The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Bay State Monthly — Volume 2, No. 2, November, 1884
    
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The Bay State Monthly — Volume 2, No. 2, November, 1884

Author: Various

Release date: October 14, 2004 [eBook #13741]
                Most recently updated: December 18, 2020

Language: English

Credits: Produced by Joshua Hutchinson, Josephine Paolucci, the PG Online
        Distributed Proofreading Team, and Cornell University


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BAY STATE MONTHLY — VOLUME 2, NO. 2, NOVEMBER, 1884 ***




Produced by Joshua Hutchinson, Josephine Paolucci, the PG Online
Distributed Proofreading Team, and Cornell University







[Illustration: Engraved by Geo. E. Perine, New York. Grover Cleveland]




THE

BAY STATE MONTHLY.

_A Massachusetts Magazine_.

VOL. II.

NOVEMBER, 1884.

No. 2.

       *       *       *       *       *

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By HENRY H. METCALF.


Save only that of Ulysses S. Grant, no name in America has come from
comparative obscurity into national eminence in so short a time as that
of GROVER CLEVELAND.

The fame of Grant was wrought out through the exigencies of a great
civil war, in which the unity of the Republic was the issue involved.
The distinction which Cleveland has achieved comes of valiant service in
another field of conflict, wherein the issue involves the perpetuity and
dominance of the great principles which constitute the framework and
fibre of republican government itself. Under ordinary circumstances,
probably, neither Grant nor Cleveland would have risen above the plane
of every-day life. The same, too, might perhaps justly be said even of
Washington. In the history of human progress it will be seen that every
great crisis involving the triumph of the principles and tendencies
which make for the moral, social, or political advancement of mankind
has developed a leader endowed with the special qualities demanded by
the occasion.

The brilliant and self-assertive men who press forward to leadership in
ordinary times, whether impelled by mere love of notoriety, personal
ambition, or an honest desire to promote the welfare of their
fellow-men, seldom become masters of the situation when a supreme
emergency arises. They may set in motion great contending forces; they
may precipitate conflicts whose ultimate outcome brings inestimable
benefit to mankind; but other hands and other minds are required to
direct the issue and shape the result. The master spirit of the occasion
is born thereof. Ulysses S. Grant had absolutely no part in bringing
about that great conflict of ideas and systems which culminated in the
war of the rebellion; nor had he even figured prominently in the field
of military achievement until long after hostilities were commenced, and
the struggle had assumed proportions entirely unforeseen by, and
actually appalling to, not only the people themselves, but those In
control of active operations in the field. But the emergency developed
the man required to meet it, and Grant came to the front.

So, too, in this later and greater conflict, which is to test the virtue
and determine the durability of popular government--whose outcome is to
decide whether political parties are to be the mere instruments through
which the people express their will, and whose relations can be changed
as the public good may seem to require, or whether the government itself
shall be subordinated to party, and its functions prostituted for the
perpetuation of party ascendency and the aggrandizement of corrupt and
selfish individuals--the leader in whom the hopes of those who contend
for the supremacy of the popular will, the surbordination of party-power
to public welfare, and the administration of the government in the
interests of the whole people, are now thoroughly centred, is one who
has gained no distinction in shaping partisan contests, and won no
laurels in the halls of legislation or the forum of public debate. He
is, simply, the man who, in the last few years, first in one, and then
in another still more important position of official responsibility, has
demonstrated more emphatically than any other in recent times (possibly
because circumstances have more generally drawn attention in his
direction) his thorough devotion to the doctrine that public office is a
public trust; and has, therefore, been selected as the best
representative and exponent of the popular idea in the great political
conflict about to be brought to an issue.

The purpose and scope of this brief article permit no detailed account
of the private life or public career of Grover Cleveland. Those who have
cared to do so have already familiarized themselves with the same
through the ordinary channels; yet, as a matter of record, a few salient
facts may be presented.

Grover Cleveland was born in the village of Caldwell, near Newark, New
Jersey, March 18, 1837. His paternal ancestry was of the substantial
English stock.

I. Aaron Cleveland, an early settler in the valley of the Connecticut.
He was liberally educated, and, ardently devoted to the interests of the
Church, he determined to take holy orders, and returned to England for
confirmation therein. Coming back to America he settled in the ministry
at East Haddam, Conn. Some fifteen years later, in August, 1757, he
died, while on a visit to Philadelphia, at the residence of his friend,
Benjamin Franklin, then publisher of the _Pennsylvania Gazette_, who
spoke of him, in an obituary notice in his paper, as "a gentleman of a
humane and pious disposition, indefatigable in his ministry, easy and
affable in his conversation, open and sincere in his friendship, and
above every species of meanness and dissimulation."

II. Aaron Cleveland, born at East Haddam, Conn., February 9, 1744. He
was a hatter by trade and located in Norwich, which town he represented
in the Legislature, where he introduced a bill for the abolition of
slavery, of which institution he was a determined opponent. Subsequently
he became a Congregational clergyman, and a power in that denomination.
He died at New Haven in 1815.

III. William Cleveland, second son of the above, a silversmith by
occupation, also dwelt in Norwich. His wife was Margaret Falley. He was
prosperous in business, respected in the community, and deacon of the
church of which his father had been pastor for a quarter of a century
previous to his decease.

IV. Richard Falley Cleveland, second son of William, born in 1804,
graduated from Yale in 1824 with high honors. He, too, became a
clergyman, having adopted the Presbyterian faith, and pursued his
studies at Princeton Theological Seminary, after serving a year as a
tutor in Baltimore, where he made the acquaintance of Miss Anne Neale,
daughter of a prominent law publisher of Irish birth, with whom he
united in marriage after completing his studies, in 1829. He was located
in pastorates, successively, at Windham, Conn.; Portsmouth, Va.;
Caldwell, N.J., and Fayetteville, N.Y. Subsequently, moved by failing
health, he sought a change, and, as agent of the American Home
Missionary Society, located at Clinton. Two years later he returned to
pastoral service, though still In feeble health, establishing himself
and family at Holland Patent, a few miles north of the city of Utica.
Here he died suddenly, a few weeks after his removal, leaving to his
wife and nine children no other fortune than the legacy of an honorable
name, and the enduring influence of a true and devoted life.

V. Grover Cleveland, third son and fifth child of Richard Falley and
Anne (Neale) Ceveland, was sixteen years of age when his father died.
The sad event necessarily marked a turning-point in his career. He was
forced to look life and duty seriously in the face, and he proved
himself equal to the emergency. It had been a cherished hope of his
boyhood that he might secure the benefit of a classical education at
Hamilton College, from which his eldest brother, William (now a
Presbyterian clergyman at Forestport, N.Y.), had then recently
graduated. But this was now out of the question. He had not only to
provide for himself, but he felt bound to aid his mother in the support
of the younger members of the family. The idea of the college course,
for which he had partially fitted himself in the preparatory school at
Clinton, was relinquished, and the battle of life commenced in earnest.
He had already learned something of the lesson of self-reliance, having
served for a year or more as a clerk in a grocery at Fayetteville, and
he soon secured a situation as an assistant in the Institution for the
Blind in the city of New York, where his brother William was then
engaged as a teacher. Here he remained nearly two years, faithfully
discharging the duties assigned him, and promptly forwarding to his
mother such portion of his moderate wages as remained after providing
for his own personal necessities. The situation, however, grew irksome.
As the young man's capabilities developed his ambition was aroused.
There was no way of advancement open before him here, and he felt that
his duty to himself, as well as others, demanded that he make the best
practicable use of the powers with which he was endowed. Returning home
for a short visit, and taking counsel with his mother, he soon set out
for the "West," the field toward which ambitious young men have turned,
with hearts full of hope, for the last half century.

His proposed destination was Cleveland, Ohio; his cherished ambition the
study and practice of the law. He was accompanied on his journey by a
young friend of kindred aspirations. Arriving at Buffalo he called on an
uncle, Mr. Lewis F. Allen, who had a fine stock farm, just out of the
city, and who finally induced him to remain there, promising to secure
him admission to a law office in Buffalo. He remained with his uncle for
a time, assisting him in the preparation of the manuscript of the
"American Herd Book," a work upon which he was then engaged; but in the
course of a few months (in August, 1855) he secured admission as a
student in one of the best known law offices of the city--that of
Rogers, Bowen, & Rogers. Blessed with good health and industrious
habits, with an earnest determination to succeed, he entered upon the
work before him. For a time he boarded at his uncle's house, taking the
long walk to and from the office at morning and night; but after a few
months he was enabled to be of such assistance in the office in clerical
and other work, that, from the modest compensation allowed, he secured
lodgings in the city and provided for all his humble wants.

After four years of unremitting study and toil, he was admitted to the
Erie county bar, having laid the foundation for future professional
success in a thorough mastery of legal principles and all the details of
practice, and in those well-established habits of thought and
application by which his subsequent life has been so fully
characterized. He had gained, also, the confidence and esteem of his
preceptors and employers, and after his admission continued with them as
confidential clerk in charge of the office business, receiving a salary
which enabled him, then, to contribute materially to the assistance of
his mother in providing for the wants of the family and maintaining the
comforts of the humble home in Holland Patent, toward which his fondest
thoughts have turned in all the years of his busy life, and where such
periods of recreation as he has felt warranted in indulging have mainly
been spent.

In 1863 Mr. Cleveland received an appointment as assistant district
attorney for Erie county, a strong testimonial to the legal abilities of
so youthful a practitioner, considering the array of professional talent
in the county and the responsibilities of the position. The war was then
in progress; two brothers, one the next older, and the other younger
than himself, had enlisted in the Union army; and when, a few months
after his appointment, as he had fairly familiarized himself with the
details of important cases intrusted to his care, he was himself
drafted, he pursued the only practicable course, and provided a
substitute for the service. In the fall of 1865, while yet serving as
deputy, he was unanimously selected by the Democratic Nominating
Convention as candidate for district attorney. The county was strongly
Republican, but young Cleveland received a support beyond his party
strength and was beaten, by a few hundred majority only, by the
Republican nominee, Lyman K. Bass, then and since his warm personal
friend.

Upon the expiration of his term of service as deputy district attorney,
in January, 1866, he entered actively into practice, having formed a
partnership with the late Isaac K. Vanderpoel, a prominent lawyer and
ex-State treasurer. The burden of the labor fell to the share of the
junior partner, and through his close attention to the interests of
clients the business of the firm soon became extensive and the income
fairly remunerative. Three years later the partnership was dissolved,
through the election of Mr. Vanderpoel as police judge, and soon after
the new firm of Cleveland, Laning, & Folsom was formed. In 1870 Mr.
Cleveland was urged by leading Democrats of Erie county to accept the
party nomination for sheriff. The proposition was by no means in
accordance with his desires or inclinations. The office, although a most
important one in a large and populous county, and commanding liberal
compensation in fees, was a most thankless one in many respects: its
duties, always delicate and exacting, sometimes disagreeable in the
extreme, and its responsibilities great. It was felt, however, that the
acceptance of this nomination by one who so thoroughly commanded the
confidence of the people, and whose professional training and experience
gave him superior qualification for the office, would insure to the
county ticket of the party, with due care in the selection of other
candidates, the strength necessary to success in the election. As a
loyal member of the party to whose principles he had ever been devotedly
attached, and in the support of whose cause he had labored in every
consistent capacity since becoming a voter, he finally yielded, accepted
the nomination, and, as had been hoped, was duly elected along with the
entire ticket. He administered the office, upon which he entered in
January following, upon strict business principles, and to the eminent
satisfaction of the courts, the bar, and the public at large, during the
full term of three years. There were no duties, however irksome, from
which he shrank; no responsibilities which he failed to meet in a
becoming manner; and when, on the first of January, 1874, his term
expired and he returned to his legal practice, it was with a larger
measure of popular esteem than he had ever before enjoyed.

In resuming professional labor he formed a partnership with his friend
and former antagonist, Lyman K. Bass, Mr. Wilson S. Bissel also becoming
a member of the firm. Now thirty-seven years of age, with mental powers
thoroughly developed, and a capacity for labor far greater than that
with which most men are favored, he was eminently well equipped for
substantial achievement in his chosen field of effort; and it is not too
much to say that, in the next seven years, during which he gave
uninterrupted attention to the work, he accomplished as much in the way
of honest professional triumph as any lawyer in Western New York. He
sought no mere personal distinction, but put his heart into his work,
and practically made his clients' interests his own. His judgment was
sound, his industry indefatigable, his integrity unquestioned. He was
eminently well fitted for judicial service, but could never be induced
to put himself in the way of preferment in that direction. He was
always the "working member" of the firms with which he was connected. As
an advocate, he made no pretensions to brilliancy; but in the
preparation of cases, and in the cogent statement of principles
involved, as well as in the effective presentation of pertinent facts,
he found no superiors, and few equals, among his associates at the bar.

Caring nothing for the pecuniary rewards of labor, beyond the provision
for his own modest wants and the comfort of those, in a measure,
depending upon his assistance, Mr. Cleveland has accumulated no large
fortune; although, with the opportunities at hand, had he made wealth
his object, he might have secured it. On the other hand, he has
befriended many a poor client to his own cost; and, while failing in
many cases to collect the fees which were his due, he has contributed to
public and private charities with a liberal, but unostentatious hand.
Though he has never posed as a "working-men's candidate" for official
preferment, the laboring people of his city and section have long known
him as the true and sympathetic friend of every honest son and daughter
of toil.

When, in the autumn of 1881, the people of the great city of Buffalo,
the third in the Empire State in population, and the second in
commercial importance, tired of the corruption, the robbery, and
oppression of the ring rule, which had fastened its grip upon them under
long years of Republican ascendency, turned at last to the Democratic
party for relief, the Democracy of the city saw in Grover Cleveland the
one man of all others with whom as their candidate for mayor, they might
reasonably hope to win, not simply a partisan triumph, but a victory for
honest government in which all patriotic citizens might well rejoice.
Much against his own will, after repeated solicitation on the part of
leading Democrats, and many Republicans, who appreciated his character
and fitness, he again consented to become the candidate of his party for
responsible office; and, at the election which followed, so great was
the desire for a change in municipal matters, and so general the
confidence in Mr. Cleveland as the man under whose direction the needed
reform might be effected, that his majority for mayor was about three
thousand five hundred, or nearly the same figure with which the
Republican ticket had ordinarily triumphed.

Entering upon the duties of his office as mayor, January 1, 1882, he
soon gave practical assurance of the fact that the people of Buffalo had
made no mistake in the selection of their chief municipal servant. In
his first message to the Common Council, which was replete with sound,
practical suggestions, he said:--

     It seems to me that a successful and faithful administration of the
     government of our city may be accomplished by constantly bearing in
     mind that we are the trustees and agents of our fellow-citizens,
     holding their funds in sacred trust to be expended for their
     benefit; that we should at all times be prepared to render an
     honest account to them touching the matter of its expenditure; and
     that the affairs of the city should be conducted as far as possible
     upon the same principles as a good businessman manages his private
     concerns.

It suffices to say that, so far as the mayor himself was concerned, and
so far as his power and influence extended, he lived up fully to the
letter and spirit of this suggestion. Although hampered by an adverse
political majority in the Common Council, still measurably under the
influence of the old rings, and more intent upon preventing the mayor
from winning public favor which might, perchance, inure to the benefit
of his party (though standing himself entirely beyond party in his
relations to the public welfare), than upon the faithful discharge of
their own duties, he succeeded, by the force of his own earnest
personality, by searching investigation into the workings of all the
departments of city affairs, by the ruthless exposure and denunciation
of various corrupt schemes of jobbery and plunder, and by the persistent
recommendation of measures and methods which commended themselves to his
judgment, in accomplishing much in the way of the reform for which his
election had been sought. He used the veto power with a vigor and a
significance which had characterized the action of no predecessor in the
office, and often regardless of the fact that its exercise might be
distorted by designing enemies, personal or political, to insure him at
least the temporary disapprobation of large classes of citizens; but he
used it only when fully satisfied, through patient research and careful
deliberation, that duty and obligation imperatively required it. It is
conceded that in his brief year's administration he saved a million of
dollars to the city treasury, stamped out numerous abuses, and
stimulated the spirit of faithful devotion in various branches of the
municipal service. Men of all parties unite in saying that the city of
Buffalo was never favored with the services of a more faithful,
conscientious, and thoroughly impartial executive head.

But he was not to continue the work of administrative reform in that
particular field of labor. The people had called him "up higher." His
reputation as a true Democrat, an honest reformer, and a faithful public
servant, had spread abroad through the State, and when the Democratic
State Convention assembled in the early autumn of that year it was
clearly apparent that the nomination of Grover Cleveland, the reform
mayor of Buffalo, as the candidate of the party for the supreme
magistracy of the Empire State, was the one certain guaranty of
overwhelming Democratic victory at the polls. That nomination was
promptly made, and the result which followed was without parallel in the
annals of American political history. He was elected governor by a
majority of nearly two hundred thousand, and, although internal
dissensions in the Republican party, then existing, contributed largely
to the general result, the most significant feature of the election is
found in the fact that the largest relative Democratic gain was made in
his own county of Erie, where he received upwards of seven thousand
majority against more than three thousand majority for Garfield in the
last presidential election, showing him strongest before the people
where his personal character and attributes, as well as his
qualifications for positions of high public trust, are most thoroughly
known.

As governor of New York, which position he has occupied for the last
twenty months, first with a Democratic and later with a Republican
legislature, Mr. Cleveland has followed the same rule of official
conduct adopted for his guidance in other positions. Mindful of all
proper obligations to his own political party, he has never permitted
party demands to stand in the way of his duty to the public and the
State. Believing, to quote his own language, "in an open and sturdy
partisanship which secures the legitimate advantages of party
supremacy," he also believes that parties were made for the people, and
declares himself "unwilling, knowingly, to give assent to measures
purely partisan which will sacrifice or endanger the people's
interests." In the office of governor, as well as in that of mayor, he
has made vigorous but discriminate use of the veto power, and in the one
case, as in the other, it has invariably been found, upon candid
investigation, that his action has been taken under a profound sense of
the binding authority of the fundamental law, and with an unflinching
regard for the rights and interests of the whole people,--however
violent, at times, may have been the denunciation of demagogic
opponents, or clamorous the protests of those who sought merely
temporary advantages in particular directions, regardless of ultimate
results upon the general welfare. In this, as in other positions, his
general line of action has been such as to command the hearty approval
of patriotic men of all parties; and if he has incurred the hostility of
any, it has been through his opposition to the schemes of corrupt rings
and the purposes of selfish individuals, which he regarded detrimental
to the public good; or through his support of wholesome measures,
calculated to protect the body politic, and thwart their illegitimate
designs in other directions.

And now, Grover Cleveland stands before the people of the whole country
the duly nominated candidate of the Democratic party for the highest
office in the gift of the Republic; while his candidacy is indorsed and
enthusiastically supported by tens of thousands of pure and unselfish
men of the opposite party, who see, through his election, the only hope
of a return to constitutional methods and honest practices in the
administration of the Federal Government, without which ere long the
complete and irremediable subversion and destruction of the government
itself will be accomplished. This candidacy comes not through his own
seeking. Grover Cleveland never sought an office in all his life. He has
consented to serve his fellow-citizens in public station only at their
solicitation and command. He has served them faithfully and well so far
as he has been called, and none need fear that, if called to still
higher responsibilities and a broader field of duty, he will not prove
equal to the emergency--equally true to himself and his trust.

Grover Cleveland is a man "cast in nature's noblest mould." Of
commanding presence, with a physical development commensurate with his
mental powers, thoroughly democratic in habit and manner, accessible to
all, meeting the humblest and highest upon equal terms, sympathizing
heartily with the honest laborer in every field of action, frank and
outspoken in his opinions, hating hypocrisy and sham with all his soul,
fighting corruption and dishonesty wherever he finds them, respecting
the opinions and listening to the suggestions of others, but acting
invariably in accordance with his own convictions of right, he fills the
perfect measure of honest manhood; and whether he be President of the
American Republic, or simple citizen, he will never, it is safe to
assume, forfeit either his own self-respect, or the confident regard of
his fellow-men.

       *       *       *       *       *

BOUNDARY LINES OF OLD GROTON.--IV.

