jf/Cx^i/i, H/iU\ With the Compliments of. THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF MASSACHUSETTS ^ d* ^ w IN ITS RELATIONS TO NEW HAMPSHIRE: A Part of the Council's Report made to the American Antiquarian Society, at Worcester, on October 21, 1890. By SAMUEL A. GREEN, M.D. \ THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF MASSACHUSETTS IN ITS RELATIONS TO NEW HAMPSHIRE: A Part of the Council's Report made to the American Antiquarian Society, at Worcester, V ON October 21, 1890. "b »)- By SAMUEL A. GREEN, M.D. CAMBRIDGE: JOHN WILSON AND SON. S^uilifisitg iUrrss. 1890. mised And further doth Order the Treasurer to Sattisfy to Captajne willard and Captajne Johnson twenty markes a peece for their pajnes :/. (General Court Records, IV. 103.) Lying on the bed of the stream, near the outlet of the lake, and projecting above the surface, is a large granite bowlder running north and south, perhaps seven feet long, which is a conspicuous object as seen from the shore. For a guess, it is a hundred feet from the western bank, and a hundred and twenty-five feet from the eastern bank ; and at low water, even before the stone was raised, it was always uncovered. This rock caught the eye of the Commissioners, and at once was taken by them as the head of the Merrimack ; and, in token of their ofificial authority, it was marked on the upper surface with the following letters : — EI S W WP lOHN ENDICVT GOV These letters are roughly cut, but with moderate care can easily be made out. From the action of the elements and the discoloration by time, their edges are somewhat worn, but they are still fairly distinct. They are about four inches in height, though they vary somewhat, and are read from the west side of the rock. The initials in the first line are those of the two Commissioners, Edward Johnson and Simon Wil- lard, while the rest of the inscription gives the name of the Governor of Massachusetts at that period. Without doubt the letters " WP" stand for Worshipful, a title of dignity given in early times to persons of high ofificial station. Formerly the bowlder, now known as the Endicott Rock, was somewhat lower in the bed of the stream, and its upper surface was ex- posed for the most part during the summer season only, but about six years ago it was raised two or three feet and blocked underneath, so that the inscription cannot be covered by water. 1 1 The Rock was considered at that time to be of so much public interest that the Senate and House of the State of New Hamp- shire, on September 7, 1883, passed a joint Resolution, ap- propriating the sum of ^400 for its better preservation and protection; and under this authority the raising was done. These changes appear to have been suggested first in the " Bos- ton Daily Advertiser," July 26, 1850, by a correspondent who signs himself " F. J." A crack or split, made perhaps at the time of the raising, passes through the long diameter of the stone ; and in order to protect it further, a large iron bolt has been put through the short diameter, with heavy nuts screwed on at each end. Its dimensions, speaking roughly, are seven feet in length, six feet in width, and five feet in height. The bowlder is situated on the property of the Winnepissiogee Lake Cotton and Woollen Manufacturing Company, who use the lake as a storage basin, and in dry seasons draw upon it for a supply of water. About ten years ago, with due fore- sight, this Company had casts in plaster — four certainly, and perhaps more — taken of the inscription. One of these was given to the cabinet of the Massachusetts Historical Society, on March 12, 1881, another to the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology at Cambridge, a third to the New Hampshire Historical Society, and a fourth to the Proprietors of the Locks and Canals on Merrimack River, whose office is in Lowell. It is somewhat singular that the existence of this inscrip- tion and of the Rock as a memorial stone should have been lost sight of for more than a century and a half, and entirely forgotten, as is the fact. The letters were cut either in July or August, 1652 ; and there is no subsequent allusion or ref- erence to them until they were brought to light anew in a letter of Colonel Philip Carrigain written to John Farmer, Esq., the antiquary. This communication is printed in the " Collections of the New Hampshire Historical Society " (IV. 194-200), and gives some interesting details in connec- tion with the discovery. The volume was published in the year 1834; and the letter, which is undated, was written near that time, probably in the autumn of 1833. A dam was made 12 across the outlet to the lake, in order to clear the channel so that a steamboat — then recently built — might pass to a win- ter harbor