Hatfield Town (part 2 of 16)

Did space allow, it would be pleasant to delineate, in full, the personal character of Mr. Judd; but a brief summary of salient traits is all that can be attempted. And first, it is obvious to remark, that he was eminently a self-made man, having relied very little upon others for his knowledge or opinions. He was also a progressive man, never wedded to the old, because it had been established by authority in some former period, but ever ready to believe that the whole of truth might not yet have been found out, and not frightened lest new discoveries should conflict with received opinions. In this spirit, the efforts at reform in education and morals met with cordial sympathy from him. While religion, consisting of duties to God and man, was always a cardinal element of his being, he was no dogmatist, and willingly accorded to all the right of private judgment. A strong sense of justice and truth pervaded his whole nature, and led him often to err on the side of right, rather than run any hazard on the side of wrong. In business transactions, he was so lenient to creditors as to lose much that was justly his due, and in bargains of buying and selling, he was quite as careful of the interests of others as of his own. He could hardly be said to have a proper estimate of money, even for its uses, and not until compelled by necessity did he reckon closely his expenditures. For the present History, in collecting materials for which so large a portion of his life was expended, he did not expect to receive, and his family will not realize, any return, save the money actually expended in paper, printing and binding. In answer to hundreds of letters, asking for information, which he spent years in acquiring, compensation was seldom demanded, and not often offered. His memory was exact and strong, and his mental powers of application seemed hardly to know a limit. His original physical constitution must have been strong, to bear such a life-long draft upon it as was made by his habits of study. His eyesight continued unimpaired, long beyond the usual period. He was cheerful in temperament, and remarkably genial in social intercourse, being a cherished companion for the young, as well as for the more advanced. Although little demonstrative in the inner feelings of the heart, his affections were deep and tender as those of woman, and the ties existing between him and his family were too strong for death to sever.

Contents

Early settlements on Connecticut River - Controversies in the church at Hartford - Decision of the council of 1659 - Difficulties at Wethersfield . I

Application to Massachusetts for land - Engagement at Hartford to remove to Massachusetts - Committee to lay out a town at Norwottuck; their return, not accepted - Proceedings of the first settlers in 1659 and 1660 - Settlers on the west side of the river - Courts of Justice - The new town named Hadley - Contest with Mr. Bradstreet ..... 10

Division of lands in New England - Hadley Homelots and Street - Manner of distributing Hadley Intervals - East side and west side Intervals - Hatfield Homelots - Measuring Land - Common Fields and Fences - Gates ............ 22

The Grammar School or Hopkins School - Schools of New England - Grammar Schools - Free Schools - Instruction of Females - Schools and Scholars in Hadley - School Houses - School-masters - School Books . . 48

Ordinary-keepers or Inn-keepers - Retailers of wine and liquors - Selling liquors to Indians - -Trial of Dr. Westcarr - Drinks in the 17th century - Distilling - Aquavitae - Intemperance in New England ... 62

Town Meetings - Townsmen's Accounts - Freemen - ^Town Officers - Pound - Town By-laws - Occupations of the people - Petitions of Hadley, in 1665, 1669 and 1670 ......... 68

Xl Contents

County of Hampshire - Towns and Churches before 1700 - Courts in Hampshire - Town marks - Hadley cases in Courts - Presentments for wearing silks - Expenses of Courts - Transportation - Sleds - Prices of grain - Contributions for Harvard College ...... 85

Lands in New England before it was settled by the English - Indian Burnings - Bushes - Burnings by the English - Wood and Timber - Fire-wood - Building Timber - Rift Timber - Clapboards - Saw-logs - Pasturing domestic animals in the woods ....... 96

Good land of little value to Indians - Purchases by Penn and Pynchon - Purchases of the Indians in Norwottuck Valley - Remarks on the Indian Deeds - How Hatfield was purchased - How much Hadley paid for land - The name Norwottuck ........ 104

Indians near Connecticut River - The Norwottucks and their Forts - The Mohawks and their cruelty and cannibalism - The Mohawks in Hampshire County - Talks at Albany - Presents to the Mohawks - Entertainment of Indians - Wampum, or the money of the Indians ... 114

The Indian War of 1675 ^°*^ '^7^ - Erroneous notions about Philip - Importance of the Nipmucks - Destruction of Brookfield - Mr. Stoddard's account of the attempt to disarm the Norwottucks, and of their escape - Fight above Hatfield - Deerfield burnt - Men slain at Northfield - Capt. Beers and his party cut off at Northfield - Northfield deserted - Attack upon Hadley repelled by the aid of Gen. Goffe - Capt. Lathrop and his company slain at Bloody Brook - Deerfield abandoned - Burning of Springfield - Attack on Hatfield 127

Indian War of 1675 and 1676 - chiefly 1676 - Fortifications - Indians in the winter - War with the Narragansets - Destruction of Lancaster - Mrs. Rowlandson taken - Troops march to Miller's River and thence to Hadley - Northampton assaulted - Ambuscade near Longmeadow - Three men slain at Hockanum - Scheme to bring the five Hampshire towns into two - The Falls fight above Deerfield - Attack on Hatfield - Major Talcott arrives from Norwich and Quabaug - Hadley assaulted - Expedition of Major Talcott and Capt. Henchman up the river - Indians flee to the Housatonnuc and are defeated by Major Talcott - War supposed to be at an end - Persons killed and captured at Hatfield and Deerfield in 1677 - Recovery of the captives ........ 151

Fears on account of the attack upon Hatfield - Hadley fortifications - Number of persons slain in Hampshire - Buildings burnt - Benevolence - Cost of the war - Headquarters at Mr. Russell's - War taxes in Hampshire - Colony expenses in Hampshire - Soldier's wages - Flint locks and match locks - Praying Indians - Noises in the air - Garrison at Quabaug - - Posts - Hadley Mill, the parley, etc. - Surgeon - Ferrymen and others - Scenes in Hadley ......... 179

Contents Xli

Bounds of Hadley and additions - Grant of 1673 - Grant of 1683 - Land at the Falls - Grant of 1727 - Survey of 1739 - Controversy with Hatfield, 1707-1733 - New Houselots - Addition to old Houselots - New Street and lots - Grants of land - Skirts of Forty Acres and Hockanum - Fort River Pastures - Hadley Swamps ....... 185

Coined Money - Taxation in 17th century - Hampshire County rates - War rates and charges in Hampshire - Money rates - How rates were paid - Grain for taxes - Hadley rates, 1682 and 1687 - Changes in Hadley . 195

The Militia and their postures and arms - Hadley militia - Hampshire Troop - Change in fire-arms - New Militia Law - New Military book - Bayonets - Colors - Calling the roll - Watches - Alarms . . . . 215

Witchcraft in Europe - In New England - In Hampshire County - Mary and Hugh Parsons of Springfield - Mary Parsons of Northampton - Death of John Stebbins of Northampton - Case of Mary Webster of Hadley - The witch mania of 1692 - Various notices relating to Witchcraft . . 224

The Poor of Hadley - Story of Rebekah Crow - Marriages and Weddings - Funerals and Mourning - Hadley Graveyard - Titles - Names - Old Style and New Style 233

The second Indian War, 1688 to 1698 - Six persons killed at Northfield - Presents to the Maquas - Destruction of Schenectady - Troubles with Albany Indians - Persons killed at Deerfield and Brookfield - Murder of Richard Church of Hadley, and trial and execution of two Indians - Attack in Hatfield meadows - Expenses of the war - Pay of soldiers - The war in Hampshire - Hampshire soldiers - Taxes - Palisades - Contributions ........... 248

Execution of Sarah Smith and Negro Jack - Sickness of 1689 - Change of Government - New Charter, 1692 - Connecticut and Hampshire County - Third Indian War began in 1703 - Destruction of Deerfield andPascommuck, and other events in 1704 - Snowshoes - The war from 1705 to 1713 - Expenses - Taxes - Pay and food of soldiers - Captives - Scalps - Dogs - Dutch at Albany - Mohawks ...... 261

Common lands - Division of Hadley lands now in Amherst - Division of Hadley lands now in South Hadley and Granby - The Crank - Highways and paths - Division of the Inner Commons in Hadley - Summary of Grants and Distributions - Hockanum - Peter Domo . . . 273

Xlii Contents

Equivalent Land - New Towns - Land Speculation - Tar and Turpentine - Candlewood - Scarcity of Timber - Floating timber down the Connecticut - Logs on the meadows - Rafts of boards - Carting by the Falls - Hadley Landings - Island between Northampton and Hadley . . 281

Paper Money, or Colony bills and Province bills - End of Province bills, 1750 - Old Tenor - The shad and salmon fishery at Hadley and South Hadley - Lampreys - Gatherings at the Falls ...... loi

Second Meeting-house in Hadley - Sounding-board - Square glass - Seats and pews - Seating - Spire - Clock - Weather-cock - Bells - Horse-blocks - Stoves - Plan of the lower floor .......

