707.

** Well furnished with learning," says Dunton, he " has a natural fluency of speech and can say what he pleases." ^ During the witchcraft delusion he bore himself prudently and firmly. Pastor of three of the special judges of that tribunal, " he has as yet," says a contemporary, " met with little but unkindness, abuse, and reproach from many men." Calef says that once ** one of the accusers cried out publicly of Mr. Willard, as afflicting of her." He published many works, of which the chief was his Cotnplete Body of Divinity, the first folio volume of theology published in this country, in 1726.*

* [The portrait of Willard, given in this volume, is a reduced heliotype from the engraving which stands as a frontispiece to this folio. There is a portrait in Memorial Hall, Cambridge. - Ed.]

- The lofty bearing which these Puritan ministers could assume is shown in their answer to the Quaker, George Keith, just after this time. Keith's book was called The Presbyterian and IndependetU Visible Churches in §Ltm iffnglann And else-where. Brought to the Test, &c Philadelphia, 1689.

" To James Allen, Joshua Moody, Samuel Willard, Cotton Mather, Preachers in the Town of Boston in New England. " Friends and Ncighl)ours : -

*' I being well assured, both by the Spirit of God in my Heart and the Testimony of the holy Scriptures, that the Doctrine ye preach to the People is false and pernicious to the Souls of People in many things, do earnestly desire and entreat you, and every one of you, the Preachers in the Town of Boston, to give me a fair and publick hearing or meeting with you, either in one of your publick Meeting-Houses or in any other convenient place, where all who are desirous to come may have liberty, and let the time be as soon as may, as either to day in the Afternoon, or to morrow in the Fore-noon ; but rather then fail, if ye will give me any assurance to have a meeting with you, I will attend your leasure for two or three days to come, providing once this day ye send me your positive answer ; and if ye give me a meeting with you, I proffer in true love and good-will, by the divine assistance, to show and inform you that ye teach and preach unto the People many false and unsound Principles contrary to the Doctrine of Christ, sufficiently declared in the holy Scriptures."

It is an interesting illustration of the doctrine then taught in the I^ton pulpit, that among his twelve points of complaint, besides asserting his doctrine of the ** Inner Light," he mentions that they teach -

Tiie Rise Of Dissenting Faiths

Of those who were with these ministers, - the shaft to their spear-head, - we can now call up only few and shadowy glimpses. We know, indeed, the names of a few of the gentlemen who were on the side of the native cause; but with the exception of Judge Scwall there is hardly one whom we can vividly picture to ourselves. The great men of the former genera- tion had passed away. With the death of that grand old Commonwealth soldier. Governor Leverett. nine years before, the last of the heroic group had gone. The most venerable figure whom we now see is old Simon Bradstreet, full of years and of dignity. When Andros is overthrown

'* Having received a Blasphemous and Heretical Paper, subscribed by one George Keith, our answer to it and him is, - If he desires Conference to instruct us, let him give us his Arguments in wiiting, as well as his Assertions: If to inform himself, let him write his Doubts : If to cavil and disturb the Peace of our Churches (which we have cause to suspect), we have neither list nor leasure to attend his Motions: If he would have a Publick Audience, let him Print: If a private Discourse, though he may know where we dwell, yet we forget not what the Apostle John saith, £p. ii. la

The final Scriptural reference is this : " If there come any to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither give him God-speed."

in 1689 he will be placed at the head of the government, though weighed down with the snows of ninety years. We prize the few words in which the Labadist missionaries describe him,^ "an old man, quiet and grave, dressed in black silk, but not sumptuously." Venerable, but not forcible, his memory was long cherished, largely because he had the happy fortune to linger the last survivor of a band of remarkable men. He seemed to concentrate in himself the dignity and wisdom of the first century of Massachusetts life.

But the strength of the opposition which the ministers headed was really the same which made the strength of the Revolution, and again of our own War for the Nation. It was the tough persistence of the common people. The yeomen of New England knew perfectly what they wanted ; and they wanted no bishops nor tithes, nor forced loans of their churches. They might bend a little for a moment; but they would only spring back the harder ; and they would never break I

The strange law by which the Old South Church was brought, in this earlier time of revolution as well as in the later ninety years afterward, into a sort of representative attitude as the special antagonist of the alien influences, is strikingly exemplified in the person who stands in history as the typical Puritan of his time. It is not because Samuel Sewall was the most prominent man in Boston ; for that he was not, at the time where we are, though he was a man of wealth and influence and of the real Puritan character. But it is, above all, because he kept a diary ! His ink had a wholesome human tincture in it which has prevented it from fading through two centuries. Judge Sewall is the Pepys of New England. His diary is as quaint and racy, and as full of delicious bits of self-revealing as was that of his English contemporary. But how unlike to that other Samuel in all the nobler aspects, all of which are mirrored in those brown old pages, - his prayerful temper, his loyalty to God and to the God-fearing Puritanism which he loved so well ! ^

The Governor waited yet three months with a patience hardly in accord with his impetuous character, and showed himself a good churchman in the shorn observances in the town-hall. Sewall records : -

" [1686-7]. Tuesday, January 25. This day is kept for s* Paul and y* Bell was rung in y* Morning to call persons to service ; The Gov' (I am told) was there.

" Monday, January 31. There is a Meeting at y* Town house forenoon and afternoon. Bell rung for it ; respecting y* beheading Charles y' first. Gov' there."

But when the solemn days of the Church at the close of Lent drew nigh, there seemed a special unfitness in their celebration by the representative of the King and by the authorized ritual of England in a place devoid of all sacred associations, with a few ** benches and formes," while around the Governor were commodious houses of worship tenanted by a form of religion which at home had no rights, - not even the legal right to exist.

The Rise Of Dissenting Faiths

No reason is given why the South Church was selected to be the very unwilling host of the new Episcopal Society ; but it may be conjectured that it was cither because it was the nearest to where Sir Edmund lived, - in what was then called '* the best part of the town," and near where the Province House afterwards stood, - or because the South Church only had one minister, while each of the others had two^ i. e., twice as many persons with troublesome tongues. Then, too, Randolph had doubtless told the Governor how the South Church rose out of a bitter quarrel, and he may have thought that the other two churches would look on its vexations with more composure of spirit. To be sure, in 1682, when ominous clouds were gathering over the prospects of New England Puritanism, the First Church had proposed to the South Church ** to forgive and forget all past offences," and to live '* in peace for time to come." But it may well have been supposed that the old gulf had not wholly closed.

"Tuesday, March 22, 168^. This day his excellency views the three Meeting houses. Wednesday, March 23. - The Gov' sends Mr. Randolph for y* keys of our Meetingh. y* may say Prayers there. Mr. Eliot, Frary, Oliver, Savage, Davis, and my self wait on his Excellency ; shew that y* Land and House is ours, and that we can't consent to part with it to such use ; exhibit an extract of Mrs. Norton's Deed and how 'twas built by particular persons as Hull, Oliver, loo;^ a piece, &c.

"Friday, March 25, 1687. The Gov' has service in ye south Meetinghouse; Goodm. Neccihani [the Sexton] tho' had resolv'd to ye Contrary, was prevail'd upon to Ring ye Bell and open ye door at ye Govemour's CoiTiand, one Smith and Hill, Joiner and Shoemaker, being very busy about it. Mr. J no. Usher was there, whether at ye very begining, or no, I can't tell."

From this time, during the remainder of Andros's administration, - that is, for a little over two years, - the Episcopalians had joint occupancy of the South Church with its proper owners, though against occasional protests.

It was something, indeed, for which the Puritan congregation had reason to be grateful, that they were allowed to worship at all in their own meeting-house by the representative of a government which at home had set so many marks of scorn on dissenters from the Church of England. Nevertheless, on the special days of the Church they were subjected to grave inconveniences. On Easter Sunday, 1687, t'^^ Governor and his suite met there again at eleven, sending word to the proprietors that they might come at half-past one ; '* but it was not until after two that the Church service was over;" owing, says Sewall, to "the sacrament and Mr. Clarke's long sermon ; so 'twas a sad sight to see how full the street was with people gazing and moving to and fro, because they had not entrance into the house."

The Puritan diarist, to whose invaluable pages we are indebted for the history of this obstinate contest, follows it further step by step with his pithy narrative till the end of October, 1688, in passages which we have not space to quote. The pressure of imposition on the one side and of resistance on the Other grew more urgent. In April, 1688, the Governor gave his definite promise that they would *' build a house;" but the further long delay led to hot remonstrances and an angry dispute between the high-tempered soldier and the Puritan owners of the South Church, who were stubborn for their rights.