at Lake Village five miles below. During the exca- vation the rock and inscription were first noticed by Daniel Tucker, Esq., and Mr. John T. Coffin, President and Cashier, respectively, of the Winnipisiogee Bank at Meredith, and by them reported to Colonel Carrigain, who hastened to visit the spot, and who promptly communicated the discovery to Mr. Farmer, then a member of this Society. At that time The Weirs came within the limits of Meredith, as Laconia had not yet been set off as a separate township. It is an interesting fact to note that Colonel Carrigain, in his letter, first sug- gested that the stone be called the Endicott Rock, a name by which it has since been known. On the second day of last August, during a very delight- ful drive through parts of Vermont and New Hampshire, in company with the Honorable George Lewis Balcom, of Clare- mont, I visited this interesting bowlder. It is situated a short distance below the railroad station, and just above the bridge leading from The Weirs to the other side of the river, and easily accessible by a boat. The stone is the earliest public monument found within the limits of New England which was made by the English settlers, and as such is worthy to be kept in mind. For nearly two centuries and a half the inscription has battled the storms of all seasons,,and now bids fair to withstand them for ages to come. The State of New Hampshire showed a due regard for right sentiment when she made an appropriation to preserve and protect such an historical relic. The northern boundary of the original grant to the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, as has been shown, was based on a misapprehension ; and this ignorance of the topography of the country on the part of the English authorities afterward gave rise to considerable controversy between the adjoining Provinces of Massachusetts and New Hampshire. So long as the territory in question remained unsettled, the dispute was a matter of little practical importance ; but after a time it led to much confusion and assumed grave proportions. 13 Grants made by the one Province clashed with those made by the other ; and there was no ready tribunal to pass on the claims of the two parties. Towns were chartered by Massa- chusetts in territory claimed by New Hampshire ; and this action was the cause of bitter feeling and provoking legisla- tion. Massachusetts contended for the tract of land "nomi- nated in the bond," which would carry the jurisdictional 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 Merri- mack River. In order to settle these conflicting claims, a Royal Commission was appointed to consider the subject and establish the contested line. The Commissioners were se- lected from the Councillors of the Provinces of New York, New Jersey, Nova Scotia, and Rhode Island, — men supposed to be free from any local prejudices in the matter and impar- tial in their feelings ; and, without doubt, they were such. The Board — as appointed under the Great Seal — consisted of nineteen members, although only seven served in their capac- ity .as Commissioners. They met at Hampton, New Hamp- shire, on August I, 1737 ; and for mutual convenience the Legislative Assemblies of the two Provinces met in the same neighborhood, — the Assembly of New Hampshire at Hamp- ton Falls, and that of Massachusetts at Salisbury, places only five miles apart. This was done in order that the claims of each side might be considered with greater despatch than they would otherwise receive. The General Court of Massa- chusetts met at Salisbury in the First Parish Meeting-house on August 10, 1737, and continued to hold its sessions in that town until October 20 inclusive, though with several adjournments, of which one was for thirty-five days. The printed Journal of the House of Representatives, during this period, gives the proceedings of that body, which contain much in regard to the controversy besides the ordinary busi- ness of legislation. Many years previously the two Provinces had been united, so far as to have the same Governor, — at this time Jonathan Ijclcher, — but each Province with its own legislative body and laws. Governor l^elcher was a native of Cambridge ; and in the discussion of these matters his prejudices and sympathies appear to have been with Massa- chusetts. To a disinterested person, one hundred and fifty years afterward, it seems as if the Trojan and Tyrian had not been treated by him with the same discrimination. The Commissioners heard both sides of the question, and agreed upon an award in alternative, leaving to the King the interpretation of the charters given respectively by Charles I., and William and Mary. Under one interpretation the deci- sion was in favor of Massachusetts, and under the other