The second, third and fourth Ministers of Hadley - Ordinations - Inscriptions on the Gravestones of four Ministers - Texts and Sermons - The Lord's Supper - Baptisms - Lectures - Whitfield - Minister's wood . 318

Chapter Xxxi

Noxious Beasts and Birds - Wolves - Wildcats - Bears - Catamounts, Crows and Blackbirds - Woodchucks - Furred Animals and the Fur Trade - Beavers - Raccoons - Muskrats - Deer and Deer Hunting - Venison - Deerskin Garments - Wild Turkeys - Pigeons - Rattlesnakes . . 344

Husbandry - Wheat, Peas, Rye, Meslin, Barley, Oats, Beans, Buckwheat, Indian Corn, Potatoes, Turnips, Pumpkins, Flax, Hemp, Broom Corn, and Brooms - Hay Grasses, native and foreign - Cider and Apples - Apple Molasses - Beer - Gardens ....... 353

Domestic Animals, etc. - Horses, Oxen - Fat Cattle - Butchers - Cows - Swine - Pork and Bacon - Puddings and Sausages - Sheep and Wool and trade to Newport - Domestic Fowls - Geese - Bees and Honey - Tobacco - Butter and Cheese - Flaxseed and Oil - Berries - Nuts - -Maple Sugar - Soap - Lights - Timepieces - Blue Dyeing - Cotton - Rags - Sleighs- Carriages - Wagon to and from Boston - Time of Planting, Harvesting, etc. - Statistics of four Towns, 1771 ...... 367

South Hadley - First Settlement - First Meeting-bouse and Minister - Mr. Rawson forcibly ejected from the pulpit - Mr. Woodbridge settled - Contest about the second Meeting-house; one end cut down - The Parish divided - The First Parish - Tiie Common - Schools - The Poor - Innkeepers and Retailers - The Revolutionary War - The Canal and Visitors - The Second Parish and Granby - Various matters . . . 387

Contents Xliii

The Third Precinct, or East Hadley - First Meeting-house and Minister - Church Members - Minister's Wood - Deacons - Second Minister - East Parish - District of Amherst - Representatives and Justices - Plan to divide Amherst - The Revolution - Tories - Taxes - Minute-men - Delegates and Representatives - Schools - The Poor - Innkeepers, etc. - Highways - Flat Hills - Physicians - Planters and householders - Insurrection - School dames . ........

Hadley Broad Street - ^Wearing of the banks by the river - New North Lane - Injury to Hadley by the river - Floods - Middle Street - Sidewalks - Shade Trees - Inhabitants in 1770 - North Hadley - Trees of Hadley - Mount Holyoke - Logs and Boards - Fences^Clearing Land . . 419

Chapter

Early settlements on Connecticut River - Controversies in the church at Hartford - Decision of the council of 1659 - DifEcuIties at Wethersfield.

The first English settlement in New England was made at Plymouth in 1620. This was the beginning of the Plymouth Colony, which was united to Massachusetts in 1692. The oldest town in the colony of Massachusetts is Salem, which was planted in 1628. Charlestown was begun in 1629, and the foundations of Boston, Dorchester, Roxbury and Watertown were lain in 1630, and a beginning w^as made at Cambridge in 1631. In a few years, many towns were planted in Massachusetts.

Previous to the settlement at Plymouth, some Dutch traders visited Hudson's River and Long Island Sound, and in 1614, they built a small fort on the island of Manhattan, now New York, and in the next year, began a settlement near Albany. These Dutch adventurers discovered Connecticut River, which they named Fresh River, and in 1614, Adrian Block sailed up the river as far as Windsor. A commercial intercourse began between the Dutch and the Plymouth colonists in 1627. The Dutch gave the Plymouth people intimations respecting the fertile lands upon Connecticut River.

The Indians on Connecticut River were harassed and terrified by the more powerful Pequots; and some of their sachems and others who had been driven out, made a journey to Plymouth and Boston in 1631, and urgently solicited the English to form a settlement on the river, but the English governors declined the invitation. The Plymouth colonists, whose vessels had visited the river, determined in 1633 to build a trading house there. They were anticipated by the Dutch, who, in 1633, built a light fort near the mouth of Little River in Hartford, having purchased some land of the conquering Pequots in June of that year. They intended to exclude the English from the Connecticut. But in October, 1633, WilHam Holmes of Plymouth, ascended the river, with the materials for a house on board his vessel, and disregarding the menaces of the Dutch, he passed by their fort, and erected a trading house a little below^ the mouth of Windsor River, on a meadow^ that still bears the name of Plymouth Meadow. Holmes carried to the Connecticut some of the sachems, whom the Pequots had driven out.

In September, 1633, John Oldham and three others went overland to Connecticut River, to trade. These were doubtless the first Europeans, that passed by land from the seacoast of Massachusetts, to Connecticut River. In November, 1633, Samuel Hall and two others travelled through the woods to the river, and returned in January. In 1634, men were sent from "the towns in the Bay," to examine the country on the river. Those who took a view of the borders of the Connecticut, found fine lands and good situations for plantations, and their accounts of the fertility of the soil were spread among the people; and many of the planters in the towns around Boston, and some new-comers, resolved to take possession of these desirable places. In 1635, some of the Watertown people began a plantation at Wethersfield; those from Cambridge (then called Newtown) settled at Hartford, and those from Dorchester at Windsor. In October, about 60 men, women and children from Dorchester, with their horses, cattle and swine, were 14 days in removing through the wilderness to Windsor. The ensuing winter was unusually severe, and the privations and suflferings of the inhabitants were extreme. The country about Springfield was examined in 1635, but William Pynchon and his small company from Roxbury did not establish themselves there until May, 1636. In June, 1636, Mr. Hooker, Mr. Stone and about 100 men, women and children, with 160 cattle, traversed the forests from Cambridge to Hartford. They left Cambridge on the last day of May.

The inhabitants of the new towns soon recovered from the distresses attending their first settlement, and from the effects of the Indian war, and many years of prosperity and happiness succeeded. They were industrious and frugal and their lands were productive. As early as December, 1644, the General Court were endeavoring to find a market for their surplus produce. They say, "Massachusetts and Plymouth complain of our over- filling their markets." They built good houses and barns, made additions to their furniture and implements, and multiplied their conveniences and enjoyments.

The first emigrants to Connecticut River, knowing that their productions must be sent to market by the river, and their supplies be received from abroad through the same channel, selected places where the river was navigable. Even Mr. Pynchon and his associates did not plant themselves above boat navigation. But the great Falls above Springfield, now at South Hadley, were an obstacle sufficient to prevent any settlement north of them for many years. At length, in May, 1653, seventeen years after Springfield was begun, a number of men residing at Windsor, Hartford and other places, petitioned the General Court to grant them a plantation at Nonotuck, above Springfield; and their petition was aided by three of the principal men in Springfield, who were very desirous of having neighbors in the colony to which they belonged. The General Court in the same month appointed three men of Springfield, John Pynchon, Elizur Holyoke and Samuel Chapin, to divide the land into two plantations, and the petitioners were to have one of them. In 1654, the Committee reported to the General Court, that they had laid out the bounds of one plantation, on the west side of the river, extending "from the little meadow called Capawonk or Mattaomet, down to the head of the falls;" reserving the lands on the east side of the river for another plantation. The Indian title was purchased by John Pynchon for the planters, Sept. 24, 1653. The settlement of Northampton began in 1654. The planters purchased Capawonk meadow (now in Hatfield) of the Indian owner in 1657, this tract not being included in the purchase made in 1653. Hadley, the second plantation in the valley of Nonotuck, or Norwotuck, was commenced in 1659, five years later than Northampton.*

Differences in the churches at Hartford and Wethersfield were the principal cause of the settlement of Hadley in 1659; but if these disputes had not occurred, such desirable tracts of interval would not long have remained without cultivators. The church at Hartford was one of the largest and most eminent in New Eng-

says the differences in the churches in the years 1656, 1657 and 1658, "ended in the removal of one part of the churches and towns of Hartford, Wethersfield and Windsor to another plantation or two up higher, upon Connecticut River, the one of which was called Hadley, and the other Northampton." These partial errors of Hubbard are copied by Holmes, who fixes the settlement of both towns in 1658, which is not correct in regard to either. Religious differences had no concern in the first planting of Northampton.

land, and the two ministers, Mr. Thomas Hooker and Mr. Samuel Stone, though unlike in some respects, were both great and good men, whose praise was in all the churches. Mr. Hooker was firm and decided, yet prudent and conciliatory, and there was no serious trouble or discord in the church while he lived. In a few years after his death, which happened July 7, 1647, ^ contention arose, having Mr. Stone and a majority of the church on one side, and a strong minority on the other. Several on each side, were men of distinction in the town and colony. The origin of the difficulty has not been clearly stated by any writer. Hubbard alludes to different opinions concerning the extension of the privileges of those not church-members; and says, "the first appearance of disturbance which on that account happened among them, was occasioned on a call of a person to supply the place of Mr. Hooker." He does not tell when this occurred, nor who was the person to whom a call was given. In another place, he says, the differences at first were "about the enlarging of baptism and such like accounts." Mather says, the misunderstanding began between Mr. Stone and the ruling elder, (William Goodwin,) but its origin was obscure. Trumbull supposes, "that some member had been admitted, or baptism administered, which Elder Goodwin conceived to be inconsistent with the rights of the brotherhood and the strict principles of the Congregational churches."

The minority were attached to the Congregational way of church order as professed and practiced under Mr. Hooker; they seemed to adhere to the Cambridge Platform, and were opposed to all important changes. They were sometimes called "strict Congregationalists." On the other hand, Mr. Stone was endeavoring to introduce some new practices into the church; to effect some innovations that were displeasing to the minority; and he seems to have been sustained by a majority of the church. Trumbull is of opinion that his changes related to three subjects, and that the whole controversy respected them, viz., the qualifications for baptism, church membership, and the rights of the brotherhood. These three points require some explanation.