To this enforced tenancy of the South Meeting-house we owe some of the most picturesque passages in the religious history of the period. We quote Sewall again : -

" Monday, May 16, 1687. This day Capt. Hamilton buried w*** Capt. Nicholson's Redcoats and y* 8 Companies : Was a funeral-sermon preach'd by y* Fisher's Chaplain : Pulpit cover'd with black cloath upon w*^*" scutcheons: Mr. Dudley, Stoughton & many others at y* Comon Prayer, and Sermon : House very full, and yet ye Souldiers went not in."

But the most impressive scene which it witnessed was the funeral of Lady Andros. The rigid Puritan diarist gives us an unconscious glimpse into his feelings of indignant sorrow for New England, in his private entry on this event : -

" Feb. 10, 168J. Between 4 and 5. 1 went to y* Funeral of y* Lady Andros having been invited p ye Clark of ye South- Company. Between 7. and 8. (Lychus illuminating ye cloudy air) The Corps was carried into the Herse drawn by six Horses. The Souldiers making a Guard from y* Governour's House down ye Prison Lane to ye South-M. House, there taken out and carried in at ye western dore, and set in ye Alley before ye pulpit w"' six Mourning women by it. House made light with candles and Torches ; was a great noise and clamor to keep people out of y*" House, y* might not rush in too soon. I went home, where about nine a clock I heard y* Bell toll again for ye Funeral. It seems Mr. RatclifTs Text was. Cry, all flesh is Grass. The Ministers turned in to Mr Willards. The Meeting House full, among whom Mr. Dudley, Stoughton, Gedney, Bradstreet &c. On Satterday, Feb. 11. y* mourning cloth of y" Pulpit is taken off and given to Mr. Willard. My Bro'. Stephen was at y* Funeral, and lodged here."

Another illustration of the bitter conflicts of feeling here is found in the account of the funeral of a person named Lilly, who had left the ordering of this to his executors. Mr. Ratclifle undertook to read the service at his grave, he having been one of the subscribers to the church, but the executors forbade him ; and when he began, Deacon Frairey of the South Church interrupted him and put a stop to the service, for which the deacon was bound to his good behavior for twelve months. This was deemed of sufficient importance to be reported to the Privy Council in England.

The Governor on one occasion requested the South Church minister to begin his service at 8 A.M. for the convenience of the Episcopalians, and promised that it should be the last time. But still the church was occupied in this way till just before the popular uprising which overthrew Andros's government, on the news of William of Orange's landing in England.

It is a chapter of outrageous wrongs which Andros wrote here, and there is cause for lasting regret that the origin of so good a thing as religious freedom under the stern old Puritan regime should have been sullied by his despotic acts. But it is satisfactory to remember that ninety years later King's Chapel willingly expiated this injustice by opening its doors wide to the Old South Congregation, when dispossessed of their own church by the later revolution. It should be said, too, that the character both of Andros and Randolph doubtless had a better side than they showed to these troublesome (as they must have seemed to them) and rebellious colonists. They were pupils in a bad school, - the household of the Stuarts.* As a matter of policy, it was obviously unwise for Andros to irritate the town by forcing his form of worship into a meeting-house against the will of its lawful owners. He had to build his own church at last. But we should fall into a great error if we should measure his act by the standard of toleration of our modern day.

The enforced tenancy of the South Meeting-house did not wait to be brought to a close till the downfall of Governor Andros in April, 1689. The fact that the first wooden church was already nearly finished at that time is sufficient proof that the interference with property which gave such offence was a temporary though high-handed obedience to supposed necessity, and not a step towards confiscation. The foundations of the new building had been laid before the middle of October, 1688, and the frame was raised soon after. The last record by Sewall concerning the unwelcome tenants of the South Church reads thus: "Ocf. 28 [1688]. N. It seems y« Gov' took M*"- Ratcliffe with him [on a journey to Dunstable],

Sir Edmund had delayed too long. The building which at an earlier day must have been accepted as a proper recognition of the State and the religion which the Governor represented, was now considered to be his reluctant concession to public opinion. One of the complaints most urged against him before William the Third was, "That the Service of the Church of England has bin forced into their Meeteing Houses."

Andros justified his course in his official report to his superiors at home as follows: *- The Church of England being unprovided of a place for thcyr publique worship, he did, by advise of the Council!, borrow the new meetinghouse in Boston, at such times as the same was unused, untill they could provide otherwise; and accordingly on Sundays went in between eleven and twelve in the morning, and in the afternoon about fower. But understanding ft gave offence, hastned the building of a Church, ^ych ^vas effected at the charge of those of the Church of England, where the Chaplaine of the Souldiers p'formed divine service and preaching." - Sir E. Andros*s Report of his Administration in DoctimaUs Rtlating to Colonial History ofN, K, vol. ill.

1 Randolph was probably in the family of the Duke of York before he became James II., while Andros had begun life as a page to Charles I. They were loyal to church and king after the old High Tory fashion. Randolph is descril>ed by Dr. Ellis as " a persistent and pestering, if not unscrupulous, man." Of Andros Mr. Whitmore, in his Andros Tracts^ says there Is " no evidence that he was cruel, rapacious, or dishonest," or immoral, and that " a hasty temper is the most palpable fault to be attributed to him." But the domineering will of both Andros and Randolph came out in its harshest colors when brought in such collision with the will of the Puritans, which was as unyielding as the granite of New England itself.

These advocates were not such as wise men would have chosen. But the cause which they were advocating, though blindly, was of the best. And doubtless not a few of those who first met in this way had a spirit worthy of the cause. ** In the most contentious and stormy periods," says Dr. Greenwood, " I dojbt not that a holy calm was shed upon the heart of liiany a worshipper as he offered up his prayers in the way which to him was best and most affecting, and perhaps the way in which, long years ago, he had offered them up in some ivy-clad village church of green England, with many dear friends

SO met not at all distinct in our House y* day: Several of y" w**» us in y« afternoon. Col. Lidget, M'- Sherlock, Farwell in our Pue, went to Contribution." As the custom was for the contributors to go up in the presence of the congregation, and give what they had to offer in the sight of all, this was a conspicuous act. It is pleasant to know that High Churchmen though these men were, and among those whom they loved not, they were Christian enough to join in the worship of the Puritans, and to contribute for its support, - an example of charity which it is to be hoped that some of those with whom they thus held communion would have been willing to imitate in turn. Worship was first held in the new church on Sunday, June 8, 1689. It stood on a corner of the old burial-ground, cover! nj^ the space now occupied by the tower and front part of the present King's Chapel.

The Governor had first tried to purchase a site for the new church on Cotton Hill, nearly opposite; but Judge Sewall, who had no liking for Andros or for Episcopacy, felt that it would be a desecration of the ground on which Sir Henry Vane had built a house, and which on leaving the country he had given to John Cotton. He was more than once approached on the subject, and once particularly by Mr. Ratcliffe, but constantly replied that he " could not; first, because he would not set up that which the people of New England came over to avoid, and second, because the land was entailed."

Finally the Governor and Council seem to have used their authority, as the supreme governing body, to appropriate a part of the corner from the old burying-ground, which probably was then but thinly tenanted. Ill-natured question is sometimes made of the rightful tenure of this spot by the church, but the question seems to be fairly answered by two facts: first, only the smaller moiety of the land on which the present King's Chapel * stands was obtained at that time, the other portion having been bought from the town when the present church was built, at an exorbitant price, sufficient to cover the fair value of all the land ; second, if tlie town had power to sell to the church in 1749, the Governor and Council, being the only lawful authorities at the time, had the right to convey a piece of the public land in 1688. If it had not been so considered, the act would surely have been at least impugned, if not annulled, after the overthrow of Sir Edmund Andros. But no attempt to do so appears, even in Sewall's Diary?

Here, then, the modest little church was built at a cost of £2%/^ \6s. or $1,425. To defray this expense, ninety-six persons throughout the colony had contributed ;f 256 9^., the balance being given by Andros on his departure from the country, and by other English officers later.

There was poetical justice in the fact that Andros and Randolph never entered the building which they had done so much to obtain. They were punished for their misdeeds of oppression by not enjoying their good deed, or seeing established the emblem of that form of religion for which they really cared. The church-book, on the next page to that which states the cost of the house, contains the following: "Note that on 18** Aprill preseeding the date on th' other side, began a most impious and detestable rebellion ag* the King's Majes*^'" Government; the Govern' and all just men to the same were brought into restraint." There can be little doubt where the sympathies of the writer lay. If he was the Senior Warden it is not strange, as Dr. Bullivant had been one of those imprisoned.