in favor of New Hampshire ; and at the same time each party was allowed six weeks in which to file objections. Neither side, however, was satisfied with this indirect decision, when the whole matter was taken to the King in Council. Massa- chusetts claimed that the Merrimack River began at the con- fluence of the Winnepisaukec and the Pemigewasset Rivers, and that the northern boundary of the Province should run, east and west, three miles north of this point. It is true that this line was somewhat to the southward of the one proposed by the Colonial Commissioners in the summer of 1652 ; but at the time of the dispute the relative size of the two rivers was better understood. On the other hand, New Hampshire claimed that the intention of the Charter was to establish a northern boundary on a line, running east and west, three miles north of the mouth of the Merrimack River. In this controversy Massachusetts seems to have based her claim on the letter of the contract, while New Hampshire based hers on the spirit of the contract. The strongest argument in favor of Massachusetts is the fact that she had always considered the disputed territory as belonging within her jurisdiction ; and before this period she had chartered twenty-four towns lying within the limits of the tract. These several settlements all looked to her for protection, and naturally sympathized with her during the controversy. To offset this statement in favor of Massachusetts, I will give the following extract from "A Summary, Historical and 15 Political, of the first Planting, progressive Improvements, and present State of the British Settlements in North-America " (Boston, 1749), a work written by Dr. William Douglass. The author was a noted physician of Boston during the last century, of whom it was once wittily said that he was always positive and somewhat accurate : — A few Years since, the General Assembly of the Massachusetts- Bay, was in the Humour of distributing the Property of much vacant or Province Land ; perhaps in good Policy and Foresight, to secure to the Massachusetts People, by Possession, the Property of Part of some controverted Lands ; accordingly it came to pass, that upon a royal Commission from the Court of Great- Britain, to determine this Controversy, the Jurisdiction but not the Property was allotted to New-Hatnpshire, or rather to the Croivn (I. 424). As just stated, neither party was satisfied with the verdict of the Royal Commissioners, and both sides appealed from their judgment. The matter was then taken to England for a decision, which was given by the King on March 4, 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 many townships were taken from Massachusetts and given to New Hampshire. It is said that the King reprimanded Governor Belcher for the partisan way in which he presented his side of the case, and this fact may have biassed his mind. The settlement of the disputed ques- tion was undoubtedly a public benefit, although it caused at the time a great deal of hard feeling. In establishing the new boundary west of the Merrimack, Pawtucket Falls — situated at the present time 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 i6 of this point. It was surveyed officially in the spring of 1741, with reference to the settlement of the dispute according to the King's decree. Concerning the boundary east of the Merrimack there was but little controversy, as the river was a good guide in the matter, although there were a few minor points under discussion. After the King's decision was ren- dered, the question of expense came up in regard to the sur- veys and the marking of the line. It seems to have been understood that the entire cost of these preliminary steps should be borne by the Province of Massachusetts, but Gov- ernor Belcher did not so regard it ; and this misunderstanding caused further delay in the settlement of the dispute. George Mitchell was appointed to make the survey from the Atlantic Ocean to the point three miles north of Pawtucket Falls, after- ward known as the Boundary Pine, though now the tree has disappeared ; and Richard Hazen from the Boundary Pine to the Hudson River. Mitchell worked from a fixed line, as he had to establish a boundary three miles from the Merrimack ; but Hazen was to run a straight line through the wilderness with the help of only a compass, — a much harder task than Mitchell's. Surveys dependent on the compass are always subject to many sources of inaccuracy, — such as the loss of magnetic virtue in the poles of the needle ; blunting of the centre-pin ; unsuspected local attractions ; oversight or mistake as to the secular variation ; and variability from the influence of the sun, known as the diurnal variation. Error from the diurnal vari- ation may amount, in the distance of a mile, to twenty feet or more of lateral deviation. Notwithstanding these iKifficulties and drawbacks, the accuracy of Hazen's survey has been con- firmed to a remarkable degree ; and the controversy over the boundary line has been wholly in regard to the variation of the needle which Hazen allowed in making the survey. His Journal, fortunately, has been preserved, and is printed in " The New-England Historical and Genealogical Register " (XXXIII. 