I. Baptism. Hitherto, only the members of churches in full communion, had their children baptized. Now, many ministers and others desired to enlarge the subjects of baptism, and a council or synod from Massachusetts and Connecticut met at Boston in June, 1657. and decided that baptism might be extended to the children of such baptized parents as were not scandalous, and would own the covenant, though not members of the church in full communion. Mr. Stone was one of this council, and is supposed to have advocated the introduction of this new measure, this "half-way covenant," as it was subsequently called. Another synod met in Boston in 1662 and recommended the same practice. This alteration met with much opposition in both colonies, and was but slowly introduced.*

2. Church membership. From the first settlement of New England, only those who gave some evidence of their faith and repentance, were admitted to communion by the churches. There were individuals, perhaps many, who desired to have all admitted to the Lord's Supper who had competent knowledge, and whose conduct was not immoral, though not professing to be regenerate. No evidence has been adduced to show that Mr. Stone, or any other minister, or the majority of any church, at the time of the Hartford contentions, were in favor of such a latitude in admitting members to communion. The council at Boston in 1657, which approved of "owning the covenant," was decisive against receiving any to full communion, except those who manifested faith and repentance. It may be doubted whether Mr. Stone differed much from Elder Goodwin and the minority on the question of full church membership.

3. The rights of the brotherhood. Trumbull says, "Mr. Stone's ideas of Congregationalism appear to have bordered more on Presbyterianism, and less on independence, than those of the first ministers in the country in general." These ideas of Mr. Stone, with actions in some degree corresponding, will account for much of the controversy at Hartford. He was probably considered by the minority as claiming too much power, and encroaching upon the rights of the brethren."]"

The papers containing the chief points upon which the parties differed, their grievances and complaints, and the decisions of the councils that were called to compose their differences, have not been preserved, except the account of the proceedings of the

*Trumbull is mistaken in supposing that "owning the covenant" was not practiced in Connecticut until 1696. There is an old record in Windsor, relating to church matters, which states that Mr. Warham first began this practice, January 31, 1657-8, and continued it until March 19, 1664-5, when ^^ forbore, owing to scruples of conscience. Mr. Chauncey "set it on again," June 21, 1668, the church assenting to it.

1670, the second church in Hartford was formed by "strict Congregationalists" who had been members of the first church. Their sentiments were apparently similar to those of the planters of Hadley. They complained of opposition by preaching and practice to the Congregational way. This is now the South Church in Hartford. The first church is that under the pastoral care of Rev. Dr. Hawes.

Councils from the neighboring churches convened about 1654 and 1655, to reconcile the parties, but without effect. In June, 1656, a council from the churches about Boston met at Hartford and gave their advice. The aggrieved minority seemed willing to comply, but the church did not submit to the advice given. The same council from Massachusetts was again invited to Hartford, and they went the latter part of April, 1657, and succeeded in effecting an agreement which was called a "Pacification," on the 3d of May. For reasons which do not appear, there soon followed what was called a relapse - a breach of the pacification, and each party accused the other of violating it. The parties became more embittered and alienated than before. Mr. Stone and the church undertook to deal with some of the principal men in the minority, viz., Governor Webster Andrew Bacon and William Lewis. After this, the minority formally withdrew from the church, and were about forming a union with the church at Wethersfield under Mr. John Russell. This withdrawal appears to have taken place in the latter part of 1657 or in the early part of 1658. Mr. Stone and the church were proceeding with the withdrawers in a course of discipline, when the General Court interfered, in March, 1658, and prohibited the church from proceeding, and forbid the withdrawers to prosecute their object.

It was apparently in the early part of 1658, that the minority of the church began to think seriously of removing to the colony of Massachusetts. They sent men up the river to view the lands east and north of Northampton. Others applied to the General Court of Massachusetts for a grant of land; they were favorably received, and obtained what they desired. In the spring of 1659, an agreement was formed, and it was determined to begin the plantation that season. In their grant from Massachusetts was a condition, that they should submit to an orderly hearing of the differences between themselves and their brethren.

The former council from Massachusetts, with an addition from tvv^o more churches, were invited to meet at Hartford on the 19th of August, 1659. The church at Dorchester declined sending their minister, Mr. Richard Mather, "in regard to his age and the difficulties of the journey," but intimated that they would afford their help if the meeting were somewhere in the Bay. It was finally agreed that the council should meet in Boston, on the 26th of September. They heard the grievances, blamed both parties, and proposed terms of reconciliation, which were accepted.

History Of Hadley 7

After this, the churches of Hartford and Hadley held communion with each other. Their grievances presented to this council had all happened since the pacification of May, 1657; there was no allusion to the earlier subjects of controversy.*

The General Court of Connecticut, in appointing the annual Thanksgiving in November, 1659, mention as one reason for thanks, "the success of the endeavors of the reverend elders of the last council, for composing the sad differences at Hartford."

This reconciliation caused much joy in many churches. On the 23d of October, 1654, Mr. Mather recited to the church in Dorchester, the determination of the council, "and the loving acceptance thereof by both parties, with their readiness to make confession of the failings of each to the other, for which we ought to give God the praise. "f

The Council of 1659. The result of this council is among the papers of the Massachusetts Historical Society. It is a long document, and not easily read. What follows is only an abstract, containing the substance of the decision.

"A Council held at Boston, Sept. 26, 1659, concerning the long, sad, and afflicting controversy between the Rev. Teacher, Mr. Samuel Stone, and the brethren of the church at Hartford, on one part, and the brethren, the withdrawers from said church, on the other part, since the relapse, after the pacification of May, 3 1657."

Council. The dealing with honored Mr. Webster was unnecessary and should have been spared. The dealing with brother Bacon for his first speech was of the hardest. His second speech was more censurable, but might have been passed with a rebuke. We dare not censure the proceedings in brother Lewis's case, as rigid.

*Trumbu!l supposes that three councils from Massachusetts met at Hartford, viz., one in 1656, one June 3, 1659, and one Aug. 19, 1659; he omits the council that made the pacification in May, 1657, or perhaps he transfers its transactions to the supposed council of June 3, 1659. There was no council at Hartford, Aug. 19, 1659, but there was one at Boston, Sept. 26, 1659, whose proceedings in which are mentioned the other councils, Trumbull had not seen. These proceedings make no allusion to a council in June, 1659.

6. "Concerning the church's separating carriages, not taking congnizance of our complaints, and owning Mr. Stone in his offensive practices."

Council. Affairs seem not to have been managed with such impartiality, and encouragement of the dissenters, as the state of things required. When Mr. Stone was blameworthy, the brethren who upheld him, were blameworthy.

Breach of pacification is the principal point. Mr. Stone was guilty of actions which tended to unsettle the pacification, but not guilty of a breach of it.

Council. The separation of the withdrawers was irregular, as there was no just cause for separation; and if there had been, council might have been had, and the dismission been orderly. Though their act was irregular, yet we look not on them as schismatics, because they were led thereto by a mistake concerning the act of the council of 1656. They have all along desired a council.

Council. They cannot be members of two churches at once. We bear witness against such of the withdrawers as have joined another church, as being irregular.

We desire that in case of mutual satisfaction given and taken, between all parties, that then there might be a returning of the dissenters into communion with the Hartford church. But if any of them, after satisfaction, shall choose to dispose of themselves elsewhere, and to remove their habitations, then our advice is that the church give them dismission on their request, and that such as have joined another church, do renew their covenant. We expect they will hold communion with the church at Hartford, and the church with them.

The council closed with strong exhortations to the parties; and mentioned the great labor of the council at Hartford in 1656; the services of the messengers from Massachusetts, and the pacification of May 3d, 1657, and the relapse; and the labors of the present assembly.

Wethersfield experienced various vicissitudes, and most of the early settlers removed to other towns, and their places were supplied by new comers. After a few years, the inhabitants became more stable and prosperous, and the village contained many intelligent and thriving men. Mr. Henry Smith, their minister, died in 1648, after preaching there eight or ten years. Mr. John Russell succeeded him in 1649. ^^ ^"^ ^ number of the church entertained opinions in unison with those of the minority at Hartford, while others seemed to sympathize with the majority. There was some difficulty at Wethersfield in 1658, and a complaint was presented to the General Court against Mr. Russell in August.

History Of Hadley 9

A few months after this, Lieut. John Hollister* was excommunicated by the church. In March, 1659, he complained that the charges against him had not been presented to him. The General Court required Mr. Russell and the church to deliver to him a copy of the charges; and they desired the church to consider the matter and conclude upon some way to issue their sad differences.

The town voted, December, 1658, that they had no settled minister among them; and on the 24th of March, 1659, they chose a committee "to procure a solid and approved minister." The committee were to consult Governor Wells, who resided in Wethersfield, and Mr. Stone of Hartford. On the 2d of May, 1659, the town chose another committee to engage a minister, prefacing the vote with these words: - "seeing it is commonly reported that Mr. Russell hath sent for his church to Norwottuck, to do some church act, whereby the town is wholly destitute." In June, 1659, the General Court judged it to be the duty of the inhabitants of Wethersfield to provide a minister.

It appears from these proceedings that Mr. Russell preached in Wethersfield until some time in April, 1659, though the town voted that they had no settled minister, some months previous. A majority of the town were opposed to him, but a majority of the church seem to have adhered to him. In October, 1659, the General Court, referring to the long and tedious differences and troubles betwixt Mr. Russell and several members of Wethersfield church, particularly betwixt Mr. Russell and the lieutenant, desired the churches of Hartford and Windsor to send messengers to Wethersfield to give advice and counsel. "And the whole church belonging to Mr. Russell's charge, lately of Wethersfield, is to be acquainted herewith." The meeting was to be on the first Tuesday in November. The result of this council is not known. In March, 1661, the General Court remarked that divers members of the church at Wethersfield had removed from thence without notice to, or allowance from the court, magistrates or churches of that colony; those still remaining there were declared by the court to be the true and acknowledged church at Wethersfield.