BY THE HON. SAMUEL ABBOTT GREEN.


About this time it was proposed to form a new township from Groton,
Lancaster, and Harvard, including a small parcel of land, known as Stow
Leg, a strip of territory perhaps two hundred rods in width and a mile
in length, lying west of the Nashua river. This "Leg" had belonged
originally to Stow, but by the incorporation of Harvard had become
wholly detached from that town. The proposed township covered nearly the
same territory as that now occupied by Shirley. The attempt, however,
does not appear to have been successful. The following covenant, signed
by certain inhabitants of the towns interested in the movement, is on
file, and with it a rough plan of the neighborhood; but I find no other
allusion to the matter either in petitions or records.

     We the Subscribers being Inhabitants of the Extream Parts of
     Groton Lancaster and Harvard as allso the Proprietors of the Land
     belonging to the Town of Stow (which Land is Scituate, Lying and
     being Between the Towns above said Namely Groton Lancaster and
     Harvard) Do Covenant and Promise to and with Each other And We Do
     Hereby of our own Free Will and Motion In the Exercise of Love and
     Charity Towards one another with Mutual Consent in the strongest
     Manner Binding our Selves the Subscribers each and every of us
     Conjointly one to another (for the Gosples Sake) Firmly Covenanting
     and Promising to and with Each other that we will as Speedely as
     may be with Conveniency Petition the Several Towns to which we
     Respectively belong and Likewise the Great and General Court That
     we may be Erected or Incorporated into a Destinct and separate
     Township of our Selves with those Lands within the Bounds and
     Limits Here after Described viz Beginning at the River called
     Lancaster [Nashua] River at the turning of Sd River Below the Brige
     called John Whits Brige & Runing Northerly to Hell Pond and on
     Still to the Line Betwixt Harvard and Groton Including John Farwell
     then to Coyecus Brook Leaveing the Mills and Down Said Brook to the
     River and down Said River to the Rye ford way then Runing Westerly
     to the Northerly End of Horse Pond & so on to Luningburg Line,
     Including Robert Henry & Daniel Page and then Runing Southerly
     Extendig Beyound Luningburg So far Into Lancaster as that Running
     Easterly the Place on which Ralph Kindal formerly Lived Shall be
     Included and so on Running Easterly to the Turn in the River first
     mentioned

     Moreover we Do Covenant Promise and Engage Truly and Faithfully
     that will Consent to and Justifie any Petition that Shall be
     Prefered in our names and behalf to our Respective Towns and to the
     Great & General Court for the Ends and Purposes above Mentioned

     Furthermore we Do Covenant Promise and Engage as above that we will
     advance money for and Pay all Such Reasonable and necessary Charges
     that may arise in the Prosecuting and Obtaining our Said Petitions
     and that we will Each and Every of us Respectively Endever to
     Promote and Maintain Peace Unity Concord and Good Agreement
     amoungst our Selves as Becometh Christians

     And now haveing thus Covenanted as above Said We Do Each and Every
     one of us who have Hereunto Subscribed Protest and Declare that
     Every Article and Parigraph and Thing Containd in the above Writen
     Shall be Absolutely and Unacceptionably Binding in Manner and form
     as above Declared and Shall So Continue upon and Against Each and
     Every one of us untill we are Erected or Incorporated Into a
     Township as above said or that Provedance Shall Remove us by Death
     or Otherways any thing to the Contrary Notwithstanding

     Witness our Hands the Eight Day of December one Thousand Seven
     Hundred and Fourty Seven and in the Twentieth Year Of His Majesties
     Reign Georg the Secund King &c

      Harvard

    Richard hall
    Jon'n Bigelow
    Joseph Hutchins
    Simeon Farnsworth
    Timothy hall
    Phenihas Farnsworth
    Amos Russll
    Johnathan--Read (His mark)
    Jonathan Read iu
    Abijah Willard

      Groton
    Samuel Hazen
    Joseph Preist
    Samell flood
    John pearce
    Charles Richards
    Daniel Page
    John Longley jn'r
    Abijah Willard
    Manasser Divoll
    John Osgood
    Abijah Frost
    John Peirce hous rite

      Lancaster
    Henry Haskell
    John Nicholls
    Thomas Wright
    William Willard
    Joshua Johnson
    Daniel Willard
    Joseph Priest
    William Farmer
    Joseph Bond
    Henry Willard
    Benjamin Willard
    Jacob Houghton
    Corp Elias Sawyer
    Amos Am Atherton (his mark)

      Stow
    John Houghton Ju
    John Sampson
    Joseph Brown
    Hannah Brown
    Samuel Randal
    Benjamin Samson

    [Massachusetts Archives, CXV., 220-222.]

Hell Pond, mentioned in this covenant, is situated in the northwest part
of Harvard, and so called "from its amazing depth," says the Reverend
Peter Whitney, in the History of Worcester County (page 158).

Two years after this covenant was signed, another attempt was made to
divide the town, but it did not succeed. The lines of the proposed
township included nearly the same territory as the present ones of
Shirley. The following references to the scheme are found, under their
respective dates, in the printed Journal of the House of
Representatives:--

     A Petition of sundry Inhabitants of _Groton_ and _Lunenburg_,
     praying they may be erected into a distinct and seperate Township
     or Precinct, agreable to the Plan therewith exhibited, for the
     Reasons mentioned.

     Read and _Ordered_, That the Petitioners serve the Town of
     Lunenburg, and the first Parish in _Groton_, with Copies of this
     Petition, that they shew Cause, if any they have, on the 29th of
     _December_ next, if the Court be then Sitting, if not on the first
     Friday of the next Sitting of this Court, why the Prayer thereof
     should not be granted.

     Sent up for Concurrence.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 100), November 30,
     1749.]

     _Samuel Watts_, Esq; brought down the Petition of sundry
     Inhabitants of _Lunenburg_ and _Groton_, as entred the 30th of
     _November_ last, and refer'd. Pass'd in Council, _viz_. In Council
     _December_ 29th 1749. Read again, with the Answer of the Town of
     _Lunenburg_, and _Ordered_, That the Consideration of this Petition
     be refer'd to the second Wednesday of the next Sitting of this
     Court. Sent down for Concurrence.

     With a Petition from sundry Inhabitants of _Lunenburg_, praying to
     be set off from said Town of _Leominster_. Pass'd in Council, _viz_
     In Council _December_ 29th 1749. Read and _Ordered_, That the
     Petitioners serve the Town of _Lunenburg_, with a Copy of this
     petition, that they shew Cause, if any they have, on the second
     Wednesday of the next Sitting of this Court, why the Prayer thereof
     should not be granted.

     Sent up for Concurrence.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 143), December 29,
     1749.]

     _John Chandler_, Esq; brought down the Petitions of _John Whitney_,
     and others of the westerly Part of _Groton_, and the easterly Part
     of the Town of _Lunenburgh_, and _Edward Hartwell_, Esq; and others
     of said Town, Pass'd in Council, _-viz._ In Council _April_ 4th
     1750. _Ordered_, That _Samuel Watts, James Minot_, and _John Otis_,
     Esqrs; with such as the honourable House shall join, be a Committee
     to consider the Petitions above-mentioned, and the several Answers
     thereto, hear the Parties, and report what they judge proper for
     the Court to do thereon.

     Sent down for Concurrence.

     Read and concur'd, and Mr. _Rice_, Capt. _Livermore_, Col.
     _Richards_, and Mr. _Daniel Pierce_, are joined in the Affair.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 214), April 5,
     1750.]

     _Joseph Wilder_, Esq., brought down the Report of a Committee of
     both Houses, on the Petition of _John Whitney_, and others, as
     entred the 30th of _November_ last, and refer'd. Signed _James
     Minott_, per Order.

     Pass'd in Council, _viz._ In Council _June_ 21, 1750. Read and
     _Voted_, That this Report be not accepted, and that the Petition of
     _John Whitney_ and others therein refer'd to, be accordingly
     dismiss'd, and that the Petitioners pay the Charge of the
     Committee.

     Send down for Concurrence. Read and concur'd.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 41), June 22, 1750.]

     A Petition of sundry Inhabitants of the westerly Part of _Groton_,
     and the easterly Part of _Lunenburg_, praying that their Memorial
     and Report thereon, which was dismiss'd the 22'd of _June_ last,
     may be revived and reconsidered, for the Reasons mentioned.

     Read and _Ordered_, That Mr. _Turner_, Mr. _Tyng_, and Major
     _Jones_ with such as the honourable Board shall join, be a
     Committee to take this Petition under Consideration, and report
     what they judge proper to be done thereon. Sent up for Concurrence.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (pages 76, 77), October 3,
     1750.]

     _John Greenleafe_, Esq.; brought down the Petition of sundry
     Inhabitants of _Groton_ and _Lunenburg_, as entred the 3d Currant,
     and referr'd. Pass'd in Council, _viz_. In Council _October_ 3d
     1750. Read and nonconcur'd, and _Ordered_, That this Petition be
     dismiss'd.

     Sent down for Concurrence.

     Read and nonconcur'd, and _Ordered_, That the Petitioner serve the
     Town of _Lunenburg_ with a Copy of this Petition, that they shew
     Cause, if any they have, on the second Wednesday of the next
     Sitting of this Court, why the Prayer thereof should not be
     granted.

     Sent up for Concurrence.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 93), October 9,
     1750.]

     A Memorial of _John Whitney_ and others of the Southwesterly Part
     of _Groton_, praying that their Petition exhibited in _November_
     1749 may be revived, and the Papers prefer'd at that Time again
     considered, for the Reasons mentioned.

     Read and _Ordered_, That the Petition lie on the Table.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 64), October 9,
     1751.]

     _Ordered_, That the Petition of _John Whitney_ and others of the
     Southwesterly Part of _Groton_, lie upon the Table.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 81), January 3,
     1752.]

     The Memorial of _John Whitney_ and others, as entred _October_ 9th
     1751, Inhabitants of the Southwesterly Part of _Groton_ and the
     Eastwardly Part of _Lunenberg_, setting forth that in _November_
     1749, they preferred a Petition to this Court, praying to be set
     off from the Towns to which they belong, and made into a distant
     [distinct?] and seperate Town and Parish, for the Reasons therein
     mentioned; praying that the aforesaid Memorial and Petition, with
     the Report of the said Committee thereon, and all the Papers
     thereto belonging, may be revived, and again taken into
     consideration.

     Read again, and the Question was put, _Whether the Prayer of the
     Petition should be so far granted as that the petition and Papers
     accompanying it should be revived_?

     It pass'd in the Negative. And _Voted_, That the Memorial be
     dismiss'd.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 92), January 9,
     1753.]

The discussion in regard to the division of the town resulted in setting
off the district of Shirley, on January 5, 1753, three months before the
district of Pepperell was formed. In the Act of Incorporation the name
was left blank, as it was in the one incorporating Pepperell, and
"Shirley" was filled in at the time of its engrossment. It was so named
after William Shirley, the governor of the province at that period. It
never was incorporated specifically as a town, but became one by a
general Act of the Legislature, passed on March 23, 1786. It was
represented, while a district, in the session of the General Court which
met at Watertown, on July 19, 1775, as well as in the Provincial
Congress of Massachusetts, and thus tacitly acquired the powers and
privileges of a town, which were afterward confirmed by the act just
mentioned.

The act for establishing the district of Shirley is as follows:--

     Anno Regni Regis Georgii Secundi Vicesimo Sexto.

     An Act for dividing the Town of Groton and making a District by the
     Name of....

     Whereas the Inhabitants of the Southwesterly part of the Town of
     Groton by Reason of the Difficulties they labour under being remote
     from the place of the publick worship of God have addressed this
     Court to be Sett off a Separate District whereunto the Inhabitants
     of Said Town have Manifested their Consent Be it therefore enacted
     by the Lieutenant Governour Council and House of Representatives
     that the Southwestwardly part of the Town of Groton Comprehended
     within the following boundaries viz begining at the the [_sic_]
     mouth of Squanacook River where it runs into Lancaster [Nashua]
     River from thence up Said Lancaster River till it Comes to Land
     belonging to the Township of Stow thence Westwardly bounding
     Southwardly to said Stow Land tilll it comes to the Southwest
     Corner of the Township of Groton thence Northwardly bounding
     westwardly to Luningburgh and Townsend to Squanacook River
     afores'd thence down said River and Joyning thereto to the mouth
     thereof being the first bound--Be and hereby is Sett off from the
     said Town of Groton and Erected into a Separate and Distinct
     District by the name of ... and that the Inhabitants thereof be and
     hereby are Vested with all the powers priviledges and Immunities
     which the Inhabitants of any Town within this Province do or by law
     ought to Enjoy Excepting only the Priviledge of choosing a
     Representative to represent them in the Great & General Court, in
     choosing of whom the Inhabitants of Said District Shall Joyn with
     the Inhabitants of the Town of Groton, as heretofore has been
     Usual, & also in paying said Representative

     Provided nevertheless the Said District Shall pay their
     proportionable part of all such Town County Parish and Province
     Charges as are already Assessed upon the Town of Groton in like
     manner as though this Act had never been made.

     And Be it further Enacted that M'r Jn'o. Whitney be and hereby is
     impowred to Issue his Warrant directed to Some principal Inhabitant
     in s'd District requireing Him to Notifie & warn the Inhabitants of
     S'd District qualified by law to vote in Town affairs to meet at
     Such Time & place as shall be therein Set forth to Choose all such
     officers as Shall be Necessary to manage the affairs of s'd
     District

     In the House of Rep'ives June 4, 1752

     Read three several times and pass'd to be Engross'd

     T. HUBBARD Spk'r.

     Sent up for concurrence

     In Council Nov'r. 28, 1752 Read a first Time 29 a second Time and
     pass'd a Concurrence

     THO's. CLARKE Dp'ty Secry.

     [Massachusetts Archives, CXVI., 293, 294.]

This act did not take effect until January 5, 1753, when it was signed
by the governor.

On June 3, 1771, thirty years after Groton Gore had been lost by the
running of the provincial line, the proprietors of the town held a
meeting, and appointed Lieutenant Josiah Sawtell, Colonel John Bulkley,
and Lieutenant Nathaniel Parker, a committee to petition the General
Court for a grant of land to make up for this loss. They presented the
matter to that body on June 7, and the following entry in the records
gives the result:--

     The Committee on the Petition of _Josiah Sartel_, and others,
     reported.

     Read and accepted, and _Whereas it appears to this Court, That the
     Proprietors aforesaid, had a Grant made to them by the General
     Court in_ April 1735, _of Ten Thousand, Eight Hundred Acres of
     Land, in Consideration of Land taken from said_ Groton _by_
     Littleton, _Major_ Willard _and_ Read's _Farms being prior Grants,
     and for their extraordinary Suffering in the former Indian Wars and
     in_ June 1736 _said Grant was confirmed to said Proprietors, since
     which Time, the said Proprietors have been entirely dispossessed of
     said Land by the running of the Line between this Province and_
     New-Hampshire: _And whereas it appears there has been no
     Compensation made to the said Proprietors of_ Groton, _for the
     Lands lost as aforesaid, excepting Three Thousand Acres granted in_
     November _last_, to James Prescot, William Prescot, _and_ Oliver
     Prescot _for their Proportion thereof_. Therefore _Resolved_, That
     in Lieu thereof, there be granted to the Proprietors of _Groton_,
     their Heirs and Assigns forever, Seven Thousand and Eight Hundred
     Acres of the unappropriated Lands belonging to this Province, in
     the Western Part of the Province, to be layed out adjoining to some
     former Grant, and that they return a Plan thereof, taken by a
     Surveyor and Chainmen under Oath into the Secretary's Office,
     within twelve Months for Confirmation.

     Sent up for Concurrence.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 44), June 13, 1771.]

These conditions, as recommended by the report of the committee, appear
to have been fulfilled, and a grant was accordingly made. It lay on the
eastern border of Berkshire county, just south of the central part, and
was described as follows:--

     The Committee on a Plan of a Tract of Land granted to the
     Proprietors of _Groton_, reported.

     Read and accepted, and _Resolved_, That the Plan hereunto annexed,
     containing three Thousand nine Hundred and sixty Acres of Province
     Land, laid out in Part to satisfy a Grant made by the Great and
     General Court at their Sessions in _June_ 1771, to the Proprietors
     of Groton, in Lieu of Land they lost by the late running of the
     _New-Hampshire_ Line, as mention'd in their Petition, laid out in
     the County of _Berkshire_, and is bounded as followeth, viz.
     Beginning at a Burch Tree and Stones laid round it the Southwest
     Corner of _Tyringham-Equivalent_ Lands standing on the East Branch
     of _Farmington_ River; then North eighteen Degrees East in the West
     Line of said _Equivalent_ five Hundred and sixty-one Rods to a
     small Beach Tree and Stones laid round it, which Tree is the
     Southeast Corner of a Grant of Land called _Woolcut's_ Grant; then
     running West eighteen Degrees North in the South Line of said Grant
     two Hundred and forty Rods to a Beach Tree marked I.W. and Stones
     laid round it, which is the Southwest Corner of said Grant; then
     running North eighteen Degrees East in the West Line of said Grant
     four Hundred Rods to a Heap of Stones which is the Northwest Corner
     of said Grant; then running East eighteen Degrees South two Hundred
     and forty Rods in the North Line of said Grant to a large Hemlock
     Tree and Stones laid round it, which is the Northeast Corner of
     said Grant; it is also the Northwest Corner of said _Equivalent_,
     and the Southwest Corner of a Grant called _Taylors_ Grant; then
     running North eighteen Degrees East one Hundred and sixty Rods in
     the West Line of said _Taylors_ Grant to the Northwest Corner of
     the same; then running East nine Degrees South in the Line of said
     _Taylors_ Grant eight Hundred Rods to a Stake and Stones standing
     in the West Line of _Blanford_, marked W.T. then running North
     eighteen Degrees East in said _Blanford_ West Line five Hundred and
     thirty Rods to a Beach Tree and Stones laid round it which is the
     Northwest Corner of said _Blanford_; then running East ten Degrees
     South forty-two Rods in the North Line of said _Blanford_ to a
     Stake and Stones which is the Southwest Corner of _Merryfield_;
     then running North ten Degrees East in said _Merryfield_ West Line
     three Hundred and three Rods to a Heap of Stones the Southeast
     Corner of _Becket_; then running West two Degrees South in said
     _Becket_ South Line four Hundred and twenty-six Rods to the
     Northeast Corner of a Grant of Land called _Belcher's_ Grant; then
     running South in the East Line of said _Belchers_ Grant two Hundred
     and sixteen Rods to a small Maple Tree marked T.R. which is the
     Northwest Corner of a Grant of Land called _Rand's_ Grant; then
     running East in the North Line of said _Rand's_ Grant two Hundred
     and fifty Rods to a Hemlock Pole and Stones laid round it, which is
     the Northeast Corner of said _Rand's_ Grant; then running South in
     the East Line of said _Rand's_ Grant three Hundred and thirty-one
     Rods to a Hemlock Tree marked and Stones laid round it, which is
     the Southeast Corner of said _Rand's_ Grant; then running West in
     the South Line of said _Rand's_ Grant two Hundred and fifty Rods to
     a Beach Pole marked T.R. the Southwest Corner of said _Rand's_
     Grant; then running North in the West Line of said _Rand's_ Grant
     eighty-three Rods to the Southeast Corner of said _Belcher's_
     Grant; then running West bounding North three Hundred and
     forty-eight on said _Belcher's_ Grant and four Hundred and
     fifty-three Rods on a Grant called _Chandler's_ Grant, then running
     North on the West Line of said _Chandler's_ Grant four Hundred and
     sixty to said _Becket's_ South Line; then running West in said
     _Becket_ South Line twenty Rods to a Stake and Stones the North
     West Corner of additional Lands belonging to the Four _Housatonick_
     Townships; then running South two Degrees West one Thousand four
     Hundred and eighty-eight Rods in the East Line of said additional
     Lands to the Place where the said East Line crosses said
     _Farmington_ River; then Southerly or down Stream three Hundred and
     thirty Rods to the first Bounds, bounding Westerly on said River,
     be accepted, and is hereby accepted and confirmed unto the
     Proprietors of _Groton_ aforesaid, their Heirs and Assigns forever.
     _Provided_ the same doth not exceed the Quantity aforementioned,
     nor interfere with any former Grant.