323-333) for July, 1879. ^^ shows the hardships he encountered and the obstructions he met during the prog- ress of the survey, which was begun on March 21, 1741, 17 and ended at the Hudson River, on April i6. In less than four weeks he established a straight line one hundred and nine miles long through an unbroken wilderness, when the ground a large part of the way was covered with snow. At one place he writes : " The Snow in Generall was near three feet Deep, & where we lodged near five ; " and in many other places the snow was between two and three feet deep. According to the Journal, the surveyors began to measure the line, running three miles due north from the Merrimack, at a place called " The Great Bunt," near the Pawtucket Falls, now in the city of Lowell. This spot lay on the west side of the mouth of Beaver Brook, and was once a noted fishing-ground. Formerly, before the dam was built, the Falls covered a longer stretch of the river than they do at the present time ; and a hundred and fifty years ago the entire course of the rapids was probably included under the name of Pawtucket Falls. The designation of "The Great Bunt " has now dis- appeared from the local nomenclature of that neighborhood, though some of its cognate forms were kept up for a long time. When the same line was re-surveyed in the summer of 1825, it began at a point called the "great pot-hole place," which was presumably the same spot under another name. " Bunt" is a nautical word applied to the middle part or belly of a sail, as well as to the sag of a net, and perhaps allied to " bent ; " and it requires no great stretch of the imagination to see why a cavity or hole in the river was called a *' Bunt." The boundary line between the two Provinces, as estab- lished by Hazen, ran straight through the wilderness, over hill and dale, across fields and pastures in a sparsely settled country, frequently cutting off large slices of towns, as well as of farms, and sometimes bisecting them, and suddenly transferring the allegiance of the people from one political power to another. To the plain and sturdy yeomanry it seemed a kind of revolution, which they could not under- stand. In many instances they were taxed for their lands in adjoining towns, where previously the tax had been paid wholly in one town ; and much confusion was created. Even to-day many of the border farms overlap the boundary and lie i8 in both States, and often the owners cannot say exactly where the line should run. A man living near the line once told me that he had paid taxes on the same parcel of land in two different towns, — one in Massachusetts and the other in New Hampshire. Another man living in close proximity to the line has told me during the present autumn that he could not say within several rods where the boundary came. Ordi- narily, in agricultural districts, State lines divide the social and religious relations of a community with an edge nearly as clean-cut and distinct as they separate the political rela- tions. In a great measure the average family is more inti- mate with those who go to the same religious meeting and with those who belong to the same political party, because there is so much in common between them. But this state of affairs does not hold good to the same extent among the people living along the northern boundary of Massachu- setts and the southern boundary of New Hampshire ; and I attribute the fact largely to the continuity of local tradi- tions and to the common origin of the original settlers of the neighborhood. By the new line the following Massachusetts towns between the Merrimack River and the Connecticut, in their geograph- ical order, lost portions of their territory: — First, Dunstable, a large township originally containing 128,000 acres, and lying on both sides of the river, was so cut in two that by far the larger part came within the limits of New Hampshire. Even the meeting-house and the burying- ground were separated from that portion still remaining in Massachusetts, and this fact added not a little to the animosity felt by the inhabitants when the disputed question was settled. It is no exaggeration to say that throughout the old township the feelings and sympathies of the neighbors on both sides of the line were entirely with Massachusetts. A short time be- fore this period the town of Nottingham had been incorporated by the General Court, and its territory was taken from Dun- stable. It comprised all the lands of that town lying on the easterly side of the Merrimack River ; and in a great measure the difficulty of attending public worship led to the division. 