It may be concluded from expressions in the records and other circumstances, that a majority of the Wethersfield church-members settled at Norwottuck with Mr. Russell. The church was

*John Hollister, usually called "the lieutenant," was an influential man in Wethersfield. His daughter Sarah married Rev. Hope Atherton, the first minister of Hatfield; and after his death, she married Timothy Baker of Northampton.

not large. Goodwin, in his Foote Genealogy, states that early in the spring of 1659, all the members of the church, except six, voted for a removal. The General Court of Massachusetts, so careful to have the Hartford men separate from the church in an orderly manner, never suggested that there w^as any irregularity in the conduct of the Wethersfield members who settled in Hadley,

Farmer's Genealogical Register says Mr. Russell was installed in Hadley. The correctness of this remark may be doubted. It is believed that the "church act" at Hadley, whatever it may have been, was not an act in which the aid or concurrence of any other church was sought. When a minister and a majority of his church changed their residence, no installing act was deemed necessary.

Disputes in the church at Hartford and elsewhere continued long after Hadley was settled, but became less vehement. Mr. Bradstreet of New London, in his Journal in 1667, mentions that a synod was called at Hartford, to discuss some points concerning baptism and church discipline, and he expressly names the two parties, Congregational and Presbyterian. The Saybrook Platform of 1708 seems to have been the result of a compromise between similar parties.

Chapter Ii

Application to Massachusetts for land - Engagement at Hartford to remove to Massachusetts - Committee to lay out a town at Norwottuck; their return, not accepted - Proceedings of the first settlers in 1659 and 1660 - Settlers on the west side of the river - Courts of Justice - The new town named Hadley - Contest with Mr. Bradstreet.

Capt. John CuUick and Elder William Goodwin, two prominent men among the withdrawers, (as they were then denominated,) went to Boston and presented the following petition to the General Court, May 20, 1658:

"Whereas your most humble servants, the subscribers, v/ith several others of the colony of Connecticut, do conceive that it may be most for the comfort of them and theirs to remove themselves and families from thence, and to come under your pious and godly government, if the Lord shall please so to order it, and yourselves to accept it. We do presume to present this our humble motion to your wisdom's consideration, whether we may, without offence, view any tract of land unpossessed within your colony, in order to such an end, and in case v/e can present any thing that may be to the encouraging of a considerable company to take up a plantation, either at Nonotuck or elsewhere, we may have your gracious allowante to dispose ourselves there; or in case that be not, then within any of your settled plantations, as the wise God shall direct us and show unto us; we being first of you, presume to tender ourselves first to you, which if you shall please to grant, we hope through the grace of

History Of Hadley

Christ, our conversations among you shall be without offence; so committing you and all your weighty affairs to the guidance and blessing of the Lord, we rest,

"In answer to the petition of Capt. Cullick and Mr. Wm. Goodwin, in behalf of themselves and others, the Court judgeth meet to grant their request, in reference to lands not already granted, and further gives them liberty to inhabit in any part of our jurisdiction already planted, provided they submit themselves to a due and orderly hearing of the differences between themselves and their brethren."

In the same year, 1658, some of the withdrawers desired propositions from Northampton in regard to Capawonk meadow, which belonged to that town. In October, 1658, the town of Northampton voted to "give away" Capawonk, on four conditions: - 1st. The Hartford men are to settle two plantations; one on each side of the river. 2d. They are to maintain a sufficient fence against hogs and cattle. 3d. They are to pay 10 pounds, in wheat and peas. 4th. They are to inhabit here by next May.

The Agreement or Engagement of those who intended to remove from Connecticut to Massachusetts, is dated at Hartford, April 18, 1659, and is recorded on the first book of Hadley records. The following is a copy of that Agreement and of some proceedings of a later date recorded with the other:

"At a meeting at Goodman Ward's house, in Hartford, April i8th, 1659, the company there met engaged themselves under their own hands, or by their deputies, whom they had chosen, to remove themselves and their families out of the jurisdiction of Connecticut into the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts, as may appear in a paper dated the day and year abovesaid. The names of the engagers are these: -

1st. We whose names are above written do engage ourselves mutually one to another, that we will, if God permit, transplant ourselves and families to the plantation purchased, on the east side of the river of Connecticut, beside Northampton, therein to inhabit and dwell by the 29th of September come twelve months, which will be in the year 1660. [Meaning Sept. 29th, 1660.]

3d. That we will raise all common charges, of what sort soever, for the present, upon the land that men take up: mow, plow land and house lot, according to the proportion of land that each man takes of all sorts; and all charges shall be paid as they shall arise and be due, from the date hereof.

4th. That if any persons so engaging be not inhabiting there by the time aforesaid, then, notwithstanding their payment of charges, their lands and what is laid out in rates shall return to the town: and yet this article doth not free men from their promise of going and inhabiting.

5th. That no man shall have liberty to sell any of his land till he shall inhabit and dwell in the town three years; and also to sell it to no person, but such as the town shall approve on.

Agreed that all those persons that will go up within three weeks shall give in their names by this day fortnight, and then those that are so agreed shall take up a quarter together, and so those that follow shall take up another quarter, so they do it together, or so far as their numbers run.

Agreed also that no persons shall fell any trees upon any lot of ground lotted out, or to be lotted out, but upon his own ground or lot, or against his own lot within ten rods of the same in the highway. The land to be lotted is either what is for the homelots, or between the homelots and the meadow.

It is agreed also by the said company, upon the 25th of April, 1659, that they will purchase the lands on the west side of the great river, above Napanset, if it can be bought, and that each of the said engagers will pay their several proportions to the said purchase, according to what they have put in to take up lands by, at the time of their said engagement: witness their hands, dated April the i8th 1659.

At the said meeting William Westwood, Richard Goodman, William Lewis, John White and Nathaniel Dickinson were chosen by the whole company, to go up to the foresaid plantation, on the east side of Northampton, and to lay out the number 59 homelots, and to allow eight acres for every homelot, and to leave a street 20 rods broad betwixt the two westermost rows of homelots; and to divide the said rows of homelots into quarters by highways. Those men, being willing to answer the desire of the said company, did undertake the work. They desiring to make some beginning there for themselves, the company granted them liberty, according to a former agreement, that they might choose in any of the quarters to lay out their own homelots, provided they took them together at one side of any of the said quarters.

The plantation being begun by them and some other of the engagers, the rest of the engagers that remained at Hartford and Wethersfield, with those that were come up to inhabit at the said plantation, did upon the ninth of November (1659) at Hartford, and about the said time at Wethersfield, and at the said plantation, choose by vote, William Westwood, Nathaniel Dickinson, Samuel Smith, Thomas Standley, John White, Richard Goodman, and Nathaniel Ward, to order all public occasions, that concern the good of that plantation for the year ensuing.

The said Townsmen made a rate upon the 22d of November, 1659, for the paying of the purchase of the said plantation, and for the minister's maintenance, levying it at 50 shillings the 100 pounds, which in the whole sum came to 180 pounds; for the speedy gathering of this rate, we sent the rate down to the two towns Hartford and Wethersfield, that the charges might be truly paid and satisfied, by every man according to his engagement, as is visible in the engagement itself, that is dated the i8th of April 1659."

There are 59 names to the Agreement, and one not fully engaged. Of these, 31 first named, from John Webster to Andrew Warner, inclusive, belonged to Hartford, except Samuel Porter, who was from Windsor, but may have resided in Hartford in 1659. The next 20, from Mr. John Russell, Jr. to John Latimer, inclusive, belonged to Wetherslield; the next tw^o, Peter Tilton and John Hawks, were of Windsor, and 5 or 6 of the 7 below Hawks, were of Hartford. Those with this mark, * 18 in number, did not remove to Hadley, or remained there but a short time.

The General Court, on the 28th of May, 1659, appointed a committee of five, viz., three from Springfield and two from Northampton, to lay out the bounds of a town, according to the grant made May 25, 1658. The order follows, copied from the printed records of the Colony, and retaining the orignial orthography, except a few contractions.

"Whereas it hath appeared to this Court, that according to a former graunt to Capt. John Cullicke £? Mr Willjam Goodwyn, in behalfe of themselves and ffreinds that desired to remoove into our colony, they haue begunne to remoove to Norwoottucke with seuerall familjes, and made some begining on the east side the riuer in order to a plantacion, and that there are many desirable persons hauing a pastor with his church engaged to goe along with them, with another who may in tjme be joyned to that church for theire further helpe in the worke of the ministry, whereby they are enabled not only to carry on a toune, but church worke also, - this Court, being willing to remoove all obstacles out of theire way, and finding the people so many and considerable that haue engaged, with seuerall others that would engage if there might be encouragement found there for them, doe order, that these persons ffollowing, viz., Capt. Pinchon, Left. Holyhoke, Deacon Chapin, Willjam Holton, and Richard Lyman, shall be a committee fully impowered by this Court to lay out the bounds of the toune at Norwottocke, on either or both sides the riuer as they shall see cause, so as shall be most suitable for the chohabitation and full supply of those people, that this wildernes may be populated and the majne ends of our coming into these parts may be promoted. Voted by the whole Court mett together. 28, 3, 1659."

The preamble of the order shows clearly that the Court deemed these emigrants from Connecticut to be estimable men, and a valuable acquisition to the colony. It also shows that the church at Wethersfield, (that is, a majority of its members) were about to remove with their pastor. The other minister alluded to, was Mr. Samuel Hooker, son of Mr. Thomas Hooker, of Hartford. He was then preaching at Springfield. In the agitation at Hartford, he appears to have harmonized in opinion with the minority of the church.