The storm of that time had well-nigh driven the little ark of the church from its anchorage. Even now, after the lapse of nearly two centuries, it is impossible to read the Andros Tracts without feeling the ground-swell of those waves of passion which tossed so fiercely in the little town of Boston. In July, 1689, Rev. Robert Ratcliffe returned to England. It is very unlikely, in the angry state of public feeling, that there was any public dedication, or perhaps any consecration at all, of the wooden church. The very building itself seems to have been in some danger, for in those days there was such a power as the " Boston Mob." A. pamphlet published in London in 1690, entitled New England's Faction Discovered ; by C, i?., states that " the church itself had great difficulty to withstand their fury, receiving the marks of their indignation and scorn by having the Windows broke to pieces and the Doors and Walls daubed and defiled with dung and other filth in the rudest and basest manner imaginable, and the Minister for his safety was forced to leave the country and his congregation and go for England." »

The church, however, survived to be fostered by the care and honored with the gifts of the successive monarchs of England, from William and Mary to George the Third. Under the long ministry of Rev. Samuel Myles it won the respect, if not the love, of its neighbors. The plain building was the only place in New England where the forms of the court church could be witnessed. The prayers and anthems which sounded forth in the cathedrals of the mother country were here no longer dumb. The equipages and uniforms which made gay the little court of Boston brightened its portals. Within, the escutcheons of Royal governors hung against the pillars; at Christmas it was wreathed with green; the music of the first organ heard in New England here broke the stillness of the Sabbath air.*

The religious struggle of twenty-five years was over. If it be asked which party won in it, the answer must be, - Neither, and both. The despotism of Andros was overthrown ; the charter never was restored in its first fulness, but its work was wrought ; a people had been trained to great traditions of freedom, and these survived eighty-six years more and then burst into blossom and fruit. On the other hand the religious despotism of Puritanism was broken forever. Baptists, Episcopalians, Quakers, might henceforth worship as they would ; to-day, everything, anything, or nothing may be believed where for nearly sixty years the Calvinism of New England was all in all.

By Charles C. Smith

WHEN Winthrop and his company cast anchor in Salem harbor, in the summer of 1630, it was their intention to remain together and begin only a single settlement. With this view an exploration of the neighborhood was begun three days after the arrival of the " Arbella." * But circumstances over which they had no control soon compelled them to relinquish this purpose. "We were forced," says Deputy Governor Dudley, in his letter to the Countess of Lincoln, *' to change counsel, and for our present shelter to plant dispersedly, - some at Charlestown, which standeth on the north side of the mouth of Charles River; some on the south side thereof, which place we named Boston (as we intended to have done the place we first resolved on) ; some of us upon Mistick, which we named Medford ; some of us westward on Charles River, four miles from Charlestown, which place we named Watertown ; others of us two miles from Boston, in a place we named Roxbury; others upon the river of Saugus, between Salem and Charlestown ; and the western men four miles south from Boston, at a place we named Dorchester."^ Accordingly, at a Court of Assistants held at Charlestown on the 7th of September, 1630, Old Style, which corresponds with the 17th of September as time is now reckoned, it was ordered "that Trimountain shall be called Boston."' This order is the only act of incorporation which Boston had under the colony charter.

What was the extent, and what was the source of the powers, which the towns of Massachusetts exercised is by no means clear. It has been asserted by high authority that the principle on which the Plymouth Colony was founded, - and the remark is equally true as to the Massachusetts Colony, - required that while the inhabitants of the town "should remain a part of the whole, and be subject to the general voice in relation to all matters which concerned the whole colony, they should be allowed to be what their separate settlements had made them ; namely, distinct communities, in regard to

1 Winthrop, New Englandy I. 27. The party « i M<iss. Hist, ColL viii. 39 ; Voung, Chfonwas absent three days, went up Mystic River, icUs of Mass, pp. 313, 314. and visited Noddle's Island and Nantasket * Mass, CoL Records^ i. 75.

such affairs as concerned none but themselves."^ There was no sharply defined line separating the powers which the town and the colony might respectively exercise ; and the limitations with which we are familiar grew up by slow degrees, or were created by orders of the General Court or the Court of Assistants, sometimes limited to the towns named in the order, and sometimes of wider application.^ So late as October, 1662, the General Court passed an order reciting that, notwithstanding the wholesome orders hitherto made by the selectmen of Boston against fast riding, many persons frequently galloped in the streets of that town, to the great danger of other persons, especially children; and ordering that no one should, in future, gallop any horse there under a penalty of three shillings and four pence for each offence, to be paid, on conviction before any magistrate of the town, to the treasurer of the county of Suffolk.' And at a still later period, in October, 1679, the General Court passed the following order: -

" For prevention of the profanation of the Sabbath, and disorders on Saturday night, by horses and carts passing late out of the town of Boston, it is ordered and enacted by this Court, that there be a ward from sunset, on Saturday night, until nine of the clock or after, consisting of one of the selectmen or constables of Boston, with two or more meet persons, who shall walk between the fortifications and the town's end, and upon no pretence whatsoever suffer any cart to pass out of the town after sunset, nor any footman or horseman, without such good account of the necessity of his business as may be to their satisfaction ; and all persons attempting to ride or drive out of town after sunset, without such reasonable satisfaction given, shall be apprehended and brought before authority to be proceeded against as Sabbath-breakers ; and all other towns are empowered to do the Uke as need shall be." *

The passage of such orders as these shows how undefined was the extent of the powers which the colonial authorities exercised in the first halfcentury afler the settlement of the town.

The need of some sharper distinction between the powers which the colony reserved to itself and those with which the town was invested seems to have strongly impressed the inhabitants of Boston. Twice, at least, during the

* The most important of these orders was bles, surveyors for the highways, and the like.'* adopted by the General Court at the session in {Mass, Col, Records^ i. 172.) In Quincy's Mun- March, 1635-36. Itbeginsby reciting that "par- icipal History of Boston ^ p. i, the date of this ticular towns have many things which concern order is misprinted 1630. The order was not only themselves, and the ordering of their own passed until Boston had been settled between affairs, and disposing of business in their own Ave and six years. The true date is of importtown." Therefore power was granted to them ance in tracing the history of town goveniments *'to dispose of their own lands and woods, with in Massachusetts.

Boston And The Colony

colonial period they petitioned for an act of incorporation. In May» 1650, in answer to a petition from the inhabitants of Boston, the Court declared a willingness ** to grant the petitioners a corporation, if the articles or terms, privileges and immunities thereof, were so presented as rationally should appear, respecting the mean condition of the country, fit for the Court to grant ; " and the petitioners were required to present their propositions, at the next session.^ So far as now appears, nothing further was done at that time; and in May, 1659, the Court, in answer to a request of the town of Boston to be made a corporation, granted them " liberty to consult and advise amongst themselves what may be necessary for such an end, and the same to draw up into a form and present the same to the next session." * Again, three years later, in May, 1662, in answer to a petition of the inhabitants of Boston ** for some further power in reference to the well ordering of trade and tradesmen, and the suppressing of the vices so much abounding there," a committee was appointed " to peruse the charter now in Court, and consider how far it is meet to be granted, or what else they shall judge meet for the attaining of the ends above mentioned, and to make return of what they shall conclude upon to the next Court of Election." - In October, 1663, the same committee was reappointed, with the same instructions, expressed in almost precisely the same words ;* but it does not appear that any report was ever made by the committee, and here the matter apparentiy dropped. It is curious to notice how littie trace of these applications has been left on the town records. There is not a single entry in them near the date of the orders of the Court which can be directiy connected with these petitions for a charter ; and the only votes of the town which can be supposed to have even a remote reference to the matter were in October, 1652, and October, 1658.* But in May, 1677, the town instructed her deputies to the General Court to use their endeavors " that this town may be a corporation, or made town and county." -

