Skip to main content

Full text of "Records relating to the early history of Boston .."

See other formats 


GOVERNMENT  DOCUMENTS 

DEPARTMENT 
BOSTON  PU31  !C  LIBRARY 


FIFTH   REPORT 


OF      THE 


RECORD  COMMISSIONERS. 


1880. 


BOSTONIA 

COND1TA.AD. 
163O. 


BOSTON : 

ROCKWELL    AND    CHURCHILL,    CITY    PRINTERS, 

No.    39    ARCH    STREET  . 
1880. 


[DOCUMENT  105  —  1880. 


CITY  OF  BOSTON. 


FIFTH   REPORT 


RECORD   COMMISSIONERS, 


BOSTON,  Dec.  10,  1880. 

In  their  fourth  report,  dated  Sept.  1,  1880,  the  Record 
Commissioners  announced  that  the  City  Council  had  appro- 
priated the  sum  of  five  thousand  dollars  for  the  publication 
of  historical  documents  relating  to  Boston.  This  was  in  con- 
formity with  a  suggestion  of  the  Committee  on  Printing  for 
1879,  and  it  is  presumed  that  the  grant  will  be  continued 
annually.  As  already  announced,  the  first  of  the  volumes 
thus  ordered  is  the  present  fifth  report,  and  it  contains  a 
series  of  articles  relating  to  the  history  of  estates  lying  on  or 
around  Beacon  Hill.  These  articles  were  contributed  in 
1855  to  the  "Boston  Daily  Transcript"  by  the  late  Nathaniel 
Ingersoll  Bowditch,  under  the  signature  of  "Gleaner." 

Mr.  Bowditch  was  confessedly  the  most  learned  conveyan- 
cer of  the  day.  He  was  born  at  Salem,  June  17,  1805,  and 
was  the  oldest  child  of  Dr.  Nathaniel  Bowditch,  the  distin- 
guished mathematician.  In  1823,  the  year  following  the 
graduation  of  the  subject  of  this  sketch,  his  father  removed 
to  Boston,  and  Nathaniel  studied  law  under  the  late  Hon. 
William  Prescott.  From  this  time  until  his  death,  April  16, 
1861,  Mr.  Bowditch  was  an  honored  and  useful  citizen  of 
Boston,  pursuing  his  chosen  department  "of  practice  with  un- 
rivalled skill,  and  accumulating  treasures  of  information  oi 
which  but  a  small  portion  is  here  shown.  In  1851  he  printed 
a  "  History  of  the  Massachusetts  General  Hospital,"  and  in 
1857  a  collection  of  curious  facts  entitled  "  Suffolk  Surnames." 
The  latter  volume  has  been  twice  reprinted. 


ii  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

In  1855,  Mr.  Bowditch  began  the  interesting  series  of 
"  Gleaner  "  articles,  which  aroused  a  lively  interest  among  all 
conversant  with  the  subject.  Often  a  single  article  would 
call  forth  the  reminiscences  or  comments  of  other  writers, 
and  the  whole  collection  has  been  for  years  regarded  as  indis- 
pensable to.  any  one  who  would  write  on  that  portion  of  our 
local  history. 

Although  the  series  terminated  abruptly  in  the  manner  ex- 
plained on  page  180  of  this  volume,  enough  had  been  written 
by  Mr.  Bowditch  to  make  its  republication  a  matter  of  pub- 
lic interest.  When,  therefore,  the  Record  Commissioners  re- 
ceived the  munificent  grant  of  the  city,  they  at  once  selected 
these  "  Gleanings  "  as  among  the  first  documents  to  be  issued. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  portion  of  our  territory  covered  by 
these  notes  is  small ;  but  the  articles  are  consecutive,  and  the 
treatment  is  exhaustive.  Beacon  Hill  and  its  surroundings 
are  considered,  every  estate  is  scrutinized,  and  the  proverbi- 
al dryness  of  antiquarian  and  legal  discussions  is  relieved  by 
anecdotes  of  the  distinguished  citizens  who  have  lived  upon 
this  noted  territory  during  the  past  two  hundred  years. 

It  has  seemed  unnecessary  to  attempt  annotations  to  the 
original  work.  Of  course  the  twenty-five  years  which  have 
elapsed  have  produced  many  changes  ;  but  these  matters  are 
within  the  recollection  of  the  present  generation,  which  is 
now  to  reperuse  these  sketches. 

The  consent  of  the  representatives  of  the  family  to  this 
reproduction  was  given  a  number  of  years  ago,  and  has 
been  renewed  at  the  present  time. 

The  commissioners  have  to  announce  that  their  sixth  report 
is  nearly  completed,  and  that  it  will  contain  the  Roxbury 
Land  Records,  together  with  the  records  of  the  First  Church 
in  Roxbury.  It  is  intended  that  it  shall  appear  among  the 
city  documents  for  1880. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

WILLIAM  H.  WHITMORE, 
WILLIAM  S.  APPLETON, 

Record  Commissioners. 

ERRATA. 

The  following  errors  «of  the  press  have  been  noticed  :  — 
P.. 64.  (Note.)  Abbott  Lawrence  died  Aug.  18,  1855. 
P.  62.  (Note.)  Mr.  Bowditch  died  in  1861 ;  Mr.  Savage  died  in  1873. 


"GLEANER"    ARTICLES, 


i. 

HISTORICAL. 

July  6,  1855. 

It  is  well  known  that  when  our  forefathers  first  came  to  this 
peninsula  they  found  here  a  solitary  settler,  —  Mr.  William  Black- 
stone.  Thus  the  Charlestown  records  say  :  — 

Mr.  Blackstone,  dwelling  on  the  other  side  of  Charles  Kiver,  alone,  to  a 
place  by  the  Indeans  called  Shawmutt,  where  he  only  had  a  cottage  at  or  not 
far  off  the  place  called. Blackstone' s  Point,  he  came  and  acquainted  the 
Governor  of  an  excellent  Spring  there,  withal  inviting  him  and  soliciting  him 
thither.  Whereupon,  after  the  death  of  Mr.  Johnson  and  divers  others,  the 
Governor,  with  Mr.  Wilson  and  the  greatest  part  of  the  Church,  removed 
thither.  Whither  also  the  frame  of  the  Governor's  house  was  carried,  when 
people  began  to  build  their  houses  against  winter,  and  this  place  was  called 
Boston. 

Mr.  Drake,  in  his  excellent  "  History  of  Boston,"  quotes  this  ex- 
tract, and  remarks  that  "  this  place  was  not  thought  of  for  a  town 
until  Blackstone  urged  it."  He  thinks  that  Blackstone' s  Point  was 
that  afterwards  called  Barton's  Point,  at  the  northerly  end  of 
Leverett  street,  towards  Charlestown,  and  adds:  "  His  Point  is 
more  easily  located  than  his  house  or  his  spring"  and  proceeds  to 
suggest  as  not  unlikely  that  these  may  have  been  near  Poplar 
street. 

Now,  the  exact  location  of  Mr.  Blackstone's  homestead  lot  is  as 
definitely  fixed  as  that  of  the  Milldam  or  Western  avenue.  He  made 
a  deed  to  the  inhabitants,  of  the  whole  peninsula,  retaining  this 
homestead  lot  of  six  acres.  By  the  town  records  of  1735,  "  the  re- 
lease of  Mr.  Blackstone,  the  first  proprietor  of  the  town  of  Boston," 
is  mentioned  as  "  now  on  file  in  the  town  clerk's  office."  The  original, 
however,  has  never  been  seen  by  either  of  the  historians  of  Boston,  — 


2  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Shaw,  Snow,  or  Drake,  —  and  is  doubtless  lost.  Blackstone,  wish- 
ing to  live  a  more  retired  life  and  amid  fewer  neighbors,  subsequently 
sold  this  reserved  lot ;  but  no  deed  from  him  is  found  on  record. 
In  the  course  of  time,  therefore,  its  precise  location  became 
doubtful.  It  was,  however,  accidentally  discovered  by  an  inves- 
tigation of  my  own.  In  May,  1829,  I  was  examining  the  titles  of 
the  Mt.  Vernon  proprietors,  claimed  under  John  Singleton  Copley, 
the  celebrated  artist.  I  succeeded  in  tracing  back  his  lot  in  part  to 
a  deed  from  one  Richard  Peyps  and  Mary  his  wife,  of  Ashon, 
Essex  Count}r,  to  Nathaniel  Williams,  by  a  deed  not  found  on 
record,  but  expressly  referred  to  as  dated  January  30,  1655  ;  and 
a  deposition  of  Anne  Pollard,  in  1 71 1  (Suffolk,  Lib.  26,  p.  84) ,  proves 
that  Blackstone  sold  to  Richard  Pepys.  In  1676  is  recorded  a 
deed  of  Peter  Bracket  and  Mary  his  wife,  late  widow  of  said  Wil- 
liams (Suffolk,  Lib.  9,  fol.  325),  conveying  to  her  children, 
Nathaniel  Williams  three-quarters  and  Mary  Viall  one-quarter  — 
all  that  messuage,  with  the  barns,  stables,  orchards,  gardens,  and 
also  that  six  acres  of  land,  be  it  more  or  less,  adjoining  and  be- 
longing to  said  messuage,  called  the  Blackstone  lot,  being  the  same 
which  were  conveyed  to  said  Nathaniel  by  Richard  Pepis,  of  Ashon, 
Essex  County,  and  Mary  his  wife,  as  by  their  act,  bearing  date  Jan- 
uary 30, 1655,  will  more  fully  appear. 

Mary  Viall's  one-quarter  gets  into  said  Nathaniel,  who  con- 
veys the  whole  lot  in  1709  (Suffolk,  Lib.  24,  f.  103)  to  Thomas 
Banister  as  **  an  orchard  and  pasture,  containing  six  acres  more  or 
less  on  the  N.W.  side  of  the  common  with  the  flats ;  the  upland 
and  flats  being  bounded  N.W.  on  Charles  river  or  a  cove,"  etc., 
etc.  "  Southerly  on  the  Common." 

Blackstone's  six-acre  lot,  therefore,  was  at  the  lower  part  of  the 
south-westerlj-  slope  of  Beacon  Hill,  or,  according  to  the  present 
monuments,  it  was  at  the  bottom  of  Beacon  street,  bounded  southerly 
toward  the  Common,  and  westerly  on  the  river.  In  other  words,  his 
fine  taste  led  him,  at  the  outset,  to  select  for  his  abode  the  precise 
spot  which  is  now  the  "  Court-end  "  of  the  city.  It  must  have  been 
a  sheltered  and  sunny  enclosure  of  almost  unrivalled  beauty. 
Charles  street  was,  in  1804,  laid  out  along  the  water's  edge,  and, 
in  the  cellar  of  one  of  the  houses  easterly  of  that  street  (set  off  to 
the  late  B.  Joy,  one  of  the  Mt.  Vernon  proprietors),  is  a  copious 
spring,  which  was  doubtless  Mr.  Blackstone's.  Shaw,  in  his  de- 
scription of  Boston,  p.  103,  says:  "Blackstone's  spring  is  yet  to 
be  seen  [1800]  on  the  westerly  part  of  the  town,  near  the  bay  which 
divides  Boston  from  Cambridge." 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  3 

I  felt  as  proud  of  my  delivery  as  a  hen  does  that  has  laid  an 
egg ;  and  it  was  the  subject  of  much  cackling  on  my  part.  An 
account  of  it  will  be  found  in  the  "  Boston  Courier"  of  that  time. 
uThe  Sexton  of  the  Old  School"  has  also  made  it  the  subject  of 
one  of  his  later  lucubrations  in  the  "Transcript."  I  had  every  reason, 
indeed,  to  believe  that  the  public  mind  was  forever  enlightened  on  this 
momentous  topic.  Judge,  then,  of  my  mortification,  Mr.  Editor, 
when  I  found  the  old  erroneous  surmises  reproduced  in  a  standard 
work  by  so  careful  and  well-informed  an  antiquarian  as  Mr.  Drake  ! 
—  my  "  pet "  discovery  wholly  ignored  by  the  ver}r  man  of  all  others 
who  should  have  known  everything  about  it!  —  my  "credit  "as 
clean  gone  as  if  I  had  been  an  original  stockholder  in  the 

"  VERMONT  CENTRAL." 


II. 

HISTORICAL. 

July  6,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Being  at  present  confined  to  my  house  I  am 
unable  to  refer  to  certain  abstracts  of  my  own  which  I  well  re- 
member, especially  a  deposition  of  Odlin,  etc.  Mr.  Drake's  his- 
tory, however  (p.  530),  supplies  me  with  all  I  want,  and  proves,  as 
I  think,  conclusively  that  Blackstone's  point  was  the  six-acre  lot 
which  he  reserved,  and  that  his  house  stood  on  part  of  it.  Mr.  Drake 
speaks  of  the  four  depositions,  in  1684,  of  John  Odlin,  Robert 
Walker,  Francis  Hudson,  and  William  Lytherland,  and  he  repre- 
sents them  as  saying  that  they  had  — 

Dwelt  in  Boston  from  the  first  planting  thereof,  and  continuing  so  at  this 
day  (June  10,  1684)  ;  that  in  or  about  1634  the  said  inhabitants  of  Boston  Cof 
whom  the  Hon.  John  Winthrop,  Esq.,  Governor  of  the  Colony,  was  chief) 
did  agree  with  Mr.  William  Blackstone  for  the  purchase  of  his  estate  and 
right  in  any  lands  lying  within  the  said  neck  called  Boston ;  and  for  said  pur- 
chase agree  that  every  householder  should  pay  6s.,  none  paying  less,  some 
considerably  more,  which  was  collected  and  paid  to  Mr.  Blackstone  to  his 
full  satisfaction  for  his  whole  right,  reserving  only  about  six  acres  on  the  point 


4  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

commonly  called  Black  stone1  s  Point,1  on  part  whereof  his  then  dwelling  house 
stood  ;  after  which  purchase  the  town  laid  out  a  place  for  a  training  field, 
which  ever  since  and  now  is  used  for  that  purpose  and  for  the  feeding  of 
cattle. 

Now,  to  my  apprehension,  nothing  can  make  the  matter  clearer 
than  the  above  extract  from  Mr.  Drake's  own  history.  If  it  had 
been  printed  in  the  part  of  the  volume  where  his  surmises  are  made 
in  favor  of  Barton's  Point,  he  could  not,  as  it  seems  to  me,  have 
failed  to  be  himself  convinced  of  his  mistake.  The  Common 
(which  contains  about  50  acres)  was  very  probably  the  residue  of 
the  50  acres  which  had  previously  been  granted  to  Mr.  Blackstone, 
and  which  thus  became  revested  in  the  town. 

One  word  of  reply  to  Mr.  Alonzo  Lewis.2  Mr.  Blackstone's 
cottage  was  doubtless  a  slight  structure,  and  in  1709  had  disap- 
peared ;  but  the  trees  which  he  had  planted  had  grown,  and  were 
an  orchard,  which  of  itself  becomes  a  conspicuous  monument, — since 
it  is  the  only  orchard  shown  on  the  most  ancient  plans  of  Boston. 
That  there  were  numerous  other  springs  I  admit.  That  there  was 
an  excellent  spring  on  this  spot  so  near  the  original  shore  that  the 
fresh  water  bubbled  forth  and  ran  down  the  sand  to  sea,  I  was 
assured  by  an  aged  witness,  now  deceased,  who  was  consulted  as 
to  the  titles  in  that  locality  in  the  suits  of  the  Overseers  of  the 
Poor  against  the  Mount  Vernon  Proprietors. 

SUMMARY. 

Edward  Johnson,  in  1630,  in  his"  Wonder-Working  Providence," 
writes:  "  One»[on]  the  South  side  of  the  River,  one  a  Point  of 
Land  called  Blaxton's  Point,  planted  Mr.  William  Blaxton." 

The  Records  show  that  "  1  April,  1633,  it  is  agreed  that  Mr. 
William  Blackstone  shall  have  fifty  acres  set  out  for  him  near  his 
house  in  Boston  to  enjoy  forever." 

Blackstone  sold  the  town,  the  following  year,  all  said  allotment 
except  six  acres,  on  part  of  which  his  then  house  stood  —  the  sale 

1  Judge  Sewall,  in  bis  Diary  (vol.  I.,  p.  186),  under  date  of  August  15,  1687,  wrote 
as  follows,  "  Went  into  Water  alone  at  Blackstone's  Point."     This  shows  that  the  name 
was   long   preserved.     Later   on    Mr.  Bowditch    traces  the  title  of  adjacent  lots,  so 
strengthening  his  first  position,  that  it  may  be  deemed  to  be  settled  that  Blackstone's 
Point  was  at  the  corner  of  Beacon  and  Charles  streets.  W. 

2  Mr.  Lewis  had  replied  to  the  first  article  by  suggesting  that  Blackstone's  six-acre 
lot  might  have  been  at  the  further  end  of  his  fifty  acres,  and,  therefore,  miyht  have 
been  at  the  point  called  afterwards  Barton's  Point.     Mr.  S.  Gr.  Drake  also  reiterated 
his  ideas  in  an  article.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  5 

not  being  restricted  to  the  44  acres,  but  including  all  his  right  in 
the  peninsula.  He  received  £30,  raised  by  a  town  vote  assessed 
Nov.  10,  1634. 

The  deposition  of  Odlin,  etc.,  is  a  well  known  historical  docu- 
ment, which  has  been  often  printed  in  extenso.3 

Blackstone  probably  removed  from  Boston  in  1635.  It  is,  at  any 
rate,  certain  from  a  publication  in  1641  that  he  had  removed  before 
that  year.  See  Savage's  Winthrop.  Annie  Pollard  proves  that  he 
sold  his  reserved  six  acres  to  Richard  Pepj's.  This  six-acre  lot, 
"  commonly  called  the  Blackstone  lot,"  is  traced  from  Pepys  in 
1655,  through  Williams,  to  Banister,  1709,  and  through  Copley  to 
the  Mount  Vernon  Proprietors —  and  it  bounds  S.  on  the  Common, 
W.  on  the  River. 

Now,  as  to  the  orchard  planted  by  Blackstone.  In  a  publica- 
tion of  1765  it  is  stated  that  many  of  the  trees  still  bore  fruit. 
Bonner's  plan  of  1722,  though  it  has  no  division  lines  marking  the 
bounds  of  the  Common,  has  an  arrangement  of  trees  in  rows,  i.e., 
an  orchard,  obviously  in  this  locality.  This  orchard  reappears  in 
Price's  plan  of  1733.  Who  can  doubt  that  it  was  Blackstone's, 
Pep}Ts',  Williams',  Copley's  orchard? 

As  to  there  being  no  Point  at  the  foot  of  Beacon  hill  —  all  Bos- 
ton has  been  called  in  print  "  Blackstone's  Neck"  and  the  name  of 
Biackstone's  Point  may  have  been  given  to  that  projecting  part  of 
Boston  which  was  nearest  to  his  house.  It  is,  however,  a  mere 
question  of  nomenclature,  and  does  not  at  all  affect  the  question  of 
where  Blackstone  actually  lived.  Besides,  no  one  can  know  that 
there  was  not  some  such  projection  of  the  original  shore  at  the  foot 
of  Beacon  hill  as  might  with  propriety  be  called  a  point.  The 
whole  space  at  the  bottom  of  the  Common,  now  used  as  a  parade 
ground,  and  of  which  the  level  has  been  greatly  raised  within  a  few 
years,  was  doubtless  at  that  time  a  mere  marsh  or  beach,  occa- 
sionally, if  not  always,  covered  by  the  full  tides.  If  so  the  shore 
must  have  made  a  decided  bend  or  sweep  toward  the  east,  imme- 
diately in  front  of  Mr.  Blackstone's  homestead  lot.  In  other 
words,  there  must  have  been  &  point  thus  formed.  On  the  whole  I 
think  the  "  point"  is  "  settled"  where  Blackstone  settled,  and  feel 
safe  in  changing  my  signature  to 

Q.  E.  D. 


3  The  original  deposition  is  in  Suffolk  Deeds,  Lib.  24,  fol.  406.    It  is  printed  in  full 
in  Shurtleffs  Description  of  Boston,  pp.  296-7.  W. 


6  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

III. 

ANCIENT  ITEMS. 
July  10,  1855. 

In  1676,  after  King  Philip's  war,  Dr.  Increase  Mather,  of  Boston, 
"did  by  his  letters  procure  a  whole  ship-load  of  provisions  from 
the  charity  of  his  friends  in  Dublin."  So  that  when  Boston  sent, 
by  R.  B.  Forbes,  Esq.,  a  ship-load  of  provisions  to  Ireland,  a  few 
years  since,  it  was  but  the  payment,  without  interest,  of  a  debt 
contracted  by  our  forefathers  a  century  and  three-quarters  before. 
The  debt  is  mentioned  by  Drake,  but  not  its  somewhat  tardy  dis- 
charge. Mr.  Drake,  in  each  page  of  his  history,  has,  in  the  notes, 
preserved  copies  of  the  miscellaneous  votes  passed  by  the  town  in 
each  year,  these  being  generally  of  too  trivial  a  character  to  justify 
an  insertion  in  the  text.  Thus,  under  the  j^ear  1640,  the  following 
vote  is  recorded  as  passed  March  30,  viz.  :  "  Ordered,  That  no  more 
land  be  granted  in  the  Town  out  of  the  open  ground  or  common 
field,  which  is  left  between  Sentry  Hill  and  Mr.  Colbron's  end,  ex- 
cept 3  or  4  lots  to  make  up  the  street  from  bro.  Robt.  Walker's  to 
the  Round  Marsh."  On  this  vote  he  makes  not  a  word  of  comment, 
and  yet  it  was  the  origin  of  the  Boston  Common.  Sentry  Hill  was 
Beacon  Hill.  Mr.  Colbron's  end  or  field  extended  from  Washing- 
ton street  back  along  Pleasant  street  and  the  water,  and  the  street 
referred  to  is  Boylston  street.  The  Common  originally  reached  to 
Tremont  House,  and  indeed  the  little  flower-garden  at  the  S.E. 
corner  was  granted  more  than  190  years  ago  as  a  house-plat,  out 
of  that  end  of  the  Common.  Rather  a  small-sized  house-lot,  by 
the  way !  The  granary  and  workhouse  were  erected  where  the 
Park-street  Church  and  houses  now  stand,  the  street  leading  by 
them  having  been  called  Sentry  street.  The  Common  origin  ally 
extended  to  Mason  street ;  and  the  whole  Colonade  Row  block  of 
houses  was  built  on  land  sold  off  from  it.  On  the  other  hand,  its 
original  dimensions  were  enlarged  in  1780,  by  a  purchase,  from 
William  Foster,  of  about  two  acres  on  Boylston  street,  east  of  the 
bury  ing-ground,  and  between  it  and  Tremont  street.  The  Public 
Garden  was,  and  as  I  conceive  still  is,  part  of  the  Common,  though 
divided  from  it  by  Charles  street  about  1804.  Surely  a  vote  to 
which  Boston  is  indebted  for  this  beautiful  public  pleasure-ground 
should  have  received  from  its  historian  at  least  one  sentence  of 
mention  in  his  text. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  7 

Mr.  Drake  does  indeed  mention  in  his  text  that  on  March  31, 
1645,  "  there  was  purchased  of  Thomas  Scotto  for  the  use  of  the 
Town  his  dwelling-house,  yard,  and  garden,  for  fifty-five  pounds. 
[Cheap.]  It  was  bounded  on  the  north  by  land  of  Henry  Messen- 
ger, on  the  east  by  Mr.  Richard  Hutchinson's,  by  the  Common 
street  south,  and  the  buying- place  west."  But  it  would  not  have 
been  amiss  if  he  had  added  that  this  is  the  School-street  estate,  on 
which  now  stands  the  City  Hall.  Between  this  School-street  land 
and  the  city  land  on  Court  street,  on  which  formerl}7  stood  the 
prison  and  now  stands  the  Court  House,  were  intervening  lots  of 
Henry  Messenger,  etc.,  which  have  been  subsequently  acquired,  so 
that  the  two  estates  are  now  united.  And  it  would  seem  that  of 
the  original  School-street  land  portions  were  subsequently  sold  off, 
on  which  were  erected  the  brick  buildings  owned  by  the  late  John 
Lowell,  Wm.  Sullivan,  etc.,  and  which  were  again  purchased  at  a 
much  later  day  by  the  city,  the  land  so  repurchased  being  now  laid 
out  as  ornamental  enclosures  in  front  of  the  City  Hall.  It  is  ob- 
servable that  the  west  boundary  of  the  deed  of  1645  is  on  the 
burying-place.  It  was  not  until  more  than  forty  years  after  this 
period,  under  the  administration  of  Andros,  that  the  first  Episcopal 
church,  now  known  as  King's  Chapel,  was  erected  on  part  of  "  the 
burying-place." 

GLEANER. 


IV. 

KING'S  CHAPEL  BURYING-GROUND. 

July  12,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  There  is  a  well-known  legal  conundrum  — 
"  What  is  that  which,  when  it  has  once  begun  to  run,  never  leaves 
oft  running?"  The  answer  is,  "A  statute  of  limitation."  It, 
indeed,  runs  to  some  purpose.  Its  "  might  makes  right."  An 
unauthorized  intrusion  upon  lands  —  a  barefaced  squat  —  it  con- 
verts at  last  into  a  title,  guarded  by  all  the  sacred  majesty  of  law. 

Our  citizens,  as  the}7  pass  by  the  chapel  in  Tremont  street,  see 
merely  an  ancient  edifice,  of  fine  proportions,  belonging  to  one  of 
our  most  wealthy  and  fashionable  congregations,  and  in  the  bury- 
ing-ground  adjoining  they  behold  the  resting-place  of  those  who, 
from  age  to  age,  after  having  worshipped  at  that  church,  have,  at 


8  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

last,  been  gathered  together  beside  its  hallowed  walls.     Nothing, 
however,  can  be  further  from  the  truth  of  history. 

Isaac  Johnson  was  one  of  the  most  distinguished  of  the  founders 
of  Boston.  His  wife,  the  Lady  Arabella,  nobly  born  and  delicately 
nurtured,  sunk  at  once  under  the  fatigues  and  privations  of  her 
western  voyage,  and  died  at  Salem,  where  she  landed.  The  place 
of  her  burial  is  not  known  — 

"  Yet  still  she  hath  a  monument 
To  strike  the  pensive  eye,  — 
The  tender  memories  of  the  land 
Wherein  her  ashes  lie." 

Her  husband  died  shortly  afterwards  (September  30,  1630). 
The  grave  closed,  as  it  were,  at  once  over  them  both. 

It  is  tradition,  derived  from  the  late  Chief  Justice  Sewall,  that 
Mr.  Johnson  had  chosen  for  his  lot  the  great  square  between 
Washington,  School,  Tremont,  and  Court  streets,  and  that,  by  his 
desire,  he  was  buried  at  the  south-west  end  of  that  lot,  "  which 
gave  occasion  for  the  first  bury  ing -place  of  this  town  to  be  laid  out 
round  about  his  grave."  It  is,  however,  a  matter  of  doubt  where 
he  was  buried,  and  it  does  not  appear  that  this  whole  square,  or, 
indeed,  any  part  of  it,  was  ever  actually  granted  to  him.  It  is 
certain  that,  in  the  "  Book  of  Possessions  "  (our  Doomsday-book), 
it  is  subdivided  among  several  possessors. 

Thus,  Richard  Hutchinson  is  u  Possessor"  of  theS.E.  corner  lot 
on  Washington  street;  the  bury  ing-place  is  located  at  the  S.W. 
corner  on  Tremont  street ;  while,  between  them,  comes  the  estate 
which,  in  1645,  Thomas  Scotto  sold  to  the  town  (now  the  City  Hall 
estate). 

Here,  then,  were  buried  those  sturdy  champions  of  Puritanism, 
who,  dreading  and  detesting  the  thraldom  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, had  left  the  comforts  and  luxuries  of  the  Old  World,  that  they 
might  worship  God  according  to  their  own  consciences ;  who 
through  life  had  looked  with  almost  equal  aversion  upon  Episco- 
pacy and  Popery.  The  feeling  that  prompted  Endicott  to  cut  out 
the  cross  from  the  King's  colors  —  however  the  policy  of  his  act 
might  be  questioned  —  really  pervaded  almost  all  minds.  Fleeing 
from  persecution  themselves,  they  thought  that  they  had  the  right 
to  drive  forth  from  among  them,  even  by  persecution,  those  sectaries 
who  sought,  under  claim  of  like  liberty  of  conscience,  to  worship 
God  in  modes  which  they  judged  erroneous.  Here  lie  buried  John 
Winthrop,  "  The  Governor,"  d.  1649  ;  "the  famous,  reverend  and 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  9 

learned  Pastors/'  John  Cotton,  d.  1652,  John  Davenport,  d.  1670, 
and  John  Oxenbridge,  d.  1674  ;  Major  Thomas  Savage,  d.  1681-2  ; 
Major  Thomas  Brattle,  d.  1683,  and  others,  their  wise  and  brave 
contemporaries. 

Mr.  Cotton's  burial  has  been  quaintly  described  as  "  the  most 
grievous  and  solemn  funeral  ever  known  upon  the  American 
strand ; "  and  an  elegy  is  extant  "  on  the  Sudden  and  much 
Lamented  Death  and  Expiration  of  that  Worthy,  Grave,  Pious, 
and  Everyway  accomplished  Hero,  Major  Thomas  Savage,  Esq'r." 

How  would  it  have  shocked  these  worthies  on  their  death-beds 
could  they  have  foreseen  that  their  last  resting-place  was  eventually 
to  be  desecrated  by  the  intrusion  of  a  hateful  Episcopal  edifice, 
within  which,  in  still  later  times,  under  episcopal  forms,  what  they 
would  have  regarded  as  the  damnable  heresy  of  Unitarianism  would 
be  inculcated  ! 

In  May,  1686,  the  first  society  of  Episcopalians  was  formed. 
The  old  charter  of  the  Colony  having  been  annulled,  and  the  politi- 
cal power  being  then  in  the  hands  of  that  denomination,  on  the 
arrival  of  Andros,  in  December  of  that  year,  they  succeeded  in  com- 
pelling the  Old  South  Society  to  permit  them  to  use  their  building 
as  often  as  occasion  required.  Drake  says  :  "  How  the  (Episco- 
pal) Society  obtained  the  land  on  which  their  church  stood  has 
not  been  discovered  ;4  but  it  is  not  at  all  improbable  that  it  was 

« Somewhat  later  Mr.  Bowditch  obtained  some  light  on  this  subject,  and  May  28, 
1858,  he  published  the  following  in  the  "  Transcript." 

A  QUESTION  OF  TITLE. 

MB.  EDITOR:— In  an  article  printed  in  the  Transcript,  in  1855,  I  illustrated  the 
doctrine  of  squat  titles  and  titles  by  possession  by  the  case  of  King's  Chapel — a  part 
of  a  public  bury  ing-ground  taken  from  the  town  for  an  Episcopal  church,  in  the  times 
of  Andros.  I  had  a  list  of  all  deeds  indexed  under  the  name  of  "  Boston,"  and  found 
no  deed  recorded.  I  still  believe  that  article  entirely  accurate  as  to  the  original  edifice 
and  the  land  under  it.  Within  a  day  or  two,  however,  my  attention  has  been  called  to 
a  deed  indexed  under  the  names  of  Thomas  Hancock  and  others,  to  Henry  Caner  and 
others,  but  which  is  really  a  deed  of  the  Selectmen  of  Boston  to  the  wardens  and  vestry 
of  King's  Chapel  in  1748  (Suff.,  76,  f.  82),  by  which  certain  additional  pieces  of  land 
are  bought  by  said  grantees  for  the  enlargement  of  the  church,  and  which  deed  of 
course  recognizes  the  ownership  by  said  wardens  and  vestry  of  the  original  lot.  Think- 
ing that  a  religious  society  would  feel  relieved  to  learn  that  any  part  of  their  church 
and  land  had  been  bought  and  paid  for,  I  am  happy  to  refer  them  to  this  old  deed, 
'which  not  being  indexed  under  the  names  either  of  "Boston"  or  "King's  Chapel,' 
would  necessarily  be  overlooked  by  all  who  sought  for  it.  GLEANEB. 


In  a  tract  entitled  "A  Vindication  of  New  England,"  printed  in   1688,  written 
probably  by  Rev.  Increase  Mather,  we  find  these  words  relative  to  the  Episcopalians 


10  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

taken  by  order  of  Governor  Andros  out  of  the  common  burial-place 
which  was  given  to  the  town  by  Mr.  Isaac  Johnson."  It  is  cer- 
tain that  jt  was  built  on  part  of  that  burying-place,  —  an  appro- 
priation of  the  spot  which  could  not  have  been  obtained  from  the 
living  except  under  duress,  and  which  would  have  been  utterly  re- 
pugnant to  the  most  cherished  feelings  of  the  dead.  The  act,  in- 
deed, could  not,  at  first,  have  been  regarded  in  any  other  light  than 
as  a  flagrant  wrong  and  insult.  It  is,  however,  now  the  source  of 
one  of  the  best  titles  in  Boston,  and  is  at  least  one  good  fruit  of  the 
tj'ranny  of  Sir  Edmund  Andros. 

According  to  the  usual  practice  of  reserving  the  most  important 
matters  for  insertion  in  the  postscript,  I  would  mention  that  I, 
myself,  witnessed  on  this  spot  a  truly  sacrilegious  official  act, 
perpetrated  by  the  direction  of  a  superintendent  of  the  City  Burial 
Grounds,  now  deceased.  Under  the  very  windows  of  the  Historical 
Society,  he  caused  many  gravestones  to  be  removed  from  their 
original  position,  and  rearranged  them  as  edge-stones  by  certain 
paths  which  he  there  laid  out.  The  result  is,  that  the  tear  of  affec- 
tion and  friendship  may  hereafter  be  shed,  or  the  sigh  of  sentiment 
breathed,  in  a  wrong  locality;  and  perhaps  the  bones  of  a  stranger 
instead  of  an  ancestor  may  be  piously  gathered  and  entombed  anew 
b}'  a  descendant,  unsuspicious  of  so  strange  and  inexcusable  an 
outrage.  In  delightful  contrast  to  this  attempt  to  improve  "  The 
King's  Chapel  Burying  Ground,"  let  me  refer  your  readers  to  a 
beautiful  volume,  in  which  it  is  described,  by  Thomas  Bridgman, 
published  in  1853,  and  entitled  "  Memorials  of  the  Dead  in  Boston." 

GLEANER. 


of  Boston:  "  Thus  at  their  own  charge  they  built  an  house;  but  can  the  Towns-men 
of  Boston  tell  at  whose  charge  the  land  was  purchased?"  From  a  letter  of  Judge 
Sewall's  in  Mass.  Historical  Society's  Collections,  4th  series,  vol.  viii,  p.  517,  it  seems 
certain  that  the  Council  under  Andres's  administration  took  the  land  for  the  church 
building.  There  was  no  legislature  then,  and  this  act  of  the  supreme  authority  of  the 
colony  could  not  be  questioned.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  11 

V. 

THE    BARRICADO    OF    1672. 
July  13,  1855. 

Mr.  Drake,  in  his  "History  of  Boston,"  p.  394,  says,  under  date 
of  Sept.  5,  1672  :  "  The  fears  of  an  invasion  from  the  Dutch  may 
have  given  rise  to  a  stupendous  project  of  fortifying  the  town.  A 
circular  wall  was  ordered  to  be  erected,  extending  from  one  ex- 
tremity of  the  cove  to  the  other,  or  its  terminations  were  the  Sconce, 
at  the  point  now  occupied  by  India  wharf,  on  the  South,  and  Capt. 
Scarlet's  wharf,  at  the  foot  of  Fleet  street,  on  the  North."  "  The 
circular  line  to  be  built  upon  was  to  touch  the  channel  at  the  nearest 
point  before  the  town,  and  between  the  wall  and  the  seaward  ex- 
tremities of  the  wharves,  built  and  to  be  built,  one  hundred  feet 
space  for  vessels  was  to  be  left."  "  This  great  structure  fell 
gradually  into  decay,  and  it  has  been  long  since  any  vestiges  of  it 
were  to  be  seen.  Its  exterior  was  probabty  of  wood.  It  went  by 
the  name  of  the  Old  Wharf  as  long  as  any  of  it  remained." 

There  are  various  inaccuracies  in  the  above  statements.  It 
would  hardly  be  proper  to  say  that  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
may  have  been  caused  by  the  aggressions  of  the  mother-country. 
The  Sconce,  or  South  Battery,  which  was  one  terminus  of  the 
structure  (though  I  have  not  my  plans  to  refer  to),  coincides,  I 
believe,  with  Rowe's  wharf*  rather  than  India  wharf,  which  it 
adjoins.  The  structure  was  not  built  on  a  circular  line,  but  on  a 
straight  line  or  lines.  It  was  the  earliest  large  wharf  erected  in 
Boston.  Long  wharf  did  not  exist  till  17W).  Central  wharf  and 
India  wharf  were  built  within  the  present  century.  Further,  it  was 
erected  without  any  reference  to  "  touching  the  channel."  And  what 
is  meant  by  the  phrase  "  Between  the  wall  .and  the  seaward  ex- 
tremities of  the  wharves  built  and  to  be  built,  one  hundred  feet 
space  for  vessels  was  to  be  left "  ?  The  facts  are,  that  the  structure 


*  Foster's  wharf  bounds  northerly  on  "  Sconce  "  lane,  13  feet  wide,  laid  out  in  1673. 
On  the  northerly  side  of  this  lane  is  Rowe's  wharf,  of  which  part  was  conveyed  to  John 
Rowe  in  1764,  by  the  executors  of  Jacob  Wendell,  and  the  residue  (measuring  100  feet 
on  Batterymarch  street,  now  Broad  street)  was  conveyed  to  said  Rowo  by  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  Town  of  Boston,  in  1785.  (Suffolk,  Lib.  181,  fol.  258.)  This  was  part  of 
the  Old  South  Battery  estate  or  Sconce.  The  name  of  Batterymaroh  street  is  derived 
from  this  battery,  which  bounded  upon  it. 


12  CITY  DOCUMENT  -No.  105. 

was  a  sea-wall,  built  across  the  mouth  of  the  cove,  with  certain 
"  gaps"  or  openings  left  for  the  passage  of  vessels.  All  the  flats 
outside  of  this  wall,  to  the  channel,  and  also  two  hundred  feet  in 
width  of  the  flats  inside  of  it,  or  towards  the  town,  were  granted 
in  fee  simple  to  the  individual  undertakers  who  erected  the  struct- 
ure. And  the  various  upland  owners  were  restricted  from  wharf- 
ing  out  be3Tond  a  circular  line,  which  was  swept  along  the  shore 
from  one  terminus  of  the  structure  to  the  other,  which  "  circular 
line"  ranged  west  of  much  of  the  present  Commercial  street,  etc. 
The  consequence  was,  that  many  conveyances  of  wharf-estates  on 
this  cove,  for  a  centmy  and  a  half,  instead  of  bounding  on  "  the 
sea,"  or  " low-watermark,"  bound  on  ^  the  circular  line,"  to  which 
their  right  of  wharfing  out  was  thus  restricted.  Mr.  Drake,  recol- 
lecting that  there  ivas  a  "  circular  line  "  somewhere,  has  erroneously 
transferred  it  to  the  actual  structure.  The  whole  space  between  the 
"  circular  line  "  and  the  line  of  the  two  hundred  feet  of  inside  flats 
granted  to  the  undertakers,  was  to  remain  in  common  for  wharfage, 
etc.,  and  not  merely,  as  Mr.  Drake  says,  "a  one  hundred  feet 
space." 

Mr.  Drake  speaks  of  this  structure  as  having  long  since  "  wholly 
ceased  to  exist"  Down  to  the  time  of  the  erection  of  Central 
wharf,  say  fort}'  years  ago,  a  portion  was  standing,  called  the 
South  Island  wharf,  on  which  were  salt  stores  belonging  to  the 
proprietors  of  Long  wharf.  Over  part  of  this  Island  wharf  Cen- 
tral wharf  was  laid  out.  In  digging  for  the  foundations  of  that 
wharf  branches  of  trees  —  part  of  the  "  primeval  forest,"  with  the 
bark  still  entire,  were  thrown  up  from  the  bottom  of  the  original 
structure,  with  the  stones  in.  connection  with  which  they  had  been 
sunk  one  hundred  and  forty  years  before.  Another  similar 
"  island,"  lying  north*  of  the  Long  wharf,  was  removed  about 
twent}'-five  years  ago  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  channel  or 
water  passage  in  common  for  the  wharves  in  its  vicinity.  And  at 
this  present  time  (1855)  one  of  the  chief  wharves  of  the  city, 
though  now  of  course  rebuilt,  is  itself  but  a  part  of  the  Barricaclo 
of  1672,  viz.,  the  T  wharf.  The  neck  of  the  T,  connecting  it  with 
Long  wharf,  is  a  part  of  that  structure,  and  the  T  itself  still  main- 
tains entire  and  enjoys  its  two  hundred  feet  of  flats  inside,  and  all 
the  flats  outside  toward  the  sea,  —  all,  or  nearly  all,  said  flats  being 
now  covered  by  the  present  solid  and  substantial  wharf.  Here 
certainty  is  a  very  respectable  "  vestige"  of  this  old  enterprise. 

The  name  of  the  structure  was  "  The  Barricade,"  or  u  out 
wharf."  It  only  acquired  the  name  of  "  The  old  wharf  or  wharves  " 


"  GLEANER  AETICLES.  13 

by  lapse  of  time,  and  probably  after  it  had  fallen  into  decay; 
after  it  had  got  into  the  condition  of  an  estate  near  the  foot  of 
State  street,  an  ancient  deed  of  which  graphically  describes  it  as 
"  a  messuage  now  running  to  despair."  It  is  as  much  a  misnomer 
as  if  the  South  Society  had  been  stated  to  have  had  the  prefix 
"  Old  "  when  it  was  first  established. 

The  Barricado  grant  gave  to  each  "undertaker"  a  fee  simple 
title,  but  it  was  upon  the  condition  that  he,  his  heirs  and  assigns, 
should  keep  in  repair  the  part  which  he  built.  Breaches  of  this 
condition  have  gradually  worked  a  forfeiture  of  almost  all  these 
titles,  but  the  grant  itself  will  always  remain  one  of  great  historical 
interest.  It  is  perhaps  the  most  anomalous  exercise  of  power  recorded 
in  our  local  annals;  being  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  prior  vested 
rights  of  all  the  upland  owners  in  that  cove,  who,  by  virtue  of  the 
Colony  ordinance  0/1641,  as  construed  by  the  present  conditions  of 
our  Supreme  Judicial  Court,  already  owned  in  fee  simple  all  the 
Jlats  to  the  channel. 

GLEANER. 


VI. 

ST.   PAUL'S   CHURCH. 

July  14,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  We  have  seen  that  King's  Chapel  Church  origi- 
nated in  something  like  a  "  squat."  There  is  one  circumstance 
respecting  St.  Paul's  Church,  equally  peculiar,  and  perhaps  not 
generally  known,  even  to  those  who  worship  there. 

At  the  beginning  of  all  things  Robert  Blott  is  found  to  be 
u  Possessor"  of  a  tract  of  land,  measuring  140  feet  on  the  high- 
way, now  Washington  street,  and  extending  in  depth  276  feet 
along  a  cross  street  or  lane,  named  from  him-Blott's  lane,  after- 
wards Willis's,  or  Banister's  lane,  now  Winter  street.  Behind  this 
lot,  occupying  all  the  residue  of  Winter  street  to  the  Common,  was 
the  possession  of  John  Leverett,  who  is  named  as  the  westerly 
abutter  of  Blott  in  the  "  Book  of  Possessions."  The  northerly  part 
of  Leverett's  possession,  measuring  210  feet  in  front  on  Winter 
street  by  about  100  feet  in  depth,  is  the  source  of  title  to  the  blocks 
of  dwelling-houses  now  standing  thereon,  four  of  which  front  on 
Tremont  street,  the  others  on  Winter  street. 


14  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

The  southerty  part  of  Leverett's  Possession  had  been  sold  off,  as 
early  as  1664,  to  one  W}rard  or  Wyre,  though  the  deed  is  not  re- 
corded. Thus,  we  find  that  "  Hudson  Leverett,  alias  John 
Leverett,"  mortgaged  in  1664  an  half  an  acre  of  ground,  bounding 
on  the  street  north,  the  Common  west,  the  land  now  Goodman 
Wyre's  W.  (evidently  a  mistake  for  S.),  and  Goodman  Blott's 
easterly. 

Robert  W^ard  and  Sarah  his  wife  convey  to  John  Wampas,  an 
Indian,  by  warranty  deed,  dated  January  28,  1666,  recorded  Sep- 
tember 28,  1668,  in  Suffolk  Deeds,  Lib.  5,  fol.  690,  a  tract  of  land 
210  feet  deep  and  32  feet  broad,  more  or  less,  bounded  W.  on  the 
Common,  S.  on  John  Cross,  E.  on  Alexander  Baker  (who  had 
succeeded  Blott) ,  and  N.  on  land  now  or  late  of  Leverett. 

And  it  is  from  this  Indian,  John  Wampas,  that  St.  Paul's  church 
derives  its  title  to  the  northerly  portion  of  its  estate,  say  32  feet  on 
Tremont  street,  by  210  feet  in  depth. 

The  light  of  Gospel  truth  emanating  from  a  truly  heathen  source  I 

GLEANER. 


vn. 

THE  FIRST  CHURCH. 

July  7,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  It  is  believed  that  the  title  of  the  First  Church 
in  Chauncy  Place  is,  in  one  particular,  entirely  unique.  Summer 
street,  from  its  leading  towards  a  mill,  and  from  its  passage  by  the 
Seven  Star  Inn  (which  once  occupied  the  site  of  Trinity  Church), 
was  in  ancient  times  known  successively  as  "  ye  Mylne  streete," 
and  "  Seven  Star  lane."  It  was  at  first  called  merely  "  the  street  " 
or  highway.  The  "  Book  of  Possessions,"  among  the  estates  on  the 
south  side  of  this  street,  has  the  following  item  :  "  Richard 
Hollich,  one  house  and  lott,  bounded  with  Thomas  Bell,  East, 
Gamaliel  Waite,  West,  William  Blantaine,  South,  the  streete, 
North." 

From  the  possession  of  Gamaliel  Wait,  on  the  West,  is  derived 
the  title  of  the  store  now  occupied  by  Hovey  &  Co.  Thomas  Bell, 
named  as  the  adjoining  easterly  owner,  was  dead  in  1655,  and  his 
son  Thomas  sold  to  John  Maryon  [  i.e.,  Marion]  a  moiety  of  the 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  15 

estate  in  1668,  described  as  measuring  90  feet  on  the  street,  and 
bounded  "  with  the  land  of  Richard  Hollidge  West,  and  is  there 
254  feet  more  or  less." 

Richard  Holling/iecid  of  Boston,  planter  [being  the  third  alias 
under  which  this  original  possessor  appears]  and  Ann,  his  wife, 
"  being  preserved  to  a  state  of  old  age,  attended  with  many  weak- 
nesses and  infirmities,  and  for  a  valuable  sum  of  money  secured  to 
be  annually  paid  us,  and  the  survivor  of  us  "  —  conveyed  to  Henry 
Alline  and  Robert  Sanderson,  u  Deacons  of  the  First  Church  of 
Christ  in  Boston  aforesaid,  whereof  we  are  members,"  "  all  that 
our  dwellyig-house  and  housing  with  the  land  whereupon  they 
stand,  yards,  garden,  orchard,  barn,  and  land  unto  us  belonging, 
situate  on  the  southerly  end  of  the  town  of  Boston  aforesaid,  and 
butted  and  bounded  Northeasterly  on  the  street  or  highway,  South- 
easterly by  the  land  of  John  Marion,  Sr.,  Southwesterly  by  the 
land  of  Phebe  Blanton,  widow,  and  Northwesterly  by  land  of 
Gamaliel  Wait "  (reserving  during  their  lives  the  use  of  the  old 
house,  so  called,  and  the  little  garden),  "  to  have  and  to  hold  to 
them,  their  successors  in  said  office,  or  assigns,  to  the  only  proper 
use  and  behoof  of  said  Church  or  Society  forever,"  by  warranty 
deed  dated  December  17,  1680,  recorded  December  20,  in  Suffolk 
Deeds,  Lib.  12,  fol.  1. 

The  first  church  edifice  erected  in  Boston  was  on  the  south  side 
of  State  street.  The  present  Brazier's  building  occupies  part  of 
the  site,  though  the  original  lot  projected  out  much  farther  into  the 
street.  The  whipping-post  and  stocks,  etc.,  were,  one  or  both, 
erected  in  front  of  it.  The  menial  and  physical  means  of  improv- 
ing the  population  were  thus  brought  into  immediate  juxtaposition. 
After  standing  on  this  spot  about  nine  years  the  church  was  re- 
moved, in  1640,  to  its  second  location  on  Cornhill  square. 

By  an  indenture  in  1807  (Suffolk,  Lib.  223,  fol.  131)  between 
Ebenezer  Preble  (who  had  succeeded  Marion)  and  the  then 
deacons  of  the  First  Church,  Chauncy  place  was  laid  out,  40  feet 
wide,  almost  wholly  over  land  of  the  church  (a  triangular  gore  of 
land,  six  feet  wide  on  the  street,  and  running  to  a  point  at  the  dis- 
tance of  117  feet,  being  all  that  was  contributed  by  Mr.  Preble, 
who  bought  of  the  Society  a  somewhat  larger  triangular  gore  of 
land,  extending  from  said  point  southerly,  and  lying  easterly  of  the 
easterly  line  of  said  place).  The  Society  then  sold  Benjamin  Joy, 
Esq.,  in  1808,  their  estate  in  Cornhill  square  (on  which  he  erected 
"  Joy's  Building  ") ,  he  agreeing  to  erect  for  the  Society  four  brick 
dwelling-houses  on  the  front  portion  of  their  Summer-street  estate. 


16  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Behind  this  block  of  houses  stands  the  present  church,  bounding 
easterly  on  the  new  court  thus  laid  out.  And  a  school-house  was 
subsequently  erected  on  a  lot  sold  off  on  the  south  side  of  the 
church. 

The  original  homestead  lot  of  Mr.  Hollich  appears  to  have  been 
about  150  feet  wide,  and  more  than  250  feet  in  depth ;  and  now, 
though  a  quarter  of  an  acre  of  it  is  appropriated  a  highway,  it  con- 
veniently accommodates  two  public  edifices  and  four  private  ones. 
So  that  the  first  occupant  had  ample  room  for  "  swinging  a  cat" 
whenever  he  felt  so  inclined. 

There  is  probably  no  land  in  Boston,  except  that  on  which  Chauncy 
Place  Church  stands,  which  is  held  under  a  direct  conveyance  from 
the  first  possessor,  and  .of  which  no  subsequent  conveyance  has  ever 
been  made. 

GLEANER. 


VIII. 

NOVELTIES  IN  ESTATES. 

July  19,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  There  are  "  curiosities  of  law"  as  well  as  "  curi- 
osities of  literature."  When  just  entering  that  profession  —  which 
I  regret  to  confess  was  at  a  remote  period  of  some  thirty  years  ago 
—  I  remember  hearing  the  following  professional  anecdote:  A 
young  lawyer  had  put  up  his  "  shingle,"  and  sat  waiting  for  his 
first  client.  An  interesting  female  in  black  walked  into  the 
apartment,  and  submitted  her  case  to  his  consideration.  She  was 
a  widow,  and  the  second-story  apartments  of  her  husband's  house 
had  been  assigned  to  her  in  full  of  her  dower  or  thirds  in  his  real 
estate.  The  building  had  just  been  burnt  up.  The  question  sub- 
mitted was,  "What  had  become  of  her  dower?"  This  was 
decidedly  a  "  poser."  The  attorn e}^  had  to  dig  very  laboriously  to 
get  at  the  foundations  of  this  "  castle  in  the  air."  What  was  the 
final  advice  given  to  this  fair  client  I  do  not  remember. 

It  is  often  the  case  that  an  arched  passageway  is  laid  out 
through  an  estate,  so  that  a  portion  of  a  house  is  sustained  above 
it.  Such  are  the  estates  at  the  entrance  of  Williams  court,  and  of 
Disbrow's  Riding-school  in  Washington  street.  I  do  not  recollect, 
however,  more  than  two  instances  in  the  whole  city,  of  fee  simple 


"GLEANER''  AKTICLES.  17 

estates  witJiout  any  land  whatever  attached  to  them.  One  of  these 
is  the  lofts  over  the  arch  on  India  wharf,  which  belonged  to  the 
late  John  Lowell,  Jr.,  at  the  time  of  his  death  ;  the  adjoining  stores 
which  sustain  it  being  the  property  of  others,  one  or  both  of  them 
being  subject  to  the  easement  of  a  stairway  which  forms  the  means 
of  access  to  the  lofts.  The  other  instance  is  that  of  the  apart- 
ments over  the  arch  in  Franklin  place.  Thus  Charles  Vaughan, 
William  Scollay,  and  Charles  Bulfinch,  in  consideration  of  five 
shillings,  and  for  the  promotion  of  the  designs  of  the  Massachu- 
setts Historical  Society,  conveyed  to  said  Society,  May  1,  1794 
(Suffolk  deeds,  Lib.  179,  fol.  98),  "  the  upper  apartment  or  room 
in  the  centre  building  in  Franklin  place,  in  Boston,  called  the 
Crescent,  with  the  passageway  or  staircase  leading  to  the  same." 
[See,  also,  Lib.  446,  fol.  43,  Suffolk  deeds  for  conveyance  of 
Vaughan  to  the  Boston  Library.] 

In  contrast  to  houses  without  any  laud  attached  to  them,  we 
sometimes  find  lands  upon  which  no  buildings  stand  or  can  stand. 
Thus  opposite  the  last-mentioned  arch  is  the  enclosed  area  in 
Franklin  place.  This  originated  under  the  following  deed : 
Charles  Vaughan,  retaining  6-50ths,  conve3*ed  to  21  grantees 
44-50ths  of  the  block  of  eight  dwelling-houses,  east  of  the  arch  — 
by  deed  dated  May  3,  1794  (Suffolk  deeds,  Lib.  178,  fol.  107), 
and  covenants  that  a  certain  street  shall  be  kept  open,  u  enclosing 
in  its  circuit  a  piece  of  ground  of  semi-oval  form  —  the  shortest 
diameter  of  which,  in  the  centre  between  its  extreme  points,  shall 
be  30  feet,  ivhich  said  semi-oval  piece  of  land  shall  be  kept  unoccu- 
pied by  any  buildings  forever  for  the  accommodation,  convenience, 
and  beauty  of  said  lot  of  land,  and  the  advantage  of  said  houses." 

Buildings  without  land  are  rather  unsubstantial,  —  and  land 
without  buildings  is  rather  unproductive.  I  should  always  give  a 
decided  preference  to  investments  in  which  both  are  judiciously 
united. 

GLEANER. 


18  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

IX. 

THE   NAMES  OF   STREETS. 

July  20,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Few  matters  of  mere  taste  and  fashion  result  in 
more  serious  inconveniences  than  the  frequent  and  capricious 
changes  made  in  the  names  of  streets.  Our  original  street  nomen- 
clature was  certainty  not  ver}r  select,  yet  how  interesting  would  it 
be  to  the  local  antiquarian  to  feel  sure  at  once  of  the  identity  of 
some  old  Iocalit3r  from  its  existing  name !  How  man}'  spots  in 
London  are  still  visited  by  pilgrims  who  delight  to  recall  the  wits 
and  sages  who  formerly  frequented  them  !  The  memoiy  of  the 
great  lexicographer  is  better  perpetuated  by  Bolt  court  than  it 
would  be  by  Johnson  square. 

Our  Pudding  Lane,  so  called,  probably,  from  some  primitive 
eating-house,5  had  not  ceased  to  be  an  appropriate  designation  even 
in  the  days  of  the  Exchange  Coffee-house  —  though  it  had  long 
been  superseded  by  Devonshire  street.  Frog  Lane,  so  named  from 
the  ancient  croakers  on  the  Common,  though  now  called  Boylston 

5  In  the  notes  to  "  John  Dunton's  Letters  from  New  England  in  1686,"  printed  by 
the  Prince  Society  in  1867,  I  have  fully  explained  this  name.  It  seems  that  the  famous 
"  Blue  Anchor  Tavern "  fronted  on  Washington  street  and  bounded  south-east  on 
Pudding  lane.  (Suff.  Deeds,  Lib.  21,  f.  369.)  The  exact  location  is  fixed  by  the  deed 
of  Mary  Lidgett  (Lib.  19,  f.  71),  of  land  bounded  west  forty  feet  on  the  highway  to 
Roxbury,  south  by  land  and  house  belonging  to  Harvard  College,  north  by  Monck's 
house,  etc.  The  store  still  belongs  to  Harvard  College,  and  is  the  one  occupied  by 
Little,  Brown  &  Co.  The  Lidgett  estate,  which  was  bought  of  William  Avery  and 
Mary  his  wife,  widow  of  John  Tappan,  seems  to  include  the  two  stores  next  north  of 
the  College  property,  and  thus  the  old  tavern  estate  would  be  the  one  next  north  at 
the  angle  in  the  street.  The  lot  north  of  the  tavern  belonged  to  John  Wiswall,  whose 
daughter,  Mary  Ernmons,  sold  it  in  1709  (Lib.  24,  f.  241)  to  Elisha  Cooke.  It  bounded 
south  on  the  house  formerly  the  Anchor  Tavern,  "  now  in  possession  of  James  Pitts," 
and  north  on  house  and  land  of  said  Cooke.  Elisha  Cooke,  therefore,  came  next  north, 
and  the  corner  belonged  .to  Col.  Nicholas  Paige.  Said  Paige  gave  it,  in  December, 
1714,  to  Nathaniel  Oliver  (Lib.  30,  f.  246),  bounding  north  on  King  street  (now  State 
street)  fifty-seven  feet,  east  on  John  Gerrish  one  hundred  and  thirty-two  feet; 
south  on  Cooke  and  Pitts;  west  on  Cooke  and  Cornhill  street  (Washington  street). 
The  old  lines  remained  with  hardly  a  change  until  our  times,  when  State  street  has  been 
widened  slightly  and  Devonshire  street  (the  old  Pudding  lane)  has  been  materially 
altered. 

The  Blue  Anchor  Tavern  was  famous  in  our  early  history,  until  its  sale  in  1703.  It 
accounts  most  satisfactorily  for  Pudding  lane. 

W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  19 

street,  will,  I  understand,  in  view  of  the  verjr  latest  improvements, 
be  officially  changed  to  "  Squirrel  avenue."  Goodman  Robert 
Blott  ought  still  to  preside  over  Winter  street.  When  King  and 
Queen  streets  gave  place  to  State  and  Court  streets,  what  lingering 
sense  of  lo}Talty  to  the  House  of  Hanover  caused  that  name  to  be 
retained  !  Think  of  Queen  Anne,  of  glorious  memory  !  being  actu- 
ally obliged  to  change  her  name,  because,  by  harboring  females  of 
bad  repute,  she  at  last  lost  her  own  character,  and  made  her  near- 
est neighbors  ashamed  of  her  acquaintance  !  And,  then,  what  an 
insignificant  and  unmeaning  misnomer  of  North  street  was  substi- 
tuted !  Look  at  the  late  preposterous  extension  of  the  name  of 
Congress  street  through  to  Broad  street,  in  violation,  as  it  were,  of 
the  vested  rights  of  Theodore  Atkinson ! 

Hog  Alley,  indeed,  is  the  only  ancient  home  which  I  am  not 
prepared  to  defend.  It  was  a  small  alley  formerly  running  from 
Washington  street,  now  discontinued  and  making  part  of  the 
Adams-House  estate  and  that  next  adjoining.  Patriotism  may 
palliate,  though  it  does  not  justify  the  merging  into  Washington 
street  of  the  several  streets  known  as  Dock  square,  Marlboro9 
street,  Newbury  street,  Orange  street,  and  the  Neck.  How  much 
more  convenient  were  the  former  subdivisions,  to  say  nothing  of 
the  victories  of  Marlboro*  and  the  fame  of  the  noble  House  of 
Orange  —  which  these  old  names  commemorated  !  Who  can  now 
tell,  for  instance,  where  343  or  789  Washington  street  is,  without 
first  ascertaining  the  nearest  cross  streets  between  which  it  is  situ- 
ated ?  An  old  gentleman  once  told  me  that  he  had  always  lived  in 
the  same  house,  but  on  six  different  streets.  It  fronted  easterly  on 
Orange  street,  afterwards  Washington  street,  and  bounded  north- 
erly on  Nassau  street,  afterwards  Common  street,  then  Tremont 
street,  and  finally  Common  street  again,  after  Tremont  street  was 
extended  through  to  meet  Tremont  road.  An  individual  who 
devotes  himself  to  the  examination  of  land  titles  may,  indeed,  well 
sigh  at  these  changes. 

It  is  refreshing  to  a  lover  of  the  past  to  find  a  few  names  still 
commemorating  original  proprietors.  The  area  included  between 
Green  street  and  Cambridge  street  once  converged  almost  to  a 
mere  point,  called  the  Field  Gate.  By  different  deeds,  in  1667, 
1672,  and  1685,  Simon  L}'nde  purchased  nearly  the  whole  tract 
through  to  Chambers  street,  and  the  same  became  vested  by  mesne 
conveyances  in  his  son,  Samuel  Lynde,  who,  in  1691,  bought  the 
remaining  lot,  and  by  deed  dated  in  1718  (L.  32,  f.  270)  conveyed 
the  whole  to  John  Staniford,  as  bounded  easterly  by  the  highway, 


20  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

i.e.,  Bowdoin  square,  which  had  cut  off  the  apex  of  the  triangles), 
66  feet  northerly  on  Green  lane,  855  feet  on  a  bevel  line,  as  the 
fence  runs,  westerly  on  land  of  Charles  Chambers,  546  feet,  and 
southerly  on  Cambridge  street,  677  feet.  Through  this  tract  of 
about  six  acres  were  laid  out  two  highways,  appropriately  named 
Lynde  street  and  Staniford  street. 

There  is  one  "oasis"  in  this  desert,  —  one  street  of  which  the 
name  can  never  be  changed  without  a  violation  of  the  plighted  faith 
of  the  city.  John  Hull,  who  by  coining  the  famous  pine-tree  shil- 
lings for  the  public,  amassed  a  large  private  fortune,  invested  some 
of  his  residuary  shillings  in  a  pasture  at  the  north  part  of  the 
town,  containing  1£  acres,  bought  of  Richard  Dumer  in  1665 
(Suffolk  L.  6,  f.  235).  It  was  between  Salem,  Snowhill,  and 
Charter  streets.  He  died  in  1683,  intestate,  leaving  a  widow  and 
one  daughter.  His  only  child,  Hannah,  married  Samuel  Sewall, 
Esq.,  and  Hull  street  was  conveyed  by  them  to  the  town  in  1701 
and  1705  (L.  20,  f.  265),  on  the  express  condition  that  it  should 
alwa3*s  continue  to  bear  that  name.  If  history  had  recorded  noth- 
ing else  of  Judge  Sewall,6  I  should,  from  this  one  circumstance, 
have  formed  a  high  opinion  of  him  as  a  judicious  and  discreet  per- 
son. He  did,  indeed,  temporarily  yield  to  the  witchcraft  delusion 
of  1692  ;  but,  at  least,  on  the  particular  subject  of  the  names  of 
streets,  he  was  decidedly  in  advance  not  only  of  his  own  age  but  of 
our  own. 

GLEANER. 


X. 

CHAMBERS'  FOUR  ACRE  PASTURE. 

July  21,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  We  will  walk  a  little  farther  into  the  pastures, 
or  "The  New  Fields."  Going  from  Bowdoin  square,  we  left 
John  Staniford,  in  1718,  owner  of  all  the  land  to  Chambers  street. 
Next  west  of  this  estate  came  Chambers'  pasture.  This  is  traced 
back  directly  to  the  Book  of  Possessions,  where  we  find,  p.  144, 

6  Judge  Samuel  Sewall  will  be  long  remembered  on  account  of  his  most  interesting 
and  valuable  Diary,  covering  the  period  from  A.D.  1685  to  1730,  now  owned  by  the 
Massachusetts  Historical  Society.  Two  volumes  of  the  three  requisite  have  already 
been  printed.  W. 


w  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  21 

"  Valentine  Hill,  of  Boston,  graunted  unto  Mr.  William  Davies  a 
certain  parcel  of  land  in  }re  new  field  in  Boston,  being  foure  acres, 
more  or  less,  bounded  on  ye  North  with  James  Penn,  John  Biggs, 
and  James  Penn  on  the  West,  and  Robert  Turner  on  ye  East,  and 
Thomas  Buttolph  on  ye  South ;  and  this  was,  by  an  absolute  deed 
of  sale,  sealed  and  delivered  before  William  Aspinwall,  Not.  Pub., 
ye  2:  6  mo.  1648." 

Robert  Turner  was  the  predecessor  of  Staniford.  Buttolph's 
Pasture  was  south  of  Cambridge  street,  which  did  not  yet  exist. 

Capt.  William  Davies  died  in  1676.  His  son  and  executor,  Ben- 
jamin, conveyed  to  his  mother,  Sarah,  who  married  Major  Edward 
Palmes ;  and  Palmes  and  wife,  reciting  this  conveyance  and  mar- 
riage, convey  to  Charles  Chambers,  March  5,  1695-6  (Suffolk,  L. 
25,  f.  10),  "  all  that  our  pasture  of  four  acres,"  etc.,  bounded  W. 
on  widow  Mynott  and  on  James  Allen,  N.  on  said  Allen,  E.  on 
Manasseh  Beck  [a  predecessor  of  Staniford],  and  S.,  on  the  high- 
way leading  to  said  Mynotfs  house"  (i.e.,  Cambridge  street). 

Chambers  laid  out  Chambers  street,  and  in  1727  sold  to  Stani- 
ford a  gore  14  feet  on  Cambridge  street,  245  feet  deep,  lying  E.  of 
said  street  (Suffolk,  L.  41,  f.  214).  After  this  he  had  left,  W. 
of  Chambers  street,  a  square  tract  of  land,  320  feet  wide  on  Cam- 
bridge street  by  546  feet  4  inches  deep  on  Chambers  street ; 
bounded  both  N.  and  W.  on  Allen  ;  or,  in  reference  to  other  streets 
since  laid  out,  his  pasture  reached  on  Cambridge  street  to  a  point 
70  feet  W.  of  N.  Russell  street,  while  on  Chambers  street  it 
reached  a  point  40  feet  N.  of  Eaton  street. 

Chambers  died  in  Middlesex,  1743,  devising  to  four  grandchildren 
named  Russell.  James  Russell,  acquiring  the  whole,  conve}*ed 
to  Thomas  Russell,  1778  (Suffolk,  L.  164,  f.  281).  Thomas  Rus- 
sell, after  selling  off  the  northerly  feet  on  Chambers  street,  con- 
ve}*ed  all  the  residue  to  Daniel  Austin,  Thomas  K.  Jones,  and 
Thomas  Clark,  in  1794  (Suffolk,  L.  178,  f.  249).  These  grantees 
laid  out  F.  Russell  street  40  feet  wide,  and  Eaton  street  36  feet 
wide,  and  divided  the  premises  into  36  lots,  —  being  a  land  specu- 
lation of  quite  venerable  antiquity.  In  calling  the  street  through 
this  pasture  Chamber  street,  the  city  has  given  it  an  absurd  and 
insignificant  name,  in  mutilations  of  the  fair  proportions  of  that  to 
which  it  is  realty  entitled.  A  robbery  even  of  a  single  letter  is 
criminal.  Official  restitution  should  immediately  be  made. 

GLEANER. 


22  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

XI. 

ALLEN'S  TWENTY  ACRE  FARM. 
July  23,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Resuming  our  walks  from  Bowdoin  square 
into  the  pastures,  we  find  that  Chambers'  pasture,  in  1648,  bounded 
north  and  in  part  also  west  on  James  Penn,  the  residue  of  the  west 
line  being  on  John  Biggs  ;  while  in  the  deed  of  1695  to  Chambers, 
Biggs  has  turned  into  "  the  widow  Mynott,"  and  Penn  into 
"James  Allen."  The  town  granted,  in  1641,  to  John  Biggs,  1£ 
acres  "  of  marsh  land  on  centinel  hill  field,"  extending  back  from 
the  front  (i.e.,  Cambridge  street)  to  a  salt  creek  (which  is  now 
missing).  Biggs  devised  to  his  wife  Mary,  who  married  a  Mynot 
[Minot],  and  on  her  death,  in  1676,  her  lands  came  to  her  father, 
John  Dasset,  Sen.,  who,  in  1696,  joins  with  his  son,  John  Dasset, 
Jr.,  in  conveying  six  acres  to  James  Allen,  clerk.  (L.  17,  f.  237, 
etc.)  These  six  acres  extended  south  of  Cambridge  street,  besides 
including  the  north  of  the  street. 

James  Penn  was  a  man  of  the  highest  consideration  in  his  day, 
—  a  ruling  elder  of  the  church.  It  is  not  strictly  correct  to  say 
that  he  lived  "  at  the  Albion,"  but  his  mansion  house  was  at  that 
corner  of  Tremont  and  Beacon  streets.  He  had  an  18-acre  past- 
ure in  the  new  fields  as  early  as  1648.  Perhaps  it  was  held  under 
the  grant  referred  to  the  town's  order  of  18,  3  mo.,  1646.  He 
died,  and  by  will  dated  in  1671,  says :  u  I  give,  etc.  to  Mr.  James 
Allen  all  my  pasture,  being  eighteen  acres,  more  or  less,  lying  be- 
tween Major  Leverett  and  Captain  Davis,  to  enjo}*  after  my  wife's 
decease  forever."  Now,  Capt.  Davis  was  the  predecessor  of  Cham- 
bers, and  Leverett  owned  the  large  estate  extending  from  Green 
street  to  the  water,  through  which  Leverett  street  was  laid  out  by 
his  heirs. 

By  these  two  sources  of  title,  the  farm  now  in  question  gets 
united  in  Rev.  James  Allen.  He  made  a  deed  of  settlement  in 
1706  (L.  23,  f.  8),  and  in  1710  devised  his  lands  in  accordance 
therewith.  B}r  these  instruments  he  vested  in  his  son,  John  Allen, 
"  all  that  his  tract  of  laud  or /arm,  so  called,  containing  by  esti- 
mation 18  acres,  lying  in  the  new  fields,  which  was  devised  to  him 
by  his  uncle,  James  Penn,  deceased,  and  two  acres  of  his  meadow 
land,  part  of  the  purchase  of  John  Dassett,  lying  next  adjoining  to 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  23 

the  aforesaid  farm  or  lands."  *  It  is  very  natural  that  Biggs'  l£ 
acres  should  have  grown  a  little.  This  20-acre  farm  of  John  Allen 
embraced  all  the  lands  west,  and  also  all  north  of  Chambers'  four- 
acre  pasture,  at  the  corner  of  Cambridge  and  Chambers  streets, 
being  situated  between  Cambridge  street,  south,  the  water,  west, 
and  the  Leverett  street  estates  north  and  north-east.  Allen  ex- 
tended Chambers  street  northerly  through  his  lands,  bending  round 
westerly  towards  the  water,  being  a  30-feet  highway,  known  for 
many  3'ears  as  "Allen's  highway,  or  Wiltshire  street,  now  merged 
in  the  name  of  Chambers  street.*  Accordingly  an  elegant  plan  of 
the  Leverett  street  lands,  1728,  is  recorded  (Suf.,  L.  40,  f.  9),  the 
west  and  south-west  lines  of  which,  in  all  1,406  feet  4  inches  in 
extent,  from  Green  street  to  the  water,  bound  throughout  on  "  Mr. 
John  Allen's  30-feet  highway."  These  lines  indicate  the  exact 
bounds  of  the  Allen  farm  in  that  direction,  so  that  it  included 
Blossom  street,  Friend  street,  Vine  street,  North  Grove  street, 
Bridge  street,  McLean  street,  late  South  Allen  street,  Allen  street, 
formerly  North  Allen  street,  Poplar  street,  etc.,  the  City  Jail,  the 
Medical  College,  the  Hospital  Grounds,  etc.  The  whole  of  his 
extensive  tract,  except  only  two  acres,  immediately  fronting  on  Cam- 
bridge street,  being  the  possession  of  Penn. 

The  entire  lower  part  of  Cambridge  street  was  a  marsh,  the 
shore  at  this  point  being  deepty  indented.  As  now  filled  up,  the 
tract  will  probably  be  thirty  acres  at  least ;  and,  besides  this,  Mr. 
Allen  owned  sixteen  acres  south  of  Cambridge  street.  The  rope- 
walks,  formerly  on  Poplar  street,  and  those  formerly  constituting 
the  boundary  of  the  estates  on  Pinckne}r  street,  though  so  widely 
separated,  were  both  on  part  of  his  one  continuous  tract  of  land. 
I  think  it  certain,  therefore,  that  Rev.  James  Allen  owned  a  far 
larger  part  of  the  territory  of  Boston  than  was  ever  owned  by  any  indi- 
vidual, unless,  perhaps,  we  except  one  William  Blackstone.  And  he, 
though  he  had  a  grant  of  fifty  acres,  only  retained  and  cultivated 
six.  And  it  may  be  safely  asserted  that  Mr.  Allen's  deed  of  settle- 
ment, in  1706,  passed  a  title  to  more  lands  than  any  other  deed  re- 
corded in  Suffolk  County. 