"In obedience to an order of the much Honored General Court in May last, appointing us whose names are subscribed, to lay out the bounds of the new plantation at Norwottuck on the river Connecticutt for the supply of those people that are to settle there; considering what people are to remove thither and the quality of the lands thereabouts, we have thought good to lay out their bounds on both sides of said River, viz. on the East side of said river their southerly bounds to be from the head of the Falls above Springfield and so to run east and by north the length of nine miles from the said river: And their Northerly bounds to be a little brook called by the Indians Nepasoaneage up to a mountain called Quunkwattchu, and so running eastward from the river the same length of nine miles: from their southerly bounds to the northerly bounds on the east side of the river is about ii or 12 miles, And on the west side of the river their bounds on the south are to join or meet with Northampton bounds, (which said bounds of Northampton come to a little riverett running betwixt two pieces of land called Capawonk and Wequittayyagg) And on the north their bounds to be a great mountain, called Wequomps; and the North and South bounds are to run west two miles from the great river; And from North to South on that side the river is about 6 or 7 miles.

A postscript. Whereas it's said above that their north and south bounds are to run two miles west from the great river; it is intended that the south bounds are the riverett above mentioned upon what point soever it run, and the two miles west respects the straight line.

The report, it will be seen, was not accepted by the magistrates. Some of them had received grants of land, within the bounds laid out by the committee; and if they gave up these, they intended to take up other lands in the same valley.

Hadley was never able to extend her bounds as far eastward as this committee proposed. Nepasoaneag brook, at its mouth, continued to be the northern limit. On the west side of the Capawonk meadow, then owned by Northampton, came up to the riverett, now Hatfield Mill river. Wequomps mountain was Sugar Loaf, now in Deerfield.

All the transactions of 1659 that are recorded, may be found on pages II and 12. It may be presumed that the broad street and homelots were laid out in 1659; that a number of the engagers "came up to inhabit at the said plantation," in 1659, and built rude dw^ellings, where they lived during the next winter. Who, or how many, passed the winter there, cannot be known. The seven men, chosen Nov. 9, 1659, "to order all public occasions," and called Townsmen, were at the new plantation and made a rate, Nov. 22, 1659, and they, or a majority of them, probably wintered there with others. One of these Townsmen, Thomas Stanley, made his will, Jan. 29, 1659-60, in which he disposed of his house and land, "that are here at the new plantation," proving conclusively that he then lived in the new town.

No record whatever remains of their doings in 1660, previous to the 8th of October, and it may be concluded that no public business was performed that required a register.

On the 8th of October, 1660, a Town-meeting, so called, was held at the house of Andrew Warner, and it was voted: - That no person should be owned for an inhabitant, or have liberty to vote or act in town affairs, until he should be legally received as an inhabitant - That all who sit down on the west side of the river, shall be one with those on the east side, in both ecclesiastical and civil matters, that are common to the whole; they paying all charges from their engagement, and all purchase-charges from the beginning. Those admitted for inhabitants on the west side of the river, are to be "inhabiting there in houses of their own by Michaelmas next," (Sept. 29, 1661,) and to sign an engagement by themselves, or some others for them. The votes or agreement at this meeting were signed by 28 persons, viz., John Webster, William Goodwin, John Crow, Nathaniel Ward, John White, Andrew Bacon, William Lewis, William Westwood, Richard Goodman, Thomas Standley, Samuel Porter, Ozias Goodwin, John Marsh, William Markum, Samuel Moody, Zechariah Field, Andrew Warner, Mr. John Russell, junr., Nathaniel Dickinson, Samuel Smith, Thomas Coleman, John Dickinson, Philip Smith, Thomas Wells, Thomas Dickinson, Richard Montague, Peter Tilton, Richard Billing.

Most of those who wished to settle on the west side of the river, signed an engagement for themselves, or their friends for them, to be dwellers there before Sept. 29, 1661. Some signed at the meeting, Oct. 8th, others Nov. ist, and some in January, February or March, 1661. Twenty-five persons manifested an intention before March 25, 1 66 1, to establish themselves on that side of the river, in the new town, viz., Aaron Cook, Thomas Meekins, William AUis, Nathaniel Dickinson, Jr., John Coleman, Isaac Graves (with his father, Thomas Graves,) John Graves, Samuel Belding, Stephen Taylor, John White, jr., Daniel Warner, Richard Fellows, Richard Billing, Edward Benton, Mr. Ritchell (with his son,) Ozias Goodwin, Zechariah Field, Lieut. Thomas Bull, Gregory Wilterton, Nathaniel Porter, Daniel White, William Pitkin, John Cole, Samuel Church, Samuel Dickinson. Of these 25 persons, Aaron Cook and Samuel Church did not remove to the west side of the river; Ozias Goodwin, Lt. Bull, Gregory Wilterton and William Pitkin continued to reside at Hartford, Nathaniel Porter at Windsor, and Mr. Ritchell or Richall and Edward Benton lived at Wethersfield. Sixteen were permanent residents on the west side.

During the years 1659 and 1660, no permanent distribution of lands was made in the intervals or meadows. Men tilled parcels of the common lands, temporarily assigned to them. It was uncertain how many of the engagers would become actual settlers. The grants to Mr. Bradstreet and others, may have discouraged some; various things operated to dissuade others from the undertaking, and in the course of two years, many had changed their minds. New applicants appeared to supply their places, and there was no lack of settlers.

Courts similar to County courts were ordered, by the General Court, in May, 1658, to be kept yearly, the last Tuesday of March and the last Tuesday of September, one at Springfield and one at Northampton. They were held by the Springfield Commissioners. In Oct. 1659, it was ordered as follows, concerning freemen and the new town: -

"Those made freemen here, and who removed to Connecticut, and have now returned to this colony, are still freemen here, without any further oath. Those in the plantations on Connecticut River, who are not freemen, but capable by law to become so, are to be sworn by the Springfield Commissioners. The new town is to be under the power of the Springfield Commissioners in regard to County Courts, till further order."

"May 31, 1660. Mr. John Webster of the new town at Norwottuck, is by this Court commissionated with magistratical power for the year ensuing, to act in all civil and criminal cases as one magistrate may do. He is to join the Commissioners in keeping the courts."

Mr. John Webster, and the three Springfield Commissioners, viz., Capt. John Pynchon, Mr. Samuel Chapin and Elizur Holyoke, held a court at Springfield, Sept. 25, 1660 and another at Northampton, March 26, 1661. On the same 26th of March, the Springfield Commissioners were at "Newtown or Norwotuck," (so they call the place) and the following persons took the freeman's oath before them, viz., Mr. John Webster, Mr. John Russell, Nathaniel Ward, William Markham, Thomas Dickinson, Andrew Bacon, Thomas Wells, John Hubbard, Nathaniel Dickinson, Philip Smith, Thomas Coleman, Robert Boltwood, Samuel Gardner, Peter Tilton. There were others who had been made freemen in Massachusetts before they removed to Connecticut.

At a meeting. May 11, 1661, it was voted that all the freemen should meet at the house of Goodman Lewis "upon the next 2d day," (meaning the second day, or Monday, of the next week)

History Of Hadley 17

Some things agreed upon at that meeting, may be inferred from the following order of the General Court, May 22, i66i, copied from the printed records: -

"On the motion of the inhabitants of the new plantation nere Northampton, relating to sundry particculars, it is ordered by this Court, that the sd toune shall be called Hadley, and that for the better gouernment of the people, ^ suppressing of sinns there, some meete persons, annually presented by the freemen vnto this, shall be commissioned and empowred to act in seuerall services as followeth: first, the sajd commissioners, together with the commissioners of Springfeild and Northampton, or the greater part of them, shall haue liberty & be impowred to keepe ye Courts appointed at Springfeild & Northampton; secondly, that the said commissioners for Hadley shall and are hereby empowred, without a jury, to heare ii. determine all ciuil actions not exceeding fiue pounds; 3dly, that the sajd commissioners for Hadley shall & are hereby empowred to dcale in all criminall cases according to laue, where the penalty shall not exceed tenn stripes for one offence; provided, that it shall be lawfull for any person sentenced by the sajd commissioners, either in ciuil or criminall cases, to appeale to the Court at Springfeild or Northampton; fourthly, that the persons for the yeare ensuing, & till others be nominated & chosen, for the toune of Hadley, appointed & authorized as aforesajd, are, Andrew Bacon, Mr. Samuell Smith, & Mr Wm Westwood; 5thly,that the commissioners hereby appointed shall take theire oathes before Capt.Pinchon for the faithfull discharge of theire duty therein, who is hereby authorized to administer the same vnto them. It is also ordered by this Court, that the jurymen freemen for trialls at Springfeild & Northampton Courts shall take information & make presentments to ye Court of misdemeanors, as grand jurymen vsually doe, or ought to doe, and that the clarke of the Court for Springfeild & Northampton send forth warrants to the three tounes for jurymen, with respect to the ease of travill to each Court, & yt Mr John Russell, Sen, be clarke of ye writts for Hadley, and yt Mr Westwood, or, in his absence, one of the other commissioners, are hereby authorized to joyne persons in marriage at Hadley."

This place, previously denominated the new town, the new plantation, or Norwottuck, was by the preceding act named Hadley, and the incorporation of the town is commonly dated from the same act. The old towns in Massachusetts were not made legal bodies by any regular act of incorporation. A few words, declaring a place to be a town, and giving it a name, conferred all the powers and privileges of a town; and in some instances, the mere naming of a place seems to have been equivalent to an act of incorporation. In regard to Springfield and Northampton, no transaction of the General Court is recorded, which can be called an incorporation.

