The Bay State Monthly. Volume 1, No. 6, June, 1884

[General Court Records (xvi, 334), June 15, 1736, in the office of the secretary of state.]

This grant, now made to the proprietors of Groton, interfered with the territory previously given on April, 1735, to certain inhabitants of Ipswich, but the mistake was soon rectified, as appears by the following:—

Voted, That one thousand seven hundred Acres of the unappropriated Lands of the Province be and hereby is given and granted to the Proprietors or Grantees of the Township lately granted to sixty Inhabitants of the Town of Ipswich, as an Equivalent for about that quantity being taken off their Plat by the Proprietors of the Common Lands of Groton, and that the Ipswich Grantees be allowed to lay out the same on the Northern or Westerly Line of the said new Township or on both sides.

Sent up for Concurrence.

[Journal of the House of Representatives (page 108), January 12, 1736.]

Groton Gore in 1884

The record of the grant clearly marks the boundaries of Groton Gore, and by it they can easily be identified. Dram Cup Hill, near Souhegan River, the old northwest corner of Dunstable, is in the present territory of Milford, New Hampshire. From that point the line ran south for six or seven miles, following the western boundary of Dunstable, until it came to the old Townsend line; then it turned and ran northwesterly six miles or more, when turning again it made for the original starting-place at Dunstable northwest corner. These lines enclosed a triangular district which became known as Groton Gore; in fact, the word gore means a lot of land of triangular shape. This territory is now entirely within the State of New Hampshire, lying mostly in Mason, but partly in Brookline, Wilton, Milford, and Greenville. It touches in no place the tract, hitherto erroneously supposed to comprise the Gore. It was destined, however, to remain only a few years in the possession of the proprietors; but during this short period it was used by them for pasturing cattle. Mr. John B. Hill, in his History of the Town of Mason, New Hampshire, says:—

Under this grant, the inhabitants of Groton took possession of, and occupied the territory. It was their custom to cut the hay upon the meadows, and stack it, and early in the spring to send up their young cattle to be fed upon the hay, under the care of Boad, the negro slave. They would cause the woods to be fired, as it was called, that is, burnt over in the spring; after which fresh and succulent herbage springing up, furnished good store of the finest feed, upon which the cattle would thrive and fatten through the season. Boad's camp was upon the east side of the meadow, near the residence of the late Joel Ames. (Page 26.)

In connection with the loss of the Gore, a brief statement of the boundary question between Massachusetts and New Hampshire is here given.

During many years the dividing-line between these two provinces was the subject of controversy. The cause of dispute dated back to the time when the original grant was made to the colony of Massachusetts Bay, The charter was drawn up in England at a period when little was known in regard to the interior of this country; and the boundary lines, necessarily, were very indefinite. The Merrimack River was an important factor in fixing the limits of the grant, as the northern boundary of Massachusetts was to be a line three miles north of any and every part of it. At the date of the charter, the general direction of the river was not known, but it was incorrectly assumed to be easterly and westerly. As a matter of fact, the course of the Merrimack is southerly, for a long distance from where it is formed by the union of the Winnepeseogee and the Pemigewasset Rivers, and then it turns and runs twenty-five or thirty miles in a northeasterly direction to its mouth; and this deflexion in the current caused the dispute. The difference between the actual and the supposed direction was a matter of little practical importance so long as the neighboring territory remained unsettled, or so long as the two provinces were essentially under one government; but as the population increased it became an exciting and vexatious question. Towns were chartered by Massachusetts in territory claimed by New Hampshire, and this action led to bitter feeling and provoking legislation. Massachusetts contended for the land "nominated in the bond," which would carry the line fifty miles northward into the very heart of New Hampshire; and on the other hand that province strenuously opposed this view of the case, and claimed that the line should run, east and west, three miles north of the mouth of the river. At one time, a royal commission was appointed to consider the subject, but their labors produced no satisfactory result. At last the matter was carried to England for a decision, which was rendered by the king on March 5, 1739-40. His judgment was final, and in favor of New Hampshire. It gave that province not only all the territory in dispute, but a strip of land fourteen miles in width, lying along her southern border, mostly west of the Merrimack, which she had never claimed. This strip was the tract of land between the line running east and west, three miles north of the southernmost trend of the river, and a similar line three miles north of its mouth. By the decision twenty-eight townships were taken from Massachusetts and transferred to New Hampshire. The settlement of this disputed question was undoubtedly a public benefit, although it caused, at the time, a great deal of hard feeling. In establishing the new boundary Pawtucket Falls, situated now in the city of Lowell, and near the most southern portion of the river's course, was taken as the starting-place; and the line which now separates the two States was run west, three miles north of this point. It was surveyed officially in the spring of 1741.