GLEANER. 

*  I  do  not  include  the  part  of  Chamber  street  which  runs  into  Leverett  street,  formerly 
known  as  Gravel  street,  and  laid  out  through  Leverett's  land. 


24  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

XII. 

ZACHARIAH  PHILLIPS'   NINE  ACRE   PASTURE. 

July  24,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  At  our  last  walk  into  the  pastures,  we  had  got 
stuck  at  the  extreme  end  of  the  north  side  of  Cambridge  street, 
in  "  a  parcel  of  marsh  ground,  tying  in  ye  Centinel  Hill  field,  con- 
taining 1J  acres,"  etc.,  granted  27,  7,  1641,  to  John  Biggs, 
"  bounded  with  ye  salt  water  toward  the  north-west,  with  a  salt 
creeke  toward  the  north."  If  we  now  go  into  the  "  salt  water/' 
and  swim  to  the  spot  forming  the  present  south  corner  of  Cam- 
bridge and  Charles  streets,  we  shall  see,  south-easterly  of  us,  at 
the  distance  of  250  to  300  feet,  an  elliptical  line  of  shore,  no 
where  reaching  within  100  feet  of  Cambridge  street,  and  having  a 
bend  outwards  towards  the  south,  after  which  it  again  bends 
inwards.  This  north-west  edge  or  slope  of  the  "  Centinel  Hill," 
or  Beacon  Hill,  was  occupied  by  a  pasture  of  nine  acres,  the 
lines  extending  over  the  flats,  northerly,  towards  Cambridge  street, 
and  also  westerly  towards  the  Channel.  This  is  "Zachariah 
Phillips'  Nine  Acre  Pasture,  a  name  which  sounds  as  familiarly  in 
my  ears  as  "  Pemberton  square." 

This  pasture  extends  from  Cambridge  street,  southerly,  along  the 
water  side,  till  it  meets  the  "  Blackstone  six-acre  lot"  at  the  bot- 
tom of  Beacon  street.  Its  east  line  begins  on  Cambridge  street, 
at  a  point  110  feet  west  of  Grove  street,  and  then  runs 
straight  nearly  at  right  angles,  slightly  converging  toward  Grove 
street,  so  that  on  the  north  side  of  May  street  its  distance  from 
Grove  street  is  reduced  to  66  feet.  This  straight  line  continues 
about  832  feet  from  Cambridge  street,  or  to  a  point  266  feet  south 
of  May  street ;  then  there  is  a  jog  inwards  of  140  feet ;  then  it 
again  runs  south  about  two  hundred  feet  farther,  and  then  westerly 
to  the  sea.  These  last  lines  are  on  Blackstone  or  Copley ;  the 
first  long  line  is  on  the  16  acres  of  James  Allen. 

The  earliest  deed  found  is  that  of  Samuel  Cole  to  said  Phillips, 
Dec.  30,  1658  (Suffolk,  L.  3,  f.  194).  It  has  a  little  twist  in  the 
points  of  the  compass.  It  conveys  nine  acres,  more  or  less, 
bounded  north  on  Brown  and  on  said  Cole  [afterwards  Allen], 
on  the  sea  south  and  west,  and  on  Nathaniel  Williams  east  and 
south.  Williams  owned  Blackstone' 's  6  acre  lot. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  25 

Phillips,  in  1672,  sells  to  John  Leverett  and  Sarah,  his  wife 
(Suffolk,  L.  8,  f.  98).  John  Leverett  died  in  1678.  In  1707, 
one-half  of  this  pasture  was  assigned  to  the  heirs  of  Hudson  Lev- 
erett, who,  in  1725,  sold  to  Nathaniel  Hubbard  (Suffolk,  L.  42,  f. 
65),  and  he  to  Nathaniel  Byfield  in  1726  (L.  42,  f.  71). 

The  other  half  belonged  to  the  six  daughters  of  Governor  Lev- 
erett, and,  after  mesne  conve}rances,  five-sixths  became  vested  in 
Byfield  in  1726  by  deed  (L.  42,  f.  69),  and  he  married  the  re- 
maining daughter,  which  got  the  whole  title  snugly  unto  him,  since 
she  "  Dame  Sarah  Leverett,  being  minded  to  show  regard,  value, 
and  confidence  for  and  in  said  Nathaniel,"  conveyed  to  him  her 
share,  etc.,  1718  (L.  37,  f.  605). 

This  pasture  was  divided  into  59  lots,  —  Southack  and  May 
streets  being  laid  out  through  it  parallel  to  Cambridge  street,  and 
Southack  street  (now  called  West  Cedar  street)  being  also  laid 
out  to  run  southerly  along  the  shore.  Two  other  streets,  Hill  street 
and  Short  street,  were  also  laid  out,  which  many  a  modern  house 
has  now  unconsciously  covered  over. 

I  will  not  specify  their  exact  location  lest  I  should  disturb  those 
occupants  whose  "  ignorance  is  bliss."  West  Cedar  street  has  at 
a  latter  day  been  continued  northerly  from  Southack  street  to 
Cambridge  street.  This  old  plan  was  never  recorded.  Hon.  Na- 
thaniel Byfield  sold  off  7  of  these  lots,  numbered  7  to  14,  to  Nathan- 
iel Kenney ;  and  then  (apparently  forgetting  this  deed,  which 
merely  included  a  lot  300  feet  wide  on  Southack  street,  and  thence 
extending  westerly  to  the  low  water,  widening  as  it  went),  for  love 
to  his  three  grandsons,  Byfield  Lyde,  Francis  Brinley,  and  George 
Cradock,  makes  a  deed  of  gift  to  them  of  the  whole  pasture  in  1729 
(L.  44,  f.  49).  The}"  appear  to  have  made  a  verbal  agreement  to 
divide  according  to  this  plan,  probably  drawing  lots  from  a  hat 
instead  of  making  a  formal  indenture  ;  it  being  "  all  in  the  family." 
This  process,  however  convenient  at  the  time,  has  since  caused 
much  trouble  to  others,  if  not  to  themselves.  At  a  later  period 
most  of  the  northerly  water  lots  on  this  plan  get  united  in  Charles 
Bulfinch,  and  the  southerly  ones  in  Messrs.  Otis,  Mason,  Joy,  et 
al.,  or  the  Mt.  Vernon  proprietors. 

The  celebrated  suits  of  the  Overseers  of  the  Poor  against  these 
proprietors  were  brought  to  recover  some  of  the  extreme  southerly 
lots  of  this  pasture.  This  debatable  land  extended  from  a  little 
west  of  Louisburg  square  to  the  water,  ranging  a  little  north  of 
Pinckney  street,  and  reaching  near  Mount  Vernon  street.  One 
Tilley  had  mortgaged  these  lots  to  Pemberton  in  1747,  who  fore- 


26  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

closed  in  1750,  and  devised  to  the  Overseers  in  1782.  The  pur- 
chasers of  the  Copley  estate,  or  Blackstone  lot,  in  1795,  under  a 
deed  which  ran  westerly  toward  the  water,  found  a  fence  standing, 
fastened  to  an  old  powder  house,  which  was  proved  to  have  been 
as  far  north  as  within  twenty  feet  of  Pinckney  street.  This  fence 
erroneous!}'  continued  to  the  water,  and  included  nearly  all  the  de- 
manded premises  as  part  and  parcel  of  the  Copley  lot.  And  as  to 
the  residue  of  the  land  sued  for,  the  acts  of  the  Mount  Vernon 
proprietors  in  digging  down  the  whole  hill  to  a  great  depth  in  1804, 
and  laying  out  Charles  street  across  the  same,  were  held  evidence 
of  a  good  title  by  disseisin  against  all  persons  from  whom,  after 
such  a  lapse  of  time,  a  grant  would  be  presumed.  These  suits, 
between  thirty  and  forty  in  number,  with  a  great  array  of  eminent 
counsel,  were  among  the  most  important  private  actions  ever  de- 
cided in  this  count}7,  and  gave  quite  a  celebrity  to  u  Zachariah 

Phillip's  Pasture." 

GLEANER. 


XIII. 

OLD   GRANTS   OF  NECK  LANDS. 

July  25,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR: — In  1708  the  town  of  Boston  conveyed  to  Sam- 
uel Phillips,  David  Jeffries,  Thomas  Savage,  William  Clark,  Wil- 
liam Pa}'ne,  Benjamin  Pemberton,  Oliver  Noyes,  Habijah  Savage, 
Elisha  Cook,  Jr.,  Thomas  Bannister,  Jr.,  and  Benjamin  Fitch,  a 
tract  of  land  and  flats  extending  across  the  Neck  from  low-water 
mark  to  low-water  mark  (Suffolk,  L.  24,  f.  (106).  This  deed 
gives  no  measures,  but  the  grant  extends  from  the  pasture  of  John 
Bennett  and  land  of  Daniel  Epes,  as  far  south  towards  Roxbury  as 
"  24  feet  beyond  the  new  pavement."  Not  a  very  permanent  monu- 
ment! It  was  really  a  grant  of  about  1,000  feet  in  length.  Its 
north  line  is  the  present  Castle  street,7  and  its  south  line  stops 

7  It  may  be  well  to  mention  here  that  the  land  on  the  north  side  of  Castle  street  and 
west  side  of  Washington  street  belonged  to  Daniel  Epes.  He  bought  it  of  William 
Paine,  whose  mother  was  Elizabeth  Colbron,  daughter  of  the  first  owner.  Castle  street 
is  thus  an  important  boundary,  as  Dea.  Colbron's  estate  was  very  large,  and  no  deed  of 
division  is  on  record.  See  Sparhawk  v.  Bullard,  1  Metcalf,  95-108. 

W. 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  27 

a  little  short  of  Dover  street.  It  was  on  the  condition  that  the 
grantees  should  finish  a  highwa}-  (now  Washington  street),  and 
"  secure  and  keep-  off  the  sea,"  which,  as  it  would  seem,  some- 
times washed  across  the  land  from  east  to  west. 

Three  of  these  grantees  (Habijah  Savage,  Bannister,  and  Fitch) 
released  to  the  others,  and  in  their  stead  Stephen  Minot  and  John 
Noyes  were  admitted.  And  in  1709  a  great  indenture  of  division 
was  made  into  ten  lots,  each  of  them  measuring  at  low-water  mark 
on  the  east  side  97  J  feet,  and  at  low-water  mark  on  the  west  side 
94  feet  3  inches  —  the  lines  being  slightly  converging.  The  meas- 
ures on  the  east  side  of  the  street  were  96  feet,  and  on  the  west 
side  of  the  street  95  feet  4  inches.  The  indenture  is  recorded  in 
Suffolk,  Lib.  24,  fol.  239.  The  premises  thus  divided,  upland  and 
flats,  were  probably  fifty  acres.  This  division  is  the  source  of  all 
the  modern  titles  within  the  extensive  area  which  it  embraces. 

It  is  a  fact,  though  it  will  hardly  be  believed,  that  Castle  street 
was  once  known  as  Cambridge  street.  Thus  in  the  division  of 
Stephen  Harris'  estate  (Probate  Records,  1774,  Lib.  74,  fol.  28), 
a  lot  is  set  off,  bounded  east  on  Orange  street,  north  on  Cam- 
bridge street. 

An  interval  of  nearly  eighty  years  passed  without  any  further 
grant  of  Neck  lands.  But  in  1785  the  town  conveyed  to  Stephen 
Gore  and  others  a  tract  of  land  and  flats  1,400  feet  from  north  to 
south,  extending  200  feet  west  of  Washington  street,  and  embrac- 
ing all  east  of  that  street  to  low-water  mark.  (Suffolk,  Lib.  149, 
fol.  126). 

Two  of  the  original  grantees,  Nathaniel  Davis  and  Joshua 
Farrington,  give  place  to  Edward  Blake  and  Jeremiah  Williams. 
The  ultimate  proprietors  were  Robert  Davis,  John  May,  Edward 
Blake,  John  Parker,  Joshua  Witherle,  Benjamin  Cobb,  Jr.,  Stephen 
Gore,  Nathaniel  Curtis,  Ebenezer  Dorr,  Amasa  Davis,  Jeremiah 
Williams,  William  Boardman,  William  Dall,  and  Caleb  Davis. 
This  grant  was  on  the  condition  of  erecting  certain  "  barriers  "  for 
a  like  purpose  of  excluding  the  tide  waters,  and  was,  perhaps, 
nearly  if  not  quite  as  extensive  as  the  first. 

An  indenture  of  partition  was  made  among  these  proprietors  in 
1778,  dividing  their  land  into  14  lots  on  both  sides  of  Washington 
street,  the  general  direction  being  by  straight  lines  from  low-water 
mark  on  the  east  side  to  the  line  of  the  town  land,  200  feet  west 
of  the  street.  But,  to  avoid  a  bevel,  every  lot  has  a  bend  in  its 
lines  at  about  70  feet  from  the  street,  which  it  thus  meets  at  right 
angles.  This  bend  has  given  a  very  peculiar  appearance  to  all  the 


28  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

buildings  which  have  since  been  erected  on  this  long  range  of  lots. 
The  indenture  is  recorded  in  Lib.  162,  fol.  100.  The  area  included 
in  this  division  begins  a  few  feet  south  of  Dover  street,  and  ex- 
tends a  little  beyond  the  estate  of  the  late  John  D.  Williams, 
whose  well-known  partiality  for  a  particular  color  is  still  perpet- 
uated in  his  green  house  and  green  store.  A  parchment  plan  of 
this  division  existed  unrecorded  for  more  than  half  a  century,  but 
is  now  bound  in  at  the  end  of  a  modern  volume  (Lib.  491),  being 
separated  from  the  indenture  to  which  it  relates  by  229  volumes. 

Beyond  these  lots,  on  the  city  lands,  where  we  now  find  splendid 
dwellings  and  elegant  public  squares,  there  stood,  }*ear  after  year, 
onlj-  the  gallows  —  that  land-mark  of  civilization  —  the  traveller's 
guide-post  at  the  entrance  of  a  great  metropolis!  One  of  its 
posts  formed  the  boundary  of  "  Colonel  John  May's  lot,"  which 
words  of  ownership  were  accordingly  painted  on  it.  A  wag  added 
the  words  "  and  portion."  Another  anecdote  is  told  of  two  friends, 
riding  into  town  across  the  Neck,  one  of  whom,  looking  signifi- 
cantly at  this  structure,  jocosely  observed  to  the  other,  "  Where 
would  3rou  be  now  if  everybody  had  their  deserts?"  The  reply 
was,  "  I  should  be  riding  into  town  alone!"  It  is  said  that  when 
Marshall  Prince  was  executing  the  sentence  of  the  law  on  four 
pirates,  an  eminent  counsellor,  now  deceased,  went  from  motives 
of  curiosit}'  to  witness  the  spectacle,  intending  to  preserve  a  strict 
incognito.  The  marshal,  however,  happened  to  discover  him  in 
the  background,  and  utterty  disconcerted  him  by  calling  out  to 
the  crowd  with  a  loud  voice,  "  Make  way,  there  !  make  way  for  the 
Honorable  Mr.  O. ! "  Mr.  O.,  though  "born  great,"  and  though 
he  had  also  himself  "  achieved  greatness,"  doubtless  felt  that  on 
this  occasion  he  had  "  greatness  thrust  upon  him." 

GLEANER. 


XIV. 

COPFS  HILL. 

July  27,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  One  of  the  most  ancient  burying-grounds  in 
Boston  is  that  at  Copp's  Hill.  It  is  made  up  of  several  parcels  of 
land.  The  north-easterly  part,  measuring  294  feet  on  Charter 
street  and  154  feet  on  Snowhill  street,  was  sold  to  the  town  by  deed 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  29 

of  John  Baker  and  Daniel  Turell,  dated  February  20,  1659,  re- 
corded November  1,  1736,  Lib.  53,  fol.  154.  After  Hull  street 
was  laid  out  by  Sewall  and  wife,  they  conveyed  to  Joshua  Gee  in 
1708  (L.  25,  174)  u  one  rodd  square  in  which  Mrs.  Margaret 
Thatcher  now  lj*eth  buried,"  bounded  north  by  the  burying-place, 
and  on  all  other  sides  by  their  pasture,  with  no  right  of  way  ex- 
cept through  the  old  burying-place."  They,  in  1711,  "for  the 
purpose  of  enlarging  the  burying-place,"  conveyed  to  the  Select- 
men of  Boston  (^Suffolk,  L.  26,  fol.  97)  a  tract  of  land  measuring 
170  feet  on  Snowhill  street  and  180  feet  on  Hull  street ,  in  other 
words,  extending  the  old  south-easterly  line  of  the  burying-place 
straight  through  from  Charter  to  Hull  street.  In  this  deed  was  an 
exception  of  the  "  rodd  square  sold  to  Gee."  The  consequence  is, 
that  in  the  midst  of  this  buiying-place  of  the  town,  there  is  a  small 
square  lot,  which  is  private  property,  the  place  of  interment  of 
a  wealthy  lady,  who,  while  living,  owned  a  large  estate  in  this 
vicinity. 

This  busing-ground  has  since  been  further  widened  on  Hull 
street  so  as  to  include  lots  measuring  148  feet  10  on  that  street, 
originally  sold  by  Sewall  and  wife  to  John  Clark,  Jr.,  in  1726  ; 
Wm.  Lee,  John  Jackson,  and  Thomas  Jackson  in  1816.  But  mat- 
ters so  modern  cease  to  be  interesting ! 

A  word  or  two  about  Mr.  Gee  and  Mrs.  Thatcher.  Joshua  Gee, 
boat  builder,  owned  a  very  large  tract  of  land  and  flats  between 
Charter  street  on  the  north,  Prince  street,  south,  Snowhill  street, 
east,  and  extending  down  the  hill  to  the  sea.  He  died  in  1724, 
and  his  son  Ebenezer  dying  in  1730,  the  estate  came  wholly  to 
Rev.  Joshua  Gee,  who  died  in  1748,  and  the  division  of  his  estate 
in  1750  between  his  seven  daughters  and  his  son  Joshua  is  one  of 
the  most  important  documents  in  the  Probate  Office.  The  Gas 
Company's  works,  Brown's  wharf,  etc.,  are  held  under  it.  This 
son  died  without  issue,  and  the  name  of  u  Gee"  thus  became  ex- 
tinct among  us.  In  the  suit  of  Rust  vs.  The  Boston  Mill  Corpora- 
tion the  locations  of  Mr.  Gee's  lands  became  important  —  and  the 
growth  of  some  of  the  boundaries  and  contents  was  amusingly 
commented  upon  by  the  late  H.  G.  Otis  (who  on  this  occasion 
was,  I  believe,  counsel  in  court  for  the  last  time),  as  being  a  cir- 
cumstance which  might  naturally  have  been  anticipated,  as  "  Gee," 
in  Greek,  means  the  earth,  i.e.,  land. 

Mrs.  Margaret  Thatcher  was  the  wife  of  Rev.  Thomas  Thatcher. 
Her  first  husband  was  Jacob  Sheafe,  a  man  of  note,  who  died  in 
1658.  We  find  that  a  deed  was  made  to  Thatcher  and  wife  by 


30  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

John  Everedd,  alias  Webb,1  in  consideration  of  £195  paid  by  her 
as  administratrix  of  her  former  husband.  It  is  dated  Juty  5,  1666, 
recorded  Suff.,  L.  5,  f.  510.  This  deed  included  all  the  land  be- 
tween Salem,  Hull,  Snowhill,  and  Prince  streets,  except  certain 
lots  on  Prince  street,  which  had  been  fenced  in  previously.  Mrs. 
Thatcher  died,  leaving  a  daughter,  Mehitable.  wife  of  Sampson 
Sheafe,  and  Elizabeth,  wife  of  Jonathan  Corwin.  Sheafe  and  wife 
sold  to  Robert  Gibbs  in  1697.  On  a  division  between  the  families 
of  Gibbs  and  Corwin,  two  streets  were  laid  out,  commemorating 
the  family  name  of  Sheafe,  the  first  husband,  and  Margaret,  the 
Christian  name  of  the  lady  herself. 

In  regard  to  the  right  of  way  out  of  the  u  one  rod  square,"  it 
would  seem  that  as  to  the  occupant,  at  least,  a  right  of  egress  is  not 
so  important  from  a  place  of  interment  as  from  a  place  of  residence. 
And  yet  it  appears  that,  after  all,  the  venerable  old  lady,  Mrs. 
Thatcher,  must  have  walked  out  of  this  lot,  since  I  find  among 
the  inscriptions  in  the  King's  Chapel  Burj-ing-ground  the  follow- 
ing :  —  "Here  lyeth  interred  the  body  of  Mrs.  Margaret  Thatcher, 
formerly  wife  of  Mr.  J**ob  Sheafe,  and  late  ye  wife  of  the  Rever- 
'end  Mr.  Thomas  Thatcher,  aetatis  68,  orbit  23d  February,  1693," 
who  can  tell,  however?  "  To  lie  like  a  tombstone  "  is  a  proverb  ; 
and  the  tombstones  in  that  bury  ing-ground  have  been  shuffled 
about  so  much  that  on  a  question  of  locality  of  interment  their 
authority  is  especially  apocryphal. 

GLEANER. 


XV. 

OLD  BAKERS. 
July  30,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  One  of  the  earliest  trades  of  civilized  man  is 
that  of  a  baker.  How  soon  it  may  have  been  divided  into  distinct 
branches  among  us  I  cannot  state.  But  a  centuty  ago  there  is  re- 
corded a  deed  from  a  "gingerbread  baker."  Presiding  over  his 
comparatively  luxurious  department,  he  probably  looked  down  with 
contempt  on  his  humbler  brethren  who  merely  provided  the  plain 

1This  is  one  of  the  rare  cases  of  an  hereditary  alias.  The  two  names  are  always 
used  thus  linked  together. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  31 

"  staff  of  life."  It  is  certain  that  old  times  were  golden  times  for 
the  bakers,  and,  doubtless,  also  for  their  customers,  for  there  were 
no  villanous  adulterations  in  those  days.  At  the  time  of  the  siege 
of  Boston,  Ebenezer  Torre}',  a  baker,  removed  to  Sudbury  or  its 
vicinit}',  and  died  leaving  an  estate  of  over  $100,000.  After  the 
Revolution  (say  seventy  years  ago),  six  of  the  wealthiest  and  most 
respectable  citizens  of  Boston  were  bakers. 

Three  resided  at  the  North  End  —  Edward  Edes,  John  White, 
and  "  Deacon  "  Tudor  ;  three  at  the  South  End —  Samuel  Smith, 
John  Lucas,  and  Edward  Tuckerman.  Mr.  Edes  has,  I  believe, 
left  no  male  descendants  living  in  Boston.  The  late  Professor 
"Webster  was  a  grandson  and  namesake  of  Mr.  White.  Deacon 
Tudor  owned  a  very  valuable  wharf  estate  on  Ann  street,  near 
Lewis  street.  This  famil}*  still  hold  the  highest  social  position  in 
our  community.  The  chief  legatee  of  Mr.  Smith  married  Joseph 
Head,  Jr.,  Esq.,  and  they  removed  from  this  city  several  years 
since.  John  Lucas  left  at  his  decease  a  very  large  estate,  and 
made  man}'  public  and  private  bequests.  He  owned  a  tract  of  land 
on  Washington  street,  adjoining  Lucas  place.  Mr.  Tuckerman 
left  several  sons  who  were  distinguished  merchants.  His  estate, 
as  divided  in  1819,  included  very  valuable  parcels  in  State  street, 
etc.,  and  especially  an  extensive  tract  of  land  on  the  west  side 
of  Washington  street,  embracing  all  Dover  street.  The  late  Col. 
Joseph  May  remembered  when  these  bakers  were  in  the  habit  of 
going  on  horseback  to  Philadelphia,  with  specie  in  their  valises, 
behind  them,  to  make  their  purchases  of  flour,  which  were  sent 
home  b}'  packets.  This  journey  generally  occupied  from  two  to 
three  weeks,  and  they  had  notes  up  in  church  asking  for  Divine  pro- 
tection from  its  perils. 

Shade  of  Moll}'  Saunders,  I  invoke  thee  !  There  have  doubtless 
been  fairer  faces  and  more  graceful  forms  than  thine,  but  thy  gin- 
gerbread was  matchless.  Thou  hast  infused  new  vigor  into  the 
elastic  step  of  the  youthful  dancer.  The  statesman,  wearied  with 
the  cares  of  office,  and  the  politician,  burdened  with  the  affairs  of 
the  Commonwealth,  have  found  relief  and  solace  from  thy  minis- 
trations. I  have  shaken  hands  with  President  Munroe,  and  even 
with  President  Pierce,  but  what  were  those  glorious  moments  com- 
pared with  one  cake  of  thy  "  buttered  gingerbread  —  price  three 
cents  !  "  Thy  praises  have  been  on  the  lips  of  beauty,  of  youth, 
manhood,  and  age,  fifty-,  aye,  seventy  years  ago,  as  they  are  now 
upon  mine.  Thy  name  and  fame  have  become  "  historical,"  and  have 
reached  from  the  village  of  Salem  to  the  metropolis  of  New  Eng- 


32  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

land.  Such  is  the  fitting  reward  of  true  genius  and  a  life  devoted 
to  the  sacred  cause  of  humanity !  Milnefs  rusks  were  excellent, 
and  Kelt,  when  he  tries,  can  do  a  thing  or  two,  but  thou  hast  ever 
been  unapproachable !  Vainly  do  my  aged  heart  and  palate  now 
yearn  for  thee  and  thy  delicious  handiwork !  Yet  wilt  thou  forever 
remain  associated  with  the  most  tender  and  cherished  recollections 
of  m}'  childhood  !  Verily  thou  wast  a  queen  among  the  bakers  of 
olden  time !  GLEANER. 

P.  S.     Don't  3'ou  think,  Mr.  Editor,  that  the  Salem  papers  will 
republish  this  obituary  notice  of  the  late  Miss  Saunders? 


XVI. 

OLD   ROPEWALKS. 

July  31,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  — I  fear  that  my  subject  will  oblige  me  to  **  spin  a 
long  yarn."  The  first  rope-maker  in  Boston  was  John  Harrison, 
A.D.  1642.  His  exact  whereabouts  is  not  specified  by  Drake, 
but  can  be  very  definitely  fixed.  His  ropewalk,  or  "ropefield," 
ten  feet  ten  inches  wide,  is  now  covered  by  Purchase  street,  begin- 
ning at  the  foot  of  Summer  street.  Thus  the  range  of  lot  on 
High  street  used  to  extend  to  the  water,  separated,  however,  into 
two  parts  .by  "Harrison's  ropewalk"  or  "ropefield,"  or  more 
recently  by  Purchase  street.  [See  Suffolk,  Lib.  5,  fol.  99  ;  Lib. 
12,  fol.  250]  In  1736  it  became  the  property  of  the  town,  and  was 
appropriated  as  a  highway. 

Harrison  owned  a  large  tract  of  land  of  at  least  340  feet  in  ex- 
tent on  High  street,  measuring  westerly  from  Atkinson  street,  and 
including  all  Prentice's  wharf,  and  part  of  Russia  wharf,  the  prin- 
cipal part  of  which  land  was  divided  among  his  children  in  1685. 
Purchase  street  is  thus  rightly  named,  as  it  was  in  part,  at  least, 
purchased.  Drake's  History  mentions  that  Harrison,  in  1663, 
appealed  to  the  Selectmen  not  to  license  a  rival  rope-maker,  John 
Hey  man,  and  remarks,  that  "  at  the  last  accounts  it  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  Selectmen." 

This  notice  of  the  first  rope-maker  in  Boston  brings  back  to  my 
affectionate  remembrance  the  last  one,  recently  deceased.  Asso- 
ciated for  several  years  with  the  late  Isaac  P.  Davis,  as  a  trustee 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  33 

of  one  of  our  literary  institutions,  I  ever  found  him  to  be  a  man 
of  cultivated  intellect,  courteous  manners,  and  the  most  genial 
kindness  of  heart.  Habitually  possessing  almost  unequalled 
knowledge  of  passing  events,  and  great  vivacity  in  narrating  and 
commenting  on  them,  he  was  a  universal  favorite  in  society.  With 
him  the  "rope-maker"  was  merged  in  the  "  gentleman."  During 
the  two  centuries  since  our  city  was  founded,  that  occupation  has 
certainly  never  had  a  more  popular  living  representative,  nor  one 
whose  death  —  though  at  quite  an  advanced  age  —  has  been  more 
generally  and  sincerely  regretted. 

The  estates  on  the  west  side  of  Pearl  street,  about  130  feet 
deep,  are  made  up  of  seven  rope- walks,  or  strips  of  land.  Of  these 
the  two  inner  ones  are  held  under  Atkinson,  and  the  others  under 
Hutchinson.  Thus  the  most  west  one,  20  feet  by  744  feet,  was 
conveyed  by  Theodore  Atkinson  and  others  to  Edward  Gray,  in 
1712  (L.  26,  f.  127),  and  became  the  property  of  John  and  Rich- 
ard Codman,  1793.  The  next  lot,  20  feet  by  about  740  feet,  was 
sold  by  the  same  grantors  in  1712  to  William  Tilley  (L.  26,  f. 
126),  and  became  vested  in  Mr.  Davis  in  1794.  All  the  remain- 
ing lots  are  part  of  the  4J  acres  owned  in  1668  by  Eliakim  Hutch- 
inson. The  Commonwealth,  having  confiscated  the  estates  of 
Governor  Hutchinson,  conveyed  part  to  Jeffry  Richardson  in  1793 
(L.  176,  f.  8)  ;  part  to  Samuel  Emmons,  Jr.,  and  Victor  Blair, 
1782  (L.  174,  f.  183)  ;  part  to  Rev.  Samuel  Parker,  D.D.,  1796 
(L.  184,  f.  145)  ;  part  to  Edward  C.  Howe,  1782  (L.  135,  f.  22), 
and  the  residue  to  William  and  Archibald  McNiell  1782  (L.  134, 
f.  27), 

The  old  name  of  Pearl  street  was  Hutchinson  street,  which  was 
rendered  odious  to  our  rebel  ancestors  by  Governor  Hutchinson. 
These  rope-walks  were  burnt  July,  1794,  and  the  titles  were  all 
conveyed  to  Rev.  Samuel  Parker  in  1796,  under  deeds  from  whom 
the  present  estates  are  held.  Two  acres,  occupying  all  the  west 
side  of  Pearl  street,  seems  to  be  a  snug  little  investment  for  a 
clergyman ;  but,  unfortunately,  he  officiated  in  this  matter  not  as  a 
proprietor  but  as  a  mere  channel  of  conveyance,  a  "  cat's-paw  "  for 
effecting  a  division  of  the  estates. 

Drake  mentions  the  burning  of  seven  rope- walks  at  one  time, 
which  he  says  were  "  in  the  vicinity  of  Atkinson  street."  He 
might  have  mentioned  more  definitely  that  they  occupied  the  whole 
west  side  of  Pearl  street  from  Milk  to  High  street.  If  they  did 
not  bound  on  Atkinson  street,  however,  they  burnt  it. 

GLEANER. 


34  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


XVII. 

OLD    ROPE-WALKS. 
August  1,  1855. 

The  plan  recorded  in  1726  (L.  40,  f.  9),  with  the  division  of  the 
11  acres  of  land  of  the  Leverett  heirs,  by  Leverett  street,  shows  a 
rope-walk  then  existing  there  which  must  have  ranged  across  the 
lands  afterwards  known  as  the  Poor  House,  or  Alms  House,  estate 
at  the  point.  It  was  held  under  a  lease,  and  has  not,  therefore, 
left  a  durable  trace  among  the  conveyances  on  record.  And  yet 
it  is  probable  that  it  is,  from  the  visible  fact  that  one  Barton  was 
making  ropes  there,  that  that  whole  point  of  land  acquired  and 
kept  for  a  century  the  name  of  Barton's  point.  This  name  appears 
on  Bonner's  plan  in  1722  ;  and  the  Barton  Point  Association  pur- 
chased all  the  city  lands  at  the  bbttom  of  Leverett  street  in  1824. 
A  similar  instance  is  found  in  the  old  name  of  East  Boston,  which 
was  Noddle's  Island,  though  never  owned  by  any  u  Noddle." 

That  island  was  owned  by  Samuel  Maverick,  whose  feastings, 
failings,  and  fines  have  been  so  amusingly  shown  up  by  L.  M. 
Sargent,  Esq.  His  name  is  piously  commemorated  b}r  the  "  Mav- 
rick  Church." 

Rev.  James  Allen,  as  we  have  previously  stated,  owned  a  large 
pasture  south  of  Cambridge  street.  It  was  bought  before  1700  in 
several  lots,  containing  in  all  18  acres.  By  his  deed  of  settlement, 
1706,  and  his  will  in  1711  pursuant  thereto,  the  southerly  7  acres 
became  vested  in  his  daughter  Mary,  wife  of  John  Wheelwright. 
Both  died,  —  the  husband  in  1760.  He  undertakes  to  give  to  his 
son  Jeremiah  the  piece  of  land  "  which  came  to  me  by  his  mother." 
The  son,  however,  really  took  as  heir  to  the  mother. 

Jeremiah  Wheelwright  sold  off  to  Enoch  Brown  If  acres  (Suf., 
L.  132,  f.  120)  (which  subsequently  became  vested  in  the  Mt. 
Vernon  proprietors,  and  included  lands  on  Pinckney  st.),  etc. 
He,  in  1783,  conveyed  to  Jonathan  L.  and  Benjamin  Austin  a 
rope-walk  lot,  24  feet  by  900  feet  (L.  170,  f.  42).  Jeremiah  Wheel- 
wright died  in  1784,  and  his  devisees  conveyed  to  Joseph  Carnes 
another  adjoining  rope-walk,  20  feet  by  900  feet  (L.  189,  f.  64),  and 
to  George  and  Peter  Cade  a  third  adjoining  rope- walk  in  1792. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  35 

(L.  173,  f.  20.)  This  also  was  900  feet  long,  and  it  was  24  feet 
wide  for  540  feet,  and  1 2  feet  wide  for  the  residue. 

These  three  rope-walks  of  Austin,  Carnes,  and  Cade,  were  all 
bought  in  1805  by  Messrs.  Asa  or  Samuel  Hammond,  Samuel 
Swett,  and  Ebenezer  Farley,  who  laid  out  the  same  into  house- 
lots  fronting  north  on  Myrtle  street,  and  extending  back  to  the 
rear  of  the  Pinckney-street  lots,  all  of  which  bound  north  on  Cade's 
rope-walk  for  the  whole  extent  of  900  feet. 

Mr.  James  Allen  had  a  farm  of  twenty  acres  north  of  Cambridge 
street  and  embracing  Poplar  street.  On  the  south  side  of  this 
latter  street  a  range  of  three  rope-walks  was  placed,  fronting  on 
Chambers  street.  Thus  in  Suffolk,  L.  43,  f.  159,  is  a  plan  of  all 
the  Allen-street  lots,  1729,  the  north  line  being  on  John  Allen's  land 
or  rope-walk.  Thus,  one  25  feet  wide  was  conveyed  by  Allen  to  his 
son  Jeremiah,  1752,  who,  in  1757,  conveyed  to  John  Erving  ;  sub- 
sequently "Tyler  &  CaswelPs  "  rope-walk.  The  middle  one,  25 
feet  wide,  is  traced  through  Wells,  Winthrop,  to  Joseph  Head, 
1805.  The  north  one  is  traced  through  Gardner,  1737,  to  Joseph 
Runnell,  1785.  The  two  south  rope-walks  were  each  25  feet  wide  ; 
the  north  one,  30  feet  wide. 

All  these  rope-walks  becoming  the  property  of  Samuel  Brown 
and  William  Paque,  were,  in  1807,  laid  out  into  a  range  of  house- 
lots,  occupying  the  whole  south  side  of  Poplar  street  from  Cham- 
bers street  to  the  sea. 

It  is  remarkable  how  extensively  the  initial  letter  P  figures  in 
regard  to  the  location  of  these  old  rope-walks.  Purchase  street, 
Pearl  street,  Pinckney  street,  Poplar  street,  and  the  Point  on 
which  the  Poor  House  was  built ;  and  I  certainly  consider  that  the 
most  provoking,  perplexing,  and  protracted  professional  job  which 
I  ever  had  to  undertake  in  my  profession  was  that  in  which  I 
found  that,  in  order  to  get  at  the  title  of  one  house-lot,  I  was 
obliged  to  investigate  from  three  to  seven  rope-walks.  At  this  day, 
such  an  examination  would  be  preposterous,  because  of  no  practi- 
cal importance. 

After  the  Pearl-street  rope-walks  were  burnt,  the  town  sold  off  a 
range  of  rope-walks  at  the  bottom  of  the  Common,  which  were  the 
last  that  remained  standing  within  the  limits  of  the  city  proper. 
They  were  west  of  Charles  street,  fronting  towards  the  Providence- 
depot  lot,  and  their  rear  line  being  towards  the  Mildam.  Restric- 
tions were  imposed  which  secured  to  the  public  light,  air,  and 
prospect  over  these  low  buildings.  In  the  mayorality  of  President 
Quincy  they  were  all  repurchased  by  the  city,  it  being  a  favorite 


36  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

project  of  his  to  improve  the  premises  in  that  vicinity  by  buildings. 
Generally  succeeding  in  all  his  enterprises,  this  repurchase  has 
been  one  of  the  most  successful  of  his  municipal  undertakings,  in 
consequence  of  the  total  failure  of  the  specific  project  which  alone 
led  him  to  extinguish  these  rope-walk  titles,  since  the  city  has  thus 
gained  the  exclusive  control  of  its  beautiful  Public  Garden.  This 
pleasure  ground  we  owe  equally  to  his  having  done  what  he  did,  and 
to  his  having  been  prevented  from  doing  what  he  intended.  The 
first  was  an  arduous  enterprise,  which  only  his  energy  could  have 
accomplished.  The  last  was  rendered  almost  an  impossibility  by 
that  very  energy  honestly  exerted  in  a  wrong  direction.8 

GLEANER. 


8  [By  an  oversight  the  editorial  note  on  p.  30  was  neither  numbered  nor  signed  W.] 
The  matter  of  the  propriety  of  building  on  the  Public  Garden  was  long  contested.  The 
land  was  originally  a  strip  of  flats,  in  which  rose  Fox  Hill  ai  an  island. 

August  12,  1794,  in  a  town-meeting,  the  question  was  considered  of  allowing  the 
owners  of  the  rope-walks  destroyed  by  a  fire  on  Pearl  street  to  rebuild  on  the  marsh. 

In  September  the  report  of  a  committee  was  accepted,  granting  these  rope-makers 
the  marsh  and  flats,  including  the  whole  or  such  part  of  Fox  Hill  as  fell  within  the 
bounds. 

This  grant,  which  was  made  in  consideration  of  not  building  on  Pearl  street,  was  for 
a  strip  of  land  300  feet  wide  and  in  length,  extending  from  a  line  drawn  parallel  with 
Beacon  street,  and  500  feet  from  that  street.  The  upper  or  eastern  line  was  to  run  from 
the  westerly  end  of  Ridge  Hill  (being  500  feet  from  Beacon  street),  "  directly  towards 
Eliot  street  as  far  as  the  town's  land  extends  on  the  west  side  of  Pleasant  street,"  leav- 
ing a  "  space  of  fifty  feet  between  this  line  and  the  end  of  the  rail  fence  projecting  down 
from  the  burying-ground  on  the  south  side  of  the  Common."  The  grantees  might -vary 
the  lines  by  relinquishing  fifty  feet  on  the  east  line  and  taking  fifty  feet  instead  on  the 
west  lide;  or  they  might  extend  across  the  marsh  diagonally,  provided  they  did  not 
come  nearer  than  fifty  feet  to  the  end  of  the  burying-ground  fence,  nor  cross  the  line  par- 
allel with,  and  500  feet  from,  Beacon  street. 

The  town  reserved  "  sixty  feet  in  width  across  the  southerly  end  of  said  piece  of 
land  for  a  road  from  Pleasant  street  down  to  the  channel." 

The  selectmen  "  were  also  authorized  to  lay  out  a  road  sixty  feet  wide  from  Pleasant 
street  along  the  easterly  side  of  these  lands  over  the  marsh  towards  Beaoon  street,  in 
order  to  meet  a  road  that  might  be  opened  from  West  Boston  bridge. 

Thus  Charles  street  was  established,  and  Boylston-street  continuation  was  projected. 

The  rope-walk  lots  were  six  in  number,  each  fifty  feet  wide,  and  when  bought  back, 
in  1824,  the  first  three  lots  measured  1,006  feet  on  Charles  street,  1,138  feet  on  the  west 
side.  Lots  4,  5,  and  6,  measured  1,138  feet  each. 

In  1806  the  rope-walks  were  burned  and  rebuilt.  In  1824  the  city  bought  back  all 
these  rights.  On  the  26th  July  and  27th  December  of  that  year  the  town  voted  on  the 
following  questions:  — 

1.  On  authorizing  the  City  Council  to  sell  the  upland  and  flats  west  of  Charles  street. 
Rejected,  1,027  to  846. 

2.  In  case  the  sale  was  authorized,  whether  the  Common  should  be  forever  kept  open. 
Agreed  to;  1,111  for,  and  737  against. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  37 


XVIII. 

JAMES  ALLEN'S  SIXTEEN-ACRE  PASTURE. 

August  2,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  After  our  late  swim  we  landed  on  Zachariah 
Phillips'  pasture,  at  the  end  of  the  south  side  of  Cambridge  street, 
and  have  seen  that  the  earliest  deed  in  1658  bounds  on  Brown  and 
on  Samuel  Cole,  afterwards  land  of  James  Allen.  Accordingly 
we  find  that  James  Brown,  joyner,  conveyed  to  Josiah  Cobham  in 
1666  (Suf.,  L.  5,  f.  84)  two  acres,  more  or  less,  bounded  south  on 
Brattle,  east  on  John  Biggs,  west  on  Phillips,  north  on  the  beach 
or  river.  [The  water  then  extended  up  some  distance  east  of  the 
present  end  of  Cambridge  street.] 

Josiah,  the  son  of  this  grantee,  was  dead  in  1691  ;•  and  Josiah, 
3d,  his  grandson,  in  1697,  sells  to  James  Allen  (Suf.,  L.  18,  f.  21) 
two  acres  of  land  on  west  side  of  Boston,  late  in  the  tenure  of  my 
grandfather,  Josiah  Cobham,  bounded  south  on  land  now  or  late 
of  Thomas  Brattle,  Sen'r.,  east  on  John  Biggs,  now  said  Allen's, 
west  on  late  Zachariah  Phillips,  and  by  the  beach  and  river  north- 
erly. [Cambridge  street  did  not  yet  exist.] 

In  tracing  the  title  of  the  Allen  farm  on  the  north  side  of  Cam- 
bridge street,  we  found  a  grant  to  John  Biggs,  in  1641,  of  1£  acres 
of  marsh  for  40  shillings  (rather  a  low  price  for  all  the  land  from 

3.  Whether  a  settlement  should  be  made  with  the  Boston  and  Roxbury  Mill  Co. 
Rejected,  1,404  to  420. 

4.  Whether  the  uplands  and  flats  should  be  sold  south  of  a  line  from  a  point  on  Charles 
street,  opposite  the  south-west  corner  of  the  Common  (1,350  feet  from  Beacon  street), 
running  at  an  angle  of  85°  with  Charles  street,  to  the  bounds  of  the  city  flats;  provided, 
that  the  Common,  and  all  the  upland  and  flats  lying  west  therefrom,  should  be  kept  for- 
ever free  from  buildings.     This  was  rejected,  1,404  to  420. 

5.  Whether  the  City  Council  should  be  authorized  to  lay  out  any  part  of  the  lands 
and  flats,  lying  west  from  the  Common,  for  a  cemetery.     Rejected,  1,632  to  176. 

In  1843  the  question  of  selling  the  land  was  revived,  and  a  pamphlet  was  printed 
giving  the  opinions  of  Jeremiah  Mason  and  Franklin  Dexter,  to  the  effect  that  the 
rope-walk  lots  were  part  of  the  Common,  and  as  such  could  not  be  sold.  Mr.  Bowditch 
signed  a  similar  opinion  about  the  land  north  of  the  Providence  depot.  See,  also,  a 
pamphlet  entitled  "  The  Public  Rights  in  Boston  Common.  Being  the  Report  of  a 
Committee  of  Citizens.  Boston,  1877." 

W. 


38  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

the  water  to  within  70  feet  of  North  Russell  street) ,  which  held  out 
two  acres.  He  also  acquired  4  acres  of  upland  adjoining,  and  his 
inventor}7,  in  1666,  mentions  "4  acres  of  upland  and  1£  acres  of 
marsh,  £120.  I  do  not  find  the  grant  to  him  of  these  four  acres, 
though  in  1644  he  had  liberty  to  fence  in  his  marsh,  and  "  if  any 
quantity  fell  within  the  said  fence  above  his  proportion,  he  is  to 
allow  the  town  for  it."  Perhaps,  therefore,  he  fenced  in  these  4 
acres  at  the  same  price.  He  devised  to  his  widow  Mary,  who 
married  a  Minot,  and  died,  as  we  have  seen,  devising  to  her 
father  and  brother,  John  Dasset,  Sen.  and  Jr.,  who  sell  to  said 
Allen  1696  (Suf.,  L.  17,  f.  237),  a  piece  of  land  containing  6 
acres,  more  or  less,  bounded  with  said  James,  north  (i.e.,  his 
land  on  the  north  side  of  Cambridge  street,  acquired  under  James 
Penn) ,  south  and  east  on  Nathaniel  Oliver,  west  on  Josiah  Cob- 
han.  Of  this  purchase,  4  acres  only  come  south  of  Cambridge 
street. 

Samuel  Cole,  after  the  sale  in  1658  of  Zechariah  Phillips'  past- 
ure, retained  a  tract  which  he  seems  to  have  sold  to  Thomas 
Brattle,  but  the  deed  is  not  recorded.  In  the  inventory  of  Cole's 
estate  (Prob.  Rec.,  L.  5,  f.  37)  is  this  item :  "  A  bill  due  from  Mr. 
Brattle,  £20."  This  I  guess  was  the  purchase-money  of  this  land. 
Brattle  died  in  1683,  leaving  seven  children,  and  in  1684  (Suff., 
L.  13,  f.  96)  there  was  set  off  to  his  three  sons-in-law,  Nathaniel 
Oliver,  John  A3*re,9  and  Joseph  Parson,  in  right  of  their  wives, 
"  all  that  pasture-land  lying  in  Boston  near  unto  Gentry  hill."  A 
subdivision  took  place  in  1685,  by  indenture  (Suff.,  L.  13,  f.  380  ;  L. 
16,  f.  64),  by  which  this  pasture  is  assigned  to  Mrs.  Oliver.  Na- 
thaniel Oliver  and  Elizabeth,  his  wife,  conveyed  to  James  Allen  by 
warranty  deed  dated  June  6,  1698  (Suff.,  L.  18,  f.  180),  "eight 
acres,  etc.,  bounded  north  on  the  highway  and  on  land  late  of  John 
Dassett ;  east  on  Davy  and  on  Mrs.  Swett,  late  Thomas  Butolph  ; 
south  on  the  late  Francis  East  and  N.  Williams  ;  west  on  land  late 
of  Leverett,  and  on  land  late  of  said  Dassett."  [East  and  Wil- 
liams owned  the  Copley  lot  on  Beacon  street ;  Leverett  owned 
Phillips'  pasture.] 

Zacheus  Bosworth  had  lands  in  the  Book  of  Possessions.  As 
early  as  1648  he  owned  5  acres  in  the  vicinity  (see  mortgage, 
Suff.,  L.  1,  f.  92),  and  he  died  seized,  devising  the  same  to  his  son 
Samuel,  in  1655.  He  sold  off  to  Richard.  Cook  the  easterly  2£ 

'This  name  is  more  properly  spelled  Eyre,  and  should  not  be  confounded  with 
that  of  Ayer  cr  of  Ayres,  both  of  which  are  found  on  our  records.  W. 


"  GLEANER  "   ARTICLES.  39 

acres,  1665  (Suff.,  L.  4,  f.  320)  ;  and  by  deed  not  recorded,  but  ex- 
pressly referred  to,  he  conveyed  the  westerly  2£  acres  to  Humphrey 
Davie  (not  the  distinguished  philosopher).  Davie  mortgaged,  in 
1 683  (Suff., L.  13,  f.  72),  to  secure  a  marriage  settlement  on  his  wife, 
this  tract  called  4  acres,  more  or  less,  but  which  (subsequently 
shrinks  again  to  its  true  proportions) ,  and/the  mortgage  being  fore- 
closed, his  widow  conveyed  to  John  Davie ;  and  John  Davie  and 
Elizabeth,  his  wife,  conveyed  to  James  Allen,  by  warranty  deed, 
May  11,  1699  (Suff.,  L.  19,  f.  358),  "About  two  and  an  half  acres 
of  pasture,  enclosed,  bounded  west  on  the  late  Samuel  Coole  (Cole), 
now  said  Allen's  ;  east  on  Richard  Cook,  since  Elisha  Cook  ;  north 
on  land  in  the  tenure  and  occupation  of  Joseph  Bellknap,  Jr.,  and 
on  land  of  said  James,  heretofore  Thomas  Butolph ;  south  on 
Thomas  Miller,  now  Samuel  Sewall,  with  an  highway  as  heretofore 
used." 

Now,  these  purchases  of  2,  4,  8,  and  2£  acres,  make  up  together 
sixteen  and  an  half  acres,  and  constitute  Allen's  one  continuous  past- 
ure, on  the  south  side  of  Cambridge  street  next  east  of  Zechariah 
Phillips'  pasture.  GLEANER. 


XIX. 

JEREMIAH  ALLEN'S  PASTURE. 

August  6,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  We  have  shown  that  Rev.  James  Allen  acquired, 
by  four  purchases,  16^  acres  on  the  south  side  of  Cambridge  street. 
By  his  deed  of  settlement  in  1706,  and  his  devise  in  accordance 
with  it  (1711),  he  vested  in  his  daughter,  Mrs.  Wheelwright  (as 
we  have  stated) ,  the  southerly  seven  acres  ;  the  whole  of  which 
(except  the  part  thereof  covered  by  three  rope-walks  on  M}Ttle 
street)  gets  united  in  the  Mount  Vernon  proprietors ;  the  easterty 
portion  by  the  deed  of  the  children  of  Enoch  Brown,  in  1797, 
(Suffolk,  L.  186,  f.  232),  and  the  residue  or  westerly  portion  by 
direct  deed  of  the  devisees  of  Jeremiah  Wheelwright,  son  and  heir 
of  Mrs.  Wheelwright,  in  1795  (L.  180,  f.  191).  The  easterly  line 
of  the  Brown  purchase  is  77  feet  west  of  Belknap  street. 

The  northerly  tract,  containing  about  ten  acres,  by  the  same  deed 
of  settlement  and  devise  (1706-1711),  was  vested  by  James 
Allen  in  his  son,  Jeremiah  Allen.  He,  about  1725,  laid  out  the 


40  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

same  into  87  lots,  containing,  generally,  4,000  feet  each.  Through 
the  centre  of  the  pasture  he  opened  Centre  street,  and,  at  intervals 
of  200  feet  on  each  side  other  streets,  called  respectively  Grove  street 
and  Garden  street,  —  names  doubtless  then  significant  of  the  rural 
beauty  of  the  spot.  He  also  laid  out,  at  intervals  of  240  feet,  two 
cross  streets,  parallel  to  Cambridge  street,  viz.,  Southack  street  and 
May  street.  These  two  last  streets  are  continued  west  into  Zach- 
ariah  Phillips'  pasture,  which  was  divided  into  lots  at  the  same 
time ;  the  two  plans  being  evidentty  made  to  conform  to  each 
other.  Neither  of  them  were  recorded.  A  large  proportion  of 
the  lots  of  Mr.  Allen  remained  unoccupied  and  unimproved  by  his 
grantees  for  very  many  years. 

This  pasture  begins  on  Cambridge  street,  110  feet  west  of  Grove 
street,  and  extends  to  land  late  of  Buttolph,  (now  Buttolph  street) . 
It  measures  in  front  550  feet  on  Cambridge  street,  and  is  in  depth 
648  feet,  to  the  ancient  rope-walk,  the  side  lines  slightly  converg- 
ing. At  a  later  day.  Myrtle  street  has  been  extended  across  the 
extreme  south  lots  of  this  pasture ;  so  that  it  is  now  enclosed  by 
four  very  definite  boundaries,  viz.,  Cambridge  street,  Buttolph 
street,  Myrtle  street,  and  the  east  line  of  Zachariah  Phillips' 
pasture. 

This  territory  has  been  the  theatre  of  very  queer  conveyancing. 
One  Thomas  G.  Urann,  in  1804,  made  warranty  deeds  at  pleasure, 
for  very  trifling  considerations,  of  certain  portions  of  it  which  he 
found  lying  unenclosed  and  unclaimed.  Some  of  his  grantees  hold 
to  this  day.  He  was  at  last  deterred  by  threats  of  indictment  from 
the  further  pursuit  of  this  systematic  project  of  land  theft.  In 
one  single  volume  of  Suffolk  deeds  [Lib.  211]  will  be  found  no 
less  than  forty-eight  conveyances  from  him.  A  deed  to  him  would 
be  a  rarity.  I  was  some  years  since  amused  at  one  of  his  heirs-at- 
law  calling  upon  me  under  the  idea  that  he  was  entitled  to  some 
lands  in  this  locality  which  his  ancestors  had  left  unconveyed.  I 
told  him  that  the  only  inheritance  left  by  Mr.  Urann  was  a  minus 
quantity,  viz.,  the  obligation  to  make  restitution  to  the  true  owners 
of  lands  which  he  had  himself  wrongfully  appropriated. 

About  a  century  after  the  death  of  Rev.  James  Allen  (1802), 
and  although  he  did  not  die  owner  of  this  pasture,  having  disposed 
of  it  by  deed  in  his  lifetime,  a  decree  of  the  Probate  Court  was 
obtained,  as  if  he  had  been  owner  at  his  death,  and  as  if  his  estate 
had  been  still  in  a  course  of  settlement.  By  this  decree  an  assign- 
ment was  made  of  "his  estate  in  Cambridge  and  Buttolph  streets, 
valued  at  two  hundred  dollars,"  to  one  of  his  descendants,  James 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  41 

Allen,  he  paying  to  the  other  heirs  their  proportion,  and  by  him 
a  conveyance  of  the  fictitious  title  thus  commenced  was  forthwith 
made  for  $500.  This,  legal  finesse  effected  for  many  lots  of  this 
pasture  what  had  been  accomplished  as  to  other  lots,  in  a  more 
manly,  may  I  not  say  a  more  honorable  mode,  by  Mr.  Urann. 

The  late  Mr.  Otis  possessed  a  lot,  70  by  100  feet,  at  the  corner 
of  May  and  Centre  streets.  He  obtained  a  deed  from  the  true 
owner  of  the  corner  lot,  40  by  100  feet,  which  bounded  east  on  a 
lot  belonging  to  the  late  Henderson  Inches.  Now,  Mr.  Inches, 
who  bought  in  1766,  had  accidentally  mislocated  his  land  30  feet 
too  far  to  the  east,  and  his  heirs,  finding  that  they  had  all  the  deed 
gave  to  their  ancestor,  told  Mr.  Otis  that  if  they  ever  lost  the  30 
feet  which  had  been  accidentally  enclosed,  they  should  take  this  30 
feet  adjoining  his  lot,  but  otherwise  not.  Mr.  Otis  accordingly  kept 
it  as  his  own,  and  sold  four  house-lots,  each  25  by  70  feet,  so  that 
all  the  yards  and  out-buildings  were  upon  this  disputed  territory. 
After  many  years,  the  Inches'  heirs  were  sued  and  lost  their  30 
feet.  They  then  sued  Mr.  Otis'  grantees,  who  were  placed  in  a 
very  embarrassing  situation,  being  certain  of  losing  all  the  needful 
appendages  to  their  tenements.  The  suits  were  decided  in  favor 
of  the  demandants,  and  Mr.  Otis,  paying  the  sum  awarded  by  ref- 
erees mutually  chosen,  the  titles  of  his  grantees  were  confirmed 
A.D.  1833. 

The  moral  and  legal  character  of  this  district  was  for  a  long 
time  equally  bad.  The  Hill  was  the  Jive  points  of  Boston.  It  was, 
however,  purged  by  the  official  broom  of  President  Quincy,  and  its 
titles  and  its  reputation  have  become  much  improved  by  time. 

GLEANER. 


XX. 

BUTTOLPH'S   EIGHT-ACRE  PASTURE. 

August  8,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  — Leaving  Mr.  Jeremiah  Allen's  pasture,  with  its 
ancient  u  gardens"  and  "groves"  sadly  desecrated  by  civilization, 
we  proceed  easterly,  and  reach  Thomas  Buttolph's  8£-acre  pasture. 
In  the  Book  of  Possessions,  p.  57,  "William  Hudson,  Sen.,  a  lot 
in  ye  new  field,  containing  about  fyve  acres,  bounded  with  Richard 
Cooke  on  the  east,  Mr.  Thomas  Clarke  west,  sould  to  Mr.  But- 


42  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

tolph  p.  42."  And,  accordingly,  in  p.  42  we  find  "  Wm.  Hudson, 
Sen.,  granted  to  Thomas  Buttolph  fyve  acres  of  land  in  the  new 
field,  bounded  with  Richard  Cooke  east,  James  Johnson  west,  Wm. 
Wilson  south,  —  Davis  apothecary,  north,  and  this  was  by  a  deed 
dated  26,  4,  1646,  acknowledged  same  da}r  before  Mr.  Winthrop, 
Governor."  James  Johnson's  possession  is  described  as  "  about 
an  acre,  bounded  with  John  Biggs  (our  old  friend)  north,  Francis 
Lloyle 10  west,  Zach.  Bosworth  south,  Thomas  Clarke  east."  John- 
son seems  to  have  acquired  also  Lloyle's  and  Clarke's  lots.  Thus 
we  find  that  James  Johnson  conveyed  to  Thomas  Buttolph  by  deed 
dated  14th,  6th,  1649,  recorded  29th,  1  mo.,  1654  (Suff.,  L.  2,  f.  11), 
3£  acres  in  Gentry  field,  bounded  on  land  of  said  Thomas  east,  on 
William  Davis  north,  on  Theodore  Atkinson  west,  and  Zacheus 
Bosworth  south.  These  two  purchases  vested  in  Buttolph  the  8£ 
acres.  Davies  owned  the  Chambers  pasture  on  north  side  of  Cam- 
bridge street. 

Buttolph  died  in  1667,  devising  to  two  sons,  John  and  Thomas. 
The  latter  died  intestate,  1668,  leaving  a  widow,  Mary  (who  mar- 
ried Swett),  and  four  children,  Thomas,  Nicholas,  Mary,  and 
Abigail.  In  1682  John  conveyed  to  these  children  his  moiety. 
(Suff.,  L.  12,  f.  274.) 

Thomas  died.  Abigail  married  Joseph  Belknap,  Jr.  Mary 
married  one  Thaxter,  and  after  his  death,  Robert  Guttridge.  In 
1701  these  heirs  divided  the  whole  pasture  (Suff.,  L.  23,  f.  119),  each 
having  a  lot  of  2f  acres ;  the  westerly  part  being  assigned  to 
Nicholas ;  the  middle  to  Mrs.  Belknap,  and  the  easterly  part  to 
Mrs.  Thaxter,  or  Guttridge.  This  pasture  extended  from  Buttolph 
street  to  Hancock  street,  being  about  430  feet  in  average  width, 
and  in  depth  back  it  measured  about  625  feet  to  Myrtle  street.  In 
1734,  by  indenture  between  the  Belknap  heirs  and  Mrs.  Guttridge, 
Belknap  street  was  laid  out  (Suff.,  L.  49,  f.  98).  On  the  west  side  of 
Mrs.  Belknap's  lot  was  a  rope-walk,  24  feet  wide,  which  Nathaniel 
Belknap  sold  to  Thomas  Jenner  in  1733  (L.  48,  f.  179)  ;  sold  in  1771 
to  Edward  Games.  It  is  &  straggling  rope-walk,  which  should  have 
shown  itself  in  my  article  on  "  Old  Rope-walks."  South  Russell  street 
was  laid  out  in  1737  (L.  54,  f.  203),  through  the  middle  of  Nicholas' 
lot,  by  his  heirs,  Mary,  wife  of  John  Phillips,  and  Abigail,  wife  of 

10  The  Book  of  Possessions  has  been  printed  for  the  city  in  the  second  volume  of 
these  reports.  James  Johnson's  possessions  are  on  p.  20  of  the  original  (p.  174  of  the 
printed  copy).  The  name  which  Mr.  Bowditch  reads  as  Francis  Lloyle,  is  by  me 
deciphered  as  Francis  Loyall.  On  p.  697  of  the  printed  copy  he  stands  as  Francis 
Lyle;  and  SAVAGE  records  him  as  Lyall,  Lysle,  Lisle,  Lioll  or  Loyal.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  43 

Knight  Leverett,  or  rather  by  their  husbands.  It  was  probably  so 
named  because  it  led  in  a  southerly  direction  from  Chambers'  or 
Russell's  pasture,  or  opposite  to  North  Russell  street. 

Buttolph  street  was  laid  out  along  or  across  the  extreme  westerly 
line  of  this  estate,  and  its  easterly  boundary  includes  the  houses  on 
the  west  side  of  Hancock  street.  The  westerly  portion  of  this 
pasture,  like  that  of  Jeremiah  Allen,  became  gradually  occupied  by 
our  "  colored  brethren."  Thus  a  lot,  no  less  than  88J  feet  wide  by 
117  feet  deep,  on  the  westerly  side  of  Belknap  street,  bought  by 
Ebenezer  Storer  in  1737,  was  conveyed  by  his  executors  to 
"  Scipio."  He  is  not  styled  in  the  deed  "  Africanus,"  but  was  no 
doubt  lawfully  entitled  to  that  additional  appellation.  The  deeds 
of  this  area  show  how  exclusively  the  great  names  of  antiquity  are 
borne  by  this  class  of  our  fellow-citizens.  Cato,  Cpesar,  Pompey, 
Scipio,  here  figure  on  an  humbler  stage  than  of  old,  in  company 
with  "Cuff  Buffum,"  etc.  And  among  the  "  Dinahs,"  and 
"  Phillises,"  occur  other  female  names,  which  though  derived  from 
bright  colors,  really  indicate,  at  first  blush,  the  dark  skin  of  the 
parties,  viz.,  Olive,  Violet,  Rose,  etc.  Our  city  fathers,  not  being 
of  opinion  that  "  a  rose  by  any  other  name  will  smell  as  sweet," 
have  recently  merged  Belknap  street  into  the  less  offensive  name 
of  Joy  street.  Buttolph  street  has  not  been  disturbed,  except  that 
with  the  usual  official  brevity,  it  has,  like  Elliot  street,  been  cur- 
tailed of  one  letter,11  and  now  figures  as  Butolph  street.  Hancock 
street  (so  named  from  King  John,  having  before  been  named 
George  street  for  King  George)  has  always  been  occupied  by  white 
inhabitants,  being  the  genteel  end  of  Buttolph's  pasture. 

GLEANER. 

"Mr.  Bowditch  is,  perhaps,  over-critical  in  respect  to  Eliot  street.  That  street  was 
laid  out  in  1740  through  lands  belonging  to  the  descendants  of  Jacob  Eliot,  who  was 
one  of  the  brothers  of  Rev.  John  Eliot,  the  "apostle  to  the  Indians."  This  family  in 
all  its  branches  has  always  used  the  form  "Eliot";  but  the  Essex  county  Elliots  or 
Elliotts,  to  which  belonged  the  Boston  ministers  and  our  Mayor  Eliot,  have  varied  the 
spelling  at  times. 

I  annex  an  abstract  of  the  indenture  laying  out  Eliot  street,  and  also  that  part  of  our 
Tremont  street  which  crosses  it.  See,  also  City  Document  No.  119,  of  1879.  "  Nomen- 
clature of  streets:  — "  W. 

"  Lib  69,  fol.  63-5.  —  4  June  1740.    Indenture  between  Benjamin  Eliot  )  stationers. 

John  Eliot         5 

Rev.  Jacob  Eliot  of  Lebanon,  Windham  co.  Conn. ;  Mary  w.  of  Jona.  Willis  of 
Boston,  housewright,  they  four  being  the  heirs  of  Jacob  Eliot,  mariner,  decd,  on  the 
one  part 

Also  John,  Edward,  Samuel  <fc  Jacob  (Holyokes  all), 

Mary  Arnold,  Hannah  Burrill,  widows,  &  Sarah  w.  of  John  Eliot,  stationer:  —  they 
seven  being  the  heirs  of  Mary  Holyoke  widow  deed  —  who  was  also  an  heir  of  Jacob 


44  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


XXI. 

MIDDLECOTT'S   FOUR-ACRE  PASTURE. 

August  9,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Our  earliest  deed  of  Scottow's  pasture  bounded 
on  Jeremiah  Houchin.  His  executors  sell  in  1677  (SufF.,  L.  16,  f. 
297)  "  all- that  theire  piece  or  parcel  of  land,  situate  tying  and  being 
in  Boston,  containing  by  estimation  four  acres,  be  the  same  more  or 
less,  being  butted  and  bounded  on  the  north  by  the  highway,  east 
by  Mr.  'Simon  Lynd,  south  by  the  land  of  John  Turner,  west  by 
the  land  of  Benjamin  Gibbs."  [Scottow  had  sold  to  Gibbs.] 
The  grantees  in  this  deed  were  Richard  Middlecott  and  William 
Taylor.  The  latter  died  1682,  and  his  son  and  heir,  of  the  same 
name,  conveyed  to  said  Middlecott,  1697.  (Suff.,  L.  17,  f.  351.) 

Middlecott  died  1704,  and  a  division  was  made  1727  (L.  42, 
f.  175),  by  which  a  40-feet  street  was  laid  out  through  the  pasture, 
called  Middlecott  street,  which  name  it  retained  many  }Tears.  This 
pasture  measured  310  feet,  8  on  Cambridge  street,  and  extended 
back  on  the  west  side  689  feet,  on  the  east  side  741  feet,  and  in 
the  rear  it  measured  210  feet.  The  lots  on  the  west  side  of  Middle- 
cott street  measured  130  feet  on  Cambridge  street,  and  those  on 
the  east  side  139£  feet  on  Cambridge  street ;  and  at  the  rear  end  of 
the  pasture  the  lots  narrowed  to  85  feet  on  each  side  of  this  new 
street.  The  street  so  laid  out  was  40  feet  wide. 

Here,  then,  was  one  of  the  finest  estates  in  the  city,  and  this 

Eliot  &  whereas  the  other  sister  &  heir  of  Jacob  E.  was  Abigail  Davis  who  sold 
her  right  to  bro.  Benjamin,  now  they  desire  to  make  a  division 

First  they  lay  out  2  streets  at  nearly  right  angles,  one  to  run  WNW  from  Orange 
street  —  to  be  called  Eliot  st;  the  other  to  run  SSW  from  Frog  Lane  to  Hollis  at,  to  be 
called  Holyoke  st:  to  be  described  as  follows. 

Eliot  at.  to  begin  21  inches  from  the  S.E.  corner  of  sd  Jacob  Eliot's  house  on 
Orange  st.  occupied  first  by  Paul  Collins,  then  by  John  Clark  &  now  by  Benj. 
Eliot,  to  run  in  a  strait  line  WNW  906  feet  till  it  reaches  land  lately  bo't  by  sd  John 
Eliot  of  Abigail  Davis,  widow  —  The  street  to  be  30  ft  wide.  And  as  this  30  ft  at  the 
first  point  will  run  7£  feet  on  the  land  of  Joseph  Henderson,  late  of  Samuel  Hand,  the 
s<*  H.  has  sold  a  strip  to  the  town  for  a  street. 

Holyoke  street  begins  at  the  N.E.  corner  of  land  of  Wm  Lambert  in  Frog  Lane  & 
runs  first  through  land  of  John  Clough,  next  through  the  lands  to  be  divided  A  then 
through  land  of  Gov.  Belcher,  till  it  falls  into  Hollis  at." 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  45 

spacious  avenue  was  appropriately  named  for  one  of  its  earliest 
owners.  Houchin  street  would  not  have  been  quite  the  thing,  but 
Middlecott  street  was  unexceptionable,  —  a  name  agreeable  both  to 
the  eye  and  the  ear.  It  happened,  however,  that  one  Bowdoin, 
some  70  years  ago,  was  placed  by  his  fellow-citizens  in  that 
gubernatorial  ducking -stool,  in  which  the  commander-in-chief  is 
annually  soaked  while  reviewing  the  "Ancient  and  Honorable 
Artillery."  It  also  happened  that  he  owned  an  estate  on  Beacon 
street.  His  devise  (bearing  the  same  name),  in  1800,  opened 
through  this  land  a  street  in  continuation  of  Mr.  Middlecott's,  and 
presto  !  the  whole  street  became  Bowdoin  street.  Now,  it  cannot  of 
course,  be  suspected  that  the  living  Mr.  Bowdoin  named  this  street 
for  himself.  The  act  would  savor  of  ostentation.  The  selectmen, 
doubtless,  thought  that  having  accommodated  Governor  Hancock 
with  a  street,  they  ought  in  justice  to  do  as  much  for  his  rival.  In 
itself,  the  change  was  as  absurd  as  if  a  boy,  having  a  fine  kite 
with  an  excellent  bob  to  it,  should,  because  it  had  a  ribbon  or  bow 
added  to  it,  be  obliged  to  call  the  whole  article  by  the  name  of 
this  tail-piece. 

The  partiality  thus  evinced  for  governors  has  not  yet  died  out, 
though  now,  indeed,  it  rarely  extends  to  such  as  are  either  officially 
personally  defunct.  But  how  appropriate  would  it  be  to  confer  the 
name  of  the  governor  for  the  time  being,  on  the  street  in  which  he 
happened  to  live  !  The  visible  splendor  and  dignity  of  our  highest 
office  would  thus  be  greatly  increased ;  periodical  changes  in  the 
names  of  streets  would  thus  be  brought  about  with  even  greater 
frequency,  and  in  a  less  fitful  and  capricious  manner  than  at 
present.  Mt.  Vernon  street  would  become  Gardner  street,  etc.  If 
such  a  rule  should  prevail,  perhaps,  in  a  few  years,  Winthrop  square 
would  succeed  as  the  third  designation  of  Pemberton  square,  which 
has  only  had  two  names  in  twenty  years.  If  it  should  be  thought 
that  in  the  event  Winthrop  place  might  lead  to  some  confusion ; 
that  name,  conferred  in  honor  of  a  dead  governor,  could  be  ex- 
changed. It  is  the  order  of  nature,  indeed,  that  the  dead  should 
give  place  to  the  living.  Besides,  it  is  rather  an  equivocal  com- 
pliment to  name  half  of  a  court  for  anybody.  Otis  place  and 
Winthrop  place  could  both  be  named  for  Sir  William  Pepperell, 
through  whose  estate  Otis  place  is  laid  out.  They  could  together 
be  called  Pepperell  square.  Two  birds  would  thus  be  killed  by  one 
stone ;  and  then  in  a  few  years  the  authorities  could  ignore  the 
origin  of  the  name,  drop  off  the  "  ell,"  as  they  did  in  EHiot  street, 
and  the  residents  would  hail,  in  the  director}',  from  Pepper  square. 


46  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

The  names  of  streets,  however,  are  comparative!}^  unimportant, 
since  we  seem  in  a  fair  way  to  lose  the  reality,  —  several  streets,  as 
I  learn  by  the  papers,  being  at  once  used  up  by  the  Metropolitan 
Railroad. 

GLEANER. 

P.S.  — Is  it  true  that  the  mayor  had  a  present  of  a  snapping- 
turtle,  weighing  forty  pounds,  to  put  into  the  Frog  Pond?  If  so, 
I  wish  he  would  snap  at  our  city  functionaries  for  some  of  their 
proceedings.  G. 


XXII. 

JOSHUA  SCOTTOW'S  FOUR-ACRE  PASTURE. 