Hadley, when it was named in 1661, had no established boundaries, on either side of the river. The first purchases of the Indians had been made, viz., one on the east side, Dec. 25, 1658, and two on the west side in 1660. The three purchases cost the inhabitants 150 pounds.

Hadley was named from Hadleigh or Hadley, a town in England, in the county of Suffolk, situated on the small river Berton, a branch of the Stour, a few miles west of Ipswich and east of

Sudbury. It is not far from the northern boundary of Essex, a county from which came many of the early settlers of Hartford. The Saxon name of Hadleigh was Headlege, according to Camden. When he wrote, about 1600, it was famous for making woolen cloths. In 181 1, the population was 2592, and it had a handsome church.

It may be conjectured that some of the first planters of Hadley came from the town of the same name in England. No record remains to show who they were. The name in the town and county records is sometimes written Hadleigh.

Hadley chose five townsmen in December, 1660, and these men held the office 13 months, though what is deemed an act of incorporation took place about 5 months after they were chosen. Others continued in office without a new choice.

The judicial power conferred upon the Hadley commissioners under the 2d and 3d heads, in the order of May, 1661, was unusual and it was abrogated and made null in 1663. The commissioners of the three towns were empowered, in 1661, to hold courts at Springfield and Northampton, but the Northampton and Hadley commissioners do not appear as judges of these courts until March 31, 1663.

The General Court in 1653, when they appointed a committee to divide the land at Nonotuck into two plantations, evidently contemplated a plantation on the eastern, as well as one on the western side of the river. Yet through forgetfulness, inattention or ignorance of this part of the colony, the General Court in May, 1657, permitted Mr. Simon Bradstreet, to whom they had previously granted 700 acres, to take up his grant on the eastern side of Connecticut River, in the vicinity of Northampton. They also granted to Maj. Daniel Denison, 500 acres, and to Mr. Samuel Symonds, 300 acres, near Mr. Bradstreet's. Gen. Humphrey Atherton also had a grant of 500 acres "at Nonotucke beyond Springfield," May 26, 1658.

There were no deputies present from Springfield and Northampton in 1657 and 1658, and those from the eastern towns knew very little about this remote region of "Nonotucke beyond Springfield." But those individuals who obtained grants of land upon the river, were not ignorant of their value, and not unmindful of their own interests.

On the 27th of May, 1659, after it was ascertained that the Connecticut people were about to remove to Norwottuck, the Deputies passed the following" vote, and the Magistrates consented : -

History Of Hadley 19

The Court have granted to Mr. Bradstreet, Mr. Symonds, Maj. Gen. Denison and Maj. Atherton, each of them, a farm, which they intended to take upon Connecticut River, above Springfield; but as the taking it there will be very prejudicial to the new plantation, now going on there, which this Court is very willing to encourage, the Deputies desire the four Magistrates to find out some other place to take their farms in, and if it shall not be equal in respect to quality, it may be made up in quantity.

In November, 1659, the Court added 200 acres to Maj. Atherton's grant, and he took the 700 acres at Waranoke; on the 31st of May, 1660, the Court added to Mr. Bradstreet's grant, 300 acres, to Mr. Symond's, 100 acres, and to Maj. Gen. Denison's, 300 acres, in consideration of their having resigned their former grants, for the accommodation of the nev\^ tovi^n. And they had Hberty to take up their lands in any place on the west side of the river, "provided it be full six miles from the place now intended for Northampton meeting house, upon a straight line;" or they might take their grants elsewhere in unappropriated lands. Mr. Bradstreet was to have the first choice.

Mr. Symonds took his land elsewhere; but Mr. Bradstreet determined to take 500 of his 1000 acres on the west side of the river; and Maj. Gen. Denison, 500 of his 800 acres, near Mr. Bradstreet's.

Hadley did not complain of the decision of the General Court, and Mr. Bradstreet did not apparently manifest any dissatisfaction for about two years, but after he was sent to England as an agent of the colony, his son Samuel Bradstreet sent a petition to the General Court at the May session, 1662, stating that his father had chosen 500 acres on the west side of Connecticut River, betwixt 5 and 6 miles in a straight line from Northampton meeting house, "being for the most part compassed about with a great brook, a long pond or ponds and Connecticut River." He requested a confirmation of this land for his father, and used some flimsy arguments to show that his father ought to have it, though he had not gone 6 miles from Northampton meeting house.

It is hardly to be supposed that the Magistrates were much influenced by his arguments; yet they wished to do Mr. Bradstreet a favor, and were willing that he should have the land petitioned for. The Deputies did not consent, but said the grant must begin full 6 miles from Northampton meeting house, as before ordered.

The subject was again presented to the Court at the October session, 1662, and the Deputies again gave Mr. Bradstreet his 500 acres north of the 6 miles. The Magistrates did not consent to this, but gave Mr. Bradstreet the land where he desired it, south of the 6 miles line, and the Deputies finally agreed with them. The Deputies did not manifest as much perseverance as in some

Other cases, when contending with the Magistrates or Upper House; and thus was consummated an act which Hadley people judged to be one of great injustice towards them; it was directly contrary to the order of May 31, 1660.

This decision produced much excitement in Hadley. The land now granted to Mr. Bradstreet was an important interval or meadow, from which the settlers on the west side of the river had received, or were to receive, a large portion of their interval land. It was called the Higher Meadow, the North Meadow, and the Great Meadow. Its boundaries still are brooks, ponds and the river, and the southern part is within about a mile of Hatfield meeting house. It included near a fourth part of all the interval on both sides of the river.

At the next General Court, May, 1663, earnest petitions were sent from the church and town of Hadley, and one from Northampton in behalf of Hadley. They all believed that the act giving the Great Meadow to Mr. Bradstreet was not equitable.

"The church of Christ in Hadley," in their petition, say, "we ask only what we have a right unto, derived from yourselves." They refer to the encouragement at first given by the court for them to settle at Hadley, and to the subsequent order requiring the gentlemen who had grants not to come within six miles of Northampton Meeting House. They request that this order may stand sure and steadfast. They estimate the interval given to Mr. Bradstreet, at "about one-fourth part of their serviceable land." They conclude with these words: - "the thing is likely to leave the house of God unfurnished amongst us as well as our civil society." The petition is signed by John Russell, Pastor; WUl. Goodwin, Ruling Elder; Nathaniel Dickinson and Peter Tilton, Deacons, in the name of the church.

Henry Clarke, Andrew Bacon and William Westwood signed the petition in the name of the town of Hadley, May 25, 1663. This petition is much longer than that of the church and would fill two or three pages of this book. Some extracts and abstracts follow.

They request the General Court - "to lend a listening ear to our cry, occasioned by our present necessity and distress. Having viewed this place, although we found it bare and mean enough, in itself to answer our ends, and accompanied with many inconveniences besides the great one of its remoteness, yet considering the court's encouraging answer to our motion, we doubted not of enjoying what the place would afford." They then refer to the committee, appointed in May, 1659, to lay out the bounds of the plantation, who allotted to them the land they were pleading for, as appears by their return. "All the land here would not be sufficient for such a competency as was thought not too much for our neighbors in the nest plantation; [Northampton] yet they think their neighbors will find their place hard and the work heavy enough. They complain because so much land was given to Mr. Bradstreet and Maj. Gen. Denison "which discouraged some of our company, and several fell off, and among others, our dear and precious help in the ministry, Mr. Hooker." "As to our engrossing too much land, ten of the greatest men amongst us have not so much interval land as this farm Mr. Bradstreet pleads for, and that within three-fourths of a mile of our houses, and the furtherest part of it within one mile and three-fourths of our houses." - "The place (Hadley) has proved far worse for wintering cattle than was expected; and the transportation of other things is tedious. We have purchased of the Indians at such rates as we believe never any plantation in New England was purchased."

History Of Hadley 21

Northampton was interested in the prosperity of these new settlements, being very desirous of neighbors on both sides of the river. A petition was therefore signed by 35 of the inhabitants of Northampton, in favor of the people of Hadley, May 19, 1663. Some extracts follow: -

Our brethren profess themselves to have set down there confiding in the honored court's grant. The accommodations they have there, if they have all they expected, are but mean and very inconvenient for such a company, the uplands here being of inconsiderable value to what they are in other places. What is raised here is at small price, foreign commodities are dear, and the charge and trouble in transporting by land near 50 miles, will be more felt by those that do it than others can readily conceive of. Should they fail of a supply of food and clothing for their families, and many remove elsewhere, and the plantation be scattered, how much should we be disappointed who have hoped for the comfort and refreshing of Christian neighborhood. May it please the honored court, to take such order in the case as that the worthy gentlemen concerned may be no losers, and yet our societies not broken, nor our beginnings routed, nor the work of the Lord hindered.

On the nth of June, 1663, Mr. Bradstreet sent to the General Court, a protest against the claims of Hadley, and referred to the decision in his favor in October, 1662. The Court adhered to that decision, and the petitions in favor of Hadley were unavailing.

At the October session, 1663, the south line of Maj. Denison's farm was fixed at an oak tree, at the side of a great plain, near a swamp, about six miles from Northampton meeting house; the line to run east and west from the oak tree; and to extend to the north one mile on the river, and then west from the river far enough to make 500 acres.

The south line of this farm seems to have been then considered the north line of Hadley on the west side of the river, Mr. Bradstreet's farm being included in the township.