     Sent up for Concurrence.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (pages 182, 183). April
     24, 1772.]

I am unable to say how or when this territory was disposed of by the
proprietors. Seven or eight years before this time, James, William, and
Oliver Prescott, acting for themselves, had petitioned the General Court
for a tract of land to make up their own losses. They were the sons of
the Honorable Benjamin Prescott, through whose influence and agency the
original Groton Gore was granted, and they were also the largest
proprietors of the town. The following extracts from the Journal of the
House relate to their application:--

     A Petition of _James Prescot_, and others, Children and Heirs of
     _Benjamin Prescot_, late of _Groton_, Esq; deceased, praying a
     Grant of the unappropriated Lands of this Province, in
     consideration of sundry Tracts which they have lost by the late
     running of the Line between this Government and _New-Hampshire_.

     Read and committed to Col. _Clap_, Col. _Nickols_, Col. _Williams_
     of _Roxbury_, Col. _Buckminster_, and Mr. _Lancaster_, to consider
     and Report.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 187), January 12,
     1764.]

On February 3, 1764, this petition was put over to the May Session, but
I do not find that it came up for consideration at that time. It does
not appear again for some years.

     A Petition of _James Prescot_, Esq; and others, praying that a
     Grant of Land may be made them in Lieu of a former Grant, which
     falls within the _New-Hampshire_ Line.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 129), November 2,
     1770.]

This petition was referred to a committee consisting of Dr. Samuel
Holten, of Danvers, Colonel Joseph Gerrish, of Newbury, and Mr. Joshua
Bigelow, of Worcester.

     The Committee on the Petition of _James Prescot_, Esq; and others,
     reported.

     Read and accepted, and _Resolved_, That in Lieu of Lands mentioned
     in the Petition, there be granted to the Petitioners, their Heirs
     and Assigns, Four Thousand Four Hundred Acres of the unappropriated
     Lands belonging to the Province, to be laid out in the Westerly
     Part thereof, adjoining to some former Grants, provided they can
     find the same; or Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Acres of
     the unappropriated Lands lying on the Easterly side of _Saco_
     River; it being their Proportion in said Grant: And return a Plan
     thereof taken by a Surveyor and Chainman under Oath, into the
     Secretary's Office within Twelve Months.

     Sent up for Concurrence.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 156), November 14,
     1770.]

The Committee appointed to consider the Plan of two Tracts of Land
granted to _James Prescot_, Esq; and others, reported.

     Read and accepted. _Resolved_, That both the above Plans, the one
     containing Four Thousand one Hundred and thirty Acres, the other
     containing two Hundred and seventy Acres, delineated and described
     as is set forth by the Surveyor in the Description thereof hereunto
     annexed, be accepted, and hereby is confirmed to _James Prescot_,
     Esq; and others named in their Petition, and to their Heirs and
     Assigns in Lieu of and full Satisfaction for Four Thousand four
     Hundred Acres of Land lost by the late running of the Line between
     this Province and _New-Hampshire_, as mention'd in a Grant made by
     both Houses of the Assembly, A.D. 1765, but not consented to by the
     Governor. _Provided_ both said Plans together do not exceed the
     Quantity of Four Thousand four Hundred Acres, nor interfere with
     any former Grant.

     Sent up for Concurrence.

     [Journal of the House of Representatives (page 73), June 22, 1771.]

It is evident from these reports that the Prescott brothers took the
forty-four hundred acres in the westerly part of the province, rather
than the fifty-eight hundred and eighty acres on the easterly side of
the Saco river, though I have been unable to identify, beyond a doubt,
the tract of land thus granted. I am inclined to think however, that it
is the one mentioned in the Memorial of the One Hundredth Anniversary of
the Incorporation of Middlefield, Massachusetts, August 15, 1883. The
town is situated on the westerly border of Hampshire County,--forming a
jog into Berkshire,--and was made up in part of Prescott's Grant. A map
is given in the "Memorial" volume (page 16) which shows that the Grant
was originally in Berkshire county, very near to the tract of land given
to the proprietors of Groton.

Professor Edward P. Smith, of Worcester, delivered an historical address
on the occasion of the anniversary, and he says:--

     Prescott's Grant, the nucleus of the town, appears as a large
     quadrilateral, containing more than a thousand acres in the north
     and west part of the town. Who the Prescott was to whom the grant
     was made is not known, further than that he must have been some one
     who had rendered military or other services to the State. That he
     was the Prescott who commanded at Bunker Hill is, indeed, possible;
     but, as the grant was probably made before the Revolutionary War,
     that supposition seems hardly tenable. (Page 15.)

By an act of the General Court, passed February 25, 1793, a large
section of territory was taken from Groton and annexed to Dunstable.
This change produced a very irregular boundary between the two towns,
and made, according to Butler's History of Groton (page 66), more than
eighty angles in the line, causing much inconvenience. The following
copy from the "Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts" gives the
names of the families thus transferred:--

     An Act to set off _Caleb Woods_, and others, from _Groton_, and to
     annex them to _Dunstable_.

     BE _it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives, in
     General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same_, That
     _Caleb Woods, Silas Blood, Amaziah Swallow, Nathaniel Cummings,
     Ebenezer Procter, Silas Blood_, jun. _Silas Marshall, Levi Parker,
     Amos Woods, Isaac Lawrence, Peter Blood, Caleb Blood_, jun. _Henry
     Blood, Caleb Woods_, jun. and _Silas Marshall_, jun., together with
     their families and estates, and also the estates of Doctor _Jonas
     Marshall_, the heirs of Captain _Solomon Woods_, deceased, and
     _Joseph Parkhurst_, which they now own in said _Groton_, be, and
     they are hereby set off from the town of _Groton_, in the county of
     _Middlesex_, and annexed to _Dunstable_, in said county, and shall
     hereafter be considered a part of the same, there to do duty and
     receive privileges, as the other inhabitants of said _Dunstable.
     Provided, nevertheless_, That the persons above-mentioned shall pay
     all taxes that have been legally assessed on them by said
     _Groton_, in the same manner as if this Act had never been passed.

     [This act passed _February_ 25, 1793.]

The zigzag line caused by this act was somewhat modified by the two
following ones, passed at different times a few years later. I think
that the very irregular boundary between the two towns, with its
eighty-six angles, as mentioned by Mr. Butler, was produced by the
subsequent annexations to Dunstable.

     An Act to set of _Nathaniel Lawrence with_ his Estate, from the
     Town of _Groton_, and annex them to the Town of _Dunstable_.

     BE _it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives, in
     General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same_, That
     _Nathaniel Lawrence_ of _Groton_, in the county of _Middlesex_,
     together with his estate, which he now owns in that town, be, and
     hereby is set off from said town of _Groton_, and annexed to the
     town of _Dunstable_, in the same county; and shall hereafter be
     considered as part of the same; there to do duty and receive
     privileges as other inhabitants of said town of _Dunstable:
     Provided nevertheless_, That the said _Nathaniel Lawrence_ shall be
     holden to pay all taxes that have been legally assessed on him by
     said town of _Groton_, in the same manner as if this Act had not
     been passed.

     [This act passed _January_ 26, 1796.]

     An act to set off Willard Robbins with his estate from the town of
     _Groton_, in the county of _Middlesex_, and to annex the same to
     the town of _Dunstable_, in the same county.

     Sec. 1. BE _it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives,
     in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same_. That
     Willard Robbins, of _Groton_, in the county of _Middlesex_, with
     his estate, be, and hereby is set off from said town of _Groton_,
     and annexed to the town of _Dunstable_, in said county, there to do
     duty and receive privileges in the same manner as other inhabitants
     of the said town of _Dunstable_.

     Sec. 2. _And be it further enacted_, That the said Willard Robbins
     shall be holden to pay and discharge all legal assessments and
     taxes, that have been assessed upon him by said town of _Groton_
     prior to the passing this act.

     [This act passed _June_ 18, 1803.]

The boundary between the two towns now remained unchanged until February
15, 1820, when another act was passed by the Legislature making a
further surrender of territory. It took a considerable parcel of land
and gave it to Dunstable, thereby straightening and simplifying the
jurisdictional line, which at this time formed but five angles.

In the autumn of 1794 a plan of Groton, Pepperell, and Shirley was made
by Dr. Oliver Prescott, Jr., which gives a few interesting facts. The
following notes are taken from the copy now in the office of the
Secretary of State. It will be seen that Dr. Prescott refers to the land
set off by the Act of February 25, 1793:--

     This Plan contains the Bounds of three Towns, viz. Groton,
     Pepperrell & Shirley,--all which, together with whatsoever is
     delineated on said Plan, was taken by an actual Survey, agreeably
     to a resolve of the General Court, passed June 25, 1794, & under
     the Inspection of the Selectmen & Committee's from the respective
     towns, appointed for that purpose in the month of Sept'r. 1794.

     By OLIVER PRESCOTT, Ju'r. Surveyor.

     The reputed distance of Groton from Cambridge [the shire-town] is
     Thirty two Miles, & from Boston Thirty five miles; The River Nashua
     is from 8 to 10 rods in width. The River Squannacoock 4 or 5 rods
     in width. In Groton are twenty natural Ponds, six of which are
     delineated on the Plan, by actual Survey. Several of the other
     Ponds are in size, nearly equal to those on the plan, & may in the
     whole contain about two Thousand Acres. There are no Mines in said
     Town, except one of Iron Ore, nearly exhausted. Every other Matter
     directed to be delineated, described or specifyed, may be found on
     the Plan.

     SAM'll LAWRENCE      }
     ZACH'h FITCH         } Committee.
     OLIVER PRESCOTT Ju'r.}

     The reputed distance of Pepperrell from Cambridge is thirty seven
     miles; from Boston forty Miles.

     The River Nissitisset is about four Rods in width.

     The reputed distance of Shirley from Cambridge is thirty five
     Miles; & from Boston thirty Eight Miles.

     Catacoonamug & Mulpus Brooks are from one to two Rods in width. The
     Plan contains every thing relative to the two last mentioned Towns
     necessary to be described.

     OLIVER PRESCOTT, Ju'r.

     What is enclosed in this Blue line, contains about the quantity of
     Land set off from Groton to Dunstable, by Act of the General Court,
     passed February 25, 1793. As by said Act, the petitioners and their
     Farms were set off, without specifying particular bounds, Accuracy
     cannot be obtained, with respect to this Line, without very great
     expence and Trouble.

By an act passed February 6, 1798, a considerable portion of territory
lying on the easterly side of the Nashua river, in the south-west corner
of Groton, was annexed to Shirley. This tract continued to form a part
of Shirley until the incorporation of Ayer, on February 14, 1871, when
its political condition was again changed, and its government
transferred to the new town. The act authorizing the annexation is as
follows,--and I give it entire in order to show the loose way of
describing boundary lines during the latter part of the last century:--

     An Act to set off certain Lands from the town of _Groton_, and
     annex the same to the town of _Shirley_.

     BE _it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives, in
     General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same_, That a
     tract of Land at the south western extremity of the town of
     _Groton_, bounded by a line beginning at a large white oak stump,
     on the southeast side of _Nashua River_, being the northwest corner
     of the town of _Harvard_; thence running southeasterly on _Harvard_
     line, as the town bounds direct, till it comes to the stump of a
     pine tree lately fallen down, an antient bound mark in said town
     line; thence northerly to a heap of stones by the road leading to
     _Harvard_ at SIMON DABY'S southerly corner, thence northeasterly on
     said SIMON DABY'S line to a pine tree marked, thence northerly to a
     heap of stones on a ledge of rocks; thence northerly on said SIMON
     DABY'S line to a heap of stones on a large rock; thence
     northwesterly still on said SIMON DABY'S line to a stake and stones
     in the roots of a pine tree, fallen down, in a valley, said SIMON
     DABY'S northeast corner and SAMUEL CHASE'S southerly corner, thence
     northerly on said SAMUEL CHASE'S line, to the road leading to ABIL
     MORSE'S mill, at a heap of stones on the north easterly side of
     said road, thence northeasterly on said SAMUEL CHASE'S line by said
     road to a heap of stones, thence northeasterly on said CHASE'S
     line, to a stake and stones at the end of a ditch at a brook;
     thence down said brook to _Nashua River_, thence up said river, to
     the bounds first mentioned, together with the inhabitants thereof,
     be, and they are hereby set off from the town of _Groton_ and
     annexed to the town of _Shirley_, there to do duty and receive
     privileges in the same manner as other lands and inhabitants of the
     said town of _Shirley_.

     SECT. 2. _Provided nevertheless, and be it further enacted_, That
     the said tract of land and the inhabitants thereof shall be liable
     to be taxed by the town of _Groton_, their full proportion in a tax
     to the amount of the debts now due from said town of _Groton_, in
     the same manner as if this act had not been passed: _Provided_ such
     tax be made and assessed within one year from the time of passing
     this act; and shall also be liable to pay their proportion of all
     state taxes that may be assessed on the town of _Groton_ until a
     new valuation be taken.

     [This act passed _February_ 6, 1798.]

All the changes of territorial jurisdiction thus far noted have been in
one direction,--from Groton to the surrounding towns; but now the tide
turns, and for a wonder she received, by legislative enactment, on
February 3, 1803, a small parcel of land just large enough for a
potato-patch. The annexation came from Pepperell, and the amount
received was four acres and twenty rods in extent. The following is a
copy:--

     An act to set off a certain parcel of land from the town of
     _Pepperell_, in the county of _Middlesex_, and to annex the same to
     the town of _Groton_, in the same county.

     BE _it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives, in
     General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same_, That a
     certain tract of land, bounded, beginning at the end of a wall by
     the road leading by Zachariah Fitch's, in said _Groton_; thence
     running easterly, by land of Jonas Fitch, to the _Nashua River_,
     (so called;) thence up said river to said road, near the bridge
     over the same river; thence, bounding by the same road, to the
     bounds first mentioned, containing four acres and twenty rods, be,
     and hereby is set off from said town of _Pepperell_ and annexed to
     said town of _Groton_ forever.

     [This act passed _February_ 3, 1803.]

The Worcester and Nashua Railroad was opened through the township of
Groton in the month of December, 1848. It ran at that time a distance of
eight miles through its territory, keeping on the east side of the
Nashua river, which for a considerable part of the way was the dividing
line between Groton and Pepperell. The railroad station for the people
of Pepperell was on the Groton side of the river, and in the course of a
few years a small village sprang up in the neighborhood. All the
interests and sympathies of this little settlement were with Pepperell;
and under these circumstances the Legislature, on May 18, 1857, passed
an act of annexation, by which it became in reality what it was in
sentiment,--a part and parcel of that town. The first section of the act
is as follows:--

     An act to set off a part of the Town of Groton, and annex the same
     to the Town of Pepperell.

     _Be it enacted, &c., as follows_:

     All that part of the town of Groton, in the county of Middlesex,
     with the inhabitants thereon, lying north of the following
     described line is hereby set off from the town of Groton, and
     annexed to the town of Pepperell, to wit: Beginning at the boundary
     between said town of Groton and the town of Dunstable, at a stone
     monument in the wall on land of Elbridge Chapman and land of Joseph
     Sanderson, and running south, eighty-six degrees west, about six
     hundred and sixty rods, to a stone monument at the corner of land
     called the "Job Shattuck Farm," and land of James Hobart, near the
     Nashua River and Worcester and Nashua Railroad; thence in same line
     to the centre of Nashua River and the boundary of said town of
     Pepperell: _provided, however_, that for the purpose of electing a
     representative to the general court, the said territory shall
     continue to be a part of the town of Groton, until a new
     apportionment for representatives is made; and the inhabitants
     resident therein shall be entitled to vote in the choice of such
     representatives, and shall be eligible to the office of
     representative in the town of Groton, in the same manner as if this
     act had not been passed.

[Illustration: Map of Groton Plantation in 1884]

The latest legislation connected with the dismemberment of the original
grant--and perhaps the last for many years to come--is the Act of
February 14, 1871, by which the town of Ayer was incorporated. This
enactment took from Groton a large section of territory lying near its
southern borders, and from Shirley all that part of the town on the
easterly side of the Nashua River which was annexed to it from Groton on
February 6, 1798.

Thus has the old Groton Plantation, during a period of more than two
centuries, been hewed and hacked down to less than one-half of its
original dimensions. It has furnished, substantially, the entire
territory of Pepperell, Shirley, and Ayer, and has contributed more or
less largely to form five other towns. An examination of the
accompanying map will show these changes more clearly than any verbal or
written description.

       *       *       *       *       *

SAILS.


  The ship's white sails are all unfurl'd
    To the salt breath of the sea;
  And never a ship in all the world
    Sails on with the wind more free.

  For the white sails are white hopes of youth,
    The breath of the future blows;
  But whither the vessel flies, in truth,
    There is no man that knows.

       *       *       *       *       *

ELIZABETH.[1]

A ROMANCE OF COLONIAL DAYS.

BY FRANCES C. SPARHAWK, Author of "A Lazy Man's Work."

[Footnote 1: 1884, by Frances C. Sparhawk.]




CHAPTER I.

ON THE TIDE.


One August evening of the year 1743 a boat lay as if anchored in the
beautiful Piscataqua; her sail seemed swung only to show its whiteness
in the bright moonlight. Every cord upon it hung lifeless, serving only
the purpose of pictured lines, one silvered in the light, the dark
shadow of the other traced in clear outlines on the sail. The swash of
the waves against the side of the boat was too slight to sway it; the
sheet dipped in the water and swung almost imperceptibly, while now and
then a few straws floated against it and caught there. The moon, high in
the heavens, gave pearly tints to the clouds that floated near it; the
pines on the shore flung dark masses against the oaks and maples, or
stood as a Rembrandt background for the boughs of the trees on which the
moonlight fell, or for some ghostly procession of the white birch
trunks. The water, in the shadows as dark and smooth as a Claude
Lorraine glass, showed far off in the moonlight faint quivers of its
surface here and there, as if the breeze so longed for were coming to
the idle boat. But it was too far off, or too faint, for it spent itself
before reaching the watchers there, although at the symptoms one of them
rose with great show of solemnity, and making a trumpet of his hands,
blew vigorously against the sail. But neither these movements nor the
concerts of whistling were successful. At last another of the company
leaning over the side of the boat busied himself with the sheet.

"I'll tell you the reason this boat don't go," he said, gravely, "the
rope was all twisted. I've straightened it out, and taken off the
straws."

A burst of laughter greeted him as he turned around his face, still
grave, but his dark eyes, roving from one to another, their laughing
expression hidden in the shadow, for the moon was behind him.

"What a useful member of society you are, Stephen," cried Katie
Archdale. "I don't see how we could get on without you."

"I don't think we're getting on with him _very_ fast," remarked a young
gentleman sitting opposite Katie, pointing significantly at a curve of
the shore that they had not drifted out of sight of in the last half
hour.

"At least he has roused us," returned the girl, "for I half believe I
was sleepy before."

"I believe it wholly," answered Stephen, taking his seat beside her
again and looking down into her face teazingly with a cousinly freedom.
But it was not altogether a cousinly regard from which Katie drew back
after a moment, tossing her head coquettishly, and with a heightened
color, glancing past at her friend beyond him, who sat dipping one hand
in the water and looking dreamily at the shore. Stephen Archdale and his
cousin Katie lived within a few miles of each other, and there had
always been constant intercourse between their families. When boy and
girl, Stephen, four years the elder, the two had played together, and
they had grown up, as people said, like brother and sister. But of late
it was rumored that the conduct of young Archdale was more loverlike
than brotherly, and that, if Katie choose, the tie between them would
one day be closer than that of cousinhood. The stranger who sat opposite
Archdale, watching them both in silence, was of the same opinion. He was
rather portly for his age, which could not have been over thirty, and as
he sat in the boat he looked a taller man than he proved to be when on
his feet. His dark-brown beard was full, his eyes, like Archdale's, were
in shadow, for he had drawn down his hat well over his brows, while
Stephen and young Waldo sat bareheaded in the August air.

"I wonder"--began Katie.