August  10,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  At  the  last  advices  I  hailed  from  the  west  side 
of  Hancock  street  at  the  easterly  end  of  Buttolph's  pasture :  con- 
tinuing easterly  a  four-acre  pasture  of  Joshua  Scottow  is  next 
reached,  which  extends  from  Hancock  street  easterly  280  feet  on 
Cambridge  street,  or  to  a  point  52£  feet  east  of  Temple  street, 
and  is  in  depth  back,  towards  summit  of  Beacon  Hill,  660  feet,  or 
just  beyond  the  line  of  Derne  street.  This  estate  was  probably 
sold  by  Thomas  Scottow  to  his  brother  Joshua,  27,  4,  1648.  A 
mortgage  by  Joshua,  discharged  in  1665,  mentions  such  a  deed. 
Joshua  Scottow  conveyed  to  his  son-in-law,  Benjamin  Gibbs,  Jan. 
10,  1670  (Suffolk,  L.  7,  f.  168).  Colonel  Benjamin  Gibbs  and 
Lydia,  his  wife,  mortgaged  the  same  to  our  old  friend,  Rev.  James 
Allen,  for  £150,  1671  (Suffolk,  L.  7,  f.  192),  who  assigned  it  to 
Richard  Wharton,  by  whom  the  mortgage  was  foreclosed,  1680 
(L.  12,  f.  329).  Richard  Wharton  died  1691,  and  his  administra- 
tor conveyed  to  Stephen  Minot  the  south-west  moiety,  or  two  acres, 
Nov.  24,  1697  (L.  18,  f.  18),  and  to  Isaiah  Tay  the  north-easterly 
moiety,  or  two  acres,  Nov.  23,  1697  (L.  18,  f.  17).  The  whole 
pasture  is  thus  described :  "  A  pasture  on  the  north-west  side  of 
Beacon  Hill,  containing  about  four  acres,  bounded  north-east  on 
the  late  Jeremiah  Houchin,  now  Richard  Middlecott's,  south-east 
on  the  late  John  Turner  and  Richard  Cook,  south-west  on  late 
Buttels  (i.e.,  Buttolph's  pasture),  and  north-west  on  the  lane  lead- 
ing to  the  pastures,"  (i.e.,  Cambridge  street.) 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  47 

And  here  another  "  rope- walk"  turns  up,  and  one,  too,  of  quite 
respectable  size,  viz.,  44  feet  6  inches  on  Cambridge  street,  by  665 
feet  deep.  It  was  sold  off  by  Minot  in  1731  to  Samuel  Waldo  (Suff., 
L.  46,  f.  170)  from  the  easterly  side  of  his  allotment.  Waldo's  heirs 
sold  off  to  Joseph  Ridgway  ml  768  (Suff.,  112,  f.  105.)  Now,  the 
volumes  112  and  114  have  been  missing  from  the  Registry  of 
Deeds,  ever  since'the  Revolution  ;  a  most  convenient  circumstance 
for  conveyancers,  as  it  allows  us  to  suppose  ALL  missing  deeds  to 
have  been  there  recorded,  an  hypothesis  which,  of  course,  cannot 
be  possibly  disproved.  I  nryself  caused  this  deed  to  be  re- 
recorded in  1834  (L.  383,  f.  20).  It  embraced  all  except  a  30- 
feet  lot  at  the  south  end,  being  44  feet  by  635  feet  6  inches.  Across 
the  west  part  of  the  old  rope-walk  was  laid  out  a  lane  10  feet  wide, 
now  well-known  as  Ridgway's  lane.  This  rope-walk,  and  Jenner's 
rope-walk,  which  we  found  in  Buttolph's  pasture,  added  to  those  by 
Pearl,  Pinckney,  and  Poplar  streets,  make  together  14  rope-walks 
in  Boston,  which  were  probably  "  spinning,"  all  at  once,  for  a 
period  of  at  least  sixty  years. 

Mr.  Minot  had  retained  almost  all  the  lots  on  the  east  side  of 
Hancock  street,  being  throughout  about  91  feet  deep,  to  this  old 
rope-walk  on  Ridgeway's  lane.  He  died  in  1732,  and  a  great  di- 
vision was  made  in  1733  among  his  heirs  ;  John  Minot  taking  the 
north  lot,  of  the  moderate  size  of  217  feet  on  Hancock  street; 
George  took  the  next  lot  of  159  feet  wide  ;  Christopher  contented 
himself  with  only  the  next  85  feet  on  Hancock  street ;  while  Peter 
brought  up  the  rear  with  the  south  lot  of  159  feet.  All  this  long 
range  of  lots  finally  became  vested  in  Jonathan  L.  and  Benjamin 
Austin,  from  whom  the  modern  titles  of  all  the  east  side  of  Han- 
cock street,  north  of  Derne  street,  are  derived ;  and  this  street 
should,  I  think,  have  been  named  for  Scottow,  Wheaton,  Minot,  or 
Austin. 

Mr.  Isaiah  Tay  died,  seized  of  his  two-acre  pasture,  in  1730,  and 
devised  the  same  to  his  wife  ;  but  the  poor  man  forgetting  to  add 
the  word  " heirs"  (probably  from  not  employing  an  attorney),  the 
poor  woman  lost  her  pastures,  and  it  went  to  collateral  heirs  of  her 
husband.  In  1737  partition  deeds  were  made  (L.  54,  f.  235  ;  L. 
55,  f.  80)  by  which  a  30-feet  street  was  laid  out  directty  through 
the  centre  of  the  pasture,  leaving  on  each  side  lots  52£  feet  deep. 
This  street  is  now  Temple  street.  About  half  of  the  land  on  the 
east  side  of  this  street  (say  330  feet  deep  from  Cambridge  street) 
was  subsequently  bought  by  Joseph  Coolidge,  Esq.,  and  formed 
part  of  the  garden  of  his  noble  mansion-house  estate,  which,  alas  ! 


48  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

has  forever  disappeared.  Having  now  got  into  some  of  the  best 
society  in  Boston,  I  like  my  quarters  so  well  that  I  think  I  shall 
stop  and  pass  the  night.  I  ma}r,  perhaps,  hereafter  advise  you  of 
my  further  journey  to  the  eastward. 

GLEANEB. 

P.S.  —  As  the  city  fathers  eagerly  listen  to 'all  proposals  for 
changing  the  names  of  streets,  I  beg  leave  to  ask  that  Temple 
street  should  be  changed  to  Tay  street.  A  temple  is  a  heathen 
building,  which  only  by  poetic  license  is  applied  to  a  Christian 
church.  The  present  name  was  given  to  this  street  before  it  had 
any  church  in  it  —  or  as  a  mere  matter  of  taste  and  fane}'.12  Now,  as 
the  law  prevented  Mr.  Tay  from  separating  this  estate  from  his 
family  and  name,  it  ought,  at  least,  not  to  separate  his  name  from 
the  estate.  Tay  is  a  word  so  short  that  it  will  not  probably  be 
Jthought  necessary  (as  in  so  many  other  cases)  to  strike  out  a 
letter.  Though  if  that  should  be  thought  desirable,  the  y  might  of 
course  be  omitted.  The  word  itself  is  extremely  musical.  It  occurs 
in  the  poet's  lay,  and  rhymes  can  easily  be  found  for  it  through  all 
the  letters  of  the  alphabet.  The  only  objection  that  occurs  to  me 
is,  that  to  our  Hibernian  fellow-citizens  it  may  suggest  merely  a 
well-known  beverage,  instead  of  the  ancient  legal  martyr,  whose 
fate  I  wish  thus  to  commemorate.  G. 


XXIII. 

BULFINCH'S  FOUR-ACRE  PASTURE. 
Augutt  11,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  You  will  remember  that  I  was  last  in  Middle- 
cott  or  Bowdoin  street,  having  entered  Mr.  Coolidge's  garden  from 
Temple  street.  He  purchased  the  northerly  lots  on  the  west  side 

12  Surely  Mr.  Bowditch  must  have  forgotten  that  Gov.  Bowdoin's  daughter  married 
Sir  John  Temple,  bart.,  whose  daughter  married  Lt.-Gov.  Thomas  Lindall  Winthrop. 
Temple  was  a  Bostonian  by  adoption  at  least,  his  father  and  grandfather  having  lived 
at  the  Ten  Hills  Farm,  and  was  one  of  our  most  noted  citizens.  Doubtles  this  was  the 
true  source  of  the  name  of  the  street.  In  this  connection  I  may  add  the  wish  that  Mr. 
Bowditch  had  lived  to  protest  against  the  change  of  the  name  of  "  Lindall  street," 
which  commemorated  a  famous  family  here,  to  the  unmeaning  and  misleading  title  of 
"  Exchange  place,"  in  1873.  For  140  years  Lindall's  lane  or  street  was  known.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  49 

of  Bowdoin  street,  1791,  1795,  and  1825,  which  gave  his  estate  a 
total  front  on  that  street  of  368  feet  3  inches.  This  house  and  gar- 
den was  altogether  one  of  the  most  beautiful  residences  which  have 
existed  in  our  city  within  my  memory.  It  was  laid  out  into  lots 
in  1834,  and  no  less  than  28  dwellings  were  erected  on  it ;  while  a 
large  parcel  of  nearly  5,000  feet,  with  a  fine  old  tree  upon  it,  was 
purchased  and  retained  by  the  late  Dr.  Shattuck,  for  air,  light,  and 
ornament,  for  the  benefit  of  his  estate  on  the  opposite  side  of  Cam- 
bridge street.  This  also  has  just  been  covered  with  bricks  and 
mortar.  The  Middlecott  estate  extended  back  from  Cambridge 
street  about  166  feet  south  of  Allston  street,  that  street  (which  was 
formerly  known  as  Somerset  place),  and  also  Bulfinch  place,  30 
feet  wide,  having  been  both  opened  into  Bowdoin  street,  through 
this  pasture,  and  thence  extended  easterly  into  Bulfinch  street. 

This  leads  us  naturally  to  visit  Bulfinch's  pasture.  It  seems  to 
have  been  estimated  as  containing  four  acres.  It  measured  north 
on  Cambridge  street  148J-  feet,  on  the  west  side  874  feet,  in  the 
rear  74£  feet,  then  easterly  118  feet,  and  again  south  23  feet,  and 
then  east  again  673  feet  to  Cambridge  street.  It  was  devised  in 
1665  by  John  Newgate  to  his  son-in-law,  Simon  Lynde  [Lynde 
is  named  as  east  abutter  in  the  deed  of  Middlecott's  pasture] ,  and 
as  earty  as  1687  was  vested  in  his  son,  Samuel  Lynde.  Rather 
more  than  100  years  ago  it  became  the  property  of  Thomas  Bul- 
finch. It  remained  in  his  family  nearly  50  years,  being  finally  dis- 
posed of  in  1796-1797. 

The  Revere  House  estate,  117  feet  on  Cambridge  street,  184  feet 
on  the  west  line,  and  140  feet  on  Bulfinch  street,  was  sold  for  the 
moderate  sum  of  $7,000  in  1797,  and  for  many  years  was  the 
well-known  and  beautiful  mansion-house  of  the  late  Kirk  Boott, 
partner  of  the  late  William  Pratt,  under  the  firm  of  Boott  &  Pratt. 
It  is  rather  remarkable  that  the  private  residences  of  both  have  ex- 
panded into  hotels,  —  the  latter  having  lived  in  the  Pearl-street 
House.  Mr.  Boott's  mansion  had  a  more  venerable-looking  ex- 
terior than  its  age  justified,  it  having  been  originally  built  with 
brick  soaked  in  a  preparation  of  molasses,  with  the  design  of  ex- 
cluding the  moisture  more  effectually.  When  erected,  Bowdoin 
square  was  the  very  centre  and  nucleus  of  aristocracy  and  fashion. 
Mr.  Boott,  indeed,  had  the  offer  of  land  in  Beacon  street,  at  a  far 
less  price  per  foot  than  he  paid  for  this  estate.  Here  resided  the 
late  Mr.  Lyman  (on  the  Baptist  church  lot),  the  late  Joseph 
Coolidge,  Jr.  (where  stores  are  now  about  to  be  built),  the  late 
Samuel  Parkman,  and  various  members  of  his  family,  including  his 


50  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

daughters,  the  late  Mrs.  Edward  Blake  and  the  late  Mrs.  Robert 
G.  Shaw,  for  whom  were  erected  the  two  stone  houses  fronting 
easterly  on  Bowdoin  square.  Though  the  glory  of  this  locality  has 
now  departed,  as  far  as  respects  its  private  splendors,  }*et  to  the 
public  these  are  more  than  replaced  by  a  hotel,  which,  in  its  ac- 
commodations and  management  has  no  superior  in  the  United 
States,  or  perhaps  in  the  world.  As  you,  yourself,  however,  live 
there,  it  is  superfluous  for  me  to  enlarge  on  the  ability  and  the 
courtesy  of  Paran  Stevens.  May  his  receipts  never  be  less  ! 

GLEANER. 

P.S.  —  As  in  duty  bound  we  first  paid  our  respects  together  to 
Mr.  Blackstone,  and  ate  some  of  his  apples.  We  then  strolled 
through  a  couple  of  bury  ing-grounds,  and  looked  into  two  or  three 
churches,  half-a-dozen  bakeries,  and  about  sixteen  rope-walks.  We 
also  walked  from  Castle  street  beyond  the  green  store  on  the  Neck, 
to  see  a  hanging.  We  have  inspected  the  hogs  in  Hog  alley,  the 
cows  on  the  Common,  the  —  I  was  on  the  point  of  writing  —  but 
I  mean  the  mayor,  in  the  City  Hall.  We  went  on  a  sailing  party 
from  the  "  Circular  Line,"  and  landed  on  "  island  wharves,"  built 
by  the  hand  of  man  "  to  traverse  guns  upon,"  where,  however,  we 
found  more  salt  than  saltpeter.  We  have  even  ascended  into  the  air 
to  visit  an  estate  or  two.  But  our  chief  excursion,  now  completed, 
has  been  from  Bowdoin  square,  down  one  side  of  Cambridge  street, 
and  back  again  on  the  other  side  of  the  street  to  the  point  of 
departure.  This  we  have  made  rather  leisurely,  stopping  to  chat 
with  the  neighbors  as  we  went  along.  I  have  not  myself  thus  far 
picked  up  much  in  these  wanderings,  though  I  will  inform  you,  in 
confidence,  that  I  have  received  an  anonymous  promise  of  some  of 
"  Mollie  Saunders'  gingerbread."  If  it  comes,  I  shall  indeed  feel 
that  I  have  "  gleaned"  to  some  purpose.  In  the  meantime  I  dare 
say  that  I  can  get  something  almost  as  nice  at  the  "  Revere." 

G. 


XXIV. 

MOLLY   SAUNDERS'   GINGERBREAD. 

August  13,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  In  my  postscript  to  "  Bulfinch's  Pasture,"  I  sug- 
gested a  vague  hope  of  receiving  some  of  "  Molly  Saunders'  gin- 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  51 

gerbread."  That  hope  has  been  fully  realized.  I  have  just  got  a 
loud  note  from  the  old  lady.  It  is  signed  "  Shade  of  Molly  Saund- 
ers."  But  though  thus  obviously  coming  from  the  spirit  land,  it 
was  accompanied  by  a  basket  filled  with  the  "  real  article,"  —  pre- 
cisely as  I  used  to  eat  40  years  ago.  Of  this  there  can  be  no  pos- 
sible mistake.  Here,  then,  at  least,  is  a  "  spirit  communication  " 
which  cannot  be  explained  away.  It  is  most  palpable  alike  to  sight, 
touch,  and  taste.  As  you  were  the  "  medium  "  through  whom  this 
departed  shade  was  apostrophized  by  me,  a  few  cakes  are  sent  to 
you  in  acknowledgment  of  your  services  in  that  capacity.  If  our 
deceased  friend  could  be  further  persuaded  to  u  impress"  you  and 
your  readers  with  the  receipt  which  she  used  while  on  earth,  what 
an  inestimable  blessing  would  be  thus  conferred  on  mankind ! 

GLEANER. 

P.S.  — It  appears  that  the  old  lady  had  to  return  here  to  do  the 
baking,  —  and  in  her  note  to  me  she  says,  very  feelingly,  "  I  could 
not  make  it  look  just  as  it  used  to,  for  there  is  no  wood  and  no 
ovens  to  be  seen  on  airth  now.  I  wouldn't  live  here  again  for 
nothing." 


XXV. 

SOUTHACK'S    TWO-ACRE    PASTURE   AND    TANYARD. 

August  14,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  On  Satdrday  last,  I  was  left  at  the  Revere,  tak- 
ing some  refreshment,  after  our  various  excursions ;  and  then,  after 
eating  a  little  "  gingerbread,"  I  started  off  with  renewed  strength 
and  spirits.  Having  previously  visited  some  other  of  our  city 
churches,  I  thought  I  would  now  look  in  upon  one  which  stands  on 
almost  the  extreme  south  end  of  Bulfinch's  pasture  (as  the  Revere 
does  at  its  north  end).  This  pasture  extended  a  few  feet  south  of 
the  south  side  of  Ashburton  place,  so  that  it  includes  the  whole 
front  of  the  houses  of  W.  T.  Andrews  and  J.  M.  Beebe,  to  the 
average  depth  of  14  feet.  The  east  line  of  the  Mt.  Vernon  Con- 
gregational Church  estate  coincides  exactly  with  the  east  line  of 
this  pasture,  but  on  the  west  a  small  purchase  was  made  from  the 
Bowdoin  estate.  There  are  few  more  eloquent  preachers  than  the 
Rev.  Edward  N.  Kirk,  and  he  is  duly  appreciated  by  a  numerous 


52  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

and  attentive  congregation.  In  the  summer  season,  so  many  of  our 
citizens,  especially  as  it  happens  among  the  Unitarian  and  Epis- 
copal societies,  retire  into  the  county,  that  the  churches  of  those 
denominations,  if  opened  at  all,  present  a  clear  case  of  only  "two 
or  three  gathered  together."  Thus,  out  of  148  families  belonging 
to  King's  Chapel,  all  are  BOW  absent  except  12.  But  it  is  far 
otherwise  with  Dr.  Kirk's  society.  Bulfinch's  pasture  is  truly 
admirably  represented  at  both  ends.  It  makes  adequate  provision 
alike  for  physical  and  spiritual  wants. 

This  pasture,  as  we  have  seen,  after  extending  northerly  118 
feet,  made  a  jog  outwards  of  23  feet.  Both  these  lines  were  on 
the  estate  of  Cotton  or  Sewall,  since  of  the  late  Gardiner  Greene, 
who  owned  through  to  Tremont  street  a  tract  of  land  embracing 
the  largest  part  of  Pemberton  square.  Proceeding  again  northerly, 
the  east  line  of  Bulfinch's  pasture  is  on  land  of  Cyprian  Southack, 
or  more  recently,  of  John  Bowers,  of  Somerset.  According^,  we 
find  that  Howard  street  was  anciently  named  Southack's  court,  for 
the  former,  and  Somerset  street  was  so  named  by  the  latter. 

This  estate  (next  east  of  Bulfinch's  pasture)  contained  two 
acres.  In  the  "  Book  of  Possessions  "  is  Edward  Bendall,  p.  53, 
another  house  and  garden,  together  with  two  acres  of  land  adjoin- 
ing, bounded  on  Sudbury  street  (i.e.,  Tremont  street)  east ;  Robert 
Hears  north ;  John  Cotton  south  and  west.  Bendall  sells  to 
David  Yeale,  1645  (Suffolk,  L.  2,  f.  48),  whose  attorneys  convey  to 
the  use  of  Capt.  John  Wall,  1653  (ib.)  He  died  1670,  and  his 
heirs,  in  1678,  convey  to  Edward  Shippen  (Suffolk,  L.  11,  f.  195;. 
Shippen  sells  off  to  Benj.  Fitch,  1702  (L.  38,  f.  56)  a  certain  tan- 
yard  and  land,  bounded  north  on  the  highway  leading  to  the  Bowl- 
ing Green  (i.e.,  Court  street)  48  feet  by  156  feet  deep.  He  sells 
to  Andrew  Mariner  the  next  westerly  lot,  48  feet  on  said  street, 
1691  (15,  f.  167),  and  in  1702  sells  all  the  residue  to  Cyprian 
Southack  (Suffolk,  Lib.  21,  f.  14)  :  "  All  that  messuage,  contain- 
ing two  acres,  more  or  less,  bounded  on  Sudbury  street  (i.e.,  Tre- 
mont street)  east ;  on  land  now  or  late  of  Sewall,  south ;  on  land 
now  or  late  of  Samuel  Lynde  (i.e.,  Bulfinch's  pasture)  west ;  and 
north  on  the  way  leading  by  the  south  side  of  the  Bowling  Green  ; 
excepting  therefrom  the  lots  sold  Mariner  and  the  tam^ard  in  the 
occupation  of  Russell."  Southack  sells  off  to  Jonathan  Armitage, 
1718  (Suffolk,  33,  f.  51),  the  remaining  or  westerly  lot,  74  feet  on 
Court  street  by  200  feet  on  the  west  line,  so  that  this  pasture 
measured  170  feet  on  Court  street ;  and  he  granted  him  a  right  in 
a  new  highway,  27  feet  wide,  laid  out  south  of  these  lots,  1720 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  53 

(Suffolk,  L.  35,  f.  61 ) .  This  was  Howard  street.  Southack's  pasture, 
south  of  Howard  street,  was  of  an  L  shape,  bounded  north  on  that 
street  141  feet,  west  on  Bulfinch's  pasture  440  feet,  south  on  Cotton 
or  Sewall  about  614  feet,  east  on  Tremont  row  103.3,  then  north 
on  Robert  Mears'  possession,  and  east  on  other  lands.  Various 
changes  of  these  boundaries  were  subsequently  made.  John 
Bowers  bought,  1799-1800,  a  tract  extending  about  62  feet  west 
of  Somerset  street,  and  147  feet  east  of  it ;  and  a  large  portion, 
therefore,  of  his  lands  was  wholly  east  of  Southack's  pasture. 

The  most  easterly  of  Bowers'  lots  was  the  Howard  Athenaeum. 
The  rear  wall  of  that  estate  is  an  embankment  of  at  least  40  feet 
in  height,  showing  the  difference  of  level  between  it  and  the  north 
estates  on  Pemberton  square.  The  lots  on  both  sides  of  Somerset 
street,  from  Howard  street  to  the  range  of  the  north  line  of  the 
estates  on  the  north  side  of  Ashburton  place,  are  held  under  deeds 
from  Bowers.  On  the  east  side  of  this  street  stands  a  block  of  two 
houses,  built  by  Ebenezer  Francis,  Esq.  (to  which  a  third  has 
been  lately  added).  The  northerly  of  these  houses  belongs  to 
Dr.  Charles  T.  Jackson,  who  recently  received  from  the  Sultan 
a  decoration  for  the  ether  discovery.  [It  would  seem  that  the 
Sultan  had  not  heard  of  one  Dr.  Morton,  whose  office  is  in  Tremont 
row.] 

The  southerly  house  in  this  block  has  also  had  some  distinguished 
tenants.  It  was  first  occupied  by  the  late  Uriah  Getting,  who,  in 
the  construction  of  India  wharf  and  Central  wharf,  Broad  street 
and  Cornhill,  etc.,  etc.,  and  especially  by  the  stupendous  enterprise 
of  the  Mildam  or  Western  avenue,  evinced  an  almost  incredible 
genius,  activity,  and  energy.  His  services,  indeed,  seem  to  be  for- 
gotten by  the  present  generation.  His  very  name  is  scarcely  pre- 
served except  by  his  tombstone  in  the  Granary  Burying-Ground. 
But  our  local  historians,  through  coming  ages,  as  the  future  shall 
more  and  more  develop  the  results  of  his  improvements,  will  grate- 
fully recognize  his  claims  as  the  Chief  Benefactor  of  Boston.  Sub- 
sequently to  his  death  this  house  was  occupied  by  our  fellow- 
citizen  William  Ropes,  a  distinguished  Russia  merchant  whose 
vigorous  old  age  still  shames  the  degenerate  manhood  of  man}T  who 
are  half  a  century  younger  than  himself.13 

Daniel  Webster  became  its  tenant  while  he  was  in  the  full  maturity 
of  his  glorious  powers,  before  disappointment  had  darkened  around 
him,  and  before  he  had  ever  uttered  a  word  or  done  an  act  as  a 

18  William  Rojjes  died  March  11, 1869.  —  W. 


54  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

statesman  which  any  of  those  hearts  that  most  honored  him  could 
have  wished  unsaid  or  undone.  Having  been  one  of  his  warmest 
admirers,  I  will  not  say  more  than  this  of  the  dead;  yet,  believing 
that  but  for  him  the  fugitive  slave  law  —  that  accursed  torch  of 
civil  dissension  !  —  would  not  now  be  throwing  its  lurid  glare  abroad 
through  our  land  ;  I  cannot  say  less.  Abbott  Lawrence  next  occu- 
pied this  mansion,  one  whose  entire  career,  both  public  and 
private,  has  reflected  so  much  honor  on  our  city,  our  country,  and 
our  age  ;  and  whose  precarious  health,  at  this  very  moment,  awakens 
such  intense  solicitude  among  ourselves,  and  has  brought  back  echoes 
of  regret  from  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic.14 

The  Rev.  Ephraim  Peabody,  of  the  King's  Chapel,  one  of  the 
most  estimable  and  popular  of  our  city  clergymen,  for  several 
years  resided  here,  and  between  these  two  last  occupants  came 
your  humble  servant.  It  was  the  home  of  all  the  early  years  of  my 
married  life,  the  spot  where  all  my  professional  "  gleanings"  were 
used  up  in  "  family  expenses."  I  have  always  felt  proud  of  having 
made  one  in  so  goodly  a  company.  But  I  trust  that  I  have  ever 
cherished  a  proper  humility.  Some  years  since  the  late  Sheriff 
Sumner,  father  of  our  distinguished  senator,  delivered  a  lecture  on 
the  duties  of  "  Sheriff."  He  remarked  that  in  England  the  holder 
of  that  office  was  entitled  to  the  appellation  of  "  High  ;  "  "  but," 
added  he,  demurely  making  a  meek  bow  to  his  audience,  and 
placing  his  hand  on  his  heart,  "  it  is  not  so  in  this  country,  and, 
in  one  instance  at  least,  that  title  of  honor  is  entirely  declined."  I 
would  withdraw  in  an  equally  modest  manner  on  the  present  occa- 
sion. GLEANER. 


XXVI. 

REMINISCENCES  OF  SOMERSET  STREET. 

August  15,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Having  finished  my  call  at  my  own  domicile,  we 
will  look  in  for  a  moment  at  the  next  door.  One  of  the  lots  of  the 
Bowers'  estate,  on  which  stand  three  new  brick  dwellings,  directly 
opposite  the  east  end  of  Allston  street,  measured  80  feet  on  Somer- 
set street,  and  extended  back  over  215  feet  on  the  south  line.  It 

14  Abbott  Lawrence  died  August  18,  1865.  —  W. 


"GLEANER"   ARTICLES.  55 

was  about  thirty  years  the  residence  of  Ebenezer  Francis,  who 
also  purchased  the  adjoining  mansion  house  of  the  late  James 
Lloyd,  south  of  it.  On  the  rear  of  these  lands  (with  some  changes 
of  boundar}^  lines),  stand  his  present  mansion  house  at  the  north 
end  of  Pemberton  square,  and  the  two  next  houses  on  its  west 
side.  With  the  exception  of  these  three  estates,  all  the  lots  in  that 
square,  and  also  all  l>ack  of  the  same  from  Tremont  row  to  Somer- 
set street,  are  held  under  deeds  of  Patrick  T.  Jackson.  On  Mr. 
Francis'  old  mansion-house  estate,  at  the  corner  corresponding 
with  part  of  No.  10  Pemberton  square,  now  occupied  by  R.  M. 
Mason,  Esq.,  stood  a  summer-house,  on  the  very  apex  of  the  hill, 
seventy  feet  above  even  its  present  high  level.  The  prospect  from 
this  building  was  one  of  very  great  extent,  and  of  the  most  varied 
beauty.  Charlestown,  and  many  an  inland  town  besides,  were  in 
full  view  towards  the  north  and  west,  while  in  front  lay  spread 
out  before  the  spectator  the  thronged  streets  of  the  city,  the  masts 
of  its  shipping,  the  harbor  dotted  with  its  graceful  islands,  and 
beyond,  in  the  extreme  distance,  might  be  seen  Nahant,  etc. 

Mr.  Webster,  while  tenant  of  the  adjoining  estate,  from  time  to 
time  came  here  to  gaze  on  this  magnificent  panorama.15  On  one 
occasion  he  had  some  friends  at  dinner,  and  was  desirous  that 
they  should  participate  in  this  pleasure.  Accordingly,  the  little 
gate  was  opened  (the  erection  of  which  had  been  permitted  for 
these  visits)  and  a  procession  appeared,  headed  by  a  servant  bear- 
ing a  waiter  with  refreshments,  and  followed  by  Mr.  Webster  and 
his  guests.  It  so  happened  that  on  that  day  a  feather  bed  had 
been  taken  to  the  summer-house  to  be  opened  and  readjusted, 
and  the  process  being  in  full  operation  at  noon,  the  building  had 
been  left  by  the  servants.  It  was,  of  course,  now  found  to  be  pre- 
viously occupied  by  an  assemblage  of  feathers,  which,  aided  by  a  high 
wind,  at  once  flew  out  to  welcome  their  visitors.  This  unexpected 
reception  was  a  source  of  much  merriment.  Chairs  and  a  table 
were  placed  in  the  open  air,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  both  host 
and  guests  found  new  inspiration  from  the  beauties  of  this  glorious 
dining-room. 

To  those  who  remember  these  estates  as  they  then  stood,  the 

IB  It  may  be  well  to  note  here,  that  I  possess  a  large  painting  by  Salmon,  represent- 
ing this  view,  executed  early  in  the  present  century.  The  stand-point  is  apparently  on 
Sandy  Hill,  about  on  the  line  where  Ashburton  place  now  is,  and  in  the  immediate  fore- 
ground is  a  summer-house  which  I  presume  was  the  one  mentioned  in  the  text.  An 
engraving  will  be  given  in  the  Memorial  "  History  of  Boston,"  soon  to  be  issued  by  J. 
E.  Osgood  &  Co.  W. 


56  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

present  neat  and  elegant  buildings,  and  the  quiet  square  which  they 
surround,  seem  but  a  poor  and  paltry  substitute.  The  excavations 
made  throughout  this  purchase  by  Mr.  Jackson  and  his  associates 
were  absolutely  frightful.  The  estate  of  Mr.  Francis,  towering  up 
to  such  a  height  next  to  them,  of  course,  could  not  but  greatly  en- 
danger any  buildings  which  might  be  erected  beneath  it ;  and, 
indeed,  it  could  not  itself  any  longer  be  used. with  safety.  So  the 
summer-house  passed  away. 

When  I  was  in  college  I  had  petitioned  at  the  close  of  my  junior 
year  for  a  room  in  Holworthy,  instead  of  which  I  obtained  one 
directly  opposite  to  that  which  I  already  occupied.  I  was  quizzed 
by  a  classmate,  who  suggested,  as  a  consolation,  the  ease  with 
which  one  of  the  "goodies"  could  remove  my  effects  across  the 
entry.  An  almost  equalty  short  and  easy  removal  awaited  me  in 
after  years  as  a  householder.  Since  on  ceasing  to  occupy  the  man- 
sion of  "glorious  antecedents"  in  Somerset  street,  I  was  trans- 
ferred to,  and  still  remain  a  tenant- at- will,  of  one  of  the  new  domi- 
ciles under  or  nearly  under  that  ancient  summer-house. 

GLEANER. 


XXVII. 

ANCIENT  AND  MODERN  LAW. 
August  16,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  The  lower  portion  of  Southack's  pasture  was 
known  as  Valley  acre.  Thus  a  deed  of  the  Cotton,  or  Greene 
estate,  after  bounding  north  311  feet  back  from  Tremont  street 
continues  the  line  295  feet  further  on  the  land  formerly  of  Cyprian 
Southack,  now  of  Mr.  John  Tyng,  or  Valley  acre,  A.D.  1758  (Suff., 
92,  f.  52).  Mr.  Drake  somewhere  speaks  of  Valley  acre  as  iden- 
tical with  or  part  of  Pemberton  square,  which  is  like  speaking  of 
Mt.  Tom  or  Mt.  Washington  as  a  valley.  The  lots  of  Mr.  Bowers 
were  probably  measured  by  a  line  along  the  rising  surface  of 
Somerset  street,  and,  of  course,  fell  short.  A  suit  arose  for  a  gore 
of  land  under  a  deed  which  went  100  feet  from  Howard  street  "  till 
it  comes  to  the  wall  of  a  brick  stable."  The  case  was  opened  by 
Rufus  G.  Amory,  Esq.,  for  demandant.  Chief  Justice  Parsons 
said,  "Is  the  land  sued  for  beyond  the  stable?"  —  "Yes,  your 
Honor." — "  Well,  then,  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  you  must  bring  in 


"GLEANER"   ARTICLES.  57 

3'our  verdict  for  the  tenant." —  "  But,  Your  Honor,  I  wish  to  argue 
the  point."  —  "I  cannot  hear  any  argument ;  monuments  govern 
measurements.  Call  the  next  jury." 

The  same  principle,  thus  promptly  announced,  has  just  been  ap- 
plied to  another  estate  which  happened  to  belong  to  the  same  party. 
But  there  is  a  marked  difference  between  the  two  decisions.  This 
last  case  (u  Curtis  vs.  Francis")  was  in  court  from  1839  to  1855, 
and  the  point  decided  is,  that  under  the  rule  o/u  monuments  govern* 
ing  measurements"  a  straight  line  in  a  deed  may  be  broken  off  in  the 
middle  and  one  part  detached  from  the  other,  even  to  the  distance  of 
40  feet,  said  detached  part  thence  to  continue  in  a  direction  vary- 
ing 15  degrees  from  the  course  at  the  commencement.  The  line  in 
Curtis  vs.  Francis  began  on  Sea  street,  "  at  the  south-west  corner 
of  Capen  &  Drake's  wharf,  and  from  said  corner  running  in  a 
direction  of  about,  south,  60  degrees  east,  bounded  north  on  Capen 
&  Drake's  wharf  and  flats  to  the  channel  or  low-water  mark." 

Now,  to  common  apprehension,  this  seems  to  be  one  continuous 
line  from  street  to  channel.  And  in  a  previous  case  (Dawes  vs. 
Prentice),  where  the  language  was  from  Purchase  street  to  the 
capsill  of  the  wharf,  about  114  feet,  and  from  thence  to  run  down 
to  low-water  mark,"  the  Court  say,  "  There  is  no  change  of  course 
indicated,  and  the  construction  must  be  that  the  line  below  the  wharf 
is  to  run  the  same  course  as  the  line  of  the  wharf."  And  here  again, 
to  common  apprehension,  seems  a  decision  perfectly  in  accordance 
with  the  natural  construction  which  first  suggests  itself  to  the 
reader's  mind.  The  Court,  however,  in  Curtis  and  Francis,  in 
effect  say,  "  It  is  true  that  Drake's  wharf  is  a  monument  as  far  as 
it  goes,  but  then  Drake's  flats  become  a  monument,  and  it  appears 
to  us  that  Drake  and  his  neighbor  mistook  their  lines  of  flats, 
though  the  deed  in  question,  therefore,  shall  be  deemed  to  convey 
a  gore  of  flats,  which  we  really  think  belonged  to  Drake,  outside 
of  his  wharf;  because  the  deed  runs  by  the  wharf;  yet,  when  the 
wharf  ends,  the  line  shall  be  deemed  to  hop  off  to  what  we  consider 
the  true  line  of  Drake's  flats,  and  thence  run  by  that  monument  to 
the  channel.  These  ancient  grantors  and  grantees  would,  I  think, 
be  ver}r  much  surprised  if  the}7  knew  that  their  one  straight  line 
had  been  thus  transformed,  and  this,  too,  by  the  application  of  one 
of  the  soundest  rules  of  judicial  construction.  It  would,  almost, 
seem  that,  while  the  first  case  was  decided  rightly  in  fifteen  minutes, 
the  last  one  has  been  decided  wrongly  in  fifteen  years. 

GLEANER. 


58  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


XXVIII. 

THE  SPRING  HOUSE. 

August  77,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  At  the  last  advices  I  had  fallen  into  some  tan 
vats  which  I  found  on  Court  street,  122  feet  east  of  Bulfinch  street, 
and  which  extended  48  feet  on  that  street.  Escaping  without  any 
serious  injury,  I  rearranged  my  toilette  in  some  small  lots  of  about 
137  feet  on  Court  street,  and  from  50  to  60  feet  deep,  reaching  to 
Stoddard's  lane  or  street.  All  the  lands  east  and  south  of  this 
range  of  lots  (extending  to  Tremont  row,  and  on  both  sides  of 
Howard  street)  became,  in  very  early  times,  united  in  Simon 
Lynde,  who  thus  unexpectedly  turns  up  again.  The  extreme  cor- 
ner of  Tremont  row  and  Court  street  was  bought  by  him  of 
Thomas  Boyden  and  Hannah,  his  wife,  in  1662  (Suffolk,  L.  4,  f.  61) , 
bounded  on  said  Lynde  south,  on  Sudbury  lane  east  and  north. 
Now,  Robert  Howen  was  an  original  possessor,  and  we  find  deeds 
of  John  and  Israel  Howen  to  said  Lynde,  1662, 1663  (Suff.,  L.  4,  f.  71 
and  141),  conveying  two-thirds  and  one-third  of  "all  that  land 
and  ground  late  of  my  mother,  Elizabeth  Howen,  containing  half 
an  acre,  bounded  with  Robert  Hears  south,  and  some  part  of  it 
with  the  street  (i.e.,  Tremont  street)  easterly  and  eastwardly,  north 
and  west  with  the  house  where  said  Simon  now  dwelleth,  also  a 
corner  bounded  west  with  the  land  in  occupation  of  Governor  Endi- 
cott."  We  thus  learn  where  to  call  on  his  excellency. 

Lynde  died  in  1687,  and  we  find  a  deed  of  Nathaniel  Newgate, 
or  Newdigate,  and  Sarah,  his  wife  (a  daughter  of  said  Lj'nde),  con- 
veying, in  1694,  this  corner  estate  as  messuage  known  by  the 
name  of  "  The  Spring  House."  So  that  The  Spring  Hotel,  at 
Watertown,  had  an  ancient  predecessor  in  Boston.  Hannah,  the 
only  daughter  of  Mrs.  Pordage,16  married  James  Bowdoin,  and  in 
1748  an  indenture  was  made  to  bar  an  entail  of  the  part  of  said 
lands  south  of  Howard  street,  and  east  of  Southack's  pasture  [i.e., 
from  the  centre  of  Somerset  street  to  Tremont  street].  It  is  from 

is  George  Portage,  or  Pordage,  married  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Simon  Lynde,  who  was 
thus  an  heir  to  part  of  the  estate.  Their  daughter  Hannah  married  James  Bowdoin, 
8enr.,  father  of  Goy.  B.  W. 


w  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  59 

this  source  that  Bowers  got  his  title  to  the  Howard  Athenaeum 
lot,  etc. 

The  large  estate  east  of  the  Howard  Athenaeum,  measuring  154 
feet  on  Howard  street,  and  74  feet  onTremont  street,  was,  in  1779, 
contracted  to  be  conveyed  to  Ellis  Gray,  who  died  (see  Suffolk, 
L.  148,  f.  52)  and  became  the  property  of  Theodore  Lyman,  Senior, 
in  1785  (L.  154,  fol.  121).  This  lot  was  designed  to  have  been 
used  by  the  Brattle  Street  Society  for  their  church ;  but  by  the 
present  of  a  bell,  Governor  Hancock  induced  them  to  rebuild  on  the 
old  site.  The  brick  block  on  Tremont  street  presents  now  a  very  dif- 
ferent aspect  from  the  beautiful  green  jrard  or  lawn  which  originally 
extended  in  front  of  Mr.  Lyman's  mansion.  Next  south  of  this 
comes  a  lot  85  feet  on  Tremont  street  (by  284  feet  6  inches  on  the 
south  line),  which  is  held  under  the  possession  of  Robert  Mears. 
Mr.  Mears  died  1667,  devising  his  land  u  as  adjoining  to  the 
grounds  of  the  late  Governor  Endicott."  Part  of  these  lands,  in 
1709,  gets  into  one  John  Staniford  (Suffolk,  L.  24,  f.  146,  226) 
[who,  it  appears,  was  not  contented  with  the  six  acres  he  had 
bought  from  Bowdoin  square  to  Chambers  street.]  He  sells  to 
the  Rev.  Henry  Harris,  1763  (Suffolk,  L.  37,  f.  92),  whose  executors 
sell,  in  1734,  to  James  Pemberton  (L.  48,  f.  299),  in  whose  family 
the  same  remained  for  half  a  century,  and  whose  name  now 
flourishes  in  Pemberton  square.  Another  part  of  Mears'  lands  is 
traced  through  Hodges,  Ellis  Gray,  Colman,  etc.,  to  Dr.  Samuel 
Danforth,  1785  (Suff.,  L.  154,  f.  136). 

We  have  seen  that  Southack's  pasture  came  out  on  Tremont  row, 
with  a  front  of  103  feet  3,  next  south  of  Robert  Meares.  This 
front  part,  313  feet  deep  on  Cotton  or  Sewall,17  he  sold  off  to  John 
Jekyll  in  1724  (L.  38,  f.  98),  and  by  deed  of  Jekyll's  heirs  it 
became  vested  in  Dr.  James  Lloyd  by  deed  in  1768  (L.  114,  f.  137), 
which  volume  being  now  lost,  it  was  again  recorded  in  1827 
(L.  315,  f.  273).  Having  thus  called  upon  all  his  neighbors,  the 
Rev.  John  Cotton,  the  spiritual  father  of  Boston,  will  have  reason 
to  feel  hurt  if  we  do  not  pay  him  an  early  visit. 

GLEANER. 


"  At  this  point  Mr.  Bowditch  brings  the  titles  of  the  northerly  half  of  the  hill  in 
contact  with  those  traced  on  the  southerly  part.  The  Cotton  or  Sewall  lot  is  traced  in 
a  subsequent  article  to  this  point.  When  SewalFs  property  was  sold  by  his  heirs  to 
William  Vassall,  in  1758  (Suff.,  Lib.  92,  f.  52),  the  lines  were  north  on  the  heirs  of 
John  Jekyll  311  feet,  and  of  Capt.  Cyprian  Southac  (then  John  Tyng),  on  Valley 
Achor  295  feet,  and  heirs  of  Bulfinch  20  feet,  the  whole  line  from  Treamount  street  up 
to  and  across  Valley  Achor  being  626  feet,  eto.  W. 


60  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


XXIX. 

"  VALLEY    ACRE." 

August  18,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  My  attention  has  been  called  to  an  article  *  in 
the  "  Transcript,"  of  yesterday,  signed  "  Valley  Acre."  Thatname  of 
course  indicates  a  region  at  the  base  of  a  hill.  The  line  of  311 
feet  from  Tremont  street,  mentioned  in  the  deed  to  which  I  refer  as 
locating  it,  extends  several  feet  west  of  the  houses  on  the  west  side  of 
Pemberton  square  —  there  begins  the  295  feet  boundary  on  Valley 
acre.  This  last-mentioned  line  extends  to  a  point  about  20  feet 
east  of  the  church  in  Ashburton  place.  Valley  acre,  therefore, 
embraced  the  lands  on  both  sides  of  Somerset  street,  to  Bulfinch  street, 
etc.,  and  extended  down  the  hill  to  the  low  ground  on  Court  street. 
This  may  not  be  "  far  from  the  present  northern  termination  of  the 
iron  fence  in  Pemberton  square  ; "  but  the  very  definiteness  of  that 
landmark  seems  to  place  Valley  acre  on  the  top  of  the  hill,  in- 
stead of  at  and  near  its  base,  and,  as  I  thought,  justified  my  allusion 
to  a  valley  being  located  on  the  summit  of  Mount  Tom  or  Mount 
Washington.  GLEANER. 

*To  the  Editor  of  the  Transcript: — As  you  are  disposed  to  set  all  little  historical 
matters  right,  I  beg  you  will  request  Mr.  "  Gleaner  "  to  set  his  readers  right  in  respect 
to  what  is  said  in  the  History  and  Antiquities  of  Boston  about  "  Valley  acre."  The 
readers  of  his  article  in  the  "Transcript"  of  to-day  (16th  August)  may  be  disposed,  from 
his  statement,  to  think  that  the  author  of  the  History  has  made  some  important  blunder 
in  locating  the  place  in  question,  while  he  does  not  locate  it  himself.  Now,  if  you  or 
your  readers,  and  "  Gleaner,"  too,  will  turn  to  page  593  of  the  History,  the  following 
definite  statement  will  be  found  respecting  "  Valley  acre:  "  "  Valley  acre,  as  appears 
from  an  early  map  of  the  town,  was  adjacent  to  a  spur  of  Beacon  Hill,  which  extended 
north-easterly  from  the  main  hill,  terminating  abruptly  not  far  from  the  present 
northern  termination  of  the  iron  fence  in  Pemberton  square." 

It  may  be  as  difficult  for  any  one  to  imagine  what  this  can  have  to  do  with  Mount 
Tom  or  Mount  Washington,  as  it  was  for  "  Gleaner  "  to  locate  VALLEY  ACRE. 

[NOTE.    This  was  Mr.  S.  G.  Drake.     W.] 


"GLEANEK"  ARTICLES.  61 


XXX. 

COTTON   HILL. 

August  20,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  — In  the  Book  of  Possessions,  p.  9,  is  "  Mr.  John 
Cotton,  1  house  and  garden  and  about  half  an  acre,  with  an  acre 
adjoining,  bounded  with  Sudbury  streete  (i.e.  Tremont  Row)  east, 
Edward  Bendall  north,  the  Centerie  Hill  west,  Mr.  Bellingham 
and  Daniel  Maud  south."  Bendall  was,  as  we  have  seen,  the 
predecessor  of  Cyprian  Southack.  This  possession  of  an  acre  and 
a  half  in  the  very  heart  of  the  town  was  a  noble  allotment  to  its 
first  citizen  —  one  from  whose  place  of  residence  in  England  our 
city  derives  its  name.  It  does  not  savor  of  the  small  salaries 
sometimes  so  grudgingty  paid  to  their  pastors  by  our  smaller  towns. 
Looking  directly  down  Queen  street,  or  Court  street  (which,  not- 
withstanding its  later  glories,  for  man}'  a  long  year  was  known  as 
Prison  Lane,  from  the  prison  standing  where  the  Court  House 
does  now),  it  rose  to  a  great  height,  forming  a  sort  of  outpost  to 
Beacon  Hill.  It  soon  acquired  the  name  of  Cotton  Hill. 

Mr.  Cotton  died,  and  by  will,  proved  January  27,  1652-3.  he 
says,  "  and  because  the  south  part  of  my  house,  which  Sir  Henry 
Vane  built  whilst  he  sojourned  with  me,  he  by  a  deed  gave  it  at 
his  departure  to  my  son  Seaborne,  I  doe  yrefore  leave  it  unto  him 
as  his  by  right,"  etc.  He  also  speaks  of  his  wife's  u  house  and 
garden  in  the  market-place  in  Boston  in  Lincolnshire."  This  item 
does  not,  however,  come  within  my  present  investigations.  If  his 
wife  and  children  die  without  heirs,  u  or  if  they  shall  transplant 
themselves  fro  hence  into  Old  England,  then  my  will  is,  and  I 
give  the  farm  at  Muddy  River  one  half  to  the  College,  one  half  to 
the  Church." 

It  seems  that  beside  his  son  Seaborne  (quaintly  so  named  from 
his  place  of  birth)  he  left  as  devisees,  Sarah,  wife  of  Richard 
Mather,  Mariah,  wife  of  Increase  Mather,  and  John  Cotton,  who, 
in  1664,  confirmed  this  devise  to  Seaborne  (Suff.  6,  f.  233),  and  he 
sells  this  part  to  John  Hull  (Suffolk  6,  f.  226).  Their  original 
parchment  deed  is  in  my  possession  —  the  recent  gift  of  my  friend 
Hon.  James  Savage.  He  doubtless  thinks,  "good  easy  man"  — 


62  Cixr  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

that  if  I  die  first  it  is  to  revert  to  him,18  but  I  shall  instruct  my  heirs 
to  hold  on.  fln  1677,  Nicholas  Paige  bought  out  the  residue  of  the 
estate  (Suffolk  10,  170  and  108),  bounded  north  in  part  on  Simon 
Lynde  (i.e.  Bulfinch's  Pasture),  and  in  part  on  the  house  and  land 
where  Governor  Endicott  last  dwelt,  and  in  1682  this  also  was 
bought  by  Mr.  Hull  (L.  12,  f.  216).  So  the  mint-master  suc- 
ceeded the  clergyman :  here  being  another  quite  respectable  invest- 
ment of  his  surplus  "  shillings"  before  mentioned.  This  last  deed 
bounds  north  on  Lynde  in  part,  and  in  part  on  "  the  land  of 
Edward  Shippen,  formerly  the  dwelling-place  of  Governor  Endicott" 
Now,  Shippen  was  owner  of  Southack's  two-acre  pasture.  So  we 
have  incidentally  made  sure  of  the  exact  domicile  of  the  governor, 
having,  as  it  were,  "  shot  him  flying." 

Hull  died  1683,  and  the  division  in  1684  embraced  "  the  lands 
in  Boston,  former!}7  Mr.  Cotton's,  at  Cotton  Hill,  commonly  so  called, 
with  all  the  buildings  that  now  [are]  or  shall  be  erected  thereon" 
(L.  13,  f.  92).  By  this  instrument,  the  premises,  after  the  death 
of  Hull's  only  daughter,  Hannah,  wife  of  Samuel  Sewall,  are  set- 
tled on  her  issue. 

Richard  Bellingham's  possession,  p.  5,  is  "  also  a  garden  lot, 
bounded  on  Mr.  John  Cotton  and  Daniel  Maud  north,  the  high- 
way, east  John  Coggan  south."  He  died  1672.  His  only  son 
and  heir,  Samuel,  being  about  to  marry  Elizabeth  Savage,  widow, 
made  a  marriage  settlement  by  deed  to  John  Shelton  and  Edward 
Hull,  1695,  and  said  Elizabeth  appoints  to  said  Samuel  Sewall  in 
1697  (Suff.  14,  f.  439),  "  a  piece  or  parcel  of  land,  being  on  the 
side  of  a  hill  adjoining  to  a  hill  formerly  belonging  to  Mr.  Cotton." 
It  is  described  as  about  half  an  acre,  and  is  bounded  north  on  said 
Sewall,  east  on  said  Sewall,  and  in  part  on  land  belonging  to  the 
First  Church,  etc.  This  I  suppose  to  be  one  of  the  most  venerable 
marriage  settlements  on  our  records. 

Samuel  Sewall  survived  his  wife,  Hannah,  and  died  1729,  and 
under  division  deeds  (L.  45,  f.  183),  the  premises  came  to  his 
daughter  Judith,  wife  of  William  Cooper,  and  after  her  death  were 
conveyed  to  William  Vassal  1758  (L.  91,  f.  76).  In  1790 
.Patrick  Jeffry  became  owner.  He  married  Madam  Haley,  widow 
of  Alderman  Haley  of  London,  and  sister  of  the  celebrated  patriot 
or  demagogue,  John  Wilkes.  A  cabinet  or  secretary,  and  various 
articles  of  plate,  formerly  of  Madam  Haley,  with  the  Wilkes 

18  Mr.  Bowditch  died  first,  April  16,  1761,  aged  fifty-six.  His  friend,  James  Savage, 
the  venerable  antiquary,  though  twenty-one  years  his  senior,  lived  twelve  years  longer, 
dying  March  8,  1783,  aged  nearly  eighty-nine  years.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  63 

Arms,  were  purchased  at  the  sale  of  Mr.  Jeffrey's  effects  by 
Ebenezer  Francis,  Esq.  Her  occupation  of  this  estate  was  in  a 
style  of  splendor  of  equipage,  and  of  living,  etc.,  utterly  at  vari- 
ance with  the  puritanic  austerity  of  its  first  possessor,  or  the 
simple  dignity  of  his  noble  guest,  who,  having  served  his  country 
with  a  self-devotion  like  that  of  the  Regicides,  like  them  died  a 
martyr  in  her  cause,  by  Suffering  a  traitor's  death. 

GLEANER. 


XXXI. 

COTTON    HILL.  —  (Continued.) 

August  21,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Rich  widows  who  marry  3Toung  husbands  too 
often  find  their  hearts  grow  heavier  and  their  purses  lighter.  Such 
was  the  experience  of  Madam  Haley,  who  was  worth  70,000 
guineas  when  she  became  Mrs.  Jeffrey.  She  returned  to  England 
and  died  there  in  her  husband's  lifetime.  He  remained  in  America. 
He  was,  I  believe,  a  brother  of  the  celebrated  Scotch  reviewer. 
There  is  a  form  of  conveyance  well-known  to  the  English  law, 
called  "  Lease  and  Release,"  where  a  lease  is  first  made  for  one  year, 
and  then  the  fee  simple  is  released.  A  very  large  number  of 
valuable  estates  in  Boston  and  elsewhere,  bought  with  Mrs.  Jeffrey's 
money,  were  thus  conve}red,  and  simultaneously  the  same  were  re- 
conveyed,  so  as  to  vest  the  titles  in  him  and  his  wife,  and  the 
survivor.  This  is  the  chief,  and  indeed,  almost  the  only  instance 
that  I  remember  in  our  records,  of  this  roundabout  way  of  effecting 
what  is  more  simply  done  by  our  common  deed.  Survivorship  be- 
tween husband  and  wife  ensures  a  salutary  control  over  the  issue 
of  the  marriage,  and  makes  it  certain  that  the  wife  surviving  shall 
have  her  own  again.  This  circumstance  satisfied  me  that  Mr. 
Jeffrey  was  a  man  of  honor.  I  have  known  the  wife's  estates  so 
conveyed  as  to  shift  the  fee  directly  into  the  husband,  in  which 
case  the  wife  would  only  get  dower  in  her  own  lands.  This 
arrangement  never  appeared  to  me  to  be  a  striking  proof  of  disin- 
terested affection.* 

*  MADAM    HALEY. 

August  23,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Your  careful  correspondent,  and  my  very  good  friend  "  Gleaner," 
is  mistaken  in  his  opinion  that  Patrick  Jeffrey,  the  second  husband  of  Madam  Haley, 


64  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Patrick  Jeffrey,  in  1801,  conveyed  to  the  town  a  strip  of  his  land19 
taken  for  Somerset  street,  which  was  extended  to  Beacon  street 
(Suff.,  L.  277,  f.  297),  and  then  for  $36,000  conveyed  this  estate  to 
Jonathan  Mason,  1802  (L.  203,  f.  32),  back  to  Somerset  street. 
The  portion  west  of  Somerset  street,  i'.e.,  back  to  Bulnnch's  pasture, 
or  the  church  he  sold  for  $12,000  to  Asa  Ha'mmond,  1804  (L.  210, 
f.  138).  Mr.  Mason  conveyed  for  $41,000  to  Gardiner  Greene,  in 
1803  (L.  205,  f.  252).  And  now  the  original  splendors  of  the 
estate  seem  to  return.  For  nearly  thirty  years  it  remained  the 
mansion  of  Mr.  Greene,  the  wealthiest  citizen  of  his  day,  one 
who  held  high  public  and  private  trusts,  and  was  conspicuous  for 
his  intelligence,  integrity,  and  good  judgment.  The  house  had  no 
remarkable  architectural  pretensions  of  any  kind,  but  the  natural 
beauties  of  the  site,  improved  by  faste  and  art,  made  it  altogether 
the  most  splendid  private  residence  in  the  city. 

Some  of  the  most  agreeable  reminiscences  are  associated  with 
the  elegant  festivities  of  that  old  mansion.  Belonging  to  one  of 
our  first  families,  Mr.  Greene  connected  himself  by  marriage  with 
others  equally  distinguished.  One  wife  was  a  sister  of  the  late 

was  a  brother  of  Francis  Jeffrey,  the  Scotch  reviewer.  Francis  Jeffrey  was  the  son  of 
George  Jeffrey  and  Henrietta,  daughter  of  John  Loudoun.  Their  children  were 
Margaret,  Mary,  Francis,  John,  and  Marion.*  John  came  to  Boston,  and  joined  his 
mercantile  uncle,  Patrick,  who  became  the  husband  of  Madam  Haley,  f  The  maiden 
name  of  Madam  Haley  was  Wilkes.  She  was  the  sister  of  the  celebrated  John  Wilkea, 
of  the  North  Briton. :}:  My  mother  was  an  intimate  friend  of  this  lady,  during  her 
halcyon  days  as  Madam  Haley,  and  for  some  time  after  she  became  the  victimized  wife 
of  Patrick  Jeffrey,  who  treated  her  with  great  brutality,  and  to  escape  from  whose 
persecution  she  finally  returned,  in  comparative  poverty,  to  England.  There  is  a 
sequel  to  the  history  of  this  unhappy  lady's  residence  here,  which  I  have  heard  related 
more  than  once  in  our  family  circle,  and  which  I  suppose  may  be  relied  upon  as 
correct. 

Mrs.  Haley  had  a  daughter,  who,  against  her  mother's  wishes,  became  affianced  and, 
in  disregard  of  her  menaces  of  repudiation,  ultimately  married  to  a  physician  of 
Boston  named  Brown.  If  I  do  not  misremember,  be  had  been  a  pupil  of  Dr.  John 
Jeffries.  He  was  quite  respectable,  but  obscure  and  penniless.  He  had,  I  believe,  ac- 
quired considerable  notoriety  by  a  dissertation  on  yellow  fever.  After  his  marriage, 
Madam  Haley  kept  her  word,  and  obstinately  refused  to  have  any  commerce  with  the 

*  Cockburn's  Life  of  Lord  Jeffrey:  Vol.  1,  pp.  1  and  2. 
t  Ibid,  p.  50. 
t  Ibid,  p.  50. 

19  It  seems  proper  to  premise  here  that  William  Vassall,  who  was  the  purchaser  of  the 
Sewall  lot,  was  a  mandamus  councillor  and  refugee.  In  1787  (Suff.,  Lib.  169,  f.  270)  he 
sold  this  estate  to  his  nephew,  Leonard  Vassall  Borland,  of  Boston,  for  £4,000.  This 
sale  seems  to  have  been  illegal,  and  in  1790  (Suff.,  L.  179,  f.  241)  John  Lowell,  as 
attorney  for  William  Vassall,  sold  the  property  to  Patrick  Jeffrey.  The  exact  bounds 
will  be  mentioned  later.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  65 

John  Hubbard ;  another  (his  widow,  still  living  among  us) ,  is  a 
sister  of  Lord  Lyndhurst,  formerly  Lord  Chancellor  of  Great 
Britain.  The  son  of  the  celebrated  artist,  Copley,  and  a  Boston 
boy,  he  gained  for  himself  entrance  into  the  peerage,  and  attained 
the  highest  of  judicial  honors.  He  is  still  living20  —  the  Nestor  of 
the  House  of  Lords  —  taking  an  active  part  in  public  affairs.  No 
one  could  have  said  with  more  truth  than  himself,  what  was  said  by 
a  distinguished  predecessor  on  the  woolsack,  when  repelling  what 
he  deemed  an  insult :  "  As  presiding  officer  of  this  House,  as 
keeper  of  his  Majesty's  conscience,  as  Lord  High  Chancellor  of  the 
realm,  I  feel  myself  as  respectable,  aye,  and  as  much  respected  as  the 
proudest  peer  I  now  look  down  upon."  Only  a  year  or  two  since 
Lord  Lyndhurst  instituted  inquiries  as  to  the  operation  of  the 
system  of  Registry  of  Deeds  in  Massachusetts  and  New  York,  with 
a  view  to  its  introduction  into  England.  His  autograph  note,  ex- 
pressing his  satisfaction  with  the  answers  which  I  prepared  to  his 
questions,  I  value  far  more  than  any  professional  fee  that  I  ever 
received. 

The  west  line  of  Cotton's  estate  coincides  with  the  east  line  of 

daughter  or  her  husband.  They  finally  settled  in  London,  where  he  became  very 
respectably  established  in  good  practice. 

'It  must  be  here  stated  that  the  second  marriage  of  his  sister  was  exceedingly 
offensive  to  John  Wilkes,  and  he  was  said  to  have  expressed  himself  with  intemperate 
severity,  and  even  with  bitterness,  in  regard  to  her  and  Mr.  Patrick  Jeffrey. 

Unable  to  bear  any  longer  the  harsh  and  ungrateful  usage  of  a  brutal  husband, 
whose  promises  to  love  and  to  cherish  had  less  reference  to  her  person  than  to  her 
property,  Madam  Haley  returned  to  England.  On  her  arrival  in  London,  she  instantly 
repaired  to  the  house  of  her  brother,  Mr.  Wilkes,  and  sent  in  word  by  the  servant,  that 
his  sister,  Mrs.  Jeffrey,  was  at  the  door.  After  some  delay,  a  chilling  message  was 
delivered  :  "  Mr.  Wilkes  had  once  a  sister,  in  America  Mrs.  Haley,  but  he  knows  nothing 
of  Mrs.  Jeffrey."  After  this  cruel  repulse,  she  retired  to  Borne  private  lodgings  in  the 
city. 

There  is  an  old,  homely,  distioh  — 

A  son  is  a  son,  till  he  gets  him  a  wife  — 

A  daughter,  a  daughter  all  the  days  of  her  life. 

The  imputation  conveyed  in  the  first  line,  I  personally  know  to  be  false.  With  a 
few  unnatural  exceptions,  the  averment  in  the  second  may  be  true.  Ere  long,  the 
tidings  of  the  mother's  arrival  reached  the  ears  of  Mrs.  Brown  and  her  husband.  They 
instantly  repaired  to  the  lodgings  of  this  unhappy  lady,  —  not  to  oppress  her  broken 
spirit  and  subdued  and  softened  heart,  by  a  formal  tender  of  of  their  services,  but  im- 
pulsively to  rush  into  her  arms,  to  ask  her  forgiveness,  to  take  her  forthwith  to  their 

20  John  Singleton  Copley,  born  at  Boston,  May  21,  1772,  was  the  son  of  the  distin- 
guished artist  of  the  same  name.  He  was  Lord  Chancellor,  1827-1830.  He  was  twice 
married,  but  left  only  daughters  at  his  decease,  Oct.  12,  1863.  His  sister,  Mrs.  Greene, 
died  Feb.  1,  1866,  aged  95,  leaving  numerous  descendants.  W. 


66  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Bulfinch's  pasture,  i.e.,  of  the  Church  estate  in  Ashburton  place. 
Its  north  line  ran  630  feet  in  a  straight  course  to  Tremont  row,  in- 
cluding the  house-lots  on  the  north  side  of  Ashburton  place,  and 
the  whole  central  portion  of  Pemberton  square,  embracing  the 
fronts  of  all  the  houses  on  its  west  side,  south  of  Mr.  Francis' 
lands,  and  corresponding  portions  of  the  houses  on  its  east  side, 
both  north  and  south  of  the  entrance  from  Tremont  row.  Cotton's 
estate  (with  Bellingham's  united21  in  the  Sewall  family),  measured 
east  on  Tremont  row  163  feet,  or  nearly  to  the  south  line  of  the 
present  entrance  to  the  square.  It  had  various  jogs  outward  on 
its  southerly  line,  greatly  enlarging  its  contents,  adding  perhaps  90 
feet  more  to  its  average  width,  for  a  depth  of  over  300  feet.  The 
possession  of  Daniel  Maud,  measuring  137  feet  on  Tremont  row, 
by  about  an  average  depth  of  80  feet,  was  also  bought  by  Mr. 
Greene.  Hezekiah  Usher  sold  it  to  Thomas  Scotto,  1645,  (L.  2, 
f.  193),  "  bounded  west  and  north  on  Mr.  John  Cotton."  It  passed 
through  Leblond,  Erving,  Brimmer,  Bowdoin,  Waldo,  Walcott, 
Winthrop,  and  was  conveyed  to  Mr.  Greene  for  $31,000  in  1824, 
(L.  293,  f.  196).  This  gave  Mr.  Greene  in  all  a  front  of  300  feet 

abode,  to  cheer  her  declining  years,  to  make  up  for  the  time  that  had  been  lost,  by  re- 
doubling their  efforts  to  make  her  happy!  In  the  home  of  this  devoted  daughter 
Madam  Haley  passed  the  rest  of  her  days.  During  her  residence  here,  her  town  house 
was  on  "  Pemberton's  hill,"  and  her  country  house  on  Milton  hill, — the  situation 
occupied  subsequently  by  the  Hon.  Jonathan  Russell.  SIGMA. -z 

We  sent  a  proof  of  the  above  to  "  Gleaner,"  who  has  furnished  the  following 
reply:  — 

"  I  stated  it  merely  as  my  belief  that  Mr.  Jeffrey  was  brother  of  the  Scotch  Reviewer, 
and  admit  that  "  Sigma"  is  right  in  making  him  out  an  uncle.  I  cannot  but  regret 
that  one  who,  by  his  conveyances,  seemed  so  considerate  as  to  the  right  of  the  old  lady 
in  case  she  should  survive  him,  should  have  so  brutally  tried  to  break  her  heart  and  kill  her 
off  in  his  lifetime;  thus,  as  it  were,  defeating  the  manifest  intent  of  the  instrument  which 
he  had  executed."  GLEANER. 

21  This  phrase  is  a  little  obscure.  In  his  next  article,  Bowditch  seems  to  trace  all  of 
Bellingham's  front  lots  without  touching  Hull  or  Sewall.  Probably  he  refers  to  the 
fact  that  Sewall  bought  part  of  Bellingham's  back  lot,  Oct.  11,  1697  (Lib.  14,  f.  439). 
It  was,  adjoining  to  the  hill  formerly  belonging  to  John  Cotton,  and  was  bounded  north 
by  Sewall;  east  partly  by  Sewall  and  partly  by  land  belonging  to  the  First  Church, 
now  occupied  by  Mr.  John  Bay  ley ;  south  by  land  lately  of  Humphrey  Davie,  and  west 
by  land  lately  of  Capt.  John  Wing.  It  was  about  half  an  acre.  W. 

22  Most  Bostonians  will  remember  that  "  Sigma "  was  the  well-known  signature  of 
Lucius  Manlius  Sargent,  who  wrote  many  antiquarian  notes  for  the  "  Transcript,"  a 
part  of  which  were  republished  in  1856  under  the  title  of  "  Dealings  with  the  Dead. 
By  a  Sexton  of  the  Old  School."  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  67 

on  Tremont  row.    He  died  in  1832,  and  his  90,000  feet  of  land  are 
appraised  at  $142,000,  say  at  $70,000  per  acre. 

Pemberton  square  was  laid  out  in  1835,  just  twenty  years  ago. 
Had  it  been  named  Cotton  place,  for  the  old  clergyman,  it  would 
have  been  thought  that  Mr.  Jackson  so  named  it  because  he  was  a 
distinguished  manufacturer.  If  called  Vane  place,  that  name, 
however  spelt,  seems  to  be  associated  with  qualities  of  mind  not 
the  most  respectable.  Faneuil  place  would  have  become  Funnell 
place.  It  was  at  first  christened  Phillips  place,  its  southerly 
portion  being  held  under  deed  of  Jonathan  Phillips  to  Mr.  Jackson. 
But  as  there  was  a  prior  "  Phillips  place  "  within  a  few  rods,  old 
Mr.  Pemberton  was  called  in,  who  once  owned  on  the  extreme  out- 
skirts of  the  square,  at  its  north  end.  Bellingham  place  would 
have  been  much  more  appropriate,  or  even  "  St.  Botolph's  square," 
the  old  town  of  Boston,  in  England,  deriving  its  name  from  this 
patron  saint.  A  "jingo  tree,"  the  only  one  in  this  part  of  the 
country,  was  successfully  removed  to  the  Boston  Common,  by  the 
Beacon-street  mall,  nearly  opposite  Mrs.  Greene's  present  residence, 
where  its  dark  glossy  foliage  must  often  remind  her  of  the  departed 
grandeur  and  beauty  of  her  old  homestead. 

GLEANER. 


XXXII. 

FIRST   CHURCH   LOT,  AND  PETER   FANEUIL'S   HOUSE 
ON  TREMONT  ROW. 

August  22,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  We  have  seen  that  Gardiner  Greene's  estate  was 
made  up  of  parts  of  the  original  possessions  of  Cotton  and  Belling- 
ham, and  also  the  little  Maud  possession.  Other  portions  had  been 
sold  off  by  Mr.  Bellingham,  and  one  of  those  became  vested  in 
Rev.  John  Davenport,  who,  dying  in  1670,  and  his  son  John  in 
1676,  the  ultimate  heirs  conveyed  for  £170  to  Robert  Sanderson, 
Senior,  Henry  Alline,  and  Joseph  Briclgham,  deacons  of  the  1st 
Church  of  Christ  in  Boston,  A.D.  1693  (Suf.,  16,  f.  133),  "  all 
that  certain  messuage  or  tenement,  with  the  appurtenances  and 


68  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

land  thereto  belonging,  situate  in  said  Boston,  bounded  at  the  east 
end  with  the  street  or  highway  leading  from  Prison  lane  (i.e.,  Court 
street)  up  to  the  Common  or  training  field,  on  the  west  end  with 
land  heretofore  appertaining  to  Richard  Bellingham,  Esquire,  de- 
ceased, of  which  this  land  hereby  granted  was  once  a  part ;  on  the 
south  side  with  the  garden  and  land  of  the  late  Humphrey  Davy," 
etc.,  the  north  boundary  being  in  part  on  land  of  the  late  John 
Hull.23 

This  lot  measured  68  feet  in  front,  62  feet  in  rear,  156|-  feet  on 
north  line,  137£  feet  on  south  line.  Its  location  is  just  about  in 
the  centre  of  the  lots  on  Tremont  row  (south  of  the  entrance  to 
Pemberton  square),  and  it  includes  the  back  portion  of  three  estates 
on  the  east  side  of  Pemberton  square.  It  remained  the  property  of  the 
church  for  nearly  a  century,  being  conveyed  in  1787  to  Sampson  Reed 
(L.  160,  f.  166.)  It  became  the  property  of  Wm.  Phillips  in  1805, 
at  a  cost  of  $15,000.  Upon  this  lot  stood  a  most  ancient  looking 
building,  with  windows  of  very  small  panes  of  glass.24  I  have  heard 
it  stated,  and  have  reason  to  believe  it  true,  that  when  it  was 
pulled  down  a  chair  was  made  from  some  of  its  timbers  for  the 
late  Hon.  Judge  Davis,  as  possessing  great  antiquarian  interest 
under  the  idea  that  it  was  in  this  house  that  Sir  Harry  Vane  so- 
journed. It  was  within  one  of  being  the  right  house,  but  a  miss  is 
as  good  (or  as  bad)  as  a  mile,  in  such  matter.  I  trust  that  it  has 
not  been  presented  to  and  officially  accepted  by  the  Historical 
Society  as  a  genuine  article.  Few  who  drop  in  at  Mrs.  Mayer's  to 
take  an  ice,  have  any  idea  how  venerable  is  the  source  of  her  land- 
lord's title.  And  I  certainly  regret  the  necessity  of  depriving  so 
pleasant  a  locality  of  any  of  its  ancient  honors. 

Mr.  Bellingham  had  still  retained  a  lot  140  feet  on  Tremont 
street,  120  feet  in  rear,  with  an  average  depth  of  325  feet  —  quite 
a  pretty  residuum.  This  he  conve}'ed  to  our  friend  Humprey  Davy, 
1663,  by  deed  not  recorded  till  after  47  years.  (L.  25,  f.  166.) 
"  A  parcel  of  land  being  part  of  an  enclosure  lying  and  being  in 
Boston  between  the  old  burying-place  highway  east,  the  land  and 
orchard  of  Joshue  Scottow  south,  the  ground  or  orchard  of  Davis, 

23.  Part  by  garden  of  Robt.  Howard,  deceased,  now  appertaining  to  Gabriel  Barnon. 

W. 

24  Shaw  says  that  Gov.  Bellingham's  house  stood  on  the  spot  where  Faneuil  built. 
But  this  seems  an  error,  as  the  north  lot  of  Bellingham  (sold  to  the  church)  had  the 
house  on  it,  and  the  lot  sold  Davie  is  land  only.  Hence,  we  may  presume  that  this  old 
house  was  Gov.  Bellingham's,  and  that  Davie  built  his  own  stone  house,  which  he  sold 
to  Faneuil.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  69 

widow,  west,  and  the  land  of  said  Bellingham,  being  the  other  part 
of  said  enclosure,  north." 

We  met  with  Mr.  Davie  among  the  pastures  south  of  Cambridge 
street,  and  by  the  same  mortgage  to  secure  a  marriage  settlement, 
1683  (L.  13,  f.  72),  and  foreclosed,  the  title  to  both  estates  got 
vested  in  his  widow.  She  conveys  to  her  two  sons,  1706-1710 
(Suff.,  23,  f.  9,  10),  having  at  the  last  date  picked  up  a  third  hus- 
band. And  here  I  take  occasion  to  remark,  that  invariably  if  a 
woman  own  a  large  landed  estate,  she  is  sure  to  keep  getting  mar- 
ried from  time  to  time,  as  often  as  death  affords  an  opportunity, 
thus  making  great  embarrassments  in  tracing  titles.  These  two 
Davies  conveyed  it  for  £800  to  Andrew  Faneuil,  1710  (L.  25,  f. 
168),  with  "a  stone  dwelling-house"  thereon,  who  died  in  1737, 
devising  to  Peter  Faneuil,  of  immortal  memory.  On  his  death  in 
1742,  the  inventory  appraised  his  "mansion-house,  garden,  out- 
houses, and  yard,  at  £12,375."  So  that  it  was  doubtless  a  fine  old 
mansion,  worthy  of  such  an  owner,  and  such  it  continued  to  be 
during  its  whole  subsequent  occupancy  by  the  Phillips  family.  In 
1 772  it  became  the  property  of  John  Vassall,  who  being  an  un- 
fortunate "  conspirator,"  the  commonwealth  pocketed  £2,400  by 
selling  to  Isaiah  Doane,  1783  (L.  141,  f.  2).  Wm.  Phillips  bought 
it  in  1791  (L.  169,  f.  125). 