The lands had been so allotted on both sides of the river, that it became necessary to purchase Mr. Bradstreet's farm, even at a high price, in order to give the planters on the west side, their proportion of meadow land. In April, 1664, Lieut. Samuel Smith was empowered by the town to purchase this farm, but he was not to exceed 200 pounds. Mr. Bradstreet would not sell for this sum. At length it was agreed that he should have 200 pounds, and looo acres of land lying north of Denison's farm, if it could be obtained. Lieut. Smith was under the necessity of petitioning the General Court, at the May session, 1664, for a gift of 1000 acres to Hadley, to enable the town to pay Mr. Bradstreet. The Court granted the petition and Hadley paid the 200 pounds in 1664 and 1665. Mr. Bradstreet, for his original grant of 700 acres, received 200 pounds, in money, a large sum in those days, 1000 acres of land upon Connecticut River, some of it valu-

The Denison Farm and this second Bradstreet Farm are well known to the people of Hatfield and Whately. A tract of land called Bashan, lying south of the Denison Farm, was not included in Bradstreet's Interval.

Chapter Iii

Division of lands in New England - Hadley Homelots and Street - Manner of distributing Hadley Intervals - East side and west side Intervals - Hatfield Homelots - Measuring Land - Common Fields and Fences - Gates.

The fathers of New England evidently intended that every industrious man should have the means of obtaining a competent share of the comforts of life; and for this end, land was distributed to all, and the cultivators were also proprietors of the soil. A distribution of land was a distribution of power. This was a wide departure from the system of Europe, where the land was owned by a few, and working men were poor, dependent and despised.

The General Court granted lands in townships, but seldom prescribed the manner in which they were to be apportioned among the inhabitants. In making allotments, no uniform rule was observed; lands were variously distributed in different towns, and even in the same town. In making divisions, persons and property were considered. The head of the family and the sons, and sometimes the wife and all the children, were taken into account. Ministers, and some besides them, received land from other considerations.

In many towns in Massachusetts and Connecticut, some tracts were distributed equally to all the proprietors. Homelots were sometimes nearly equal. In a few towns, the least share was half as much as the greatest, or the poorest man received half as much land as the richest. In others, the smallest share was only one-third, one-fourth, one-sixth or one-tenth as much as the largest. In some, the inequality was much greater, a few individuals receiving very large allotments on account of large estates and disbursements.

A much greater proportion of the people of the old towns in Massachusetts and Connecticut were freeholders and independent proprietors soon after their settlement than at any subsequent period. Church-members and freemen had no advantage over others in the distribution of lands. - The later divisions of large tracts of woodland in Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield were far more unequal than the early apportionments of intervals.

Hadley Homelots on the east side of the river. - By the agreement at Hartford in 1659, every planter was to have a homelot of 8 acres. This equal division did not extend to other lands. The deficiency in a few of the homelots, which were less than 8 acres, was made up in the meadows.

The spacious street, 20 rods wide, and the homelots on each side, 80 rods in length, must have been partially laid out in 1659. The town plot was laid out into four quarters, two on each side of the street, divided by a highway. It was voted Jan. 21, 1661, that the homelots should be well fenced by the middle of April next, each man doing his proportion. The ends of the street, and the west end of the middle lane into the woods, were to be fenced by the town, with posts and rails and gates. The homelots required about 16 miles of fence.

The street extended across the neck* or peninsula, near its junction with the main land, and had the river at each end. The length of the street on the west side was not far from a mile or 320 rods; the distance on the east side was considerably more. At the north end, the street turned easterly. The idea of a street so wide, may have been suggested by the Broad-street at Wethersfield. In forming it, they appear to have regarded both utility and beauty. Besides other uses, this enclosure of about 40 acres was very convenient for grazing ground, when they had but few fenced pastures.

In 1663, there were 47 houselots. Samuel Church lived with his father and had no houselot. Aaron Cooke lived with his father-in-law, William Westwood, and had no houselot.

The plan of the village on the next page, exhibits the street and highways, the 47 houselots, and the names of the proprietors in 1663. The figures denote the number of acres in each lot. A full lot of 8 acres was 16 rods wide. There was a broad space between the small lots at the north end and the river, and some years later, several small houselots were granted next to the river, and men built houses on these lots and lived there many years. M. in the street is the place where the first meeting-house stood. It was built after 1663.

*Neck was the appellation which our fathers often gave to a peninsula and isthmus, as well as to other projections or points of land. The whole of Boston was sometimes called a neck of land.

History Of Hadley 25

Manner of distributing Intervals or Meadows in Hadley. - Those who intended to remove to Hadley, had put in a sum "to take up lands by," in April, 1659. When the lands were divided, each proprietor received allotments according to a sum annexed to his name, called estate. These sums varied from 50 to 200 pounds, and must have been the result of friendly consultation and agreement. How persons and property were considered, cannot be known. Some of the engagers were worth three times the sum set against their names, and some were worth less than the sum so affixed. - Hartford had divided lands according to sums set against the names of proprietors.

In June^ 1662, three young, single men applied for land, viz., John Taylor, John Ingram and William Pixley, and in December, a small houselot was granted to each at the north end of the east houseiots, and 40;^ allotments in the meadows. One of them had been a servant, and it is believed that all had. Yet these unmarried men, without property, received one-fifth as much land as the most wealthy head of a family.

Among the original proprietors of Hadley, the largest share of land was only four times greater than the smallest, and after the addition of the three in 1662, five times larger. The distributions of land seem to have been satisfactory to all, and their equity was never called in question.

It is supposed that v/hen a tract of land was to be divided, there were as many tickets, numbered I, 2, 3, 4, &c. as there were persons to whom it was to be distributed; and that a ticket was drawn for each man, the number determining where his lot was to be in the tract.

There were 48 proprietors (not including Aaron Cooke) on the east side of Connecticut River, who had the whole of the interval land on that side, below Mill River, and about 360 acres on the west side. The town reserved a lot in each division, and is one of the 48. These 48 proprietors all received their lands according to the sums affixed to their names in the following list. They are arranged by house-row, (as they sometimes are in the records) beginning at the lower or south houselot, on the east side of the street, and proceeding to the north end, and then coming down on the west side. The numbers in the second column of figures, exhibit the order of the 48 lots in Hockanum meadow, as they were drawn in March, 1663, and the other figures show the quantity of land in each lot. Aaron Cooke's estate and lands were not separate from Mr. Westwood's.

History Of Hadley

Change of Proprietors. - In February, 1661, there were 46 east side proprietors, when the Meadow Plain was divided. Nine of these ceased to be proprietors in 1661 and 1662, viz., John Webster died in 1661, Robert Webster Hved at Hartford, EHzabeth, widow of Luke Hitchcock, married in Springfield, James Northam died in 1661, Capt. Cullick removed to Boston, Mr. Samuel Hooker was ordained at Farmington, 1661, Richard Weller removed to Northampton, John Arnold lived at Hartford. John Kellogg was perhaps a mistake for Joseph Kellogg. (John Hawks died 1662; left a family.)

Eleven new proprietors were added before March, 1663, making 48, viz., the Town, which took Mr. Hooker's lots, Wm. and Thos. Webster as one, Henry Clarke from Windsor, Joseph Baldwin from Milford, who married the widow of James Northam, Timothy Nash from Hartford, Chileab Smith, Samuel Church, Joseph Kellogg from Farmington and last from Boston, John In gram, John Taylor,* William Pixley.

Meadows on the East side of the River. - The alluvial meadows adjoining the Connecticut, induced men to settle at Hadley; for some years, grants of upland were not asked for. There were four meadows besides the School meadows, upon the east side of the river, that contained about 1200 acres; and these were allotted to the proprietors in 1661, 1662 and 1663, viz.

I. Forty Acre Meadow, or Forty Acres, was north of the village towards Mill River. Hartford had a parcel of meadow so named. When distributed, it was estimated at about 67 acres, but contained considerably more. Those who lived in the north half of the village had the Forty Acres, and the Forlorn and some east of it, in the Great Meadow, as an equivalent for Fort Meadow, which the southern half of the village possessed.

n. The Great Meadow included all the land upon the peninsula or neck, west and south of the homelots. It was divided into 177 pieces or lots, containing according to the town measurers, about 710 acres, and averaging 4 acres each Highways running westerly divided the meadow into oblong parcels denominated furlongs in the records. It is not far from two miles from the street to the extreme north-western point of the meadow; and more than a mile from the street to the river where Northampton bridge is. The north-west part of the meadow was called the Forlorn,f and sometimes Honeypot, from the name of a place in the river.

The Great Meadow was formed into three divisions for distribution, besides the Forlorn. One division adjoining the homelots, was called the Meadow Plain. Excepting the homelots, this Plain was the first land divided among the settlers. The lots were drawn the last of February, 166 1.

*John Taylor's lot on 24th page should be next to that of A. Nicholls. -|-A tract in Northampton, where deficiencies in other lands were made up, was called Forlorn.

Below the south highway, now the old road to Northampton, a tract of mowing was called Maple Swamp and Aquavitae.* The latter name was at first Aquavitae Bottle, from a fancied resemblance in the shape to a case-bottle.

III. Fort Meadow, south of the village, and most of it north and west of Fort River, was estimated to contain 147 acres, besides some south of the river and some low swamps. Those who lived in the southern part of the village had this meadow at the rate of 5 acres to the 100 pounds. Those in the northern part of the village had as an offset 5 acres and 143 rods to the 100 pounds in Forty Acres, and in and near Forlorn.

IV. Hockanum Meadow, below Fort Meadow, was a long point or neck of land, containing about 293 acres, but reduced to 276 in the records, by the process of equalizing. A tract called swamp in the south-eastern part, was not included. The meadow extended from the eastern lot south-westerly about 467 rods, or almost one mile and a half. The width of the neck, or length of the lots, was generally from 80 to 140 rods; a few were shorter near the south-west end. That part of the meadow which had become quite narrow, 25 or 30 rods wide, by the long-continued wearing of the river, and through which the river formed a new channel, on the 25th of February, 1840, was not less than 100 rods wide in 1663.