19 When the new line was established it aftected Nottingham, like many other towns, most unfavorably. It divided its ter- ritory, and left a tract of land in Massachusetts too small for a separate township, but by its associations and traditions belonging to Dunstable. This tract to-day is that part of Tyngsborough lying east of the river. The larger portion of the town, by the new line, came under the jurisdiction of New Hampshire ; but as there was another town of Notting- ham in the eastern quarter of that Province, the name was subsequently changed by an Act of Legislature, on July 5, 1746, to Nottingham West; and still later, on July i, 1830, this was again changed to Hudson. Counting the city of Nashua, there are in the State of New Hampshire at the present time no less than seven towns made up wholly or in part of the territory which was taken from Dunstable by the running of the line. Secondly, Groton, though suffering much less severely than Dunstable, lost more land than she cared to spare, lying now mostly in Nashua, though a small portion of it — not much larger than a good-sized potato patch — comes within the limits of Hollis, near the railroad station. Thirdly, Townsend was deprived of more than one quarter of her territory; and the present towns of Brookline, Mason, and New Ipswich in New Hampshire are enjoying the benefit derived from it. Fourthly, two of the Canada townships, so called, — now known as Ashburnham and Warwick and Royalston, the last two not at that time incorporated as separate towns, — shared the same fate as the other towns lying along the new line. Ashburnham lost a thousand acres ; and Warwick and Royal- ston, then called " Canada to Roxbury," or " Roxbury Can- ada," a considerably larger slice of land. Fifthly and lastly, Northfield was deprived of a strip of its territory more than four miles and a half in width, running the whole length of its northern frontier. This portion of the town is now included within the limits of Hinsdale and Win- chester, New Hampshire, and of Vernon, Vermont. Besides these losses a tract of unappropriated land, usu- 20 ally denominated Province land, was transferred to New Hampshire. On the easterly side of the INIerrimack, between the river and the ocean, there had always been much less uncertainty in regard to the divisional line — as, in a general way, it followed the bend of the river — and therefore much less controversy over the jurisdiction. At the period when the new line was established it was generally thought that the question was permanently settled, but such did not prove to be the fact. Early in the present century, owing to the uncertainty of the line at that time, pub- lic attention was again called to the subject. It was claimed by the State of New Hampshire that, in establishing the boundary, Hazen had allowed too many degrees for the varia- tion of the needle, and consequently the line had been carried too far north, or, in other words, that there was a narrow gore of land lying along the northern boundary of Massachusetts, and coming within the limits of that State, which rightfully belonged to New tiampshire. It was further said that Gov- ernor Belcher was responsible for this allowance in the varia- tion of the needle, and that he had given instructions to Hazen to allow this variation in order to circumvent the decree of the King, and to defraud New Hampshire. Fortunately, to refute this charge, the warrant given to Hazen by the Governor is still extant, and shows that no such directions were given ; and furthermore, if such directions had been given, it would have added as much territory on the eastern boundary of New Hampshire as was lost by that State on the southern boundary. In order to settle the disputes at this period between the citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and those of the State of New Hampshire, the Governor of Massachusetts was authorized by a Resolve of the General Court, on Febru- ary 24, 1825, to appoint three Commissioners, who were em- powered to meet similar Commissioners appointed on the part of New Hampshire ; and they were jointly authorized to agree upon such principles respecting the running of the boundary line as to them should seem just and reasonable. Under this 21 authority Lieutenant Governor Marcus Morton, at that time Acting Governor, in consequence of the death of Governor Eustis, named on May lo as Commissioners the Honorable Samuel Dana, of