These  two  estates,  thus  united  in  William  Phillips,  embrace 
about  the  southerly  two- thirds  of  Tremont  row  and  all  the  houses 
which  front  north  on  Pemberton  square.  Wm.  Phillips  devised 
these  estates  to  his  son  William,  1804,  who  died  1827,  devising 
them  to  his  son  Jonathan  ;  they,  at  this  latter  date,  being  appraised 
at  $90,000.  They  were  sold  to  Patrick  T.  Jackson,  in  1835,  for 
$115,000.  He  paid  for  the  Greene  estate  $160,000  ;  for  the  Lloyd 
or  Jekyll  estate,  $42,000 ;  for  the  Bordman  estate  on  Somerset 
street,  $20,000 ;  for  the  Bartlett  or  Lawrence  estate  on  Somerset 
street,  834,205.  These  different  purchases,  with  the  expenses  of 
grading,  etc.,  must  have  exceeded  $400,000,  a  speculation  at  that 
time  of  unexampled  magnitude.  TFe,  however,  have  lived  to  see  a 
single  individual  (President  Quincy) ,  at  the  advanced  age  of  more 
than  80  years,  undertake  with  characteristic  energy,  and  carry 
through  to  a  most  successful  conclusion,  a  private  enterprise,  in 
which,  however,  he  engaged  solely  from  the  most  public-spirited 
motives,  which  involved  at  the  outset,  as  the  first  cost  of  the  land, 
an  expenditure  of  8561,000,  and  upon  which  land  he  has  erected 
various  elegant  warehouses,  thus  far  surpassing  all  the  associated 


70  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

enterprises  of  the  capitalists  who,  through  the  agency  of  Mr.  Jack- 
son, bought  and  laid  out  Pemberton  square.25 

GLEANER. 


XXXIII. 

THE    HOUSES    OF    REV.    JOHN    OXENBRIDGE    AND 
ELDER  JAMES   PENN. 

August  24,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —  Leaving  the  homestead  of  Peter  Faneuil,  on 
which  every  Bostonian  must  look  with  interest,  we  come  next  to 
the  Pavilion  and  the  Albion,  or  the  estates  at  the  corner  of  Tre- 
mont  row  and  Beacon  street.  John  Coggan,  in  1658,  died  seized 
of  an  orchard  in  Tremont  street,  measuring  76  feet  in  front,  69  feet 
8  inches  in  the  rear,  bounded  north  on  Richard  Bellingham  or 
Faneuil  322  feet,  and  south  on  James  Penn,  the  ruling  elder.  [It 
is  under  this  will  that  Harvard  College  acquired  a  tract  of  Marsh 
in  Chelsea,  known  as  Coggan's  marsh  for  175  years,  and  finally 
sold,  I  believe,  to  Dr.  Edward  H.  Robbins.]  In  his  inventory, 
this  orchard  is  appraised  at  £30.  Coggan's  executrix  sold  to 
Joshua  Scotto,  1659  (L.  3,  f.  347),  and  he  to  Col.  Samuel  Shrimp- 
ton,  1670  (L.  6,  f.  214).  Shrimpton  owned  Noddle's  island.  He 
and  his  wife,  Elizabeth,  convej^ed  to  John  Oxenbridge,  1671  (L.  6, 
f.  275),  "  all  that  orchard  and  garden  which  I  lately  bought  of  Mr. 
Scotto,  and  which  he  bought  of  Mr.  Coggan's  executrix,  with  a 
dwelling-house  thereon,  built  by  said  Scotto,  bounded  on  James 
Penn  south,  Richard  Bellingham  north,  James  Davis  west,  and  the 
street  east,  containing  half  an  acre  (with  a  gore  of  land  bought  of 
Elder  Penn  by  said  Scott) ."  After  a  deed  and  reconveyance,  1672, 
1673  (L.  7,  f.  334;  L.  8,  f.  238),  Rev.  John  Oxenbridge,  pastor 
of  the  First  Church,  died  seized,  and  by  will  proved,  January  9, 

25  The  reference  is  to  Josiah  Quincy,  the  earlier  mayor  of  the  name.  He  was  the 
originator  of  the  plan  by  which  the  great  market  was  built,  and  the  city  became  the 
owner  of  a  wharf  at  the  end  thereof.  When  it  was  decided  to  sell  this  wharf,  Mr.  Quincy 
remonstrated  ineffectually.  He  believed  in  its  prospective  value,  and  most  unexpectedly, 
as  he  said,  he  became  its  purchaser  at  auction,  tempted  thereto  by  the  low  price.  He 
offered  it  back  to  the  city  at  cost  the  next  day,  but  the  offer  was  declined.  It  is  believed 
that  the  profit  proved  equal  to  hie  expectations.  Mayor  Quincy  died  July  1,  1864,  aged 
92  years.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  71 

1674,  devised  to  his  daughter  Bathshua,  wife  of  Richard  Scott,  and 
on  certain  contingencies  to  the  First  Church. 

The  inventory  values  this  dwelling-house,  orchard,  and  garden, 
at  £550.  Another  daughter,  Theodora,  married  Peter  Thacher. 
Humphrey  Davy,  as  attorney  of  Scott  and  wife,  conveyed  to  said 
Peter,  1683  (L.  12,  f.  356),  and  certain  children  of  said  Peter  re- 
lease to  him,  1706-7  (L.  34,  f.  218),  as  bounded  east  on  the  back 
street  leading  from  Prison  lane  to  the  Common.  In  1707  it  was 
conveyed  to  Samuel  Myles  (L.  24,  f.  98),  who  sold  to  George 
Cradock,  1728  (L.  42,  f.  284),  and  he  to  John  Jeffries,  1733  (L. 
47,  f.  302),  who  devised  the  same  in  tail  to  Dr.  John  Jeffries,  son 
of  David  Jeffries,  under  whom  the  title  came  to  Samuel  Eliot.  Dr. 
Jeffries,  besides  his  more  substantial  professional  reputation,  ac- 
quired much  celebrity  by  ascending  in  a  balloon.  This  tract  came 
within  a  very  few  feet  of  Somerset  street,  and  embraced  the 
Pavilion  Hotel  and  the  court  and  hall  adjoining  and  behind  it ; 
also  the  rear  moiety  of  John  L.  Gardner's  estate  on  Beacon  street, 
and  most  of  the  rear  moiety  of  the  club-house  estate  adjoining. 

James  Penn,  the  ruling  elder,  owned  at  least  as  early  as  1658 
the  corner  lot,  measuring  70  feet  on  Tremont  street,  and  bounded 
south  on  Beacon  street.  The  west  boundary  was  on  James  Davis. 
Now  the  fee  of  Somerset  street  and  land  west  of  it,  and  also  a  small 
gore  east  of  it,  are  conveyed,  in  1677,  by  Mrs.  Davis,  to  her  son-in- 
law,  John  Wing,  as  bounded  east  in  part  on  Davie,  i.e.,  the 
Phillips  estate,  and  in  part  on  James  Allen.  James  Penn,  by  will 
dated  in  1671,  devised  to  said  Allen  "  an  enlargement  of  his 
ground  to  the  pear  tree,"  so  that  Allen  must  have  acquired  part  of 
Penn's  land  before  that  date.  Penn  devised  to  his  kinsman,  Col. 
Penn  Townsend,  his  "  dwelling-house  and  land,"  extending  from 
Tremont  street  150  feet  on  Beacon  street,  to  Allen's  land.  Town- 
send's  executor  sells,  1750,  to  Samuel  Sturgis  (L.  84,  f.  8),  and 
after  passing  through  John  Erving,  Jr.,  Gilbert  Deblois,  Nathaniel 
Coffin,  and  John  Amory,  the  premises  came  to  Samuel  Eliot,  and 
were  for  many  years  his  well-known  mansion-house  estate.  It  em- 
braced the  Albion  and  the  block  of  brick  houses  west  of  it.  The 
deed  to  Sturgis  bounds  south  on  the  lane  leading  to  the  almshouse. 
Rather  a  humble  original  designation,  by  the  way,  for  what  is  now 
the  first  street  in  Boston  ! 26 

2«  The  Almshouse  was  on  the  corner  of  Park  street  and  Beacon  street,  the  latter  being 
of  course  the  "lane  leading  to"  it.  The  Granary  occupied  nearly  the  whole  side  of 
Park  street,  and  the  town  lot  butting  on  the  graveyard  reached  as  far  as  the  Athenaeum 
lot.  W. 


72  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Rev.  James  Allen  by  his  deed  of  settlement,  in  1706,  and  his 
will  in  1710,  so  often  referred  to,  vests  in  his  son  Jeremiah  all  that 
mansion-house  and  land  wherein  I  now  dwell,  bounded  south  on 
the  street  leading  towards  the  Common,  east  on  Penn  Townsend 
and  on  Peter  Thacher,  north  on  said  Thacher,  and  west  on  Thomp- 
son. On  Jeremiah's  death,  in  1741,  the  same  was  settled  by  indent- 
ure, in  1747,  on  his  son  Jeremiah  (L.  77,  f.  79),  who  died  in  1755, 
leaving  several  children.  Among  them  were  James  (on  whom  it  was 
settled  in  1784  as  "  a  stone  house  and  land  belonging  to  it,  situate  in 

street,  £550  —  Prob.  Records,  83,  f.  551),  and  Jeremiah, 

well-known  as  high  sheriff  of  the  county,  who  bought  the  same  of 
his  brother,  1789,  133  feet  on  Beacon  street  (Suffolk,  193,  f.  142). 
Sheriff  Allen  died  in  1809,  and  the  celebrated  law  case,  "Exparte 
Allen"  (as  to  period  of  time  within  which  courts  will  grant  license 
to  sell  real  estate  of  deceased  persons),  had  its  origin  in  this 
locality.  This  stone  house  was  a  very  remarkable  edifice  in  its 
day.  It  embraced  the  front  land  of  Mr.  Gardner's  house  and  of 
the  club  house. 

The  late  David  Hinkley,  in  1810,  became  purchaser  of  all  this 
Allen  land,  excluding  a  gore  sold  off  to  Mr.  Eliot,  and  including 
the  rear  lands  which  had  been  bought  of  Eliot.  He  tore  down  the 
stone  house,  purchased  new  stone,  imported  glass,  etc.  But  the 
war  coming  on,  an  entire  stop  was  for  a  time  put  to  his  arrange- 
ments for  building.  Afterjthe  war  he  proceeded  to  erect  the  present 
double  stone  mansion.  Having  charged  on  his  books  $100,000,  he 
carried  the  remaining  items  of  their  cost  to  profit  and  loss.  It  was 
conjectured  that  each  house  and  land  cost  him  not  less  than  $75,000. 
The  easterly  of  these  houses  was  sold  in  1820,  for  $40,000 ;  in 
1827,  for  $30,500,  and  in  1828,  for  $29,000,  at  which  price  it  was 
purchased  by  Joseph  Peabody,  Esq.,  of  Salem,  as  a  residence  for 
Mrs.  Gardner. 

The  westerly  house  was  occupied  by  Mr.  Hinkley  during  life,  and 
afterwards  was  owned  and  occupied  by  the  late  Benjamin  W. 
Crowninshield  until  his  death,  when  it  became  the  club-house,  so 
well  known  to  "  Young  America"  for  its  elegant  appointments; 
or,  as  deserted  wives  sitting  at  home  might  prefer  to  call  them,  its 
seductive  attractions.'*1 

Often  as  I  walk  along  Tremont  row,  the  din  of  travel  is  hushed, 

27  Since  then,  as  is  well  known,  this  club-house  has  been  sold,  and  is  now  the  head- 
quarters of  a  flourishing  religious  association.  The  Somerset  club,  with  an  enlarged 
list  of  members,  has  obtained  another  and  equally  famous  "  stone  house,"  the  former 
residence  of  Hon.  David  Sears.  W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  73 

the  gay  and  bustling  throng  disappears  ;  I  am  again  among  the 
days  of  old,  in  that  quiet  "  backstreete  leading  from  Prison  lane," 
which  meets  "  the  lane  that  leads  to  the  almshouse."  On  the  one 
side  of  me  are  those  beautiful  enclosures  of  orchard  and  garden  — 
the  homes  of  Cotton,  Davenport,  Oxenbridge,  and  Penn ;  while,  on 
the  other  side  (then  as  now) ,  I  behold  the  silent  burial-place  where 
those  three  faithful  pastors  were  at  last  laid  side  by  side  together. 
There  was  not  then  a  lovelier  spot  within  the  limits  of  Boston. 
There  is  not  one  more  hallowed  by  the  memories  of  those  who,  in 
their  day  and  generation,  were  its  noblest  citizens. 

GLEANER. 

P.  S.  —  In  meeting  again  the  Thacher  family,  I  would  remark, 
that  in  a  late  article28  I  suggested  that  Mrs.  Margaret  Thacher, 
buried  in  King's  Chapel  burying-ground,  in  1693,  appeared  by  a 
deed  in  1708,  to  be  a  tenant  of  a  lot  u  one  rodd  square,"  on  Copps 
hill.  My  friend  George  M.  Thacher,  Esq.,  disturbed  at  the  idea 
that  this  lady  had  such  a  troubled  conscience  as  not  to  have  lain 
quietly  in  her  grave,  at  my  suggestion  examined  the  deed  referred 
to,  and  finds  there,  Mary  instead  of  Margaret.  This  mistake  of 
transcribing  must  have  been  from  the  fact  that  my  mind  reverted 
to  one  who  was  a  distinguished  person  in  her  day,  thus  slighting 
another  as  to  whom  I  was,  and  am  "  a  know-nothing."  Like 
General  Jackson,  I  honestly  assumed  the  responsibility  of  removing 
the  deposits.  Events  proved  him  to  have  been  in  the  right,  and  me 
to  be  in  the  wrong.  G. 


XXXIV. 

JAMES   DAVIS'S   OR    MAJOR  THOMPSON'S   TWO-ACRE 

PASTURE. 

August  25,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Tearing  myself  away  reluctantly  from  the  club- 
house, we  will  walk  into  James  Davis's  two-acre  pasture,  adjoining. 
We  find  that  Johannah  Davis,  his  widow,  conveyed  to  her  son, 
John  Wing,  1677  (Suff.,  10.  f.  218),  "  all  that  parcel  of  ground, 
containing  two  acres,  near  Century  hill,  bounded  west  on  John 
Fair  weather,  north  on  land  late  in  the  tenure  of  Mr.  Cotton,  or  his 

26 'Ante,  p.  30.  —  W. 


74  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

assigns,  east  on  Mr.  Humphrie  Davie  and  Mr.  James  Allen,  (i.e., 
the  club-house,  etc.)  This  pasture  was  of  a  most  peculiar  triangular 
shape.  Its  front  on  Beacon  street  was  only  13£  feet.  The  west 
line  was  279  feet,  and  in  the  rear  it  widened  to  295  feet.  It  ex- 
tended back  within  two  or  three  feet  of  Ashburton  place.  This 
north  line  reached  163  feet  east  of  Somerset  street,  and  yet 
Somerset  street,  as  now  laid  out,  actually  cuts  off  half  of  what  little 
front  the  pasture  originally  had,  leaving  only  a  width  of  5  feet  on 
Beacon  street,  west  of  Somerset  street. 

John  Wing  mortgaged  the  same  (with  other  lands)  to  John 
Richards,  who  is  known  as  the  worshipful  John  Richards,  perhaps 
because  he  was  Treasurer  of  Harvard  College.  This  mortgage  was 
made  to  him  in  1677,  as  attorney  of  Major  Robert  Thompson 
(Suff.,  10,  f.  219) .  Thus  we  get  at  once  among  the  "  Upper  Ten." 
Major  Robert  Thompson  always  resided  in  England.  It  appears 
that  he  had  a  son  Joseph,  of  Hackney,  who  had  a  son  Joseph,  of  the 
Inner  Temple,  London,  who  was  ancestor  of  William  Thompson, 
of  Eltsham.  These  lands,  with  various  others  of  great  value,  seem 
to  have  been  entailed  by  the  "  major,"  and  to  have  been  so  inherited 
for  eighty  years.  In  1758,  proceedings  were  had  to  bar  the  entail 
(L.  93,  f.  125),  and  the  various  estates  were  then  conveyed  in  fee 
simple.  This  pasture  was  purchased  by  Joseph  Sherburne,  in  1759 
(Suff.,  93,  f.  193),  who  sold  off  a  gore  to  William  Vassall  (the 
predecessor  of  Mr.  Greene),  in  1768  (L.  118,  f.  170).  After  his 
decease  the  premises  became  the  property  of  Jerathmiel  Bowers, 
who,  dying  in  Bristol  County,  transmitted  the  same  to  his  son  John 
Bowers.  We  have  before  seen  that  John  Bowers  bought  all  the 
lands  north  of  Mr.  Cotton's,  and  he  thus  acquired  all  the  land 
south  of  Mr.  Cotton's,  and  opened  Somerset  street  through  his 
estates,  both  from  Howard  and  from  Beacon  streets,  the  street 
being  extended  by  the  town  across  Jeffrey's  or  Cotton's  intervening 
land. 

Under  this  title  are  derived  the  two  estates  on  the  east  side  of 
Somerset  street,  which  were  'included  in  the  Pemberton  square 
speculation,  also  a  triangular Jgore  of  the  club-house  estate,  while 
on  the  west  side  of  the  street  it  includes  most  of  the  Church  estate, 
and  of  the  houses  on  Ashburton  place  north  of  it,  and  also  a  narrow 
portion  of  the  houses  south  of  it.  Of  the  two  lots  east  of  Somerset 
street,  the  southerly  one,  120  feet  8  inches  wide,  is  traced  through 
Bowers  and  Dr.  Thomas  Bartlett,  to  John  Hubbard,  in  1817,  and 
from  him,  in  1834,  to  Abbott  Lawrence,  who  conveyed  to  Patrick  T. 
Jackson.  The  north  lot,  50  feet  wide  on  the  street,  is  traced  through 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  75 

Bowers,  Isaac  Rand,  Jr.,  James  Lloyd,  Jr.,  Asa  Hammond,  and 
Eobert  Turner,  to  William  H.  Bordman,  in  1814,  who  died  seized 
in  1826,  and  whose  heirs  conveyed  to  Mr.  Jackson  in  1835.  This 
house  is  doubtless  well-remembered  by  many  besides  myself,  as 
the  scene  of  the  agreeable  weekly  receptions  of  our  accomplished 
townswoman,  Mrs.  H.  G.  Otis. 

Through  the  southerly  of  these  two  lots  is  laid  out  the  present 
outlet  from  Pemberton  square  into  Somerset  street,  the  portion 
south  of  that  avenue  being  purchased  by  the  late  Mr.  Crowninshield, 
as  an  addition  to  his  estate  on  Beacon  street. 

Mr.  Jackson  became  also  the  purchaser  of  the  rear  part  of  the 
lands  at  the  north  end  of  Pemberton  square,  on  which  he  erected  a 
large  and  elegant  dwelling-house,  for  his  own  occupation,  now  be- 
longing to  John  A.  Lowell,  Esq.  The  view  from  the  north  win- 
dows of  this  mansion  is,  I  think,  the  finest  in  the  city.  Mr.  Jackson 
after  this  sale  resided  in  a  much  smaller  house  on  the  east  side  of 
the  square,  and  at  his  death  owned  and  occupied  that  on  the  west 
side,  now  belonging  to  Joseph'  Coolidge,  Esq. 

Sixty-eight  first-class  brick  dwelling-houses  and  stores  were 
erected  on  Pemberton  square  and  the  streets  adjoining,  and  thus 
the  taxable  property  of  the  city  was  greatly  increased.  We  have 
got  the  "  almighty  dollar"  instead  of  a  natural  eminence  with  its 
terraces  or  " hangings"  (as  they  are  called  in  the  deeds),  which, 
like  the  Boston  Common,  was  a  daily  gratification  to  our 
citizens,  and  on  which  strangers  stopped  to  gaze  with  admiration 
and  delight. 

Mr.  Lawrence  was  one  of  Mr.  Jackson's  associates  in  this  enter- 
prise. And  in  bidding  a  final  adieu  to  this  locality,  I  cannot  for- 
bear to  acknowledge  my  deep  professional  indebtedness  to  the  early 
and  long-continued  patronage  of  them  both.  And  among  the 
dearest  treasures  of  memory  will  be  the  consciousness  that  I  have 
always  enjoyed  the  personal  friendship  alike  of  him  who  was 
so  suddenly  withdrawn  from  us,  in  the  midst  of  his  usefulness, 
several  years  since,  and  of  him  upon  whom  the  grave  has  just 
closed  amid  the  regrets  of  our  community  and  of  the  nation. 

GLEANER. 


76  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


XXXV. 

HAD  MADAM  HALEY  A  DAUGHTER  ? 
August  27,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —  My  friend  "  Sigma"  caught  me  tripping  a  day 
or  two  since,  in  the  opinion  that  Patrick  Jeffrey  was  a  brother  of 
the  Scotch  Eeviewer,  and  he  proceeded  to  narrate  so  beautiful  an 
episode  of  the  filial  conduct  of  a  daughter  of  Mrs.  Jeffrey  (by  her 
first  husband,  Alderman  Haley),  that  I  felt  really  glad  of  my  mis- 
take. There  is  a  little  maxim,  however,  very  much  acted  upon  in 
life,  called  "  Tit  for  tat,"  and  I  must  confess  that  I  take  no  slight 
satisfaction,  malicious  though  it  be,  in  disclosing  some  important 
inaccuracies  in  the  story  which  he  has  told  so  well. 

Dr.  Samuel  Brown,  who  received  a  prize  for  an  essay  on  yellow 
fever  in  1799  or  1800,  did  not  marry  a  daughter  of  Mrs.  Patrick 
Jeffrey.  He  married  Nancy  Jeffries,  the  daughter  of  Dr.  John 
Jeffries,  by  a  first  marriage.  This  marriage  was  opposed  indeed, 
not  however  by  Madam  Haley  or  Mrs.  Jeffrey,  but  by  the  bride's 
step-mother,  Mrs.  Jeffries.  Dr.  Brown  and  his  wife  did  not  go  to 
England,  and  of  course  he  did  not  get  into  successful  practice  in 
London.  On  the  contrary,  being  afflicted  with  what  was  called  a 
fever  sore,  his  leg  was  amputated  a  few  years  after  his  marriage,  and 
the  operation  proved  fatal  in  a  short  time.  His  beautiful  but  unfor- 
tunate wife  did  not  long  survive  him.  They  left  two  daughters, 
who  were  adopted  by  Mrs.  Stone,  of  Windsor,  Vermont,  a  sister 
of  Dr.  Brown.  In  that  town  these  two  ladies  still  reside,  the  one 
single,  the  other  married.  Dr.  Brown  was  one  of  the  earliest  con- 
verts to  Swedenborgianism  in  Boston. 

It  is  possible  that  Madam  Haley  had  a  daughter  who  married 
some  other  "Brown,"  and  that  they  behaved  in  the  exemplary 
manner  so  touchingly  described  by  "Sigma."  His  anecdote  is  too 
good  not  to  be  true.*  GLEANER. 

*«TIT    FOR   TAT." 

August  29,  1855. 

MY  DEAR  "  GLEANER:  "  — This  is  all  very  fine.  But  there  is  another  saying,  which 
both  of  us  might  well  wear,  for  a  phylactery  —  "  ranis'  horns  if  I  die  for  it"  The  tenor 
of  your  brief  notice  would  lead  one  to  suppose,  that  /also  had  a  "  malicious  satisfac- 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  77 


XXXVI.      • 

ROBERT  TURNER'S   GREAT  PASTURE  ON  BEACON 
STREET  AND  HILL. 

Augutt  28,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —  Leaving  "  Major"  Thompson's  triangular  past- 
ure, we  come  upon  an  extremely  large  estate  of  Robert  Turner, 
which  must  have  extended  on  Beacon  street  from  a  point  five  feet 
west  of  Somerset  street  to  and  behind  the  State  House  land,  to  a 
point  19  feet  east  of  Hancock  street.  In  tracing  the  Cambridge 
street  pastures  of  Middlecott,  etc.,  we  find  that  they  bound  south 
on  Turner. 

tion,"  in  having  "  caught "  you  "  tripping."  Not  at  all.  You  were  desirous  of  being 
historically  accurate;  and,  I  supposed  you  would  be  pleased  to  be  set  right,  even  in  a 
matter  of  trivial  importance ;  and,  in  return  for  my  kindness,  you  avow  that  you  have 
a  "  malicious  satisfaction  "  in  pointing  out  the  errors  of  my  story!  Well,  I  do  believe 
the  devil  is  in  everybody. 

Now,  dear  "  Gleaner,"  it  is  oruel  of  you  to  interfere  with  me,  when  I  try  to  be 
pathetic,  who  never  interfere  with  you,  when  you  labor  so  very  hard  to  be  facetious! 
But  you  have  spoiled  my  story;  and  you  know,  I  dare  say,  how  much  easier  it  is  to 
mar  an  interesting  tale,  than  to  make  one. 

In  the  outaet,  I  stated,  very  courteously,  that  you  were  mistaken,  in  your  "  opinion," 
that  Patrick  Jeffrey  was  the  brother  of  the  Scotch  reviewer.  You  admitted  your  error; 
but,  by  way  of  rams'  horns,  appended  the  remark,  that  you  only  stated  as  your  "  belief." 
Subtle  this,  rather  :  —  your  "  belief,"  but  not  your  t(  opinion  !  " 

Now,  what  have  I  done  ?  I  have  put  nothing  forth  as  "  Historical."  I  have  recited 
a  narrative,  which  I  heard  many  years  ago;  which  I  certainly  believed  to  be  true,  and 
of  which  I  simply  said,  I  supposed  it  might  be  relied  on.  If  you  are  right  in  your  state- 
ments, and  I  dare  say  you  are,  the  combinations  of  my  tale  clearly  resemble  some  which 
may  be  found  on  the  pages  of  Heathen  mythology;  and  all, I  can  say  is,  that,  since  you 
own  that  you  have  enjoyed  BO  much  "  malicious  satisfaction,"  in  breaking  it  up,  you 
are  welcome  to  the  pieces. 

In  another  article  of  yours,  my  dear  "  Gleaner,"  you  allude  to  a  slight  mistake 
which  you  made  between  the  names  of  Mary  and  Margaret.  I  was  reminded,  by  this 
misnomer,  of  an  inscription  which  I  read,  in  1840,  upon  a  marble  monument,  in  Nor- 
folk, Virginia.  It  was  rather  an  expensive  concern,  and  erected  over  the  grave  of  the 
wife  of  Captain  Kennedy,  of  the  United  States  Navy.  After  stating  the  name,  age, 
relation,  time  of  departure,  etc.,  of  the  deceased,  at  the  bottom  were  the  words, 
"  Erratum,  for  Margaret,  read  Martha"  I  am  not  quite  sure  as  to  both  of  these  names, 
but  well  remember  the  erratum,  the  first  I  fancy,  that  ever  figured,  eo  nomine,  on  a 
gravestone. 

Yours  truly,  SIGMA. 


78  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

William  Pell,  in  1655,  sells  to  Robert  Turner  (Suff.,  L.  2,  f.  154) , 
1J  acres  of  land  between  said  Robert's  land  east,  said  Robert's 
land  and  land  of  Thomas  Millard  south,  Jabez  Heaton  west,  and 
Jeremiah  Houchin  north.  [Houchin  owned  Middlecott's  pasture, 
through  the  centre  of  which  runs  Bowdoin  street.]  Jabez  Heaton, 
in  1655,  sells  to  said  Turner  (Suffolk,  L.  2,  f.  153) 1£  acres  in  Centery 
Hill,  between  the  land  of  said  Robert  east  and  south,  the  land  of 
Millard  south,  the  land  of  Edward  Hutchinson,  Senior,  west,  the 
land  of  Joshua  Scottow  north,  and  Jeremiah  Houchin  north. 
[Scottow  owned  the  pasture  east  of  Hancock  street.]  John 
Leverett,  in  1663,  conveys  to  said  Turner  (Suffolk,  L.  9,  f.  308)  one 
acre  of  land  in  the  new  field  bounded  on  land  late  of  Nathaniel 
Eaton  east,  on  Thomas  Millard  south,  on  Bosworth  west,  and  on 
Scotto  north.  Nathaniel  Eaton  married  Elizabeth,  widow  of  Wil- 
liam Pell.  [Bosworth  owned  5  acres,  the  easterly  moiety  of  which, 
extending  from  77  feet  west  of  Belknap  street  to  19  feet  east  of 
Hancock  street,  he  sold  to  Cooke.] 

We  thus  get  four  acres  into  Robert  Turner,  the  deed  in  1658 
bounded  in  part  on  land  already  his.  The  other  southerly  abutter, 
named  in  the  foregoing  deeds,  Thomas  Millard,  is  the  source  of 
title  to  the  State  House  and  land  west  of  it,  so  that  the  land  already 
Robert  Turner's  must  have  been  the  whole  front  part  of  the  land 
on  Beacon  street  to  the  State  House.  It  is  therefore,  not 
unlikely  that  Turner  may  have  owned  in  all  as  much  as  eight 
acres. 

He  died  in  1664,  and  his  will  contains  various  devises  to  his 
children.  To  Joseph  he  gives  a  parcel  of  ground  on  the  Century 
Hill,  to  be  in  breadth  at  the  front  3  rods,  and  lie  next  to  my  son 
John's  division,  and  to  run  through  up  to  Mr.  Houchin's  (i.e., 
Middlecott  pasture).  Also  to  my  son  Fairweather  a  house  and 
land  on  Centurie  Hill,  "formerly  delivered  into  his  possession;" 
also  a  strip  of  ground  about  3  rods  in  breadth  adjoining  to  Mr. 
Lyne's  (i.e.,  Lynde  or  Bulfinch's  pasture). 

My  will  is  that  Ephraim  shall  have  a  share  at  Center  Hill  next 
to  my  son  Fayerweather,  to  be  4  rods  broad  at  the  (groat?)  and 
run  through  with  other  divisions.  Also  to  John  he  gives  "  a  por- 
tion next  to  Ephraim's  3  rods  broad  equal  to  Joseph's."  He  then 
gives  certain  legacies  to  be  paid  out  of  the  rents  or  sales  of  the 
Center  Hill  and  other  lands.  The  inventory  mentions  "the  house 
confirmed  to  Fairweather  and  land,  £200.  The  new  frame  and  all 
the  land  at  Century  Hill,  £200. 

Penelope,  executrix  of  Robert  Turner,  in  1666,  conveyed  to  said 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  79 

Ephraim  (Lib.  5,  f.  188)  f  of  an  acre,  bounded  south-easterly  on  the 
highway  to  the  Common  (i.e.,  Beacon  street),  north-west  on  Jere- 
miah Houchin  (i.e.,  Middlecott pasture),  north-east  on  said  Ephraim, 
south-west  on  John  Turner.  She  also  conveyed  to  said  Ephraim,  in 
1667  (Lib.  5,  f.  40),  another  f  of  an  acre,  bounded  south-easterly  on 
the  highway  to  the  Training  place  (i.e.,  Beacon  street,)  south-west 
[north-west]  on  said  Houchin,  and  on  Joshua  Scottow,  [who  owned 
the  4-acre  pasture  west  of  Middlecott's] ,  north-east  on  said 
Ephraim,  south-west  on  Joseph  Turner.  In  this  deed  are  recited 
the  devises  in  the  will  of  her  husband,  and  it  is  stated  that  this 
conveyance  is  an  enlargement  of  Ephraim's  portion,  and  that  the 
alterations  made  by  her  deeds  to  the  children  were  such  as  tended 
to  the  satisfaction  of  all  the  brethren.  [Her  deeds,  numerous  and 
complicated  as  they  are,  have  certainly  not  proved  equally  satisfac- 
tory to  posterity.]  She  conveyed  to  her  son  Joseph,  1670  (Lib.  6, 
f.  200) ,  all  that  division  that  lyeth  next  the  hill,  as  now  divided  ; 
bounded  with  the  Common,  south,  5  rods  and  6  feet ;  on  John  Tur- 
ner, 31  rods  and  5i  feet ;  on  Jere.  Houchin' s  pasture,  north,  4  rods 
and  3  feet,  and  on  said  John  Turner,  east,  29 h  rods  and  3  feet, 
with  a  new  dwelling-house  on  it  —  and  said  Joseph  conveyed  to  said 
John,  1671  (Lib.  7,  f.  313),  about  half  an  acre,  bounded  north  on 
Houchin,  deceased ;  south  on  my  land,  bordering  on  Centery  hill, 
west,  and  on  said  John,  east.  Said  Penelope  conveyed  to  said 
John,  1670  (Lib.  6,  f.  206),  2  acres  of  land  at  Centre  hill,  bounded 
on  Joseph  Turner,  east ;  on  Richard  Cook,  west  [i.e.,  a  line  19  feet 
east  of  Hancock  street],  Joshua  Scottow,  north,  and  Thomas 
Millard,  south,  with  a  parcel  of  land  k  a  rod  broad  and  30  rods 
long,  bounded  east  on  said  John,  west  on  said  Joseph,  north  on 
Scottow,  south  on  the  Common,  bordering  also  on  the  highway  going 
up  to  the  top  of  the  hill,  on  the  top  of  which  hill  lyeth  a  parcel  of  land 
belonging  to  the  town  of  Boston,  i.e.,  6  rods  square.  Ephraim  Tur- 
ner conveyed  to  John  Fairweather,  1681  (Lib.  13,  f.  450),  all  my 
parcels  of  land  at  Beacon  Hill,  between  the  land  of  said  Fairweather 
and  my  brother  John  Turner. 

The  result  is,  that  John  Fairweather  by  devise  and  conveyances 
gets  some  large  portions  of  this  estate,  the  easterly  of  which 
measured,  as  we  shall  find,  about  260  feet  on  Beacon  street,  by  490 
feet  in  depth. 

In  conclusion,  I  feel  that  I  owe  an  apology  for  the  unrelieved 
dulness  of  this  article,  and  trust  that  my  next  may  prove  more 
lively  and  interesting.  In  the  meanwhile,  as  an  antidote,  buy  and 
read  "  Sydney  Smith's  Life."  GLEANER. 


80  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


XXXVII. 

OUR  GREAT  MEN  OF  100  YEARS  AGO. 
August  30,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  In  my  last  article,  we  leave  in  John  Fayerweather 
(1664-1681),  among  other  lots  of  hia  deceased  father-in-law,  Rob- 
ert Turner,  a  tract  of  260  feet  on  Beacon  street,  located  5  feet  west 
of  Somerset  street.  We  have  seen  that  immediately  east  of  that 
street  David  Hinckley  erected  a  costly  double  stone  mansion,  both 
parts  of  which  have  always  been  occupied  by  some  of  our  wealthiest 
citizens.  In  the  easterly  one,  Benjamin  Wiggin,  brother  of  the 
London  banker,  Timothy  Wiggin,  resided  for  several  years.  His 
wife  (Miss  Fowle,  of  Watertown),  was  the  most  beautiful  woman 
of  her  day.  It  was  in  her  honor  that  Robert  Treat  Paine,  the  poet, 
offered  the  sentiment,  "The  fair  of  other  towns,  the  Fowle  of 
Watertown."  The  estates  west  of  Somerset  street  we  shall  find  to 
have  belonged  to  other  citizens  of  the  very  highest  consideration. 

John  Fayerweather  convej^ed,  in  1703,  the  westerly  part  of  his 
land  to  Jonathan  Pollard  (L.  21,  f.  251),  "  a  lot  bounded  south  on 
the  highway  to  the  Common  135  feet,  west  on  Gamaliel  Rogers 
(who  had  succeeded  John  Turner),  490  feet  8  inches,  north  on 
Middlecott  and  Lynde  161  feet,  east  on  Sewall  (i.e.,  Cotton  Hill 
estate),  119  feet,  south  on  my  homestead,  73  feet,  east  on  the  same 
to  the  highway."  Pollard,  in  1709  (L.  24,  f.  258) ,  sold  the  same  to 
Samuel  Lynde  (who  thus  owned  through  from  Cambridge  street  to 
Beacon  street).  Lynde,  retaining  a  portion-  in  the  rear  as  an  en- 
largement of  his,  afterwards  Bulfinch's,  pasture,  conveyed  the 
residue  to  John  Barnes  in  1721  (L.  35,  f.  189).  After  various 
deeds  and  reconveyances,  Barnes  died  seized  in  1739,  and,  in  1746, 
his  executors  conveyed  to  William  James  (L.  72,  f.  22).  In  1756, 
it  was  conveyed  by  Hon.  John  Erving  to  James  Bowdoin.  Both 
the  grantor  and  grantee  were  at  the  very  head  of  the  aristocracy  of 
Boston  100  years  ago.  Bowdoin  also  acquired  of  Bulfinch  a  gore 
of  land  in  the  rear. 

John  Fayerweather  died  in  1712,  seized  of  the  easterly  part  of 
his  land,  124  feet  wide  on  Beacon  street,  by  about  300  feet  deep ; 
appraised  at  £230.  The  easterly  moiety,  62  feet  on  Beacon  street, 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  81 

became  vested  in  William  Holberton  and  wife,  1712-1727,  whose 
heirs  in  1740  convey  to  Benjamin  Green  (L.  62,  f.  42).  It  became 
the  property  of  Joseph  Sherburne  1745  (L.  74,  f.  143).  Sherburne 
owned  the  two-acre  pasture  east  of  it,  to  which  this  purchase  formed 
an  addition,  giving  him  in  all  67  feet  on  Beacon  street.  The  title 
is  derived  from  him  through  Jerathmeel  Bowers  and  his  son  John, 
to  David  Sears,  1803,  and,  having  been  for  many  years  his  man- 
sion-house estate,  is  now  covered  by  two  elegant  and  costly  brick 
dwelling-houses,  erected  by  his  son  and  heir,  Hon.  David  Sears, 
so  well-known  as  one  of  our  most  wealthy  and  public-spirited 
citizens.29 

The  westerly  moiety  (62  feet  on  Beacon  street)  was  conveyed  to 
Samuel  Sewall,  in  1731  (L.  46,  f.  7),  who  failed  in  1742,  when  it 
became  the  property  of  Edward  Bromfield  (L.  65,  f.  164),  whose 
executors,  in  1763,  conveyed  the  same  to  William  Phillips  (L.  99, 
f.  210).  He  died  seized,  in  1804,  devising  to  his  son  William,  on 
whose  death,  in  1827,  it  became  the  property  of  a  grandson.  It  is 
under  this  title  that  the  Freeman  Place  Chapel  and  the  two  houses 
in  front  of  it  are  held.  All  these  successive  owners  have  been 
among  the  first  families  in  our  city. 

The  Bowdoin  estate  is  one  of  great  interest  and  importance,  and 
will  be  hereafter  separately  noticed.  The  houses  of  Lieut.  Gov 
ernor  Phillips  and  of  Governor  Bowdoin  were  both  placed  back 
from  the  street,  being  approached  by  a  high  flight  of  stone  steps. 
At  a  dinner  party  once  given  by  the  latter  a  rain  occurred,  and  the 
weather  becoming  cold  the  steps  were  found  to  be  entirely  covered 
with  ice.  Under  any  circumstances  there  would  have  been  almost 
a  certainty  that  life  or  limb  would  be  put  in  jeopardy  by  an  attempt 
to  walk  down;  and  the  guests  had  probably  done  justice  to  the 
generous  wines  of  their  host,  —  a  circumstance  which  tended  to  in- 
crease the  difficulty.  At  last  they  all  concluded  to  sit  down  on  the 
upper  step,  and  so  hitch  along  from  step  to  step  in  a  perfectly  snfe, 
though,  it  must  be  confessed,  in  a  somewhat  ungraceful  manner. 
Probably,  indeed,  there  never  was  an  occasion  where  so  many  of 
our  first  citizens  voluntarily  took  such  low  seats ;  or  where  the 
dignity  of  small  clothes,  silk  stockings,  and  cocked  hats  was 
sacrificed  to  necessity  or  expediency  in  a  more  amusing  manner. 

GLEANER. 

29  Hon.  David  Sears  died  January  14th,  1871,  aged  83  years. 


82  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


XXXVIII. 

THE    NICETIES    OF    LAW. 

August  32,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  In  this  country,  when  a  very  complicated  affair 
is  spoken  of,  it  is  said  that  "  it  would  puzzle  a  Philadelphia  lawyer." 
I  am  inclined,  however,  to  doubt  the  justice  of  the  compliment  — 
if  it  be  one  —  which  is  here  implied.  In  sound  legal  attainments 
and  exact  logical  acumen  the  late  Jeremiah  Mason  has,  I  think, 
never  been  surpassed.  And  when  professional  chicanery  was  to  be 
resisted,  no  one  could  wield  more  effectually  than  he,  in  the  cause 
of  truth  and  justice,  the  most  subtle  contrivances  of  the  law.  We 
learn  that  in  the  middle  ages  Schoolmen  debated  whether  two  or 
more  spirits  could  stand  on  the  point  of  a  needle.  The  affirmative 
of  this  proposition  is  abundantly  proved  every  day  among  us,  as  a 
practical  matter,  in  legal  decisions  respecting  our  estates  and 
property.  In  a  recent  article  I  alluded  to  two  adjudications,  both 
of  them  good  law ;  one,  that  if  a  line  runs  l>y  Mr.  A's  wharf,  and 
thence  to  low-water  mark,  it  must  be  straight  throughout,  because 
no  change  of  course  is  indicated.  In  the  other,  a  line  running  by 
Mr.  A's  wharf  and  flats  to  low-water  mark  was  held  not  to  be  a 
straight  line,  although  one  express  course  was  prescribed  through- 
out its  whole  extent. 

In  5  Pickering's  Reports,  528,  Hayden  vs.  Stoughton,  it  was 
decided,  under  a  will  proved  in  1806,  that  a  devise  to  a  town  for 
the  purpose  of  building  a  school-house  was  a  devise  on  condition 
that  the  estate  vested  accordingly  in  the  town,  and  that  on  a  sub- 
sequent breach  of  condition  the  estate  passed  to  the  residuary 
devisee,  and  not  to  the  heir,  there  being  an  interest  in  the  testator 
not  specifically  devised,  depending  on  the  performance  or  non- 
performance  of  the  condition.  The  Court  adopt  as  good  law  an 
English  decision  of  Chief  Justice  Willes,  confirmed  in  a  subsequent 
case  of  Doe  vs.  Scott,  and  they  thus  state  the  rule,  viz. :  "  That 
if  the  testator  has  not  given  away  all  his  interest  in  the  land,  so 
that  if  he  were  to  die  immediately,  something  would  remain  undis- 
posed of,  it  is  to  be  presumed  that  he  intended  to  give  the  remainder 
in  such  lands  to  the  residuary  devisee."  And  Judge  Putnam  says  : 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  83 

"  It  is  clear  that  the  testator  did  not  dispose  of  his  whole  interest 
to  the  inhabitants.  The  inhabitants  might  not  choose  to  perform 
the  condition,  and  so  might  forfeit  their  interest.  The  testator 
might  have  limited  over  that  interest  specialty,  i.e.,  he  might  have 
made  a  further  specific  devise  of  it  to  some  one  else  on  breach  of 
condition.  If  he  had  done  so,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  would 
have  been  a  good  limitation  of  his  remaining  interest.  He  made 
no  limitation  over.  The  inhabitants  became  seized  of  the  fee- 
simple  conditional,  and  the  contingent  interest  not  otherwise  disposed 
of  was  disposed  of  by  the  residuary  clause." 

In  21  Pick.  Rep.,  215,  Austin  vs.  Cambridgeport,  a  testator 
had  by  deed  granted  an  estate  on  condition  that  it  should  always  be 
used  for  church  purposes,  and  then  died,  and  by  will,  proved  in 
1819,  devised  one-fourth  of  all  his  remaining  estate  to  his  widow. 
A  breach  of  condition  occurred  in  1833.  She  sued  and  recovered 
the  estate  thus  devised  to  her.  The  court  cite  with  approval  this 
earlier  case,  and  remark  that  the  right  of  the  testator  was  "  a  con- 
tingent possible  estate."  They  then  add  :  "  That  such  an  interest 
is  devisable  in  England,  seems  well  established  by  the  case  of  Jones 
vs.  Roe,  3  T.  R.,  and  the  cases  there  cited.  Chancellor  Kent 
states  the  rule  to  be  that  all  contingent  possible  estates  are  devis- 
able," etc.  And  accordingly  they  say:  "It  is  a  contingent 
interest  in  the  testator,  not  disposed  of  by  any  other  part  of  the 
will,  and  therefore  falls  within  the  residuary  clause  disposing  of  all 
the  estate  not  before  devised." 

But  in  the  Brattle-street  parsonage  case  just  decided,  Mrs.  Lydia 
Hancock,  by  will  proved  in  1777,  devises  her  mansion-house  estate 
on  condition  that  it  should  always  be  occupied  as  a  parsonage.  On 
breach  of  such  condition  she  directs  that  it  shall  "  revert  to  her 
estate"  and  proceeds  specially  to  devise  the  same  over  to  Governor 
Hancock,  and  also  makes  him  her  general  residuary  devisee.  To 
me  this  case  appears  (to  use  an  elegant  expression)  to  run  on  all 
fours  with  those  above  alluded  to,  yet  the  Court  decide  (as  elabor- 
ately reported  in  the  newspapers),  that  such  a  devise  over  is  too 
remote,  and  therefore  void  in  law ;  that  nothing  passes  to  such 
devisee,  and  that  such  limitation  over  being  too  remote  and  void, 
carries  the  condition  with  ft,  and  thus  the  church  gets  the  absolute 
title  free  of  all  condition.  How  these  decisions  can  stand  together 
is  to  me  inexplicable,  unless  they  had  been  put  upon  the  special 
construction  of  the  particular  statutes  of  devises  in  force  at  the 
different  periods,  when  the  testator  died,  which  seems  to  be  ex- 


84  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

pressly  negatived  by  the  approving  quotations  of  the  general 
doctrines  of  the  English  law  and  of  Chancellor  Kent. 

Further,  there  is  a  legal  maxim,  that  "  surplusage  does  not 
vitiate ; "  and  another  that  the  law  aims  rather  to  preserve  than 
destroy,  and  acts  on  the  Latin  adage  "  ut  majis  valeat  quam 
pereat."  Now,  observe  how  beautiful  an  application  of  these  rules 
is  made  in  this  last  decision  !  A  testator  makes  a  devise  which  is 
void  or  a  nullity.  The  rule  respecting  surplusage  would,  at  least, 
one  would  suppose,  prevent  its  having  any  noxious  effect.  But  not 
so.  Had  the  testator  not  undertaken  to  make  this  void  devise,  his 
heir-at-law  would  have  an  unquestionable  right  to  recover  the  estate 
on  breach  of  condition  ;  but  the  mere  nugatory  attempt  to  devise  it 
away  from  the  heir-at-law  is  construed  not  so  as  to  preserve  his 
right,  but,  on  the  contrary,  is  held  to  destroy  it.  Perhaps  even 
the  mere  making  of  a  residuary  devise  (unavoidable  though  it 
seems  to  be)  would  be  equally  fatal.  The  only  rule,  indeed,  prac- 
tically illustrated  by  this  decision  is  the  Scripture  one,  "To  him 
that  hath  shall  be  given."  In  other  words,  to  the  church  to  whom 
the  testatrix  meant  to  give  only  a  qualified  interest,  the  law  has  given 
the  whole. 

It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  if  an  absolute  fee-simple  estate  is  de- 
vised to  one,  and  on  a  certain  contingency  the  same  estate  is  de- 
vised to  another,  such  executory  devise  over  must  be  upon  a 
contingency  to  happen  within  a  limited  time  (a  life  or  lives  in  being 
and  21  years,  etc.,  after),  otherwise  it  will  be  too  remote  and  void. 
On  the  other  hand,  a  conditional  fee-simple  may  be  granted  or 


"THE  NICETIES  OF  LAW"  — AGAIN. 
September  3,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR: — The  case  of  the  proprietors  of  the  church  on  Brattle  square  vt. 
Moses  Grant  et  aL,  which  your  correspondent,  "  Gleaner,"  favored  with  a  notice  in  your 
paper  of  last  Friday,  under  the  appellation  of  the  "  Brattle  Street  Parsonage  Case," 
and  the  decision  which,  unfortunately,  fails  to  receive  his  approval,  was  argued  before 
the  Supreme  Court  in  March,  1853.  The  opinion,  "  as  elaborately  reported  in  the 
newspapers,"  was  printed  from  the  original  manuscript  of  Judge  Bigelow,  and  may, 
therefore,  be  considered  as  authentic.  The  reasoning  of  "Gleaner"  upon  the  law,  as 
stated  by  him,  although  plausible,  shows  to  one  who  understands  the  case  that  he 
neither  comprehends  the  principles  of  the  cases  on  which  he  comments,  nor  the  de- 
cisions which  he  condemns;  but  as  the  estate  is  shortly  to  be  sold,  and  his  public  de- 
nunciation of  the  "  opinion"  may  possibly  have  an  injurious  effect  upon  the  sale,  it  is 
proper,  perhaps,  to  make  a  slight  effort  towards  the  reestablishment  of  the  Supreme 
Court  in  the  good  estimation  of  the  community,  now  so  seriously  shaken  by  two  as- 
saults from  "  Gleaner." 

The  case  of  the  parsonage  received  during  the  two  years  it  was  under  advisement 
the  special  attention  of  each  judge,  as  well  as  their  united  consideration  in  frequent 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  85 

devised,  and  whenever  (at  however  remote  a  period)  the  condition 
is  broken,  the  heirs  at  law  (or  devisees  as  it  would  seem)  may  re- 
cover back  the  estate  as  being  an  interest  remaining  in  the  testator 
or  ancestor.  Such,  at  least,  I  think,  was  the  belief  of  the  profes- 
sion, and  the  doctrine  of  our  courts,  prior  to  the  Brattle-street 
parsonage  case.  In  view  of -the  directly  opposite  results  arrived  at 
under  circumstances  seemingly  identical,  it  must  be  confessed  that 
the  laws  of  the  land,  upon  which  our  dearest  rights  of  person  and 
property  depend,  are  composed  of  filaments  of  the  most  gossamer 
fineness.  These  remarks  are  preliminary  to  some  account  of  the 
Bowdoin  estate,  which  presented  a  most  conspicuous  legal  battle- 
field about  a  dozen  years  ago. 

GLEANER. 


XXXIX. 

THE  BOWDOIN  ESTATE. 
September  3,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  There  has  never  been  in  our  city  a  better  battle- 
field for  legal  ingenuity  than  the  Bowdoin  estate.  I  have  men- 
tioned that  John  Erving,  in  1756,  conveyed  to  James  Bowdoin. 
In  order  not  to  facilitate  too  much  the  business  of  conveyancing,  I 
will  not  state  where  the  deed  is  recorded.  Several  hours  may  be 
profitably  spent  in  looking  for  it,  and  several  hours  more  will,  I 
think,  be  required  for  finding  the  deed  to  Mr.  Erving.  The  deed 

consultation.  There  was  no  disagreement  amongst  the  Court  upon  the  final  result. 
Neither  the  Chief  Justice,  whose  service  on  the  Bench  for  more  than  twenty-five  years 
has  so  established  his  judicial  reputation,  both  at  home  and  abroad,  for  profound  and 
accurate  knowledge,  that  neither  the  "  highest  living  authority  on  estates,"  nor 
any  other  authority,  can  shake  it,  nor  that  member  of  the  Court  whose  deep  knowledge 
of  the  principles  and  doctrines  of  the  common  law  was  well  established  while  "  Gleaner" 
was  using  up  his  gleanings  "  to  pay  family  expenses,"  nor  either  of  the  other  four 
able  lawyers  who  compose  the  Court,  and  who  have  increased  upon  the  bench  the  repu- 
tation they  brought  with  them  from  the  bar,  dissented  from  the  principles  or  result  of 
that  decision.  It  is  therefore  submitted  to  the  public  that  the  decision  of  the  Court  is 
at  least  as  likely  to  be  correct  as  that  pronounced  against  it  in  the  article  alluded  to. 
In  many  matters  connected  with  estates,  the  authority  of  "  Gleaner,"  it  may  be  admit- 
ted, is  conclusive.  But  when  a  title  depends  upon  the  construction  of  a  deed,  as  in 
Curtis  vs.  Francis,  or  upon  principles  of  the  common  law  not  the  subject  of  frequent 
investigations,  as  in  the  Brattle-street  case,  there  is  not  much  hazard  of  error  in  assum- 
ing that  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts  may  be  correct  in  the  law  which  they  de- 
clare—  especially  as  they  carry  into  the  decision  of  a  case  no  pride  of  opinion  upon  a 
preconceived  theory.  Z. 


86  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

to  Bowdoin  conveyed  a  lot  137  feet  on  Beacon  street,  bounded 
west  on  land  late  of  widow  Rogers,  now  of  John  Spooner,  490  feet, 
&c.  It  also  included  the  lower  lot  of  Middlecott's  pasture,  bound- 
ed west  on  Middlecott  or  Bowdoin  street  78  feet.  Dr.  Bulfinch 
conveyed  to  Mr.  Bowdoin  a  gore  of  land  in  1772,  for  the  record  of 
which  a  like  long  search  may  be  instituted.  The  main  lot  was 
bounded  on  the  westerly  line  about  40  feet  east  of  Bowdoin  street. 

Governor  Bowdoin  died  in  1790,  devising  to  his  widow  for  life, 
with  remainder  to  his  son,  James  Bowdoin,  who  purchased  of  D. 
D.  Rogers  (1803-1807,  L.  206,  f.  261  ;  L.  219,  f.  226),  two  strips 
of  land,  the  north  one  measuring  156  feet,  and  the  southerly  one 
110  feet,  on  Bowdoin  street.  After  which  his  land  bounded  south 
on  Beacon  street  177  feet  6  inches  west  on  Bowdoin  street,  110 
feet  north  on  other  lots  sold  off  by  Rogers,  42  feet  west  on  the 
same,  200  feet,  south  on  the  same  40  feet  6  inches,  west  again  on 
Bowdoin  street  about  257  feet,  north  in  the  rear  on  Samuel  Park- 
man's  estate  at  the  southerly  corner  of  Allston  street,  90  feet  10 
inches,  east  on  Bulfinch's  pasture,  and  on  the  Phillips  estate  to 
Beacon  street.  The  north  part  of  this  land  is  the  source  of  title 
to  the  block  of  four  houses  on  Bowdoin  street. 

The  residue,  or  his  mansion-house  estate,  he  devised,  in  1811 ,  to 
his  nephew,  James  Temple  Bowdoin,  for  life,  with  remainder  to  his 
issue  successively  in  tail-male.  In  1836  conveyances  were  made 
to  bar  the  entail,  and  vest  the  land  in  said  James  Temple,  for  life, 
with  remainder  to  his  son  of  the  same  name,  in  fee  simple.  Now, 
James  Temple,  Senr.,  was  born  in  London,  in  1766,  and  subse- 
quently naturalized  here,  and  his  son  was  born  in  Rome,  in  1815. 
I  have  in  my  volumes  copies  of  elaborate  opinions  of  Mr.  Justice 
Jackson,  of  Mr.  Webster,  and  of  the  late  Wm.  C.  Aylwin,  as  to 
the  question  of  alienage  —  of  entail  —  of  conditions  of  residence  in 
this  country,  annexed  to  the  devise  in  tail,  of  the  effect  of  the 
deeds  for  barring  the  same,  etc.  James  Bowdoin,  a  son  of  the 
late  Thomas  L.  Winthrop,  died  without  issue.  He  was  the  next 
subsequent  devisee  in  tail  before  the  ultimate  devise  to  Bowdoin 
College.  And  now  came  the  tug  of  war  between  James  Temple 
Bowdoin,  claiming  to  have  barred  the  entail,  and  the  College  deny- 
ing his  title  in  toto. 

An  array  of  learned  counsel  were  employed  on  each  side.  Pos* 
session  was  the  important  point,  as  the  premises  were  vacant,  and 
accordingly  one  morning  a  wooden  edifice  appeared,  the  fany 
growth  of  the  night,  tenanted  by  an  adequate  supply  of  hired  men 
to  guard  its  precincts.  On  a  subsequent  night  it  vanished  as  sum- 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  87 

marily  as  it  came,  to  the  great  amusement  of  the  public,  who  en- 
joyed the  sport  as  they  would  have  done  a  street  fight  between  two 
canine  opponents,  though  this  one  was  conducted  with  entire  good- 
humor  and  urbanity.  At  last  a  compromise  was  made  (1843). 
Joint  deeds  were  given,  the  College  receiving  three-tenths  of  the 
proceeds.  This  estate  embraced  six  houses  on  Beacon  street,  five 
on  the  south  and  four  on  the  north  side  of  Ashburton  place,  and 
also  the  New  Jerusalem  Church  ;  and  it  may  be  remarked  that  resi- 
dents in  this  neighborhood  can  within  the  distance  of  little  more 
than  one  hundred  feet  have  their  choice  of  four  kinds  of  preaching, 
—  Baptist,  Scotch  Presbyterian,  Congregationalist,  and  Sweden- 
borgian. 

Governor  Bowdoin  was  a  man  of  great  ability  and  firmness,  who 
rendered  the  Commonwealth  important  service,  under  very  trying 
circumstances.  The  suppression  of  Shay's  insurrection  devolved 
upon  him,  and  of  course,  in  certain  quarters,  entailed  upon  him 
much  odium.  His  antagonist,  Governor  Hancock,  was  the  popu- 
lar idol  of  the  day ;  but  posterity  has,  I  think,  rendered  a  more 
just  and  discriminating  verdict  as  to  the  relative  merit  of  these  two 
chief  magistrates.  On  one  occasion  they  both  appeared  to  advan- 
tage. Governor  Bowdoin.  offered  to  give  his  large  lot  at  the  corner 
of  Tremont  Row  and  Howard  street  to  the  Brattle-street  Societ}', 
for  the  erection  of  a  church.  Governor  Hancock,  and  with  him  a 
majority  of  the  society,  decided  not  to  accept  the  gift.  He  there- 
upon subscribed  £200  for  rebuilding  on  the  old  site,  and  Governor 
Hancock  gave,  besides  a  bell,  the  sum  of  £1,000  towards  the  same 
object.  GLEANER. 


XL,. 

"  CONTEMPT  OF  COURT." 

September  4,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —Your  correspondent  "  Z."  seems  to  regard  me 
as  quite  presuming,  in  expressing  a  doubt  of  the  correctness  of 
certain  decisions  of  our  Supreme  Court.  He  dwells  with  much 
emphasis  on  the  indisputable  talent  and  learning  of  its  several 
members,  and  announces  the  long  period  of  time  which  they  had 
devoted  to  the  consideration  of  the  case  alluded  to.  Admitting 
that  there  is  a  province  in  which  I  may  legitimately  form  and 
express  an  opinion,  that  might  be  entitled  to  some  weight,  he  yet 


88  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

considers  that  I  wholly  transcend  that  province  when  I  undertake  to 
judge  what  land  is  conveyed  by  a  deed,  or  what  title  passes  by  a 
will.  I  really  conceive  that  with  these  two  deductions  there  is 
nothing  left  for  a  conveyancer,  these  being  the  two  fundamental 
matters  of  inquiry  involved  in  every  investigation  which  he  is 
called  upon  to  make. 

I  deem  it  the  right, —  aye,  more  than  that, —  the  duty  of  every 
loyal  member  of  the  profession  fairly  and  candidly  to  criticise  any 
legal  decision  which  he  shall  think  erroneous,  from  however  high 
a  tribunal  it  may  emanate ;  and  although  it  may  happen  to  be 
founded  on  a  deliberation  of  two,  or  even  of  fifteen,  years.  I  cer- 
tainly yield  to  no  one  in  respect  for  the  law  or  its  ministers.  As 
to  the  Judge  who  delivered  the  opinion  specially  commented  upon 
I  will  say  that  I  have  alwa37s  felt  for  him  a  sincere  personal  regard, 
—  that,  although  the  youngest  member  of  the  Court,  I  think  him 
one  of  the  ablest, —  and  that,  considering  the  decision  as  emanating 
from  them  all,  I  do  not  believe  that  the  views  arrived  at  could 
possibly  have  been  stated  with  greater  legal  precision,  clearness, 
or  accuracy.  It  was  a  master-piece  of  technical  reasoning. 

In  the  case  of  Curtis  vs.  Francis  x  I  conscientiously  believe  that 
no  person  ever  did  read,  or  ever  can  read,  the  deed  in  question  with- 
out the  most  entire  and  absolute  conviction  of  the  actual  intent  of 
the  grantor  to  sell,  and  of  the  grantee  to  buy,  a  tract  of  land  in- 

i  THE  LAW  AGAIN. 

Mr.  EDITOR:  —  "  Gleaner"  informs  us  that  he  shall  die  in  the  faith  that  the  case  o 
Curtis  vs.  Francis  will  be  overruled  one  of  these  days.  I  will  not  inflict  on  your  readers 
an  argument  against  this  opinion  of  "  Gleaner's."  Such  a  discussion  would  be  quite  as 
amusing,  and,  perhaps,  as  profitable,  as  a  history  of  the  Cambridge-street  pastures.  The 
case  has  not  yet  been  reported ;  but  if  "  Gleaner's  "  own  statement  of  the  point  decided 
is  correct,  it  is  very  apparent  that  he  will  be  the  solitary  martyr  to  his  faith.  Why 
"  Gleaner"  should  travel  so  far  out  of  his  path  to  attack  the  decision  in  the  Brattle- 
street  Church  case  was,  at  first,  mysterious.  It  is  no  longer  so. 

We  remember  the  old  story  of  a  traveller  down  east,  who,  one  day,  saw  a  child  sitting 
on  the  roadside,  blubbering  over  a  hay -cart  upset  in  the  highway.  "  Why  don't  you 
call  your  father  instead  of  whimpering  over  your  misfortune  ?  "  said  the  traveller.  "  I 
would,"  replied  the  boy;  "  but  the of  it  is,  that  dad  is  under  the  load." 

No  one  doubts  the  right  of  "  Gleaner,"  or  any  other  competent  person,  "  fairly  and 
candidly  to  criticise  any  legal  decision  which  he  shall  think  erroneous;"  but  sarcasm  and 
ridicule  are  unbecoming  weapons  to  use  against  such  a  tribunal  as  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Massachusetts,  —  especially  in  criticising  a  decision  where  "  no  labored  examination 
of  authorities"  had  been  made  by  the  critic,  and  his  knowledge  of  the  case  is,  by  his 
own  confession,  exceedingly  superficial. 

The  opinion  of  the  late  Mr.  Justice  Hubbard  upon  the  will  of  Mrs.  Hancock,  to  which 
"  Gleaner""  so  complacently  refers,  I  have  always  been  informed  was  not  at  all  upon  the 
point  of  the  validity  or  invalidity  of  the  devise.  It  was  only  that  the  interest  of  each 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  89 

eluded  within  parallel  straight  lines.  I  believe  that  such  is  the 
legal  effect  of  the  conveyance, —  that  (as  I  have  said  elsewhere)  a 
line  is  one  line,  and  that  a  line  broken  off  in  the  middle,  and  one 
part  detached  from  the  other,  is  as  impossible  in  the  true  construc- 
tion of  a  deed  as  in  a  proposition  of  Euclid.  I  shall  die  with  un- 
altered convictions  on  this  point.  I  have,  therefore,  clearly  and 
unequivocally  expressed  them.  This  decision,  I  am  persuaded, 
ought  to  be,  and  eventually  will  be,  overruled.  If  I  know  my  own 
heart,  I  should  have  expressed  the  like  disapproval  of  it  had  its 
effect  been  to  put  into  Mr.  Francis's  possession  an  estate  of  $50,000 
instead  of  depriving  him  of  it. 

In  relation  to  the  Brattle-street  parsonage  case  I  had  never  been 
consulted  directly  or  indirectly.  I  had  merely  heard  that  the 
estate  was  devised  on  condition.  I  had  formed  no  "  preconceived 
opinion"  on  the  question  involved,  except,  indeed,  such  as  arose 
from  the  satisfaction  which  I  felt  when  I  learnt  how  the  case  had 
been  decided.  My  entire  sympathy  and  good  wishes  were  with  the 
Society.  But  it  seemed  to  me,  on  reading  the  decision,  that,  like 
the  other  case,  it  was  founded  on  erroneous  application  of  a  sound 
rule  of  law.  I  have  made  no  labored  examination  of  authorities. 
I  have  merely  referred  to  two  prior  adjudications,  and  presented 
certain  general  views  which  happened  to  occur  to  me  as  showing 
the  nice  and  shadowy  distinctions  known  to  the  law  of  the  land.  I 
had  never  conversed  with  any  of  the  parties  or  counsel  opposed  to 
the  Society.  I  am  now,  however,  authorized  to  state  that  a  written 

heir,  whatever  it  might  be,  was  transferable  by  assignment.  This  information  may  be 
erroneous;  but  something  better  than  hearsay  will  be  required  to  prove  that  "  Gleaner  " 
is  justified  in  boasting  of  so  illustrious  a  predecessor. 

It  is  true  that  some  years  since  a  bill  was  filed  by  the  deacons  of  the  church,  praying  • 
for  leave  to  sell  the  parsonage  estate,  and  that  the  bill  was  dismissed.  "  Gleaner's  "  great 
"  respect  for  the  law  and  its  ministers  "  will  be  gratified  by  learning  that  the  dismisgal 
of  the  bill  was  not  predicated  "  on  a  directly  opposite  construction  of  the  will  from  that 
to  which  the  same  Court  have  now  arrived,"  nor  yet  upon  a  mere  matter  of  form.  The 
Court  thought  they  had  no  authority  to  order  a  sale  of  the  estate  and  a  reinvestment  of 
the  proceeds  upon  the  same  condition. 

I  do  not  and  never  did  doubt  "  Gleaner's  "  paramount  authority  upon  some  matters 
connected  with  estates.  But,  as  I  said  before,  without  denying  the  value  of  his  opinions, 
there  are  other  points  in  conveyancing,  as  to  which,  in  my  very  humble  judgment, 
the  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court,  it  is  not  impossible,  may  be  full  as  great,  if  not 
greater  than  that  of  their  critic.  Certain  it  is  that  the  deliberate  opinion  of  these  six 
able  judges,  who  separately  and  together.for  two  years  carefully  considered  and  thoroughly 
understood  this  difficult  and  important  cause,  cannot  be  impaired  in  public  estimation 
by  sneers  and  sarcasms,  however  distinguished  the  source  whence  they  proceed.  In 
the  present  instance  the  "  vigor  of  the  critic's  bow  "  by  no  means  equals  the  "  venom 
of  his  shaft."  Z. 


90  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

opinion  exists,  in  their  possession,  drawn  up  by  the  late  Mr.  Justice 
Hubbard,  before  he  became  a  member  of  the  Bench,  which  adopts 
the  precise  construction  of  this  devise,  at  which  I  arrived  without 
knowing  that  "  I  was  following  in  the  footsteps  of  so  illustrious  a 
predecessor."  "  Tliat  each  of  us  should  have  adopted  the  same 
"plausible  view"  is  a  coincidence  by  which,  I  confess,  that  I  feel 
much  grati/ied. 

Still  further.  Only  a  few  years  ago  a  bill  was  brought  in  behalf 
of  the  same  church,  for  leave  to  sell  this  very  land.  The  bill  was 
dismissed  by  a  formal  decree.  The  opinion  then  delivered  has 
never  been  published,  and  its  precise  grounds  are  unknown  to  me. 
It  would  seem  that  it  must  have  been  on  a  directly  opposite  con- 
struction of  the  will  from  that  to  which  the  same  Court  have  now 
arrived,  unless  it  turned  upon  some  matter  of  form,  which  can 
hardly  be  supposed,  as  a  Court  of  Equity  will  always  allow  any 
amendment  in  matters  of  form  which  will  enable  them  to  do  jus- 
tice between  the  parties. 

I  had  not,  of  course,  the  slightest  wish  or  intention  of  prejudic- 
ing the  sale  of  the  estate.  I  supposed  that  the  rights  of  all  per- 
sons interested  had  been  finally  and  irrevocably  fixed  by  a  decision 
to  which  all  had  been  made  legally  parties,  and  that  the  law  was,  at 
least,  well  settled  as  to  them  and  as  to  this  parcel  of  land,  as  fully 
as  it  is  in  a  capital  case  after  the  accused  has  been  acquitted  or 
executed. 

Infallibility  is  the  attribute  only  of  the  judgment-seat  of  God. 
Alread}7  there  exists  a  large  volume  devoted  to  the  enumeration  of 
"  cases  doubted  and  overruled." 

We  have  no  Judge  Kane  in  this  latitude.  Imprisonment  in  the 
.sacred  cause  of  human  freedom,  under  the  odious  doctrine  of  con- 
tempt of  Court,  —  an  imprisonment  perpetuated  by  judicial  etiquette 
—  has  made  the  jail  of  Passmore  Williamson  the  most  honorable 
abode  in  Pennsylvania.  The  ermine  of  Massachusetts  has  upon  it 
no  such  spot  or  blemish.  Her  judges  need  no  champion  —  cer- 
tainly not  one  who  resorts  to  personalities.  They  may,  indeed, 
well  challenge  the  just  criticism  of  the  world.  Far  distant  be  the 
day  when  they  shall  feel  themselves  above  listening  to  the  honest 
sentiments  of  even  the  humblest  citizen !  GLEANER. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  91 


XLI. 

CONTEMPT  OF  COURT. 

September  6,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  In  a  recent  article  we  have  seen  that  the  doctrine 
of  contempt  of  Court,  when  enforced  by  an  arbitrary  and  unprin- 
cipled Judge,  is  as  utterly  subversive  of  personal  liberty  as  was  the 
Bastile,  with  its  lettres  de  cachet,  in  the  worst  days  of  the  French 
monarchy.  But  the  subject  has  its  comic  as  well  as  its  serious 
aspect. 

The  late  Sheriff  Henderson  and  Mr.  James  Allen,  a  descendant 
of  the  Rev.  James,  were  particular  friends.  On  a  trial  of  great 
interest  Mr.  A.  had  taken  his  seat  within  the  bar,  and  others  fol- 
lowed his  example,  so  that  the  Court  ordered  it  cleared  for  the 
-convenience  of  the  attorneys.  The  sheriff  spoke  to  Mr.  Allen, 
and  then  returned  to  his  seat.  He,  however,  presuming  on  his 
acquaintance  with  the  sheriff,  did  not  move,  but  began  making 
knowing  grimaces  at  him,  deprecating  his  farther  interference. 
Instead  of  treating  it  as  a  joke,  the  sheriff  exclaimed  to  the  Court, 
"  May  it  please  Your  Honor,  I  am  insulted  !  "  — "  How?  And  by 
whom  ?  "  —  "  Mr.  Allen  is  making  up  mouths  at  me  !  "  —  "Who  saw 
him  ?  "  —  "I,"  said  a  bystander.  —  * '  Mr.  Clerk,  swear  him."  The 
witness  was  sworn,  and  testified  accordingly.  The  Judge  said, 
"  Mr.  Sheriff,  commit  Mr.  Allen  for  contempt  of  Court."  He  was 
accordingly  taken  off  to  a  lockup,  which  already  contained  two 
thieves  and  vagabonds.  They  swore  that  he  should  not  come  in 
unless  he  treated.  He  was  thus  mulcted  with  a  supplementary  fine, 
after  which  he  enjoyed  their  agreeable  society  till  the  hour  came 
for  the  adjournment  of  the  Court,  when  he  was  brought  in,  placed 
in  the  malefactor's  seat,  suitably  reprimanded,  and  discharged. 
He  doubtless  went  home  deeply  impressed  with  a  sense  of  the 
majesty  of  the  law,  the  vindication  of  which  had  required  a  resort 
to  these  dignified  proceedings.  He  made  no  more  smiling  grimaces, 
at  least  for  that  day.  In  becoming  a  wiser,  he  became  also  a 
sadder,  man.  GLEANER. 


92  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


XLII. 