The Hockanum lots were drawn in March, 1663, and 100 pounds drew 4 acres, 73 rods. The number and quantity of each man's lot may be found on page 26. Lot No. i was at the southwest end, and lot No. 48, at the north-east end.

Equalizing Land. - This was done in some of the Hadley meadows. A committee valued the various parts of a tract, and decided that some should be received at more and some at less than 160 rods to an acre, though most at 160 rods. Two acres were given for one in some places; and in one instance, 120 rods were accounted an acre.

Four Meadows on the West side of the river. - It is difficult to ascertain the quantity of land in two or three of these, as the lands of several proprietors are not recorded. The four meadows may have contained as many acres as the four on the east side, or above 1200. Considerable allowance was made for ponds, swamps and light lands.

History Of Hadley 29

Swamps that produced hay which cattle would eat, however coarse, were deemed valuable, but some were too spongy and wet, and yielded only worthless aquatic herbs and shrubs.

I. The Great, North, or Upper Meadow, which was purchased of Mr. Bradstreet, including a swamp adjoining, was separated into six divisions, and each west side proprietor had a lot in each division, and some was reserved.

III. The South Meadow, or "the Meadow adjoining to the street," at the south end, was called Wequettayag by the Indians, and commonly Great Pansett in the records of Peter Tilton. It contained about 430 acres, with little or no waste land. The east side proprietors had the west part, called 205 acres, and the west side had the east part, about 225 acres, including Indian Bottom.

Indian Bottom was the name of a tract of land adjoining the Connecticut in the South meadow, north of Hadley village. When Umpanchala sold this meadow and other lands, June 10, 1660, he reserved the Indian planting ground. He sold a part of this soon after, and the whole in a few years. From this reservation of Indian planting ground, the whole bottom has been called Indian Bottom or Indian Hollow. Most of it is productive and valuable mowing ground.

The accession to Indian Bottom by the action of the river, has been extensive, but the original bottom is not yet doubled by the increase of 185 years. Hadley has lost more than Hatfield has gained. By the aid of the old records, the curved line of the river bank in 1662 can be nearly ascertained. The old bottom varied from 19 to 40 rods in width, exclusive of the western point. The new bottom nowhere exceeds 40 rods in breadth, and in some places is much narrower than the old. [This was written in 1847.]

Opposite to this grass meadow, the inroads of the river upon Hadley have been destructive. The homesteads where some of the early settlers lived and died, the lands which they cultivated, and the highways which they traveled, have been carried away, and more serious consequences have been threatened.*

IV. The south-west Meadow, which Northampton sold to Hadley, was then called Capawonk, and subsequently, Amponchus. Little Pansett, Little Pontius, &c. It is separated from Great Pansett by Mill River. The west side inhabitants had the upper part, denominated the Plain, at two acres for one. The east side had all Capawonk, except the Plain; after being equalized and ponds and worthless swamps rejected, the number of acres was about 157.*

About one-half of the proprietors had seven lots each, and the other half, who drew in Forty Acres, 8 lots. There were some deviations, a few receiving in one division, their shares in two.

The number of proprietors who drew lots in the South Meadow and Little Meadow, was 22, and the amount of estates, 2500 pounds; 23 drew in the North Meadow, and some land was reserved for others.

Each 100 pounds drew 27 acres, 60 rods, or 2 acres and 20 rods more than the east side proprietors had. This difference is not explained. The 23 proprietors drew about 700 acres.

After the township was divided, it was estimated that Hadley had two-thirds of the improvable or interval land, and Hatfield one-third. Hadley had not far from 1600 acres, and Hatfield about 800 acres.

"So they made an end of dividing the country," as in the days of Joshua. This important business was performed harmoniously. No man claimed or received a great estate - no one had above 50^ acres of interval. The vast extent of upland was open to all equally for wood, timber and pasturage.

*Pres. Dwight (Travels in N. E., Vol. i, p. 343,) estimates Capawonk at "eight or nine hundred acres of rich interval." He supposed, perhaps, that Capawonk included Great Pansett. The real Capawonk did not exceed 275 acres.

South Meadow

A committee was appointed, Jan. 21, 1661, to lay out houselots on the west side of the river. Richard Fellows is supposed to have been the first settler on that side. A few families planted themselves there in 1661, and more in succeeding years, and the whole number in 1668 may have been from 25 to 28. The Hill, so called, west of Mill River, was not settled till after Philip's war.

The houselots of John Hawks and Philip Russell, and all below them, on the plan of the village, were granted by Hadley. Those above or north of them were granted by Hatfield, of which some were forfeited and given to others. Hatfield re-granted the lots of Goodwin, Benton and Bull. Mr. Atherton, the first minister, lived on the Goodwin lot, as did his successor, Mr, Chauncey. Barnabas Hinsdale married the widow of Stephen Taylor, and lived in her house. Nicholas Worthington married the widow of John White, Jr. and lived in her house. Thomas Meekins, sr. removed from the street and lived near his mill. John Coleman, about 1678, changed his residence, and lived on the Benton lot, and Samuel Belden resided on Coleman's first lot. No one lived on the Bull lot for many years. The greater part of the lots were of 8 acres; some were only 4. Those on the east side were short in the upper part, the 4 acre lots being 16 rods wide. The length of the street on the west side, from the highway to Northampton to the north end, was about 340 rods. The street formerly extended farther south than now, against the houselots of Cowles and Fellows.

Almost all the lands in the towns upon Connecticut River, were laid out without the aid of a surveyor's compass. The Town measurers commonly had a measuring chain, and perhaps a square to form right angles. Their calculations were in general sufficiently accurate, though not exact. The north star was sometimes regarded in establishing important lines.

Town measurers were first chosen in Hadley, Dec. 31, 1660, and were Samuel Smith and Peter Tilton. They were to lay out all the lands and keep a record of the length and breadth of every man's lot, and put stakes in the front and rear of every lot, with the initials of the man on his stake, "in some distinguishing letters." They were to receive three pence per acre for their trouble.

Peter Tilton was the first recorder of lands in Hadley, chosen Feb. 9, 1663. With a few exceptions, he recorded all the homelots and allotments in the intervals, with their bounds, width and number of acres, in a peculiar but legible hand. The lands of John Barnard, Frances Barnard, the town lots, and the lands of some proprietors on the west side, are not recorded.

The first regular surveyor with a compass, that resided in any town upon the Connecticut, was Caleb Stanley, Jr. of Hartford. He bought a surveyor's compass a few years before 1700. Timothy Dwight, born in 1694, the grandfather of President Dwight, was the first surveyor and owner of surveying instruments that

History Of Hadley 33

The early settlers of New England were acquainted with common fields in England, occupied by the tenantry of a parish or village; and they established common fields here, owned by freeholders. They could not have done otherwise in the intervals of the Connecticut. Where every man has his share of land in each division, the lots must be small; and if they were larger, partition fences could not be maintained against the river floods.

A common field was necessarily surrounded by a common fence, except in places where a river, mountain, or fence about other land, served for a barrier against domestic animals. Each proprietor of a common field was to fence according to the number of acres he held in the field, and the place of his fence, like that of his land, was fixed by lot. A quantity of upland was sometimes included within the meadow fence.

The Great Meadow was secured by the homelot fences. Hockanum Meadow was protected by Mount Holyoke for a long distance; a fence was necessary in some places near the south-west end of the mountain, and at the north, a fence was made in 1663, from Fort Meadow fence "to the mountain where it is impassable," above 200 rods. At a later period, the fences of both meadows were united, making in all 700 rods, of which, near 500 rods were on Lawrence's Plain and the lower part of Mount Holyoke.

Great and Little Pansett, on the west side, were fenced in 1662, from the Connecticut at the lower end, round to the Connecticut east of the village. The east side proprietors made about 500 rods of the southern part of the fence, and the west side proprietors made the rest.

Hadley ordered, in 1669, that Little Pansett fence should be made "vv'ith ditch, posts and two or three rails on the same," or as expressed in another vote, "with ditch and two poles or three rails on the same." The broad ditch and high bank of earth thrown out of the ditch, were an important part of the old common fence; they may still be seen on both sides of the river. The ditch was on the outside of the bank and rails, for the main object of the fence was to secure the meadows from domestic animals that roved in the woods on the outside. - Some of the meadow fences and perhaps most of the homelot fences were made of posts and rails without a ditch. Fences 5 rails high, and 4 feet

Gates in common fences that crossed public highways, were necessary appendages of the common field system, and were rather troublesome to travelers. Hadley had at first two such gates in the county road to Springfield, one called the mountain gate, near the end of the mountain, and the other, near the northwest corner of Fort Meadow. There were gates or bars in all highways into common fields, in the village and elsewhere. Bars were not common. If a person left open the gate or bars of a meadow, he was to pay 2s. 6d. Some meadow gates in county roads, continued down to the present century.

In 1663, every man was ordered to bound his land with meerstones; and those whose land adjoined, were to be called, to see the meer-stones set down betwixt them.

Chapter Iv

The early settlers of Hadley first designated the street and highways, and then laid out the lots of land contiguous to them. The supposition that the ways in this and other old towns were laid over the land of individuals is without the least foundation.

In 1665, Peter Tilton recorded the street and eleven other highways in Hadley, all in the village and meadows. He seems to have considered the north highway into the woods, as a continuation of the broad street. In 1667, the town ordered a passable cart-way to be made along the Forty Acres to Mill Brook, - the first road ordered by the town on the uplands.