In the original laying out of the towns the bounds were very loosely described, and controversies naturally arose at a very early date between adjoining towns as to the extent of territory belonging to each. The peninsula of Boston touched only one of the neighboring towns, Roxbury ; but from the narrow limits which Nature had assigned to her, her inhabitants were forced to seek "enlargement" beyond the peninsula, - and Noddle's Island and extensive tracts at Pullen Point, Mount Wollaston, and Rumney Marsh were at different times granted to Boston by orders of the General Court' Questions of boundary frequently arose under these grants, and committees were appointed by the Court, or by the town, to settle the difTerences and establish the boundaries. So early as December, 1636, a committee was appointed at a general town-meeting to consider about forming a town and church at Mount WoUaston, with the consent of the inhabitants of Boston;* and three years later, in January, 1639-40, the selectmen entered into an agreement with a committee acting in behalf of the residents at the Mount, by which Boston, in consideration of certain payments into her treasury, consented to the formation of a new town there, " if the Court shall think fit to grant them to be a town of themselves." * At the session of the General Court, in the following May. ** The petition of the inhabitants of Mount WoUaston was voted, and granted them to be a town according to the agreement with Boston, - provided that if they fulfil not the covenant made with Boston, and hereto affixed, it shall be in -the power of Boston to recover their due by action against the said inhabitants, or any of them ; and the town is to be called Braintree." * Muddy River had probably belonged to Boston from the first settlement of the town ; but the first mention of it in the Colony Records is in September, 1634,* when the General Court, at a session held in Cambridge, ordered ** that the ground about Muddy River, belonging to Boston, and used by the inhabitants thereof, shall hereafter belong to New Town, the wood and timber thereof growing and to be growing to be reserved to the inhabitants of Boston ; provided, and it is the meaning of the Court, that if Mr. Hooker and the congregation now settled here shall remove hence, that then " the ground at Muddy River shall revert to Boston.* Hooker and most of his congregation removed to Connecticut in the summer of 1636;* and the title of the lands accordingly reverted to Boston. Muddy Brook continued to be a part of Boston until 1705, when it was made a town by the name of Brookline.^ Rumney Marsh and the adjacent territory remained for a still longer period under the jurisdiction of Boston ; and it was not until near the middle of the last century that these lands were set off" from Boston, and incorporated under the name of Chelsea.®

In each of these outlying districts grants of land were made by the town, sometimes of extensive tracts to prominent individuals, and sometimes, especially at Muddy River, to " the poorer sort." For instance, in October, . 1634, a grant was made to Mr. Wilson, pastor of the church, of two hundred acres of land at Mount WoUaston, in exchange for an equal quantity of land on Mystic River previously granted to him by the General Court.® Subse-

- Mass, Col. Records^ i. 291. of Brookline printed, in 1875, such extracts from < [Two years ))efore this, in 1632, Winthrop the Boston Records as pertain to Muddy River, quently the town relinquished to him all claims to the land at Mystic, in consequence of defects in the title to the land at Mount WoUaston, which had

1 [This old housci still standing near the Episcopal Church in Longwood, was built by Peter Aspinwall about 1660, and has descended through lineal descendants (Samuel, Thomas, Dr. William) to the late Colonel Thomas Aspinwall. Though still owned by the family, the last of the name to occupy it lived there till 1803. The original deed of the land from William Colburn to Rol^ert Sharpe is dated 1650, and is in the family's keeping. Woods, ^r/v/7/W, ch. V. A famous elm, of which the stump still remains, once shaded the house. According to the A^o. Amer. Rev.^ July, 1844, it sprung up about 1656; but Dr. Pierce, Historical Address^ p. 38, says it was planted about 170a Mr. G. B. Emerson says that " it was known to be one hundred and eighty-one years old in 1837, and then measured twenty-six feet five inches at the ground, and sixteen feet eight inches at five feet. The branches extended one hundred and four feet from southeast to northwest, and ninety-five feet from northeast to southwest." - Trees and Shrubs in Mass., &c., ii. 326. Our cut follows a photograph taken before i860, and before the great tree fell, which was in September, 1863; and Jit that time it measured twenty-six feet girth at the ground, and sixteen feet eight inches at five feet from the ground, showing much the same dimensions as twenty-five years before. - Ed.]

involved him in some expenses.* In December, 1635, a committee of five of the freemen was appointed at a general town-meeting, to " go and take view at Mount WoUaston, and bound out there what may be sufficient for Mr. William Coddington and Edmund Quincy to have for their particular farms there ; " to " lay out at Muddy River a sufficient allotment for a farm for our Teacher, Mr. John Cotton ; " and also to lay out farms there for Mr. William Colburn, and for the two Elders, Mr. Thomas Oliver and Thomas Leverett At the same time it was voted, ** That the poorer sort of inhabitants, such as are members or likely so to be, and have no cattle, shall have their proportion of allotments for planting ground and other assigned unto them by the alloters, and laid out at Muddy River by the aforenamed five persons, or four of them ; those that fall between the foot of the hill and the water to have but four acres upon a head, and those that are farther off to have five acres for every head."^ Provision was likewise made for laying out the allotments at Rumney Marsh. The committee apparently made no report until January, 1637-38, when the allotments were entered at length in the town records.*

From her favorable position at the head of the bay Boston could scarcely fail to become, and continue to be, the chief place in the growing colony ; and so early as October, 1632, the Court agreed, " by general consent, that Boston IS the fittest place for public meetings of any place in the Bay." * Previously to that time, however, it had been a matter of uncertainty whether Boston or Cambridge would be the seat of government ; and the sharp controversy between Dudley and Winthrop, growing out of the failure of the latter to remove to Cambridge, is one of the most curious incidents in their personal relations : but it need not be considered here.^ It is sufficient to say that the purpose to make Cambridge the capital was relinquished, and steps were taken at an early date to secure Boston from attacks by sea as well as by land. From Winthrop's Journal we learn that a fort was begun on the eminence known to the first settlers as the Corn Hill, but which was called in later time Fort Hill, toward the end of May, 1632, and that the people of Boston, Charlestown, Roxbury, and Dorchester worked on it on successive days.* The work was not completed at that time ; and in the following May the General Court ordered " that the fort at Boston shall be finished with what convenient speed may be, at the public charge." ^ A few months later it was ordered that " every hand (except magistrates and ministers) shall afford their help to the finishing of the fort at Boston, till it be ended." - This was not all that was deemed necessary for defence on the water side ; and in July, 1634, the Governor and Council, several of the ministers, and other persons met at Castle Island, and there agreed to erect

Boston And The Colony

" two platforms and one small fortification to secure them both ; and for the present furtherance of it they agreed to lay out £i a man, till a rate might be made at the next General Court." * Accordingly, at the General Court in September, it was ordered -* that there shall be a platform made on the northeast side of Castle Island, and an house built on the top of the hill to defend the said platform." * In the following March, it was ordered by the General Court '* that there shall be forthwith a beacon set on the Sentry Hill at Boston, to give notice to the country of any danger, and that there shall be a ward of one person kept there from the first of April to the last of September ; and that upon the discovery of any danger the beacon shall be fired, an alarm given, as also messengers presently sent by that town where the danger is discovered to all other towns within this jurisdiction."^ In March of the following year, 1636, the Court granted to the inhabitants of Boston the use of six pieces of ordnance, and gave them thirty pounds in money toward the making of a platform at the foot of Fort Hill, requiring the inhabitants of the town to finish " the said work at their own proper charges before the General Court in May next."* The defence of the town on the land side began at a much earlier period ; and in the April after their arrival Winthrop wrote in his Journal, but afterward for some unknown reason erased the entry, " we began a court of guard upon the neck between Roxbury and Boston, whereupon should always be resident an officer and six men." * These ample preparations, however, were not always kept up ; the fortifications frequently fell into decay, and the garrisons were withdrawn, to be renewed whenever a new occasion of alarm arose. The colony and the town were equally reluctant to spend money on defences for which there seemed to be no probability of an immediate need ; but they were always on the alert whenever a new danger arose. Thus in May, 1649, the Deputies voted, that ** there being many ships in the harbor, and divers of them strangers, the Court judgetli meet to order that a military watch be forthwith appointed in Boston and Charlestown, to continue till any four magistrates shall see cause to alter it."*

So little did the founders of the colony anticipate the establishment of numerous and scattered settlements, that at the first Court of Assistants, in answer to the question how the ministers should be maintained, " it was ordered that houses should be built for them with convenient speed, at the common charge ; " and in answer to the further question, what should be their present maintenance, after enumerating what should be given them, it was added, " all this to be at the common charge, those of Mattapan and Salem only excepted." ^ It is not much to the credit of the first .settlers of Boston, that when Mr. Cotton came over a few years later they desired to have this precedent apply to his support ; but on " second thoughts " the council did not see any sufficient reason why the colony treasury should contribute to the support of a minister for Boston.^ Though the Boston minister soon ceased to derive any part of his support from the colony rates, his successors continued to exert an important influence on colonial politics till the very end of the charter government. From Winthrop's language it would appear that the first meeting-house in Boston was not built until the town had been settled for nearly two years, and that the cost, both of the meetinghouse and of a house for the minister, was defrayed, in part at least, by a voluntary contribution.* The same course was pursued some years afterward, when it became necessary to build a new meeting-house in place of the old one. " The church of Boston," says Winthrop, under date of February, 1640-41, "were necessitated to build a new meeting-house, and a great difference arose about a place of situation, which had much troubled other churches on the like occasion ; but after some debate it was referred to a committee, and was quietly determined. It cost about ;f 1000, which was raised out of the weekly voluntary contribution without any noise or complaint, when in some other churches which did it by way of rates there was much difficulty and compulsion by levies to raise a far less sum." ^