D.  D.  ROGERS'S  2|  ACRES. 

September  7,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  We  have  already  seen  that  John  Fa}Terweather 
held  and  disposed  of  a  lot  260  feet  on  Beacon  street,  and  490  feet 
deep,  held  under  his  father-in-law,  Robert  Turner  —  or  about  3 
acres.  There  was  still  left  of  this  Turner  estate,  between  the 
Bowdoin  estate  and  the  State-House  lot,  a  tract  measuring  190 
feet  on  Beacon  street,  490  feet  on  the  east  line,  140  feet  in  the 
rear,  and  westerly  571  feet  on  the  highway  leading  to  the  monument 
and  on  Beacon  hill  (i.e.,  the  entrance  of  Mt.  Vernon  street)  ; 
the  contents,  according  to  the  estimate  of  the  deeds,  being  2f 
acres  more.  John  Fayerweather,  not  satisfied  with  his  other  lot, 
takes  a  portion  of  this  also.  Thus  he  and  his  wife  convey  to 
Benjamin  Alford,  1685  (L.  13,  f.  329),  three-fourths  of  an  acre, 
bounded  south  on  the  Common^  west  on  the  highway  leading  to  the 
hill,  north  and  east  on  John  Turner.  Alford' s  executrix  for  £350 
conveys  to  her  son  John  Alford,  1715  (L.  32,  f.  94),  with  a  slight 
perversion  of  the  points  of  compass,  bounded  east  on  the  training 
field,  south  on  the  way  leading  to  Beacon  hill,  west  and  north  on 
Gamaliel  Rogers' s  heirs.  John  Alford  makes  a  trust  settlement 
by  way  of  jointure,  1718  (L.  33,  f.  95).  John  Alford,  of  Charles- 
town,  sells  to  William  Molineaux,  1760  (L.  95,  f.  233),  bounded 
in  front  on  Bacon  street  100  feet,  then  runs  north  a  little  east  367 
feet  [bounded  by  a  highway  leading  to  Beacon  Hill. — ED.],  then 
east  bounded  on  John  Spooner  78  feet,  then  south  to  the  street 
342  feet  [this  side  also  bounded  on  Spoooner.  —  ED.] — a  plan 
being  recorded.  William  Molineaux  built  a  mansion-house,  quite  a 
splendid  one  for  those  days,  and  died  1774.  It  was  appraised  at 
£600. 

The  Commonwealth,  in  1782,  conveyed  the  same  to  Daniel 
Dennison  Rogers,  as  the  confiscated  estate  of  Charles  Ward 
Apthorp.  (1782,  L.  135,  f.  6.)  Said  Charles  Ward  Apthorp,  as 
administrator  of  Molineaux,  brought  an  ejectment  to  try  title  as 
late  as  1780,  but  unsuccessfully.  (Suffolk,  175,  f.  67.) 

This  land  bounded  both  north  and  east  on  the  land  of  John 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  93 

Turner.  He  died  in  1681,  empowering  his  executor  to  sell  his 
14  house  and  land  at  the  upper  end  of  the  common  or  training  field, 
and  the  land  at  Beacon  hill ;"  who  accordingly  sold  to  George  Monk, 
1681  (L.  12,  f.  114),  a  dwelling-house  and  two  acres  of  land,  at 
the  upper  end  of  the  Common,  bounded  south-east  on  the  Common, 
and  running  back  to  Mr.  Middlecott's  land,  and  from  the  corner 
post  of  Mr.  Fayerweather  to  Mr.  Wharton's  land.  (Middlecott 
and  Wharton  owned  pastures  on  Cambridge  street.) 

Monk  sold  to  Gamaliel  Rogers,  1690,  (L.  14,  f.  403),  bounded 
south-east  on  the  highway  between  it  and  the  almshouse  90  feet, 
then  south-westerly  on  Ben.  Alford  340  feet,  south-easterly  on  same 
76  feet,  then  on  Col.  Samuel  Shrimpton  204  feet,  "  by  a  parcel  of 
posts  on  the  side  of  Beacon  hill,"  in  the  rear  on  Mr.  Middlecott, 
etc.,  140  feet,  and  then  490  feet  on  Fayerweather  (i.e.,  the 
Bowdoin  estate),  Thus  we  find  that  as  early  as  1690  the  alms- 
house  (in  which  our  distinguished  townsman,  George  Ticknor,  now 
lives)  had  been  built  on  part  of  the  Common.  Gamaliel  Rogers 
died  1709.  His  executrix  sells  to  Ebenezer,  1739  (L.  59,  f.  139), 
who  conveyed  to  Margaret  Hurst  1739  (L.  73,  f.  28), 
and  the  title  passing  through  Joseph  Gerrish,  Charles  Paxton,  and 
John  Spooner,  gets  into  Thomas  Bromfield  1763  (L.  99,  f.  237), 
and,  being  subsequently  traced  through  Barlow  Trecothick  and 
John  Tomlinson,  Charles  Ward  Apthorp,  James  Ivers,  this  lot, 
like  the  other,  gets  united  in  Daniel  Dennison  Rogers. 

He  laid  out  Bowdoin  street  in  continuation  of  Middlecott  street, 
selling  off  lots  fronting  200  feet  on  the  east  side  of  that  street,  and 
the  remaining  lands  north  and  south  of  those  lots  to  James 
Bowdoin,  whose  large  ownership  on  that  street,  as  we  have  seen, 
afforded  the  town  the  opportunity  of  robbing  Mr.  Middlecott,  by 
changing  the  name  of  his  street  into  Bowdoin  street.  The  land 
west  of  Bowdoin  street  was  retained  by  Mr.  Rogers.  He  erected 
upon  it  the  mansion-house  which  he  continued  to  occupy  till  his 
death.  It  is  the  source  of  title  to  all  the  block  east  of  the  State 
House,  and  also  to  sundry  houses  toward  Derne  street. 

One  of  the  houses  east  of  Bowdoin  street,  built  on  land  sold  by 
Rogers,  became  the  property  of  the  late  Thomas  J.  Eckley.  It 
remained  vacant  for  very  many  months,  no  tenant  being  found  who 
would  pay  the  rent  demanded.  An  amusing  incident  happened 
from  this  circumstance.  Certain  females,  of  something  more  than 
doubtful  character,  took  possession  in  a  quiet  manner,  without 
paying  any  rent,  and  held  their  nightly  orgies  unsuspected.  At 
last  one  of  their  visitors  got  by  accident  into  the  next  adjoining 


94  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

house,  and  so  alarmed  its  quiet  and  orderly  female  inmates  that 
an  explanation  ensued,  and  the  domicile  which  had  been  honored 
by  these  temporary  occupants  became  again  vacant. 

GLEANER. 


XLIII. 

ALLEGORICAL  — NOT  HISTORICAL. 

September-  9,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  If  my  arrow,  after  hitting  its  mark  (as  I  think 
it  did),  glanced  off  and  hit  your  correspondent  (Z.)  I  can  only 
say  that  I  did  not  know  that  he  was  there,  and  assure  him  that  he 
need  be  under  no  apprehensions  from  "  the  venom  of  the  shaft." 

No  one  laughed  more  heartily  than  myself  at  his  amusing  alle- 
gory. I  think  the  following,  though  certainly  devoid  of  the  like 
humor,  is  more  in  accordance  with  the  facts.  "  Father"  wanted  to 
send  a  valuable  load,  and,  like  everybody  else,  employed  Shaw  & 
Co.'s  Express,  who  are  known  to  be  trusty,  intelligent,  and  experi- 
enced persons.  His  intention  was  that  it  should  be  taken  to  the 
end  of  Drake's  wharf,  and  thence  over  a  bridge  built  many  years  ago 
in  the  same  straight  line,  and  communicating  with  the  flag -staff  on 
Castle  island.  The  driver  thought  he  saw  this  bridge  ranging  in  a 
southerly  instead  of  an  easterly  direction  from  the  end  of  the 
wharf,  and,  from  this  mistake  of  monuments,  drove  overboard. 
I  happened  to  be  looking  on,  and,  instead  of  scolding  or  "  blub- 
bering," forthwith  tried  as  hard  as  I  could  to  rescue  the  goods. 
But  the  vehicle  upset  about  forty  feet  south  of  the  wharf,  and,  the 
wind  and  tide  being  against  me,  I  was  obliged  to  abandon  them  to 
the  sharks  in  that  vicinity. 

Seriously,  Z.  doubts  that  Mr.  Justice  Hubbard  ever  gave  a  writ- 
ten opinion  as  to  the  Brattle-street  parsonage  case  adverse  to  the 
last  decision  of  the  Court.  The  columns  of  a  newspaper  are  not 
the  best  vehicle  for  publishing  such  a  document ;  but  I  assert,  as  a 
person  of  veracity,  that  this  will  was  submitted  to  him  for  an 
opinion  as  to  what  title  was  in  the  Society,  and  what  title  was  in 
John  Hancock,  and  who  were  entitled  under  him  to  claim  the  es- 
tate, and  in  what  proportions,  in  case  the  condition  should  be 
broken.  His  opinion  occupies  three  closely  written  pages.  The 
result  at  which  he  arrives  is,  that  the  title  of  the  church  was  on  a 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  95 

valid  condition;  that  the  devise  over  was  a  "  conditional  limita- 
tion," and  the  right  under  it  vested  in  John  Hancock.  He  pro- 
ceeds to  consider  the  descents,  deeds,  and  devises  since  his  death, 
and  examines  their  legal  bearing  upon  the  title  and  estate  thus 
given  to  Mr.  H.  The  Court  have  decided  that  there  is  no  condi- 
tion legally  annexed  to  the  ownership  of  the  Society,  —  that  John 
Hancock  and  those  claiming  under  him  have  not,  and  never  have  had, 
any  title  to  this  land.  Z.'s  position  then  seems  to  be  this,  —  that 
Mr.  Hubbard  did  not  mean  to  say  or  imply  that  in  his  opinion  the 
Hancock  heirs  had  any  title  whatever ;  but  that  this  opinion,  elabo- 
rate and  learned  as  it  is,  was  devoted  to  considering  in  whom  and 
where  nothing  vested  ;  whether  nothing  could  be  lawfully  conveyed 
or  devised  ;  whether  or  not  Mrs.  Perkins  inherited  one-third  undi- 
vided of  nothing,  etc.  I  never  met  with  anything  to  beat  this, 
except,  perhaps,  a  deed  of  a  moiety  of  a  house,  where,  among  the 
privileges  granted,  was  an  undivided  half  of  the  right  of  arching 
over  a  certain  passage-way. 

Further,  Hon.  Simon  Greenleaf,  in  1842,  had  this  will  submitted 
to  him  for  an  opinion.  His  reputation  as  Professor  of  Law  in 
Harvard  College,  and  as  author  of  some  of  the  best  text-books  in 
the  profession,  obtained  for  him  the  offer  of  a  seat  on  the  Bench 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  which,  however,  he  declined.  He  too,  it 
would  seem,  saw  nothing  too  remote  in  this  devise  to  John  Han- 
cock, which  made  it  void  in  law ;  since  he  also  has  given  a 
written  opinion  as  to  who  will,  in  his  judgment,  be  entitled  to  this 
land  under  this  will,  as  heirs  of  John  Hancock,  on  breach  of  the 
.condition. 

Z.  has  reconciled,  to  his  own  satisfaction,  the  first  and  the  last 
decisions  of  the  Court  itself  in  regard  to  this  estate,  —  their  disa- 

THB  BRATTLE-STREET   PARSONAGE  CASE. 
September  10,  1865. 

MB.  EDITOR:  —  "Gleaner"  having  solemnly  asseverated  that  the  late  Mr.  Justice 
Hubbard  did  give  a  written  opinion  upon  Mrs.  Hancock's  will,  such  doubtless  was  the 
fact.  It  would  be  uncourteous  to  say  that  "  Gleaner"  cannot  understand  a  plain  propo- 
sition, yet  there  is  only  one  alternative  by  which  to  account  for  his  ludicrous  perver- 
sion of  what  he  is  pleased  to  call  my  "  position"  in  reference  to  this  opinion.  His 
manifest  misapprehension  of  a  very  plain  statement,  added  to  the  evident  fact  that  he 
neither  comprehends  the  judgment  which  he  praises  so  highly,  nor  yet  the  law  of  the 
case,  are  not  calculated  to  create  confidence  in  the  accuracy  of  his  statements  as  to  the 
contents  of  a  written  opinion.  There  is  this  farther  reason  for  doubting  his  correctness, 
viz.,  that  Judge  Hubbard  sat  at  the  hearing  of  Grant  et  al.  vs.  Hancock  et  al.,  which 
he  would  hardly  have  done  had  he  previously  given,  as  counsel,  an  opinion  covering 
every  point  of  controversy  arising  out  of  the  will.  If  "  Gleaner"  would  substantiate 


96  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

vowal,  in  the  one  case,  of  any  jurisdiction  to  order  a  sale  and  re- 
investment of  proceeds,  and  their  exercise  of  such  jurisdiction  in 
the  other  case.  I  wish  he  would  also  try  his  hand  at  reconciling 
the  two  published  decisions,  to  which  I  shall  call  his  attention  in  a 
few  days.  If  he  can  do  so  I  shall  indeed  cheerfully  admit  the 
vigor  of  Ms  bow.  He  is  desirous  to  see  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Hub- 
bard.  I  am  desirous  to  see  the  first  opinion  of  the  Court,  about 
which  he  seems  so  well  informed.  How  happens  it  not  to  have 
been  published?  Is  there  not  a  law  that  all  decisions  shall  be 
published,  and  within  a  limited  time?  Did  the  Court  feel  dissatis- 
fied with  the  decision,  and  intend  subsequently  to  modify  or 
reverse  it?  GLEANER. 


XMV. 

A  CHALLENGE  TO  Z. 
September  10,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —  The  following  are  the  twopublished  decisions  of 
the  Supreme  Court  to  which  I  promised  to  call  Z.'s  attention. 

In  the  case  of  Tyler  vs.  Hammond,  11  Pick.  Rep.,  193,  March 
term,  1831,  for  the  recovery  of  very  valuable  land  in  Boston,  it 
was  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  that  "  where  a  deed  of  land  de- 
scribes it  as  bounding  on  a  road,  but  sets  forth  metes  and  bounds 
which  plainly  exclude  the  road,  no  part  of  the  soil  and  freehold  of 
the  road  passes  by  the  grant."  Mr.  Justice  Wilde,  in  delivering  a 
very  learned  and  satisfactory  opinion,  accordingly  says  :  "If  by 

his  boast  of  such  a  predecessor,  let  the  opinion  speak  for  itself.  I,  for  one,  have  no 
confidence  in  his  account  of  it. 

After  all,  — unless  "Gleaner"  deems  himself  justified  in  exclaiming  with  Falstaff, 
"  The  laws  of  England  are  at  my  command.  Happy  are  all  they  which  are  my  friends 
and  woe  to  my  Lord  Chief  Justice," —  it  is  really  of  no  consequence  whether  Judge 
Hubbard  and  Mr.  Geeenleaf  did  or  did  not  give  the  opinions  attributed  to  them.  The 
Supreme  Court  settle  the  law.  They  have  made  a  masterly  judgment  in  this  case, 
after  hearing  arguments  and  bestowing  great  and  unusual  deliberations  upon  the  points 
of  it.  Public  confidence  on  the  correctness  of  their  decision  is  not  to  be  shaken  by  the 
opposite  opinions  of  counsel,  however  eminent,  even  though  indorsed  by  "  Gleaner." 
Moreover,  as 

None  ever  felt  the  halter  draw 
With  good  opinion  of  the  law, 

or  its  ministers  either,  this  confidence  is  still  less  likely  to  be  diminished  by  the  sneers 
or  sarcasm  of  one,  or  even  of  a  score  of  unsuccessful  litigants,  who,  under  the  pretence 
of  candid  criticism,  have  the  bad  taste  publicly  to  exhibit  their  vexation.  Z. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  97 

the  terms  of  the  description  the  road  is  necessarily  excluded,  it  is 
equivalent  to  an  express  declaration  that  no  part  of  the  road  is ' 
intended  to  be  conveyed;  and  it  is  perfectly  clear  that  the  fee  in  the 
road  cannot  pass  as  appurtenant  to  the  land  adjoining.1'  The  law 
on  this  point  was  thus  settled  after  the  fullest  advisement  and  con- 
sideration of  all  opposite  opinions  and  dicta,  and,  I  may  add,  in 
exact  conformity  with  common-sense. 

Twenty  years  pass  away.  This  decision  is  acted  on  without  the 
slightest  hesitation  as  sound  law,  and  innumerable  conveyances 
are  made  and  construed  with  reference  to  it.  At  last  comes  the 
case  of  Newhall  vs.  Ireson  et  al.,  8  Gushing  Rep.,  595,  November 
term,  1851,  when  we  find  the  same  Court  deciding  that  "a  deed  de- 
scribing the  boundary  line  of  the  land  conveyed  as  running  northerly 
a  certain  distance  to  a  hightvay,  and  from  thence  upon  the  highway 
passes  the  land  to  the  centre  of  the  highway,  ALTHOUGH  the  distance 
specified  by  actual  measurement  carries  the  line  only  to  the  southerly 
side  of  the  highway."  The  case  of  Tyler  vs.  Hammond  was  referred 
to  in  the  argument.  Chief  Justice  Shaw  cited  the  language  of  the 
deed  under  consideration  as  "  running  northerly  7  poles  to  the 
county  road,  and  from  thence  upon  the  road  22  poles  to  the  first- 
mentioned  bound,"  and  then  says:  "The  ordinary  construction  of 
such  a  deed  to  the  highway,  and  from  thence  upon  the  highway,  would 
carry  the  land  to  the  middle  of  the  highway.  Such  is  the  established 
presumption  governing  the  construction  of  a  deed  in  the  absence  of 
controlling  words."  He  makes  various  other  references,  but  does 
not  cite  the  case  of  Tyler  vs.  Hammond.  He  adverts  to  the  fact 
that  the  measurement  only  reached  to  the  southerly  side  of  the 
road,  and  adds  :  "  But  the  Court  are  of  opinion  that  this  fact  does 
not  rebut  the  strong  presumption  that  boundary  on  a  highivay  is  ad 
Jilum  vice.  The  road  is  a  monument,  the  thread  (i.e.,  centre)  of 
the  road  in  legal  contemplation  is  that  monument  or  abuttal."  And 
accordingly  the  Court  hold  that  the  actual  measurements  of  the 
deed  are  controlled  by  the  fact  that  in  legal  presumption  it  meant 
to  run,  and  did  run,  to  the  centre  of  the  road. 

I  apprehend  that  your  correspondent  Z.,  who  thinks  it  hardly 
allowable  for  third  persons  to  differ  from  the  Court,  will  be  rather 
embarrassed  by  the  evidence  thus  afforded  that,  within  the  short 
period  of  twenty  years,  the  Court  has  differed  thus  totally  from  itself 
in  the  enunciation  of  a  general  principle  of  law,  constantly  acted 
upon  in  the  daily  transactions  of  the  community, —  and  this,  too, 
without  expressly  overruling  the  former  case,  or  even,  indeed,  al- 


98  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

hiding  to  it  in  the  most  incidental  manner,  or  indicating  the  least 
consciousness  of  introducing  any  new  doctrine. 

As  the  law  on  this  subject  stands  by  the  latest  decision,  a 
grantor  selling  an  estate  bounded  south  on  State  street  will  be 
deemed  to  convey  to  the  centre  of  the  street, —  a  doctrine  which, 
I  think,  will  surprise  some  who  are  in  the  habit  of  congregating  in 
that  locality.  If  a  grantor  lays  out  a  street  through  his  own  land, 
and,  meaning  to  retain  the  fee  of  it,  sells  off  lots  on  each  side 
bounded  north  and  south  on  the  street,  he  will  discover  that  he  has 
unwittingly  parted  with  the  fee  of  the  street  also,  and  may  thus  be 
most  seriously  embarrassed  ;  since  if  he  wishes  to  use  the  same 
highway  as  a  means  of  access  to  his  other  lands  he  may  find  him- 
self legally  a  trespasser  on  the  soil  where  he  thought  himself  a  pro- 
prietor. 

And  now,  Mr.  Editor,  I  gladly  leave  the  barren  field  of  legal 
criticism  to  visit  the  sunny  slope  of  Beacon  hill. 

GLEANER. 


XLV, 

THE   BEACON   AND   MR.   THURSTON'S   HOUSE. 
September  11,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  As  our  citizens  pass  along  Bowdoin  street  they 
may  notice  a  block  of  three  houses  at  the  corner  of  Bowdoin  place, 
the  first  of  which  is  owned  and  occupied  by  one  whom  we  all 
delight  to  honor,  —  President  Quincy.  Few  probably  are  aware  of 
the  interest  which  attaches  to  this  precise  locality.  Among  the 
lots  sold  by  D.  D.  Rogers,  this  estate,  80  feet  front  and  rear,  was 
in  1802  conveyed  by  him  to  William  Thurston  (203,  f.  86) .  There 
have  been  some  subsequent,  but  very  slight,  changes  of  boundary 
between  him  and  Mr.  Rogers.  This  land  adjoined  the  extreme 
summit  of  Beacon  hill.  His  west  line  was  on  the  lot  6  rods 
square,  in  the  centre  of  which  stood  the  beacon  or  monument 
itself. 

The  exact  location  of  the  beacon  and  of  the  99  feet  square  within 
which  it  was  erected  is  easily  pointed  out.  If  a  person  should 
walk  from  Park  street  northerly  into  Mt.  Vernon  street,  and  con- 
tinue 60  feet  northerly  of  the  north  line  of  that  street  (where  it 
takes  a  westerly  direction)  he  will  come  to  the  south  line  of  this 
reserved  lot  of  the  town.  In  other  words,  the  south  line  of  99 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  99 

feet  is  exactly  60  feet  north  of  Mt.  Vernon  street.  The  northerly 
line  is  exactly  159  feet  north  of  Mt.  Vernon  street.  The  westerly 
line  comes  about  a  dozen  feet  inside  of  the  reservoir  and  of  the 
houses  south  of  it ;  and  the  east  line  coincides  with  the  west  line 
of  Thurston's  and  Rogers'  land,  i.e.,  with  the  east  line  continued 
of  that  part  of  Mt.  Vernon  street  which  runs  north  from  Beacon 
street.  Temple  street  is  now  laid  out  through  this  monument  lot, 
leaving,  as  above  stated,  a  gore  of  about  12  feet  of  it  west  of 
that  street.  The  monument  itself  must  have  stood  on  the  east  side 
of  Temple  street,  about  6  feet  south  of  a  point  opposite  to  the  south- 
east corner  of  the  reservoir. 

Mr.  Thurston,  in  1804,  erected  on  his  estate  a  house,  from 
which  he  could  literally  look  down  upon  all  his  fellow-citizens.  It 
stood  in  about  the  centre  of  his  land  from  north  to  south,  while  it 
was  but  two  feet  distant  on  the  west  from  the  monument  lot.  It 
was  approachable  only  by  steps,  and  it  was  even  found  necessary 
to  hoist  up  all  his  wood,  etc.  In  the  12th  Mass.  Rep.,  220,  is  a 
very  celebrated  law  case  —  of  Thurston  vs.  Hancock  —  from  which 
it  appears  that  the  defendants  in  1811  dug  down  their  land  on  the 
west  60  feet  below  the  original  level,  and  the  earth  fell  in,  leaving 
.bare  his  cellar  wall,  etc.,  and  rendering  his  house  itself  unsafe,  so 
that  it  had  to  be  taken  down.  His  damages  were  laid  at  $20,000. 
The  decision  was,  that  "  no  action  lay  for  the  owner  of  the  house 
for  damage  done  to  the  house  ;  but  that  he  ivas  entitled  to  an  action 
for  damage  arising  from  the  falling  of  his  natural  soil  into  the  pit  so 
dug."  A  ver}y  learned  opinion  was  given  by  Judge  Parker.  It  was 
founded  on  the  idea  that  Mr.  T.  must  have  known  that  his  next 
neighbors  "  had  a  right  to  build  equally  near  to  the  line,  or  to  dig 
down  the  soil  for  any  other  lawful  purpose  ;  "  and  that,  "  from  the 
shape  and  nature  of  the  ground,  it  was  impossible  to  dig  there 
without  causing  excavations." 

This  opinion  has  always  been  unsatisfactory  to  many  of  the  pro- 
fession. The  town  had  owned  this  99  feet  square  on  the  summit 
of  the  hill,  with  the  30-feet  way  to  it,  for  the  purpose  of  sustaining 
a  beacon,  and  as  a  spot  accessible  to  all  citizens  and  strangers. 
It  could  not  reasonably  have  been  supposed  that  for  any  sum  of 
money,  much  less  that  for  a  mere  mess  of  pottage,  the  town  could 
have  been  induced  to  part  with  the  one  object  that  made  it  indis- 
putably the  queen  of  all  the  cities  on  this  continent.  This  area  on 
the  summit  of  the  hill  having  been  retained  for  these  high  public 
objects,  the  adjoining  individual  owners  would  have  held  their 
lands  subject  to  the  easement  that  this  area  and  the  way  to  it 


100  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

should  forever  remain  unmolested ;  and,  but  for  the  suicidal  act  of 
the  town  itself  in  selling  the  same,  I  conceive  that  we  never  could 
have  been  deprived  of  this,  the  crowning  glory  and  beauty  of  our 
metropolis.  Mr.  Thurston  was,  I  think,  entitled  to  damages,  and 
vindictive  damages  too,  against  parties  using  their  adjoining  lands 
for  a  purpose  which  neither  he  nor  any  one  else  could  reasonably 
have  anticipated,  —  a  purpose  which,  though  not  prompted  by  any 
special  malice  against  him,  ought  to  have  been  regarded  as  indi- 
cating a  general  malice  against  the  whole  community,  and  therefore 
to  have  been  visited  with  the  most  severe  punishment. 

GLEANER. 


XL,  VI. 

HANGING. 

September  12,   1855. 

"  None  ever  felt  the  halter  draw 
With  good  opinion  of  the  law." 

MR.  EDITOR  :  — Your  correspondent  (Z.),  abandoning  argument, 
has  closed  the  discussion  between  us  by  the  above  discourteous 
quotation.  I  will,  however,  use  it  as  a  text  for  a  few  remarks  on 
the  subject  of  "  Hanging."  While  John  Hancock  was  Governor 
of  the  Commonwealth  Rachel  Whall  was  hung  in  Boston  for  high- 
way robbery.  Her  offence  consisted  in  twitching  from  the  hand 
of  another  female  a  bonnet,  worth  perhaps  75  cents,  and  running 
off  with  it.  The  most  urgent  applications  for  her  pardon  were  un- 
successful. I  mention  this  not  to  the  disparagement  of  the  Gov- 
ernor. He  doubtless  acted  from  a  sense  of  duty,  thinking  it  best 
for  the  community  that  the  laws  of  the  land, —  however  frightfully 
severe, — while  they  were  laws,  should  be  executed.  A  lad  of  18  years 
of  age  was  hung  in  Salem  for  arson  during  the  administration  of 
Governor  Strong,  similar  appeals  in  his  favor  being  considered  and 
overruled.  Yet  the  intelligence  and  the  humanity,  alike  of  the 
Executive  and  of  the  Council,  notwithstanding  the  result  arrived 
at  in  both  these  instances,  were  unquestionable. 

Within  the  same  period  a  gentleman  of  this  city  saw  a  girl  of 
17  hung  in  London  for  stealing  a  silver  cream-pitcher.  Edward 
Vaile  Brown  was  hung  in  Boston  for  burglary  committed  in  the 
house  of  Captain  Osias  Goodwin,  in  Charter  street,  and  stealing 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  101 

therefrom  sundry  articles.  I  once  owned  a  set  of  the  Old  Bailey 
Trials  (1775,  1825),  embraced  in  a  series  of  perhaps  50  quarto 
volumes.  The  earliest  of  these  volumes  contained  the  details  of 
the  trial  of  the  unfortunate  Dr.  Dodd,  for  forgery,  whose  touching 
appeal  for  mercy,  here  recorded,  was  fruitlessly  enforced  by  the 
splendid  eloquence  of  Johnson.  In  a  later  volume,  long  after  the 
commencement  of  the  present  century,  eight  separate  capital  con- 
victions are  recorded  as  one  day's  job  of  a  single  tribunal,  the  cul- 
prits being  all  boys  and  girls  between  the  ages  of  ten  and  sixteen, 
and  their  offences  pett}r  thefts . 

One  case  I  remember  of  peculiar  judicial  atrocity.  A  young 
girl  of  17  was  indicted  for  stealing  a  roll  of  ribbon  worth  three 
shillings.  The  prosecutor's  testimon}' was  to  this  effect:  "The 
prisoner  came  into  my  shop  and  bought  some  ribbon.  I  saw  her 
secrete  this  piece  also.  I  personally  knew  her,  and  was  on  the 
most  friendly  and  sociable  terms  with  her.  When  she  left  the  shop 
I  accompanied  her,  and  offered  her  my  arm,  which  she  accepted. 
We  chatted  together.  As  we  reached  the  corner  of  a  street  lead- 
ing to  the  Bow-street  office,  I  turned  toward  -it.  She  said  she 
was  going  in  another  direction,  and  bade  me  good  morning ;  I 
said  to  her,  '•No  !  you  are  going  with  me  !  I  saw  you  steal  a  piece 
of  my  ribbon!'  She  immediately  implored  me,  for  God's  sake,  to 
overlook  it,  and  restored  to  me  the  article.  I  said  to  her  that  I 
had  lost  many  things  in  this  way,  and  was  resolved  to  make  her 
an  example—  that  I  was  determined  to  have  her  life!"  And  he 
got  it.  I  can  never  forget  how  my  blood  boiled  as  I  read  the  testi- 
mony of  this  cold-hearted  wretch.  In  view  of  the  judgment  of  a  mer- 
ciful God,  far  rather,  it  seemed  to  me,  would  I  have  been  in  the  plztce 
of  that  poor,  frail,  erring  girl,  even  on  the  scaffold,  than  in  the 
place  of  her  heartless  accuser. 

I  rose  from  the  perusal  of  these  volumes  horror-struck  with  the 
continuous  record  of  inconceivable  legal  cruetty.  It  seemed  to 
me  that  the  70,000  hangings  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  VIII.  were 
matched  by  an  equally  long  list  of  persons  condemned  to  be  hung 
in  the  reign  of  George  III.  Since  this  time  much  has  been  done 
in  England  bj'  Romilly,  Brougham,  Mackintosh  and  Sydney  Smith, 
and  as  much  —  perhaps  more  —  by  kindred  philanthropists  on  this 
side  of  the  Atlantic.  Hanging  has,  indeed,  become  a  raritjT  with 
us  ;  but  within  even  the  last  year  I  have  seen  a  little  boy,  who,  for 
week  after  week,  had  been  tenant  of  a  cell  in  our  jail,  for  the  atro- 
cious offence  of  throwing  a  snow-ball  at  —  Abby  Folsom  !  And 
another,  who,  coming  here  from  Lowell  the  day  before,  was  tempted 


102  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.   105. 

in  the  morning  by  an  open  baker's  cart,  and  snatched  from  it  a 
small  roll  of  bread  as  an  extempore  breakfast.  Their  respective 
fines  were  $2  each  and  costs,  which  the}7,  of  course,  could  not  pay. 
This  circumstance  gave  me  an  edifying  impression  of  the  equality  of 
the  law,  as  it  bears  on  rich  and  poor.  I  sent  these  two  urchins  on 
their  way  rejoicing  ;  but  others  have,  doubtless,  taken  their  places 
every  week  since. 

The  world  has,  indeed,  grown  wiser  and  better  in  some  respects  ; 
but  in  the  criminal  law  there  is  a  noble  battle-field  of  humanity 
yet  to  be  fought  and  won.  GLEANER. 

P.  S.  I  am  in  favor  of  hanging  everybody  who  places  an  ob- 
struction on  a  railroad,  as  I  would  shoot  a  dangerous  wild  beast. 


XL  VII. 

THE  TITLE  OF  BEACON  HILL  DERIVED  FROM   COWS. 
September  13,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  We  have  disposed  of  5J  acres  of  Robert  Turner's 
land.  There  remains  lj  acres  more, —  being  Beacon  Hill  itself 
with  the  monument.  This  lot  now  measures  south  on  Mount  Ver- 
non  street,  about  284  feet ;  west,  b}T  a  line  19  feet  east  of  Hancock 
street,  287  feet ;  northerly,  in  rear  on  narrow  strips  of  land  sepa- 
rating the  premises  from  Derne  street,  244  feet ;  and  east,  on  land 
ofD.  D.  Rogers. 

John  Turner  was  one  of  the  devisees  of  his  father,  Robert,  and 
had  acquired  portions  b}7  deeds  from  the  executrix,  etc.  He,  in 
1673,  sells  to  Samuel  Shrimpton  (8,  f.  329)  a  small  slip  of  land, 
in  breadth  23  feet  front,  bounded  on  the  Common,  south,  and  in 
length  180  feet,  bounded  on  said  Samuel,  west,  and  on  the  way 
leading  up  from  the  Training  field  to  Centry  Hill,  on  the  east 
side,  and  running  from  the  east  corner  in  front  on  a  north  line  182 
feet.  This  is  a  gore  of  the  State-House  estate,  bounded  east  on 
the  highway  to  the  monument,  i.  e.,  Mount  Vernon  street.  John 
Turner  died  1681,  and  his  executors,  as  we  have  seen,  sold  two 
acres  east  of  said  Mount  Vernon  street,  or  the  monument  highway, 
to  George  Monk,  in  1681.  On  the  same  day  they  sold  to  said 
Shrimpton  (12,  f.  353)  "all  that  land  upon  and  by  the  side  of 
Beacon  Hill,  bounded  on  said  Shrimpton  and  on  Elizabeth  Cooke, 
widow,  or  Humphrey  Davie  and  others,  on  several  points  and 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  103^ 

quarters,  reserving  unto  the  town  of  Boston  their  privilege  and 
interest  on  the  top  of  said  hill  and  passage  from  the  Common 
thereto." 

Col.  Samuel  Shrirnpton  thus  acquired  all  Beacon  Hill  and  a  gore 
of  the  State-House  lot,  the  deed  of  said  gore  bounding  on  the  resi- 
due of  said  State-House  lot,  etc.,  already  his.  Besides  these  es- 
tates and  Noddle's  Island,  he  owned  the  Union-bank  building,  and, 
from  that  circumstance,  Exchange  street  was  for  many  years 
known  as  Shrimpton's  lane.  He  was  decidedly  one  of  the  greatest 
men  of  his  day.  He  died,  and  by  will,  proved  February  17, 
1697-8,  devised  to  his  wife  Elizabeth  for  life,  the  residue  of  his 
estate,  with  power  to  dispose  thereof  among  her  relations  by  deed 
or  will.  She  married  Simeon  Stoddard  and  died  1713,  devising  to 
her  grand-daughter,  Elizabeth  Shrimpton,  various  other  estates  for 
life,  remainder  to  her  heirs  in  tail,  etc.  Her  inventory  appraises 
"  the  pasture  joining  to  Beacon  Hill,  £150."  [Decidedly  cheap  for 
the  State-House  lot,  and  about  two  acres  north  of  it !]  She  mar- 
ried John  Yeamans  in  1720,  and  died  leaving  an  only  child,  Sluite 
Shrimpton  Yeamans,  who,  in  1742,  becoming  of  age,  barred  the 
entail  (L.  66,  f.  271-272),  and  vested  the  fee  in  his  father.  The 
deeds,  besides  mentioning  the  particular  estates  devised  in  tail, 
included  "all  the  lands,  etc.,  in  Boston,  Rumney  marsh  or  else- 
where, of  which  Mrs.  Yeamans  was  tenant  in  tail  by  force  of  said 
will." 

John  Yeamans  dying,  the  estates  became  again  his  son's,  who, 
in  1752,  conveyed  to  Thomas  Hancock  (81,  f.  168)  "  a  piece  of 
land  near  Beacon  Hill,  containing  two  acres,  late  the  estate  of  my 
great-grandfather,  Samuel  Shrimpton,  bounded  south  on  the  Com- 
mon, west  on  said  Thomas  Hancock  in  part,  and  in  part  on  Com- 
mon land;  then  turns  and  is  bounded  north  on  Common  land,  then 
west  on  Common  land,  then  north  on  Common  land,  then  east  on  the 
street  or  highway  leading  from  the  Common  to  Beacon  Hill."  Now 
there  were  about  75,000  feet  of  land,  or  nearly  two  acres,  in  the 
State-House  lot,  and  the  above  description  evidently  proceeds  on 
an  erroneous  idea  that  the  Common  lands  of  the  town  included  nearly 
all  Beacon  Hill.  But  we  have  seen  the  old  deed  of  1670  to  John 
Turner,  by  which  the  town  right  is  limited  to  six  rods  square,  and 
the  highwa}-  leading  to  it.  And,  from  the  selectmen's  minutes  of 
January  17,  1753,  we  find,  that  on  petition  of  Thomas  Hancock,  an 
investigation  was  had  of  the  town's  rights,  which  were  then,  also, 
in  like  manner  limited  to  the  six  rods  square,  and  the  thirty  feet 
highway. 


104  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

The  result  is  that  Thomas  Hancock  thus  obtained  all  Beacon  Hill 
one  hundred  years  ago,  without  paying  one  cent  for  it,  and  he  and 
those  coming  after  him  retained  possession  by  pasturing  cows 
there.  These  ruminating  animals,  while  quietly  chewing  the  cud 
in  that  splendid  cattle-field  (where,  by  the  way,  they  must  have 
been  the  observed  of  all  observers),  also  silently  eat  up  the  inher- 
itance of  poor  Shute  Shrimpton  Yeamans  and  his  heirs.  One  of 
these  very  heirs,  a  high  officer  of  the  Commonwealth  (General 
William  H.  Sumner),  as  he  looked  at  them,  year  after  year,  from 
the  State-House  windows,  was  probably  wholly  unconscious  that 
the}'  were  feeding  at  his  expense.  The  language  of  the  deed  to 
Hancock,  seeming  to  recognize  the  ownership  of  this  hill  by  the 
town,  it  became  the  subject  of  protracted  litigation,  in  which  the 
inhabitants  were  at  last  defeated,  and  while  the  Hancock  heirs  and 
the  town  were  quarrelling  for  what  belonged  to  neither  of  them, 
the  true  owners  were  placidly  looking  on  in  a  blissful  state  of 
ignorance.  GLEANER. 


XL  VIII. 

HISTORICAL. —THOMAS    HANCOCK     AND     HIS     RICH 

WIDOW. 

September  14,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  In  our  last  article  we  reached  the  extreme  west- 
erly end  of  Robert  Turner's  estate,  or  a  point  19  feet  east  of 
Hancock  street.  We  have  seen  that  Thomas  Hancock,  in  1752, 
commenced  his  title  to  this  spot  on  Beacon  Hill,  which  was  per- 
fected by  the  grazing  of  cows.  The  will  of  Mr.  Turner  devised, 
as  before  stated,  to  his  sons,  Ephraim,  Joseph,  and  John,  and  his 
son-in-law,  John  Fayerweather.  Ephraim  sold  out  wholly  to  Fay- 
erweather ;  and  we  have  minuted  one  deed  of  Joseph  to  John  Tur- 
ner, bounded  south  on  Joseph's  remaining  land.  This  residue  also 
seems  to  have  been  subsequently  acquired  by  said  John  Turner. 
Of  the  whole  estate  of  the  testator,  the  easterly  3  acres  are  finally 
held  under  Fayerweather  (being  the  Sears,  Phillips,  and  Bowdoin 
estates) .  The  middle  2J  acres,  partly  under  him  and  partly  under 
John  Turner  (being  the  Rogers  estate) ,  while  the  Beacon  Hill  lot 
of  If  acres,  and  a  respectable  gore  of  the  State-House  lot  (say  2 
acres  more) ,  are  held  exclusively  under  said  John  Turner ;  so  that 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  105 

the  entire  estate  of  Robert  Turner  hglds  out  7f  acres,  or,  as  I  sup- 
posed, about  8  acres. 

Sigma  and  I  are  both  descended  from  a  common  ancestor,1  and 
one,  too,  who  lived  long  after  Adam  and  Eve  (Hon.  John  Turner, 

CORRESPONDENCE  BETWEEN  CORRESPONDENTS. 
September  17,  1865. 

MT  DEAR  GLEANER  :  —  I  heard  a  skilful  physician  say,  a  few  days  ago,  that  nothing 
would  keep  you  still  but  being  etherized.  By  the  way,  you  may  remember  that  you 
very  kindly  presented  me  with  a  copy  of  your  volume  containing  your  account  of  the 
ether  controversy.  You,  doubtless,  remember  that  I  praised  it  highly,  and  told  you 
that  I  had  no  just  notions  of  the  powerful  effects  of  ether  until  I  read  your  work,  for 
the  very  first  five  pages  put  me  asleep.  One  or  two  of  your  late  articles  in  the  "  Tran- 
script," taken  at  bedtime,  may,  possibly,  answer  as  well.  How  you  keep  yourself 
awake  while  writing  them  is  a  mystery  to  us  all. 

You  say  that  you  and  I  are  descended  from  a  common  ancestor,  John  Turner.  I 
know  it;  I  am  glad  of  it;  for  I  have  always  thought  you  a  very  clever  fellow,  though 
as  obstinate  as  the  devil.  This  old  gentleman  —  not  the  devil,  but  John  Turner  — 
was,  as  you  say,  a  man  of  note  in  his  time.  His  style  was  the  Hon.  Col.  John  Turner. 
Saltonstall  in  his  history,  and  Felt  in  his  annals,  tell  us,  that  this  John  Turner  com- 
manded in  the  battle  of  Haverhill,  so  called,  against  the  French  and  Indians,  in  1708. 
He  was  my  great-grandfather,  born  Sept.  12,  1671.  I  have  heard  my  mother  say,  that 
her  father,  son  of  the  Honorable  John,  for  several  years  preserved  some  half-a-dozen 
scalps  taken  in  that  battle.  The  father  of  the  Honorable  John  was  John  Turner,  a 
merchant  of  Salem,  born  in  1644,  and  who  died  in  1680.  This  is  the  John  Turner 
BO  often  mentioned  in  the  records  of  Salem,  as  the  lessee  of  Baker's  island  for 
1,000  years.  His  house,  in  which  he  died,  Oct.  9,  1680,  was  standing  in  1835,  at  the 
corner  of  Essex  and  Beckford  streets.  I  am  happy  to  have  descended  from  such  an- 
cestors; for  they  were  the  ancestors  of  one  of  the  greatest  men  of  our.  country,  and 
for  whom  it  has  ever  been  my  pleasure  to  express  the  most  cordial  sentiments  of  affec- 
tionate respect  —  your  honored  father. 

It  is  at  this  point  that  you  break  loose  from  what  I  have  always  supposed,  upon 
excellent  authority,  to  be  the  true  genealogy  of  the  Turner  family,  and  insist  upon 
having  a  shoemaker  your  ancestor;  and  you  say  that  I  do  not  believe  in  the  shoemaker, 
but  aspire  to  something  ultra  crepidam.  No,  my  dear  "Gleaner,"  I  do  not  believe  in 
the  shoemaker,  but  I  do  believe  that,  if  we  have  a  shoemaker  for  our  ancestor,  and 
you  and  I  continue  much  longer  to  spin  such  long,  dry,  and  hard-twisted  yarns  for  the 
"Transcript,"  the  public  will  be  very  sorry  that  we  did  not  stick  to  the  last. 

Upon  the  matter  of  ancestry  I  have  ever  been  of  the  opinion  expressed  by  Matthew 
Prior:—- 

Heralds  and  nobles ,  by  your  leave, 

Here  lie  the  bones  of  Matthew  Prior, 
The  son  of  Adam  and  of  Eve; 

Let  Bourbon  and  Nassau  go  higher. 

The  poor  boy  who  replied  to  the  inquiries  of  the  police  judge,  that  he  never  had 
any  father  and  mother,  but  was  washed  ashore,  is  more  likely  to  find  favor  with  the 
people  than  one  who  in  our  country  makes  a  parade  about  his  ancestors. 

This  matter  can  be  of  no  possible  interest  to  the  public ;  but,  since  you  have  dragged 
it  in  by  the  head  and  shoulders,  there  is  no  course  left  for  me  but  to  drag  it  out  by  the 
neck  and  heels.  My  mother,  who  died  in  1813,  at  the 'age  of  seventy,  was  the  daughter 


106  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

of  Salem).  He  was  one  of  His  Majesty's  Council  in  Provincial 
times,  and  altogether  the  great  man  of  that  "  rural  district."  It  is 
with  much  regret  that  I  confess  my  inability  to  claim  also  a  descent 
from  the  owner  of  this  very  respectable  pasture.  In  these  times, 
perhaps,  it  is  some  consolation  that  he  was  a  vintner.  Our  ances- 

of  John  Turner,  a  merchant,  who  died  in  1786,  who  was  the  son  of  the  Hon.  John 
Turner,  who  died  in  1742,  who  was  the  son  of  John  Turner,  who  died  in  1680,  —  all  of 
Salem.  I  always  understood  her  to  say  that  the  baptismal  name  John  had  been  in 
her  family  for  many  generations,  and  that  the  ancestors  of  her  grandfather  came  from  Barba- 
does.  Felt,  in  his  "  Annals  of  Salem,"  edition  of  1827,  thus  notices,  under  the  date  of 
October  6,  1690,  the  death  of  her  great-grandfather:  "  John  Turner  had  deceased  lately. 
He  was  son  of  John  Turner,  merchant,  who  died  at  Barbadoes,  1668.  *  *  *  He  also 
left  children,  John,  Elizabeth,  &c.  He  served  as  selectman.  He  was  a  respectable 
merchant.  His  estate  was  estimated  over  £6,788.  His  death  was  a  public  calamity." 
A  copy  of  the  church  records  in  Salem,  furnished  me  in  1845  by  Henry  Wheetland, 
Esquire,  exhibits  this  entry:  "John  Turner:  his  wife,  Elizabeth,  joined  the  church  in 
Salem  19.9  (i.e.,  September  19)  1637;  merchant,  born  at  Barbadoes,  where  he  died, 
1668." 

Several  years  ago,  my  dear  Gleaner,  you  suggested  this  fancy  about  the  shoemaker. 
I  gave  you  my  views,  in  writing;  a  copy  of  my  letter  is  now  before  me,  concluding 
thus  — 

Si  quid  novisti  rectius  istis, 
Candidus  imperti;  si  non,  his  utere  mecum. 

You  never  replied,  and  I  supposed  you  were  satisfied.  And  now  you  have  broken 
out  again,  in  the  same  spot.  It  must  be  the  pustule  maligne.  To  draw  such  things  to 
a  head  and  have  done  with  'em,  I  have  heard  that  nothing  was  more  effective  than  an 
application  of  shoemaker's  (your  ancestor's)  war.  • 

You  claim  relationship  with  Mrs.  Puzzlem.  You  are  right,  no  doubt  of  it.  You 
must  be  a  Puzzlem;  for,  with  my  best  efforts,  I  cannot  find  out  your  meaning  in  that 
paragraph.  Your  object,  I  think,  must  be  to  persuade  the  public  that  I  am  the  writer 
of  the  Puzzlem  letters,  and  thus  shift  the  responsibility  from  your  own  shoulders.  If 
you  consider  this  just,  you  must  have  a  strange  way  of  construing  the  golden  rule. 
Very  dry  of  late  —  especially  your  last  thirteen  articles. 

Very  truly,  your  friend  and  kinsman, 
SIGMA. 

GLEANER  AND  SIGMA.  —  Our  well-known  contributors  are  having  a  little  corre- 
spondence together,  as  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  first  page.  The  former,  having 
seen  Sigma's  communication,  wrote  the  following:  — 

"  Whether  I  was  right  in  supposing  that  I  stood  in  the  shoes  of  Robert  Turner, 
'  shoemaker,'  and  in  my  consequent  determination  to  stick  to  him  like  cobblers'  wax, 
or  whether  I  may  lawfully  go  to  Barbadoes  for  an  ancestor,  the  public  will  not 
probably  think  worth  discussion.  As  to  Mrs.  Puzzlem,  she  evidently  wishes  to  be 
incognita,  and  I  certainly  do  not  think  it  polite  to  raise  a  lady's  veil  without  her 
permission.  While,  on  the  one  hand,  I  am  sure  that  no  face  resembling  mine  would 
be  found  beneath  it,  I  think  that  her  general  gait,  air,  and  manner,  notwithstanding  her 
veil,  prove  that  you  and  she  were  both  rocked  in  the  same  cradle.  I  am  delighted  to 
learn  that  my  ether  pamphlet  produced  in  any  quarter  a  soothing  effect.  It  had  quite 
an  irritating  influence  in  other  circles,  which  led  to  much  denunciation  and  the  copious 
shedding  of  ink." 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  107 

tor  I  apprehend  to  have  been  a  "  shoemaker ,"  Robert  Turner,  who, 
by  the  way,  owned  a  very  pretty  real  estate  on  the  west  side  of 
Washington  street,  a  little  north  of  Court  street,  part  of  which 
was  the  Simpkins  estate,  now  belonging  to  Mrs.  Bangs.  This 
"  shoomaker,"  by  his  will,  seems  to  have  been  on  very  friendly 
terms  with  his  neighbor,  Mr.  Joshua  Scottow,  whom  we  also  meet 
with  as  the  next  neighbor  of  the  "vintner."  In  regard  to  my 
cousin  "  Sigma,"  it  is  worthy  of  remark,  that,  notwithstanding  all 
attempts  to  trip  him  up,  he  is  sure  at  last  (after  oscillating  about 
a  little)  to  be  found  on  his  feet  as  firmly  as  ever.  Mrs.  Polly  P. 
Puzzlem  I  take  to  be  exactly  as  near  a  relative  of  mine  as  Sigma 
is.  If  I  am  right  in  my  conjectures  she  owns  a  great  deal  of  real 
estate,  and  her  present  name  is  a  striking  confirmation  of  my  re- 
mark that  widows,  having  land,  keep  getting  married ;  since  she 
has  borne  this  name  so  recentl}T  that  I  am  satisfied  her  son  Paul 
must  be  the  issue  of  a  former  marriage.  Sigma,  by  the  wa}r,  does 
not  believe  in  the  "shoomaker."  In  the  matter  of  ancestry  he 
aspires  ultra  crepidam,  or  bej'ond  the  cobbler's  last. 

Thomas  Hancock  was  one  of  our  wealthiest  citizens,  and  deserv- 
edly of  the  highest  consideration.  In  his  lifetime  he  gave  the  town 
£500  for  founding  a  hospital,  which  was  thankfully  accepted  and 
misapplied.  Of  this  donation  I  was  not  aware  when  I  prepared  a 
history  of  the  Massachusetts  General  Hospital ;  and  the  honor 
justly  due  to  him  was  therefore  not  bestowed.  I  gladly  make  the 
amende  honorable  now,  though  in  an  anonymous  and  ephemeral 
manner.  He  died  in  1764,  and  among  numerous  bequests,  evinc- 
ing great  public  spirit  and  liberality,  he  gives  to  his  widow,  Lydia, 
£10,000  sterling;  also,  "  the  mansion  house  wherein  I  now  dwell, 
with  the  gardens,  yard,  and  land  belonging  to  it,  and  all  the  houses, 
out-houses,  edifices,  and  buildings  adjoining,  or  anyways  appertain- 
ing to  the  same  as  now  improved  and  occupied  by  me,  and  also 
the  lands  near  it  I  bought  of  Messrs.  Yeamans  and  Thompson,  and 
the  house  and  land  I  bought  of  Ebenezer  Messenger  adjoining  to 
my  garden.  I  also  give  unto  her  all  my  plate  and  household  furni- 
ture of  every  kind,  and  my  chariots,  chaises,  carriages,  and  horses  ; 
and  also  all  my  negroes,  all  which  she  is  to  hold  to  herself  and  her 
heirs  forever,"  &c.  To  Harvard  College,  £1,000  ;  to  the  Society 
for  Propagating  the  Gospel,  £1,000  ;  to  the  town,  £600,"  &c.  This 
devise  to  the  widow  included  all  the  State  House  and  lands  west  of 
it  to  Belknap  street,  and  all  Beacon  Hill  north  of  it  (between  6  and 
7  acres)  ;  so  that  she  was  undoubtedly  the  richest  widow  that  had 
ever  lived  in  Boston,  and,  strange  to  say,  she  remained  single. 


108  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Mrs.  Lydia  Hancock  [born  Henchman]  died  in  1777,  devising 
the  famous  Brattle-street  Parsonage  estate  —  and  making  many 
other  legacies,  and  constituting  her  nephew,  Governor  John  Han- 
cock, sole  residuary  legatee  and  executor,  who  thus  became  owner 
of  this  princely  inheritance,  where  he  resided  personally  till  his 
death,  in  1793.  I  can  easily  realize  the  feelings  which  induce  his 
nephew  and  namesake  still  to  retain  in  its  original  condition  his 
stone  mansion-house  and  what  is  left  of  this  great  estate.  Amid 
the  modern  destruction  of  old  landmarks  such  a  conservative  act 
is  truly  refreshing. 

But  I  am  not  yet  quite  ready  to  make  a  call  at  His  Excellency's 
mansion,  as  I  have  not  entirely  finished  my  inspection  of  the  hill 
which  at  that  time  rose  in  such  picturesque  beauty  behind  it. 

GLEANER. 


XLIX. 

THE  MONUMENT. 

.  September  15,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —  We  left  His  Excellency  John  Hancock  in  1793 
dying  seized  of  Beacon  Hill.  The  Hancock  title  I  should  charac- 
terize exclusively  by  words  beginning  with  d.  Its  descents, 
devisers,  deeds,  divisions,  and  dowers,  with  its  doubts,  difficulties, 
and  defects,  make  it  the  very  d — 1.  It  is  truly  the  Sebastopol,  I 
may,  perhaps,  say  the  St.  Helena,  of  conve}rancers.  Questions  of 
legal  construction,  of  great  delicacy,  constantly  occurring  and 
seemingly  never  ending,  and  the  most  complicated  and  embarrass- 
ing legal  proceedings,  mark  it  out  conspicuously  above  all  other 
estates  in  Boston  as  the  one  most  to  be  dreaded  by  a  novice,  who 
has  just  put  up  his  sign,  and  announced  to  a  confiding  public  that 
he  is  ready  to  examine  titles.  If  he  ever  hears  the  last  of  it  he 
will  be  more  fortunate  than  myself.  The  late  John  R.  Adan,  who 
was  an  eminently  practical  man,  for  3rears  before  his  death  adopted 
and  acted  upon  the  maxim  that  he  would  never  examine  a  title  that 
came  through  anybody  named  Spear,  —  a  rule  which,  from  analogy 
of  name  and  reason,  he  extended  to  Spurr.  I  have  seen  him 
gravely  decline  a  retainer,  alleging  this  ground  of  action,  though 
the  Mr.  Spear  in  question  assured  him  that  he  was  not  of  the 
family  of  Governor  Hancock,  and  that  his  title  would  be  found 
extremely  simple. 


"GLEANER"   ARTICLES.  109 

The  Governor  died  without  issue,  leaving  a  widow,  a  mother 
(who,  by  a  subsequent  marriage,  had  become  Mrs.  Perkins),  a 
brother  Ebenezer,  and  twelve  children  of  a  deceased  sister,  two  of 
whom  successively  married  Samuel  Spear.  One  of  these  wives  of 
Mr.  Spear  left  seven  chilren,  who  each  claimed  l-252d  part.  So 
minute  was  the  share  of  each,  that  on  a  partition,  in  1819,  of  the 
Beacon-street  lands,  each  of  these  children  had  a  strip  set  off 
measuring  less  than  18  inches  on  Beacon  street  in  wid,th  by  80  feet 
in  depth.  Three  of  them  were  females,  and  with  dresses  of  the 
present  dimensions  they  certainly  would  have  found  it  impracti- 
cable ever  to  make  an  entry  upon  their  lands. 

Mt.  Vernon  street  was  laid  out  across  the  Hancock  estate  a  few 
years  after  the  Governor's  death,  in  continuation  of  the  lower  part 
of  the  street  which  had  been  laid  out  by  the  Mt.  Vernon  proprie- 
tors. Temple  street  stopped  a  few  feet  south  of  Derne  street,  or 
at  the  north  base  of  Beacon  Hill,  which  was  the  boundary  of  Tay's 
pasture.  I  do  not  propose  to  inflict  upon  you  a  detail  of  all  the 
horrors  and  perplexities  of  this  title.  I  will  only  select  a  speci- 
men. A  very  elaborate  partition  was  made  in  1819  of  this  Beacon- 
Hill  lot ;  each  of  the  said  Spear  children  here  getting  a  strip  of  land 
measuring  less  than  two  feet  four  inches  on  Mt.  Vernon  street  by 
60  feet  deep. 

There  was  assigned  to  Thomas  Hancock,  a  non  compos  son  of 
Ebenezer  Hancock  and  one  of  the  devisees  of  Mrs.  Perkins,  a 
tract  of  17,392  feet,  being  full  half  of  the  present  reservoir  lot.  It 
was  bounded  west  on  land  of  the  Commonwealth,  north  on  land  of 
Joseph  Blake,  east  on  the  lot  set  off  to  Ebenezer  Hancock,  his 
father,  south  on  other  lots  set  off  to  said  Ebenezer,  to  John,  who 
was  brother  and  guardian  of  said  Thomas,  and  on  a  lot  left  undi- 
vided for  the  respondents — ^and,  strange  to  say,  there  was  no 
way  to  get  to  it.  Was  the  partition  void?  If  valid,  there  was 
of  course  a  way  of  necessity  somewhere;  but  over  what  lot?  It 
would  obviously  nearly  ruin  the  lot  subjected  to  such  easement. 
Shall  it  be  over  John's  lot,  whose  duty  it  was  to  have  protected 
his  ward's  rights  ?  Or  shall  the  residuary  lot  be  destroyed  ?  These 
pleasant  interrogatories  suggested  themselves  to  me  when  I  first 
made  a  professional  acquaintance  with  this  title.  Brick  houses 
had  been  erected,  and  were  owned  and  occupied  by  Charles  G. 
Loring,  Charles  P.  Curtis,  and  Thomas  B.  Curtis,  Esqs. ;  and  the 
city  had  bought  and  built  a  brick  school-house  behind  these  houses 
on  the  large  lot  of  Ebenezer  Hancock.  The  erection  of  the  reser- 
voir has  ended  all  difficulty  as  to  any  way  of  necessity,  as  this 


110  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

back  lot  became  incorporated  with  the  adjoining  lands  by  which 
it  was  separated  from  Derne  and  Hancock  streets.  Before  this 
event  Thomas  Hancock  would  have  found  it  as  hard  work  to  make 
a  legal  entry  into  his  large  lot,  as  his  young  relations  would  have 
found  in  getting  into  their  small  ones.  The  above  is  a  "  sample 
brick  "  of  this  legal  edifice. 

Mr.  Tay's  street  was  subsequently  extended  to  Mount  Vernon 
street.  I  understand  that  the  name  of  Temple  street  was  selected 
as  one  of  the  names  in  the  family  of  Governor  Bowdoin,  whose 
daughter  was  Elizabeth,  Lady  Temple,  wife  of  Sir  John  Temple. 
He,  as  well  as  his  father-in-law,  was  distinguished  as  a  statesman 
and  patriot.  And  we  have  seen  that  the  heir  in  tail  of  the  Bow- 
doin property  was  James  Temple  Bowdoin.  So  that  His  Excellency 
was  accommodated  with  two  streets,  to  say  nothing  of  Bowdoin 
square,  etc.  And  here  I  must  be  permitted  to  say  a  word  or  two 
more  on  the  nomenclature  of  streets,  upon  which  I  have  so  often 
and,  I  fear,  tediously  dwelt  already.  Beacon  street  seems  to  have 
been  so  named  because  it  did  not  lead  to  the  beacon.  Mount  Ver- 
non street  (as  it  ranged  from  east  to  west)  was  300  feet  nearer  to 
it,  and  thus  had  a  better  right  to  have  been  so  called.  But  Tem- 
ple street,  as  extended,  actually  hit  the  monument  and  knocked  it 
over,  and  therefore  was  not  named  for  it. 

The  town  conveyed  to  John  Hancock  and  Samuel  Spear,  in  1811, 
the  six  rods  square  on  which  the  monument  stood,  and  all  right  in 
the  highway  leading  to  it,  30  feet  by  60  feet  (L.  238,  f.  177),  say 
11,600  feet,  for  the  miserable  pittance  of  80  cents  per  foot  ($9,300.) 
The  monument  was  then  a  substantial  structure,  with  inscriptions 
on  its  four  sides.  These  are  still  preserved  at  the  State  House. 
My  locomotive  powers  are  still  somewhat  limited,  and  I  shall  not, 
therefore,  at  present  visit  and  copy  those  inscriptions.  I  trust  that 
they  will  preserve  for  the  remembrance  of  a  grateful  posterit}r  the 
names  of  those  who,  when  they  erected  it,  meant  that  it  should 
stand  for  ages  ;  and  I  regret  that  I  cannot  consign  to  deserved  in- 
famy the  names  of  those  who  so  disgracefully  turned  an  official 
penny  by  selling  it.  Such  persons  would  sell  a  family  graveyard  ! 

An  intelligent  merchant  of  this  city,  who  came  here  in  1787,  a 
boy  of  11  years  old,  remembers  that  this  monument  was  not  then 
erected.  There  was  at  that  time  a  stone  basement,  on  which  rested 
four  horizontal  timbers  crossing  each  other  in  the  centre.  From 
this  centre  rose  as  high  a  mast  as  could  be  procured,  which  was 
further  supported  by  braces.  It  was  surmounted  by  a  tar-barrel, 
which,  being  set  on  fire,  in  case  of  danger,  was  to  be  a  beacon  to 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  Ill 

the  country  around.  There  was  an  apparatus  of  ladders  for  as- 
cending to  this  tar-barrel ;  but,  fortunately,  it  was  never  found 
necessary  to  give  this  warning  signal.  The  hill  was  of  a  very  pe- 
culiar conical  shape,  and  the  boys  were  accustomed  to  throw  their 
balls  up  as  far  as  possible  towards  its  summit,  which  rebounded 
from  it  as  from  a  wall.  My  boyhood  was  passed  elsewhere.  It  is 
one  of  my  especial  sources  of  regret  that  I  never  saw  Beacon  Hill. 

GLEANER. 


L. 

COOK'S   2J  ACRE  PASTURE. 

September  17,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  The  British  metropolis  was  once  unpleasantly 
startled  by  the  rumor  that  an  aged  libertine,  the  Duke  of  Queens- 
bury,  daily  recruited  his  exhausted  and  diseased  frame  by  milk- 
bathing,  and  that  the  milk,  after  it  had  been  thus  used,  was  dis- 
tributed by  the  dealers  among  their  customers.  In  asking  you, 
Mr.  Editor,  to  walk  with  me  into  the  Beacon-Hill  reservoir,  I  trust 
that  we  shall  not  cause  a  like  alarm  among  the  consumers  of  "  Co- 
chituate."  I  fancy,  indeed,  that  the  visit  will  be  found  entirely 
harmless  to  them  and  to  ourselves,  since  the  neighbors  assure  me 
that  it  is  quite  a  dry  place,  and  that  the  reservoir  is  a  massive 
granite  structure  for  holding  water  theoretically. 

We  have  already  walked  around  most  of  its  area.  The  main 
body  of  it  is  built  on  the  Hancock  title.  On  the  north  it  includes 
narrow  parcels  of  land,  derived  from  Joshua  Scottow's  four-acre 
pasture,  which  it  would  be  a  useless  labor  to  trace  back,  step  by 
step,  to  its  parentage.  On  the  west  side,  however,  we  "meet  with 
a  strip  19  feet  wide,  which  separated  the  Hancock  estate  from 
Hancock  street.  To  this  we  will  now  direct  our  attention. 

In  tracing  the  title  of  the  16J-acre  pasture  of  Rev.  James  Allen, 
on  the  south  side  of  Cambridge  street,  the  south-easterly  2£  acres 
are  found  to  have  been  bought  by  Mr.  Allen  of  Mr.  Davie,  being 
the  westerly  moiety  of  a  5-acre  pasture  of  Zacheus  Bosworth. 
The  easterl}*  moiety  of  that  5-acre  pasture  had  been  sold  by  his 
son,  Samuel  Bosworth,  to  Richard  Cook,  1665  (Sun0.  L.  4,  f.  320). 
These  2£  acres  are  bounded  with  Humphrey  Davie  westerly,  with 
Thomas  Buttolph,  Sen.,  and  Joshua  Scottow's  land  north,  with  land 


112  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

of  the  widow  Turner  and  of  Thomas  Miller  [Millard]  easterly,  with 
land  of  Knight,  with  the  highway  and  said  Miller  southerly,  being 
the  moiety  of  the  land  devised  to  me  by  my  father. 

This  tract  extended  westerly  to  a  line  77  feet  west  of  Belknap 
street,  and  easterly  to  a  line  19  feet  east  of  Hancock  street.  On 
the  north  it  reached  to  the  pastures  of  Scottow  and  Buttolph  (i.e., 
to  Myrtle  street),  and  on  the  south  to  the  estates  fronting  on  the 
Common,  and  to  a  "  highway,"  of  which  particular  mention  is 
made  below.  This  Mr.  Cook  was  progenitor  of  one  of  our  first 
families.  He  died  in  1671,  and  this  land  became  the  property  of 
his  son  Elisha,  who  died  in  1715,  leaving  two  children,  Elizabeth 
and  Elisha,  and  on  a  division  in  1715  (Probate  Records,  19,  f. 
287),  there  was  set  off  to  Elisha  "  the  pasture  land  adjoining  Bea- 
con Hill ;  bounded  east  on  Joseph  Thompson  ;  south  on  Jeremiah 
Allen,  west  on  Belknap,  north  on  Shrimpton."  [Shrimpton  owned 
Beacon  Hill,  Thompson  owned  on  the  Common,  Belknap  had  suc- 
ceeded Buttolph,  etc.]  Elisha  Cook,  in  1731,  sold  off  to  John 
Daniels  (45,  f.  236)  a  strip  of  land  bounded  north  on  Williams 
19  feet,  south  on  my  land  19  feet,  east  on  Yeamans  361  feet  2, 
west  by  the  highivay  361  feet  2.  One  Jacob  Williams  then  owned 
the  extreme  lot  of  the  Scottow  pasture.  So  that  Cook  extended 
Hancock  street  through  his  pasture.  It  was  at  first  called  Turner 
street,  and  then  George  street. 

W.  H.  Montague,  Esq.,  of  this  city,  a  few  days  since,  showed 
me  a  plan  of  the  town  taken  in  1769,  under  the  official  patronage 
of  Governor  Burnett,  which  I  believe  to  be  unique  and  of  great 
value.-  Its  margin  is  filled  up  with  details  of  much  historical  inter- 
est. On  this  plan  is  laid  out  George  street,  which  begins  and  runs 
south  from  Cambridge  street,  and  then  makes  a  westerly  jog  in  the 
general  direction  of  Mount  Vernon  street,  and  then  runs  into  Bea- 
con street  by  the  present  Belknap  street,  the  north  part  of  the  pres- 
ent Belfcnap  street  not  being  connected  with  this  southerly  part, 
so  as  to  make  one  street  as  at  present.  In  other  words  the  north 
end  of  Hancock  street  and  the  south  end  of  Belknap  street,  connected 
by  a  jog  (in  the  neighborhood  of  Mount  Vernon  street) ,  then  con- 
stituted one  continuous  highway  from  Cambridge  to  Beacon  street, 
and  the  only  one  then  existing. 

To  my  great  delight  there  appeared  on  this  plan  an  orchard, 
obviously  the  same  one  as  on  Bonner's  plan  of  1722.  But,  owing 
to  its  location  in  reference  to  George  street,  and  the  size  of  the 
plan,  it  became  possible  to  fix  its  position  very  definitely.  Tow- 
ards its  south-easterly  extremity  was  a  house,  and  it  is,  I  think, 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  113 

clear,  that  this  house  and  orchard  were  the  estate  of  our  friend 
Humphrey  Davy,  on  the  south-east  end  of  Rev.  James  Allen's  pas- 
ture, the  title  to  1  4-5ths  acres  of  which  was  finally  derived  to  the 
Mount  Vernon  proprietors,  under  deeds  of  Enoch  Brown's  heirs. 
This  accounts  for  the  name  of  Davis's  lane,  which  by  Bonner's  plan 
ran  diagonally  through  what  is  now  the  State  House  lot,  and  passed 
westerly  along  the  south  end  of  this  Cooke's  pasture,  terminating 
at  the  Davy  estate,  or  77  feet  west  of  Belknap  street.  If,  there- 
fore (of  which  there  seems  to  be  no  doubt) ,  this  was  the  orchard 
planted  by  Mr.  Blackstone,  it  was  not  retained  by  him  in  the  6- 
acre  reservation  (which  he  made  when  he  sold  his  50  acres,  etc., 
to  the  inhabitants),  as  the  6-acre  lot  was  wholly  west  and  south- 
west of  this  locality,  since  this  orchard  must  have  been  by  Pinkney 
and  Mt.  Vernon  streets,  beginning  west  of  Belknap  street. 

My  pleasure  at  looking  round  in  Mr.  Blackstone's  orchard  was 
somewhat  damped  by  finding  on  and  near  this  19-feet  strip, 
another  nest  of  ropewalks.  I  really  feel,  indeed,  that  I  owe  an 
apology  for  introducing  to  3*our  notice,  at  this  late  day,  other 
edifices  of  this  description,  so  inexcusably  overlooked  in  my  pre- 
vious gleanings.  In  my  next  article  I  shall  show  that  one  of  them 
has  attained  to  a  position  of  higher  honor,  and  been  owned  by 
proprietors  of  greater  distinction  than  any  other  ropewalk  to  which 
I  have  heretofore  called  your  attention. 

GLEANER. 


LI. 


THE  COMMONWEALTH'S   ROPE-WALK. 
September  18,  1855, 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  In  our  last  article  we  left  in  John  Daniels,  1731, 
a  tract  of  land  (part  of  Cook's  pasture)  measuring  361  feet  2  on 
the  east  side  of  Hancock  street,  and  19  feet  deep.  The  northerly 
portion  of  this  land  was  sold  off,  and  became  the  property  of 
"  Box  and  Austin  ; "  the  southerly  part  was  sold  to  Ebenezer  Mes- 
senger, 1734,  bounded  east  on  Yeamans,  south  on  the  children  of 
Eben  and  Rebecca  Messenger  (Lib.  48,  f.  213).  In  1743,  Daniels 
conveyed  to  John  Henderson  312  feet  by  19  feet  (Lib.  68,  f.  32), 
who  died  in  1747  ;  and  on  a  division,  in  1762,  there  were  set  off  to 
Nathaniel  Green  and  Annabell,  his  wife,  in  her  right,  "the  rope- 


114  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

walks  near  Beacon  Hill,  now  improved  by  H.  Inches ;  also  the 
house  and  land,  now  occupied  by  Mr.  Gain,  near  the  rope-walks." 
(Probate  Records,  Lib.  60,  f.  194) .  Green  and  wife  convey  to  Gov- 
ernor Hancock  in  1765  (Lib.  105,  f.  222)  120  feet  by  19  feet.  Green 
died.  His  widow,  of  course,  married  again.  Her  second  hus- 
band, Richard  Boynton,  died  in  1795  ;  and  she,  while  a  widow, 
sold  to  the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts,  in  1798  (Lib.  194,  f. 
74),  the  residue  bounded  westerly  on  Turner  street,  192  feet, 
east  on  land  lying  between  the  premises  and  Beacon  Hill  192  feet, 
north  on  the  late  John  Box,  and  south  on  land  of  which  Governor 
John  Hancock  died  seized. 

Elisha  Cook,  besides  extending  Hancock  street  through  his 
pasture,  also  extended  Belknap  street  from  the  south  line  of  his 
pasture,  but  not  through  it  northerly,  so  as  to  connect  it  wholly 
with  that  portion  of  Belknap  street  which  communicated  with 
Cambridge  street.  To  this  was  given  the  elegant  name  of  Clap- 
board street.  Cook  sold  off  to  John  Daniels  a  rope-walk,  measur- 
ing on  west  side  of  Hancock  street  25  feet,  and  extending  back 
261  feet,  to  land  of  Wheelwright  (who  had  succeeded  Davy  — 
1736,  L.  52,  f.  152).  Cook  died  seized  of  two  other  rope-walks, 
together  measuring  44  feet  on  Hancock  street,  and  extending  back 
westerly  about  270  feet.  They  bounded  north  on  Myrtle  street, 
and  on  the  division  of  his  estate,  accepted  in  1763,  they  were 
set  off  to  Mary,  wife  of  Richard  Saltonstall  (Probate  Records  Lib. 
62,  f.  261) .  These  three  rope-walks  west  of  Hancock  street  formed 
a  barrier  separating  Clapboard  street  from  the  northerly  part  of 
Belknap  street.  At  a  later  day  the  street  was  continued  through 
them.  Such  extension  had  not  taken  place  when  the  plan  of  1769 
was  made.  All  the  lots  west  of  Clapboard  street  became  the 
property  of  Mason,  Otis,  &c.,  the  Mount  Vernon  proprietors, 
except  one  small  lot  of  25  feet  front  and  rear,  the  property  of 
Middleton  and  Glapion.  Pinckney  street  is  opened  through  a 
portion  of  these  lots ;  and  the  present  lines  of  Mt.  Vernon  street 
(formerly  called  in  succession  Olive  street  and  Sumner  street) 
cut  off  some  of  the  southerly  part  of  Cook's  pasture.  The  title  of 
many  of  these  lots  of  Cook's  pasture  gets  into  Thomas  Hancock. 
Thus  Ebenezer  Messenger  conveyed  to  him,  1775  (Lib.  87,  f.  76),  a 
lot  measuring  75  feet  on  the  east  side  of  Hancock  street  or  Turner 
street,  etc.,  partly  held  under  Cook.  Elisha  Cook  was  a  man  of 
great  wealth  and  high  standing.  He  owned  all  the  south  side  of 
State  street  from  Kilby  street  to  low-water  mark,  probably  of  itself 
now  worth  all  of  a  million  of  dollars ;  also  the  large  estates  on 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  115 

School  street,  on  both  sides  of  Chapman  place,  which  was  long 
known  as  Cook's  court. 