The new boundary passed through the original Groton grant, and cut off a triangular portion of its territory, now within the limits of Nashua, and went to the southward of Groton Gore, leaving that tract of land wholly in New Hampshire.

A few years previously to this time the original grant had undergone other dismemberment, when a slice of its territory was given to Westford. It was a long and narrow tract of land, triangular in shape, with its base resting on Stony Brook Pond, now known as Forge Pond, and coming to a point near Millstone Hill, where the boundary lines of Groton, Westford, and Tyngsborough intersect. The Reverend Edwin R. Hodgman, in his History of Westford, says:—

Probably there was no computation of the area of this triangle at any time. Only four men are named as the owners of it, but they, it is supposed, held titles to only a portion, and the remainder was wild, or "common," land, (Page 25.)

In the Journal of the House of Representatives (page 9), September 10, 1730, there is recorded:—

A petition of Jonas Prescot, Ebenezer Prescot, Abner Kent, and Ebenezer Townsend, Inhabitants of the Town of Groton, praying, That they and their Estates, contained in the following Boundaries, viz. beginning at the Northwesterly Corner of Stony Brook Pond, from thence extending to the Northwesterly Corner of Westford, commonly called Tyng's Corner, and so bound Southerly by said Pond, may be set off to the Town of Westford, for Reasons mentioned. Read and Ordered, That the Petitioners within named, with their Estates, according to the Bounds before recited, be and hereby are to all Intents and Purposes set off from the Town of Groton, and annexed to the said Town of Westford.

Sent up for Concurrence.

This order received the concurrence of the council, and was signed by the governor, on the same day that it passed the House.

During this period the town of Harvard was incorporated. It was made up from portions of Groton, Lancaster, and Stow, and the engrossed act signed by the governor, on June 29, 1732. The petition for the township was presented to the General Court nearly two years before the date of incorporation. In the Journal of the House of Representatives (pages 84, 85), October 9, 1730, it is recorded:—

A Petition of Jonas Houghton, Simon Stone, Jonathan Whitney, and Thomas Wheeler, on behalf of themselves, and on behalf and at the desire of sundry of the Inhabitants on the extream parts of the Towns of Lancaster, Groton and Stow, named in the Schedule thereunto annexed; praying, That a Tract of Land (with the Inhabitants thereon, particularly described and bounded in said Petition) belonging to the Towns above-mentioned, may be incorporated and erected into a distinct Township, agreeable to said Bounds, for Reasons mentioned. Read, together with the Schedule, and Ordered, That the Petitioners serve the Towns of Lancaster, Groton and Stow with Copies of the Petition, that they may shew Cause (if any they have) on the first Thursday of the next Session, why the Prayer thereof may not be granted.

Sent up for Concurrence.

Further on, in the same Journal (page 136), December 29, 1730, it is also recorded:—

The Petition of Jonas Houghton, Simon Stone, and others, praying as entred the 9th. of October last. Read again, together with the Answers of the Towns of Lancaster, Groton and Stow, and Ordered, That Maj. Brattle and Mr. Samuel Chandler, with such as the Honourable Board shall appoint, be a Committee, (at the Charge of the Petitioners) to repair to the Land Petitioned for to be a Township, that they carefully view and consider the Situation and Circumstances of the Petitioners, and Report their Opinion what may be proper for this Court to do in Answer thereto, at their next Session.