"A sturgeon!" cried Mrs. Eveleigh, the last member of the party.

But the sound proved the soft dip of the paddle in the water as a canoe
came toward them going down the stream. Its Indian occupant when he shot
by turned his gaze stealthily upon the gay party.

"How many more of your red savages are there coming to spy upon us?" And
the speaker pushed back his hat a trifle, and looked up and down the
river with an anxiety that he could not quite conceal.

"You've not been out here long enough," laughed Waldo. "There's no
danger; the red savages are friendly with us just at this moment, and
will remain so until we forget our rifles some day, or they learn that
we're short of ammunition. Shoot 'em down without mercy whenever they
come spying about--it's the only way. They're friendly so long as they
are afraid, and not a moment longer. For instance, why should that
fellow stop? He saw three men whom he knew were armed, besides that
young man who's pretending to sail the boat--why don't you do it, Kit?"
and Waldo laughed good-humoredly at the lad whose office had become a
sinecure. "When you get used to them, Mr. Harwin," he added, "they will
not make you shiver."

"Oh, they don't do that now," returned the other, indifferently, "but,
the ladies"--

"As to the ladies," laughed Katie, "one of them is quite fond of the
red-skins; the other," glancing at her friend, "has gone into a brown
study; I don't believe she's heard or seen anything for the last half
hour. Elizabeth, when you fish up any pearls there out of the water,
share them with us, won't you?"

"No, she'll do no such thing," interposed Mistress Eveleigh; "she'll
give them all to you." The tone was so serious that Elizabeth cried,
indignantly,--

"Cousin Patience, how can you?"

"I suppose she likes to tease you," retorted Katie, still laughing, "and
so do I. It's so funny to see you wake out of a revery and find
yourself."

"And not find myself, you mean," returned Elizabeth, joining in with a
ripple of merriment.

"Master Waldo knows all about the red-skins," said Archdale to his
opposite neighbor; "he had the pleasure of shooting one last winter."

"Did you?" exclaimed Mrs. Eveleigh, while Harwin looked at the young
fellow with a new interest. "How did it happen? Tell us about it."

"Yes, tell us about it," cried Katie, turning toward Waldo. But
Elizabeth was still looking at Archdale. Suppose the shooting had been
necessary, how could he speak of killing a human being as he would an
animal, and then lean back and look at Mr. Waldo with a smile on his
face?

Kenelm Waldo, on his part, gazed at the speaker in astonishment.

"'Pon honor," he cried, "I never killed a red-skin in my life, or even
had a shot at one. Oh, I know now what he means; he is talking of a fox
that I shot two miles from his house, one that you ought to have secured
yourself, Mr. Archdale. This was the way I did it, the best way."

When he had finished his account, Katie said:--

"I have a plan for amusing ourselves. Let us make every one tell a
story, and we'll lay forfeits on the person that doesn't give us an
interesting one. Mistress Eveleigh, please begin."

"That is rather arbitrary, Mistress Katie, with no warning," returned
that lady, smiling. "But since we've been talking about the Indians, I
will tell you something that my mother did once before she was married,
while she was living down on the Cape."

"What a pity, Katie, you did not keep Mistress Eveleigh until the last,"
cried Archdale; "I know she will have the best story of us all."

"You have too high estimation of my powers," returned Mrs. Eveleigh,
flattered; "but if I do well," she added, "it must be remembered that
none of you have had forty-five years in which to find one."

The story, like a thousand others of that time, was of the presence of
mind and courage of one of the early settlers of America, and was
listened to with the attention it deserved. All, with one exception,
were outspoken in admiration of its heroine.

"You say nothing, Mistress Royal," said Waldo; "but it may be you've
heard it before, since you and Mistress Eveleigh are in the same house."

"Yes," she answered, "I have heard it before." She moved her head
quickly as she spoke, and as the moonlight struck her face, Archdale
fancied that he saw a moist brightness in her eyes. But certainly no
tear fell, and when the next moment Katie declared it Elizabeth's turn
for a story, she told some trifling anecdote that had in it neither
sentiment nor heroism. It was laughable though, and was about to receive
its deserts of praise when at Archdale's first word Elizabeth cried,
eagerly:--

"Don't, please. It was not worth telling; only I could remember nothing
else."

At this entreaty Harwin stared at her, and his lip curled disdainfully
under the hand that partially covered his face. "Have you so much wealth
of fascination, young lady," his thoughts ran, "that you can afford to
scatter your coins in this way? I rather think not." His eyes rested
upon her for a moment as she sat looking at Katie Archdale, and the
scorn of his mouth deepened. "Admiration of one woman for another," he
commented. "Pshaw! the girl lavishes everything; she will soon be
bankrupt. She is drinking in the intoxication of Katie's beauty just
as--no, not like me, of course. If ever there could be excuse for such a
thing it would be here, for Katie is bewitching, she is perfect;
affectionate, too, but with no nonsense about _her_. She reserves her
admiration for--for whom does she reserve it? For the proud young nabob
beside her, or for the good-humored little coxcomb over here? It shall
be for neither; it shall be for me. I, too, can be fascinating when I
take the trouble. Fair lady, I have plans for you."

"Master Harwin," cried the girl's clear voice, interrupting his
thoughts, "why don't you begin? We're waiting for you."

"Pardon me," he answered, "I was not aware of it. Well, since you are
inexorable, I'll try. I will not attempt anything in this New World,
which you all know so much more about than I do, for then there'd be
every chance of my being heavily fined. But if you want a story of Old
England, perhaps on that ground I can barely escape my forfeit."

"We shall be delighted," said Miss Royal, courteously, for Katie, to
whom she saw that he was speaking, was at the moment claimed by
Archdale; he was saying something to her in a low voice, and she gave
him willing attention.

Only a flash in the narrator's eyes as he began showed that he noticed
this.




CHAPTER II.

OPPORTUNITY.


"Once upon a time, then," he said, "in Scotland, no matter in what part,
there dwelt two disconsolate people. They ought to have been very happy,
for they were lovers, but, as you may have noticed, lovers are happy
only under the condition that love runs smooth, and here it was
extremely rough. The suitor was of ancient family and poor, the lady was
charming, and wilful--and an heiress? You are all waiting to hear me say
that--no, she was poor, too. And so you see that a doubling of
impecuniosity was quite impossible, for poverty rolls up fast in a
geometrical progression. But the lovers had no such scruples. It's a
romantic story enough if I could tell it to you in detail."

"And why not?" cried Katie, whose interest was making him wish that
were possible.

"I should have to go back for generations, and tell you of family feuds
as old as the families themselves, a Montague and Capulet state of
affairs, although each family had so much respect for the golden
amenities of life that its possession by the other would have softened
the asperity of feeling. But each was poor,--poor, I mean, for people in
that station.

"The lady, as I said, was a beauty; the gentleman had extra will enough
when it was roused to make up for the absence of beauty, although,
indeed, the lady was not lacking in that quality either, and so,
opposition made them only more determined to have their own way. It was
impossible to run away,--she was too well guarded; defiance was the only
thing, and I must confess that from what I knew of them both, I think
they enjoyed it. The Capulets, as I will call them, were dissenters, the
Montagues belonged to the Established Church. Now, the Capulets were
very zealous, and at this time a famous itinerant preacher came into
their neighborhood. They, being the greatest people in the place,
invited him to stay at their house during his visit. He often preached
in the open air. One day, at the end of one of those eloquent
discourses, a young man in countryman's dress came up and asked him to
marry himself and a young woman whom he had been waiting upon a long
time, but who had refused to be married unless this very preacher could
perform the ceremony. 'She said it would be a blessed wedlock of your
joining,' pursued the young fellow. The preacher, although he was a
great man, was only human,--it is well, I suppose, that we never outgrow
our humanity,--and felt flattered by the young girl's belief in his
sanctity. He proposed the next day for the ceremony, and was arranging
to marry the rustic couple on the lawn before the house of his host when
the young man interrupted him by stating that it must be gone through
with immediately, for his lady-love was so shy that it was with
difficulty she had been persuaded to come to-night, and she would never
consent if he gave her all that time to think the matter over in, nor
would she be willing to come up on the lawn with the great people. She
was at hand with one of her friends; everything was prepared; would he
marry them then? At that moment? The bewildered minister looked up the
road before him, where the carriage of the Capulets was disappearing at
the top of the hill; he had been told that the daughter would remain
with him, and that the carriage would return as soon as Mamma Capulet
had made inquiries about a cottager who was ill; for his congregation
had been crowding about him with questions and tearful confessions of
sins, and the good Capulets, who had the opportunity to make their
confessions in private, were in haste to be gone. Where was his fair
companion? He looked about him; he had lost sight of her in the throng.
But in a few moments she came forward, accompanying the bride, who the
groom explained was a protégée of hers. Miss Capulet had drawn down her
veil, and in answer to this statement nodded to the reverend gentleman
and murmured an assent. The bride's face, too, was hidden by her bonnet
and by her shyness, which prevented her from once looking up. The name
of the groom lingered with surprise on the minister's lips, for it was
not a clodhopper's name, I assure you; but he had heard nothing of the
love affair. When he came to the bride's name, however, he did pause,
for it was that of the Capulet. 'How is this?' he asked. 'How has she
the same name as you, my child?' Before the veiled lady could answer,
the groom informed him that the bride's family, being old retainers of
the other, had the same last name, as it was in Scottish clans, and that
the bride herself, born on the same day as the young lady at the great
house, had received also the same Christian name, which explained her
being under Miss Capulet's protection. The good man was conscious that,
though his piety was eminent, his knowledge of all genealogy but Bible
was deficient, and when both women softly assented to this statement,
his air of perplexity gave place to the manner of a man who understands
the business of the hour. He was in a hurry, and in an incredibly short
time the two were one. 'Is it all over?' asked the groom. 'Are we
securely married?' 'You are joined in the holy bonds of matrimony until
death do you part,' returned the clergyman, solemnly, beginning to add
his blessing. But this died half-uttered on his lips, for the bride
slowly raised her head, threw back her bonnet, and the haughty face and
laughing eyes of the Capulet were before him. 'Bear witness,' she said,
her shyness completely gone, 'that I'm this gentleman's wife.' 'You are,
indeed,' he stammered. 'But how--why--who is this?' and he reached out a
trembling hand toward the veiled lady. 'My maid,' returned the bride;
'she came here like one of the cottagers, and we exchanged gowns while
you were talking to the people.' 'I hope, I sincerely hope, it's all
right,' returned the poor man; 'but if I had known, I would have spoken
to your honored parent, first.' 'Yes, I'm sure of that,' she laughed,
'and then we should not have been so happy.' At the moment a post-chaise
drove up, into which the bridal pair and the servant made haste to get.
'Pardon me that I cannot accompany you home,' laughed the lady, leaning
out to give the minister her hand in farewell. 'You cannot know how
grateful to you we are. I shall never be able to reward you; I can only
give you my thanks and prayers--and be sure to tell them at home how
firmly you have married us.' The chaise drove off, and the good man was
left alone. He felt inclined to think that he had been dreaming, until
he looked down and saw in his hand a purse of gold pieces that the groom
had slipped into it, whispering, 'If you refuse for yourself, be my
almoner and give it to the poor.' Before the preacher had recovered his
wits the carriage of the Capulets reappeared. The lovers, however, did
not re-appear for two years, and by that time Montague had unexpectedly
fallen heir to a fortune and a title, and was received with open arms by
the new relatives. In our days it's always the one who was not the
prodigal who has the fatted calf killed for him."


"I'm afraid the poor minister was not very welcome when he had told his
story," said Elizabeth.

"Clever enough, on my word," cried Archdale.

"Not quite to your liking, I fancy, though," answered Harwin.

"Do you think he would have had the wedding indoors, in the teeth of
everybody?" laughed Katie.

Harwin assented, adding that he felt convinced that Master Archdale
would have insisted upon all the accompaniments of a grand wedding at
any cost.

"Yes, I shall have that when my time comes," returned Stephen, looking
straight before him a trifle haughtily. But Harwin noticed that directly
his eyes fell in passing back to their watching of the shore, and that
one sweeping glance was given to Katie.

"But can people be married in such an instant?" asked Waldo. "I always
thought it was a work of time--rather a formidable piece of business."

"Oh! when you come to two or three ministers of the Church of England,
and the benedictions, and all that, so it is," said Harwin; "but the
real business part is an affair of--I was going to say less than a
minute." He sat silent after this, with his head bent, then, lifting it
suddenly, before anybody had spoken, he fixed his glance, with a musing
expression, upon Waldo. "I was wondering if I could remember the
formula," he said; "I think I can. Mistress Royal, allow Master Archdale
to take your hand a moment, if you please."

Elizabeth made no responsive movement, and Archdale, for an instant,
failed to turn toward her. He had been looking at Katie while Harwin was
speaking; but Katie drew back, hastily.

"Oh, do, Elizabeth!" she cried. "I want to see what it is like; do try
with Stephen, and let us hear." As she spoke, Archdale turned toward
Elizabeth, courteously.

"Come, Mistress Royal," he said, as Harwin was explaining that he had
asked her because she happened to be on the proper side for a bride,
"let us make an effective tableau for the amusement of these mariners,
who, since they are becalmed themselves, persist in wanting something
going on."

Elizabeth had heard the entreaty in Katie's light words. She knew that
if she herself had cared for Mr. Archdale she could never have jested at
marrying him. It made her all the more sure that Katie did care,
because, otherwise, the girl would have found it great fun to rouse a
little jealousy in the two admirers opposite, watching every movement.
She yielded her hand to the light clasp that held it, and listened with
less interest than the others to Mr. Harwin's distinct and rapid words
until he came to the sentence, "I pronounce you man and wife." Then she
shivered, and he had scarcely finished the adjuration that
follows--"What God hath joined together let not man put asunder," when
she snatched her hand away.

"It is too solemn," she cried, "it is too much; we ought not to have
jested so."

Harwin laughed.

"Pardon me if I've made you uncomfortable," he said; "but you will
forget it in five minutes, and even for that time you must blame Master
Waldo's curiosity."

"And mine," added Katie, at which young Waldo gave her a grateful
glance. Then he joined with her in breaking the hush that had fallen on
the others. "Stephen," she said, "now for your story. Do you think you
are coming off scot-free?"

"I thought we had performed our parts," he said, turning to Elizabeth
with a smile.

"Mistress Royal has already told her story," cried Waldo, "There's no
escape for you."

"Escape would be difficult now, I confess."

"So begin."

He began obediently, but fortune was kinder than he had expected, for he
had not fairly started when Kit cried out,--

"A breeze! Here it comes. Heads to larboard!" And down went Archdale's
and those of the two ladies with him as the sail was shifted and the
boat began to skim the water before the breeze which freshened every
minute. Soon they had gained the cove where they were to land, and
Archdale's story was never finished.

       *       *       *       *       *

THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN.

BY ERNEST NUSSE.


The census of 1880 fixed the juvenile population of the United States at
20,000,000, of whom 10,158,954 were boys and 9,884,705 were girls. "From
a political point of view," says the eminent philanthropist, Mr.
Elbridge T. Gerry, "the future of the nation depends on the physical and
intellectual education of its children, whose numbers increase every
year, and who will soon constitute the sovereign people. From the moral
and social point of view, the welfare of society imperatively demands
that the atmosphere in which they live, and the treatment that they
receive from those intrusted with their care or custody, shall be such
as to establish in them habits of industry, of sobriety, of honesty, and
good conduct. For injurious treatment of a child, inasmuch as it tends
to result in the distortion of its physical and moral nature,
constitutes an offence whose importance seriously effects the public
order." But what is to be understood by cruel treatment? It consists in
every act of omission or of commission which causes or procures physical
injury or death. It is hardly necessary to observe that this definition
must be limited to its practical meaning, rather than interpreted in its
broader, philosophical sense. We must leave out of the question the
results of improper or imperfect educational training and discipline. It
is doubtless a cause of harm to a delicate and nervous child to force
the development of its intelligence; a harsh word hastily uttered by
parents may leave an ineffaceable impression upon a sensitive
organization; severity degenerates into injustice when it confounds a
peevish act, the result of physical disorder, with an act of deliberate
disobedience. The weakness which resigns its authority In order to spare
itself the care of a child's education engenders for life the spirit of
insubordination. The humiliating and unjust reproach, the stinging
sarcasm, wound the child in its tenderest feelings;--but these are not
the forms of cruelty and wrong which fall within reach of the law. It is
unable to interpose between the parents and the child, except in case of
an actual and serious offence, and for the rest it must rely upon the
affection planted by nature in the hearts of parents. These distinctions
are more felt than expressed, and opinion will never deceive itself in
regard to the conduct of unnatural parents.

But if these propositions are absolutely incontestable, how do they
leave room for the function of a society? If children are beaten,
abandoned, given over to odious practices, will not the authorities, on
the complaint of those interested, or compelled by public opinion, be
able adequately to fulfil the task? This reasoning, altogether French,
would not properly take into account the American temperament, the
genius of the Anglo-Saxon race, of its institutions, and of its usages.
In France, since the fourteenth century, misdemeanors have been
prosecuted the more generally by the public minister, acting under whose
orders are numerous officers of judiciary police, who entertain the
complaints of the public and send them, with the result of their
examination, to our courts. The magistrates charged with the case
complete the investigations, if they take place. The elements of the
evidence are therefore combined when the prosecution is instituted. In
the United States these intermediate officials exist but imperfectly
between the injured party and the magistrate who renders judgment. From
lack of sufficient evidence, the rights of this injured party run the
risk of being compromised through his inexperience. Moreover, the
complaint of the child, often directed against its parents or its legal
guardians, involves the examination of a delicate situation, which must
be conducted with much discernment. Without comparing the two systems,
American and French, which correspond each to the particular genius of
the two nations, it will be seen that the American system leaves much
more to private initiative, and that it would become ineffectual when
the victim of the offence, being a child, has neither the energy nor the
knowledge necessary to demonstrate that its complaint is well founded,
without the aid of some one in power. This is the aid which is given by
the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children; and we
can now understand how the exigency of the case, so powerfully felt by
the practical intelligence of the Americans, has called into existence
this potent organization, which we may call the guardian of the rights
of childhood, for the repression of the offences from which it is liable
to suffer. The following anecdote shows how the necessity for this
institution arose, in a manner at once thrilling and dramatic:--

Ten years ago in New York, on the top floor of a tenement-house, in a
miserable room without furniture, a dying woman lay on a pallet, in the
last stage of consumption. A charitable lady who visited her asked what
she could do for her. The dying woman replied: "My hours are numbered,
but how can I die in peace when night and day I hear the beating by her
mother-in-law of the unhappy little girl who lives in the room next to
mine." And, in fact, for a month her heart had been torn by the cries of
this child, Mary Ellen, kept in confinement by this brute. Much moved by
this recital, the visitor felt impelled to demand the interference of
the police. They told her this was impracticable unless she was able to
furnish proof of her allegation. She knew the facts only upon hearsay,
and only in case a misdemeanor were actually proved would it be possible
for the police to interfere as she desired. The charitable feelings of
the lady would not permit her to stop here. She made inquiries among
benevolent societies. But here again she experienced a check. The
societies could not receive the child except upon legal commitment by an
order of court. And charitable persons with the most benevolent
tendencies, being consulted on this difficulty, confessed themselves at
a loss to suggest a remedy in the case, and declared that it was
dangerous to interfere between parents and children; that in so doing
one is liable to become involved in inextricable difficulties, since the
heads of the family are the best guardians of their children. However,
the sorrowful appeal of the dying woman echoed continually in the ears
of her whose charitable aid had been implored. She resolved upon a
supreme effort to rescue this child. She sought Mr. Henry Bergh, a man
who has never been deaf to a cry of despair, and who has devoted his
life to the protection of animals. Mr. Bergh considered the life of a
child to be quite as valuable as that of a beast, and gave it as his
opinion that the tribunals should be appealed to. A warrant was
immediately procured and the child was produced in court, its face
covered with horrible wounds. A pair of scissors with which these wounds
had been inflicted were produced. The facts in the case caused a
profound sensation in the court and throughout the city. The
mother-in-law was arrested, found guilty, and the little girl was taken
from her hands to receive an education which has rendered her an elegant
and accomplished young woman.