This  rope-walk,  east  of  Hancock  street,  was  bought  by  the  Com- 
monwealth, not,  however,  with  any  view  of  going  into  that 
business.  It  was  used  as  the  residence  of  the  Messenger  of  the 
State  House,  there  being  a  narrow  dwelling-house  erected  on  it, 
with  a  yard  in  front  tying  along  the  street.  Here  for  many  years 
lived  Jacob  Kuhn,  the  honest,  vigilant,  and  courteous  guardian  of 
the  neighboring  official  edifice.  It  was  he  who,  when  a  young  lad, 
was  passing  along  the  Granary  burying-ground,  shortly  after  Mr. 
Adino  Paddock  had  caused  a  row  of  young  trees  to  be  set  out  on 
the  sidewalk.  He  took  hold  of  one  of  these  slender  saplings,  and 
thoughtlessly  began  to  shake  it  (a  feat,  by  the  way,  which  would 
now  be  of  difficult  performance).  In  a  moment  Mr.  Paddock 
darted  out  from  his  house  opposite,  and  served  him  as  he  had 
served  the  tree.  Mr.  Kuhn  was  the  agent  for  collecting  the  bills 
of  the  old  Aqueduct  Corporation.  He  presented,  on  one  occasion, 
a  bill  to  the  late  Dr.  Bowditch,  which  he  paid  accordingly.  The 
next  day  Mr.  Kuhn  called  and  said,  "  In  paying  the  bill  yester- 
day, you  made  a  slight  mistake."  Dr.  B.  said,  "  How  can  you 
tell  what  I  gave  you?"  —  u  I  alwa}rs  tear  off  the  blank  paper  at 
the  edge  of  the  account,  write  on  it  the  name  of  the  party,  and 
pin  to  that  paper  the  particular  bills  in  which  it  is  paid.  I  did  so 
with  your  bill,  and  am  sure  that  you  made  a  mistake."  Dr.  B. 
said,  "I  am  satisfied,  and  will  cheerfully  correct  the  error."  — 
"  But,"  said  Mr.  Kuhn,  "the  mistake  is  in  your  favor.  You 
gave  me  a  850  bill  instead  of  a  $5."  Dr.  B.  then  said,  "It  is 
delightful  to  me  to  meet  with  a  man  who  is  so  exact  and  methodi- 
cal in  his  business  habits,  and  who  at  the  same  time  is  so  per- 
fectly upright.  You  must  keep  the  $45,  and  purchase  some  dress, 
etc.,  for  your  wife,  telling  her,  from  me,  that  she  ought  to  feel 
proud  of  her  husband." 

The  rope-walk  now  constitutes  the  westerly  lateral  support  of 
the  Beacon-Hill  reservoir,  an  edifice  which  cost  half  a  million  of 
dollars.  A  high  destiny,  and  worthy  of  its  dignified  ownership. 
No  other  rope-walk  can  ever  hope  to  compete  with  this.  Though 
the  last,  it  is  not  the  least  in  our  list  of  the  rope- walks  of  Boston. 

Our  graceful,  conical  hill,  with  the  monument  that  surmounted 
it  for  its  protection  and  embellishment,  has  long  since  ceased  to 
exist.  It  is  fitly  replaced  by  the  Beacon-Hill  reservoir.  The 
Roman  aqueducts  are  among  the  grandest  vestiges  of  ancient 
civilization.  This  structure  will,  to  coming  generations,  be  as 


116  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

noble  a  memorial  of  the  genius,  science,  and  enterprise  of  the 
present  age.  We  have,  indeed,  lost  a  majestic  pinnacle  reared  b}T 
the  God  of  Nature ;  but  there  has  arisen  in  its  stead  a  glorious 
creation  of  human  wisdom  and  beneficence.  GLEANER. 

P.S.  On  applying  to  James  W.  Baldwin,  Esq.,  respecting  the 
details  of  the  reservoir  building,  a  very  elegant  plan  was  cour- 
teously prepared  for  my  use,  by  Mr.  Richards,  which,  while  it 
impresses  me  forcibl}'  with  the  ingenuity  of  the  arrangements,  I 
find  it  impossible  accurately  and  adequately  to  describe.  The 
lateral  walls  are  double,  the  outside  one  being  over  3  feet  thick, 
and  the  inner  one  being  of  varying  width  from  5  to  3  feet.  The 
vacant  space  between  them  is  over  7  feet  in  width  from  the  base  to 
about  the  height  of  the  arches  on  Derne  street.  These  two  walls 
are  united  together  at  the  top,  and  also  at  the  bottom.  The 
width  of  the  Derne-street  arches  is  over  20  feet  in  the  clear.  The 
depth  of  the  foundation,  and  the  height  of  the  building,  and  the 
thickness  of  the  immediate  basin  of  the  reservoir  above  the 
arches,  I  am  unable  to  state. 


LII. 

THE   STATE-HOUSE   LOT. 

September  21,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  In  our  Beacon-Hill  researches  we  have  already 
found  the  deed  of  John  Turner  to  Col.  Samuel  Shrimpton  in  1673 
(L.  8,  f.  329),  embracing  the  east  gore  of  the  State-House  lot, 
bounded  "  on  the  way  leading  up  from  the  Training  field  to  Gentry 
Hill  on  the  east  side,"  and  "on  land  of  said  Samuel,  westerly." 
We  have  also  seen  that  the  executrix  of  Robert  Turner  sold,  in 
1670,  the  Beacon-Hill  lot  behind  the  State  House,  bounded  south 
on  Thomas  Millard.  He  was  an  original  possessor  of  land  in  this 
vicinity,  having  half  an  acre  bounded  with  the  Common  south, 
Richard  Truesdale  west,  Thomas  Scottow  east;  and  he  bought 
in  1681  of  Zacheus  Bosworth  one  acre,  bounded  with  Edward 
Huchinson  north,  the  Common  south,  Thomas  Millard  east,  and 
said  Zacheus  west  (Possessions,  f.  76).  In  a  deed  of  1661  (L. 
10,  f.  212)  a  lot  west  of  the  State-House  land  is  conveyed  as 
bounded  both  east  and  west  on  Thomas  Millard. 

Millard  died  in  1669.     His  inventory  is  "  a  small  parcel  of  land 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  117 

lying  on  the  side  of  the  Century  Hill  and  fronting  the  Common, 
£20."  This  small  parcel  was  the  whole  of  the  State-House  lot  ex- 
cept the  gore  which  had  been  bought  of  Turner.  "  John  Lake  and 
Thomas  Blighe,  administrators  of  Thomas  Millard,  gave  posses- 
sion by  turf  and  twig"  of  the  premises,  and  also  "  of  the  land  by 
Century  Hill "  to  Samuel  Shrimpton,  attorney  of  Alice  Swift, 
sister,  &c.  of  said  Millard,  Oct.  18,  1672  (L.  8,  f.  308).  On 
Feb.  23,  1673-4,  the  administrators  acknowledged  that  possession 
was  so  delivered  because  the  estate  had  been  recovered  out  of 
their  hands.  "The  adjoining  westerly  lot  is  convej-ed  1679  (L. 
11,  f.  212),  as  bounded  east  on  land  late  of  Millard,  since  in  the 
'tenure  of  Shrimpton ." 

Now  I  really  hope  that  Col.  Shrimpton  dealt  fairly  with  Miss 
Alice  Swift,  and  did  not  keep  to  his  own  use  that  which  he 
received  possession  of  u  by  turf  and  twig,"  merely  as  her  attorney. 
I  am,  however,  unable  to  furnish  any  record  evidence  of  his  integ- 
rity in  this  matter.  He  must  stand  upon  his  general  reputation, 
which  was  that  of  a  man  of  honor.  It  is  at  any  rate  now  too  late 
for  the  good  lady  to  oust  the  Commonwealth.  Nor  do  I  think 
that  Mr.  Davy,  whose  lane  used  to  run  diagonally  from  the  south- 
east to  the  north-west  corner  of  this  lot,  can  now  disturb  the 
territory  by  any  ancient  right  of  way  to  his  pasture. 

In  a  former  article  we  have  referred  to  the  deaths  of  Mr.  Shrimp- 
ton,  1698,  and  of  his  widow,  Mrs.  Stoddard,  in  1713.  We  have 
seen  that  his  grand-daughter,  Elizabeth  Shrimpton,  married  John 
Yeamans,  1720,  and  died,  leaving  a  son,  Shute  Shrimpton  Yea- 
mans,  who,  in  1742,  joined  with  his  father  in  leaving  an  entail 
created  by  Mrs.  Stoddard,  and  supposed  to  include  this  lot;  and 
we  have  also  referred  to  his  final  deed  (after  his  father's  death)  to 
Thomas  Hancock,  1752  (L.  81,  f.  168).  This  deed  was  for  the 
consideration  of  £220,  lawful  money  of  Great  Britain.  So  that 
the  State-House  lot,  and  all  north  of  it  nearly  to  Derne  street 
(excepting  the  town's  lot,  on  the  top  of  the  hill),  is  held  under  a 
deed  of  a  century  ago,  at  the  cost  of  eleven  hundred  dollars.  It 
would  now  be  worth  eleven  hundred  thousand  dollars.  A  thousand- 
fold rise  of  value,  even  in  a  century,  is  very  fair  for  such  an  old 
place  as  Boston. 

We  have  also  seen  the  death  of  Thomas  Hancock,  in  1763, 
devising  to  his  wife  Lydia,  and  her  devise  in  1777  to  Governor 
John  Hancock,  who  died  seized  in  1793.  Among  the  items  in  his 
inventory  is  "  the  pasture  adjoining  the  garden  and  Beacon  Hill, 
between  the  mansion  house  and  D.  D.  Rogers,  £3,000."  In  1795 


118  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

this  pasture  was  conveyed  to  the  inhabitants  of  Boston.  Thus 
Mary  Perkins  (the  mother  of  the  Governor)  conveyed  her  right 
for  84, 444.44  (L.  180,  f.  116);  Ebenezer  Hancock,  his  brother, 
made  a  deed  precisely  similar,  for  the  same  consideration  (L.  180, 
f.  117)  ;  and  the  widow  released  her  right  of  dower  (Ib.,  f.  118), 
etc.  It  is  needless  to  enumerate  any  other  conveyances.  So  that 
60  years  ago  the  whole  State-House  lot  was  valued  at  $13,333.33, 
or  thirteen  thousand  dollars.  It  is  described  as  "  Governor  Han- 
cock's pasture,  beginning  at  south-east  corner  of  his  garden,  and 
running  easterly  on  Beacon  street  243  feet  3  inches  to  the  corner 
of  a  street  or  passage-way  leading  up  to  Bacon  hill,  thence  run- 
ning north  on  said  passage-way  towards  said  hill  249  feet  more  or ' 
less,  then  running  on  a  westerly  course  on  another  passage-way 
leading  round  said  Beacon  Hill  235  feet  3  inches,  to  the  north-east 
corner  of  the  garden,  then  running  on  a  line  with  the  garden  about 
371  feet  to  the  first  bounds."  These  two  passage-ways  are  the 
present  Mount  Vernon  street,  which  runs  north,  and  then  bends  at 
a  right  angle  westerly. 

The  conveyance  from  the  town  of  Boston  to  the  Commonwealth 
is  dated  May  2,  1795  (L.  182,  f.  144).  It  is  in  consideration  of 
Jive  shillings,  etc.,  and  is  declared  to  be  made  "in  fee-simple 
forever  for  the  purpose  of  erecting  buildings  and  finishing  thereon 
a  State  House  for  the  accommodation  of  all  the  legislative  and 
executive  branches  of  government,  and  such  other  public  build- 
ings or  offices,  with  their  appurtenances,  as  may  be  necessary  and 
convenient,  and  may  be  required  for  the  suitable  accommodation 
of  the  several  departments  of  government."  In  the  face  of  the 
manifest  intention  of  this  deed  it  is  somewhat  amusing  to  re- 
member the  grave  deliberations  that  have  been  held  year  after 
year  about  moving  the  seat  of  government  somewhere  else,  and  at 
the  same  time  pocketing  the  proceeds  of  this  estate,  as  the  absolute 
property  of  the  Commonwealth. 

GLEANER. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  119 


LJII. 

GOVERNOR  HANCOCK'S   HOUSE. 

September  25,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR:  — Next  west  of  the  State  House,  on  "  Governor 
Hancock's  pasture,"  came  His  Excellency's  mansion  house  and  gar- 
den, being  the  large  area  between  Beacon  street,  Belknap  (or  Joy) 
street,  Mt.  Vernon  street,  and  State-House  lot.  The  original  pos- 
sessor seems  to  have  been  Zacheus  Bosworth,  who,  as  we  have  seen, 
sold  off  in  1651  to  Thomas  Millard  one  acre  (part  of  the  State-House 
lot) ,  bounded  with  the  Common  south,  said  Millard  east,  and  said 
Zacheus  west  (Possessions,  p.  76).  By  his  will,  dated  23,  5th 
month,  1655,  proved  August  30th,  Bosworth  devises  to  his 
daughter  Elizabeth  2  acres  of  land  with  a  mare,  or  else  the  barn 
with  a  piece  of  land  to  it,  to  be  laid  out  by  my  overseers."  (Probate 
Records,  1,  f.  112.) 

John  Mors  and  Elizabeth,  his  wife,  conveyed  to  Richard  Knight 
and  his  brother-in-law,  John  Wing,  June  7th,  1661  (L.  10,  f. 
212),  two  acres  of  land  in  the  Century  field,  formerly  devised  by 
Zacheu»,Bosworth  to  his  daughter,  the  said  Elizabeth,  bounded  on 
the  Common  south,  on  Thomas  Millard  east  and  west,  on  Samuel 
Bosworth  north  (Samuel  Bosworth  owned  and  sold  Cook's  2£- 
acre  pasture  north  of  this  land),  reserving  a  ten-feet  way  for 
Samuel  Bosworth  from  the  Common.  Thus  the  Beacon-street  end 
of  Belknap  street  was  at  first  a  mere  matter  of  private  accommo- 
dation for  Mr.  Samuel  Bosworth  to  cart  hay  off  from  his  pasture. 

John  Wing  mortgaged  his  moiety  to  the  worshipful  John 
Richards,  for  the  use  of  u  the  Major,"  Robert  Thompson  of  Lon- 
don, in  1677  (L.  10,  f.  219),  and  Knight  mortgaged  his  moiety  to 
the  same  worshipful  grantee,  in  his  own  right,  in  1679  (L.  11,  f. 
212),  this  deed  bounding  east  on  land  late  of  Millard,  since  in  the 
tenure  of  Samuell  Shrimpton.  Peaceable  possession  was  given  in 
1684,  so  that  the  title  became  absolute.  The  worshipful  John 
died  in  1694  ;  one  item  of  his  will  is,  "I  give  to  Mr.  John  Alford, 
son  of  Benjamin  Alford,  all  that  piece  or  parcel  of  land  lying  near 
Beacon  Hill,  which  I  bought  of  Richard  Knight,  now  in  the* 
occupation  of  said  Benjamin,  I  having  formerly  given  it  to  his  said 
son  John,  but  he  hath  no  deed  of  it." 


120  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

At  the  Inferior  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  October  Term,  1717> 
partition  was  had  by  John  Alford  of  his  moiety  against  Joseph 
Thompson,  of  London,  as  owning  the  other  moiety,  and  the  east- 
erly half  of  the  land  was  set  off  to  Alford.  In  1732  he  sells  off  a 
small  lot  to  Ebenezer  Messenger,  20  feet  by  58  feet  (Lib.  49,  f.  248) 
in  which  is  subsequently  conveyed  to  Mr.  Hancock.  He  conveyed 
1735  to  Thomas  Hancock  (Lib.  51,  f.  117)  "  a  lot  near  Beacon  Hill 
bounded  south-east  on  the  Common  135  feet  4  inches,  south-west 
on  John  Thompson,  of  London,  341  feet,  north-west  on  the  high- 
way 155  feet,  and  north-east  on  Col.  Samuel  Shrimpton  (i.e.,  the 
State-House  lot)  263  feet."  For  this  lot  of  an  acre  on  Beacon 
street,  on  which  stands  the  stone  mansion,  Mr.  Hancock  paid 
£1,000  in  good  bills  of  the  Provinces. 

The\Thompson  moiety  tumbled  about  from  heir  to  heir,  under 
the  English  entail  created  by  the  major,  to  which  I  have  referred 
in  the  case  of  his  two-acre  pasture  by  Somerset  street.  William 
Thompson,  of  Eltsham,  England,  the  ultimate  heir  in  tail,  barred 
the  entail  in  1758  (L.  93,  f.  124,  125),  and,  by  Andrew  Oliver, 
his  attorney,  conveyed  to  said  Thomas  Hancock,  in  1759  (L.  93, 
f.  158),  "all  that  tract  of  land  set  off  to  Joseph  Thompson  on 
partition  with  John  Alford,  in  1717,  —  October  Term  of  the  Court 
of  Common  Pleas,  —  measuring  135  feet  southerly  on  the  Common, 
and  northerly  in  the  rear  93  feet  on  Elisha  Cook,  west  on  land  of 
Samuel  Sewall,  or  a  lane  between  it  and  the  premises,  and  east  on 
the  lot  set  off  to  Alford."  So  that  Mr.  Samuel  Bosworth's  10-feet 
alley  had  reached  the  dignity  of  being,  perhaps,  a  lane.  It  had 
not  yet  attained  its  full-grown  glories  as  Joy  street.  And  for  this 
acre  Mr.  Hancock  paid  £150  sterling  more. 

At  these  trifling  prices  Mr.  Hancock  acquired  all  the  land 
west  of  the  State  House  to  Joy  street.  He  devised,  as  we  have 
seen,  in  1763,  to  his  widow  Lydia,  who  died  in  1777,  devising  to 
her  husband's  nephew,  Governor  Hancock,  who  died  seized  in 
1793  of  this  great  estate  thus  cheaply  acquired.  GLEANER. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  121 


LIV. 

THOMAS  BULFINCH,  ESQ. 

September  25,  1855. 

I  am  much  gratified  to  have  been  in  any  way  the  cause  of  the 
interesting  communication  of  T.  B.1  I  was  not  aware  that  the 
monument  on  Beacon  Hill  was  planned  by  the  late  Charles  Bui- 
finch.  He  has,  however,  left  a  far  more  imposing  specimen  of 
his  taste  as  an  architect.  The  State  House  was  planned  by  him, 
though  I  have  always  been  informed  that  the  wings  were  originally 

TO  GLEANER. 

September  24,  1865. 

SIR: —  As  you  have  ingenuously  confessed  in  one  of  your  articles  that  you  never 
saw  Beacon  Hill,  you  will  permit  one  who  saw  it  often,  and  had,  as  a  child,  a  familiar 
acquaintance  with  its  dandelions  and  buttercups,  to  tell  you  something  about  it.  It 
was,  at  my  earliest  recollection,  in  its  full  glory,  surmounted  by  a  graceful  column, 
on  whose  top  perched  a  gilded  eagle,  and  on  whose  base  were  those  inscriptions  which 
I  am  still  young  enough  to  go  to  the  State  House  to  copy,  as  I  mean  to  do,  for  this 
article,  before  I  have  done.  But  let  us  go  back  to  the  time  when  the  hill  was  as 
described  by  your  ancient  friend ;  when  there  was,  in  place  of  the  column,  a  stone 
basement,  on  which  rested  four  horizontal  timbers,  crossing  each  other  in  the  centre. 
From  this  centre  rose  a  mast,  holding  on  its  top  a  tar  barrel,  which  in  case  of  danger  was 
to  be  set  on  fire,  to  be  a  beacon  to  the  country  round.  This  preparation  was  adapted 
to  a  time  of  war,  but  it  was  happily  never  needed;  when  the  war  ended,  the  beacon 
was  but  a  remnant  of  things  that  had  been.  Thus  it  remained  till  about  four  years 
after  the  war,  when  a  young  gentleman  returned  from  Europe  who  had  been  passing  a 
year  in  England,  France,  and  Italy,  led  thither  not  by  motives  of  business,  but  what 
was  then  unusual,  by  a  love  of  art,  particularly  that  art  which,  in  a  young  community 
is  the  most  practically  useful  —  Architecture.  This  young  gentleman,  Charles  Bulfinoh, 
was  the  son  of  that  Bulfinch  whose  name,  as  the  owner  of  the  pasture,  has  found  a 
place  in  some  of  your  communications.  On  his  return  home  he  immediately  begun 
to  put  in  exercise  those  tastes  for  architectural  improvement  which  he  had  carried 
with  him  abroad,  and  nourished  by  all  that  he  saw.  The  first  idea  that  occurred  to 
him  was  to  remove  the  unsightly  timbers  of  the  old  beacon  from  their  conspicuous 
site,  and  replace  them  with  a  handsome  column,  resembling  at  an  humble  distance 
those  he  had  seen  in  London,  Paris,  and  Home.  How  the  funds  were  obtained  I  do 
not  know,  but  presume  the  method  that  has  been  so  often  used  since  was  employed,  and 
a  subscription  paper  passed  round;  and  am  equally  well  satisfied  that  in  that  case,  as  in 
later  ones,  the  prime  mover  in  the  scheme  had  to  take  all  the  trouble  and  make  up 
all  deficiencies  himself. 

The  monument,  designed  by  Mr.  Bulfinch,  and  built  under  his  superintendence, 
bore  on  its  pedestal  tablets  of  slate,  with  inscriptions  written  by  him.  On  two  sides 


122  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

designed  to  have  been  of  greater  length  than  the  present,  as  com- 
pared with  the  centre  and  the  dome.  Whatever  may  be  its 
architectural  defects,  however,  it  is  a  great  ornament  to  our  city, 
and  produces  a  very  striking  and  agreeable  effect  when  first  seen 
from  a  distance.  The  recent  addition  on  its  north  side  has  made 
the  edifice  bulge  out  in  that  direction  in  a  manner  which  the 
neighbors  doubtless  consider  unsightly,  however  convenient  it 
may  be  for  the  occupants,  and  however  well  it  may,  on  the  whole, 
accord  with  the  rest  of  the  structure.  (The  stone  embankment 
wall  on  the  east  side  of  the  State  House  has  been  the  most  costly 

the  principal  civil  and  military  events  of  the  Revolution,  with  their  dates,  were  in- 
scribed. On  the  third  and  fourth  sides  one  read  as  follows:  — 

To  COMMEMORATE 
that  train  of  events 

which  led 
to  the  American  Revolution, 

and  finally  secured 

Liberty  and  Independence 

to  the  United  States, 

this  column  is  erected 

by  the  voluntary  contributions 

of  the  citizens 

of  Boston, 

MDCCXC. 

AMERICANS! 

While  from  this  eminence, 
scenes  of  luxuriant  fertility, 

of  flourishing  commerce, 

and  the  abodes  of  social  happiness, 

meet  your  view, 

forget  not  those 

who  by  their  exertions 

have  secured  to  you 

these  blessings. 

The  column  stood  till  about  the  year  1808,  when  at  last  the  suit  between  the 
Hancock  heirs  and  the  town  was  decided  in  favor  of  the  former,  and  it  became  certain 
that  the  hill  must  be  dug  down,  with  the  exception  of  a  limited  space  in  the  centre. 
It  seemed  useless  for  the  town  to  retain  this  square  pile  of  earth  (for  such  it  would 
have  been),  bounded  with  perpendicular  sides,  and  therefore  it  was  sold  to  share  the 
fate  of  the  rest.  This  is,  according  to  my  recollections,  the  reason  why  the  town 
parted  with  what,  if  it  could  have  been  preserved  entire,  would  have  been,  as  you 
Bay,  a  unique  and  unrivalled  ornament.  But  the  times  were  hard,  embargo 
and  commercial  restrictions  had  crushed  the  trade  and  damped  the  spirits  of  the 
community.  The  liberal  and  public-spirited  individual  through  whose  agency  the 
monument  had  been  erected  had  fallen  a  victim  to  the  derangements  of  the  times, 
and,  in  the  enterprise  of  Franklin  pi  ce,  had  made  shipwreck  of  his  fortunes.  No 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  123 

item  in  our  State  expenditures.  It  was  undermined  by  the  frost, 
and  had  to  be  replaced  in  the  most  substantial  manner.  The 
estimates  of  this  wall  were,  I  believe,  about  $6,000.  His  Ex- 
cellency, in  his  message,  incidentally  suggested  that  the  cost  had 
someivhat  exceeded  the  estimate.  It  was,  I  believe,  over  $20,000.) 
I  regret  very  much  to  see  that  there  is  any  intermeddling  with  the 
foundations  of  the  main  building.  Nothing  indeed,  now,  even  of 
the  most  fundamental  character,  is  held  sacred.  I  sincerely  hope 
that  the  State  House  will  not  share  the  fate  of  the  monument. 

GLEANER. 

other  stood  ready  to  redeem  the  hill  from  its  fate  by  buying  up  the  Hancock  claim, 
and  the  hill  fell,  and  the  monument  disappeared,  leaving  only  the  tableti,  which  still 
meet  the  visitor's  eye  as  he  prepares  to  ascend  to  the  lantern  on  the  top  of  the  State 
House,  a  spot  from  which  a  view  similar  to  that  which  used  to  be  commanded 
from  the  top  of  Beacon  Hill  may  still  be  seen,  with  its  "  scenes  of  luxuriant 
fertility,"  etc. 

At  my  earliest  recollection  the  appearance  of  the  hill  was  this:  a  grassy  hemi- 
sphere, so  steep  that  one  could,  with  difficulty,  mount  its  sides,  descending  with  a 
perfectly  regular  curve  to  the  streets  on  the  south,  west,  and  north.  On  the  east  it 
had  been  encroached  upon,  and  the  contour  was  broken.  Just  opposite  the  end  of 
Coolidge  avenue,  on  Derne  street,  there  was  a  flight  of  wooden  steps,  ten  or  fifteen  in 
number,  leading  part  way  up  the  hill.  After  that  one  had  to  climb  the  rest  of  the 
way  by  aid  of  the  foot-holes  that  had  been  worn  in  the  surface,  along  a  wide  path 
worn  bare  by  the  feet,  to  the  top,  where  there  was  also  a  space  of  some  fifty  feet 
square,  worn  bare  of  sod.  In  the  midst  of  this  space  stood  the  monument.  De- 
scending by  the  south  side,  one  followed  a  similar  rough  gravel  path  to  another 
flight  of  plank  steps,  leading  down  the  level  of  Mt.  Vernon  street,  and  terminating  at 
about  the  position  of  the  front  of  No.  13  Mount  Vernon  street,  the  first  house  of  those 
facing  south. 

The  sport  of  batting  the  ball  up  the  hill  and  meeting  it  again  on  its  descent  was 
played  by  some ;  but  it  was  not  so  easy  a  game  as  one  would  at  first  suppose,  on  account 
of  the  difficulty  of  maintaining  one's  footing  on  the  hillside,  which  was  so  steep  as 
to  require  some  skill  even  to  stand  erect  on  it.  The  appearance  of  the  hill  in  winter 
I  do  not  recollect;  but  I  think  it  must  have  beer^  generally  bare  of  snow,  from  its 
elevated  position,  and  I  do  not  recollect  having  ever  seen  sleds  used  on  it.  But  you 
can  ask  C.  P.  0.,  or  T.  B.  C.,  or  G.  H.  K.,  or  Dr.  R.,  or  Marshall  F.,  and  they  can 
correct  or  confirm  my  impressions  on  this  point.  T.  B. 

[THE  MONUMENT  ON  BEACON  HILL.  —  The  account  of  the  Beacon  Hill  monument,  on 
the  first  page,  will  be  read  with  much  interest.  A  portrait  of  Mr.  Charles  Bulfinoh, 
the  gentleman  alluded  to,  taken  while  he  was  in  Europe,  at  the  age  of  twenty-six,  is 
now  on  exhibition  at  the  Athenaeum  . —  Note  in  the  Transcript.'] 


124  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


LV. 

JOHN  HANCOCK. 

September  28,  1855. 

Mr.  EDITOR  :  —  As  long  as  America  shall  continue  to  hold  a 
place  among  the  nations  of  the  earth  the  memory  of  John  Hancock 
will  endure.  Few  men  during  life  have  been  more  highly  lauded, 
or  more  bitterty  assailed.  To  an  entire  disregard,  and  even  a 
culpable  neglect,  of  exactness  in  money  matters,  he  united  great 
liberality,  both  public  and  private.  While  Harvard  College  was 
dunning  him  in  vain  for  a  settlement  of  accounts  as  its  late  treas- 
urer, he  appropriated  several  hundred  pounds  sterling  to  purchase 
an  elegant  carpet  and  other  articles  in  London,  which  he  generously 
presented  to  that  Seminary.  And  I  suppose  there  is  no  doubt 
that  eventually  he  repaid  to  it,  at  least,  as  much  as  the  amount  of 
his  indebtedness.  So  remiss  was  he  in  regard  to  his  own  affairs 
that  some  very  valuable  real  estate  was  actually  taken  from  him 
under  levy  on  execution.  But  his  official  signature  nobly  repre- 
sented Massachusetts  on  the  most  important  document  in  the  his- 
tory of  our  country. 

James  Bowdoin  was  originally  chosen  a  delegate  to  the  first 
Continental  Congress.  It  was  a  glorious  post  of  duty  and  respon- 
sibility, —  one  which  the  whole  previous  and  subsequent  tenor  of 
his  life  alike  shows  that  he  would  not  have  shunned  or  evaded. 
The  avowed  reason  for  declining  was  doubtless  the  true  one,  —  the 
infirm  state  of  his  wife's  health.  [See  address  at  Bowdoin  College, 
1849,  by  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  a  great-grandson  of  Governor  Bow- 
doin.] Upon  how  slight  a  circumstance  sometimes  depends  the 
gain  or  the  loss  of  the  highest  prizes  of  life?  Mr.  Hancock  was 
chosen  as  his  substitute,  and  achieved  for  himself  that  immortality 
which  might  otherwise  have  been  his  rival's. 

When  the  French  fleet  visited  Boston  a  grand  entertainment 
was  given  to  its  officers  at  the  Governor's  mansion.  It  was  a 
breakfast,  or,  as  it  would  now  be  called,  a  matine*e.  Believing  that 
all  good  citizens  would  be  glad  to  contribute,  the  Governor  issued 
a  summary  order  that  all  the  cows  on  Boston  Common  should  be 
milked  to  furnish  supplies  for  the  occasion.  I  am  not  aware  that 
any  action  of  trespass  was  ever  brought  against  His  Excellency  for 
this  truly  arbitrary  confiscation  of  private  property. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES;  125 

These  festivities  on  shore  were  reciprocated  upon  the  water  by 
our  gallant  allies.  As  the  wife  of  His  Excellency  was  seated  at  the 
table,  on  which  was  spread  an  elegant  collation, on  board  the  vessel 
of  the  French  commander,  he  requested  her  (without  any  reason  as- 
signed) to  ring  a  small  bell  which  he  handed  her,  or  to  do  some 
other  slight  act  which  he  designated.  She  did  so.  This  was  the 
preconcerted  signal  for  a  general  salute  from  all  the  guns  of  the 
fleet.  She  was  startled  alike  out  of  her  official  dignity  and  per- 
sonal propriety  by  the  deafening  peal  of  artillery  that  immediately 
ensued. 

Governor  Hancock  thought  that,  as  the  Chief  Magistrate  of 
Massachusetts,  it  was  not  for  him  to  take  the  first  step,  even  when 
"  The  Father  of  our  Country  "  visited  us.  He  felt  that  his  dignity, 
or,  more  properly,  the  dignity  of  the  sovereign  State  which  he 
represented,  would  be  compromised  by  his  making  the  first  call, 
even  on  Washington.  His  Excellency,  however,  speedily  dis- 
covered his  mistake,  and  certainly  took,  or  was  supposed  by  the 
public  to  have  taken,  an  ingenious  mode  of  correcting  it.  Swath- 
ing his  limbs  in  flannels,  —  the  victim  of  a  sudden  attack  of  the 
gout,  —  he  caused  himself  to  be  carried  to  visit  the  President,  who, 
whatever  may  have  been  his  private  convictions,  could  not  hesitate 
to  -accept  and  excuse  the  tardy  civilities  of  such  a  suffering  invalid. 
Thus,  singularly  enough,  it  was  by  den}Ting  himself  the  use  of  his 
natural  legs  that  His  Excellency  got  upon  his  legs  again  in  this 
matter  of  etiquette.  Washington  and  his  suite  were  detained 
several  hours  upon  the  Neck,  and,  the  day  being  very  chilly  and 
disagreeable,  many  people  became  ill  with  what  was  called 
the  "  Washington  Cold."  The  President's  dinner  also  grew  cold 
(at  S.  S.  Pierce's  grocery  store,  at  the  corner  of  Tremont  and 
Court  streets)  ;  but  a  supplementary  fish,  of  great  excellence,  being 
obtained  at  the  last  moment,  was  served  up  in  the  most  approved 
and  satisfactorj*  manner.  The  non-arrival  of  a  fish  once  caused 
the  despair  and  suicide  of  a  French  cook ;  the  arrival  of  this  fish 
saved  an  American  landlord,  under  even  more  desperate  circum- 
stances, when  he  was  doubtless  making  divers  sentimental  ejacula- 
tions, though  he  would  not,  probably,  at  last  have  resorted  to 
such  a  tragical  proof  of  loyalty. 

It  is,  however,  due  to  His  Excellency  to  state  that  he  was  really 
a  frequent  martyr  to  the  gout.  My  informant,  80  years  old, 
remembers  that  on  one  occasion  he  opened  the  session  of  the 
Legislature  by  a  speech  delivered  with  great  dignity  and  effect, 
although  from  a  seat  which  was  almost  a  couch,  his  limbs  being  on 


126  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

this  occasion  wrapped  in  flannels,  from  the  bona-Jide  necessities  of 
the  case.  And  it  may  be  that  such  was  the  real  cause  of  his 
dilatory  call  on  Washington,  the  popular  opinion  to  the  contrary 
notwithstanding. 

When  President  Jackson  visited  Boston  I  was  a  young  man, 
and  had  just  discovered  the  delights  of  horsemanship.  I  had 
never  been  made  to  embrace  mother  earth  by  either  of  the  various 
processes  of  stumbling,  rearing,  halting,  or  sh}ring.  These 
saddening  experiences  came  later  in  life.  Seized,  therefore,  with 
a  fit  of  equestrian  patriotism,  I  determined  to  join  the  cavalcade 
which  was  to  escort  the  city's  guest  from  the  Neck.  I  was  mount- 
ed on  a  fine  spirited  horse,  and  we  were  duly  formed  in  a  line, 
in  front  of  which  the  procession  was  to  pass.  Just  as  the  Presi- 
dent was  approaching  us,  the  noise  of  the  music  and  the  shouts 
excited  and  alarmed  my  steed,  and,  after  sundry  demonstrations, 
which  I,  at  least,  regarded  as  very  serious,  he  finally  became  quiet, 
with  his  tail  exactly  where  his  head  should  have  been,  and  vice 
versa.  In  the  earlier  part  of  these  performances  I  had  great 
difficulty  in  preserving  my  own  centre  of  gravity,  and  the  specta- 
tors, to  a  man,  lost  their  gravity  at  its  conclusion.  I  was  aware 
that  by  thus  turning  my  back  upon  him  I  was  treating  the  head  of 
the  nation  with  apparent  discourtesy.  But  on  reflection  I  became 
satisfied  that  my  presidential  visit  had  not  proved  more  embarrass- 
ing and  awkward  to  myself,  or  the  source  of  more  amusement  and 
ridicule  to  lookers-on,  than  did  Governor  Hancock's  visit  to  Wash- 
ington ;  and  that,  with  the  best  intentions,  each  of  us  was  merely 
the  unhappy  victim  of  a  little  want  of  tact,  and  that  I  had  one 
great  advantage  over  His  Excellency,  viz.,  nobody  knew  who  I 
was. 

Dorothy,  the  widow  of  Governor  Hancock,  survived  him  nearly 
40  years,  or  till  1830.  She  married  again,  and  is  better  known 
to  us  as  Madame  Scott.  The  whole  of  this  mansion-house  estate  (ex- 
cept a  triangular  gore  between  Mount  Vernon  place  and  street) 
was  assigned  to  her  as  her  dower,  as  was  also  Hancock's  wharf. 
Evicted  from  this  latter  very  valuable  estate  as  lately  as  1817, 
under  foreclosure  of  a  mortgage  made  jn  1774,  for  only  £1,650  13s. 
5d.,  she  attempted  to  obtain  a  new  assignment  of  dower;  but  the 
Court  refused  it,  because  she  had  given  her  express  assent  to  the 
original  assignment  (13  Mass.  Rep.,  162,  Scott  vs.  Hancock). 
This  is  one  of  a  series  of  perhaps  a  dozen  lawsuits  in  our  Reports 
relative  to  lands  of  Governor  Hancock. 

I  trust  that  for  many  a  spring  yet  to  come  that  old  stone  man- 


"GLEANEK"  AETICLES.  127 

sion  will  continue  to  stand,  and  the  lilac-bushes  to  blossom  in  the 
green  enclosure  on  which  it  fronts.  Long  life  to  its  now  aged 
proprietor,  whose  laudable  pride  of  ancestiy  has  hitherto  preserved, 
for  the  gratification  alike  of  the  community  and  of  himself,  this 
interesting  domestic  memorial  of  the  First  Signer  of  the  Declaration 
of  Independence! 

GLEANER. 


LVI. 

HOUSES  ON  HANCOCK  ESTATE. 

October  I,  1855. 

Mr.  EDITOR  :  —  The  estate  of  Governor  Hancock  on  Beacon 
street  and  hill  (say  3J  acres)  would  now,  undoubtedly,  be  worth 
a  million  and  a  half  of  dollars.  It  would  not  be  interesting  to  the 
public,  or  professionally  expedient,  for  me  to  enlarge  on  the  non 
compos  proceedings,  sales  by  guardians  of  minors,  and  by  admin- 
istrators, executory  devises,  and  sundry  other  like  matters,  which 
form  the  legal  history  of  this  spot. 

In  1815  Beacon  street  was  widened  by  cutting  off  from  this 
estate  a  strip,  which  was  17  feet  wide  at  the  State-House  land,  and 
20  feet  wide  at  a  point  92  feet  6  from  Beiknap  street.  A  plan  is 
recorded  in  L.  250,  f.,  76. 

Mt.  Vernon  place  and  the  20-feet  way  behind  it  have  been  laid 
out  through  this  land  ;  and  Mt.  Vernon  avenue,  or  Hancock  avenue 
(or  Cato  alley,  as  it  has  been  jocosely  called,  from  its  affording  a 
convenient  access  across  the  Common  to  and  from  the  northerly 
end  of  Beiknap  street) ,  was  laid  out  by  mutual  agreement  between 
the  Commonwealth  and  these  proprietors.  There  is  no  other  range 
of  houses  in  Boston,  that  I  know  of,  whose  entire  value  depends  on 
light,  air,  and  prospect  enjoyed  merely  by  sufferance,  t.e.,  over 
the  land  of  the  Commonwealth.  Should  that  land  ever  be  covered 
by  buildings  these  residences  would  become  houses  on  a  ten-feet 
alley,  and  the  name  above  suggested  would  then  be  signally  appro- 
priate, as  they  would  probably  be  occupied  by  the  present  denizens 
of  the  lower  part  of  Beiknap  street. 

There  now  stand  upon  these  Hancock  lands  many  of  the  most 
desirable  residences  in  the  city.  Thus,  west  of  the  Hancock  man- 
sion, on  Beacon  street,  are  the  four  elegant  dwellings  of  Samuel 


128  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

A.  Eliot,  of  Mrs.  Gardner  Greene,  of  Mrs.  George  Parkman,  and 
of  J.  Bowdoin  Bradlee.  In  the  rear  of  these,  on  the  south  side  of 
Mount  Vernon  place,  are  seven  others,  the  corner  one  of  which,  on 
Belknap  street,  was  owned  and  occupied  by  the  late  Hon.  Theo- 
dore I/rman,  the  munificent  founder  of  the  first  reform  school  in 
the  Commonwealth.  On  the  north  side  of  said  place,  and  fronting 
on  Belknap  and  Mount  Vernon  streets,  are  six  more  houses,  the 
first  owned  and  occupied  by  George  "W.  Lyman,  Esq.,  who  is,  or 
was,  also  proprietor  of  several  of  the  others.  There  are  seven 
houses  on  the  avenue  or  "  alley."  Back  of  -the  State  House,  on 
the  north  side  of  Mount  Vernon  street,  is  an  elegant  block  of  seven 
costly  residences,  extending  from  Hancock  to  Temple  street,  all 
which,  except  a  strip  of  the  westerly  house,  come  under  this  title. 
On  the  same  street  (easterly  of  Temple  street)  are  two  houses  of 
smaller  size  and  cost ;  and  on  the  east  side  of  Temple  street 
another  block  of  eight  houses  of  the  same  character.  These  two 
last  ranges  of  houses  cover,  as  we  have  seen,  the  site  of  the  monu- 
ment, and  the  chief  part  of  the  six  rods  square  around  it,  there 
being  only  a  small  portion  of  it  on  the  west  side  of  Temple  street. 

The  result  is,  that  on  the  Hancock  estate,  besides  the  State 
House  and  most  of  the  Reservoir,  there  have  been  laid  out  four  or 
five  streets  or  ways,  on  which  stand,  in  all,  say  forty  brick  dwell- 
ing-houses. The  grounds  belonging  to  the  old  stone  mansion 
house,  will  eventually  —  I  trust,  however,  at  a  distant  day  — 
afford  space  enough  for  three  more  as  elegant  residences  as  can  be 
built  in  the  city.  A  magnificent  estate  truly,  and  yet  acquired  b}^ 
the  ancestor  of  the  Hancock  family  within  about  a  century  (1735, 
1752,  1759),  at  a  cost  of  £1,000  province  currency,  £150  sterling, 
and  £220  lawful  money  of  Great  Britain  ;  and  if  "  Inquirer  "  is  right, 
as  he  probably  is,  in  estimating  the  £1,000  at  only  $333£,  the 
total  cost  would  have  been  only  slightly  above  two  thousand 
dollars. 

In  view,  alike  of  the  two  public  edifices  which  have  been  erected 
on  it,  and  of  the  distinguished  public  services  of  its  former  pro- 
prietor, it  never  has  been  and  never  can  be  surpassed  in  interest 
by  any  private  estate  within  the  limits  of  Boston.  It  is,  indeed,  a 
coincidence  no  less  striking  than  agreeable,  that  on  one  and  the 
same  homestead  should  stand,  as  it  were  side  by  side  together, 
the  edifice  of  our  State  sovereignty,  and  the  mansion  of  him  whose 
signature  was  first  affixed  to  our  national  charter. 

GLEANER. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  129 


LVII. 

SEWALL'S   ELM  PASTURE. 

October  4,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Who  ever  heard  of  "  Sewall's  Elm  -Pasture,"  or 
of  Coventry  street,  Sewall  street,  and  Bishop  Stoke  street?  Some 
of  your  readers,  who  are  in  a  state  of  ignorance  on  these  points, 
may,  perhaps,  be  glad  to  be  enlightened. 

West  of  Bosworth's  passage-way  to  his  pastures,  afterwards 
Belknap  or  Joy  street,  came  a  5-acre  pasture,  derived  under  Rich- 
ard Truesdale  and  Thomas  Millard.  In  Book  of  Possessions  (f. 
62)  Richard  Truesdale's  possession  is  three-fourths  of  an  acre, 
bounded  on  the  Common  south,  Nathaniel  Eaton  north,  Bosworth 
west,  and  Thomas  Millard  east. 

Thomas  Millard's  possession  was  half  an  acre,  bounded  with  the 
Common  south,  Richard  Truesdale  west,  Thomas  Scottow  east 
and  north.  Zacheus  Bosworth's  possession  (f.  73)  was  two  acres 
in  the  new  field,  bounded  with  the  Common  south,  Richard  Trues- 
dale east,  Jane  Parker  west,  Wm.  Wilson  and  John  Ruggles  north  ; 
also  1£  acres  bounded  with  Thomas  Millard  south,  James  Johnson 
north,  Edward  Dennis  east,  and  Richard  Sherman  west.  Bos- 
worth,  as  we  have  seen,  conveyed  to  said  Millard  one  acre, 
bounded  with  Edward  Hutchinson  north,  the  Common  south, 
Thomas  Millard  east,  and  said  Zacheus  west,  October  10,  1651, 
—  being  part  of  the  State-House  lot,  —  and  transmitted  to  his 
daughter  the  whole  two  acres  of  the  Hancock  land  west  of  the 
State  House.  For  practical  purposes,  notwithstanding  the 
deficiency  of  contents  as  stated  in  the  Book  of  Possessions,  the 
title  is  safe  under  the  two  following  deeds  to  the  whole  land  there- 
by conveyed :  — 

Richard  Truesdale  and  Mary  his  wife  to  Thomas  Deane  —  deed 
May  14,  1667  (Lib.  5,  f.  234).  Three  acres  more  or  less,  bounded 
on  the  Common  south,  on  Thomas  Millard  north  and  east,  on 
Francis  East  west,  on  Thomas  Brattle  and  Humphrey  Davy  north- 
westerly. 

Thomas  Miller  conveyed  to  said  Deane,  May,  1668  (Lib.  5,  f. 
249) ,  3  acres  bounded  on  the  Common  south-west,  on  Richard  Cook, 
Humphrey  Davy,  and  Thomas  Brattle  north-west,  on  the  highway 


130  CITY  DOCUMENT  No    105. 

leading  to  Richard  Cook's  north-east  [i.e.,  Joy   street],  and  on 
said  Deane  south-westerly. 

These  two  purchases  would  seem  to  be  6  acres,  but  Thomas 
Deane  and  Ann,  his  wife,  sell  the  same  to  James  Whetcombe,  Feb. 
11,  1672  (Lib.  8,  f.  62)  as  five  acres,  more  or  less,  bought  partly 
of  Truesdale  and  partly  of  Miller,  bounded  south-westerly  on  the 
Common,  on  Cook,  Deane,  and  Brattle  north-west,  on  Francis 
East  west,  on  the  highway  from  Cook's  to  the  Common  north-east- 
erly. 

Whetcomb  conveyed  it  to  Wm.  Hawkins  as  early  as  1678,  and 
Win.  Hawkins  and  Anna,  his  wife,  conveyed  to  Ephraim  Savage, 
1690  (L.  15,  f.  46),  as  ''formerly  purchased  by  said  Hawkins  of 
James  Whetcomb."  Ephraim  Savage  and  Elizabeth,  his  wife,  con- 
veyed to  Samuel  Sewall,  April  2,  1692  (L.  15,  f.  183),  as  five 
acres,  more  or  less,  bounded  south  on  the  Common  28  rods  9  feet, 
west  on  Francis  East  27£  rods,  north  on  Cook,  Davie  and  Brattle 
33  rods,  and  east  on  the  lane  leading  to  Mr.  Cook's  22^  rods. 

Hon.  Samuel  Sewall  was  husband  of  Hannah,  daughter  of  Hull, 
the  mintmaster.  She  died,  and  he  mortgaged  to  Joseph  Wads- 
worth,  town  treasurer,  the  west  part  of  this  pasture,  in  1721  (L. 
35,  f.  201),  to  secure  an  annuity  of  £5,  pa}^able  every  2d  of  April, 
for  the  use  of  the  school  in  Pond  street,  of  which  Charles  Angier 
is  now  master,  not  far  from  where  John  Sanford  kept  school,  to 
which  Hannah,  the  wife  of  his  youth,  and  mother  of  his  children, 
used  to  go,  and  whom  she  used  to  mention  with  pleasure.  Lest 
the  residents  on  Beacon  street  should  feel  alarmed  as  to  this  rent 
charge  of  £5,1  will  mention  that  it  was  released  by  the  town  to  his 
heirs.  He  married  Mary,  widow  of  Robert  Gibbs,  1721  (Suffolk, 
Lib.  36,  f.  59),  and  died  seized  of  this  pasture  in  1729. 

This  pasture  may  be  set  down  as  an  investment  of  some  of  Mr. 
Hull's  "  shillings,"  though  not  made  by  himself  personally.  Con- 
sidering the  number  of  them  which  Judge  Sewall  received  with 
his  wife,  and  which  made  him  one  of  our  wealthiest  citizens,  the 
donation  above  mentioned  was  not,  in  itself,  a  munificent  endow- 
ment of  our  public  schools,  nor,  viewed  as  a  parting  tribute  of 
affection  to  the  memory  of  the  wife  of  his  youth,  when,  in  his  old 
age,  he  was  just  taking  another  helpmate,  can  it  be  considered  as 
involving  any  very  lavish  expenditure. 

GLEANER. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  131 


LVIII. 

STREETS  ON  PAPER. 

October  8,  1854. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —  Judge  Samuel  Sewall  died,  as  we  have  seen,  in 
1729.  By  the  law,  as  it  stood  till l  the  eldest  son  took  a  double 
share.  He  left  three  children  :  Samuel,  the  eldest  son  ;  Joseph  ; 
Judith,  the  wife  of  William  Cooper ;  and  the  four  children  of  a 
deceased  daughter,  Elizabeth,  wife  of  Grove  Hurst,  viz. :  Mary, 
wife  of  William  Pepperell,  Jr.  ;  Elizabeth,  wife  of  Charles  Chauncy  ; 
Hannah,  wife  of  Nathaniel  Balston  ;  and  Jane,  wife  of  Addington 
Davenport.  These  heirs  selected  referees  to  divide  this  pasture  into 
lots,  and  they  then  drew  for  a  choice,  and  executed  mutual  releases 
(1 732) .  There  was  laid  out  a  35-feet  street  parallel  to  Beacon  street, 
and  170  feet  north  of  it,  which  street  extended  westerly  from  Bel- 
knap  street  464  feet.  There  were  also  opened  two  streets  run- 
ning northerly  from  Beacon  street,  25  feet  by  170  feet  deep.  The 
first  of  these  was  160  feet  west  of  Belknap  street,  and  was  called 
Bishop  Stoke  street;  the  other  was  160  feet  further  west,  and  was 
called  Coventry  street. 

All  these  streets  I  consider  to  have  been  virtually,  perhaps  actu- 
ally, only  streets  on  paper.  They  had  no  outlet  into  other  lands, 
but  merely  served  as  access  to  the  several  lots  into  which  this  pas- 
ture was  divided.  They  have  had  no  existence,  in  fact,  for  cer- 
tainly the  last  60  years.  Part  of  Bishop  Stoke  street,  indeed, 
now  comes  within  the  lines  of  Walnut  street. 

"  Sewell's  elm  pasture,"  which  began  as  six  acres  and  shrunk 
up  to  five  acres,  proved  on  survey,  in  1732,  to  hold  out  only  4J 
acres.  It  measured  440  feet  on  the  Common  or  Beacon  street,  and 
thence  extended  back,  the  easterly  line  diverging,  and  on  the 
north  forming  a  very  irregular  line  on  Allen's  16^-acre  pasture 
(afterwards  Wheelright's,  and  finally  bought  by  the  Mt.  Vernon 
Proprietors) .  Its  greatest  depth  from  Beacon  street  was  at  about 
the  centre,  where  it  measured  490  feet.  Some  idea  of  its  general 
dimensions  may  be  formed  by  considering  that  the  present  square 
between  Beacon,  Belknap,  Mt.  Vernon,  and  Walnut  streets,  con- 
stitutes just  about  the  easterly  half  of  this  pasture. 

1  Blank  in  the  original.  —  W.  H.  W. 


132  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  108. 

Without  going  into  the  detail  of  the  various  deeds  of  these  lots, 
the  general  result  is,  that  all  west  of  Walnut  street,  as  now  laid 
out,  gets  united  in  John  Singleton  Copley,  partly  by  deeds  of  Dr. 
Sylvester  Gardner,  in  1770,  and  partly  by  deed  of  John  Williams, 
in  1773;  there  being  intervening  deeds  by  Peter  Lucee,  1744; 
Benjamin  Bagnal,  1744;  Hon.  John  Erving,  1752;  Nathaniel 
Cunningham,  1783,  and  his  son,  Nathaniel,  1751.  These  purchases 
of  Copley  included,  also,  a  gore  east  of  Walnut  street,  which  was 
subsequently  conveyed  by  him,  1800  (194,  f.  116),  to  Dr.  John 
Joy,  in  whom  all  the  other  lots  east  of  Walnut  street  likewise  get 
united  in  1791-1798. 

Great  confusion  exists  among  some  of  the  series  of  deeds  of  this 
easterly  moiety  of  the  pasture,  and  in  1792  a  deed  was  made  to 
said  Joy  by  John  Williams,  executor,  for  £100  (L.  171,  f.  255), 
.which  was  a  mere  pretended  title.  Some  time  after  Mr.  Joy 
had  bought  and  paid  for  it,  it  is  said  that  Mr.  Williams  asked  him 
if  he  did  not  want  to  pay  £100  more  for  another  deed,  and  on  Mr. 
Joy's  asking  what  he  meant,  told  him  that  he  had  still  got  as  much 
title  left  as  he  had  originally  conveyed.  This  very  deed,  however  (as 
affording  a  distinct  basis  of  a  possessory  title),  became  ultimately 
of  great  value  ;  since  it  quietly  cured  all  informalities  and  deficiencies 
in  the  deeds  of  the  true  owners.  A  fine  plan  of  this  estate  of  Dr. 
Joy,  in  1799,  accompanies  an  indenture  recorded  Lib.  192,  fol. 
198.  A  small  gore  of  land  south  of  Mount  Vernon  street  comes 
under  Allen  or  Wheelwright.  All  the  residue  of  Joy's  land  is  from 
SewalPs  pasture.  His  whole  lot  finally  measured  172  feet  on 
Beacon  street,  457  feet  4  inches  on  Walnut  street,  305  feet  1  inch 
on  Mount  Vernon  street,  and  355  feet  3  inches  on  Joy  street,  being 
about  100,000  square  feet. 

GLEANER. 


MX. 

CONDITIONS.  —  EAVES. 

October  11,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Titles  to  real  estate  forfeitable  by  breach  of  con- 
dition are  by  no  means  uncommon  in  Boston,  being,  however, 
chiefly  held  under  deeds  made  during  the  present  century.  Thus 
all  .North  and  South  Market  streets,  Park  street,  Colonnade  row, 
and  a  large  proportion  of  all  the  lands  on  the  Neck  and  elsewhere, 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  133 

convej'ed  by  the  city,  are  on  condition.  All  Winthrop  place  is 
held  under  conditional  deeds  of  George  Bond.  The  large  Barton 
Point  estate  is  held  under  such  deeds  from  the  Barton  Point  Asso- 
ciation. The  whole  great  area  of  the  old  Mill  Pond  lands  was  so 
conveyed.  The  lots  upon  Broad,  India,  and  Central  streets,  with 
the  other  streets  in  that  vicinity,  were  so  conveyed  by  the  Broad 
Street  Association,  or  by  individuals.  The  entire  marginal  lots, 
and  many  others,  at  East  Boston  are  also  subject  to  conditions. 

There  is  great  inconvenience  as  well  as  danger  from  such  titles. 
For  instance,  one  large  tract  is  conveyed  at  East  Boston  on  condi- 
tion that  no  ferry  shall  be  established.  Fifty  separate  house-lots 
are  sold  off  with  warranty,  making  no  mention  of  the  condition, 
the  parties  supposing  that  it  is  inapplicable  to  any  except  the  re- 
maining water-lots ;  and  yet  a  breach  by  this  remaining  owner 
might  work  a  forfeiture  of  the  whole  original  tract,  and  destroy  the 
titles  of  his  innocent  grantees.  In  one  court  in  this  cit}T,  a  tract, 
on  which  now  stand  seven  dwelling-houses,  is  conveyed  by  one 
deed,  with  a  like  joint  condition  as  to  the  style  of  building,  —  mak- 
ing each  proprietor  liable  for  the  acts  of  half-a-dozen  neighbors. 
And  this  is  especial!}7"  true  of  many  of  the  city  lands  on  the  Neck. 
It  not  unfrequently  happens  that  the  mention  of  the  condition  (even 
when  made  merely  of  the  one  particular  lot)  gets  omitted  in  later 
deeds  by  mistake,  and  thus  a  party  may  ruin  himself  unconsciously 
by  some  little  violation. 

In  Gray  vs.  Blanchard  (8  Pick.  Rep.,  284)  land  was  conveyed 
on  the  condition  that  "  no  windows  shall  be  placed  in  the  north 
wall  of  the  house  aforesaid,  or  of  any  house  to  be  erected  on  the 
premises  within  30  years  from  the  date  hereof,"  and  the  breach  of 
this  condition  forfeited  the  entire  estate. 

How  great  a  risk  may  be  run  from  this  cause  will  be  apparent  by 
considering  the  following  adjudication  :  — 

In  8  Gushing,  150,  Millett  vs.  Fowle,  it  was  decided  by  the 
Supreme  Court  that  the  expression  in  a  deed  u  four  feet  from  the 
northerly  side  of  the  building,"  means  four  feet  from  the  extremest 
part  of  the  building,  and  therefore  from  the  eaves.  In  other  words 
that  eaves,  as  they  project  over  the  front  or  side  of  a  house,  are  the 
extremest  part  of  that/roni  or  side  of  the  building. 

Now,  there  are  many  long  ranges  of  estates  in  Boston,  where, 
for  the  purposes  of  uniformity,  conditions  were  originally  imposed, 
the  breach  of  which  would  work  a  forfeiture.  One  of  these  condi- 
tions always  prescribes  the  front  of  the  houses  (as  that  the  front 
of  every  building  erected  shall  be  6  feet  or  10  feet  back  from  the 


134  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

line  of  the  street) .  The  main  walls  are  accordingly  placed  on  that 
exact  line.  Under  the  above  decision,  if  the  eaves,  or  as  it  would 
seem  even  the  window-sills  or  caps  project  an  inch,  it  works  a  for- 
feiture, because  the  extremest  part  of  the  front  of  the  house  must  be 
at  the  distance  prescribed. 

I  verily  believe,  therefore,  that  every  estate  in  Boston,  which  has 
heretofore  been  conveyed  on  such  a  condition  (and  the  city  are  mak- 
ing such  conveyances  every  day) ,  has  been  forfeited  under  the  above 
decision.  Or,  in  other  words,  that  the  above  decision  strictly  carried 
out  would  defeat  many  hundred  honest  titles. 

It  is  undoubtedly  a  sound  rule  of  law  that  in  all  cases  of  reasona- 
ble doubt  a  deed  is  to  be  construed  most  strongly  against  the 
grantor.  This  has  been  applied,  and  I  think  rightly,  in  an  extreme 
case  (Saltonstall  vs.  Long  wharf),  where  a  little  store  lot,  18  feet 
on  State  street,  was  conveyed,  bounded  east  on  the  sea  or  flats,  and 
the  deed  was  held  also  to  pass  all  the  flats  to  low-water  mark  along 
the  whole  south  side  of  Long  wharf,  because,  by  the  use  of  two 
words,  one  of  which  passed  the  flats,  and  the  other  which  excluded 
them,  a  reasonable  doubt  arose  as  to  the  grantor's  intent,  making 
this  rule  of  construction  applicable.  But  it  seems  to  me  that  in  the 
class  of  cases  above  referred  to  there  is  no  such  reasonable  doubt  of 
the  intent.  The  side — the  front  —  the  wall — of  a  house  means 
the  main,  general  line  of  such  side,  front,  or  wall,  —  not  those  little 
pett}T  projections,  such  as  window-caps  or  sills,  always  added  for  or- 
nament ;  or  the  more  indispensable  eaves, required  alike  for  the  effect- 
ual support  of  the  roof,  and  the  symmetrical  finish  of  the  structure. 

I  have  thus  far  considered  the  above  decision  as  erroneous  on 
general  grounds,  and  even  assuming  that  the  Court  were  correct  in 
holding  eaves  to  be  part  of  the  side  of  the  house  over  which  they 
project.  But  Webster's  Dictionary  defines  "  eaves  "  to  be  "  the 
edge  or  lower  border  of  the  roof  of  the  building  which  overhangs 
the  walls  and  casts  off  the  water  that  falls  on  the  roof."  In  like 
manner,  Johnson  and  Walker's  Dictionar}r,  as  improved  bj*  Todd, 
defines  eaves  as  "  the  edges  of  the  roof  which  overhang  the  house," 
quoting  Shakespeare  for  this  meaning.  I  have  not  thought  it 
necessary  to  consult  any  other  lexicographical  authorities. 

Under  these  definitions,  of  course,  a  line  running  4  feet  from  the 
side  of  a  building  is  not  to  be  measured  from  the  eaves,  which  are 
not  a  part  of  the  side  of  the  building,  but  of  the  roof.  In  other 
words,  our  Supreme  Court,  as  lately  as  1851,  have  decided  that 
"  eaves  "  in  law  means  a  part  of  a  house  wholly  different  from  what 
it  means  by  the  standard  dictionaries  of  the  English  language. 


*  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  135 

Within  the  past  3*ear,  indeed,  quite  a  number  of  elegant  new 
houses  on  the  Neck  were  found  to  be  accidentally  forfeited  to  the 
city  because  their  bow-fronts  projected  over  the  prescribed  line, 
and  on  application  the  forfeiture  was  released. 

Latterly  conditions  have  justly  become  very  unpopular,  and 
restrictions  are  imposed  instead.  This  is  the  case  with  Pembertdn 
square,  Edinboro'  street,  the  South-Cove  lots,  etc.,  where  the  par- 
ties may  enter  and  remove  the  building,  or  resort  to  equity  to 
compel  a  specific  performance  of  the  agreement.  Courts  lean 
strongly  against  conditions,  as  is  indeed  abundantty  proved  by  the 
late  case  of  the  Brattle-street  Parsonage.  While  it  seems  by  the 
case  of  Austin  vs.  Cambridgeport,  etc.  (21  Pick.,  215),  that  if  a 
condition  be  created  by  deed,  the  grantor  may  lawfully  devise  such 
interest,  and  a  subsequent  breach  will  give  the  estate  to  his  devisee, 
such  devise  not  being  too  remote,  and  therefore  void.  And  yet  in 
the  latter  case,  where  a  testator,  by  one  and  the  same  instrument, 
first  creates  a  like  condition,  and  then  devises  his  remaining  right, 
such  devise  over  is  too  remote,  and  therefore  void,  though  to  common 
apprehension  the  ultimate  devise  is  exactly  equally  remote  in  each 
case  ;  and  though  wills  are  avowedly  construed  more  tenderly  and 
charitably,  as  to  the  intent  of  the  testator,  than  deeds  are,  because 
they  are  often  made  in  extremis  and  without  the  aid  of  counsel, 
and  the  use  of  inartificial  language  is  therefore  overlooked  in  view 
of  the  manifest  general  intent. 

A  law  passed  prohibiting  all  conditions,  or  all  forfeitures  for 
breach  of  condition,  would,  I  think,  be  a  good  one.  GLEANER. 

P.S.  Worcester,  in  his  new  model  dictionary,  is  as  much  behind 
the  age  as  his  predecessors.  He  defines  "  Eaves"  as  "  the  edges 
of  the  roof  of  a  house." 


LX. 

FREDERIC  TUDOR  — R.   G.    SHAW. 

October  15,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Dr.  Joy  was  desirous  of  getting  a  house  in  the 
country,  as  more  healthful  than  a  town  residence,  and  he  selected 
this  locality  as  "being  country  enough  for  him."  There  were, 
indeed,  then  but  two  houses  west  of  the  square,  which  he  purchased 


136  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

—  one  of  them  occupied  by  Charles  Gushing,  Esq.  the  other  by 
"Master"  Vinal,  both  standing  on  the  Copley  estate.  The  bar- 
berry bushes  were  flourishing  over  this  whole  area,  as  they  now 
do  on  the  hills  of  West  Roxbury.  And  he  was  right  in  believing 
that  nowhere  else  could  he  inhale  purer  breezes  than  those  which 
were  wafted  across  the  Boston  Common  and  the  river  that  then 
washed  its  borders.  There  were  then  no  noxions  exhalations 
from  the  u  Back  Bay  ; "  and  they  do  not,  indeed,  even  now,  reach 
as  far  as  this  favored  spot. 

The  prices  paid  by  Dr.  Joy  were  £100,  £66  13s.  4d.,  $500  and 
£337,  or  about  $2,000.  There  now  stand  on  this  land  twent}'-two 
dwelling-houses,  among  which  are  many  of  the  very  finest  in  our 
whole  city.  Its  whole  present  value  cannot  be  less  than  half  a 
million  of  dollars.  Dr.  Joy  sold  off  all  the  westerly  and  most  of 
the  northerly  portions,  retaining  for  his  own  occupancy  the  south- 
east part  of  the  estate,  measuring  97  feet  on  Beacon  street,  and 
254  feet  7  inches  on  Belknap  street,  now  called  Joy  street.  On 
this  he  erected  a  modest  and  graceful  wooden  dwelling-house, 
which  was  eventually  removed  to  South  Boston  Point,  where  it  is 
still,  or  was  recently,  standing,  on  land  of  Benjamin  Adams,  Esq. 
Here  he  lived  till  his  death,  in  1813.  He  left  a  widow,  Abigail, 
and  two  children,  Joseph  G.  and  Nabby ;  and,  in  1833,  this 
reserved  lot  was  sold  by  his  heirs  for  $98,000,  and  upon  it  were 
erected  three  dwelling-houses  on  Beacon  street  and  the  four 
southerly  houses  of  the  block  on  Joy  street. 

The  corner  estate  on  Beacon  and  Joy  streets  (land  and  build- 
ing) is  supposed  to  have  cost  Israel  Thorndike  $90,000.  It  was 
subsequently  purchased  by  the  late  R.  G.  Shaw  for  $50,000,  and 
was  the  mansion-house  estate  occupied  by  him  at  his  decease.  It 
has  been  since  bought  by  Frederick  Tudor  for  $70,000,  who  still 
owns  and  occupies  it.  The  adjoining  house  on  Beacon  street 
belonged  to  the  late  Samuel  T.  Armstrong,  in  whose  mayoralty  it 
was,  I  believe,  that  the  iron  fence  was  completed  around  the  Com- 
mon, and  whose  signature,  as  Lt.  Governor,  gave  validity  to  a 
new  code  of  laws,  the  Revised  Statutes  of  the  Commonwealth,  in 
1836. 

The  only  natural  productions  of  New  England,  as  has  been  well 
said,  are  ice  and  granite.  It  is  to  the  wisdom  and  intelligence, 
and  above  all  to  the  indomitable  energy  and  perseverance,  of  Mr. 
Tudor,  that  the  first  of  these  articles  has  become  a  mine  of  wealth 
to  the  community,  far  more  precious  than  the  richest  "  placers" 
of  California.  It  is,  I  believe,  a  favorite  theory  of  political  econo- 


"  GLEANER     ARTICLES.  137 

mists  that  a  nation  is  on  the  road  to  ruin  when  the  value  of  its 
imports  exceeds  that  of  its  exports.  But  the  fallacy  becomes 
manifest  when  a  cargo  of  Mr.  Tudor's  ice  —  worth  almost  nothing 
here  except  the  labor  of  collecting  it  —  is  sent  abroad  to  the  pant- 
ing and  perspiring  denizens  of  the  tropics,  or  to  refresh  the  natives 
of  even  distant  India,  and  is  there  exchanged  for  a  precious 
freight  of  costly  spices  and  merchandise. 

I  remember  to  have  heard  with  much  interest  an  account  of  the 
first  shipment  of  ice  to  India,  from  the  gentleman  who  went  with 
it  as  supercargo.  He  described  the  naive  astonishment  of  the 
natives  as  they  took  into  the  palms  of  their  hands  little  particles 
of  ice,  and  watched  them  slowly  melt  away,  —  the  proceeding 
being  apparently  conducted  as  cautiously  as  if  they  had  been 
handling  live  coals,  —  and  the  formal  entertainment  given  by  the 
Governor  General,  Lord  William  Bentinck,  as  an  appreciative 
acknowledgment  to  those  who  had  thus  placed  within  the  reach 
of  a  great  nation  one  of  the  most  delightful  luxuries  of  a  bountiful 
Providence. 

All  honor  to  Mr.  Tudor  for  his  great  discovery !  May  his  own 
prosperity  always  keep  pace  with  the  ruinous  consequences  which 
it  has  entailed  upon  New  England. 

Nor  was  Mr.  Shaw  a  less  remarkable  man  in  his  way.  Ever 
extensively  and  actively  engaged  in  commerce,  cautious  when  he 
seemed  to  be  most  bold  and  daring,  he  displayed  a  uniform 
sagacity  which,  in  its  results,  was  as  advantageous  to  himself  as  it 
was  to  the  community.  The  public  spirit  which  he  displayed 
through  life  was  also  manifested  by  munificent  charitable  be- 
quests and  endowments,  which  will  make  his  name  known  and 
honored  long  after  the  wealth  that  he  won  for  his  heirs  shall  have 
passed  away,  and  the  memory  of  his  useful  career  as  a  citizen  shall 

be  forgotten. 

GLEANER. 


LXI. 

ROBERT  G.  SHAW. 

October  20,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  My  last  article  closed  with  a  brief  allusion  to 
the  late  R.  G.  Shaw,  Esq.  It  is  well  known  that,  before  his  death, 
he  became  a  convert  to  spiritualism.  While  he  showed  his  accus- 


138  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

tomed  shrewdness  in  all  business  transactions,  he  yet  implicitly 
believed  that  he  had  daily  communications  with  deceased  relatives, 
and  derived  from  this  belief  the  greatest  satisfaction  and  consola- 
tion. That  such  a  man  should  have  arrived  at  such  a  result  would 
of  itself  imply  that  he  must  have  witnessed  phenomena  that  tended 
to  justify  it.  These  phenomena  may,  perhaps,  be  satisfactorily 
explained  by  another  hypothesis.  President  Mahan  has  recently 
published  a  very  able  volume,  having  this  object,  and  in  which  he 
considers  as  incontestable  the  facts  testified  to  by  so  many  credible 
persons,  and  many  of  which  he  had  himself  witnessed. 

Within  the  past  year  circumstances  led  me  to  take  much  inter- 
est in  this  subject.  Designedly  omitting  to  read  anj^thing  in  rela- 
tion to  it,  I  determined  to  observe  for  myself.  The  use  of  a  pencil  to 
point  at  the  letters  of  the  alphabet  having  been  suggested  in  some 
quarters  as  a  source  of  unconscious  error  (inasmuch  as  a  person 
may  involuntarily  pause  longer  upon  the  right  letter  than  upon 
others,  —  a  circumstance  of  which  an  intelligent  and  observing 
medium  might  take  advantage) ,  I  latterly  dispense  with  entirely, 
in  the  following  manner :  A  printed  card  contained  the(  letters  of 
the  alphabet  in  three  lines  of  8  letters  each.  I  asked  that  the  raps 
should  be  made  1,  2,  or  3  for  the  line  at  which  I  was  to  look,  and 
then,  after  a  slight  pause,  that  further  raps  should  be  made,  from 
1  to  8,  for  the  particular  letter  meant  in  that  line.  The  effect  was 
as  if  the  particular  letter  had  been  at  once  called  out  viva  voce 
without  any  instrumentality  of  my  own . 

I  have  in  this  way  often  obtained  a  series  of  pertinent  and  coher- 
ent answers  to  mental  questions,  without  a  single  mistake,  through 
a  session  of  two  hours.  This  demonstrated  to  my  satisfaction  that 
a  power  of  thought-reading  existed  somewhere,  residing  in,  or 
proved  by,  the  agency  which  caused  the  raps,  whatever  that  agency 
might  be.  Whether  this  is  a  mesmeric  or  a  spiritual  manifestation 
is  the  question  discussed  in  Mr.  Mahan' s  volume.  He  adopts  the 
former  theory.  Whatever  may  be  the  true  explanation  the  inves- 
tigation is  one  of  intense  and  absorbing  interest. 