During the first ten years the town grew rapidly in wealth and population, and it has been estimated that before the breaking out of the civil war in England about twenty thousand persons had emigrated to New England.* Of these a much larger number settled in Boston than in any other place. But with the meeting of the Long Parliament the immigration nearly ceased. ** The Parliament of England setting upon a general reformation both of Church and State," says Winthrop, in June, 1641, **the Earl of Strafford being beheaded, and the archbishop (our great enemy) and many others of the great officers and judges, bishops and others, imprisoned and called to account, this caused all men to stay in England in expectation of a new world ; so as few coming to us all foreign commodities grew scarce, and our own of no price." * The assessments of the colony taxes will afford an approximate idea of the relative wealth and population of the several towns. In October, 1633, it was ordered that ^^400 should be collected from eleven plantations ** to defray public charges." Of this sum Dorchester was to pay £&o ; Boston, Roxbury, Cambridge, Watertown, and Charlestown, £4^ each; and Salem, £28.* In September of the following year a tax of £600 was ordered to be levied. In this assessment Dorchester, Cambridge, and Boston were each to contribute £So; Roxbury, £70; and Salem, £4$^ In tory of Massachusetts Bayxvi 1764, says: ''The 0/ the First Churchy ^. 6$, ministers of the several churches in the town of * Hutchinson, Hist, of the Col. of Mass. Bay, one of the principal ministers of the colony ex- made the basis of some curious calculations, pressing some doubts of the lawfulness of receiv- ^ Winthrop, New England, ii. 31.

May, 1636, the General Court appointed a committee " to require the last rates of each town in the plantation, and to find out thereby, and by all other means they can according to the best of tlicir discretion, the true value of every town, and so to make an equal rate/** A similar vote was passed in the following September ; * but in neither instance was any change made in the last rate of assessment In April, 1637, the Court ordered a levy of soldiers for the Pequot war. The whole number to be raised, including those already in the service, was 211. Of this number Boston was to furnish 35; Dorchester, 17; Charlestown, 16; Roxbury, 13; Cambridge, 12 ; and Salem, 24, - fourteen towns being included in the levy.' The next colony tax was in August of the same year, when in an assessment of ;f400 Boston was required to pay £sg 4s,; Salem, £4$ 12s.; Dorchester and Charlestown, £42 6s. each; Roxbury, £^0 Ss.; and Cambridge, ;f29 12 J.* From a comparison of these figfures it would appear that in 1637 Boston was not only the most populous, but also the wealthiest town in the colony. In May, 1640, - not quite ten years after the settlement of Boston, - a tax of ;f 1200 was ordered to be levied on seventeen towns. Of this sum Boston was to contribute £179, or almost exactly fifteen per cent; Braintree, which It will be remembered was set off from Boston in the same month, £2$ ; Cambridge, ;fioo; Dorchester, £9S\ Charlestown, ;f90; Roxbury, £7$; and Salem, ;fii5.*

The first windmill was erected in August, 1632, having been brought down from Cambridge, because, where it first stood, " it would not grind but with a westerly wind." - Four years later another windmill was erected ; ^ and subsequently other windmills were built on the various hills in the town,^ and tidemills were also introduced. For the purpose of encouraging the erection of a watermill, the town granted, in July, 1643, all the cove and the salt marsh bordering upon it northwest of the causeway leading to Charlestown, together with three hundred acres of land at Braintree, on condition that the grantees should, within three years, erect one or more corn mills to be maintained forever.* The cove thus granted was known, down to our own time, as the mill-pond ; and, in order that the grant to the mill-owners might not interfere with the rights of other persons, the grantees were required to make and maintain forever a gate ten feet in width, to open at flood tide for the passage of boats, so that they might arrive at -- their ordinary landing places."

It is not known when the first wharf was built; but in January, 1638-39, the town granted " to the owners of the wharf and crane one hundred acres

- Winthrop, A^rTef^«^tfW,i. 87. This wind- Cove, and is shown in the view of Boston enmill appears to have been placed on Copp*s Hill graved that year in Snow's Ffisiory, - Ed.| (see Wood's New England^ s Prospect^ in publi- » Second Report of the Record Commissioners^ cations of the Prince Society, p. 42). p. 74 |See Mr. Bynner's chapter. - Ed.| of land at Mount Wollaston, next to the allotments already granted, toward the repairing and maintaining of the said wharf and crane."* It seems probable, therefore, that there had been a wharf for a sufficient length of time for it to fall into decay and to need " repairing." Not long afterward a much more comprehensive scheme was planned for facilitating a commercial intercourse with other places. In November, 1641, the town granted to Valentine Hill and his associates and successors a considerable tract of " waste ground " near Dock Square, for a specified term of years, dependent on their purchase of various wharf-rights, and on the cost of repairs and other charges incurred by them; and, in consideration of the improvements which they proposed to make, the grantees were authorized to collect tonnage and wharfage dues from all persons who should land goods there, except persons whose lands bounded on the granted territory, who might land, free of charge, goods for their own use, but not for sale. Provision was likewise made for the valuation of the warehouses and other buildings to be erected, and for keeping the wharves in repair, all of which were to become the property of the town at the expiration of the period covered by the grant.^ The proper charges for the use of these and other wharves were regarded by the colonial authorities as matters within their discretion; and in October, 1641, the General Court appointed a committee " to settle the rates of wharfage, porterage, and warehouse hire, and certify the next General Court, - and the order to stand the meanwhile."^ In November, 1646, the Court adopted a minute schedule of charges, to remain in force until the Court of Election in 1648; and the owners of wharves, whether at Boston or at Charlestown, were " required to attend to these rules for wharfage of such goods." * From time to time new rules and regulations on the subject were made by the same authority.

But by far the most important enterprise of this kind was undertaken near the close of the colonial period, and was designed partly to secure the town from any attack by a hostile fleet, and partly to encourage maritime trade. In the summer of 1673 the Court of Assistants recommended to the town to cause a sea-wall or wharf to be erected in front of the town, from the Sconce to Captain Scarlett's wharf, or to adopt some other means for securing the town against fire ships in case of the approach of an enemy. At a town-meeting held in September it was voted not to carry on so extensive an undertaking at the public charge ; but the selectmen were authorized to make such a disposition of the flats as they might think best for promoting the execution of the proposed work by private enterprise. Accordingly, a few days afterward, the selectmen issued proposals for the construction of a wall or wharf of wood or stone from Captain Scarlett's wharf, which was at the foot of Fleet Street, in a straight line to the Sconce, or south battery, near the head of India wharf, - a distance of about twenty-two hundred feet. The wall or wharf was to be twenty-two feet in breadth at the bottom and twenty feet at the top; and it was supposed that the necessary height would be fourteen or fifteen feet, with a breastwork for cannon, and suitable openings for the passage of vessels. In consideration of the execution of the work in the manner proposed, the undertakers were to have a grant in perpetuity of all the flats within the wall, with liberty to build wharves and warehouses for a distance of two hundred feet back from the wall, the remainder to be kept as an open cove, but with the reservation of certain rights to those persons who already abutted on the shore line. And the undertakers were to have all the income which they might derive from anchorage or wharfage dues from vessels sheltered within the cove, or from grants of the privilege of fishing there.* Under these proposals forty-one subscribers undertook the work, in sections varying in length from twenty to one hundred and fifty feet* The work wad prosecuted with very little energy ; but at the General Court held in May, 1681, - more than seven years afterward, - an order was passed setting forth " that, at the great cost, pains, and hazard of said undertakers, a sea wall hath been built, and almost finished, for the safety of said town and this his Majesty's colony ; ** wherefore " the said undertakers, their heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, or major part of them, shall have power to make orders for finishing and preserving the said wall, the regulating of themselves, and appointing persons among themselves to manage their affairs," &c.^ Fortunately, the wharf was never needed for purposes of defence, and it soon fell into decay. It is shown on Franquelin's map of 1693 ; but on Bonner's map of 1722, and on Burgiss's map of 1729, only its general outline can be traced, and probably neither of these is accurate in its delineation.^