Humble beginnings, which it will be well for us to bear in remembrance
for the confusion of our pride! It is from the protection of animals
that has sprung, in New York, that of the child. And, when we
contemplate the great number of societies in the United States,--the
Humane Society of Saratoga, of Bangor, of Keene, of Taunton, of
Connecticut, the Western Pennsylvania, the Tennessee Society, those of
Nashville, of Cleveland, of Cincinnati, of Indianapolis, of Chicago, of
Peoria, of Sangamon, of Quincy, of Minnesota, of Minneapolis, extending,
simultaneously, their help to children and to the brutes, we shall be no
longer astonished either at the combination of effort explained by this
historic origin, or especially at a philosophy which rightly esteems
that cruelty commences with the animal, only to end fatally with the
human being. The proceeding instituted at the instance of Mr. Henry
Bergh was a most valuable precedent. The establishment of a method of
rescue, encouraged complaints, which, till then, had been silent, of the
abandonment, misery, or sufferings of children. Mr. Bergh's society
found itself besieged, and, after deliberation with his counsel, it was
determined to establish another in New York, whose special mission
should be the protection of children. An old gentleman of high
respectability, belonging to the sect of the Quakers, Mr. John D.
Wright, was elected to the presidency, which office he held until his
death, which occurred on the 21st of August, 1880. His successor is Mr.
Elbridge T. Gerry.

However, inasmuch as the authority with which the society sought to be
invested had reference to public justice, and involved the power to
appear for the defence of the interests of others, and to require the
coöperation of public officials, a law was indispensable, in order to
confer these powers. Such a law was passed August 21, 1875, whose
provisions covered not only the case of the New York society, but
determined the functions of all institutions of a similar nature. On
condition of complying with the prescribed formalities for acquiring a
corporate existence, the law granted to these institutions the right to
make complaints, in any jurisdiction, of violations of the statutes
regarding children; it set forth, formally, the duty of magistrates or
officers of police, to cooperate with the societies acting in the limits
of their several jurisdictions. The boundaries of the ground of
protection were thus defined, but there was still lacking the requisite
legislative authority. Experience showed that, besides the misdemeanors
of common law--attempts upon the morals, murder, assault and battery,
etc.--a multitude of offences against children remained unpunished. The
society, therefore, solicited and obtained from the Legislature, powers
which permitted it to repress acts of cruelty towards children that the
law failed to reach. The first of these measures was the law of 1876,
forbidding the employment of minors under sixteen years as dancers,
beggars, street peddlers, as gymnasts or contortionists, or in indecent
occupations prejudicial to their health or perilous to their life. Then
came the law of June 6, 1877, forbidding the admission of minors under
fourteen years into public places, liquor saloons, balls, concerts,
theatres, unless accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. With these
laws, which it caused to be interpreted in the courts in certain test
cases, the society arrived at the most satisfactory results. There were
no longer seen in New York those juvenile beggars whose miserable
appearance is made an instrument of gain by their worthless masters;
those vagrants who disguise their vagabondage under the pretext of
imaginary professions, collecting cigar stumps and rag picking; those
little girls who sell flowers at the doors of houses of bad repute,
often concealing under this ostensible occupation infamous transactions
with panders who keep them in their pay. A determined warfare was
declared against the Italian padroni, who thrive upon the toil of the
little unfortunates to whom they pretend to teach music, and whom they
utilize as peddlers and chimney-sweepers. The conviction of the too
notorious Ancarola was the signal for the suppression of these shameless
villains; the purchases of children ceased, and the cause of humanity
triumphed, thanks to the combined efforts of the society and of the
Italian consul, after long and earnest conferences. It is not only the
Italians, but the children of all nationalities, who have profited from
this powerful patronage: Hungarian, German, Chinese, Irish, French. One
of our compatriots, a girl of fourteen years, came one day to implore
its aid. Her father was a drunkard, who had reached the lowest round in
the ladder of degradation; her mother had no means of subsistence except
concubinage, nor her two sisters except prostitution. She begged that
they would save her from this life of shame. The society received her,
procured her a position, a good education. Learning that she was heiress
to a considerable property left by a grandfather, the society took
active steps in France to secure to her her rights. Unfortunately, the
agent who had possession of the estate became insolvent after having
squandered the property, and it was impossible to recover it. The
society continued to care for the young girl up to the day of her
marriage to a young man enjoying a regular salary of $1,200, and worthy
of her in all respects.

The strict watch kept upon the liquor saloons contributed equally to
improve the condition of children. Many were in the habit of being sent
by confirmed drunkards to buy the "liquid poison!" They thus promoted
this vice whose hardened subjects would prolong It even beyond the grave
by asking that "a bottle of whiskey may be put in their coffin." The
obedience of the children was rewarded by invitations to drink, which
initiated them in debauchery. It was among women abandoned to drink that
lived Eliza Clark, a child of eleven years, paying for the drinks with
the gains which she realized from dancing or singing; in return, the
women gave her brandy to drink and tobacco to smoke, so that when she
was found she resembled "a beast more than a human creature." They also
suppressed the playing of pool for drinks by minors, instituted by
saloon keepers to induce them to drink liquor, which was the reward of
those whom fortune favored in the game.

The police of the theatres performed their duty conscientiously, and the
statutes were obeyed. The necessity of being accompanied by an adult was
felt to be a strange restraint by these gamins eager for the theatre,
whose attractions led them to abandon school, work, and family, and to
procure the money for their admission by stealing it from their parents,
or at a pinch from strangers; and where they would mingle, between the
acts, with pick-pockets and low characters who encouraged them in the
ways of vice. And for a stronger reason, the child was more carefully
protected against the perils of the stage than against those of the
auditory. Juvenile performances were forbidden, and the youthful
performers were excluded successively from the Columbia Opera House or
Theatre des Folies, from the Italian Opera, from the Gem Theatre, from
Parker's American Theatre, and from the Juvenile Opera. Permissions for
individual performances were peremptorily refused even to parents who
were actors. Here the work of the society encountered serious obstacles,
and it is necessary to quote from Mr. Elbridge T. Gerry in order to
appreciate the motives by which the society was actuated in combating
with vigorous purpose the opposition which it met with: "The Press,
which is influenced to a considerable extent by the representations of
theatrical managers, often criticises severely any attempt to deprive
the public of what it is pleased to call its legitimate amusements, by
the suppression of such entertainments. And many pronounced patrons of
the dramatic art even maintain that such exhibitions are indispensable
to the proper development of a dramatic education, and that when the
necessities of the parents require it, charity should encourage the
children to procure this means of obtaining a livelihood. But let us
examine the other side of the question. When the curtain rises in the
theatre, a draught of warm air rushes from the audience on to the stage,
and often paralyzes for some moments the vocal chords of the actors.
When the curtain falls, the cold air comes down from the flies, and the
children, who have become over heated by their physical exertions,
shiver to the marrow before they are able to accustom themselves to this
sudden change of temperature. Every night these things are renewed.
During the day the children sleep as best they can. Their nervous system
is rapidly undermined; their digestion becomes impaired. It is rare that
one can point to instances of children arriving early at positions of
eminence in the dramatic art. It is true that there are a few who shine
as stars in the theatrical profession, and who entered upon their
dramatic career in early childhood; but these are rare exceptions."

It is not only on the stage that the morals of the children have been
protected; the keepers of low resorts have been prosecuted by the
society.

It has shut up the den of the too celebrated Owney Geoghegan, who long
defied the law and the police, encouraging the efforts of prostitutes to
debauch young girls. Women of notorious reputation, who enticed away the
children of respectable mechanics to sell them for money, have been
severely punished. In short, not content with bringing to justice these
outrageous offenders with a firmness which has made it the terror of
these oppressors of childhood, the society has been the instrument of
checking acts even of carelessness or imprudence. It no longer permits
the drunkard to keep his children in a cellar where the rats bite their
feet; or the mercenary father to allow his son to engage in a wager,
dangerous to his health, to make a hundred miles in twenty-four hours;
or a man to ride a bicycle bearing on his shoulders his five-year-old
daughter.

So great a work demanded accommodations of corresponding magnitude. In
1881, and at the price of $43,000, the society purchased a large
building situated at the corner of 23rd street and 4th avenue, one of
the most important thoroughfares of New York. Not far from the offices,
in the main part of the building, is found a collection of all the
instruments of cruelty seized in the legal proceedings,--rods of iron,
whips, firebars (_barres de poeles_), pokers, cudgels (_gourdins_), and
other instruments. These furnish convincing proofs of the sufferings of
the children,--for example those of Maggie Scully, when she said: "I do
all the work at my aunt's house, and if you do not believe that I have
been beaten, look at me, for my aunt has beaten me this morning with a
poker." Adjoining the offices are the rooms for the officers and the
archives of the institution, containing the papers in each case setting
forth the facts and the evidence. On the upper floor is a dormitory,
where the children are kept until final disposition is made of them,
that is to say, generally during one night. In fact, the work is going
on without interruption at all hours of the day and night. If at night a
call by telephone is received from the police-station, an officer of the
society responds immediately to this appeal.

As is most frequently the case, he finds a drunken woman in the street,
with three or four ragged children gathered about her, covered with
vermin, without fire or lodging, having been abandoned by the father.
The mother is detained at the station, but the children are taken to the
society, where they are washed, fed, and for the first time in their
lives, perhaps, put to sleep in a bed. On the following day, the
children are taken to court. If the parents or guardians are worthy,
they are returned to them; if not, the justice commits them to some
charitable institution. Some of these have a religious character, and
others a secular one; the American judge, in rendering his decision, is
influenced by interests of family, of nationality, of race, or of
religion of the child, as well as by the requirements of the law. Sick
children and nursing infants are sent to the hospital on Randall's
Island, the Ladies' Deborah Nursery, and the Child's Hospital. Each of
the charitable institutions receives a per capita allowance for children
during the time that they remain in their care.

The society does not abandon them, and if a complaint arises of improper
treatment, it causes legal proceedings to be instituted against those
who are responsible therefor.

A recent case of this kind was that of the "Old Gentlemen's Home."

It will be readily seen that the cases which come before the society
must be very numerous: during the nine years of its existence it has
investigated 13,077 complaints, involving 52,308 children, prosecuted
4,035 cases, convicted 3,637 offenders, rescued and placed in homes or
institutions 7,555 children. In the last three years it has temporarily
sheltered and clothed 1,092 children and furnished them with 9,309
meals. These figures acquire a singular force when one reads in the
annual reports the curious history of these cases setting forth the
facts in detail. In 1882 the magistrates of the city issued 1,267
warrants. On the information furnished, 834 children were held in
custody, 1,040 released. The city of New York is compelled to pay for
the support of children thus committed to custody. A saving of $108,160
has therefore been realized to the benefit of the tax-payers of New
York. In 1883 they received 2,966 complaints; there were 1,176
prosecutions and 1,128 convictions; 2,008 children were placed in
institutions of charity. Of 2,341 children arrested 1,078 were held,
1,263 released.

The resources of the society are derived exclusively from the liberality
of the public. It receives no aid either from the State or city. On the
contrary, it pay taxes even on the water used in the care of the
children in its charge. The account of receipts and expenditures amounts
to about $17,000. Of the $43,000 which its building cost, $25,000 remain
on mortgage. The field in which the society employs its activity is
already large, and is rapidly extending. It endeavors to obtain from the
legislature laws which will defeat the aims of those too numerous
enterprises which, under color of charity, utilize young children, for
example, the baby farms and those establishments (called _hospitaliers_)
which have neither the means nor the facilities necessary to their
proper conduct. It requires that children shall not be employed in
manual labor before the age of fourteen years, and only after their
physical capability has been certified to by a physician. It insists on
the prohibition of all dangerous occupations. The former articles in
this Bulletin on the abuses which exist in the industrial employment of
children in New York show how justifiable is this action of the society.
"Thousands of children," says Mr. Gerry, "die of diseases contracted in
these injurious employments; in this respect our nation is far behind
Europe in its means of affording protection to children. In France,
severe laws have been in operation since 1841. England has promptly
followed this example, and like the English legislation, that of France
expressly forbids the employment of children in the manufacture of
dangerous substances, of a nature poisonous or explosive. You have only
to visit our hospitals to see the little creatures with hand or fingers
mutilated, from being employed at too early an age in the operation of
machinery. Our negligence makes manifest the wisdom of the French law,
whose lesson is so necessary with us." This needed progress will
without doubt be made, and the society will continue with increased zeal
its charitable work. It gives to the legislator the benefit of a
practical experience in the work, to the child its powerful advocacy in
the courts, to justice the impartiality of prudent investigations, to
public opinion the assurance of the proper conduct of charitable
institutions and an impulse in the direction of improvement. It is thus
that in this land of enterprise, whose customs are adverse to permitting
affairs even of the gravest importance, like the prosecution of crimes
or the direction of works of benevolence, to be concentrated in the
hands of public officials, the consequences of _self-government_ have
been happily corrected in points where they would otherwise become
extreme, in regard to children. The New York society is therefore well
described by its worthy president, Mr. Elbridge T. Gerry, as "the Hand
of Protection." And this hand is too charitable for us to forbear to
give it a cordial pressure across the vast expanse of the Atlantic.

       *       *       *       *       *

THE MIDDLESEX CANAL.

BY LORIN L. DAME, A.M.


The curious traveller may still trace with little difficulty the line of
the old Middlesex canal, with here and there a break, from the basin at
Charlestown to its junction with the Merrimac at Middlesex village. Like
an accusing ghost, it never strays far from the Boston & Lowell
Railroad, to which it owes its untimely end.

At Medford, the Woburn sewer runs along one portion of its bed, the Spot
pond water-pipes another. The tow-path, at one point, marks the course
of the defunct Mystic Valley Railroad; at others, it has been
metamorphosed into sections of the highway; at others, it survives as a
cow-path or woodland lane; at Wilmington, the stone sides of a lock have
become the lateral walls of a dwelling-house cellar.

Judging the canal by the pecuniary recompense it brought its projectors,
it must be admitted a dismal failure; yet its inception was none the
less a comprehensive, far-reaching scheme, which seemed to assure a
future of ample profits and great public usefulness. Inconsiderable as
this work may appear compared with the modern achievements of
engineering, it was, for the times, a gigantic undertaking, beset with
difficulties scarcely conceivable to-day. Boston was a small town of
about twenty thousand inhabitants; Medford, Woburn, and Chelmsford were
insignificant villages; and Lowell was as yet unborn, while the valley
of the Merrimac, northward into New Hampshire, supported a sparse
agricultural population. But the outlook was encouraging. It was a
period of rapid growth and marked improvements. The subject of closer
communication with the interior early became a vital question.
Turnpikes, controlled by corporations, were the principal avenues over
which country produce, lumber, firewood, and building-stone found their
way to the little metropolis. The cost of entertainment at the various
country inns, the frequent tolls, and the inevitable wear and tear of
teaming, enhanced very materially the price of all these articles. The
Middlesex canal was the first step towards the solution of the problem
of cheap transportation. The plan originated with the Hon. James
Sullivan, who was for six years a judge of the Supreme Court of
Massachusetts, attorney-general from 1790 to 1807, and governor in 1807
and 1808, dying while holding the latter office.

A brief glance at the map of the New England States will bring out in
bold relief the full significance of Sullivan's scheme. It will be seen
that the Merrimac river, after pursuing a southerly course as far as
Middlesex village, turns abruptly to the north-east. A canal from
Charlestown mill-pond to this bend of the river, a distance of 27-1/4
miles, would open a continuous water-route of eighty miles to Concord,
N.H. From this point, taking advantage of Lake Sunapee, a canal could
easily be run in a north-westerly direction to the Connecticut at
Windsor, Vt.; and thence, making use of intermediate streams,
communication could be opened with the St. Lawrence. The speculative
mind of Sullivan dwelt upon the pregnant results that must follow the
connection of Boston with New Hampshire and possibly Vermont and Canada.
He consulted his friend, Col. Baldwin, sheriff of Middlesex, who had a
natural taste for engineering, and they came to the conclusion that the
plan was feasible. Should the undertaking succeed between Concord and
Boston, the gradual increase in population and traffic would in time
warrant the completion of the programme. Even should communication never
be established beyond Concord, the commercial advantages of opening to
the market the undeveloped resources of upper New Hampshire would be a
sufficient justification. Accordingly, James Sullivan, Loammi Baldwin,
Jonathan Porter, Samuel Swan, and five members of the Hall family at
Medford, petitioned the General Court for an act of incorporation. A
charter was granted, bearing date of June 22, 1793, "incorporating James
Sullivan, Esq., and others, by the name of the Proprietors of the
Middlesex Canal," and on the same day was signed by His Excellency John
Hancock, Governor of the Commonwealth. By this charter the proprietors
were authorized to lay such assessments from time to time as might be
required for the construction of the canal.

At their first meeting the proprietors intrusted the management of the
corporation to a board of thirteen members, who were to choose a
president and vice-presidents from their own number, the entire board
subject to annual election. Boston capitalists subscribed freely, and
Russell, Gore, Barrell, Craigie, and Brooks appear among the earliest
directors. This board organized on the 11th of October by the choice of
James Sullivan as president, and Col. Baldwin and John Brooks
(afterwards Gov. Brooks) as vice-presidents. The first step was to make
the necessary surveys between the Charlestown basin and the Merrimac at
Chelmsford; but the science of engineering was in its infancy, and it
was difficult to find a competent person to undertake the task. At
length Samuel Thompson, of Woburn, was engaged to make a preliminary
survey; but the directors, not wholly satisfied with his report,
afterwards secured the services of Samuel Weston, an eminent English
engineer, then employed in Pennsylvania on the Potomac canals. His
report, made Aug. 2, 1794, was favorable; and it is interesting to
compare his figures with those of Mr. Thompson. As calculated by
Thompson, the ascent from Medford bridge to the Concord river, at
Billerica, was found to be 68-1/2 ft.; the actual difference in level,
as found by Weston, was 104 ft. By Thompson's survey there was a further
ascent of 16-1/2 ft. to the Merrimac; when, in fact, the water at
Billerica bridge is almost 25 ft. above the Merrimac at Chelmsford.

Col. Baldwin, who superintended the construction of the canal, removed
the first turf, Sept. 10, 1794. The progress was slow and attended with
many embarrassments. The purchase of land from more than one hundred
proprietors demanded skilful diplomacy. Most of the lands used for the
canal were acquired by voluntary sale, and conveyed in fee-simple to the
corporation. Sixteen lots were taken under authority of the Court of
Sessions; while for thirteen neither deed nor record could be found when
the corporation came to an end. Some of the land was never paid for, as
the owner refused to accept the sum awarded. The compensation ranged
from about $150 an acre in Medford to $25 in Billerica. The numerous
conveyances are all in Sullivan's handwriting.

Labor was not easily procured, probably from the scarcity of laborers,
as the wages paid, $10 a month and board, were presumably as much as
could be earned in manual labor elsewhere. "An order was sent to England
for a levelling instrument made by S. & W. Jones, of London, and this
was the only instrument used for engineering purposes after the first
survey by Weston." Two routes were considered; the rejected route was
forty years later selected for the Lowell Railroad. The canal, 30 ft.
wide, 4 ft. deep, with 20 locks, 7 aqueducts, and crossed by 50 bridges,
was, in 1802, sufficiently completed for the admission of water, and the
following year was opened to public navigation from the Merrimac to the
Charles. Its cost, about $500,000, of which one-third was for land
damages, was but little more than the estimate. Commencing at
Charlestown mill-pond, it passed through Medford, crossing the Mystic by
a wooden aqueduct of 100 ft., to Horn pond in Woburn. Traversing Woburn
and Wilmington it crossed the Shawshine by an aqueduct of 137 ft., and
struck the Concord, from which it receives its water, at Billerica
Mills. Entering the Concord by a stone guard-lock, it crossed, with a
floating tow-path, and passed out on the northern side through another
stone guard-lock; thence it descended 27 ft., in a course of 5-1/4
miles, through Chelmsford to the Merrimac, making its entire length
27-1/4 m.

The proprietors made Charlestown bridge the eastern terminus for their
boats, but ultimately communication was opened with the markets and
wharves upon the harbor, through Mill Creek, over a section of which
Blackstone street now extends.