As  far  as  my  own  experience  goes,  the  raps  have  always  pur- 
ported to  come  from  the  spirits  of  deceased  persons,  in  natural 
terms  of  relationship  or  endearment,  and  in  their  accustomed 
modes  of  expression  ;  sometimes  from  persons  long  since  dead,  who 
had  not  been  in  my  thoughts  for  }-ears.  I  have  never  been  able  to 
get  anjr  as  from  living  persons.  Mr.  Mahan,  however,  has  a  mass 
of  testimony  to  the  contrary.  These  raps  (as  from  particular 
spirits)  I  have  always  found  marked  by  individual  peculiarities 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  139 

signally  appropriate,  and  identifying  them  from  all  others,  by  loud- 
ness  or  gentleness,  rapidity  or  slowness,  by  their  prolonged  or 
abrupt  character.  One  spirit,  indeed,  always  announced  himself 
by  a  creaking,  corkscrew  rap  in  the  leg  of  the  table,  —  thus  distin- 
guishing himself  from  all  others  by  as  marked  a  characteristic  as 
those  which  had  made  him  preeminent  among  his  fellow- men 
while  living.  I  have  sometimes  said  mentally,  "  Will  all  who  have 
been  present  rap  together?"  and  immediately  there  has  ensued 
such  a  tattoo  of  all  these  various  raps  as  was  truly  astonishing,  the 
corkscrew  being  clearly  noticeable  among  and  above  them  all. 

The  mesmeric  theory  supposes  that  you  get,  as  it  were,  a  mere 
reflection  of  your  own  thoughts,  belief,  or  wish,  and  in  a  vast 
majority  of  cases  such  is  undoubted!}'  the  fact ;  but  the  answers 
which  I  have  obtained  have  been  sometimes  wholly  unexpected. 
Thus,  one  day  last  winter,  I  was  passing  through  Washington 
street,  and  inadvertently  went  along  the  sidewalk  of  a  building  from 
which  persons  were  breaking  off  masses  of  ice  and  frozen  snow. 
One  of  these  masses  fell,  and,  hearing  cries  of  warning,  I  shrank  up 
close  to  the  wall,  and  it  just  grazed  my  shoulder  and  elbow,  and  then 
shivered  to  pieces  on  the  sidewalk.  I  felt  that  I  had  had  a  narrow 
escape  from  certain  death.  I  was  then  on  my  way  to  Mr.  Hay- 
den's,  where  I  went  immediately.  No  one  else  was  present.  I  said 
mentally,  ' '  What  happened  to  me  as  I  was  coming  here  ?  "  The 
alphabet  spelt  out,  "  You  came  near  being  killed."  —  "  How?"  — 
"  By  a  fall  of  ice  from  the  roof  of  a  house." —  "  How  did  it  happen 
that  it  did  not  fall  upon  me  and  kill  me  ?  "  The  spirit  purporting 
to  respond  was  my  father's.  The  answer  began,  4k  /  prote —  " 
I  had  supposed  that  it  would  state  the  act  of  mine  which  saved  me  ; 
but  when  it  began  with  these  letters  I  supposed  it  would  be,  "  I 
protest  I  don't  know"  The  answer  actuall}' given  was,  "  J  pro- 
tected you."  —  "  How  ?  "  —  "  By  slanting  off  the  ice."  This  led  to  a 
series  of  questions  and  answers  as  to  the  power  of  spirits  over 
matter,  etc.,  etc. 

So,  also,  at  a  session  in  company  with  a  distinguished  clergy- 
man of  this  city,  I  asked  of  a  certain  u  spirit,"  purporting  to  be 
present,  whether  a  certain  other  was  there  also.  1  rap,  or  no. 
"  Can  you  get  him?"  3  raps,  or  yes.  "  Do  so,  and  as  soon  as  he 
comes,  both  of  you  rap."  In  a  few  minutes  their  raps  were  heard 
accordingly.  In  the  meantime  another  spirit  was  communicating, 
and  had  just  finished  a  sentence  with  the  word  "  oncle."  I 
remarked  aloud  to  my  friend,  "  You  see  it  is  all  right  except  one 
letter."  I  then  turned  to  communicate  with  the  spirit  sent  for. 


140  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Immediately  many  raps  were  heard  of  the  same  faint  and  rapid 
character  as  those  of  my  late  correspondent.  The  medium  said, 
11  The  one  you  have  been  communicating  with  wishes  to  say  some- 
thing more."  Whereupon,  resuming  that  communication,  the 
alphabet  spelt  out  "  u,"  and  then  left  off..  I  said  "  Proceed."  1 
rap,  or  no.  I  said,  "Is  that  all?"  3  raps,  or  3'es.  I  reflected 
for  a  moment,  and  exclaimed,  "  Oh,  you  mean  thatw  is  the  right 
letter  where  I  said  one  letter  was  wrong  ?  "  Immediately  affirma- 
tive raps  came  several  times  repeated.  I  said,  "  Then  rap  back- 
wards from  the  end  of  your  communication,  once  for  each  letter, 
till  }*ou  get  to  the  wrong  letter,  and  I  will  strike  it  out  and  sub- 
stitute u."  5  raps  then  came,  and  I  changed  the  o  to  u.  1  then 
said,  "Is  it  now  right?"  and  got  the  same  cordial  affirmative. 
When  "  u"  came,  .1  had  not  the  slightest  idea  that  it  was  to  be  a 
correction  o/"o." 

This  exceptional  class  of  cases  is  also  discussed  in  Mr.  Mahan's 
volume ;  but,  on  the  whole,  I  became  satisfied  that,  although  Mr. 
Shaw  may  have  arrived  at  an  erroneous  conclusion,  the  premises 
upon  which  he  acted  were  by  no  means  a  mere  absurd  delusion ; 
but  that  he,  like  myself,  had  witnessed  a  mystery  of  nature  worthy 
of  the  most  careful  and  exact  scientific  investigation. 

All  my  articles  have  been  about  land,  and  perhaps  this  brief 
visit  to  the  spirit  land  may  be  allowable  as  one  of  the  series.  You 
will,  I  trust,  at  air^  rate,  excuse  me  for  what  you  may  perhaps, 
regard  as  mere  idle  speculations,  unworthy  even  of  a 

GLEANER. 


LXII. 

URIAH   COTTING  —  SAMUEL   APPLETON. 

October  25,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  The  most  westerly  of  the  three  houses  on  Bea- 
con street,  built  on  the  land  sold  by  Dr.  Joy's  heirs,  in  1833,  is 
that  owned  by  B.  C.  Clark,  Esq.,  an  active  and  intelligent  mer- 
chant, the  author  of  an  interesting  pamphlet  respecting  Hayti, 
with  which  country  he  has  extensive  business  relations.  West  of 
his  house  comes  a  large  lot  which  Dr.  Joy  in  his  lifetime  sold  to 
the  late  Uriah  Cotting  in  1806  (L.  216,  f.  16).  It  measured  in 
front  75  feet  on  Beacon  street,  and  extended  248  feet  on  Walnut 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  141 

street,  widening  in  the  rear  to  104  feet.  I  have  in  a  former 
article  briefly  alluded  to  Mr.  Cotting,  who  lived  and  died  in  the 
house  in  Somerset  street  there  spoken  of.  When  he  made  this 
purchase  of  Dr.  Joy  he  supposed  himself,  and  on  reasonable 
grounds,  to  be  one  of  the  wealthiest  of  our  citizens,  and  accord- 
ingly began  the  foundations  of  a  magnificent  mansion,  with  a 
free-stone  front,  occupying  the  whole  site  of  the  two  houses  be- 
longing to  the  late  Samuel  Appleton  and  the  late  Benjamin  P. 
Homer.  It  would  have  surpassed  any  house  even  now  existing 
among  us,  and  at  that  time  there  was  no  edifice  that  could  have 
borne  the  slightest  comparison  with  it  for  splendor  and  elegance. 
The  lower  story  was  ahead}7  constructed,  when  the  embargo, 
followed  by  war,  took  place.  Rents  declined ;  real  estate  fell 
exceedingly  in  value,  and  he  found  himself — comparatively, 
at  least  —  a  poor  man.  He  at  once  took  down  the  building,  and 
selling  off  to  Mr.  Homer  the  westerly  moiety  of  the  land  (and  of 
other  lands  which  he  had  bought  behind  it),  he  erected  on  the 
residue  the  elegant  mansion  now  standing,  and  which  he  sold  to 
Mr.  Appleton  for  $30,000,  in  1818  (L.  259,  f.  244),  the  lot  being 
43  feet  in  front  and  330  feet  deep.  His  health  soon  afterwards 
began  to  fail,  and  he  died  of  a  rapid  consumption  in  1819  ;  and 
such  still  continued  to  be  the  depressed  state  of  all  kinds  of  prop- 
erty that  his  estate  eventually  proved  insolvent. 

I  will  mention  an  anecdote  relating  to  this  house  and  to  its 
original  and  recent  ownership.  On  the  death  of  the  widow  of  Mr. 
Cotting,  one  of  the  most  estimable  and  exemplary  of  women, 
which  happened  but  a  few  years  ago,  I  published  in  the  "  Boston 
Courier  "  a  notice  of  the  services  of  Mr.  Cotting,  detailing  various 
extensive  improvements  which  he  had  planned  and  executed ; 
and  I  concluded  by  suggesting  that  perhaps  some  of  our  wealthy 
citizens,  whose  own  fortunes  had  been  increased  by  a  participation 
in  his  enterprises,  might  be  willing  to  contribute  something  to 
replace  to  his  daughters  a  small  annuity  which  their  mother  had 
hitherto  received  under  the  will  of  the  late  Edward  Tuckerman, 
and  which  thenceforth  ceased.  The  article  was  copied  by  another 
of  our  chief  journals,  and  its  closing  suggestion  approved.  I 
waited  first  upon  Mr.  Appleton.  He  told  me  the  circumstances  of 
his  purchase  of  this  house,  saying,  "  I  meant  to  deal  at  the  time 
liberally  with  Mr.  Cotting,  and  offered  him  the  amount  of  what 
I .  thought  its  actual  value,  telling  him  that  he  might  take  six 
months  to  find  any  other  purchaser  who  would  give  him  more.  In 
a  few  days,  however,  he  came  back  and  accepted  the  offer,  admit- 


142  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

ting  that  nobod}*  else  was  willing  to  give  so  much.  He  expressed 
his  great  satisfaction  at  selling  it,  and  his  obligation  to  me  for 
what  he  himself  considered  a  full  and  adequate  compensation." 
Mr.  Appleton  did  not  end  by  saying,  "  So  }-ou  perceive  that  there 
is  no  reason  why  /  should  be  thus  called  upon."  "  But,"  he  said 
to  me,  u  the  estate  is  now  worth  more  than  double  that  price, 
(perhaps  $75.000),  and  I  will  head  your  paper  with  $500."  This 
was  more  than  I  had  hoped  for,  though  I  had  never  been  refused 
by  him  in  my  life,  but,  on  the  contrary,  had  always  found  him  a 
most  "  cheerful  giver."  Another  gentleman,  who  had  been  in- 
timately associated  with  Mr.  Cotting,  at  once  added  his  name  for 
the  same  sum.  Hon.  David  Sears  and  others  subscribed  various 
amounts  in  a  like  liberal  spirit,  and  I  was  in  the  "  full  tide  of  suc- 
cessful experiment,"  when  I  received,  from  the  young  ladies 
interested,  instructions  to  proceed  no  farther,  lest  that  should 
be  yielded  to  my  solicitations  which  would  not  have  been 
spontaneously  offered  as  a  tribute  of  respect  for  their  father's 
memory. 

Mr.  Cotting  is  buried  in  the  Granary  burying-ground.  The 
forthcoming  volume  of  Mr.  Bridgman,  in  relation  to  this  place 
of  interment,  will  doubtless  be  as  accurate  in  its  facts  and  as 
beautiful  a  specimen  of  letter-press  and  typography  as  his  similar 
volume  on  the  King's  Chapel  burying-ground,  and  I  cordially 
advise  all  who  are  interested  in  "historical  gleanings"  to  sub- 
scribe for  it  at  once.  I  am  glad  that  it  will  preserve  in  a  perma- 
nent form  what  I  feel  indeed  to  be  but  a  slight  and  inadequate 
tribute  to  the  memory  of  perhaps  the  most  distinguished  citizen 
who  has  been  laid  to  his  rest  in  that  field  of  death. 

Mr.  Appleton  died  in  this  house,  July  12,  1853,  aged  87  years. 
In  youth  a  village  school-master,  in  manhood  an  eminent  mer- 
chant, he  found  in  acts  of  daily  beneficence  the  best  solace  for 
the  infirmities  of  age.  Simple  habits,  uncompromising  integrity, 
and  a  noble  public  spirit,  won  for  him  the  confidence  and  regard  of 
the  community  ;  and  death  gently  closed  a  life  that  had  been  pro- 
longed and  blest  by  the  kindest  offices  of  domestic  affection.  He 
bequeathed  a  large  part  of  his  great  wealth  for  purposes  of  litera- 
ture, science,  charity,  and  religion.  A  mural  tablet  in  the  King's 
Chapel  will  appropriatel}7  record  his  virtues  ;  but  to  this  spot,  where 
he  lived  so  long,  happy  in  making  others  happy,  —  a  spot  hallowed 
by  the  grateful  prayers  of  the  widow  and  the  orphan,  —  the  annalist 
of  Boston  will  point  with  pride  as  the  home  of  Samuel  Appleton. 

GLEANER. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  143 


LXIII. 

HISTORICAL. 

October  30,  1855. 

MR,  EDITOR:  — In  our  last  article  we  mentioned  that  Mr.  Cot- 
ting  sold  to  the  late  Benjamin  P.  Homer,  in  1816,  the  south-west 
corner  lot  of  Dr.  Joy's  land.  It  measured  32  feet  on  Beacon 
street,  and  200  feet  on  Walnut  street  (L.  250,  f.  283).  He  sold 
the  rear  lot,  measuring  66  feet  6  inches  on  Walnut  street,  to  N.  P. 
Russell,  Esq.,  1814  (L.  243,  f.  273),  which  also  subsequently 
became  the  property  of  Mr.  Homer.  Mr.  Homer  had  rather  more 
than  his  share  of  the  old  streets.  A  strip  of  15  feet  in  width  of 
old  Bishop  Stoke  street  takes  half  the  width  of  his  lot,  and  old 
Sewall  street  runs  across  his  rear.  If  these  easements  could  now 
be  enforced,  his  lot  would  certainly  be  sadly  curtailed  of  its  fair 
proportions. 

He  was  one  of  the  u  solid  "  men  of  Boston,  and  at  his  death,  in 
1838,  was  one  of  our  oldest  merchants.  His  will  contained  pro- 
visions which  called  for  judicial  construction,  and  there  are  at 
least  three  printed  decisions  in  our  reports  growing  out  of  it 
(2  Met.  Rep.,  194 ;  5  Met.,  462,  and  11  Met.,  104).  The  Legisla- 
ture also  have  been  appealed  to,  more  than  once,  to  cut  the  Gor- 
dian  knot  which  the  law  could  not  untie.  One  clause  of  his  will 
was  as  follows:  "  And  1  do  hereby  expressly  authorize  and  em- 
power my  executors,  or  such  of  them  as  shall  take  upon  themselves 
the  probate  of  this  will,  to  sell  and  convey  and  execute  good  and 
sufficient  deeds  to  convey  all  or  any  of  my  real  estate."  He 
appointed  two  executors,  both  of  whom  proved  the  will  and 
assumed  the  trust ;  but  one  of  them  immediately  found  that  he  had 
personal  interests  incompatible  with  this  official  position,  and 
forthwith  resigned  his  trust,  and  the  other  acted  alone  in  the  entire 
settlement  of  the  estate,  except  only  in  this  first  act  of  proving  the 
will.  A  statute  expressly  authorizing  a  resignation  of  an  executor 
was  passed  March  24,  1843.  The  Court,  in  the  case  before  them, 
did  not  find  it  necessary  to  consider  the  validity  of  this  resignation, 
but  they  did  decide  that,  if  the  resignation  was  valid,  the  power  of 
sale  could  not  be  exercised  by  the  other  executor.  In  arriving  at 
this  result  they  adopted  the  strictest  literal  construction  of  the 


144  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

words,  "  take  upon  themselves  the  probate  of  this  will,"  which 
might  perhaps  fairly  and  liberally  have  been  considered  as  equiva- 
lent to  u  taking  upon  themselves  the  settlement  of  my  estate"  or 
'*  those  who  shall  be  the  acting  executors  of  my  will  for  the  time 
being."  For  the  testator  certainly  had  little  confidence  in  them 
both  jointly  and  in  each  of  them  separately.  Looking  back  upon 
the  past  professional  anxieties  and  perplexities,  though  I  certainly 
should  not  say  that  I  wished  that  Mr.  Homer  had  never  lived 
(since  that  would  have  involved  the  loss  of  several  pleasant  young 
neighbors,  belles  of  the  rising  generation),  I  can  yet  truly  say 
that  I  have  more  than  once  wished  that  he  ivas  still,  living. 

On  the  rear  purchase  of  Mr.  Homer,  stood  the  house  in  Walnut 
street,  of  which  the  late  Dr.  George  Parkman  was  tenant  at 
the  time  of  his  murder.  Posterity  can  hardly  overestimate  the 
intensity  of  the  excitement  awakened  in  the  community  by  his 
tragical  fate,  and  by  the  judicial  proceedings  which  ensued.  If  I 
should  select  the  two  occasions  of  a  public  character  which  I  have 
found  more  deeply  interesting  than  any  others,  I  should  refer, 
without  hesitation,  to  the  hour  when  the  lovely  and  accomplished 
daughters  of  Professor  "Webster,  sustained,  as  they  obviously 
were,  by  an  entire  conviction  of  his  innocence,  gave  with  mingled 
calmness  and  sensibility  their  modest  and  touching  testimony  in 
his  behalf;  and  that  more  awful  hour,  when,  nearly  at  the  dead 
of  night,  we  had  assembled  on  the  same  spot  to  hear  the  verdict 
rendered,  which  consigned  to  an  ignominious  death  one  who  had 
been  the  instructor  of  our  earlier  days,  and  with  whom  we  had 
since  continued  to  be  on  pleasant  terms  of  social  acquaintance 
and  friendship.  The  moon  was  shining  serenely  and  bright  as  I 
went  forth  from  that  sad  scene  ;  having  looked  for  the  last  time  on 
a  fellow-being  who,  surrounded  by  the  happiest  domestic  influ- 
ences and  affections  had  yet  justly  forfeited  his  life ;  not,  how- 
ever, I  was  willing  to  believe,  for  a  deliberate,  preconcerted,  and 
cold-blooded  murder,  but  for  an  act,  originally  done,  as  I  was 
persuaded,  under  the  sudden  impulse  of  deadly  passion ;  but 
which,  when  done,  was  concealed  by  a  resort  to  the  most  fright- 
ful expedients  of  which  we  have  any  account  in  the  annals  of 
criminal  jurisprudence. 

There  was  a  redeeming  grace  in  the  final  conduct  of  Webster, 
which  much  softened  the  popular  feeling  against  him ;  when  his 
appeal  for  executive  clemency  had  been  made,  and  made  in 
vain ;  when  he  knew  that  in  a  few  brief  days  he  must  cease 
to  be  numbered  among  the  living,  —  he  addressed  a  submissive 


"GLEANER"   ARTICLES.  145 

and  penitent  letter  to  an  amiable  and  excellent  clergyman,  the 
near  relative  'of  his  victim,  asking  through  him  the  pardon  of  those 
into  whose  social  circle  he  had  brought  such  deep  affliction.  He 
asked  him  as  a  minister  of  the  God  of  mercy  to  imitate  his  Divine 
Master,  by  showing  mercy ;  as  a  man  to  forgive  a  dying  fellow- 
man,  as  he  would  himself  hope  to  be  forgiven.  And  he  at  last  met 
his  fate,  not  with  the  indifference  of  a  hardened  ruffian,  but  with 
a  dignified  self-possession,  —  a  sustained  fortitude  and  resigna- 
tion, such  as  only  true  repentance  (it  would  seem)  could  have 

inspired. 

GLEANER. 


IiXIV. 

JOHN   CALLENDER  AND   THE  LAW. 

November  2,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR: — The  north-west  corner  lot,  60  feet  on  Mount 
Vernon  street,  and  103  feet  6  on  Walnut  street,  was  sold  by  Dr. 
Joy  to  John  Callender,  in  1802,  and  his  heirs  conveyed  to  him  a 
lot  adjoining  (35  feet  11  inches  on  Mount  Vernon  street),  in 
1821.  Mr.  Callender  was  for  many  years  the  well-known  clerk  of 
the  Supreme  Court.  In  his  3<ounger  days  he  was  a  person  of 
much  grace  and  elegance,  and  traditionally  reputed  to  have  been 
as  good  a  dancer  as  one  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  Lord  Chancellors. 
He  was  a  person  of  much  wit  and  humor.  When  the  full  Court 
at  Washington  reversed  a  decision  of  Mr.  Justice  Story,  by  which 
he  had  claimed  jurisdiction  in  cases  of  policies  of  insurance  as 
being  maritime  contracts,  he  was  dining  with  the  Judge,  and, 
doubtless  quite  to  his  annoyance,  began  to  joke  about  the  topic, 
playfully  suggesting  to  him  that  he  had  better  bring  a  bucket  of 
salt  water  into  his  court-room  to  sustain  the  jurisdiction. 

When  Mr.  Callender  built  his  house  the  level  of  Walnut  street 
was  very  many  feet  higher  than  at  present.  The  authorities  cut 
down  the  street,  leaving  him  up  in  the  air.  He  was  put  to  much 
expense  in  consequence,  though  his  building  did  not  actually  begin 
to  tumble  into  the  pit,  as  Mr.  Thurston's  did.  Like  him  he 
resorted  to  the  law,  and  with  the  like  success.  The  result  was  the 
source  of  anj'thing  but  a  placid  demeanor  on  his  part.  Though 
himself  a  sworn  officer  of  the  law,  I  really  believe  that  he  was 


146  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

led  to  entertain  serious  doubts  as  to  its  being  "  the  perfection  of 
human  reason." 

The  north-east  lot,  bounded  120  feet  on  Mount  Vernon  street, 
and  100  feet  8  inches  on  Joy  street,  was  sold  by  Dr.  Joy  in  1802 
to  Anna  Dummer  Perkins,  wife  of  Thomas  Perkins,  Esq.,  and 
daughter  of  William  Powell,  Esq.  She  was  sister  of  Mrs.  Jona- 
than Mason,  one  of  the  original  Mount  Vernon  proprietors.  Dr. 
Joy,  in  1805,  also  sold  to  her  the  next  30-feet  lot  on  Joy  street. 
On  the  latter  lot  stands  the  dwelling-house  now  occupied  by  Henry 
B.  Rogers,  Esq.,  whose  wife  was  one  of  her  daughters,  and  who  is  so 
well  known  in  this  community  as  connected  with  our  chief  chari- 
table and  reformatory  institutions,  and  who  was  some  years  since 
an  Alderman  of  the  city.  .  On  her  original  lot  was  erected  a  fine 
brick  dwelling-house,  of  large  and  elegant  proportions,  in  which 
she  resided  till  her  death,  a  smaller  house  being  erected  on  the 
westerly  side  of  the  lot  as  the  residence  of  another  daughter,  Mrs. 
F.  C.  Loring.  The  mansion  house  itself  has  just  given  place  to 
three  new  dwellings  erected  by  Wm.  Gray,  Esq. 

It  is  under  a  contract  between  Mr.  Perkins  and  Mr.  Thorndike 
that  the  block  of  houses  on  Joy  place  was  set  back  from  the  street. 
I  trust  that  my  friend,  Mr.  Lewis  W.  Tappan,  will  not  think  me  too 
personal  in  remarking  that  the  whole  front  of  his  house  and  part  of 
that  of  his  southerly  neighbor  stand  on  and  over  the  fee  of  old 
Sewall  street.  This  need  be  no  source  of  alarm  or  uneasiness. 
Indeed  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  an  ancient  SQUAT  is  rather  better 
than  any  other  title.  There  can  be  no  question  that  from  the 
beginning  of  the  century  to  1831,  when  Tyler  vs.  Hammond  was 
decided,  the  law,  as  before  acted  on  and  as  then  settled,  would  have 
given  the  soil  and  fee  of  this  old  street  to  the  heirs  of  Judge 
Sewall.  It  is  equally  certain  that  in  1851,  by  the  decision  of 
Newhall  vs.  Ireson,  it  would  have  been  held  that  the  deeds  to  Dr. 
Joy,  bounding,  as  they  do,  north  and  south  on  that  street,  each 
passed  to  him  a  good  title  to  the  centre  of  the  street ;  in  other 
words,  that  his  title  had  all  along  been  perfect.  Both  these  cases 
related  to  public  highways  ;  but  I  am  informed  that  in  ah  unpub- 
lished case  recently  decided  (Morgan  vs.  Moore)  the  Court  adhered 
to  the  last  decision,  yet  refuse  to  apply  it  to  private  ways,  so 
that,  after  all,  Judge  Sewali's  heirs  perhaps  would  again  come 
uppermost.  But,  happily  above  and  beyond  all  these  fluctuating 
adjudications,  there  was  a  certain  fence  put  up  more  than  forty  }Tears 
ago  by  Dr.  Joy,  which  no  adverse  claimant  can  now  jump  over  or 
knock  down. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  147 

The  doctrine  that  a  deed  bounding  on  a  street,  which  is  a 
visible,  actual  monument,  really  runs  to  an  imaginary  legal  line 
or  monument  in  the  centre  of  that  street  (a  monument,  by  the 
way,  which  the  Court  in  1831  declared  had  never  existed,  although 
in  1851  they  say  that  it  had  always  existed),  seems  to  me  founded 
on  a  misconception  of  what  a  monument  is.  I  believe  that  the 
rule  of  "monuments  governing  measurements"  is  founded  on  the 
idea  that  a  deed  should  be  construed  by  its  language  in  reference 
to  actual  visible  landmarks,  such  as  fences,  walls,  or  streets.  In 
1831,  if  a  deed  bounded  by  or  on  a  public  street,  square,  or  com- 
mon, in  each  case  it  included  no  part  of  such  street,  square,  or 
common.  In  1851,  the  Court,  in  the  exercise  of  their  judicial  dis- 
cretion, saw  fit  to  decide  that  a  deed  bounding  on  a  street  should 
convey  a  fee  simple  title  to  the  centre  of  the  street.  Why  should 
not  the  same  rule  be  applied  to  all  public  squares  or  areas?  Is  it 
not,  indeed,  quite  possible  that  a  conveyance  of  land  bounding  on 
Boston  Common  may  legally  give  to  the  grantees  liberal  yard- 
room  in  front  of  their  lots,  even  to  the  centre  line  of  the  Common 
itself?  Such  a  decision  would,  a  priori,  be  no  more  surprising  than 
a  change  of  doctrine  which  has  already  occurred  in  relation  to 

abuttors  upon  streets. 

GLEANER. 


LXV. 

THE    COPLEY    TITLE -- ITS    LARGE    AREA. 

November  6,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  In  our  walk  down  Beacon  street  we  have  now 
reached  the  greatest  estate  in  Boston,  or  The  Copley  Title.  This 
is  made  up  of  three  chief  divisions.  The  easterly  portion  is  com- 
posed of  the  various  lots  which  together  constitute  the  westerly 
moiety  of  Sewall's  Elm  Pasture.  This  portion  is  about  2£  acres, 
and  is  bounded  east  on  Dr.  Joy's  land,  now  Walnut  street.  It 
extends  on  Beacon  street  more  than  260  feet,  including  the  stone 
mansion-house  estate  of  Hon.  David  Sears,  and  a  gore  of  the 
original  garden  lot  of  Mr.  Otis,  west  of  it.  The  westerly  boundary 
of  this  portion  is  a  line  which  meets  Mount  Vernon  street  at  a 
point  about  175  feet  west  of  Walnut  street,  running  diagonally 


148  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

through  the  lots  on  both  sides  of  Chestnut  street,  which  formerly 
belonged  to  Madame  Swan's  trustees. 

Next  west  of  Sewall's  Elm  Pasture  came  a  2i-acre  pasture  of 
Francis  East,  also  united  in  Copley.  This  extended  on  Beacon 
street  to  just  about  the  east  line  of  Spruce  street,  and  the  west 
boundary  of  East's  Pasture  extended  in  a  bevelling  line  to  Mount 
Vernon  street,  which  street  it  intersected  a  little  west  of  the  divi- 
sion line  between  the  two  elegant  mansions  of  Messrs.  John  E. 
and  Nathaniel  Thayer.  These  pastures  of  Sewall  and  East  were 
bounded  in  the  rear  by  irregular  lines  extending  into,  and  in  some 
parts  to  or  slightly  beyond  the  north  line  of,  Mount  Vernon  street. 

Finally  comes  the  Blackstone  six-acre  lot.  This  bounds  south 
on  Beacon  street  to  the  original  channel,  which  was  many  hundred 
feet  west  of  Charles  street,  or  about  to  the  lowest  long  block  of 
dwelling-houses  now  completed  on  the  Mill  Dam.  On  the  east 
line  it  extended  along  East's  Pasture,  and  beyond  it  on  land  of 
Allen,  or  Wheelwright,  and  to  within  a  few  feet  of  Pinckney 
street,  to  a  point  which  is  nearly  in  the  range  of  the  westerly 
part  of  the  School-house  estate,  at  the  corner  of  Centre  street ;  it 
thence  extended  along  in  the  direction  of  Pinckney  street  westerly, 
so  as  to  include  all  Louisburg  square,  till  it  met  a  line  about  50 
feet  west  of  the  west  line  of  Louisburg  square,  where  it  was 
bounded  on  the  pasture  of  Zachariah  Phillips,  on  which  pasture  it 
afterwards  bounded  northerly  by  a  line  running  to  the  water. 

The  dimensions  of  the  southerly  lots  of  Zachariah  Phillips's 
pasture  are  so  loosely  given  by  the  deeds  that  the  extreme 
southerly  line  of  that  pasture  and,  of  course,  the  extreme  north 
line  of  the  Blackstone,  or  Copley  lot,  cannot,  perhaps,  be  stated 
with  precision ;  but  it  extended  at  least  as  far  as,  and  probably 
north  of,  Mount  Vernon  street.  And,  as  we  have  stated  in  an 
earlier  article  on  Phillips's  Pasture,  the  Copley  deed,  which  ran 
along  towards  the  water  by  a  line  at  most  20  feet  south  of 
Pinckney  street,  was  made,  by  a  certain  ancient  fence,  and  the 
possessory  acts  and  claims  under  it,  to  run  to  the  water,  and  to 
sweep  across  all  these  southerly  lots  of  Phillips ;  or,  in  other 
words,  the  Copley  grant  was  extended  by  disseisin  to  a  continuous 
north  line,  ranging  but  a  few  feet  south  of  Pinckney  street. 

The  result  is,  that  the  estate  held  under  John  Singleton  Copley 
embraces  all  that  extensive  territory  between  low-water  mark  on 
the  west,  the  Common  south,  Walnut  street  east,  and  Mount  Ver- 
non street  north,  as  far  as  the  east  line  of  the  house  of  William 
Sawyer,  and  then  including  that  house  and  the  land  behind  it,  and 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  149 

all  Louisburg  square,  etc.,  west  of  it.  It  extends,  by  a  northerly 
line  nearly  coinciding  with  Pinckney  street,  to  low-water  mark. 
The  6  acres  of  Blackstone,  the  2£  of  East,  and  the  2£  of  Sewall, 
make  a  total  of  11  acres  of  upland;  and  if  to  this  we  add  the  flats, 
a  large  portion  of  which  have  been  filled  up  for  over  40  years, 
there  is  a  grand  total  of  certainly  not  less  than  20  acres,  and,  cov- 
ered as  it  now  is  with  splendid  private  residences,  it  far  surpasses 
in  value  even  the  magnificent  estate  of  Governor  Hancock,  with 
its  costly  public  edifices. 

GLEANER. 


LXVI. 

• 

EAST'S   2J-ACRE    PASTURE. 

November  9,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  Before  proceeding  to  make  any  remarks  on  the 
particular  houses  standing  upon  the  Copley  lot,  it  will  be  more 
convenient  to  trace  the  several  purchases  made  by  him,  and  which 
were  included  in  his  sale  to  the  Mount  Vernon  proprietors. 

We  have  already  stated  that  he  acquired  the  westerly  moiety  of 
Sewall's  Elm  Pasture,  or  about  2£  acres,  by  deeds,  in  1770-1773, 
swallowing  up  or  fencing  in  all  Coventry  street  and  the  westerly 
part  of  Sewall  street.  The  westerly  lots  of  this  Sewall  land  are 
included  in  the  deed  of  Dr.  Silvester  Gardiner  to  Copley,  July  5, 
1770  (L.  117,  f.  129),  the  boundary  being  westerly,  on  land  of 
said  Copley,  467  feet  8  inches,  and  north-west,  on  land  of  Jeremiah 
Wheelwright  (i.e.,  the  Allen  pasture),  127  feet  4  inches.  The 
earlier  deeds  of  these  same  lots  among  the  Sewall  heirs,  1732  (L. 
47,  f.  192-194),  bounded  west  on  land  of  Banister. 

Now,  next  west  of  this  Sewall  land  came  the  original  possession 
of  Francis  East,  who  must  have  owned  as  early  as  1667,  being 
named  as  an  abuttor  in  a  deed  recorded  in  Lib.  5,  fol.  234.  In 
the  town  records  is  the  following  entry:  "July  1,  1678.  In 
answer  to  the  desire  of  Francis  East  to  have  recorded  in  the 
Towne  book  a  tract  of  land  containing  about  3  acres,  bounded 
with  Capt.  Brattle  north  [he  sold  to  Allen,  &c.]  ;  the  tOwne's 
Common,  south;  the  land  of  Nathaniel  Williams,  west  [i.e.,  the 
Blackstone  lot],  and  the  land  of  William  Hawkins,  Sen.  (Haw- 
kins owned  Sewali's  Elm  Pasture),  on  the  east,  which  was  formerly 


150  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

a  towne  grant,  and  no  record  appearing,  having  been  long  in  pos- 
session of  said  East,  now  ordered  that  this  record  be  made  thereof." 
(Boston  Records,  Lib.  2,  fol.  116.) 

It  would  seem  that  Francis  East  died,  leaving  a  son  Samuel,  who 
died  seized  of  this  pasture  in  1693.  His  widow,  Mercy  East,  as 
administratrix  under  license  of  the  Superior  Court  of  Judicature, 
at  term  1693,  sold  the  same  to  Thomas  Banister,  by  deed  dated 
Nov.  24,  1694  (L.  17,  f.  23),  "two  acres  and  near  an  half ,  bounded 
east  on  Samuel  Sewall,  south  on  the  Common,  west  on  Capt. 
Nathaniel  Williams  (i.e.,  Blackstone  lot),  north  on  Nathaniel- 
Oliver  (who  sold  to  Allen),  measuring  on  the  east  side  26  rodd 
and  11  feet,  on  the  south  side  12  rods  13  feet,  on  the  west  side  35 
rodd  and  11  feet,  and  on  the  north  side  14  rodd  and  8  feet."  Sam- 
uel East,  as  eldest  son  of  the  intestate,  released  to  said  Banister 
all  his  right  by  deed,  indorsed  on  and  recorded  with  the  above.  • 

The  definite  measurements  in  this  deed  have  enabled  me  to  fix 
with  precision  the  lines  of  this  pasture,  notwithstanding  it  comes 
in  the  centre  of  Copley's  estate,  and  the  westerly  lot  purchased  by 
Copley  has  no  measurements  whatever.  If  this  deed  had  given  no 
measurements  it  could  only  have  been  a  matter  of  "  guess"  what 
was  the  exact  westerly  boundary  line  of  this  pasture,  or,  in  other 
words,  the  exact  easterly  line  of  Blackstone' s  6-acre  lot.  Mr. 
Banister,  the  grantee  in  this  deed,  acquired  also  the  Blackstone 
lot,  making  his  whole  ownership  8J-  acres.  And  the  title  from 
him  I  shall  trace  down,  after  first  getting  that  purchase  into  him, 

in  a  subsequent  number. 

GLEANER. 


LXVII. 

HISTORICAL. 

November  12,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  — In  our  last  article  we  traced  into  Thomas  Banis- 
ter, in  1694,  the  East  Pasture  of  2^  acres,  bounded  west  on  land 
of  Nathaniel  Williams.  Now,  we  long  since  called  upon  William 
Blackstone,  and  have  seen  that  the  town  granted  to  him  50  acres, 
and  that  when  he  sold  out  to  the  town  all  his  right  in  the  same 
and  in  all  lands  on  the  peninsula,  he  retained  to  himself  a  6-acre 
lot,  which  he  subsequently  sold  to  Richard  Pepys,  while  the  town, 


w  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  151 

in  1640,  passed  a  vote  not  to  grant  any  more  house-lots  within 
certain  limits ;  the  consequence  of  which  vote  was  the  Boston  Com- 
mon, which  was  doubtless,  in  great  part,  the  residue  of  the  50 
acres  granted  to  Blackstone.  We  have  also  referred  to  the  cele- 
brated depositions  of  Odlin  and  others  (and  of  Anne  Pollard, 
1711,  L.  26,  f.  84). 

From  the  deeds  of  Cole  to  Phillips,  1658,  and  of  Phillips  to 
Leverett  and  wife  in  1672,  of  the  Zachariah  Phillips  pasture  in 
the  rear,  it  is  certain  that  in  1658  this  6-acre  lot  belonged  to 
"  Nathaniel  Williams,"  and  tKat,  in  1672,  in  was  "  in  the  occupa- 
tion of  Peter  Bracket,  or  other  successors  of  Nathaniel  Williams, 
deceased."  In  1638  there  is  a  town  grant  in  the  new  field  near 
Mr.  Blackstone's  (Records,  f.  24,  and  27.  12.  1642).  William 
Colbron  and  Jacob  Eliot  are  appointed  to  view  a  parcel  of  land 
toward  Mr.  Biackstone's  beach,  which  Richard  Peapes  [i.e.,  Pepys] 
desires  to  purchase  of  the  Towne,  whether  it  may  be  conveniently 
sold  to  him.  (Vol.  4.  f.  64.) 

Richard  Pepys  and  Mary,  his  wife,  of  Ashon,  Essex  County, 
conveyed  to  Nathaniel  Williams,  b}^  act  dated  January  30,  1655, 
expressly  referred  to  in  the  deed  of  1676,  hereinafter  mentioned. 
Williams  died,  and  his  widow  Mary  married  Peter  Bracket  before 
March  6,  1664  (see  deed  in  4,  f.  264),  and  Peter  Bracket  and 
Mary,  his  wife,  late  widow  of  Nathaniel  Williams,  in  consideration 
of  her  natural  love  to  Nathaniel  Williams  and  Mary  Viall,  chil- 
dren of  said  Mary  by  her  first  husband,  conveyed  to  them,  three- 
quarters  to  said  Nathaniel  and  one-quarter  to  said  Mar}T,  by  deed 
of  gift,  April  14,  1676  (L.  9,  f.  325),  "all  that  messuage  with 
the  barnes,  stables,  orchards,  gardens,  and  also  that  six  acres 
of  land,  be  it  more  or  less,  adjoining  and  belonging  [to  said 
messuage,  called  the  Blackstone  lot,  being  the  same  which 
were  conve}Ted  to  said  Nathaniel  by  Richard  Pepys  of  Ashon, 
Essex  County,  and  Mary,  his  wife,  as  by  their  act,  bearing  date 
Jan.  30,  1655,  more  fully  will  appear." 

There  being  no  description  in  this  deed,  the  land  might  be  at 
Barton  Point  as  well  as  at  Beacon  street ;  but  independently  of 
the  depositions  referred  to,  the  deeds  of  the  adjoining  pasture  of 
Zechariah  Phillips  in  1658-72  fix  the  lands  of  Nathaniel  Williams 
in  1658,  and  in  occupation  of  Peter  Bracket,  etc.,  in  1672,  to  be 
in  this  precise  locality. 

I  am  sorry  to  say  that  I  have  never  succeeded  in  getting  Mrs. 
Viall's  one  quarter  part  into  her  brother  by  an}^  deed  on  record. 
But,  as  few  men  are  so  depraved  as  to  rob  a  sister,  I  am  charitable 


152  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

enough  to  believe  that  he  bought  her  out  honestly,  though  he  may 
have  omitted  to  record  his  deed.  At  any  rate,  his  present  suc- 
cessors will  probably  feel  that  they  are  now,  as  a  practical  matter, 
reasonabty  safe  under  the  following  deed,  viz.  :  — 

Nathaniel  Williams,  and  Sarah  his  wife,  in  consideration  of 
£130  in  the  present  current  money,  conveyed  to  Thomas  Banister  ' 
by  warranty  deeds  Jan.  29,  1708-9  (L.  24,  f.  103),  all  that  his, 
the  said  William's,  certain  orchard  and  pasture  land,  containing  in 
the  whole,  by  estimation  six  acres,  or  thereabouts,  be  it  more  or 
less,  situate,  lying  and  being  at  the  lower  or  north-westerly  side  of 
the  Common,  or  Training  Field,  in  Boston  aforesaid,  being  en- 
closed and  within  fence,  and  the  flats  lying  against  the  same  down 
to  low-water  mark.  The  said  upland  and  flats  being  butted  and 
bounded  on  the  northerty  side  in  part  by  Charles  river  or  a  cove, 
and  partty  by  the  lands  of  John  Leverett  (i.e.,  Phillips  pasture) 
and  James  Allen,  on  whom  also  it  abuts  to  the  northeast,  bounded 
easterly  in  part  by  land  of  the  said  James  Allen,  and  partly  by 
the  land  of  the  said  Thomas  Banister,  (i.e.  East's  Pasture),  and 
southerly  by  the  Common  or  Training  Field,  or  however  otherwise 
the  same  is  bounded  or  reputed  to  be  bounded  ;  together  with  all 
the  trees,  stones,  fences,  banks,  ditches,  waters,  and  water-courses 
therein  or  thereabout,  and  belonging  thereto,  rights,  members, 
hereditaments,  profits,  feedings,  privileges,  and  appurtenances 
thereof. 

Seventy-two  dollars  an  acre  for  upland,  with  the  flats  thrown  in, 
is  rather  cheap  for  land  on  Beacon   street,  even  150  years  ago. 

GLEANER. 


LXVIII. 

HISTORICAL. 

November  16,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —  In  1709,  we  have  seen  that  Thomas  Banister 
had  purchased  both  the  East  and  the  Blackstone  lots,  making  to- 
gether 8£  acres  of  upland.  The  name  of  "Mount  Pleasant/'  so 
familiar  to  our  Roxbury  neighbors,  was  given  also  to  this  estate. 

I  once  saw  a  ver}T  large  and  accurate  plan  in  the  possession  of 
the  Mt.  Vernon  proprietors,  made  60  or  70  years  ago,  which  was 
entitled  by  the  surveyor  in  large  and  elaborate  letters,  a  plan  of 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  153 

4 'Mount  Hoardam."  This  struck  me  as  a  very  ingenious  and 
modest  way  of  conforming  to  the  then  popular  momenclature  of 
the  spot,  without  giving  offence  u  to  ears  polite." 

Banister  died  leaving  a  will  dated  Jan.  25,  1708-9,  and  codicil 
dated  July  13,  1709  ;  and  his  wife  died  in  1711.  By  his  will  he 
devises  to  his  three  sons,  Thomas,  Samuel  and  John,  "  and  if 
either  die  without  heirs  lawfulty  begotten  in  wedlock,  I  will  their 
share  or  proportion  to  the  surviving  sons  or  son  and  their  heirs  for- 
ever." 

Besides  these  three  sons  the  testator  left  an  only  daughter, 
Mary,  wife  of  Giles  D}rer.  John  died  without  issue  in  Great 
Britain,  June  30, 1714.  Thomas  died  Sept.  12,  1716,  leaving  issue 
five  sons  and  a  daughter,  and  Samuel  died  without  issue  Feb.  28, 
1744. 

In  1713  Samuel  and  John  had  made  Thomas  their  attorney  (L. 
28,  f.  151),  who  for  himself,  and  "as  such  attorney,"  after  the 
death  of  one  constituent,  and  by  deed  not  executed  in  the  names 
of  either  constituent,  conve}red  to  Giles  Dyer  (28,  f.  152),  who 
covenanted  to  reconvey  on  certain  payments  (Ib.,  f.  153).  Said 
Thomas,  for  himself,  and  "  as  attorney  of  Samuel,"  reciting  the 
death  of  John,  conveyed  to  said  Dyer,  Dec.  10,  1714  (L.  28,  f. 
242),  other  lands  ;  "  also  the  one  moiety  or  half  part  of  all  that 
tract  or  parcel  of  land  in  the  town  of  Boston  aforesaid,  bounded 
easterly  on  the  Common  or  Training  Field,  containing  by  estima- 
tion about  eight  acres,  and  known  by  the  name  of  Mount  Pleasant, 
in  the  tenure  or  improvement  of  John  Langdon,  butcher."  Did  he 
have  a  slaughter-house  on  the  premises  ? 

And  Giles  Dyer,  reciting  these  two  deeds  of  Thomas  Banister 
to  him,  for  £1,000  consideration  conveyed  to  Samuel,  June  21,  1717 
(L.  32,  f.  1),  "  all  the  housing  lands,  tenements  and  real  estate 
granted  and  sold  to  me  the  said  Giles  Dyer  in  and  by  the  said  two 
deeds"  (except  other  land).  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  I  find  two 
mortgages  of  Samuel  Banister,  one  for  £250  in  1716,  (L.  32,  f. 
1),  the  other  for  £200  in  1719  (L.  33,  f.  261),  both  undischarged. 
He  made  a  final  mortgage  for  £1,850  to  Nathaniel  Cunningham  by 
warranty  deed,  Dec.  28,  1733  (L.  48,  f.  53),  under  foreclosure  of 
which  the  absolute  title  was  claimed  by  Cunningham. 

The  description  in  the  deed  to  Cunningham  was  as  follows  : 
"  All  that  his  the  said  Samuel  Banister's  certain  tract  or  parcell  of 
land  which  is  now  improved  as  a  garden,  and  enclosed  within  fence 
with  the  dwelling-house  thereon  standing,  situate,  tying  and  being 
at  the  lower  or  north-westerly  side  of  the  Comon  or  Training 


154  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Field  in  Boston  aforesaid,  containing  in  the  whole,  by  estimation, 
eight  acres  and  an  half  or  thereabouts,  and  be  the  same  more  or 
less,  and  the  flatts  tying  against  the  same  down  to  low- water  mark. 
The  said  upland  and  flatts  being  butted  and  bounded  as  folio weth, 
viz. :  southerly  or  south-easterly  on  the  Comon  or  Training  Field  ; 
on  the  north-westerly  side  in  part  by  Charles  river,  or  a  cove,  and 
partly  by  the  lands  of  the  late  John  Leverett,  Esq.,  and  Mr. 
James  Allen,  both  deceased,  their  heirs  or  assigns,  on  whom  also, 
it  abutts  to  the  north-east,  and  easterly  by  land  of  the  heirs  or 
assigns  of  the  late  Samuel  Sewall,  Esquire,  deceased,  or  how- 
ever otherwise  butted  and  bounded,"  &c. 

Nathaniel  Cunningham  died,  and  by  will,  dated  Ma}r  1,  1740. 
proved  December  27,  1748,  made  his  son  Nathaniel  residuary 
legatee,  who  was  appointed  administrator  with  the  will  annexed, 
and  died  in  1757,  Peter  Chardon  being  administrator.  His  inven- 
tory mentions  "  a  house,  land,  and  pasture  at  the  bottom  of  the 
Common,  occupied  by  Mr.  Chapman  and  others,  containing  8| 
acres,  £250"  (L.  53,  f.  61).  So  that  less  than  a  century  ago 
land  in  Beacon  street  (flats  thrown  in)  was  worth  but  97  dollars 
an  acre. 

GLEANER. 


LXIX, 

[COPLEY'S   TITLE.—  Continued*] 

November  19,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR: — We  left  in  Nathaniel  Cunningham,  deceased, 
under  the  administration  of  Peter  Chardon,  1757,  the  8£  acres  of 
upland,  with  the  flats,  composed  of  the  East  pasture  of  2£  acres 
and  the  Blackstone  6-acre  lot.  Under  the  will  of  the  old  owner, 
Thomas  Banister,  who  had  devised,  in  1709,  in  tail  to  his  three 
sons,  with  cross  remainders  on  their  death  without  issue,  claims 
were  repeatedly  set  up.  Thus,  in  July,  1750,  John  Banister,  Sam- 
uel Banister,  and  Wm.  Bowen,  and  Francis,  his  wife,  grandchild- 
ren of  said  testator,  bought  an  ejectment  against  Cunningham, 
which  was  decided  in  favor  of  tenants ;  and  in  August  following 
the  jury  on  appeal  gave  the  same  verdict.  In  February,  1753,  the 

i  This  title  is  supplied  by  me,  as  the  original  is  styled  simply  "  Historical."  —  W.H.  W. 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  155 

same  demandants  brought  a  writ  of  review  before  the  Superior 
Court,  and  in  August  following  the  jury  found  a  special  verdict ; 
and  in  March,  1754,  the  Court,  after  a  full  hearing,  gave  judgment 
in  favor  of  the  tenants.  In  January,  1765,  John  Banister  brought 
his  writ  of  ejectment,  which  was  carried  to  the  Superior  Court  by 
demurrer,  and  dropped  by  his  death,  which  took  place  Nov.  10, 1767. 

And  now,  during  the  lull  that  ensued,  as  is  alleged,  "  on  Jan- 
uary 18,  1769,  Peter  Chardon,  Esquire,  as  executor  of  Nathaniel 
Cunningham,  executed  a  deed  of  conveyance  to  John  Singleton 
Copley  of  these  premises."  No  such  deed,  however,  is  found  on 
record  ;  and,  more  than  that,  the  proceeds  of  the  estate  were  not 
accounted  for  in  the  Probate  Office  by  Mr.  Chardon,  as  adminis- 
trator, with  the  will  annexed. 

On  March  29,  1769,  John  Banister,  of  Newport,  brought  an 
ejectment  against  Ephraim  Fenno.  At  the  Inferior  Court  of 
April,  1769,  said  Copley  was  vouched  in  as  defendant,  and  the 
case  was  carried  by  demurrer  to  the  Superior  Court,  and  decided 
in  Copley's  favor. 

The  late  Hon.  Robert  T.  Paine,  on  January  81,  1809,  gave  his 
deposition  in  perpetuam  for  Messrs.  Mason  &  Otis,  in  which  he 
states  that  "  in  1769  he  was  counsel  for  Mr.  Copley  in  this  last 
suit ;  that  he  preserved  a  bundle  of  minutes,  among  which  is  the 
statement  of  title  (of  which  the  particulars  are  above  noticed,  in- 
cluding the  mention  of  the  deed  to  Copley) ,  which  he  has  no  doubt 
was  given  him  by  said  Copley  or  by  Samuel  Quincy,  his  counsel, 
and  which  he  has  no  doubt  is  a  true  abstract  of  Copley's  title  as 
derived  from  Thomas  Banister,  and  was  prepared  from  the  docu- 
ments to  be  used  in  said  trial ;  that  he  believed  the  question  of 
title  under  Cunningham  was  not  in  dispute,  but  was  acknowledged, 
and  it  was  expected  that  the  cause  would  turn  upon  the  question  of 
cross  remainders,  under  Thomas  Banister's  will,  and  that  the 
cause  was  determined  in  favor  of  Copley ;  that  he  knew  the 
premises  in  1760,  and  pastured  his  horse  there;  that  Ruth  Otis, 
wife  of  James  Otis,  was  living  iu  Boston,  and  he  an  eminent  law- 
3'er,  knowing  the  demand  of  Banister,  and  arguing  a  case  aris- 
ing under  the  same  will,  and  that  from  and  after  the  verdict  of 
Copley,  I  always  understood  that  the  premises  were  his  property 
till  I  heard  that  he  had  sold  them,  so  that  they  came  to  the  pos- 
session of  Messrs.  Mason  &  Otis"  (221,  f.  107).  This  Banister 
family  owned  a  valuable  estate  on  the  south  side  of  Winter  street, 
which,  from  that  circumstance,  was  long  known  as  u  Banister's 
Lane." 


156  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

It  will  be  remembered,  also,  that  the  deeds  of  the  westerly  lots 
of  Sewall's  elm  pasture,  bought  by  Cople}T  in  1770,  bounded  west 
on  this  land,  as  then  belonging  to  said  Copley.  It  will  also  be 
remembered  that  there  are  two  volumes  of  deeds  missing,  in  one 
of  which  we  may  charitably  suppose  Mr.  Copley's  deed  to  have 
been  recorded.  Another  valuable  tract  of  the  Leverett-street 
lands,  formerly  belonging  to  the  same  Mr.  Cunningham,  is  also 
held  under  a  deed  from  Mr.  Copley,  in  1771  (L.  119,  f.  191), 
though  there  is  the  same  absence  of  any  deed  to  him. 

This  want  of  any  record  title  in  Copley,  as  to  these  whole  8£ 
acres,  eventually  proved  a  very  serious  source  of  trouble  to  his 
grantees.  GLEANER. 


LXX. 

COPLEY'S   SALE   IN   1795. 

November  23,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  We  left  John  Singleton  Cople}T  the  owner  in 
1769-1773  of  the  whole  three  estates  held  under  Sewall,  East, 
and  Blackstone,  making  together  11  acres  of  upland,  with  the 
flats ;  there  being  this  little  omission,  that  he  had  no  deed  on 
record  of  8£  acres  out  of  the  11,  with  all  the  flats  ;  or,  as  perhaps 
it  may  be  better  stated,  a  record  title  to  only  the  easterly  2£  acres 
out  of  20  acres  of  upland  and  flats.  Mr.  Cople}'  was  the  most  dis- 
tinguished portrait-painter  of  America,  unapproached  by  any 
successor  except  Stuart.  The  exquisite  satin  of  his  ladies'  dresses 
and  delicate  tints  of  his  luscious  fruits  gave  great  additional  value 
to  paintings  which  have  preserved,  in  the  most  life-like  manner, 
for  the  delight  of  a  distant  posterity,  the  fair  and  intelligent  faces, 
the  lovely  or  manly  forms,  of  a  past  generation. 

Mr.  Copley  removed  to  England,  and  Gardiner  Greene,  Esq., 
was  his  agent.  Messrs.  Jonathan  Mason  and  H.  G.  Otis  made  a 
contract  for  the  purchase  of  this  estate,  through  the  agency  of  Mr. 
Greene.  When  the  deed  was  sent  out  for  execution,  Mr.  Copley 
had  ascertained  that  the  State  House  was  to  be  located  near  his 
estate,  which,  of  itself,  greatly  enhanced  its  value ;  changing  its 
character  from  mere  pasture  land  on  the  outskirts  of  Boston,  to  a 
central  estate,  extremely  desirable  for  residences.  He  felt  that 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  157 

important  information  had  been  withheld  from  him  and  from  his 
agent,  and  refused  to  sign  the  deed.  A  bill  in  equity  was  brought 
to  enforce  the  contract  for  sale.  He  probably  found  that  there 
was  no  chance  of  escape,  and  the  result  was  that  he  executed  a 
letter  of  attorney  to  his  son,  —  since  Lord  Chancellor  Lyndhurst, 
—  dated  in  October,  1795,  which  was  recorded  February  24,  1796 
(L.  182,  f.  182). 

A  gentleman  of  this  city,  now  among  its  senior  members,  men- 
tioned to  me  a  few  days  since,  that  a  lady,  now  deceased,  once 
remarked  to  him  that  she  attended  a  ball  at  the  house  of  the  late 
D.  D.  Rogers,  before  her  marriage,  and  that  young  Mr.  Copley 
was  present.  That  house,  like  all  its  neighbors,  stood  at  some 
distance  from  the  street,  and  was  approached  by  a  high  flight  of 
steps.  On  this  occasion  the  same  difficulty  occurred  as  at  Gov- 
ernor Bowdoin's  dinner-party  ;  but,  of  course,  a  }Toung  lad}'  in  a 
ball-dress  could  not  resort  to  the  same  mode  of  escape  as  did  the 
guests  of  His  Excellenc}".  On  the  contrary,  notwithstanding  the 
devoted  services  of  her  future  husband,  she  made  an  involuntary 
and  decidedly  precipitate  descent  towards  the  street,  —  a  circum- 
stance which  had  impressed  this  occasion  distinctly  on  her  memory. 

Mr.  Copley's  son  and  attorney  came  out  to  this  country,  having 
recently  completed  his  professional  studies,  and  said  Copley,  "  now 
of  George  street,  Hanover  square,  in  the  Kingdom  of  Great  Brit- 
ain, Esquire,"  acting  by  said  attorney,  for  the  consideration  of 
$18,450  conveyed  to  said  Mason  and  Otis  by  deed  of  release 
(reciting  a  previous  lease  for  one  year,  being  what  is  known  as  a 
conveyance  of  lease  and  release),  dated  Feb.  22,  1796,  recorded 
in  Lib.  182,  fol.  184. 

No  deed  of  any  lands  in  Boston  within  a  century  will  compare 
with  this  in  importance.  The  description  is,  "  All  that  tract  or 
parcel  of  land  situated  in  the  westerly  part  of  Boston  aforesaid, 
bounded  as  follows :  Southerly  by  a  line  abutting  on  the  Common 
or  training-field,  running  from  the  southern  extremity  of  a  fence 
erected  b}^  Doctor  Joy  ;  easterly  by  the  said  fence  of  said  Doctor 
Jo}~ ;  northerly  by  a  line  running  from  the  northern  extremity  of 
the  aforesaid  fence  ;  north-westerly  85  feet  or  thereabouts,  abutting 
on  Olive  street ;  then  by  a  line  running  south-westerly  1 20  feet  or 
thereabouts,  abutting  on  land  formerly  belonging  to  Jeremiah 
Wheelwright,  Esquire ;  then  by  a  line  running  north-westerly  220 
feet  or  thereabouts,  and  abutting  on  land  formerly  belonging  to 
said  Wheelwright ;  then  by  a  line  running  north-westerly  217  feet, 
abutting  on  land  formerly  belonging  to  said  Jeremiah  Wheelwright ; 


158  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

lastly  by  a  line  running  north-westerly  towards  the  water,  together 
with  all  the  flats  lying  before  the  same,  down  to  low-water  mark, 
&c.,  &c.,  or  however  the  same  may  be  butted  or  bounded."  No 
reference  to  title,  and  no  statement  of  contents. 

Taking  into  consideration  the  upland  and  flats  both,  this  pur- 
chase is  at  a  considerably  less  rate  than  $1,000  per  acre.  Indeed, 
I  have  very  little  doubt  that  it  conveyed  at  least  13  or  14  acres  of 
upland,  since  his  description  towards  the  water  being  construed  as 
meaning  to  the  water,  and  being  confirmed  by  a  fence  erected 
accordingly,  carried  the  line,  as  we  have  before  stated,  across  the 
rear  lots  of  Zachariah  Phillips's  pasture,  and  formed  a  basis  of  a 
desseisin  title  to  quite  an  additional  number  of  acres  of  upland  and 
flats,  though  it  also  contained  the  germ  of  one  of  the  most  cele- 
brated and  important  lawsuits  known  in  our  day. 

Copley  personally  executed  a  confirmatory  deed,  with  release  of 
dower,  dated  April  17,  1797  (L.  191,  f.  168),  which  is  not 
acknowledged.  It  is  made  to  Mason  and  Otis  and  Mr.  Joseph 
Woodward,  who  for  $5.00  released  to  them  by  deed  in  1817  (L. 
255,  f.  246). 

The  description  in  this  deed  from  Copley  is  as  above,  except 
that  the  corner  of  Dr.  Joy's  fence  is  said  to  be  185  feet  from 
George,  orBelknap,  street,  and  that  said  fence  runs  at  right  angles 
with  the  southerly  line  of  said  Joy's  land  on  Beacon  street. 

Thus  it  seemed  that  this  great  purchase  was  consummated  in  a 
manner  satisfactory  at  least  to  the  purchasers ;  but  there  was 
further  tribulation  and  anguish  in  store  for  them.  The  litigation 
of  the  middle  of  the  last  century  was  to  be  again  renewed  on  the 
same  extensive  scale,  breaking  out,  however,  in  a  new  spot,  —  the 
want  of  any  deed  to  Copley.  GLEANER. 


LXXI. 

[COPLEY'S   SALE.  —  Continued.^ 
November  26,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  As  the  law  stood  when  Messrs.  Mason  and  Otis 
made  the  Cople}7  purchase,  a  "writ  of  right"  to  defeat  a  title 
might  be  brought  by  a  claimant  at  any  time  within  sixty  years 
(Statute,  1786,  ch.  13).  On  March  2,  1808,  a  statute  was  passed 

1  New  title.  —  W.H.W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  159 

(Statute,  1807,  ch.  75),  that,  from  and  after  January  1,  1812,  the 
sixty  years  should  be  reduced  to  forty ;  and  thus  the  law  continued 
till  January  1,  1840,  when  the  Revised  Statutes  made  a  further 
change,  b}'  reducing  the  limitation  of  forty  j'ears  to  twenty  3rears 
(with  certain  savings).  All  these  changes  are  in  the  right  direc- 
tion, —  a  remark  by  no  means  true  of  all  recent  legislation. 

The  statute  of  1807,  above  referred  to,  besides  the  change  of  the 
period  of  limitation,  introduced  also  an  entirely  new  provision,  and 
one  of  great  importance  as  a  matter  of  public  polic}7,  and  entirely 
equitable  in  its  bearings,  viz.,  the  "betterment  law,"  by  which  a 
partjr  who  had  had  six  years'  possession  and  had  made  valuable 
improvements,  or  "betterments,"  should,  on  failure  of  title,  be 
entitled  to  compensation  for  his  improvements. 

This  betterment  law  was  nominally  asked  for  as  being  especially 
necessary  in  respect  to  lands  in  Maine  ;  but  it  was,  in  fact,  in- 
tended to  apply  to  the  Copley  estate.  The  proprietors  were  daily 
giving  warrant}'  deeds,  and  in  case  of  an  ultimate  eviction  the 
constantly  increasing  value  of  the  lands  would  make  the  final 
measure  of  damages  very  severe  to  the  warrantors,  and  it  would 
be  utterly  ruinous  to  them  if  purchasers  could  come  upon  them  also 
for  the  whole  cost  of  their  improvements.  If  this  real  object  had 
been  disclosed,  the  Legislature  would  have  refused  to  rich  posses- 
sors in  Boston,  the  protection  which  they  readily  granted  to  poor 
squatters  in  Maine,  viz. :  a  wise  enactment  applicable  alike  in  both 
cases.  The  provisions  of  the  betterment  law  have  since  been 
further  extended,  so  as  to  protect  any  person  buying  in  good  faith, 
under  a  title  believed  to  be  good,  and  making  immediate  improve- 
ments. The  strong  motives  of  self-interest  on  the  part  of  these 
proprietors,  and  their  adroit  management,  thus  directly  led  to  great 
improvements  in  the  law  of  the  land. 

These  proprietors  were  doubtless  well  aware,  from  the  beginning, 
of  the  want  of  any  deed  to  Copley  from  Cunningham's  adminstrator. 
And  the  same  discovery  was  also  seasonably  made  by  his  heirs  at  law. 
Suits  were  accordingly  commenced  to  dispossess  Copley's  grantees, 
and  great  alarm  and  anxiety  resulted  therefrom.  The  late  Abra- 
ham Moore,  Esq.,  was  by  marriage  nearly  connected  with  the 
claimant,  and  Mr.  Otis,  availing  himself  of  his  personal  good  offices 
and  assistance,  at  last  succeeded  in  obtaining  a  full  release.  This,  I 
have  always  understood,  was  effected  without  the  slightest  sus- 
picions of  her  counsel.  I  have  been  told,  indeed,  that  Mr.  Otis 
went  into  court,  and  in  his  blandest  and  most  courteous  manner 
moved  that  the  suits  should  be  dismissed.  The  opposite  counsel 


160  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

naturally  wished  to  know  upon  what  specific  grounds  he  made  this 
unexpected  motion.  He  suggested,  in  reply,  the  very  conclusive 
one,  of  a  full  release  in  his  pocket  from  the  demandant  herself. 
This,  though  not  drawn  up  with  the  technical  formalities  of  special 
pleading,  proved  probabty  as  effectual  a  "rebutter"  as  was  ever 
submitted  to  the  decision  of  a  court. 

The  claimant,  Susanna  Cunningham,  was  understood  to  have 
made  an  agreement  with  George  Sullivan,  Esquire,  and  Mr.  Mur- 
ray,by  which  they  were  to  carry  on' the  suits  for  her,  and  were  to  share 
largely  in  the  expected  "  plunder."  These  gentlemen  were  fearful 
lest  she  should  be  tampered  with,  and  took  possession  of  her,  keep- 
ing her  secluded  in  Mr.  Murray's  estate  on  the  North  River,  with 
as  much  vigilance  as  was  shown  of  old  in  regard  to  the  golden 
fruit  in  the  garden  of  the  Hesperides.  But  the  fates  were  against 
them.  The  genius  of  Mr.  Otis  prevailed.  Into  this  Eden  the 
tempter  entered  as  of  old.  The  lady  eloped  from  her  legal  guar- 
dians, as  many  a  lady  has  done  before  and  since  ;  and  she  parted 
at  last,  not  indeed  with  her  heart  and  hand,  but  with  her  title  and 
estate,  by  an  unconditional  surrender.  Those  who  had  bargained 
for  her  claim  thus  lost  their  share  of  the  expected  profits,  and  had 
the  pleasure  of  paying  their  own  expenses.  Everybody  was 
pleased  at  their  disappointment. 

Susanna  Cunningham,  of  New  York,  in  consideration  of  five 
dollars,  quitclaimed  to  said  Mason  and  Otis,  and  to  Benjamin  Jo}', 
"  all  the  right,  title,  interest,  demand,  or  estate,  which  I  have  or 
may  have  by  an}T  ways  or  means  whatsoever,  in  and  to  a  certain 
tract  of  land  in  Boston,  containing  by  estimation  8£  acres,  bounded 
southerly  by  Beacon  street,  northwesterly  on  Charles  River  in  part, 
and  partly  by  land  formerly  of  John  Leverett  and  Mr.  James 
Allen,  northeast  and  northerly  by  land  formerly  of  said  Leverett, 
of  James  Allen,  and  Nathaniel  Oliver,  and  easterly  partly  on  land 
formerly  of  Samuel  Sewall,  now  John  Vinal's,  and  parti}*  by  laud 
of  said  James  Allen,  together  with  all  the  flats  lying  before  the 
same  to  low-water  mark,  or  however  the  same  may  measure  or  be 
bounded,  the  said  land  being  the  same  which  said  Mason  and  Otis, 
and  Joy,  or  one  of  them,  or  persons  claiming  under  them,  or  some 
of  them,  now  hold  in  their  actual  occupation,  and  are  the  same 
lands  conve}Ted  to  said  Mason,  Otis,  and  Joy  by  a  deed  from  John 
S.  Cople}'',  to  hold  to  them,  their  heirs  and  assigns,  according  to 
their  own  deeds,  agreements  and  partitions  among  the  mselves." 

This  deed  is  dated,  acknowledged;  and  recorded  August  17, 
1812  (L.  240,  f.  250). 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  161 

That  was  a  happy  day  for  these  purchasers.  They  doubtless  all 
slept  the  more  soundly  the  next  night  than  they  had  for  some  time. 
It  is  generally  believed,  however,  that/ve  dollars  does  not  express 
the  exact  sum  paid  to  quiet  this  claim.  It  has  been  suggested  that 
quite  a  number  of  thousands  of  dollars  were  really  paid,  and  that 
even  Mr.  Moore  had  a  very  respectable  fee  for  his  services.  It 
may,  at  least,  be  safely  said,  as  in  the  case  of  the  State-House  wall, 
"  the  cost  somewhat  exceeded  the  estimates."  GLEANER. 


L.XXII. 

[COPLEY'S   LAND.  —  Concluded.1] 
November  30,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  — The  Copley  purchase  bounded  in  the  rear  almost 
wholly  on  Allen's  pasture,  large  portions  of  which  became  also 
vested,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  same  purchasers,  partly  by  deed  of 
Enoch  Brown's  heirs,  and  partly  by  the  deed  of  the  devisees  of 
Jeremiah  Wheelwright.  In  Lib.  192,  fol.  198,  is  a  great  plan  of 
all  these  purchasers,  the  dotted  lines  of  which  show  the  lines  of  the 
Copley  deed,  as  claimed  to  run;  and  from  this  survey  it  appears  that 
these  three  purchases  together  gave  the  proprietors  a  tract  of 
land  bounded  southerly  on  Beacon  street,  850  feet  8  inches  ;  east- 
erly on  Dr.  Jo}*'s  land  (or  Walnut  street),  457  feet  4  inches  ;  south 
on  Dr.  Joy's  land  (or  Mt.  Vernon  street),  305  feet  1  inch;  east- 
erly again  on  Belknap  street,  236  feet  1  inch ;  then  north  on  one 
of  the  lots  of  Cooke's  pasture,  77  feet ;  easterly  again  on  ditto,  83 
feet  9  inches  ;  and  then  north  by  a  general  straight  line  to  the 
water.  This  last  line  coincides  with  the  rear  line  of  the  estates  on 
the  north  side  of  Pinckne}'  street,  as  subsequently  laid  out. 

On  this  plan  appears  the  old  powder-house,  near  the  north-west 
corner  of  the  tract,  and  two  dwelling-houses  fronting  towards  Bea- 
con street,  near  its  south-easterly  corner.  One  of  these  houses  was 
formerly  occupied  by  Copley.  For  several  years  they  had  been 
occupied  ;  the  -first  by  Charles  Gushing,  Esq.,  and  the  other  by 
"  Master  Vinal."  The  Gushing  house  is  the  source  of  title  to  the 
block  now  owned  and  occupied  by  Messrs.  Nathan  Appleton  and 
Henderson  Inches  ;  while  "Master  Vinal"  is  represented  by  Hon. 
David  Sears. 

i  New  title.  — W.H.W. 


162  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

One  very  observable  fact  is,  that  on  this  plan  the  lots  of  Zecha- 
riah  Phillips's  pasture,  which  should  have  been  delineated  at  its 
north-westerly  corner,  do  not  appear.  Not  only  is  the  Copley  lot 
extended  to  the  water,  instead  of  towards  the  water,  but  the 
extreme  north  line  of  the  whole  plan,  or  the  south  line  of  the  rope- 
walks  of  Swett,  Farley,  and  Hammond,  is  extended  beyond  the 
west  end  of  the  rope-walks,  in  the  same  direction,  to  the  water. 
In  other  words,  the  pasture  bought  of  Wheelwright's  devisees  is  made 
to  sweep  across  these  lots,  precisely  as  the  Copley  estate  is  made  to 
do;  and  this  although  the  deed  of  Wheelwright's  devisees  did  not  pre- 
tend to  run  towards  the  water,  but  bounded  westerly  on  these  Phillips 
lots.  The  lots  of  Zechariah  Phillips's  pasture,  the  existence  of 
which  is  thus  ignored  on  the  plan,  were  likewise  ignored  in  fact. 
The  Latin  maxim  was  acted  on,  —  De  non  apparentibus  et  de  non 
existantibus  eadem  est  lex." 

As  one  and  another  of  the  owners  of  these  lots  came  forward 
and  claimed  their  rights  they  were  settled  with.  Thus  Samuel 
Swett  sold  one  lot  in  1803  (L.  207,  f.  115).  The  heirs  of  Tilley 
quit-claimed  in  1814,  etc.  (L.  410,  f.  155-156  ;  L.  249,  f.  136),  the 
lots  subsequently  sued  for  by  the  Overseers  of  the  Poor,  claiming 
under  foreclosure  of  mortgage  made  by  the  ancestor  ;  and  William 
Donneson  conveyed  one  lot  even  as  lately  as  1828  (L.  338,  f. 
213).  These  proprietors  also  purchased  very  many  of  the  water- 
lots  of  Zechariah  Phillips's  pasture,  lying  north  of  the  range  of 
their  original  purchase,  so  that  they  were  separated  from  Cam- 
bridge street  only  by  Mr.  Bulfinch's  land. 