A little more than two months after the town was settled, arrangements were made for setting up a ferry between Boston and Charlestown ; and at a Court of Assistants, Nov. 9, 1630, it was ordered " that whosoever shall first give in his name to Mr. Governor that he will undertake to set up a ferry betwixt Boston and Charlestown, and shall begin the same at such time as Mr. Governor shall appoint, shall have one penny for every person, and one penny for every hundred weight of goods he shall so transport." * Iii November, 1637, the Governor and Treasurer were authorized to lease the ferry for the term of three years at the rate of £^0 per annum ; - and at the expiration of that time it was granted to the college.^ In September, 1638, the General Court ordered a ferry to be set up *- from Boston to Winnissim- met, Noddle's Island, and the ships; the person to be appointed by the magistrates of Boston."^ Three years later the Court passed a general order regulating the use of ferries, and providing that every person to whom a ferry was granted should have ** the sole liberty of transporting passengers from the place where such ferry is granted to any other ferry, or place where ferry-boats used to land, and that any ferry-boat that shall land passengers at any other ferry may not take passengers from thence, if the ferry-boat of the place be ready; provided that this order shall not prejudice the liberty of any that do use to pass in their own or neighbors' canoes or boats to their ordinary labors or business."^ In November, 1646, an order was passed prohibiting the overcrowding of ferry-boats, and regulating the manner in which passengers should go on board.' It seems to have been tacitly recognized that the establishment and regulation of ferries were exclusively within the powers of the colonial government; but in two or three instances the town seems to have set up a ferry by its own authority. In January, 1635-36, Thomas Marshall was chosen to keep " a ferry from the mill point unto Charlestown, and to Winnissimmet; " in December, 1637, it was agreed that Edward Bendall should keep **a sufficient ferry-boat to carry to Noddle's Island and to the ships riding before the town; " and in January, 1646-47. George HalsoU was ordered to " keep and employ a passage boat between his wharf and the ships where the ships ride," and no other person was " to make use of his wharf or landing place for hire or reward, but it shall be lawful for any seamen or others to pass to and fro from said landing place in their own boats without paying anything for themselves or friends." * It is probable, however, that these appointments were either temporary, or were made subject to the action of the General Court.

From the first the town was careful to prevent encroachments on the streets and highways, and to keep them clean ; but she does not seem to have been equally careful to keep them in a safe condition. For this neglect Boston was frequently fined, or threatened with a fine, by the General Court; and she was also required from time to time to build or repair bridges and highways, or to contribute a proportionate part of the expense of building or repairing them. For instance, in March, 1634-35, it was ordered that a sufficient cart bridge should be built over Muddy River " before the next General Court, and that Boston, Roxbury, Dorchester, New Town, . and Watertown shall equally contribute to it." * In December, 1638, the town was fined ten shillings for defective highways and want of a watch-house, and allowed until the next court to remedy the neglect* Apparently the town paid little or no attention to this order, and in the following June " Boston was fined twenty shillings for defective highways, and enjoined to repair them, upon the penalty of five pounds." ^ Six months later, " Boston, for defect of their ways between Powder-Hom Hill and the written tree, is fined twenty shillings, and enjoined to mend them ; " but on a representation that the ways were " new laid out," the town was allowed, in October of the next year, further time to repair them.^ At the expiration of that time the General Court passed a more peremptory order, " that the highway between the written tree and Winnisimmet should be made sufficient for carts, horses, and men by Boston, within three months, upon pain of twenty pounds."^ Again, in May, 1670, the Court passed an order that, "Whereas the country highway over some part of Rumney Marsh was laid out long since, from a point of upland to the written tree, and the said way was never made passable, but in stead thereof a causey or bridge hath been made in another place, which hath been made use of, but is now and hath been often out of repair: it is ordered that the selectmen of Boston shall take speedy care to make and maintain a sufficient causey or bridge over the marsh and creek where the way was laid out first, or to see and cause the causey and bridge that is already made to be sufficiently repaired, and so kept from time to time." * On the other hand the town passed numerous orders for the abatement of nuisances in the thickly settled neighborhoods ; and in October, 1649, the selectmen made a general order "that no person whatsoever shall suffer any stones, clay, timber, or firewood, boards or clapboards, or any other thing that may annoy the town's streets, to lie above forty-eight hours, upon penalty of five shillings for every default."* To a similar purpose is the following order passed by the selectmen in January, 1657-58 : " Forasmuch as sundry complaints are made that several persons have received hurt by boys and young men playing at foot-ball in the streets, these are therefore to enjoin that none be found at that game in any of the streets, lanes, or enclosures of this town, under the penalty of twenty shillings for every such offence." *

From a very early period the town began to take precautions against the harboring of strangers who might become a charge; and in May, 1636, "it was ordered that no townsmen shall entertain any strangers into their houses for above fourteen days, without leave from those that are appointed to order the town's businesses."' At a later period, in March, 1647, the scope of this order was somewhat enlarged, and a definite penalty for any neglect to comply with its provisions was established. At that time it was " ordered that no inhabitant shall entertain man or woman from any other town or country as a sojourner or inmate with an intent to reside here, but shall give notice thereof to the selectmen of the town for their approbation within eight da}^ after their coming to the town, upon penalty of twenty shillings." At the same time it was ordered that no inhabitant should let or sell to any person any house or houses within the town, " without first acquainting the selectmen of the town therewith."^ In March, 1652, both of these orders were re-enacted.^ Some years later, - in June, 1659, - at a general townmeeting further orders were made on the subject, reciting that, " Whereas sundry inhabitants in this town have not so well attended to former orders made for the securing the town from sojourners, inmates, hired servants, journeymen, or other persons that come for help in physic or chirurgery, whereby no little damage hath already, and much more may accrue to the town : for the prevention whereof it is therefore ordered that whosoever of our inhabitants shall henceforth receive any such persons before named into their houses or employment, without liberty granted from the selectmen, shall pay twenty shillings for the first week, and so from week to week twenty shillings, so long as they retain them, and shall bear all the charge that may accrue to the town by every such sojourner, journeyman, hired servant, inmate, &c., received or employed as aforesaid." * Provision was made, however, that if a satisfactory bond were given to the selectmen to secure the town from all charges, and the persons received were not " of notorious evil life and manners," the fine might be remitted ; and if any one who had given such a bond should give " such orderly notice to the selectmen that the town may be fully cleared of such person or persons so received," his bond should be given up. Meanwhile, as a further precautionary measure, it was ordered, in March, 1657, "that henceforth no persons shall have liberty to keep shops within this town, or set up manufactures, unless they first be admitted inhabitants into the town."* On the breaking out of Philip's war the town took steps to prevent being burdened with charges which properly belonged to the whole colony; and under date of November, 1675, ^^^ ^^^^ clerk made the following record: "An humble request was presented to the General Court to settle some general way whereby those persons or families who by the outrage of the enemy were bereaved of all means of their subsistence, or forced from their habitations, many whereof have come into this town, may find such relief and redress that no particular town may be burdened thereby."*

After the great fire of 1676, which destroyed among other buildings the Second Church and Increase Mather's house,* an order was issued by the Court of Assistants, or Council, as it was often called, restraining any person from building within the burnt district before the next General Court, " without the advice and order of the selectmen." Subsequently the selectmen widened the street, now known as Hanover Street, to what was probably a nearly uniform width of twenty-two feet; and thereupon the Court passed an order that " The act of the council and return of the selectmen of Boston, as above, being read and perused by the Court, who took notice that the street, as now laid out, is made wider and more accommodable to the

* Second Report of the Record Commissioners^ - MS, Records of the Town of Boston, ii. 94. p. 90. , - Hutchin)K)n, /////. of the Col, of Mass. Bay, public, and due satisfaction given and received by all persons concerned, one only excepted, the Court approves of the act of the selectmen, and orders it to be proceeded in, and the person that hath not consented, to have the like proportionable satisfaction tendered him for so much of his land that is taken and staked out to the street."^