As the enterprise had the confidence of the business community, money
for prosecuting the work had been procured with comparative ease. The
stock was divided into 800 shares, and among the original stockholders
appear the names of Ebenezer and Dudley Hall, Oliver Wendall, John Adams
of Quincy, Peter C. Brooks of Medford, and Andrew Craigie of Cambridge.
The stock had steadily advanced from $25 a share in the autumn of 1794
to $473 in 1803, the year the canal was opened, touching $500 in 1804.
Then a decline set in, a few dollars at a time, till 1816, when its
market value was $300 with few takers, although the canal was in
successful operation, and, in 1814, the obstructions in the Merrimac had
been surmounted, so that canal boats, locking into the river at
Chelmsford, had been poled up stream as far as Concord.

Firewood and lumber always formed a very considerable item in the
business of the canal. The navy-yard at Charlestown and the shipyards on
the Mystic form any years relied upon the canal for the greater part of
the timber used in shipbuilding; and work was sometimes seriously
retarded by low water in the Merrimac, which interfered with
transportation. The supply of oak and pine about Lake Winnipiseogee, and
along the Merrimac and its tributaries, was thought to be practically
inexhaustible. In the opinion of Daniel Webster, the value of this
timber had been increased $5,000,000 by the canal. Granite from
Tyngsborough, and agricultural products from a great extent of fertile
country, found their way along this channel to Boston; while the return
boats supplied taverns and country stores with their annual stock of
goods. The receipts from tolls, rents, etc. were steadily increasing,
amounting,

  in 1812 to $12,600,
  "  1813 "   16,800,
  "  1814 "   25,700,
  "  1815 "   29,200,
  "  1816 "   32,600,

Yet, valuable, useful, and productive as the canal had proved itself, it
had lost the confidence of the public, and, with a few exceptions, of
the proprietors themselves. The reason for this state of sentiment can
easily be shown. The general depression of business on account of the
embargo and the war of 1812 had its effect upon the canal. In the deaths
of Gov. Sullivan and Col. Baldwin, in the same year, 1808, the
enterprise was deprived of the wise and energetic counsellors to whom it
owed its existence.

The aqueducts and most of the locks, being built of wood, required large
sums for annual repairs; the expenses arising from imperfections in the
banks, and from the erection of toll-houses and public houses for the
accommodation of the boatmen, were considerable; but the heaviest
expenses were incurred in opening the Merrimac for navigation. From
Concord, N.H., to the head of the canal the river has a fall of 123 ft.,
necessitating various locks and canals. The Middlesex Canal Corporation
contributed to the building of the Wiccasee locks and canals, $12,000;
Union locks and canals, $49,932; Hookset canal, $6,750; Bow canal and
locks, $14,115, making a sum total of $82,797 to be paid from the income
of the Middlesex canal.

The constant demand for money in excess of the incomes had proved
demoralizing. Funds had been raised from time to time by lotteries. In
the Columbian "Centinel & Massachusetts Federalist" of Aug. 15, 1804,
appears an advertisement of the Amoskeag Canal Lottery, 6,000 tickets at
$5, with an enumeration of prizes. The committee, consisting of Phillips
Payson, Samuel Swan, Jr., and Loammi Baldwin, Jr., appealed to the
public for support, assuring the subscribers that all who did not draw
prizes would get the full value of their money in the reduced price of
fuel.

In 1816 the Legislature of Massachusetts granted the proprietors of the
canal, in consideration of its usefulness to the public, two townships
of land in the district of Maine, near Moosehead lake. This State aid,
however, proved of no immediate service, as purchasers could not be
found for several years for property so remote. Appeals to capitalists,
lotteries, and State aid proved insufficient; the main burden fell upon
the stockholders. In accordance with the provisions of the charter,
assessments had been levied, as occasion required, up to 1816, 99 in
number, amounting to $670 per share; and the corporation was still
staggering under a debt of $64,000. Of course, during all this time, no
dividends could be declared.

Under these unpromising conditions a committee, consisting of Josiah
Quincy, Joseph Hall, and Joseph Coolidge, Jr., was appointed to devise
the appropriate remedy. "In the opinion of your committee," the report
reads, "the real value of the property, at this moment, greatly exceeds
the market value, and many years will not elapse before it will be
considered among the best of all practicable monied investments. The
Directors contemplate no further extension of the canal. _The work is
done_, both the original and subsidiary canals.... Let the actual
incomes of the canal be as great as they may, so long as they are
consumed in payment of debts and interest on loans, the aspect of the
whole is that of embarrassment and mortgage. The present rates of
income, if continued, and there is every rational prospect, not only of
its continuance, but of its great and rapid increase, will enable the
corporation--when relieved of its present liabilities,--at once to
commence a series of certain, regular, and satisfactory dividends." They
accordingly recommended a final assessment of $80 per share, completely
to extinguish all liabilities. This assessment, the 100th since the
commencement, was levied in 1817, making a sum total of $600,000,
extorted from the long-suffering stockholders. If to this sum the
interest of the various assessments be added, computed to Feb. 1, 1819,
the date of the first dividend, the actual cost of each share is found
to have been $1,455.25.

The prosperity of the canal property now seemed fully assured. The first
dividend, though only $15, was the promise of golden showers in the near
future, and the stock once more took an upward flight. From 1819 to 1836
were the palmy days of the canal, unvexed with debts, and subject to
very moderate expenses for annual repairs and management.

It is difficult to ascertain the whole number of boats employed at any
one time. Many were owned and run by the proprietors of the canal; and
many were constructed and run by private parties who paid the regular
tolls for whatever merchandise they transported. Boats belonging to the
same parties were conspicuously numbered, like railway cars to-day. From
"Regulations relative to the Navigation of the Middlesex Canal," a
pamphlet published in 1830, it appears that boats were required to be
not less than 40 ft. nor more than 75 ft. in length and not less than 9
ft. nor more than 9-1/2 ft. in width. Two men, a driver and steersman,
usually made up the working force; the boats, however, that went up the
Merrimac required three men, one to steer, and two to pole. The Lowell
boats carried 20 tons of coal; 15 tons were sufficient freight for
Concord; when the water in the Merrimac was low, not more than 6 or 7
tons could be taken up the river. About 1830 the boatmen received $15
per month.

Lumber was transported in rafts of about 75 ft. long and 9 ft. wide; and
these rafts, not exceeding ten in number, were often united in "bands."
A band of seven to ten rafts required the services of five men,
including the driver. Boats were drawn by horses, and lumber by oxen;
and "luggage boats" were required to make two and a half miles an hour,
while "passage boats" attained a speed of four miles. Boats of the same
class, and going the same way, were not allowed to pass each other, thus
making "racing" impossible on the staid waters of the old canal.
Whenever a boat approached a lock, the conductor sounded his horn to
secure the prompt attention of the lock-tender; but due regard was paid
to the religious sentiment of New England. Travelling in the canal being
permitted on Sundays, "in consideration of the distance from home at
which those persons using it generally are, it may be reasonably
expected that they should not disturb those places of public worship
near which they pass, nor occasion any noise to interrupt the
tranquillity of the day. Therefore, it is established that no
_Signal-Horn_ shall be used or blown on Sundays."

The tariff varied greatly from year to year. In 1827 the rate from
Lowell to Boston was $2.00 the gross ton; but many articles were carried
on much lower terms.

On account of liability of damage to the banks of the canal, all
navigation ceased at dark; hence, at every lock, or series of locks, a
tavern was established. These were all owned by the corporation, and
were often let to the lock-tender, who eked out his income by the
accommodation of boatmen and horses. The Bunker Hill Tavern, in
Charlestown, situated so as to accommodate both county and canal travel,
was leased, in 1830, for $350; in 1838, it let for $500. The Horn Pond
House, at Woburn, in 1838, was leased for $700. In 1825, a two-story
dwelling-house, 36 X 18, built at a cost of $1,400, for the
accommodation of boatmen and raftsmen, at Charlestown, rented, with
stable attached, for $140. In all these cases, the real estate was
supposed to pay ten per cent.

Some of these canal-taverns established a wide reputation for good
cheer, and boatmen contrived to be overtaken by night in their
vicinity. Sometimes fifteen or twenty boats would be detained at one of
these favorite resorts, and a jolly crowd fraternized in the primitive
bar-room. The temperance sentiment had not yet taken a firm hold in New
England. "Flip" was the high-toned beverage of those days; but
"black-strap," a compound of rum and molasses, sold at three cents a
glass, was the particular "vanity" of the boatmen. In the smaller
taverns, a barrel of old Medford, surmounted by a pitcher of molasses,
scorning the flimsy subterfuges of modern times, boldly invited its
patrons to draw and mix at their own sweet will. "Plenty of drunkenness,
Uncle Joe, in those days?" we queried of an ancient boatman who was
dilating upon the good old times. "Bless your heart, no!" was the
answer. "Mr. Eddy didn't put up with no drunkards on the canal. They
could drink all night, sir, and be steady as an eight-day clock in the
morning."

When the feverish haste born of the locomotive and telegraph had not yet
infected society, a trip over the canal in the passenger-packet, the
"Governor Sullivan," must have been an enjoyable experience. Protected
by iron rules from the dangers of collision; undaunted by squalls of
wind, realizing, should the craft be capsized, that he had nothing to do
but walk ashore, the traveller, speeding along at the leisurely pace of
four miles per hour, had ample time for observation and reflection.
Seated, in summer, under a capacious awning, he traversed the valley of
the Mystic skirting the picturesque shores of Mystic pond. Instead of a
foreground of blurred landscape, vanishing, ghostlike, ere its features
could be fairly distinguished, soft bits of characteristic New England
scenery, clear cut as cameos, lingered caressingly on his vision; green
meadows, fields riotous with blossomed clover, fragrant orchards, and
quaint old farmhouses, with a background of low hills wooded to their
summits.

Passing under bridges, over rivers, between high embankments, and
through deep cuttings, floated up hill by a series of locks, he
marvelled at this triumph of engineering, and, if he were a director,
pictured the manufactories that were to spring up along this great
thoroughfare, swelling its revenues for all time.

The tow-path of the canal was a famous promenade. Upon Sunday
afternoons, especially, numerous pedestrians from the dusty city
strolled along the canal for a breath of fresh air and a glimpse of the
open country, through the Royal estate in Medford, past the substantial
old-fashioned mansion-house of Peter C. Brooks, as far, perhaps, as the
Baldwin estate, and the birthplace of Count Rumford, in Woburn. "I love
that old tow-path," said Uncle Joe. "'Twas there I courted my wife; and
every time the boat went by she came tripping out to walk a piece with
me! Bless you, sir the horses knew her step, and it wan't so heavy,
nuther."

Meanwhile, under the direction of Caleb Eddy, who assumed the agency of
the corporation in 1825, bringing great business ability and
unquenchable zeal to his task, the perishable wooden locks were
gradually replaced with stone, a new stone dam was built at Billerica,
and the service brought to a high state of efficiency. The new dam was
the occasion of a lawsuit brought by the proprietors of the Sudbury
meadows, claiming damages to the extent of $10,000 for flooding their
meadows. The defendants secured the services of Samuel Hoar, Esq., of
Concord, assisted by the Hon. Daniel Webster, who accepted a retaining
fee of $100 to "manage and argue the case in conjunction with Mr. Hoar.
The cause was to have been tried November, 1833. Mr. Webster was called
on by me and promised to examine the evidence and hold himself in
readiness for the trial, but for some time before he was not to be found
in Boston, at one time at New York, at another in Philadelphia, and so
on from place to place so that I am satisfied no dependance can be
placed with certainty upon his assistance, and," plaintively concludes
the agent, "our $100 has gone to profit and loss account."

On the other side was the Hon. Jeremiah Mason, assisted by Franklin
Dexter, Esq. This case was decided the following year adversely to the
plaintiffs.

With the accession of business brought by the corporations at Lowell,
the prospect for increased dividends in the future was extremely
encouraging. The golden age of the canal appeared close at hand; but the
fond hopes of the proprietors were once more destined to disappointment.
Even the genius of James Sullivan had not foreseen the railway
locomotive. In 1829 a petition was presented to the Legislature for the
survey of a railroad from Boston to Lowell. The interests of the canal
were seriously involved. A committee was promptly chosen to draw up for
presentation to the General Court "a remonstrance of the Proprietors of
Middlesex Canal, against the grant of a charter to build a railroad from
Boston to Lowell." This remonstrance, signed by William Sullivan, Joseph
Coolidge, and George Hallett, bears date of Boston, Feb. 12, 1830, and
conclusively shows how little the business men of fifty years ago
anticipated the enormous development of our resources consequent upon
the application of steam to transportation:--

     The remonstrants take pleasure in declaring, that they join in the
     common sentiment of surprise and commendation, that any
     intelligence and enterprise should have raised so rapidly and so
     permanently, such establishments as are seen at Lowell. The
     proprietors of these works have availed themselves of _the canal_,
     for their transportation for all articles, except in the winter
     months ... and every effort has been made by this corporation to
     afford every facility, it was hoped and believed, to the entire
     satisfaction of the Lowell proprietors. The average annual amount
     of tolls paid by these proprietors has been only about four
     thousand dollars. It is believed no safer or cheaper mode of
     conveyance can ever be established, nor any so well adapted for
     carrying heavy and bulky articles. To establish therefore a
     _substitute_ for the canal alongside of it, and in many places
     within a few rods of it, and to do that which the canal was made to
     do, seems to be a measure not called for by any exigency, nor one
     which the Legislature can permit, without implicitly declaring that
     all investments of money in public enterprises must be subjected to
     the will of any applicants who think that they may benefit
     themselves without regard to older enterprises, which have a claim
     to protection from public authority. With regard, then, to
     transportation of tonnage goods, the means exist for all but the
     winter months, as effectually as any that can be provided.

     There is a supposed source of revenue to a railroad, _from
     carrying passengers_. As to this, the remonstrants venture no
     opinion, except to say, that passengers are now carried, at all
     hours, as rapidly and safely as they are anywhere else in the
     world.... To this, the remonstrants would add, that the use of a
     railroad, _for passengers only_, has been tested by experience,
     nowhere, hitherto; and that it remains to be known, whether this is
     a mode which will command general confidence and approbation, and
     that, therefore, no facts are now before the public, which furnish
     the conclusion, that the grant of a railroad is a public exigency
     even for such a purpose. The Remonstrants would also add, that so
     far as they know and believe, "_there never can be a sufficient
     inducement to extend a railroad from Lowell westwardly and
     northwestwardly, to the Connecticut, so as to make it the great
     avenue to and from the interior, but that its termination must be
     at Lowell_" (italics our own), "and, consequently that it is to be
     a substitute for the modes of transportation now in use between
     that place and Boston, _and cannot deserve patronage from the
     supposition that it is to be more extensively useful_...."

     The Remonstrants, therefore, respectfully submit: First, that there
     be no such exigency as will warrant the granting of the prayer for
     a railroad to and from Lowell.

     Secondly, that, if that prayer be granted, provision should be made
     as a condition for granting it, that the Remonstrants shall be
     indemnified for the losses which will be thereby occasioned to
     them.

This may seem the wilful blindness of self-interest; but the utterances
of the press and the legislative debates of the period are similar in
tone. In relation to another railroad, the "Boston Transcript" of Sept.
1, 1830, remarks: "It is not astonishing that so much reluctance exists
against plunging into doubtful speculations.... The public itself is
divided as to the practicability of the Rail Road. If they expect the
assistance of capitalists, they must stand ready to guarantee the
_percentum per annum_; without this, all hopes of Rail Roads are
visionary and chimerical." In a report of legislative proceedings
published in the "Boston Courier," of Jan. 25, 1830, Mr. Cogswell, of
Ipswich, remarked: "Railways, Mr. Speaker, may do well enough in old
countries, but will never be the thing for so young a country as this.
When you can make the rivers run back, it will be time enough to make a
railway." Notwithstanding the pathetic remonstrances and strange
vaticinations of the canal proprietors, the Legislature incorporated the
road and refused compensation to the canal. Even while the railroad was
in process of construction, the canal directors do not seem to have
realized the full gravity of the situation. They continued the policy of
replacing wood with stone, and made every effort to perfect the service
in all its details; as late as 1836 the agent recommended improvements.
The amount of tonnage continued to increase--the very sleepers used in
the construction of the railway were boated, it is said, to points
convenient for the workmen.

In 1832 the canal declared a dividend of $22 per share; from 1834 to
1837, inclusive, a yearly dividend of $30.

The disastrous competition of the Lowell Railroad was now beginning to
be felt. In 1835 the Lowell goods conveyed by canal paid tonnage dues of
$11,975.51; in 1836 the income from this source had dwindled to
$6,195.77. The canal dividends had been kept up to their highest mark by
the sale of its townships in Maine and other real estate: but now they
began to drop. The year the Lowell road went into full operation the
receipts of the canal were reduced one-third; and when the Nashua &
Lowell road went into full operation, in 1840, they were reduced another
third. The board of directors waged a plucky warfare with the railroads,
reducing the tariff on all articles, and almost abolishing it on some,
till the expenditures of the canal outran its income; but steam came out
triumphant. Even sanguine Caleb Eddy became satisfied that longer
competition was vain, and set himself to the difficult task of saving
fragments from the inevitable wreck.

At this time (1843) Boston numbered about 100,000 inhabitants, and was
dependent for water upon cisterns and wells. The supply of water in the
wells had been steadily diminishing for years, and what remained was
necessarily subject to contamination from numberless sources. "One
specimen which I analyzed," said Dr. Jackson, "which gave three per
cent, of animal and vegetable putrescent matter, was publicly sold as a
mineral water; it was believed that water having such a remarkable fetid
odor and nauseous taste, could be no other than that of a sulphur
spring; but its medicinal powers vanished with the discovery that the
spring arose from a neighboring drain." Here was a golden opportunity.
Eddy proposed to abandon the canal as a means of transportation, and
convert it into an aqueduct for supplying the City of Boston with
wholesome water. The sections between the Merrimac and Concord at one
extremity, and Charlestown mill-pond and Woburn at the other, were to be
wholly discontinued. Flowing along the open channel of the canal from
the Concord river to Horn-pond locks in Woburn, from thence it was to be
conducted in iron pipes to a reservoir upon Mount Benedict in
Charlestown, a hill eighty feet above the sea-level.

The good quality of the Concord-river water was vouched for by the
"analysis of four able and practical chemists, Dr. Charles T. Jackson,
of Boston; John W. Webster, of Cambridge University; S.L. Dana, of
Lowell, and A.A. Hayes, Esq., of the chemical works at Roxbury." The
various legal questions involved were submitted to the Hon. Jeremiah
Mason, who gave an opinion, dated Dec. 21, 1842, favorable to the
project. The form for an act of incorporation was drawn up; and a
pamphlet was published, in 1843, by Caleb Eddy, entitled an "Historical
sketch of the Middlesex Canal, with remarks for the consideration of the
Proprietors," setting forth the new scheme in glowing colors.

But despite the feasibility of the plan proposed, and the energy with
which it was pushed, the agitation came to naught; and Eddy, despairing
of the future, resigned his position as agent in 1845. Among the
directors during these later years were Ebenezer Chadwick, Wm. Appleton,
Wm. Sturgis, Charles F. Adams, A.A. Lawrence, and Abbott Lawrence; but
no business ability could long avert the catastrophe. Stock fell to
$150, and finally the canal was discontinued, according to Amory's Life
of Sullivan, in 1846. It would seem, however, that a revival of
business was deemed within the range of possibilities, for in
conveyances made in 1852 the company reserved the right to use the land
"for canalling purposes"; and the directors annually went through with
the form of electing an agent and collector as late as 1853.

"Its vocation gone, and valueless for any other service," says Amory,
"the canal property was sold for $130,000. After the final dividends,
little more than the original assessments had been returned to the
stockholders." Oct. 3, 1859, the Supreme Court issued a decree,
declaring that the proprietors had "forfeited all their franchises and
privileges, by reason of non-feasance, non-user, misfeasance and
neglect." Thus was the corporation forever extinguished.

       *       *       *       *       *

THE TAVERNS OF BOSTON IN YE OLDEN TIME.