Groton, David Cummings, Esq., of Salem, and Ivers Jevvett, Esq., of Fitchburg ; and they were met by the Honorable Samuel Bell, Henry B. Chase, Esq., and Samuel Dinsmore, Esq., who had been named as Commis- sioners by the Governor of New Hampshire. Caleb Butler, Esq., of Groton, was appointed Surveyor on the part of Mas- sachusetts, and Eliphalet Hunt, Esq., on the part of New Hampshire ; and each one was supplied with an Assistant Surveyor. Under the management of these gentlemen the line was re-surveyed from the Atlantic Ocean to the Con- necticut River, but, owing to disagreements between the two Boards of Commissioners, no final conclusions were reached. The Report of the Massachusetts Commission was made to the Governor on January 31, 1827, and that of the other Commission was previously made to the Governor of New Hampshire ; and they each recommended practically, though not totidem verbis, that the whole matter be indefinitely post- poned, as no satisfactory result was likely to be reached at that period. Nothing further was done by either State looking to the settlement of this vexed question until very recent times. On April 25, 1883, a Resolve was passed by the General Court of Massachusetts, authorizing the Governor to appoint a Com- mission for the purpose of establishing the boundary line be- tween the two States, which was to act in conjunction with a similar Commission to be appointed by the Governor of New Hampshire. The Commissioners were to reset and replace the monuments wherever necessary, in accordance with the Report of the Commissioners of the Commonwealth made on February 28, 1827. Under the authority of this Resolve, the following Commissioners were appointed: De Witt Farring- ton, Esq., of Lowell ; Alpheus Roberts Brown, Esq., of Somer- ville ; and Clemens Herschel, Esq , of Holyokc. The first two members of this Board were duly qualified, but the last one de- clined. From the want of co-operation on the part of New 22 Hampshire no definite result was reached, and no Report was made to the General Court, as provided for in the Resolve. On June 19, 1885, another Resolve was passed by the Legis- lature of Massachusetts, authorizing the Governor to appoint a Commission for the purpose of ascertaining and establishing the true jurisdictional boundary line between the two States, which was to act with a similar Commission to be appointed by the Governor of New Hampshire. This Resolve repealed and superseded all previous legislation on the subject ; and a new Commission was appointed, consisting of Henry Carter, Esq., of Bradford ; George W. Cate, Esq., of Amesbury ; and Nelson Spofford, Esq.. of Haverhill. The make-up" of this Board was soon changed by the resignation of Mr. Spofford, who was at once appointed surveyor on the part of Massachu- setts, and his place filled by George Whitney, Esq., of Royal- ston. Soon afterward Mr. Cate resigned, and the vacancy was filled by Edward B. Savage, Esq., of Haverhill. The Commissioners appointed on the part of New Hamp- shire were: the Honorable John James Bell, of Exeter ; Na- thaniel Haven Clark, Esq., of Plaistow ; and Charles H. Roberts, Esq., of Concord. The Chairman of the New Hampshire Commission is a member of this Society, and often honors the meetings by his presence. Each of these two Commissions has jjresented to the Legisla- tures of its respective States two reports, which are models for clearness and conciseness, and show a thorough investiga- tion of the whole subject ; but unfortunately they do not agree in regard to the disputed line. It is understood that they have reached definite and satisfactory conclusions respecting the boundary between the ocean and the Merrimack River ; but between this river and the Connecticut they do not concur. So far as this portion of the line is concerned, the matter remains in statu quo. At the present time it does not seem likely that the boun- dary line between the two States, as it runs from the Merri- mack River to the Connecticut, will ever be substantially changed; but perhaps the day may come when it will be definitely marked by monuments, on every road, so that the 23 dwellers along the border will know exactly where it lies. For generations the public sentiment of the neighborhood has placed the disputed territory within the limits of the Common- wealth of Massachusetts, and the occupants of the land have always claimed that State as their home. In their opinion they are citizens of Massachusetts, and no judgment based upon the decree of a King, rendered a hundred and fifty years ago, can dispossess them of their birthright. The customs and traditions, that have been strained through a century and a half, in their case make a law on this point stronger than any human enactment. r J ♦.