A few months later, after the fire of 1679 which destroyed eighty dwelling houses and seventy warehouses, - "the most woful desolation that Boston ever saw," ' - the General Court passed the first building law for the town : " This Court, having a sense of the great ruins in Boston by fire, and hazard still of the same, by reason of the joining and nearness of their buildings, for prevention of damage and loss thereby for future, do order and enact that henceforth no dwelling-house in Boston shall be erected and set up except of stone or brick, and covered with slate or tile, on penalty of forfeiting double the value of such buildings, unless by allowance and hberty obtained otherwise from the magistrates, commissioners, and selectmen of Boston or major part of them." * At the same session an order was passed that certain persons were '* under vehement suspicion of attempting to burn the town of Boston, and some of their endeavors prevailed to the burning of one house, and only by good Providence prevented from further damage," and therefore the Court ordered ten persons, within twenty days, to" depart this jurisdiction of the Massachusetts Colony; and in case of the return of any of the abovesaid persons without license first had from the governor and council, such offenders shall be committed to close prison until they pay the sum of twenty pounds in money, and give good security to depart this jurisdiction, and not return again contrary to this order."* In the following May the Court, on a petition from some of the inhabitants setting forth that many persons, in consequence of their heavy losses, were not able to rebuild with brick and stone, suspended the operation of the law " for the space of three years only, when it is to be in force, and all persons are required then carefully to attend unto the same."* At the expiration of that time, in December, 1683, the Court again attempted to legislate on the subject, and passed an order that ** This Court, being sensible of the great ruins in Boston by fire at sundry times, and hazards still of the same, by reason of the joining and nearness of buildings, for the prevention of

* Hutchinson, Hist, of the Col, of Mass, Bay^ piles, close together on each side of th.e streets p' 349, ftote. [See Mr. Bynner's chapter. - Ed. J as in London, and furnished with many fair

* Mass, Col. Recordsy v. 24a Describing shops; their materials are brick, stone, lime, Boston in 1665, the Royal Commissioners, or handsomely contrived, with three meeting-houses some person employed by them, wrote : ** Their or churches, and a town-house built upon pillars, houses are generally wooden, their streets where the merchants may confer ; in the chamcrooked, with little decency and no uniform- bers above they keep their monthly courts, ity." (Hutchinson, Original Papers^ p. 421). Their streets are many and large, paved with Josselyn, who was here a short time before, pebble stones, and the south side adorned with probably drew on his imagination, or trusted gardens and orchards.** (3 Mass, Hist, Coll. iii. to an imperfect recollection, when he wrote : 319.)

damage and loss thereby for the future, do order and enact, that henceforth no dweilinghouse, warehouse, shop, barn, stable, or any other building, shall be erected and set up in Boston except of stone or brick, and covered with slate or tile, on penalty of forfeiting one hundred pounds in money to the use of said town for every house built otherwise, unless by allowance and liberty obtained from this Court, from time to time." Some other provisions then followed, and the building law of 1679 was expressly repealed.^ A few months later the law was amended by the enactment of the important provision that half of any parti-wall might be set on the adjoining estate, and that when it was built into, one half of the cost of the wall should be paid for by the person using it.^ The subsequent legislation on this subject does not fall within the period covered by this chapter.

Three or four years after the settlement of the town, - in March, 1633-34, - the Court ordered a market to be kept at Boston every Tliursday.® It was not till November, 1639, that the first post-office was set up in Boston. The General Court at that time passed an order to give notice " that Richard Fairbanks's house, in Boston, is the place appointed for all letters which are brought from beyond the seas, or are to be sent thither, are to be brought unto ; and he is to take care that they be delivered or sent according to their directions ; and he is allowed for every such letter a penny, and must answer all miscarriages through his own neglect in this kind, - provided that no man shall be compelled to bring his letters thither, except he please."^ It is not known how long Mr. Fairbanks held this office; but in June, 1677, the same difficulties which had led to his appointment compelled the merchants of Boston to petition for some further action of the General Court. From the statements then made it appeared that -' many times letters are thrown upon the exchange, that who will may take them up ; " and the Court thereupon appointed Mr. John Hayward, the scrivener, as a " meet person to take in and convey letters according to their direction."* Three years later he was re-appointed to this office.*

The first act of incorporation afTecting Boston was passed in October, 1648, when "upon the petition of the shoemakers of Boston, and upon consideration of the complaints which have been made of the damage which the country sustains by occasion of bad ware made by some of that trade," the General Court granted an act of incorpoi ation for three years to certain persons, " and the rest of the shoemakers inhabiting, and housekeepers in. the town of Boston, or the greater number of them (upon due notice given to. the rest)," empowering them to choose "a master and two wardens, with four or six associates, a clerk, a sealer, a searcher, and a beadle, with such other officers as they shall find necessary." These officers were to be chosen annually and to be sworn before the governor or one of the magistrates ; and they were to have power to make orders for the government of the company and the regulation of the trade, which orders were not to be in force until approved by the County Court or the Court of Assistants. The company was also authorized to impose fines for any infractions of its orders, "provided always, that no unl.iwful combin<ition be made at any time, by the said company of shoemakers, for enhancing the prices of shoes, boots, or wages, whereby either their own people or strangers may suflfer," and provided also ''that no shoemaker shall refuse to make shoes for any inhabitant, at reasonable rates, of their own leather, for the use of themselves and families only, if they be required thereunto." ^

At the same session of the General Court, ** upon petition of the coopers inhabiting in Boston and Charlestown, and upon consideration of many complaints made of the great damage the country hath sustained by occasion of defective and insufficient casks," the coopers also were incorporated, with similar powers, '* for the space of three years, and no longer, except this Court shall see cause to continue the same ; " and with a proviso that none of the orders of the company, " nor any alteration therein, shall be in force before they shall have been perused and allowed by the court of that county where they shall be made, or by the Court of Assistants." It was also provided " that no unlawful combination be made at any time by the said company of coopers for enhancing the prices of casks or wages, whereby either our own people or strangers may suffer; " and that ** the priority of their grant shall not give them precedency of other companies that may hereafter be granted." ^

A few years later, - in June, 1652, - the General Court granted an act of incorporation to " inhabitants of the Conduit Street in Boston," to provide a supply of fresh water for their families, and especially for use in case of fire. The nature and extent of the powers which it was intended to confer on the corporation are involved in some obscurity; but the corporators and their associates were authorized to elect annually two of the proprietors to be masters or wardens of the water-works, with power to arrange for the payment of the annual rent of their land, to make all necessary repairs on the water-works, to assess the proper sums for these purposes, and to admit new members of the corporation. If any persons should be found guilty of corrupting, wasting, or spoiling the water, or water-works, or injuring the pipes, cisterns, or fountains, the warden for the time being might prosecute the offender ; and if any person should take water from the conduit without license, the warden might confiscate " such vessels from them as they shall bring to carry away such water with." The wardens could also allow poor persons to take water " for a time " without charge.' Under the authority of this act, or perhaps just before its passage, it seems that a reservoir was constructed near the corner of the streets now known as Union Street and North Street, and that it was supplied by pipes leading from wells or springs in the neighborhood.* It is not perhaps strange that ''water-works" on so simple a plan should have failed to answer any useful purpose, and that they are scarcely mentioned in the town records.

In 'September, 1670, the town found it necessary to supplement the existing means for extinguishing fires by passing an order, which shows how simple and inadequate these means still remained. The order recites : -' Whereas, it is found by experience that in case of fire breaking out in this town the welfare thereof is much endangered for want of a speedy supply of water, it is therefore ordered that after the first of March next, and so forward to the first of November in every year, every inhabitant in this town shall at all times during the said term have a pipe or a hogshead of water ready filled, with the head open, at or near the door of their dwelling-houses and warehouses, upon the penalty of five shillings for every defect." ^ From time to time persons were fined for having defective chimneys, and were required to have them put in order and swept; and in December, 1676, the colony council recommended to the town the appointment of certain persons who were named, or other persons instead of them, to see that the chimneys in the town were kept properly swept. The suggestion proved agreeable to the town, and the appointments were accordingly made.'