BY DAVID M. BALFOUR.


The first tavern in Boston was kept by Samuel Coles. It was opened in
March, 1633, and stood near the south-west corner of Merchants row and
Corn court, with an area in front on Merchants row and also on Fanueil
Hall square, which in latter days have been covered with buildings. It
was destroyed by fire during the early part of the eighteenth century,
and the older portion of the present edifice was erected in 1737, which
has been enlarged on the northerly side. It was towards the close of the
last century known as the "Brazier Inn," and was kept by a widow lady of
that name. It is now known as the "Hancock House," and is kept by a
stalwart Scotchman named Alexander Clarkson. Gov. Vane held a council in
the south-westerly room in the second story with Miantonomoh, the
Narragansett chief. The same room was subsequently occupied by Lafayette
in 1773, and afterwards by Talleyrand in 1798.

The State Arms Tavern was built in 1645, and stood on the south-east
corner of State and Exchange streets. It was occupied as the
custom-house just before the Revolution.

The Star Inn was built in 1645, and stood on the north-east corner of
Hanover and Union streets. It was first kept by Thomas Hawkins, and
afterwards by Andrew Neal, a Scotchman. The Scots' Charitable Society,
of which the landlord was a member, frequently held its meetings there.

The Roebuck Tavern was built in 1650. It stood on the east side of
Merchants row, between Clinton and North streets. It was believed to
have been built by a descendant of Richard Whittington, the Lord Mayor
of London in 1419, who was famed for his love of cats.

The Ship Tavern was built in 1651, and stood on North street, just
beyond the corner of Fleet street. John Vyall kept it in 1663, and it
was at one time called "Noah's Ark." The peace commissioners sent over
by Charles II. held their sessions there. It was demolished in 1866.

The King's Arms Tavern was built in 1654, and stood on the southeast
corner of Washington and Brattle streets, opposite the Samuel Adams
statue.

The Red Lion Tavern stood on the north-west corner of North and Richmond
streets. It was built in 1654, and kept by Nicholas Upsall, a Quaker,
who was persecuted, imprisoned, and banished for his faith. Near this
spot the devastating fire of November 27, 1676, broke out in one
Wakefield's house.

The Blue Anchor Tavern stood on the site of No. 254 Washington street.
It was built in 1664, and kept by George Monck.

The Blue Anchor Tavern (the second of that name) was built in 1665, and
stood on Brattle street, upon the site which was afterwards Doolittle's
City Tavern. It was first kept by Robert Turner, and was noted for its
_punch_, and was a favorite resort of public men.

The Blue Bell Tavern was built in 1673, and stood on the north-west
corner of Batterymarch street and Liberty square; a portion of the Mason
building now occupies its site. It was kept by Nathaniel Bishop, and
afterwards by Alleric & Drury. In 1692 it was called the Castle Tavern,
and ceased to be an inn after 1707.

The Castle Tavern (the second of that name) stood on the south-west
corner of Dock square and Elm street. It was erected by William Hudson
in 1674, and kept by John Wing in 1687, who gave his name to the street.
In 1694 it was called the George Tavern.

The King's Head Tavern was built in 1680, and stood at the northeast
corner of North and Fleet streets. It was burnt in 1691, and afterwards
rebuilt. It was kept by James Davenport in 1755.

The Seven Star Inn stood, in 1684, on the south-west corner of Summer
and Hawley streets. It gave its name to the lane which was afterwards
called Bishop's alley. Here, in 1736, was erected of wood the first
edifice of Trinity Church. The land, which originally contained 15,000
square feet, was bought of John Gibbins and William Speakman for £450.
This edifice was demolished in 1828 and a stone structure erected in
1830, which was burnt in the great fire, November 8, 1872. The site,
after having its proportions curtailed, in order to widen Summer and
Hawley streets, containing 7,126 square feet, was sold to William D.
Peckman, in 1874, for $194,402.

The Sun Tavern stood on the southwest corner of Dock and Faneuil Hall
squares. It was built in 1690, and was kept by Samuel Mears in 1724, and
by Day in 1753. It was conveyed by Thomas Valentine in 1741 for £2,475
($8,250); and by Joseph Jackson in 1794 for £1,333-6-8 ($4,444); and by
E.P. Arnold in 1865 for $20,000. The Scots' Charitable Society
frequently held its meetings there. It was the head-quarters of the
British officers during the siege. It is the oldest building in Boston.

The Queen's Head Tavern stood at the north-west corner of North and
Clark streets. It was built in 1691.

The Green Dragon Inn was built in 1692. It was first kept by Alexander
Smith, who died in 1696, and was succeeded by Hannah Bishop, who was
next succeeded by John Cary. In 1734 Joseph Kidder was its landlord. In
1764 it was conveyed by Catharine Kerr, sister to Dr. William Douglas,
to St. Andrew's Lodge of Freemasons. It was a hospital during the
Revolution. It was the head-quarters of Joseph Warren, John Hancock,
Samuel Adams, James Otis, Paul Revere, and other patriots, during the
Revolution. It was called the Green Dragon Tavern after the Revolution,
and at one time the Freemasons' Arms. Daniel Simpson, the veteran
drummer, was at one time its landlord. The Scots' Charitable Society
frequently held its meetings there. The Green Dragon building, extending
through from Union to (new) Washington street, now denotes its site.

The Salutation Inn stood on the north-west corner of Hanover and
Salutation streets. It was built by John Brooking in 1692, and sold to
Sir William Phips. John Scollay kept it in 1697, who was succeeded by
Samuel Green in 1731. It became famous, later, when William Campbell
kept it in 1773, when it was a rallying-place for the patriots who gave
rise to the word "_Caucus_." The resolutions for the destruction of the
tea in Boston Harbor were drawn up there. It was also called the "_Two
Palaverers_," from the representation upon the sign of two old gentlemen
in wigs, cocked hats, and knee-breeches, saluting each other with much
ceremony.

The Golden Bull Tavern was built in 1693, and stood on the south-east
corner of Merchants row and Chatham street. It was kept in 1752 by
Marston.

The Black Horse Tavern was built in 1700, and stood on the west side of
Prince street, which in former days was called Black Horse lane, and
Salem street. It was noted as a hiding-place for deserters from
Burgoyne's army when stationed at Cambridge.

The Half Moon Inn was built in 1705, and stood on the north-west corner
of Fleet and Sun court streets. It was kept in 1752 by Deborah Chick.

The Swan Tavern was built in 1707, and stood at the north-east corner of
Fleet and North streets.

The Orange Tree Inn was built in 1708, and stood on the north-east
corner of Court and Hanover streets during the Provincial period. White
it was kept by Jonathan Wardwell, in 1712, he set up the first
hackney-coach stand. His widow kept it in 1724. It was demolished in
1785. It was noted for having a well of water which never froze or dried
up.

The Bull Tavern was built in 1713, and stood on the south-west corner of
Summer and Federal streets. It was there that sundry inhabitants at the
South End met and formed the project to erect a church on Church green,
which was called the "New South," and presided over for a long series of
years by Rev. Alexander Young, D.D.

The Light House Tavern was built in 1717, and stood on the south side of
King (State) street, on the north-west corner of Devonshire street,
opposite the Town House (Old State House). It is not impossible that it
may have been standing there in 1742. There was also another tavern of
the same name at the North End in 1763, from which the "Portsmouth
Flying Stage" started every Saturday morning. It carried six passengers
inside; fare 13s. 6d. sterling ($3.25); to Newburyport, 9s. ($2.17).
Returning, left Portsmouth on Tuesday.

The Marlboro' Hotel was built in 1708, and took its name from the street
In front, and was the first public house in Boston dignified with the
name of "Hotel." John C. Calhoun lodged there, while Secretary of War,
upon his only visit to Boston, in 1818. McNiel Seymour was its landlord
in 1820. He afterwards became landlord of the Atlantic Hotel, opposite
the Bowling Green in New York. It had a stable in the rear which
accommodated the Providence line of stages. The site of the stable was
afterwards occupied by the Lowell Institute building. Agassiz, Lyell,
Tyndall, Price, and other scientists, delivered lectures there. Its
walls have also resounded with the eloquence of John Quincy Adams,
Daniel Webster, Edward Everett, Rufus Choate, Charles Sumner, Bayard
Taylor, William Lloyd Garrison, James T. Fields, and other famous men.
Lafayette was given a banquet at the Marlboro' upon his visit to Boston,
in 1824. The Scots' Charitable Society frequently held its meetings
there. About a generation ago it changed its name to the Marlboro'
House, and it was conducted on temperance principles. Hon. Henry Wilson,
Vice-President of the United States, made it his stopping-place while in
the city. The elegant Hemenway building now occupies its site.

The Cross Tavern was erected in 1709, and stood on the north-west corner
of North and Cross streets.

The Crown Coffee House stood on the south-west corner of State street
and Chatham row, and was built in 1710 by Gov. Belcher; and Mrs. Anna
Swords was its first landlord, and she was succeeded in 1751 by Robert
Shelcock. The Scots' Charitable Society frequently held its meetings
there.

The Bunch of Grapes Tavern was built in 1713, and stood on the
north-west corner of State and Kilby streets. Its first landlord was
Francis Holmes, who was succeeded in 1731 by William Coffin, by Joshua
Barker in 1749, and by Col. Joseph Ingersoll in 1764. It was noted as
being the best "_punch-house_" in Boston. Lafayette was a guest there in
1774. In front of it, on the 4th of August, 1806, Charles Austin was
killed by Thomas O. Selfridge in self-defence. The Scots' Charitable
Society frequently held its meetings there.

The George Tavern was built in 1720, and stood on the north-west corner
of Washington and Northampton streets. It afforded shelter for the
patriots in annoying the British during the siege. Its extensive orchard
and gardens comprised seventeen acres, and extended south to Roxbury
street, and west to Charles river, which, until the modern Back Bay
improvement, extended to the west side of Tremont street. The General
Court, as well as some of the law courts, sat there prior to 1730. The
American post was located there in 1775, which was burnt by the British
at night in July of that year. It was near that spot, in 1824, when
Lafayette visited Boston, a triumphal arch was thrown across Washington
street, bearing the couplet, written by Charles Sprague,--

  We bow not the neck, we bend not the knee.
  But our hearts, LAFAYETTE! we surrender to thee.

The Royal Exchange Tavern was built in 1726, and stood on the south-west
corner of State and Exchange streets, the site of the Merchants' Bank
building. It gave its name to the street on its easterly side. Luke
Vardy was its first landlord, who was succeeded in 1747 by Robert Stone.
It was in this building, in 1728, that the altercation began which ended
in the first duel fought in Boston, when Benjamin Woodbridge was killed
by Henry Phillips. The Scots' Charitable Society frequently held its
meetings there.

The Old Mansion House was built in 1732, and stood on the south side of
Milk street, between Hawley and Arch streets, on the site of the Bowdoin
building. It stood a little back from the street, with large American
elms in front, and was a stopping place for old stage lines. Hon. Robert
C. Winthrop was born there, and Hon. Henry Dearborn occupied it at the
time of his decease.

The Blue Anchor Tavern (the third of that name) was built in 1735, and
stood on the north-east corner of Water and Batterymarch streets. It was
kept by Joseph Wilson.

The British Coffee House was built in 1741, and stood on the site of No.
66 State street, afterwards occupied by the Massachusetts Bank. It was
kept, in 1762, by Ballard, and was largely patronized by British
officers. The repeal of the Stamp Act was celebrated there in 1767. The
eloquent James Otis was assaulted in it by a British gang, and an injury
was inflicted upon his head, which rendered him insane for a long time.
The Scots' Charitable Society frequently held its meetings there. Its
name was changed to American Coffee House in 1776.

The Cromwell's Head Tavern was built it 1751, and is still standing on
the north side of School street, upon the site of No. 13, where Mrs.
Harrington deals out coffee and mince pie to her customers. Lieut.-Col.
GEORGE WASHINGTON lodged there in 1756, while upon a visit to Gov.
Shirley, to consult with him upon business connected with the French
war. It was first kept by Anthony Brackett.

The Admiral Vernon Tavern was built in 1743, and stood on the south-east
corner of State street and Merchants row, and was first kept by Richard
Smith. The Scots' Charitable Society frequently held its meetings there.

The Sun Tavern (the second of that name) was built in 1757, and stood on
the east side of Washington street, nearly opposite Cornhill, and was
first kept by James Day, and was a popular resort of the Sons of
Liberty.

The Julien House was built in 1759, and stood on the north-west corner
of Milk and Congress streets, formerly the site of an old tannery. It
was first kept by Jean Baptiste Julien, a French refugee. It was the
resort of the _bon vivants_ of the town in former days. It is narrated
of him that, upon the occasion of a _recherche_ dinner, one of the
guests complained that the viands were not sufficiently high-seasoned.
"_Eh bien_" said Julien, "_put a leetle more de peppaire_." He died in
1805, and he was succeeded by his widow, and afterwards by Rouillard,
until 1823, when it was demolished, and supplanted by Julien, afterwards
Congress Hall. Miss Frances Ann Wright delivered lectures there in 1829.

The White Horse Tavern stood on the north-west corner of Washington and
Boylston streets. It was first kept by Joseph Morton.

The Bull's Head Tavern was built in 1774, and stood on the north-east
corner of Congress and Water streets, the site, for several years prior
to 1830, of the post-office, Merchants' Hall, and Topliff's
Reading-room, and now occupied by the Massachusetts and Shawmut banks,
and called the Howe building.

Concert Hall stood at the south-east corner of Hanover and Court
streets. It was built in 1750, and was at one time occupied by the
Deblois family. It was first occupied as a public house in 1791. It was
famous for political meetings, fashionable dancing parties, and public
exhibitions. Madrel exhibited his chess-player, conflagration of Moscow,
and other wonderful pieces of mechanism there. The famous Belgian giant,
Bihin, exhibited himself there. He was a well-proportioned man, and such
was his height that the historian Motley stood under his armpits.
Amherst Eaton was its landlord in the early days of the century. It was
kept of late years by Peter B. Brigham, and was demolished in 1868, in
order to widen Hanover street. The Scots' Charitable Society frequently
held its meetings there.

The Lamb Tavern was built in 1745, and stood on the west side of
Washington street, just beyond the corner of West street. Colonel Doty
kept it in 1760, who was succeeded by Edward Kingman in 1826, and by
Laban Adams, in whose honor the Adams House was named and opened in
1846. It was a popular resort of the country members of the Legislature.

The Lion Tavern was built in 1793, and stood just north of the Lamb
Tavern, and occupied the site of the building for several years known as
the Melodeon. In 1835 the tavern was converted into the Lion Theatre,
which had a short-lived existence. It was then purchased by the Handel
and Haydn Society, and occupied for musical purposes, lectures, and
other entertainments. Rev. Theodore Parker began lecturing there soon
after the famous South Boston sermon upon the transient and permanent in
Christianity.

The North End Coffee House was built in 1782, and stood on the
north-west corner of North and Fleet streets. It was kept by the
grandfather of the Illustrious David D. Porter.

The Bite Tavern was built in 1795, and stood in Faneuil Hall square, a
little west of Change avenue. James M. Stevens was its last landlord. It
was a favorite resort of market-men, and ceased to be a public house
about a quarter of a century ago.

Holland's Coffee House was built in 1800, in Howard street, near Court
street. It was afterwards called the Howard Street House, and kept by
William Gallagher, whose tomb "erected by those connected with him by no
tie of kindred, who knew, loved, and honored him," stands on Primrose
Path in Mt. Auburn. It was afterwards called the Pemberton House. It was
a favorite resort of literary, dramatic, and musical people. The Scots'
Charitable Society frequently held its meetings there. It was destroyed
by fire in 1854, and the site was occupied for a short time by a wooden
circular structure called Father Miller's Tabernacle, which, in turn,
was burnt, when the Howard Athenæum rose upon its site.

The Eastern Stage House was built in 1806, and upon the site of No. 90
North street. It was from that spot that the first stage-coach in
America started, in 1660, for Portsmouth (N.H.). It was first kept by
Col. Ephraim Wildes, and afterwards by his son, Moses. It was built of
brick, three stories high, and entered by a flight of steps, and
contained sixty rooms. It was the most extensive stage rendezvous in
Boston, accommodating the stages to Portsmouth, Portland, Bangor, and
Maine, generally. The stages entered its spacious court-yard under an
arch leading from North street. After an existence of forty years, it
was demolished to make room for commercial improvements.

Earl's Coffee House was built in 1807, and was located at No. 24 Hanover
street, upon the site, in part, of the present American House. It was
kept by Hezekiah Earl, and was the head-quarters of the New York,
Albany, and other stage lines.

Wilde's Tavern was built in the same year, and was located on the
north-east corner of (new) Washington and Elm streets. It was demolished
in 1874 to make room for the Washington-street extension.

Doolittle's City Tavern was also built in 1807, and stood on the
north-west corner of (new) Washington and Brattle streets. It was the
head-quarters of the Providence line of stages. It was demolished in
1874 to make room for the improvement before alluded to.

The Exchange Coffee House was built in 1808, and stood on Congress
street, upon the site of the present Howard Bank building, and at the
time of its erection was the largest house of public entertainment in
the United States. It extended through to Devonshire street, with an
entrance on State street. It bounded 132 feet on Congress street, with a
depth of 94 feet and upwards. It covered an area of 12,753 square feet,
was seven stories in height, surmounted with a dome 101 feet in
diameter. It had 210 apartments. Its erection was begun in 1805, and
occupied two and a half years in construction. Commodore Hull, after
capturing the _Guerrière_ in 1812, had a public dinner given him there.
The Grand Lodge of Freemasons, and some subordinate lodges, had their
head-quarters there. The Scots' Charitable Society frequently held its
meetings there. It was destroyed by fire in 1818, rebuilt in 1822, with
contracted dimensions, and in 1853 was demolished to give place to the
City Exchange on Congress square and Devonshire street. James Wilson,
the last of the town-criers, had his office in the Bell-in-Hand Tavern
in the basement. At the time of the fire Hon. Henry Clay was a guest in
the house, and worked bravely at the engine brakes. Hon. David Crockett,
a famous member of Congress from Tennessee, lodged there during his
visit to Boston in 1834. He addressed an audience from the eastern
portico of the Old State House, and in expatiating upon the prospects of
the country, predicted that it would extend within a score of years from
the _At_lantic to the "_Spe_cific." Among his witty sayings will be
remembered,--"Be sure you're right then go ahead." He died in 1841,
fighting for Texan independence. It was kept in former days by Col.
James Hamilton, afterwards by William Gallagher, Hart Davenport, and
lastly by McGill & Fearing.

Washington Hotel was built in 1809, and stood in Bromfield street. It
subsequently took the name of Indian Queen, and latterly Bromfield
House. Selden Crockett was its last landlord. It ceased to be a public
house about a dozen years since.

The Elm Street Hotel was built in 1812, and stood on the north-west
corner of (new) Washington and (No. 9) Elm streets. It was kept by Hart
Davenport. Its yard was obliterated in 1874 to make room for the
Washington-street extension, and the building in 1882 for a site for
commercial purposes.

The Massachusetts House was built in 1816, and still stands on the
south-west corner of Endicott and Cross streets. It is a favorite resort
of horse-jockeys and horse-fanciers.

Forster's Coffee House was built in 1817, and stood on the corner of
Court and Howard streets. The Scots' Charitable Society frequently held
its meetings there.

The Commercial Coffee House stood on the north-east corner of Milk and
Batterymarch streets. It was built in 1817, and stood on the site of
Hallowell's shipyard. It was kept by William Merriam in 1829, John Low
in 1837, Col. Whitney in 1844, and lastly, in 1848, by James Longley,
when it ceased to be a public house, and gave place to the Thorndike
building. The preliminary meeting of the Mercantile Library Association
was held there in 1820. It was a favorite resort of Eastern people.

Washington Hotel (the second of that name) was erected in 1819, and
stood on the north-west corner of Washington street and Worcester place.
It was kept in 1836, and for a few years succeeding, by Amherst Eaton.
The Washington House was built in 1820, and stood on the site of the
present Washington market, on the south-west corner of Washington and
Lenox streets. The Messrs. Cooley kept it, and it was a favorite resort
for sleighing parties.