Sent up for Concurrence.

Ebenezer Burrel Esq; brought from the Honourable Board, the Report of the Committee appointed by this Court the 30th of December last, to take under Consideration the Petition of Jonas Houghton and others, in behalf of themselves and sundry of the Inhabitants of the Eastern part of the Towns of Lancaster, Groton and Stow, praying that they may be erected into a separate Township. Likewise a Petition of Jacob Houghton and others, of the North-easterly part of the Town of Lancaster, praying the like. As also a Petition of sundry of the Inhabitants of the South-west part of the North-east Quarter of the Township of Lancaster, praying they may be continued as they are. Pass'd in Council, viz. In Council, June 21, 1731. Read, and Ordered, That this Report be accepted.

Sent down for Concurrence. Read and Concurred.

[Journal of the House of Representatives (page 52), June 22, 1731.]

The original copy of the petition for Harvard is now probably lost; but in the first volume (page 53) of "Ancient Plans Grants &c." among the Massachusetts Archives, is a rough plan of the town, with a list of the petitioners, which may be the "Schedule" referred to in the extract from the printed Journal. It appears from this document that, in forming the new town, forty-eight hundred and thirty acres of land were taken from the territory of Groton; and with the tract were nine families, including six by the name of Farnsworth. This section comprised the district known, even now, as "the old mill," where Jonas Prescott had, as early as the year 1667, a gristmill. The heads of these families were Jonathan Farnsworth, Eleazer Robbins, Simon Stone, Jr., Jonathan Farnsworth, Jr., Jeremiah Farnsworth, Eleazer Davis, Ephram Farnsworth, Reuben Farnsworth, and [torn] Fransworth, who had petitioned the General Court to be set off from Groton. On this plan of Harvard the names of John Burk, John Burk, Jr., and John Davis, appear in opposition to Houghton's petition.

The town of Harvard took its name from the founder of Harvard College, probably at the suggestion of Jonathan Belcher, who was governor of the province at the time and a graduate of the college.

To his Excellency Jonathan Belcher Esq

. Cap

General and Governour in Chief The Hon

. The Council and the Honourable House of Representatives of His Majestys Province of the Massachusetts Bay in New England in General Court Assembled by Adjournment Decemb

16 1730

The Memorial of Jonas Houghton Simon Stone Jonathan Whitney and Thomas Wheeler Humbly Sheweth

That upon their Petition to this Great and Honourable Court in October last [the 9th] praying that a Certain Tract of Land belonging to Lancaster Stow and Groton with the Inhabitants thereon may be Erected into a Distinct and Seperate Township (and for Reasons therein Assigned) your Excellency and Honours were pleased to Order that the petitioners Serve The Towns of Lancaster Groton and Stow with a Copy of their said Petition that they may shew Cause if any they have on the first Thursday of the next Sessions why the prayers thereof may not be granted.

And for as much as this great and Hon

. Court now Sitts by Adjournment and the next Session may be very Remote And your Memorialists have attended the Order of this Hon

: Court in serving the said Several Towns with Copys of the said Petition And the partys are attending and Desirous the hearing thereon may be brought forward y

former order of this Hon

Court notwithstanding.

They therefore most humbly pray your Excellency & Honours would be pleased to Cause the hearing to be had this present Session and that a Certain day may be assigned for the same as your Excellency & Honours in your great wisdom & Justice shall see meet.

And your Memorialists as in Duty bound Shall Ever pray.

JONAS HOUGHTON

SIMON STOON JUNER

JONATHAN WHITNEY

THOMAS WHELER

In the House of Rep

Dec

17, 1730 Read and in Answer to this Petition Ordered That the Pet

give Notice to the Towns of Lancaster Groton and Stow or their Agents that they give in their Answer on the twenty ninth Inst