The colony grew so rapidly that in 1643 there were thirty towns within the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, and the need of further organization was felt. Accordingly, in May of that year, the General Court divided the whole plantation into four shires or counties. Seven towns were associated with Boston under the designation of Suffolk County. These were Roxbury, Dorchester, Dedham, Braintree, Weymouth, Hingham, and Nantasket* The origin of the English counties is lost in the obscurity of Anglo- Saxon history ; but their privileges and obligations were well understood, and for this reason, probably, there is in the order creating the Massachusetts counties no enumeration of the powers which the towns thus united might exercise. Closely connected with the division of the colony into counties was the creation of a military organization; and a few months afterward an elaborate plan was adopted by the Court for this purpose, on the ground that " as piety cannot be maintained without church ordinances and officers, nor justice without laws and magistracy, no more can our safety and peace be preserved without military orders and officers."* In the orders now adopted it was expressly declared that no war ought to be undertaken without the authority of the General Court; but as emergencies might arise requiring immediate action there was to be a council, of which the Governor should always be one, with authority to raise the whole force of the country, or any part thereof, and to make such disposition of the soldiers thus raised as they might think best " for the necessary defence of the country." There was also to be a " sergeant major-general to lead and conduct their forces levied, and to execute all orders and directions of the council." In each shire or county there was to be a lieutenant with power to act independently when timely notice could not be given to the Governor and Council, and there was also to be " one sergeant-major to command, lead, and conduct the forces of that shire, being called together," and to act in the absence of the lieutenant^ Other regulations were adopted to secure the eflfective disciplining of the forces in each shire, and the defence of each shire by the local military officers. The idea of local self-government was becoming rapidly developed, though it was long before it was fully recognized and firmly established.

A precedent for this action of the General Court in the establishment of counties and the distribution of the military powers, if any were necessary, may be found in the orders passed in March, 1635-36, providing for the holding of local courts at Ipswich, Salem, Cambridge, and Boston, for those towns and the towns in their immediate neighborhood. In these orders it was declared that the courts thus established ''shall be kept by such magistrates as shall be dwelling in or near the said towns, and by such other persons of worth as shall from time to time be appointed by the General Court, so as no court shall be kept without one magistrate at the least, and that none of the magistrates be excluded who can and will intend the same ; ytt the General Court shall appoint which of the magistrates shall specially belong to every of the said courts. Such persons as shall be joined as associates to the magistrates in the said court shall be chosen by the General Court, out of a greater number of such as the several towns shall nominate to them, so as there may be in every of the said courts so many as (with the magistrates) may make five in all."^ This limited right of local appointment for the associates curiously illustrates the tendency of colonial politics to enlarge the powers conferred by the charter, and to adapt it to the wants of a growing colony.

There was no provision in the colony charter expressly authorizing the creation of any legislative body other than the Court of Assistants; but there was nothing in it inconsistent with the establishment of a representative body in which the freemen who could not be personally present in the General Court might express their will through regularly appointed delegates. With the rapid growth of the colony it soon becanje impracticable for all the freemen to meet together in the General Courts for which express provision was made in the charter, and the establishment of some system of representation became a necessity. So early as May, 1634, the General Court met the difficulty, and solved it, by ordering " that it shall be lawful for the freemen of every plantation to choose two or three of each town before every General Court, to confer of and prepare such public business as by them shall be thought fit to consider of at the next General Court, and that such persons as shall be hereafter so deputed by the freemen of [the] several plantations, to deal in their behalf in the public affairs of the commonwealth, shall have the full power and voices of all the said freemen, derived to them for the making and establishing of laws, granting of lands, &c., and to deal in all other affairs of the commonwealth wherein the freemen have to do, the matter of election of magistrates and other officers only excepted, wherein every freeman is to give his own voice." ^ Various orders were passed subsequently as to the manner in which the deputies should be paid for their necessary expenses; and in March, 1638-39, " it was ordered that no town should send more than two deputies to the General Courts."* At length, nearly forty years afterward, the town of Boston instructed its deputies to have the number of deputies from the town augmented, as the number of freemen had much increased.* No immediate action appears to have been taken on the subject; but in March, 1680-81, the Court granted the town liberty to send three deputies in future.* At first the magistrates and deputies sat together, the former claiming the right to negative the votes of the deputies; but in March, 1643-44, after a controversy which belongs to the history of the colony rather than to the history of the town, the Court passed the following preamble and order : " Forasmuch as, after long experience, we find divers inconveniences in the manner of our proceeding in Courts by magistrates and deputies sitting together, and accounting it wisdom to follow the laudable practice of other States who have laid groundworks for government and order in the issuing of business of greatest and highest consequence. - it is therefore ordered, first, that the magistrates may sit and act business by themselves, by drawing up bills and orders which they shall see good in their wisdom, which having agreed upon, they may present them to the deputies to be considered of, how good and wholesome such orders are for the country, and accordingly to give their assent or dissent; the deputies in like manner sitting apart by themselves, and consulting about such orders and laws as they in their discretion and experience shall find meet for common good, which agreed upon by them, they may present to the magistrates, who, according to their wisdom, having seriously considered of them, may consent unto them or disallow them ; and when any orders have passed the approbation of both magistrates and deputies, then such orders to be engrossed, and in the last day of the Court to be read deliberately, and full assent to be given, provided, also, that all matters of judicature which this Court shall take cognizance of shall be issued in like manner." * These orders of May, 1634, and March, 1643-44, formed the basis on which, with only a single important modification, the system of town representation in Massachusetts rested down to our own time.

held their sessions during the first twenty-five years after the settlement of the town. It is stated, indeed, by Johnson, that the first Court of Assistants, August 23, 1630, was held on board the " Arbclla; "* but as his work was not published until 1654 the statement is of doubtful authority. In May, 1634, the Court was held in the meeting-house in Boston ; ^ and this probably continued to be its place of meeting, for according to Lechford - who was here for about four years, and whose Plaiiu Dealing ; or Naves from New England was published in 1642 - "the General and Great Quarter Courts are kept in the church meeting-house at Boston." - In at least one memorable instance, in May, 1637, the Court of Election was held in the open air.* But in 1658, when the first town-house was erected in Boston, the town was required to provide suitable accommodations for the courts as one of the conditions of receiving aid from the colonial treasury. At its session in May of that year the Court passed the following order: "In answer to the request of the selectmen of Boston, the Court judgeth it meet to allow unto Boston, for and toward the charges of their town-house, Boston's proportion of one single country rate for this year ensuing, provided that sufficient rooms in the said house shall be forever free for the keeping of all courts, and also that the place underneath shall be free for all inhabitants in this jurisdiction to make use of as a market forever, without paying of any toll or tribute whatever." - According to the contract with the builders it was to be "a very substantial and comely building," sixty-six feet in length, and thirty-six feet in breadth, set upon twenty-one pillars ten feet in height between the pedestal and capital. The building was to be a story and a half in height, with three gable ends on each side ; and the principal story was to be ten feet high. On the roof was to be a walk fourteen or fifteen feet wide, with two turrets and turned balusters and rails around the walk. The contract price was four hundred pounds, - the town furnishing all the mason's work and materials, all the iron-work, lead, glass, and glazing. The cost was to be defrayed in part from a legacy of three hundred pounds left to the town by Captain Keayne, and in part from a voluntary subscription.' It does not appear whether the town intended that any part of the cost should be raised by a direct tax ; but the contrac-

* Winthrop, A'ew Engiattdy i. 132. the town of Boston have long since covered the ' 3 Mass, Hist, Coll, iii. S4. east staircase of said house at their own cost

* Mass, Cof, Records, vol. iv. pt. i. p. 327. in Mass. Hist, Soc. Proc., March, 1858, pp. 337- In consideration oi the joint occupancy of the 341. [Keayne is famous for having left the town-house, the colony recognized the obligation most voluminous will known on our records. It to keep the building in repair, and in Septemt)er, fills 1 58 pages ; was executed Dec. 28, 1653, and 1685, the following order was passed: ''The proved May 2, 1656.

tors claimed a much larger sum in the final settlement, and in January, 1660-61, the town voted to allow them six hundred and eighty pounds in full.1

In at least one instance the colony made a specific grant to Boston in aid of a purely local institution. At the session in October, 1660, the General Court, in answer to a petition of the town of Boston, granted to the town one thousand acres of land ** for their furtherance and help to discharge the charge of a free school there." ^ On the other hand, the town was not backward in contributing to general colonial objects. In December, 1652, at a public town-meeting a committee was chosen to receive any sums of money which any persons might subscribe " toward the maintenance of the President and Fellows or poor scholars of Harvard College."* In July, 1654, another committee was chosen '* to collect the several sums subscribed for the use of the college by the selectmen."* In November, 1656, "a rate for town and country and college " was committed to the constables for collection ; and in the following month it was voted to discharge the constables of this rate, - the whole amount apparently having been collected.* But the relations of the town and the college will be treated at length in another chapter of this History; and these votes have been cited only to show that the town had helped to support the college even before she received aid for her free school.

All through the colonial period Boston clung to the charter with an unquestioning devotion ; and it was no doubt with a smile of grim satisfaction that the town-clerk placed on record the unanimous decision of the townmeeting in January, 1683-84, against a surrender of the charter: -