In 1821 William Fenno opened a tavern in Cornhill square, and afterwards
on the east side of Theatre alley (Devonshire street), near the corner
of Franklin, adjoining what was the site of the (old) Boston Theatre,
and latterly in Province street, near the south-easterly corner of
Bromfield street.

The Stackpole House was built in 1732, and was the mansion of William
Stackpole, a noted Boston merchant. It stood on the north-east corner of
Milk and Devonshire streets, and was first kept as a public house in
1823 by Rouillard, formerly of the Julien House, and was a favorite
resort of the choice spirits of former days. It was afterwards kept by
James W. Ryan. Among its last landlords was Alexander McGregor, a
stalwart Scotchman, and descendant of Rev James McGregor who led the
colony which made the first settlement in Deny (N.H.) in 1824. The
Scots' Charitable Society, of which the landlord was a member,
frequently held its meetings there. It was demolished in 1868, to make
room for the post-office edifice.

The Sun Tavern (the third of that name) was built in 1801, and stood on
the north-west corner of Battery march and Hamilton streets, and was the
mansion of Benjamin Hallowell, who owned a shipyard opposite to his
residence. It was first kept as a public house in 1824 by Goodwich, and
in 1841 by Capewell, when it ceased to be a public house, and was
demolished when Fort Hill was leveled in 1865. It was a popular resort
of Eastern people.

The Lafayette Hotel was built in 1825, and stood on the east side of
Washington street, opposite Boylston market. It was largely patronized
by people from the country. Haskell was its landlord in 1836. The Scots'
Charitable Society frequently held its meetings there.

The Tremont House was built in 1828, and opened October 1, 1829. It was
owned by William H. Eliot, brother of the mayor of Boston 1837-1840. It
was the prototype of the large caravanseries which dot the continent
from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Its first landlord was Dwight Boyden,
who retired from its management in 1836 to assume that of the Astor
House, which was opened May 1 in that year. It was the stopping-place of
Webster on his way from Marshfield to Washington. It sheltered President
Jackson upon his visit to Boston in 1833, a decade later President
Tyler, and President Johnson in 1867. It was the temporary abode of
Charles Dickens upon his first visit to America in 1842. Under its roof
the Ashburton treaty, defining the north-eastern boundary between the
United States and Great Britain, was negotiated by Lord Ashburton on
behalf of the mother country, Abbott Lawrence on the part of
Massachusetts, and Edward Kent on the part of Maine. Some of the most
renowned men in the world have fed at its tables and slept under its
roof. It still lives in its pristine vigor, and will not yield the palm
to any hostelry in the world.

The Franklin House was built in 1830, and stood on the west side of
Merchants row, between North Market and North streets, opposite the head
of Clinton street. It was a favorite resort of Eastern people. Joshua
Sears, an eminent merchant on Long wharf, made it his home for several
years.

The Shawmut House was built in 1831, and stood on the north side of
Hanover street, and its site is now absorbed in the American House. The
Scots' Charitable Society frequently held its meetings there.

Liberty Tree Tavern was built in 1833, and stood on the south-east
corner of Washington and Essex streets, upon the identical spot where
formerly stood the famous Liberty Tree, which was planted in 1646, and
become famous in Stamp Act times, and was cut down by the British in
1775.

The Mount Washington House was built in 1834 by a company of which Hon.
John K. Simpson was president, who occupied the "Old Feather Store" on
the corner of Faneuil Hall square and North street, built in 1680. The
company became bankrupt, and it was sold in 1839 to the Perkins
Institute and New England Asylum for the Blind. Its location on
Washington Heights admirably adapts it for the benevolent purpose for
which it is now used.

The Maverick House was opened on Noddies or Williams Island on the 27th
of May, 1835. At the date of its erection the island contained but a
score of dwellings, two or three factories, and a half-dozen of
mechanics' shops. Major Jabez W. Barton was its first landlord. It was
built of wood, 94 feet long and 85 feet wide, six stories high, and
contained more than eighty rooms. In 1838 its width was increased to 160
feet. C.M. Taft became its landlord in 1841. The house, stables, and
furniture were sold in 1842 to John W. Fenno for $62,500. The house was
taken down in 1845 and a block of buildings erected by Noah Sturtevant.
Different parts of the block were respectively occupied as a hotel,
dwelling-houses, stores, and offices, until it was burnt January 25,
1857. A new building was erected upon its site, by Mr. Sturtevant, of
iron and brick covered with mastic, 130 feet long on Maverick square,
with an average width of no feet, and containing 180 rooms. It was
opened February 23, 1858, and was called for a decade or more the
Sturtevant House, when it resumed its former name of Maverick House. In
its rear, on the 25th of September, 1819, a duel was fought by
Lieutenants Finch and White between two elm-trees standing between
Meridian and Border streets, nearly opposite the Church of the Holy
Redeemer. White fell and died upon the spot.

The Pearl Street House stood on the north-west corner of Milk and Pearl
streets, and was built in 1816, and was the mansion of William Pratt. It
was first occupied as a hotel in 1836. Colonel Shepherd was its first
landlord. The Scots' Charitable Society frequently held its meetings
there. It was obliterated in the great fire of November 8, 1872.

The Perkins House was built in 1815, and was the mansion of Hon. Thomas
H. Perkins, who donated it in 1833 to the Asylum for the Blind. It stood
on the west side of Pearl street, about midway between Milk and High
streets. It remained there under the management of Samuel G. Howe until
the encroachments of business demanded its removal. In 1839 the
institution was transferred to the Mount Washington House. The Perkins
House was opened in that year under the management of a Scotchman named
Thomas Gordon. It was a favorite resort of those who dined down-town.
The Scots' Charitable Society, of which the landlord was a member,
frequently held its meetings there. It ceased to be a public house In
1848, when it succumbed to the advancing waves of commerce.

The Congress House, built in the same year, was the mansion of Daniel
Hammond, and stood on the north-east corner of Pearl and High streets.
It was opened as a public house in 1840, and was kept by Hastings, until
it was swept away in the great fire before alluded to.

The Greyhound Tavern stood on Washington street, opposite Vernon street,
upon the site of Graham block. It was built in 1645, and was famous for
the excellence of its punch, and was much resorted to by the convivial
spirits of Boston and vicinity. Its last landlord was John Greaton. In
1752, and for many years subsequently, the Masonic fraternity celebrated
St. John's day there, and the courts sat there during the prevalence of
small-pox in Boston. A catamount, caught in the woods about eighty miles
from Boston, was exhibited there. It was a recruiting station for
enlistments during the French war. Gen. Washington resided there during
the winter of 1776. It ceased to be a tavern just after the Revolution.
Such was its size that it contained forty fireplaces. On its site was
erected the first fire-engine house in Roxbury. A portion of the
building still stands in the rear of Graham block.

The Flower de Luce Tavern was built in 1687, and stood on the north-east
corner of Bartlett and Blanchard streets. It was there, in 1698, that a
meeting was held "to settle about the Muddy river people worshipping In
their house." Its last landlord was Samuel Ruggles.

The Punch Bowl Tavern was built in 1729 by John Ellis, and stood in
Brookline, about two hundred feet west from the boundary line between
Roxbury and Brookline, upon the present site of Brookline gas-works, on
the south-west corner of Washington street and Brookline avenue. It was
a two-story hipped-roof house, and its enlargement from time to time, by
the purchase and removal of old houses thither from Boston and vicinity,
resulted in an aggregation of rooms of all sorts and sizes, and produced
a new order of architecture, appropriately called "_conglomerate_" With
its out-buildings it occupied a large space, and was of a yellowish
color, with a seat running along the front under an overhanging
projection of the second story. In front and near each end were large
elm-trees. Under the west end stood a pump, which still remains. Its
sign, suspended by a high, red post, exhibited a huge bowl and ladle,
overhung by a lemon-tree. It had a large dancing-hall, and was a
favorite resort for gay parties from Boston and vicinity. It was
patronized by British officers before the Revolution. The mill-dam and
the bridges destroyed its usefulness, and it was bought by Isaac Thayer,
and demolished in 1833, with the exception of one of its adjuncts, which
now stands on the easterly side of Brookline avenue, nearly opposite
Emerald street.

Kent's Tavern was built in 1747, and stood on the site of Grove Hall,
built by, and for many years the mansion of, Thomas Kilby Jones, a
famous auctioneer of Boston, and now known as the "Consumptives' Home,"
on the south-east corner of Washington street and Blue Hill avenue. It
was originally the home-stead of Samuel Payson, and was owned by John
Goddard in the early part of the last century. It ceased to be a public
house in 1796.

Hazlitt's Tavern stood on the corner of Washington and Palmer streets.
It was built in 1764, and had a deer's head for a sign. Afterwards it
was known as the "Roebuck Tavern," John Brooks being its last landlord.
It was first occupied as a public house in 1820, and it was the place of
refuge of Edmund Kean when driven by a mob from the (old) Boston
Theatre, December 21, 1825.

The Peacock Tavern was built in 1765, and stood at the south-westerly
corner of Centre and Allandale streets, near the famous mineral springs.
It was kept by Capt. Samuel Childs, who led the minutemen company of
the third parish in the Lexington battle. It was purchased in 1794, with
forty acres adjoining, by the patriot Samuel Adams, and he occupied it
during his gubernatorial term as a summer residence, and afterward until
the close of his honorable life.

On the north-west corner of Washington and Vernon streets, where Diamond
block now stands, there formerly stood an old house, which was occupied
in 1805 as the Old Red Tavern, kept by Martin Pierce.

The City Hotel was built of brick in 1804, and stood near the north-west
corner of Washington and Zeigler streets, and was the mansion of George
Zeigler. It ceased to be a public house about a third of a century ago.

Taft's Tavern stood at the north-west corner of Washington and South
streets, near the Roslindale station, on the Dedham Branch railway. It
was built in 1805, and first kept by Sharp & Dunster, and was long
famous for good dinners. The widow of Samuel Burrill kept it during the
War of 1813-1815. It is now the Roslindale Hotel.

The Norfolk House was built in 1781, and was the mansion of Joseph
Ruggles, a well-known lawyer of that day. His uncle Joseph kept an inn
in Roxbury in 1765. After the decease of Capt. Nathaniel Ruggles the
mansion was the residence of Hon. David A. Simmons, who sold it to the
Norfolk House Company in 1825, and it was opened in the following year
as a public house, a large brick addition having been built containing a
hall for public assemblies, known at first as Highland Hall,
subsequently as Norfolk Hall, which, in 1853, was moved to the rear. The
old mansion now stands on the north side of Norfolk street, and is
occupied as a tenement-house. It was the starting-point of the Roxbury
hourly coaches, which began running to the Old South Church on the first
of March, 1826; fare, twelve and a half cents. It ceased to be a public
house a generation ago, and became the pioneer of that large class of
domestic and social comforts designated as "family hotels," no less than
sixty of which now stand where, half a century ago, the tide ebbed and
flowed.

In 1635 Robert Long with his wife and ten children arrived from
Dunstable (Eng.) at Charlestown, and in 1638 purchased the so-called
"Great House," originally erected by Thomas Graves for the governor's
residence, for court-meetings, and public religious worship, which stood
in what is now City square, opposite the Waverley House, and the base of
the Town Hill. In a few years it was abandoned. Long paid £30 for the
premises, to be used as a tavern, or ordinary. No use of tobacco, no
card-playing, and no throwing of dice was allowed. He was allowed the
use of a pasture, provided he would fence it, for the use of the horses
of the guests. He was liable to a fine of ten shillings for every
offence of selling at a price exceeding sixpence for a meal, or taking
more than a "penny for an ale-quart of beer out of meal-times," or for
selling cake or buns except for marriages, burials, or like special
occasions. The tavern was well known afterwards as "The Three Cranes."
Mr. Long and his sons following him carried on the house for
three-quarters of a century, Robert, the first landlord, died January 9,
1664, and his widow May 27, 1687. In 1683 John, son of Robert, willed
the house to his widow Mary, daughter of Increase Nowell. The estate had
a brew-house attached to it. In 1711 the property was deeded by Mrs.
Long to her son Samuel, and named in the deed as the "Great Tavern."
Samuel, in 1712, sold it to Ebenezer Breed, when the house was called
"The Old Tavern." The building was probably burnt in the destruction of
Charlestown, on the day of the Battle of Bunker Hill, June 17, 1775.
Finally, the land was bought by the town, and is now part of City
square.

The Cape Breton Tavern was built in 1731, and stood on the corner of
Main street and Hancock square. It was burnt in the general
conflagration of June 17, 1775.

The Ship Tavern was built in 1748, and stood on the south-east corner of
Charles River avenue and Water street. It was kept by Benjamin Gerrish.

The Warren Tavern was built in 1775, and still stands on the south-west
corner of Main and Pleasant streets. It was first kept by Eliphalet
Newell. It was from that edifice that the procession connected with
funeral ceremonies in honor of GEORGE WASHINGTON started on the 31st of
December, 1799, when the nation mourned as one man the departed patriot,
statesman, and chieftain, "upon whose like they should not look again."

Trumbull's Tavern stood on the north-east corner of Charles River avenue
and Water street. It was built in 1771.

The Indian Chief Tavern was built in 1779, and was the mansion of David
Wood, an influential citizen of Charlestown. It occupied the site of
Harvard Church. It was there that David Starrett, cashier of the
Hillsboro', N.H., bank, was said to have been robbed and murdered on the
evening of March 26, 1812. Suspicion attached to Samuel Gordon, the
landlord. A reward of $200 was offered for the recovery of his dead
body, but without success. In 1814 Hon. Nathan Appleton received a
letter from Starrett, in South America, whither he had fled owing to the
insolvency of the bank. It contained a hall, in the second story, known
as "Massachusetts Hall." It was removed in 1818 to the north-west corner
of Main and Miller streets, and its name changed to Eagle Tavern. It
still stands, although it ceased to be a public house a quarter of a
century since.

The Mansion House stood on the south side of City square and north-west
corner of Warren avenue. It was erected in 1780 by Hon. Thomas Russell
as a family mansion, and occupied by him until his decease in 1796. It
was afterwards occupied by Commodore John Shaw, John Soley, Grand Master
of the Grand Lodge of Freemasons of Massachusetts, and Andrew Dunlap,
U.S. District Attorney, who conducted the trial of the twelve pirates of
the schooner "Pindu," in 1834. It was first occupied as a hotel in 1835,
and kept by Gorham Bigelow, and afterwards by James Ramsay. It was
demolished in 1866 to make room for the Waverley House.

Page's Tavern stood at the corner of Main and Gardner streets, and was
afterwards known as "Richards'", and more latterly, "Babcock's." It was
the starting-point of the Charlestown hourly coaches, which commenced
running April 1, 1828, to Brattle street; fare, twelve and a half cents.
Passengers were accommodated by being called for, or left at their
residences on cross streets. It ceased to be a public house about a
generation ago.

Piper's Tavern stood on the south-west corner of Main and Alford
streets.

Pierce's Hotel stood on the north-west corner of Charles River avenue
and Water street. It was built in 1795 by Hon. Thomas Russell for a
family mansion; but he died just before its completion. In one of its
rooms was a remarkable clock with a blue dial and moving figures of men,
which appeared when the clock struck the hours, and then disappeared.
The ordaining council of the first pastor of Harvard Church convened
there. It was at one time occupied by Silas Whitney, Jr., who was buried
from there with Masonic honors in 1824. Potter, the celebrated
ventriloquist, held his exhibitions there, to the delight of the
youngsters of that day. It was last kept by James Walker, and its name
changed to the Middlesex House. It was destroyed by the great fire of
August 28, 1835.

Robbin's Tavern stood on the west side of City square and south-east
corner of Harvard street. It was built in 1796, and stood directly in
the rear of the site of the Three Cranes Tavern, before alluded to. It
was demolished in 1816, and the Charlestown Town Hall erected upon its
site, which, in turn, was demolished in 1868 to make room for the City
Hall.

Ireland's Tavern was built in 1797, and stood on the north side of
Cambridge street, near the Lowell Railroad bridge.

Yoelin's Tavern was built in 1798, and stood on the east side of City
square and north-west corner of Chamber street. It was first occupied as
a tavern in 1821, and was destroyed by the great fire before alluded to.
The first meeting of the proprietors of Warren bridge was held there in
1828.

Copp's Tavern was built in 1799, and stood on the south side of City
square, near the corner of Bow street. The building, which had ceased
for some years to be occupied as a tavern, was demolished in 1866 to
make room for the Waverley House.

"_Sic transit gloria mundi_." Thus have disappeared from time to time,
with but few exceptions, the taverns, inns, and coffee-houses of the
Town of Boston, while the bodily forms of those who took their ease in
them have long since crumbled into dust. We will now resign to the pen
of the local historian of a century hence to describe the mammoth
hostelries of the City of Boston, which have arisen since the era of
railways, steamships, electric telegraphs, ocean cables, telephones,
electric lights, and other modern developments of science and art.

       *       *       *       *       *

EDITOR'S TABLE.


A correspondent asks in connection with an article in the May number on
"Town and City Histories," in which was incidentally mentioned the
government of Western towns by trustees, the following question: "Can
you tell me where I can find that government treated of; also, that of
towns in the Middle and Southern States?" The question is a hard one to
answer. Of the town meeting, that peculiarly New England institution,
much has been written; but about the local forms of government prevalent
in the States between the Hudson and the Pacific Ocean very little has
found its way into print. The local historians seem to take it for
granted that all these things are understood everywhere, and so shed
little light on the question. The pages of this magazine will be open to
any one who can give the desired information.

The season of agricultural fairs, "cattle-shows" and the like, is about
over. There is scarcely a county in New England, scarcely a State in the
Union, but has had a fair of some sort or other. Most of them report
better exhibits and larger attendance than ever before. Some few report
a falling off in attendance. That all these fairs have done exhibitors
much good is doubtful; that they have benefited the thinking portion of
their attendants is unquestionable. Unfortunately, the thinking portion
of a farming community is lamentably small. Most people go to a
"cattle-show" to be amused; a few go to learn. The few that derive
benefit from seeing the wonders of the earth collected in pens and on
tables are helped just as a teacher gets benefit from a teacher's
institute--both get food for thought. At the cattle-show the farmer
_may_ learn of new methods and see their results. The trouble is that
the ordinary farmer goes to the fair for the same reason that the
average citizen buys a ticket to the menagerie--to see the circus. There
are more clowns at a cattle-show than the sawdust ever saw. The horses
may not be so pretty or gaudy, but they go faster. One man defended
himself very frankly at the dinner of a county fair in this State when
he said: "The Lord made horses to go, and I like to see them do it."
This question of trotting or no trotting at the fair is not a new one;
but with age it seems to acquire toughness,--like chickens, for
instance.

But passing by the horse question, we come to the question of clowns,
which is really a very serious one. It may be irreverent to compare
"cattle-show" orators to circus clowns, but really the temptation is
irresistible; and then they are the only features of the respective
exhibitions that have speaking parts. Joking aside, there are important
lessons which the speaking and the speakers at the recent fairs may
teach us. We find that the candidate for office has become a great
attraction, one which the fair-managers bid high for. They draw well,
too.

This calls to mind this year's Salisbury Beach Festival, a time-honored
institution which has degenerated into a money-making affair in these
later days. This year there was, to be sure, a large crowd present, but
yet the attendance was smaller than in any year for a long time. The
number of people present was between 3,500 and 5,000. Prominent
gentlemen in Essex County were advertised to address the crowd. The
newspaper comment on the event is short and to the point: "There was no
speaking, as the crowd was more interested in seeing the Lawrence Base
Ball Club beat the Newbury porters, by a score of 9 to 7." Again: "The
principal attractions were Professors Parker and Martin at the skating
rink, and the 4,000-pound ox."

_O Tempora! O Mores!_










*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BAY STATE MONTHLY — VOLUME 2, NO. 2, NOVEMBER, 1884 ***


    

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.


START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
    at www.gutenberg.org. If you
    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
  
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

    • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
        the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
        Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
        Literary Archive Foundation.”
    
    • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
        works.
    
    • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
        receipt of the work.
    
    • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
        distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
    

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.