The  Mount  Vernon  proprietors  were  Jonathan  Mason  and  H.  G. 
Otis,  each  three-tenths,  and  Benjamin  Joy  two-tenths ;  while  the 
remaining  two-tenths  were  held  by  General  Henry  Jackson,  and 
more  recently  by  Wm.  Sullivan,  as  trustees  of  Hepsibah  C.  Swan, 
wife  of  James  Swan,  Esq.,  and  subject  to  her  appointment.  Va- 
rious partitions  were  made  by  mutual  releases,  by  indentures  of 
division,  and  by  order  of  court.  A  partial  division  was  made  by 
the  indenture  recorded  with  the  plan  above  referred  to,  on  which 
appears,  for  the  first  time,  Walnut  street,  Chestnut  street,  Mount 
Vernon  street  (west  of  Belknap  street) ,  and  Pinckney  street.  The 
indenture  laj'ing  out  Louisburg  square,  etc.,  was  made  in  1826 
(L.  312,  f.  217,  etc.).  A  large  division  of  the  lands,  east  and 
west  of  Charles  street,  etc.,  had  been  made  in  1809,  by  order  of 
court,  as  per  plan  at  the  end  of  Lib.  230  ;  and  another,  of  the 
lands  west  of  Charles  street,  and  north  of  the  Milldam  in  1828, 
the  plans  being  recorded  at  the  end  of  L.  330. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.'  163 

On  the  first  old  plan  of  L.  192,  the  sea  came  up  to  a  point  850 
feet  west  of  Dr.  Joy's  fence,  or  to  a  point  143  feet  east  of  the  east 
line  of  Charles  street.  This  would  reach  to  the  easterty  corner  of 
the  house  next  east  of  Mr.  John  Bryant's,  on  Beacon  street ;  and 
accordingly,  Mr.  Bryant  informs  me,  that  when  he  dug  his  cellar 
he  came  to  the  natural  beach,  with  its  rounded  pebble  stones,  at  the 
depth  of  three  or  four  feet  below  the  surface.  The  barberry  bushes 
speedily  disappeared  after  this  Copley  purchase.  Charles  street 
was  laid  out  through  it,  and  lots  sold  off  on  that  street  in  1804. 
The  first  railroad  ever  used  in  this  country  was  here  employed,  an 
inclined  plane  being  laid,  down  which  dirt-cars  were  made  to  slide, 
empt3Ting  their  loads  in  the  water  at  the  foot  of  the  hill.  It  was 
not,  however,  until  Mr.  Otis  himself  became  mayor  that  the  final 
improvements  of  digging  away  May  street  and  the  adjoining  lands, 
and  reducing  the  hill  to  its  present  grade,  were  completed.  On 
this  occasion,  I  remember  one  "black"  tenement  perched  up  in 
the  air,  at  least  15  feet  above  its  old  level.  These  final  measures, 
though  certainly  important  to  the  public  convenience,  happened 
also  to  be  very  beneficial  to  the  Mount  Vernon  Proprietors,  afford- 
ing another  instance  in  which  their  interests  and  those  of  the  com- 
munity, being  identical,  were  advanced  by  one  and  the  same 
instrumentality.  GLEANER. 


LXXIII. 

MOUNT  VERNON   STREET.* 

December  4,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  — On  the  Copley  estate  live,  or  have  lived,  a  large 
proportion  of  those  most  distinguished  among  us  for  intellect  and 
learning,  or  for  enterprise,  wealth,  and  public  spirit.  I  do  not 
propose  to  be  guilty  of  the  impertinence  of  saying  much  about 
private  individuals  because  they  happen  to  live  in  a  certain  locality. 
I  shall  merely  mention  a  few  incidents  and  facts  which  occur  to 
me.  The  easterly  part  of  Copley's  estate  is,  as  we  have  stated, 
composed  of  2£  acres  of  Sewall's  Elm  Pasture.  Sewall  street,  as 
laid  out  in  1732,  would  extend  west  of  Walnut  street  about  200  feet, 
and  would  destroy  the  out-buildings  of  about  the  first  eight  or  ten 
houses  on  Chestnut  street ;  and,  though  Mr.  Sears  is  one  of  the 

1  New  title.  —  W.H.W. 


164  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

last  of  our  citizens  whom  we  would  feel  inclined  to  send  to  or  put 
in  "  Coventry,"  I  am  sorry  to  sa}"  that  Coventry  street,  as  laid  out 
in  1732,  runs  nqrth  from  Beacon  street  140  feet  west  of  Walnut 
street,  and  would  therefore  pass  directly  through  his  elegant  estate. 
The  Massachusetts  General  Hospital  has  two  free  beds  for  surgical 
cases,  to  be  forever  supported  from  the  income  of  Mr.  Sears' 
bounty,  who  also  contributed  generously  to  the  enlargement  of  its 
buildings  in  1846.  Desirous  that  his  children,  during  his  life, 
should  enjo}7  the  benefits  of  his  wealth,  he  has  displayed  towards 
them  and  their  families  a  liberality  unsurpassed  in  this  community, 
while,  at  the  same  time,  he  has  never  overlooked  or  disregarded 
any  just  claims  of  the  public.  I  should,  therefore,  be  truly  sorry 
that  he  should  be  rendered  houseless  by  this  venerable  highway. 

The  outstanding  fee  of  or  easements  in  these  ancient  streets  will 
not,  however,  probably  ver}r  seriously  affect  the  present  market 
value  of  an}r  of  these  estates. 

The  Mount  Vernon  Proprietors  sold,  in  1804,  to  Richard  C. 
Derby,  a  lot  measuring  73  feet  on  Chestnut  street,  and  extending 
back  on  land  of  Otis  150  feet  to  Olive  or  Mount  Vernon  street, 
on  which  he  erected  a  mansion-house  fronting  on  Chestnut  street, 
which  he  occupied  for  many  }Tears.  Mount  Vernon  street,  when 
actually  laid  out,  proved  to  be  about  165  feet  from  Chestnut  street 
at  this  spot.  There  was  consequently  a  gore  of  land  on  Mount 
Vernon  street,  in  front  of  the  stable  built  by  Mr.  Derby,  on  what 
he  supposed  to  be  the  line  of  that  street,  and  which  the  measure- 
ments of  his  deed  did  not  cover.  This  surplus  gore  of  land  must 
have  been  peculiarly  unsightly  to  the  Mount  Vernon  Proprietors, 
as  it  kept  constantly  before  them,  probably,  the  only  instance  in 
which  they  had  parted  with  more  than  they  intended.  This  estate 
was  sold  in  1846  to  the  Messrs.  Tha}*er,  whose  two  freestone 
houses  were  erected  fronting  on  this  latter  street.  A  remarkable 
change  was  thus  wrought,  since  only  a  few  years  ago  horses  were 
groomed  and  carriages  washed  amid  the  litter  of  a  stable,  where 
are  now  two  of  the  most  lofty  vestibules  and  magnificent  drawing- 
rooms  in  Boston. 

It  has  been  said  that  an  absent-minded  fellow-citizen,  when  trav- 
elling, once  bought  his  own  boots.  It  is  certain  that  two  of  our 
most  intelligent  citizens,  formerly  residing  in  Beacon  street,  deliber- 
ately bought  their  own  houses.  One  of  them  had  on  various  occa- 
sions spoken  about  selling  his  estate,  and  a  broker,  one  da}',  said  to 
him,  "  Oh,  it  is  very  well  for  you  to  talk  in  this  way.  You  dare 
not  name  a  price  which  you  will  be  willing  to  take."  The  owner, 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  165 

piqued  by  this  challenge,  instantly  replied,  "Yes,  I  will.  I  will 
take  $50,000."  —  "I  will  give  it,"  was  the  equally  instant  and 
appalling  rejoinder.  The  owner,  of  course,  could  not  refuse  to  sign 
a  written  agreement,  thus  making  himself  legally  responsible.  But 
the  unwillingness  of  a  member  of  his  family  to  remove  led  him  to 
propose  a  reference  in  regard  to  the  question  of  damages,  and  the 
result  was  that  he  remained  in  his  own  house  at  the  price  of  ten 
thousand  dollars.  He,  as  may  be  easily  believed,  never  offered  it 
for  sale  again.  After  his  death  it  became  the  property  of  Hender- 
son Inches,  Esq.  Another  gentleman  himself  repented  of  a  sale 
on  sober  second  thought,  and  voluntarily  rescinded  the  contract  at 
the  same  cost.  His  house  is  now  owned  by  William  H.  Prescott, 
the  historian. 

Mr.  Otis  erected  an  elegant  mansion  on  Mount  Vernpn  street, 
which  he  occupied  for  some  3^ears.  It  was  subsequently  sold  to 
the  wife  of  Col.  Benjamin  Pickman,  of  Salem,  for  $29,500  (in 
1805,  L.  211,  f.  156),  who,  altering  his  mind  as  to  his  intended 
removal  to  this  city,  sold  it  for  $18,700  (in  1806,  L.  217,  f.  232), 
to  John  Osborn.  It  was  for  man}7  years  the  residence  of  Mrs. 
Gibbs,  widow  of  the  distinguished  Newport  merchant,  who  bought 
it  of  Mr.  Osborn  in  1809,  for  $28,500  (L.  230,  f.  179  ;  L.  234, 
f.  262),  and  her  daughter,  Miss  Sarah  Gibbs,  became  the  owner,  in 
1828,  at  a  cost  of  $25,950.  Samuel  Hooper,  Esq.,  bought  of  her 
in  A.D.  1845,  for  $48,000  (L.  544,  f.  233),  and  after  selling  off 
the  house-lots  on  Pinckney  street,  sold  the  residue  for  $70,000  to 
the  Misses  Pratt,  in  1853.  Though  thus  curtailed,  it  is  still  one  of 
the  finest  private  residences  left  in  the  city. 

East  of  this  mansion  is  a  block  of  buildings,  erected  30  feet 
back  from  the  street,  under  an  agreement  in  A.D.  1820,  imposing 
mutual  restrictions  between  the  late  owners,  Benjamin  Joy  and 
Jonathan  Mason,  deceased  (L.  269,  f.  304)  ;  and  a  like  restriction 
in  a  deed  of  Mr.  Swan's  lot  in  1832  (L.  358,  f.  2).  The  first 
house  in  this  block  stands,  indeed,  partly  on  Miss  Gibbs's  lot,  and 
was  the  residence  of  her  brother-in-law,  Rev.  William  Ellery 
Channing,  who  has  a  world-wide  celebrity  as  a  theologian  and 
philanthropist. 

On  the  west  of  this  Otis  mansion  is  a  large  lot,  on  which  stand 
two  houses  fronting  on  Mt.  Vernon  street,  besides  smaller  houses 
in  the  rear,  fronting  on  Pinckney  street.  This  was  sold  in  1805  to 
Charles  Bulfinch  (L.  214,  f.  18),  who  in  1806  divided  the  front 
into  two  lots,  by  deeds  (L.  215,  f.  147 ;  L.  217,  f.  69).  The  east- 
erly of  these  two  houses  was  built  by  Stephen  Higginson,  Jr.,  and 


166  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

is  owned  by  William  Sawyer,  Esq.,  one  of  our  oldest  retired  mer- 
chants, formerly  a  partner  of  the  late  Thomas  Wiggles  worth.  With 
him  resides  his  sister,  Mrs.  George  G.  Lee,  the  well  known  author- 
ess. The  other  house  was  built  and  formerly  owned  and  occupied 
by  General  David  Humphre}Ts,  whose  widow,  a  native  of  Portugal, 
at  an  advanced  age  married  a  French  Count  Walewski  (about  A.D. 
1830).  At  her  request,  the  late  Hon.  John  Pickering  "gave  her 
away,"  much  to  the  amusement  of  his  friends.  He  advised  her  to 
secure  her  property  to  her  separate  use.  She,  however,  declined 
doing  so,  remarking:  "It is  delightful  to  us  women  to  feel  our- 
selves dependent  for  everything  on  the  man  we  love."  Her  senti- 
mental bridal  illusions  were,  however,  speedily  dissipated,  as  in 
the  similar  case  of  Madam  Haley.  Her  husband,  doubtless,  took 
a  more  matter-of-fact  view  of  the  ceremony,  and 'perhaps  was  even 
then  thinking  of — this  land.  At  any  rate,  she  soon  died,  and  this 
estate,  converted  into  cash,  was  remitted  to  Paris  (L.  351,  f.  34 ; 
L.  373,  f.  23),  to  replenish  the  finances  of  "  the  Count." 

GLEANER. 


LXXIV. 

THOMAS  L.    WINTHROP   AND   JOHN  PHILLIPS. 

December  7,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  The  first  dwelling-house  on  Beacon  street  held 
under  the  Copley  title  is  that  at  the  corner  of  Walnut  street, 
owned  and  occupied  by  the  family  of  the  late  Thomas  Dixon.  By 
the  great  indenture  of  division  in  1799  (L.  392,  f.  198),  it  was 
assigned  to  Jonathan  Mason,  who,  in  1804,  sold  the  same  to  John 
Phillips  (L.  208,  f.  223).  He  died  in  1823,  and  his  heirs  in  1825 
conveyed  to  Thomas  L.  Winthrop,  who  died  1841,  when  his  exec- 
utors conveyed  to  Mr.  Dixon.  This  estate  was,  therefore,  for 
many  years  in  succession,  the  mansion-house  estate  of  Mr.  Phillips 
and  of  Mr.  Winthrop. 

No  office  in  this  country  is  hereditary  except,  as  it  would  seem, 
that  of  Register  of  Deeds,  which,  in  this  country,  has  been  held  by 
grandfather,  father,  and  son  (Henry,  William,  and  Henry  Alline) , 
whose  next  immediate  predecessor  (Ezekiel  Goldthwait)  was  the 
lineal  ancestor  of  the  wife  of  the  present  incumbent.  This  tenure, 
during  four  generations,  of  an  elective  office,  indicates  some  sub- 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  167 

stantial  merits  as  the  basis  of  popular  favor.1  In  like  manner 
one  of  our  earliest  governors  was  John  Winthrop.  Another, 
equally  distinguished,  was  James  Bowdoin.  The  late  Thomas  L. 
Winthrop,  a  lineal  descendant  of  the  former,  and  who  married  the 
granddaughter  of  the  latter,  was  himself  elected  for  seven  succes- 
sive years  (1826—1832)  Lieut-Governor  of  the  Commonwealth. 
His  son,  the  late  Greiiville  Temple  Winthrop,  who  some  years 
since  closed  a  retired  life  in  a  neighboring  town,  was  formerly 
commander  of  that  well-known  corps,  the  Boston  Cadets.  On  an 
intensely  cold  election  day  the  company  was  not  Reasonably  ready 
to  attend  upon  his  Excellenc}7"  Governor  Lincoln,  at  the  conclusion 
of  the  services  at  the  Old  South  Church.  The  undignified  haste 
with  which  they  left  their  snug  quarters  and  pleasant  refreshments 
at  the  Exchange  Coffee  House,  and  ran  along  the  streets  to  over- 
take the  Commander-in-Chief,  afforded  much  innocent  amusement ; 
but,  as  a  breach  of  military  etiquette,  the  indignity  could  not  be 
overlooked.  The  result  was  a  court-martial,  and  the  proceedings 
led  to  a  voluminous  publication  in  two  octavos,  which  a  friend 
once  playfully  pointed  out  to  me  as  u  Winthrop's  Works." 

Distinguished  as  was  the  late  Lt.-Governor  Winthrop*  in  his 
lifetime,  he  will  hereafter  be  better  known  as  the  father  of  a  more 
distinguished  son,  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  who,  under  the  doctrine  of 
hereditary  descent,  based  upon  merit,  may  well  aspire  to  the  same 
high  position  which  has  been  so  honorably  filled  alike  by  his 
paternal  and  maternal  ancestors. 

However  much  our  views  may  differ  on  the  subject  of  slavery,  I 
do  not  believe  that  the  interests  of  the  character  of  our  old  Com- 
monwealth would  suffer  at  his  hands.  So,  too,  the  late  John 
Phillips,  for  ten  successive  years  the  President  of  our  State  Senate, 
and  though  selected,  from  his  personal  popularity,  above  all  others, 
to  be  the  first  Ma}ror  of  Boston,  will  be  —  nay,  is  already  —  chiefly 
remembered  as  the  father  of  Wendell  Phillips.  As  an  advocate  in 
any  event  of  disunion,  I  totally  dissent  from  his  views ;  but  much 
should  be  pardoned  to  an  honest  zeal  in  a  righteous  cause.  As 
long  as  a  slave  shall  tread  upon  that  soil  which  of  all  others  in  the 
world  seems  especially  consecrated  to  freedom,  aye,  long  after 

1Mr.  G old th wait's  first  signature  as  Register  is  to  a  deed  recorded  Nov.  6,  1740,  L. 
60,  f.  77,  and  his  last  to  a  deed  recorded  Jan.  17,  1776,  L.  127,  f.  31.  It  is  a  remark- 
able fact  that  both  he  and  his  immediate  successor  died  in  office  blind.  I  shall  gladly 
continue  to  vote  for  our  present  competent  and  courteous  Register  until  he  becomes 
blind,  —  a  disability  which  I  sincerely  hope  will  never  befall  him.  I  am  convinced  that 
while  he  has  his  eyes  the  public  willnot  find  a  more  faithful  servant. 


168  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

that  foul  stigma  shall  have  been  effaced  from  our  national  char- 
acter, —  as  God,  in  his  merc}T,  grant  that  it  speedily  may  be, 
without  civil  dissensions  and  fraternal  bloodshed !  —  the  classic 
erudition  and  the  dignified  eloquence  of  Sumner,  the  graceful 
delivery,  the  fervid  oratory,  the  sometimes  too  impassioned  de- 
nunciations of  Phillips,  will  have  made  their  names  household 
words  as  among  the  foremost  of  those  who  in  any  age  or  country 
have  vindicated  the  cause  of  oppressed  and  degraded  humanitj^. 
I  rejoice  to  believe  that  the  coldness,  the  bitterness,  the  social 
proscription  of  to-day  will  be  amply  atoned  for  hereafter  by  the 
gratitude  of  a  united,  happy,  and  free  people. 

It  is  a  remarkable  circumstance  that  the  estate  should  have  been 
derived  by  the  great  anti-slavery  champion  b}^  regular  conveyances 
from  Jonathan  Mason,  one  of  the  few  Northern  men  whose  votes 
established  the  Missouri  Compromise.  And  nothing  indicates 
more  strongly  the  subsequent  retrograde  movement  of  the  nation  on 
this  subject  than  the  fact  that  we  are  now  seeking,  and  probably 
seeking  in  vain,  to  procure  even  a  restoration  of  this  veiy  compro- 
mise, which,  when  it  was  first  forced  upon  us,  was  regarded  with 
universal  and  unmitigated  detestation.  We  bartered  away  our 
birthright,  and  have  lost  even  the  poor  pittance  for  which  we 
bargained.  GLEANER. 


LXXV. 

BEACON   STREET.1 

December  II,  2855. 

MR.  EDITOR  :  — Next  west  of  Lt. -Governor  Winthrop's  house  is 
that  of  Hon.  Nathan  Appleton.  As  an  associate  of  the  late 
Francis  C.  Lowell  and  P.  T.  Jackson,  he  participated  largely  in 
the  creation  of  the  great  manufacturing  interest  of  New  England, 
and  is  probably  now  as  well  informed  in  relation  to  that  subject  as 
any  one  among  us.  As  a  member  of  Congress,  he  was  opposed  to 
Henry  Lee,  who  advocated  free  trade  in  opposition  to  "  the  Ameri- 
can system."  In  m3r  father's  household  were  four  voters.  He 
himself  was  a  warm  partisan  of  Mr.  A.,  but  two  of  us  "young 
Americans  "  could  not  be  convinced  \>y  his  arguments,  and  so  the 
entire  famity  turned  out  at  the  polls  and  exactly  neutralized  each 

1  New  title.  —  W.H.W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  169 

other.  Mr.  A.  is  a  brother  of  the  late  Samuel  Appleton,  and  the 
famity  name  still  preserves  its  ancient  brightness.  Of  his  two 
elder  daughters  one  is  married  to  the  son  and  biographer  of  Sir 
James  Mackintosh,  the  Governor  of  St.  Christophers,  the  other  to 
the  poet  Longfellow.  At  the  last  commencement  of  Harvard 
College,  Mr.  Appleton  received  the  honorary  degree  of  Doctor  of 
Laws. 

Elizabeth,  wife  of  Charles  Gushing,  Esq.,  in  1796  acquired  a 
lot  73  feet  on  Beacon  street  by  165  feet  deep  (L.  184,  f.  90),  and  he 
purchased  the  adjoining  25-feet  lot,  1804  (L.  210,  f.  25).  Their 
children  conveyed  in  1816  to  Nathan  Appleton  and  Daniel  P. 
Parker  (252,  f.  69),  who  erected  two  elegant  brick  mansions. 

Mr.  Parker  was  an  active  and  successful  merchant,  and  at  his 
death  owned  one  of  the  finest  vessels  in  the  port,  to  which  he  had 
given  the  name  of  his  friend  and  neighbor,  Samuel  Appleton.  He 
was  for  several  }-ears  a  trustee  of  the  Massachusetts  General 
Hospital.  He  left  one  son,  Henry  Tuke  Parker,  and  two  daughters, 
the  eldest  of  whom  is  the  wife  of  Edmund  Quinc}7. 

Mr.  Gushing  was  a  well-known  citizen,  —  the  Clerk  of  the  Courts  ; 
and  the  testimony  of  his  son  of  the  same  name  —  a  gentleman  of 
intelligence  and  high  standing  —  was  of  great  importance  to  the  Mt. 
Vernon  Proprietors  in  the  suits  brought  by  the  Overseers  of  the 
Poor.  He  remembered  that  Copley's  fence  joined  on  the  old  pow- 
der-house, thus  establishing  an  ancient  monument. 

The  stone  mansion  of  Mr.  Sears  was  originally  a  much  lower 
building,  having  only  one  bow  in  the  centre,  instead  of  two  bows  or 
projections.  It  fronted  on  a  yard  or  carriage-way,  laid  out  on  the 
easterly  side  of  his  lot.  It  was  a  very  graceful  and  beautiful 
building,  and  a  great  ornament  to  the  street.  He  subsequently 
erected  an  additional  house  on  the  east,  covering  the  whole  front  of 
his  lot,  and  also  making  radical  changes  in  the  original  structure. 
On  this  lot  of  Mr.  Sears,  behind  the  old  house,  stood  a  barn,  which 
was  converted  into  a  temporary  hospital  for  the  wounded  British 
officers  after  the  battle  of  Bunker  Hill.  When  Mr.  Sears  was 
digging  for  the  foundations  of  his  house,  the  workmen  came,  at  a 
depth  of  several  feet  under  the  surface,  to  a  gigantic  moccasined 
foot,  perhaps  2£  feet  long,  broken  off  at  the  ankle,  and  carved  from 
a  kind  of  a  sandstone  not  found  in  this  vicinity,  which  he  pre- 
sented to  the  Boston  Athenaeum,  where  it  now  is  —  not. 

"  Master  Vinal"  would  doubtless  be  much  gratified  to  find  that 
his  humble  wooden  house  has  attained  to  such  high  distinction  in 
these  later  times.  And  even  Mr.  Copley  would  admit  that  the 


170  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

houses  of  Messrs.  Sears,  Parker,  and  Appleton  have  more  than 
made  good  the  two  domiciles  which  are  delineated  in  all  the  dignity 
of  yellow  paint,  with  doors,  windows,  and  chimneys,  on  the  origi- 
nal plan  of  the  Mount  Vernon  Purchase  (in  Lib.  192).  Except 
the  old  powder-house,  we  have  seen  that  only  these  two  houses 
appear  on  a  plan  of  an  estate  containing  a  million  of  square  feet, 
upon  which  now  stand  probably  five  hundred  houses. 

After  Mr.  Otis  had  sold  his  mansion  house  on  Mt.  Vernon  street, 
he  removed  to  an  elegant  and  spacious  house  which  he  erected  on 
Beacon  street,  next  west  of  Mr.  Sears's,  and  here  he  lived  till  his 
death.  His  lot  was  120  feet  front  by  165  feet  in  depth.  The 
easterly  portion  was  a  fine  garden.  Land  at  last  became  so  valu- 
able that  he  did  not  feel  justified  in  retaining  for  a  mere  matter  of 
sentiment  this  beautiful  enclosure,  which  had  long  pleased  all  ej'es, 
and  decided  to  convert  it  to  a  more  substantial  use.  He  accord- 
ingly, in  1831,  sold  the  easterly  part  to  Mr.  Sears,  for  $12,412.5.0 
(L.  356,  f.  227),  who  proceeded  to  erect  a  house,  and  on  the  west 
part  Mr.  Otis  himself  erected  another.  The  bow  of  Mr.  Otis's 
mansion  house,  which  originally  projected  into  the  garden,  still 
projects  into  this  house,  though  this  encroachment  is  ingeniously 
disposed  of  and  concealed  by  its  interior  arrangements.  When  the 
houses  were  erected  on  this  garden  there  was  found  what  had  the 
appearance  of  an  old  well,  entirely  filled  up  with  beach  sand. 
Its  existence  was  before  unknown.  The  foundations  of  the  new 
buildings  were  constructed  by  arching  it  over.  And  perhaps,  after 
many  a  year  yet  to  come,  it  may  again  astonish  the  spectators. 
The  mansion  house  itself,  after  Mr.  Otis's  death,  was  conveyed  to, 
and  is  now  owned  by,  Samuel  Austin,  b}T  whom  it  has  been  thor- 
oughly renovated.  There  is,  perhaps,  on  the  whole,  no  more 
desirable  residence  in  Boston.  Mr.  Austin  paid  for  it  the  sum  of 
$60,000.. 

There  probably  has  never  lived  in  Boston  any  individual  with 
finer  natural  endowments  than  Mr.  Otis.  Possessing  a  noble 
presence,  a  beautifully  modulated  voice,  great  readiness  and  self- 
possession,  and  a  cultivated  intellect,  he  has  rarely,  if  ever,  been 
surpassed  in  the  divine  gift  of  eloquence.  Nor  was  he  less  agree- 
able and  fascinating  in  the  intercourse  of  private  life.  His  brilliant 
repartees,  his  graceful  compliments,  his  elegant  manners,  made 
him  as  distinguished  and  successful  in  the  social  circle,  as  his 
talents  and  intelligence  did  at  the  bar  and  in  all  the  business 
relations  of  a  long  and  active  life.  A  single  anecdote  will  illus- 
trate his  instant  readiness :  a  friend  and  his  wife  were  one  day 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  171 

approaching  him  in  the  street.  The  wife  noticed  some  derange- 
ment of  her  husband's  dress,  and  stopped  to  adjust  it.  As  Mr. 
Otis  reached  them,  she  turned  round,  and,  struck  with  the  faultless 
neatness  of  his  costume,  exclaimed  to  her  husband,  "There, 
look  at  Mr.  Otis's  bosom."  Mr.  O.  immediately  bowed  and  said, 
"  Madam,  if  your  husband  could  look  within  this  bosom,  he  would 
die  of  jealousy"  Had  Mr.  Otis  been  less  absorbed  with  the  care 
of  his  own  concerns  and  interests,  there  was  no  honor  in  the  gift 
of  his  fellow-citizens  which  they  would  not  have  bestowed  upon 
him  by  acclamation. 

He  died  in  1848,  leaving  three  sons  and  one  daughter.  Several 
of  his  children  had  died  during  his  lifetime,  three  of  whom  left 
issue.  He  had  strong  domestic  affections,  and  the  kindest  feelings 
existed  between  him  and  those  employed  in  his  household.  He 
rightly  thought  that  that  relation  involved  something  more  than 
mere  service  on  the  one  side  and  wages  on  the  other.  I  have  heard 
him  spoken  of  with  great  regard  by  one  who  for  many  years  was 
a  frequent  inmate  of  his  dwelling,  employed  in  labors  of  needle- 
work. In  his  last  will  is  the  following  item  :  "  I  give  to  Deborah 
Hastings,  my  faithful  nurse,  two  hundred  dollars,  and  a  suit  of 
mourning  at  the  discretion  of,"  &c.,  "handsome,  suitable  for  her 
condition  in  life,  and  not  too  extravagant."  GLEANER. 


L.XXVI. 

THE  LOWELL  FAMILY.1 

December  14,  1855.  . 

MR.  EDITOR  :  —  There  is  no  name  among  us  more  entitled  to 
honorable  commemoration  than  that  of  Lowell.  It  has  still  one 
venerable  living  representative,  —  the  survivor  of  a  past  generation, 
Rev.  Charles  Lowell,  D.D.,  who  is  father  of  the  distinguished 
poet,  James  Russell  Lowell,  and  of  Mrs.  Samuel  R.  Putnam,  a 
lady  as  unaffected  and  pleasing  as  she  is  talented  and  learned. 
One  of  Dr.  Lowell's  brothers,  the  late  Hon.  John  Lowell,  was  in 
early  life  at  the  head  of  the  Suffolk  Bar,  and  eventually  the  most 
distinguished  agriculturist  in  New  England.  He  was  for  many 
years  a  member  of  the  Corporation  of  Harvard  College,  as  his  son 

xNew  title.— W.H.W. 


172  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

John  Amory  Lowell  is  now.  Another  brother,  the  late  Francis  C. 
Lowell,  devoted  himself  with  the  utmost  enthusiasm  to  the  estab- 
lishment and  development  of  our  manufactures.  A  great  city 
sprang  into  existence,  the  future  emporium  of  this  branch  of  our 
national  industry,  and,  b}T  adopting  his  name,  has  gratefully  recog- 
nized him  as  its  virtual  founder. 

I  have  alluded  in  a  former  article  to  the  rapid  rise  in  value  of 
lands  in  Boston.  The  same  remarks  are  even  more  strikingly 
applicable  to  lands  in  Lowell.  A  single  farm  of  100  acres  was 
bargained  for  at  the  outset  (1819-22)  at  from  $15  to  820  per  acre. 
Nine  out  of  the  ten  owners  conve}*ed  accordingly.  The  tenth 
died,  and  in  the  delay  of  getting  license  to  sell  to  raise  enough  to 
pay  his  debts,  the  f  of  his  &  sold  in  1824  for  $3,206.89.  This 
sum  paid  all  his  debts,  and  a  new  license  became  necessary  to  sell 
for  the  benefit  of  his  heirs,  and  their  J  of  TV  was  sold  for  $4,742. 
When  I  was  examining  the  titles  in  Lowell,  in  1831,  Mr.  Kirk 
Boott  informed  me  that  this  farm,  without  any  improvements, 
could  not  be  worth  less  than  $15,000  per  acre,  —  or,  in  other  words, 
that  its  value  had  increased,  in  ten  3rears,  from  about  $1,500  to 
$1,500,000,  or  a  thousandfold. 

I  was  employed  to  examine  all  the  titles  in  Lowell,  from  the 
circumstance  that  an  individual  was  engaged  in  trying  to  discover 
defects,  and  to  extort  money  from  the  Corporation.  I  one  day 
received  a  note  from  Mr.  Boott,  that  this  person  pretended  that  a 
valid  claim  existed  for  the  whole  of  this  farm,  because,  when  it 
was  conveyed,  in  1782,  by  Benjamin  Melvin,  and  Joanna,  his  wife 
(L,  84,  f.  277),  she  was  a  minor ;  that  both  husband  and  wife  had 
lived  till  within  the  past  few  years,  and  therefore  her  heirs  were 
not  }'et  barred.  It  of  course  became  of  great  importance  to  find 
out  whether  or  not  she  was  a  minor  in  1782.  I  knew  that  there 
was  a  large  trunk  full  of  papers  in  the  Probate  Office,  which  had 
never  been  recorded,  because  the  fees  had  not  been  paid.  I  deter- 
mined to  examine  every  paper.  In  doing  so  I  found  her  choice  of 
a  guardian  in  1772,  specif3Ting  her  age  to  be  then  15  years,  which 
proved  conclusively  that  she  must  have  been  25  years  old  at  the 
time  of  her  conveyance.  I  procured  a  certified  copy  of  this  docu- 
ment, and  there  was  no  more  trouble  or  alarm  on  that  subject. 

One  very  curious,  mistake  of  title  I  discovered  and  caused  to  be 
corrected,  in  regard  to  the  valuable  Kurd  estate,  then  so  called, 
since  belonging  to  the  Middlesex  Company.  It  contained  several 
acres,  and  was  sold  in  1827  for  855,000.  In  1822  it  belonged 
wholly  to  Thomas  Kurd.  He  conveyed  to  his  brother  William  in 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  173 

1822  (L.  248,  f.  388),  one-half  part  of  all  my  right,  &c.,  in  and  to. 
These  words  were  servilely  copied  in  the  two  next  deeds,  each  of 
which  was  intended  to  convey  the  whole  interest  of  the  grantor. 
Thus  William,  instead  of  selling  ^,  sold  J  to  Joseph  Hurd  in  1824 
(L.  268.  f.  208),  and  Joseph  reconveyed  to  Thomas  in  1826 
(L.  268,  f.  236),  only  |-  instead  of  the  £  which  he  supposed  that  he 
was  selling.  Three-eighths  of  the  whole  land  were  thus  left  out- 
standing, merely  .from  supposing  that  moiety  had  no  meaning. 
I  once  met  with  a  like  curious  defect  in  a  title  in  Boston,  caused 
by  its  being  supposed  to  mean  any  fractional  share  whatever.  A 
series  of  deeds  conveyed  one  undivided  moiety  or  quarter  part,  &c., 
which,  on  the  rule  of  construing  a  deed,  in  case  of  doubt,  most 
strongly  against  the  grantor,  of  course  made  him  legally  sell  twice 
what  he  meant,  and  the  later  grantees  were  left  in  a  forlorn  and 
destitute  condition.  In  L.  258,  f.  233,  of  Suffolk  Deeds  will  be 
found  a  case  where  a  grantor  sells  four  moieties  of  a  parcel  of  land 
as  being  all  that  he  owned  himself,  "  and  also  all  the  right  of  my 
dearly  beloved  wife  Abigail." 

At  the  death  of  Francis  C.  Lowell,  in  the  year  1817,  he  left  four 
children,  —  a  daughter,  who  married  her  cousin,  John  Amory 
Lowell,  and  three  sons.  One  of  these  was  John  Lowell,  Junior. 
Possessing  a  considerable  estate,  he  married  a  lad}r  of  large  for- 
tune, who  died  leaving  him  two  children.  He  purchased  a  house 
in  Beacon  street,  part  of  the  Copley  lot,  as  an  investment  on  their 
account.  A  guardian  is  only  permitted  to  invest  in  real  estate 
under  previous'  license  of  Court.  This  had  not  been  obtained. 
A  question  was  raised,  therefore,  as  to  the  allowance  of  the 
account.  Both  the  children  died  by  sudden  and  severe  disease 
within  a  few  days,  and  the  father,  as  heir  of  the  survivors,  became 
entitled  to  all  the  property  which  had  been  held  in  trust  for  his  kite 
wife.  By  his  will,  dated  Nov.  8,  1832,  he  established  that  admi- 
rable foundation,  The  Lowell  Institute.  He  never  married  again ; 
but  this  document  provides  minutely  for  a  possible  wife  and  chil- 
dren, and,  in  default  of  any  such  immediate  claimants,  appropri- 
ates a  moiety  of  all  his  estate  to  this  public  use.  By  a  second 
codicil,  dated  April  1,  1835,  "from  the  top  of  the  palace  of 
Louxor,  in  the  French  house  at  Thebes,"  he  gives  his  final  direc- 
tions as  to  this  Lecture-Fund  Trust.  The  time-defying  pyramids, 
by  their  massive  grandeur,  inspired  Napoleon  to  address  to  his 
troops  that  stirring  appeal  which  history  will  never  allow  to  be 
forgotten.  And  the  same  associations  perhaps  led  the  American 
traveller  to  consummate,  among  the  glorious  remains  of  ancient 


174  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

Egypt,  a  cherished  purpose,  of  which  the  effects  will,  perhaps,  be 
as  enduring  as  the  monuments  of  the  Pharaohs.  May  the  ever- 
increasing  intelligence  of  the  citizens  of  Boston,  through  coming 
generations,  be  the  appropriate  memorial  of  his  wisdom  and 
philanthropy ! 

I  remember  but  one  other  will  which  states  any  peculiar  circum- 
stance attending  its  execution.  The  late  Redford  Webster,  father 
of  Professor  Webster,  appended  to  his  signature,  in  1832,  the 
following:  "  With  Mr.  Eliot's  bad  pen  in  the  dark  shop."  Not- 
withstanding this  trivial  remark,  the  testator  was  a  person  of 
superior  intelligence. 

Mr.  Lowell's  house  has  since  his"  death  become  the  property  of 
his  brother,  Francis  C.  Lowell,  who  for  several  years  ably  presided 
over  the  Massachusetts  Hospital  Life  Insurance  Company,  one  of 
the  largest  of  our  monej^ed  institutions,  and  whose  active  services 
and  ready  aid  have  been  freely  rendered  to  the  charitable  estab- 
lishments of  our  city.  Their  youngest  brother,  the  late  Edward 
Jackson  Lowell,  was  a  classmate  of  my  own  at  Harvard  College. 
None  who  had  previously  borne  the  name  were  purer  in  character, 
more  brilliant  in  talents,  or  governed  by  higher  impulses  and 
nobler  views  of  life  and  duty.  He  died  of  consumption  in  1829, 
one  of  the  earliest  taken  and  best  beloved  of  our  band  of  brothers. 

GLEANER. 


LXXVII. 

THE   SWAN   FAMILY.* 

December  18,  1855. 

MR.  EDITOR: — Hon.  Jonathan  Mason  died  in  1831,  leaving  a 
numerous  family,  who  are  among  our  most  estimable  and  respected 
citizens.  Of  his  two  sons,  Jonathan  and  William  P.,  the  latter 
was  for  several  years  reporter  of  the  decisions  of  Judge  Story, 
though  he  has  now  retired  from  the  profession.  Of  Mr.  Mason's 
daughters  one  is  wife  of  Hon.  David  Sears ;  one  is  the  widow  of 
the  late  Patrick  Grant ;  one  was  wife  of  Samuel  D.  Parker,  the 
distinguished  criminal  lawyer ;  one  was  first  wife  of  Dr.  John  C. 
Warren,  and  mother  of  his  equally  distinguished  son,  J.  Mason 
Warren ;  and  one  is  mother  of  the  late  Dr.  Samuel  Parkman, 

1  New  title.— W.H.W. 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  175 

whose  private  worth,  and  whose  eminence  as  a  surgeon,  make  his 
recent  death  a  loss  to  our  whole  community. 

Mr.  Mason  and  Mr.  Otis  were,  as  we  have  seen,  the  two  chief 
Mount  Vernon  Proprietors,  and  Mrs.  Hepsibah  C.  Swan,  wife  of 
James  Swan,  Esq.,  was  one  of  their  associates.  She  was  a  lady 
of  great  personal  beauty,  of  strong  impulses,  and  of  a  most  marked 
and  decided  character.  Mr.  Swan  was  at  Paris  during  all  the 
fearful  events  of  the  old  French  Revolution.  He  sent  home  to  this 
country  many  beautiful  pieces  of  tapestry  and  rich  furniture, 
purchased  from  the  spoils,  probably,  of  royal  palaces  and  noble 
residences,  some  of  which  are  still  possessed  by  his  descendants. 
Many  have  long  since  been  disposed  of.  A  massive  silver  soup 
tureen  was  bought  by  my  informants  very  many  years  ago.  If  its 
mate  could  have  been  procured,  the  two  would  readily  have  brought 
$1,000.  Comparatively  useless  of  itself,  he  eventually  sent  it  to 
the  East  Indies,  where  it  was  sold  for  $300.  At  a  period  long 
subsequent  its  companion  was  disposed  of  at  auction  in  Boston. 
A  pair  of  andirons,  of  elegant  and  elaborate  workmanship,  were 
sent  from  Paris,  which  for  many  years  enjc^ed  a  golden  reputation. 
They  became  the  propert}'  of  the  late  George  Blake,  and  after  his 
death  were  discovered  to  be  brass  gilt. 

Mr.  Swan  also  remitted  large  sums  of  money,  which  were  in- 
vested (for  the  use  of  his  wife,  and  subject  to  her  power  of  appoint- 
ment) in  two-tenths  of  all  the  Mt.  Vernon  lands,  and  in  numerous 
other  of  the  most  valuable  parcels  of  real  estate  in  our  city.  At 
last,  his  speculations,  which  for  a  time  had  been  so  successful, 
proved  ruinous,  and  he  became  deeply  insolvent.  Sinbad  could 
not  shake  from  his  shoulders  the  old  man  who  took  possession  of 
them.  "  Old  Vans"  till  his  death  persecuted  the  Codmans,  and 
Mr.  Swan  had  his  "  Picquet."  He  was  imprisoned  in  the  jail  at 
Paris  by  his  inexorable  creditors,  and  there  he  continued  to  live, 
year  after  year,  and  there,  I  believe,  he  died,  unless,  perhaps, 
shortly  before  his  death,  released  by  some  act  of  grace.  He,  at 
any  rate,  did  not  get  back  to  this  county.  Let  it  not  be  supposed, 
however,  that  his  life  was  a  miserable  one.  Though  he  was,  from 
compulsion,  a  domestic  man,  and  his  excursions  were  unpleasantly 
restricted,  nobody  lived  in  greater  style,  or  had  more  elegant 
entertainments.  He,  however,  certainly  saw  less  of  his  family 
than  most  of  us  would  have  deemed  desirable.  His  wife  died  in 
1829,  and  he  died  in  Paris  in  1831. 

Repeated  attempts  were  made  to  get  at  the  estates  in  this 
country  as  having  been  purchased  with  his  creditors1  funds ;  but 


176  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

they  were  unsuccessful.  His  wife  lived  here,  with  an  elegant 
establishment  in  the  city  (now  Benjamin  Welles'  house,  in  Chest- 
nut street),  and  a  beautiful  summer  residence  in  Dorchester.  In 
the  garden  of  this  latter  mansion  is  still  to  be  seen  the  enclosure 
in  which  lies  buried  General  Henry  Jackson,  the  original  trustee, 
who  had  charge  of  her  property  and  affairs.  Many  amusing  and 
striking  anecdotes  are  told  of  this  lady.  She  had  (besides  a  son, 
who  finally  died  without  issue)  three  daughters,  one  of  whom 
married  the  late  John  C.  Howard,  and  died  leaving  several  chil- 
dren. Two  of  her  daughters  are  now  wives  of  two  of  the  most 
distinguished  divines  in  this  vicing,  Rev.  Francis  Way  land,  D.D., 
late  President  of  Brown  University,  and  Rev.  Cyrus  A.  Bartol,  of 
the  West  Church  in  this  city. 

Another  daughter  of  Mrs.  Swan  married  the  late  William  Sulli- 
van. She  was  one  of  the  most  refined,  amiable,  and  lady-like 
persons  in  the  whole  society  of  Boston ;  and  her  husband  was 
equally  distinguished  for  his  elegant  manners  and  kind  disposi- 
tion. His  considerate  notice  of  the  young,  his  thoughtful  atten- 
tions, his  graceful  and  elegant  hospitality,  and  the  charming 
societ}*  of  his  beautiful  and  accomplished  family,  made  his  house 
truly  delightful  to  all  friends  and  visitors.  One  of  his  daughters 
married  the  talented  artist,  Stewart  Newton,  and  is  now  the  wife 
of  Mr.  Okey,  of  New  York.  One  of  his  sons,  an  estimable  young 
man,  who  inherited  the  pleasant  manners  of  his  parent,  died  long 
since,  an  esteemed  classmate  of  my  own.  A  feeling  of  regret 
comes  over  me  as  I  remember  that  both  parents  were  called  upon 
at  last  to  endure  peculiarly  distressing  maladies,  and  that  this 
delightful  household,  by  death  and  removal,  has  entirely  passed 
away  from  among  us.  There  has,  indeed,  been  seldom,  if  ever, 
gathered  within  the  walls  of  any  of  our  mansions  a  more  agreeable 
and  attractive  famity,  or  one  of  which  a  more  affectionate  remem- 
brance will  be  longer  or  more  widely  cherished. 

Mr.  Sullivan  was  a  man  of  cultivation  and  refinement.  He 
published  an  interesting  volume,  entitled,  "  Familiar  Letters  on 
Public  Characters."  At  the  bar  he  was  a  pleasing  speaker,  and 
he  took  a  high  rank  in  his  profession.  He  was  deficient,  however, 
in  method  and  exactness.  His  conveyances,  though  often  drawn 
up  with  accurate  technical  language,  had  occasionally  some  one 
point  of  law  or  fact  overlooked  or  disregarded,  which  made  the 
instrument  fatally  defective.  Thus  the  first  three  houses  in  Colon- 
nade row  (those  owned  by  the  late  Amos  Lawrence,  William 
Lawrence,  and  Jeremiah  Mason,  and  a  part  of  the  fourth  house, 


"GLEANER"  ARTICLES.  177 

owned  by  James  T.  Austin)  became,  by  appointment  of  Mrs. ' 
Swan,  the  estate  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Sullivan,  and  of  Mr.  and  Mrs. 
John  T.  Sargent,  and  of  Mrs.  Howard,  in  1811  (238,  f.  227).  A 
conveyance  was  drawn  of  them  forthwith,  in  which  Mr.  Sullivan 
and  Mr.  Sargent  were  grantors,  and  their  wives  merely  joined  at 
the  close  of  the  deeds  to  release  dower,  Mrs.  Howard  being  wholly 
omitted,  A.D.  1811  (238,  f.  235).  This  mistake  was  discovered 
and  corrected  as  to  each  of  these  bouses,  in  succession,  in  1822  as 
to  Mr.  Austin's  house  (L,  277,  f.  15),  in  1831  as  to  Amos  Law- 
rence (L.  352,  f.  117),  and  as  to  Mrs.  Williams,  or  Mr.  Mason's 
(L.  355,  f.  25),  and  in  1839  as  to  Mr.  Lawrence's  house  (L.  442, 
f.  244). 

Though  it  would  have  been  supposed  that  as  soon  as  the  mistake 
had  been  pointed  out  in  regard  to  one  of  these  estates,  Mr.  Sulli- 
van, as  a  business  man,  would  have  been  led  to  look  for  the  like 
error  in  relation  to  the  others,  precisely  the  same  mistake  occurred 
in  regard  to  quite  a  valuable  lot  of  land  on  the  north  side  of 
Bromfield  street,  crossing  Montgomery  place,  which  was  conveyed 
by  James  Swan,  in  A.D.  1807  (L.  219,  f.  277),  though  the  fee  was 
in  his  wife.  In  this  case  death  intervened  before  the  mistake  was 
discovered,  and  $4,191.60  was  paid  to  the  heirs,  who  now  owned 
the  estate  because  their  mother  did  not  put  her  name  into  the  right 
part  of  the  deed,  A.D.  1831  (L.  353,  f.  75). 

The  remaining  daughter  of  Mrs.  Swan  married  in  succession 
John  Turner  Sargent,  Esq.  (brother  of  Sigma),  and  Rev.  Dr. 
Richmond  ;  and  after  the  death  of  the  latter  she,  by  permission  of 
the  Legislature,  resumed  the  family  name  of  her  first  husband. 
She  still  occupies  her  mother's  mansion  at  Dorchester.  In  early 
life  she  was  pree'minently  distinguished  for  beauty.  I  remember 
to  have  seen  a  private  letter,  dated  about  60  }rears  ago,  addressed 
to  an  eminent  lawyer  of  this  city,  then  resident  elsewhere,  speak- 
ing in  terms  of  the  utmost  enthusiasm  of  the  charms  of  "  Kitty 
Swan."  Her  name  was  "Christiana  Keadie,"  —  a  name  which, 
peculiar  as  it  is,  is  still  perpetuated  in  the  person  of  an  attractive 
granddaughter,  whose  companions  address  her  with  the  same 
sociable  "  feline"  epithet.  There  were  three  sons,  one  of  whom, 
John  T.  Sargent,  is  well  known  as  a  minister  at  large  in  this  city. 
Another,  Hemy  J.  Sargent,  has  a  cultivated  musical  taste,  and 
not  long  since  published  a  volume  of  poems.  He  is  father  of  the 
young  "  Kitty,"  to  whom  he  recently  dedicated  quite  a  graceful 
and  pleasing  song.  GLEANER. 


178  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 

LXXVIII. 

THE   BEACON-STREET  FIRE. 

January  12,  1850. 

MR.  EDITOR:  —  On  Wednesday,  July  7th,  1824,  just  before  two 
o'clock,  the  bells  of  Boston  rang  an  alarm  of  fire,  and  instantly  a 
dense  mass  of  black  smoke  was  seen  to  overhang  the  entire  city. 
I  have  always  been  an  amateur  at  fires.  If  the  calamity  must 
happen,  I  like  to  be  present,  to  behold  what  sometimes  proves  to 
be  a  most  magnificent  spectacle.  I  was  then  a  young  man,  —  in  my 
teens,  — and  hastening  from  'Change  to  the  corner  of  Park  street, 
I  saw  at  once  that  a  most  furious  and  destructive  conflagration  had 
commenced.  The  wind  was  blowing  a  hurricane  from  the  north- 
west. When  I  reached  the  bottom  of  the  Beacon-street  Mall,  a 
stream  of  fire  was  pouring  through  the  passage-way  west  of  Mr. 
Bryant's  house,  from  carpenter  shops  and  other  combustible 
premises  on  Charles  and  Chestnut  streets. 

The  flame  was  of  the  full  width  of  the  passage-way,  and  it  was 
curling  round  into  the  front  windows  of  Mr.  B.'s  house,  which  was 
then  nearl}'  finished  and  ready  for  occupancy.  The  out-buildings 
and  fences  of  all  that  range  of  dwelling-houses  were  then  of  wood, 
so  that  the  fire  was  also  making  its  fearful  approaches  in  the  rear. 
I  have  never  seen,  before  or  since,  any  similar  occasion  of  a  more 
appalling  character.  The  hasty  removal  of  household  furniture, 
much  of  it  being  thrown  from  the  windows,  which  were  broken  out 
for  the  purpose  ;  the  panic  of  the  occupants,  as  they  and  their 
children  were  obliged  to  fty,  some  at  a  notice  of  a  few  minutes ; 
the  crackling  of  the  flames,  the  intense  heat,  the  falling  of  the 
walls  of  one  dwelling-house  after  another,  as  the  fire  proceeded 
along  the  street ;  the  shouts  of  the  firemen  ;  the  mass  of  specta- 
tors filling  the  bottom  of  the  Common  and  the  rising  ground  in 
its  centre,  the  jets  of  flame  often  springing  over  a  space  of  several 
feet,  the  burning  fragments  borne  aloft  over  our  heads  to  remote 
parts  of  the  city ;  the  magnitude  of  the  danger  which  led  to  the 
covering  with  wet  blankets  of  houses  even  as  distant  as  Mr.  Otis's 
and  Mr.  Sears's,  —  formed  together  an  aggregate  of  sights  and 
sounds  which  can  never  be  forgotten. 

As  those  houses  which  at  first  were  not  thought  in  great  danger, 
one  after  another,  took  fire  and  were  consumed,  owners  who 
originally  decided  not  to  have  their  furniture  moved  were  at  last 
obliged  to  remove  it  so  hastily  that  much  was  ruined,  and  much 


"  GLEANER  "  ARTICLES.  179 

more  was  necessarily  left  behind.  In  some  instances  old  family 
portraits  and  inherited  articles  of  furniture,  rendered  invaluable  by 
the  associations  of  a  lifetime,  were  thus  reluctantly  surrendered. 
On  the  other  hand  a  tin-kitchen  was  saved,  and  its  viands  cooking 
for  dinner  were  protected  from  the  danger  of  being  overdone. 

Extensive  removals  were  made  from  several  houses,  which  were 
eventually  saved,  as  in  the  case  of  Mr.  William  Appleton's  and 
others.  The  Common  presented  a  curious  medley  of  miscellaneous 
articles,  the  shabbiest  household  utensils  side  by  side  with  ele- 
gant drawing-room  carpets  and  ornaments.  Bottles  of  wine  which 
had  not  seen  the  light  for  twenty  3^ears  were  suminaril}-  decapi- 
tated without  any  ceremonious  drawing  of  corks,  and  the  Juno  or 
Elipse  vintage  was  probably  never  quaffed  with  greater  relish  than 
when  it  refreshed  the  parched  throats  of  the  exhausted  firemen. 
Other  amateurs,  without  having  their  apology,  imitated  their 
example,  and  the  scene  assumed  rather  a  bacchanalian  character. 
One  gentleman,  desirous  of  withholding  further  fuel  from  this  con- 
flagration, locked  up  his  wine-cellar,  and  left  its  contents  to  be  at 
least  harmlessly  consumed.  • 

Seven  dwelling-houses  on  Beacon  street,  east  of  the  passage-way, 
were  burnt,  besides  the  entire  range  of  buildings  between  the 
passage-way  and  Charles  street.  The  fire  was  at  last  success- 
fully checked  at  the  house  of  the  late  Mr.  Eckley.  I  sup- 
pose that  it  always  happens  that  in  a  large  fire  somebody's  policy 
has  just  expired.  This  was,  I  believe,  the  case  with  the  late  Mr. 
Henry  G.  Rice.  To  many  besides  him  that  was  a  very  sad  and 
discouraging  day.  Mr.  Bryant  had  the  advantage  over  his  neigh- 
bors of  not  being  incommoded  b}-  any  furniture  or  family,  as  he 
had  not  yet  taken  possession.  It  is  satisfactoiy  to  reflect  that  all 
the  pecuniary  loss  then  sustained  has,  undoubtedly,  been  much 
more  than  made  good  by  the  greatly  enhanced  value  of  real  estate 
in  that  vicinity.  And,  independently  of  all  the  direct  and  per- 
petual advantages,  of  the  most  inestimable  character,  derived  by 
our  citizens  from  the  Boston  Common,  it  should  never  be  forgotten 
that  it  was  solely  owing  to  the  existence  of  this  open  space  on  this 
occasion  that  the  entire  southern  portion  of  our  city  was  not 
destroyed.  The  range  of  trees  at  the  foot  of  the  Beacon-street 
Mall  rendered  a  truly  important  service.  Suffering  the  flames  of 
martyrdom,  they  died  at  their  post  of  dut}r. 

A  burning  cinder  lodged  in  ni}'  eye,  causing  a  violent  inflamma- 
tion, and  bringing  to  an  abrupt  close  my  meditations  on  this 
striking  spectacle,  and  a  like  inflammation  of  the  same  organ  now 
brings  to  a  like  abrupt  close  the  speculations  of  GLEANER 


180  CITY  DOCUMENT  No.  105. 


EDITORIAL  NOTE. 


The  closing  lines  of  the  last  article  may  be  classed  among 
involuntary  prophecies ;  for  this  proved  to  be  the  real  close 
of  this  amusing  and  instructive  series  of  notes.  On  January 
4,  1856,  Mr.  Bowditch  had  printed  an  article  relating  to 
Benjamin  Joy,  and  especially  noticing  his  sale  of  land  to  the 
McLean  Asylum  in  Somerville.  Certain  expressions  therein 
called  forth  a  sharp  letter  from  Mr.  John  B.  Joy,  a  son  of 
the  gentleman  criticised.  Mr.  Bowditch  in  reply  disclaimed 
any  intention  to  reflect  upon  the  family,  and  was  again  assailed 
by  Mr.  Joy.  This  brought  forth  an  answer,  and  then  a  last 
retort  from  Mr.  Joy.  It  has  not  seemed  best  to  reprint  any 
part  of  this  controversy . 

Unfortunately  this  trivial  dispute  seems  to  have  entirely 
quenched  Mr.  Bowditch's  willingness  to  continue  his  work, 
and  the  articles  came  to  an  abrupt  conclusion.  It  will  always 
remain  a  source  of  regret  that  the  public  was  thus  deprived 
of  further  information  upon  our  local  antiquities  from  one  so 
competent  to  communicate  it.  w.  H.  w. 


INDEX 


Adams,  136. 
Adams  House,  19. 
A  dan,  108. 
"  Africanus,"  43. 
"Albion,  The,"  22,  70,  71. 
Alford,  92,  93,  119.  120. 

Allen,  21,  22,  23,  24,  34,  35,  37,  38,  39,  40,  41, 
43,  46,  71,  72,  74,  91,  111,  112, 132, 148, 149, 
150,152,  154,  160. 
Alley,  Cato,  127. 
Alley,  Hog,  19,  50. 
Alline,  15,  67,  166. 
Alms  House,  34,  35,  71,  93. 
America,  63,  65,  124, 156. 
Amory,  56,  71. 
Anchor  Tavern,  18. 
Andrews,  51. 
Andros,  7,  9,  10. 
Angier,  130. 

Appleton,  141,  142,  161,  168,  169,  170,179. 
Apthorp,  92,  93. 
Armitage,  52. 
Armstrong,  136. 
Arnold,  43. 
Ashon,  2,  151. 
Aspinwall,21. 
Athenaeum,  71,  123. 
Athenaeum,  Boston,  169. 
Atkinson,  19,  33,  42. 

Austin,  21,  34,  35,  47,  83, 113,  135,  170,  17T. 
Avenue,  Coolidge,  123. 
Hancock,  127. 
Mt.  Vernon,  127. 
Squirrel,  19. 
Western,  1,  53. 

( Ayer,  38. 
Ayre,  38. 

(  See  Eyre. 
Ayres,  38. 
Aylwin,  86. 

"  Back  Bay,"  136. 
Bagnall,  132. 
Baker,  14,  29. 
Baldwin,  116. 
Balston,  131. 
Bangs,  107. 

(  Banister,  2,  5,  149,  150,  152,  153,  154,  155. 
)  Bannister,  26,  27. 
Barbadoes,  106. 
Barnes,  80. 
Barnon,  68. 

"Barricade,  The,"  12,  13. 
Bartlett,  69,  74. 
Bartol,  176. 
Barton,  34. 

Barton  Point  Association,  34, 133. 
Barton's  Point,  1,  4,  34,  133,  151. 
Bastile,  91. 
Bayley,  66. 

Beacon-street  Mall,  178, 179. 
Beck,  21. 
Beebe,  51. 
Belcher,  44. 
Bell,  14. 

Bellingham,  61,  62,  66,  67,  68,  69,  70. 
Bellknap,  39,  42,  112. 


Bendall,  52,  61. 

Bennett,  26. 

Bentinck,  137. 

Bigelow,  84. 

Biggs,  21,  22,  23,  24,  37,  42. 

Blackstone,  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  23,  24,  50,  113, 148, 
149, 150,  151,  152,  156. 

Blackstone  lot,  2,  5,  26,  148,  149,  150,  151, 152. 
six  acre  lot,  2,  3,  24,  148,  150,  154. 
Neck,  5. 
Point,  1,  3,  4,  5. 

Blair,  33. 

Blake,  27,  50,  109,  175. 

Blanchard, 133. 

Blantaine,  14. 

Blanton, 15. 

Blaxton,  4. 

Blaxton's  Point,  4. 

Blighe,  117. 

Blott,  13,  14, 19. 

"  Blue  Anchor  Tavern,"  18. 

Boardman,  27. 

Bond,  133. 

Bonner,  5,  34, 112,  113. 

"  Book  of  Possessions  "  14,  20,  38,  41,  42,  52, 
61. 

Boot,  49,  172. 

Borland,  64. 

Boston,  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  8,  9,  10,  11,  15,  16, 
.  17,  21,  23,  26,  28,  29,  31,  32,  37,  38,  41,  43, 
44,  47,  48,  53,  58,  59,  60,  61,  62,  63,  64,  65, 
67,  68,  71,  73,  76,  79,  80,  90,  96,  100,  103, 
107,108,115,  117,  118,  124,  126,  127,  128, 
132, 133, 134,  142,  143,  147,  152,  153,  154, 
155,  156, 157,  159,  160,  164,  170,  173,  174, 
175,  176,  178. 

Boston  Courier,  3, 141. 
Library,  17. 
Records,  150. 
and  Roxbury  Mill  Co.,  37. 

Bosworth,  38,  42,  78,  111,  116,  119,  120, 129. 

Bowditch,  4,  9,  37,  42,  43.  48,  59,  62,  66,  115. 

Bowdoin,  45,  48,  51,  58,  66,  80,  81,  85,  86,  87, 
92,  93, 104,  110,  124,  157,  167. 

Bowen,  154. 

Bowers,  52,  53,  54,  56,  59,  74,  75,  81. 

Bowling  Green,  52-. 

Boyden,  58. 

Boynton,  114. 

Box,  113,  114. 

Bracket,  2,  151. 

Bradlee,  128. 

Brattle,  9,  37,  38,  129,  130,  149. 

Brattle-street  Parsonage  Estate,  83, 84,  85,  89, 
108,  135. 

"  Brazier  Building,"  15. 

Bridge,  West  Boston,  36. 

Bridgham,  67. 

Bridgman,  10,  142. 

Brimmer,  66. 

Brinley,  25. 

Broad-street  Association,  133. 

Bromfield,  81,  93. 

Brougham,  101. 

Brown,  24,  34,  35,  37,  39,  64,  65,  76,  100,  113, 
161. 

Brown  University,  176. 


182 


INDEX. 


Bryant,  163, 178,  179. 

Bulfinch,   17,  25,  49,  59,  80,  86,  121,  123,  162, 

165. 

Bullard,  26. 
Burnett,  112. 
Burrill,  43. 
Butolph,  38,  39. 

Buttolph,  21,  40,  41,  42,  111,  112. 
Byfield,  25. 

Cade,  34,  35. 
Csesar,  43. 
California,  136. 
Callender,  145. 
Cambridge,  2. 
Cambridgeport,  83, 135. 
Caner,  9. 
Carnes,  34,  35,  42. 
Gas  well,  35. 
Cato,  43. 

Chambers,  20,  21,  22. 
Channing,  165. 
Chapman,  154. 
Chardon,  154,  155. 
Charlestown,  1,  55,  92,  155. 
Chauncy,  131. 
Chelsea,  70. 
Church,  Baptist,  49. 

Brattle  St.,  88,  89. 

England  of,  8. 

Episcopal,  9. 

First,  14,  15,  16,  62,  66;  67,  70,  71. 

First  Episcopal,  7. 

Maverick,  34. 

Mt.  Vernon  Congregational,  51. 

New  Jerusalem,  87. 

Old  South,  167. 

Park  Street,  6. 

St.  Paul's,  13,  14. 

Trinity,  14. 

West,  176. 

City  Burial  Grounds,  10. 
Council  36,  57. 
Hall,  7,  8,  50. 
Jail,  23. 

Clark,  21,  26,  29,  44,  140. 
Clarke,  41,  42. 
Clough.  44. 
Cobb,  27. 
Cobhara,  37,  38. 
Cockburn,  64. 
Codman,  33,  175. 
Coffin,  71. 

Coggan,  11,  40,  62,  70,  141,  142,  143. 
Coggan's  Marsh,  70. 
Colbron,  6,  26,  151. 
Cole,  24,  37,  38,  39,  151. 
College,  Bowdoin,  86,  87,  124. 

Hazard,  18, 124. 

Medical,  23. 
Collins,  44. 
Colman,  59. 

Common,  2,  4,  5,  6,  13,  14,  18,  35,  36,  37,  50, 
60,  67,  68,  71,  72,  75,  79,  80,92,  93,  102, 
103,  112,  116,  117,  119,  120,  124,  127,  129, 
130,  131,  136,  147,  148,  149,  150,  151,  152, 
153,  154,  157,  178,  179. 
Commonwealth,  33,  87,  92, 100, 104,  109,  114, 

115,  117,  118,  127,  128,  136. 
Continental  Congress,  124. 
Cook,  26,  38,  39,  46,  79,  111,  112,  114,  120,  129, 

130. 

Cooke,  18,  41,  42,  78,  102. 
Coole,  39. 

Coolidge,  47,  48,  49,  75. 
Cooper,  62, 131. 

~  pley,  2,  5,  24,  26,  38,  65,  132,  148,  150,  155, 
'  156,  157,  158,  159,  160,  162,  163,  166,  169, 
173. 

Copley  Title,  147, 149, 166. 
Cornhill,  53. 

Corporation,  Aqueduct,  115. 
Corporation,  Boston  Mill,  29. 
Corwin,  30. 


Getting,  53. 

Cotton,  9,  52,  53.  56,  59,  60,  61,  62,  65,  66,  67, 

73,  74. 

Council,  His  Majesty's,  106. 
County,  Bristol,  74. 

Essex,  2,  43,  51. 
Southacks,  52. 
Suffolk,  23. 
Windham,  43. 
Court  — 

Common  Pleas,  120. 

End,  2. 

House,  7,  61. 

Inferior,  155. 

Inferior  Common  Pleas,  120, 155. 

Probate,  14,  40. 

Superior,  150,  155. 

Superior  of  Judicature,  150. 

Supreme,  84,  85,  87,  88,  89,  95,  96,  97, 

133,  134,  145. 
Court,  Bolt,  18. 
Court,  Cook's,  115. 
Court,  Williams,  16. 
Coventry,  164. 
Cradock,  25,  71. 
Crescent,  The,  17. 
Grose,  14. 

Crowninshield,  72,  75. 

Cunningham,  132,  153, 154,  155,  156,  159,  160. 
Curtis,  27,  57,  85,  109. 
Gushing,  97,  133,  136,  161, 169. 

Dall,  27. 

Danforth,  59. 

Daniels,  112, 113,  114. 

Dasset,  38. 

Dassett,  22,  38. 

Davenport,  9,  67,  73,  131. 

Davie,  39.  66,68,  69,71,  74. 

Davies,  21,  42,  69. 

Davis,  22,  27,  32,  33,  42,  44,  68,  70,  71,  73. 

Davy,  38,  68,  71,  113,  114,  117,  129. 

Dawes,  57. 

Deane,  129,  130. 

Deblois,  71. 

Dennis,  129. 

Derby,  164. 

Dexter,  37. 

«  Dinahs,"  43. 

Disbrow,  16. 

Dixon,  166. 

Doane,  69. 

Dodd,  101. 

Doe,  82. 

Donneson,  162. 

Door,  27. 

Dorchester,  176, 177. 

Drake,  1,2,3,  4,  6,  7,  9, 11, 12, 32, 33,  56,  57, 60. 

Drake's  flats,  57. 

Drake's  (History),  32. 

Dublin,  6. 

Dumer,  20. 

Dunton,  18. 

Dyer,  153. 

East,  38,  129,  130,  148, 149,  150,  152,  156. 

East  Boston,  34,  133. 

East  Indies,  175. 

East  lot,  152. 

Eaton,  78,  129. 

Ebenezer,  93. 

Eckley,  93,  179. 

Edes,  31. 

Egypt,  174. 

(  Eliot,  43,  44,  71,  72,  128,  151,  174. 

I  Elliots,  43. 

(  Elliotts,  43. 
Eltsham,  74,  120. 
Emmons,  18,  33. 
Endicott,  8,  58,  59,  62. 
England,  54,  61,  63,  64,  65,  67,  74,  76,  83,  96, 

101,  120,  121,  156. 

England,  New,  9,  18,  31, 136, 137,  168,  171. 
England,  Old,  61. 


INDEX. 


183 


Epes,  26. 

Episcopalians,  9. 

Erving,  35,  66,  71,  80,  85,  132. 

Essex  County,  2,  43,  151. 

Euclid,  89. 

Europe,  121. 

Everdd,  30. 

Eyre,  38.     See  Ayer,  Ayre. 

Exchange  Coffee  House,  167. 

Fairweather,  73,  78,  79. 

Falstaff,  96. 

Faneuil,  68,  69,  70. 

Farley,  35,  162. 

Farrington,  27. 

Fayerweather,  78,  80,  92,  93, 104. 

Felt,  105,  106. 

Fenno,  155. 

Field,  Gentry,  42. 

Field,  Century,  119. 

Field,  Training,  102,  116,  152, 153, 154. 

Field  Gate,  19. 

Fitch,  26,  27,  52. 

Folsom,  101. 

Forbes,  6. 

Foster,  6. 

Fowle,  80,  133. 

France,  121. 

Francis,  53,  55,  56,  57,  63,  66,  85,  88,  89. 

Freeman  Place  Chapel,  81. 

Frog  Pond,  46. 

Gain,  114. 

Garden,  Public,  6,  36. 

Gardiner,  149. 

Gardner,  35,  71,  72, 132. 

Gas  Company's  Works,  29. 

Gee,  29. 

Gerrish,  18,  93. 

Gibbs,  30.  44,  46,  130, 165. 

Glapion,  114. 

Goldthwait,  166,  167. 

Goodwin,  100. 

Gore,  27. 

Granary,  71. 

Granary  Burying  Ground,  53,  115,  142. 

Grant,  84,  95,  174. 

Gray,  33,  59, 133. 

Great  Britain,  65, 117, 128,  153, 157. 

Green,  81,  113,  114. 

Greene,  52,  56,  64,  65,  66,  67,  69,  74,  128, 156. 

Greenleaf,  95,  96. 

Guttridge,  42. 

Hackney,  74. 

Haley,  e2,  63,  64,  65,  66,  76,  166. 

Hammond,  35,  64,  75,  96,  97,  146,  162. 

Hancock,  9,  45,  59,  83,  87,  88,  94,  95,  99,  100, 
103,  104,  107,  108,  109,  110,  111,  114,  117, 
118,  120,  122,  123,  124,  125,  126,  127, 128, 
129,  149. 

Harris,  27,  59. 

Harrison,  32. 

Hnrrison's  ropewalk  or  ropefleld,  32, 

Harvard  College,  70,  74,  95, 107,  124, 169,  171, 

Hastings,  171. 
Haverhill,  105. 
Hawkins,  180,  149. 
Hayden,  82,  139. 
Hayti,  140. 
Head,  31,  35. 
Heaton,  78. 
Henchman,  108. 
Henderson,  44,  91. 113. 
Hesperides,  160. 
Heyman,  32. 
Higginson,  165. 
Hill,  Bacon,  118. 

Beacon,  2,  4,  5,  6,  46,  60,  61,  79,  92,  93, 
98,  102,  103,  104,  107,  108,  109,  111, 
112,  114,  115,  116, 117,  118,  119,  120, 
121,  123,  127. 

Bunker,  169. 


Hill,  Center,  78. 

Centerie,  61. 

Centery,  22,  24. 

Centinel,  78,  79. 

Centre,  79. 

Centurie,  78. 

Gentry,  38,  102, 116. 

Century,  73,  78,  117. 

Copps,  28,  73. 

Cotton,  61,  62,  63,  80. 

Fox,  36. 

Milton,  66. 

Pemberton's,  66. 

Ridge,  36. 

Sandy,  55. 

Sentry,  6. 

Valentine,  21. 
(  Hinckley,  80. 
I  Hinkley,  72. 
Hodges,  59. 
Holberton,  81. 
Hollich,  14,  16. 
Hollidge,  4. 
Hollinghead,  15. 
'Holworthy,  56. 
Holyoke,  43. 
Homer,  141,  143,  144. 
Hooper,  165. 
Hospital  Grounds,  23. 
Houchin,  44,  46,  78,  79. 
House  of  Hanover,  19. 

of  Orange,  19. 
Howard,  68, 176,  177. 
Howard  Athenaeum,  53,  59. 
Howe,  33. 
Howen,  58. 

Inches,  41,114,  161,165. 

India,  137. 

Inferior  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  120, 155. 

Inner  Temple,  74. 

Ireland,  6. 

Ireson,  97,  146. 

Island,  Baker's,  105. 

Castle,  94. 

Nodle's,  34. 

Noddle's,  70,  103. 
Italy,  121. 
Ivers,  93. 

Jackson,  29,  53,  55,  56,  67,  69,  70,  73,  74,  75, 

86,  126,  162,  168, 176. 
Jail,  City,  23. 
James,  80,  91. 

(  Jeffrey,  63,  64,  65,  66,  74,  76,  77. 
\  Jeffry,  62. 
Jeffries,  26,  64,  71,  76. 
Jekyll,  59,  69. 
Jenner,  42. 

Jenner's  rope- walk,  47. 
Johnson,  1,  4,  8,  10,  42,  101,  129. 
Jones,  21,  83. 
Joy,  2,  15,  25,  132, 135,  136,  140,  141,  143,  145, 

146,  147,  157,  158,  160,  161,  162,  1<53,  165, 

180. 
Joy's  Building,  15. 

Kane,  90. 

Keadie,  177. 

Kelt,  32. 

Kennedy,  77. 

Kenney,  25. 

Kent,  83,  84. 

King's  Chapel,  7,  9,  13,  52,  54, 142. 

King's  Chapel  Burying-ground,  10,  30,  73, 

142. 

Kirk,  51,  52. 
Knight,  112,  119. 
Kuhn,  115. 

Lake,  117. 
Lambert,  44. 
Lane,  Banister's,  13, 155. 
Blott's,  13. 


184 


INDEX. 


Lane,  Davis,  113. 

Frog,  18,  44. 

Q-reen,  20. 

Prison,  61,  68,  71,  73. 

Pudding,  18. 

Ridgway's,  47. 

Sconce, 11. 

Shrimpton,  103. 

Star  Seven,  14. 

Sudbury,  58. 

Willis,  13. 
Langdon,  153. 

Lawrence,  54,  69,  74,  75,  176,  177. 
Lebanon,  43. 
Leblond,  66. 
Lee,  29,  166,  168. 
Leverett,  13,  14,  22,  23,  25,  34,  38,  43,  78,  151, 

152,  154,  160. 
Lewis,  4. 
Lidgett,  18. 
Lincoln,  167. 
Lincolnshire,  61. 
Little,  Brown  &  Co.,  18. 
Lloyd,  54,  59,  69,  75. 
London,  18,  62,  65,  74,  76,  80,  86,  100,  119, 

]20,  121,  124. 
Longfellow,  169. 
Loring,  109,  146. 
Loudoun,  64. 
Louxor,  173. 

Lowell,  7, 17,  64, 75, 101, 168, 171, 172, 173, 174. 
Lowell  Institute,  173. 
( Loyal,  42. 
!  Loyall,  42. 

Lioll,  42. 
!  Lisle,  42. 
\  Lloyle,  42. 
I  Lyall,  42. 
I  Lyle,  42. 
ILysle,  42. 
Lucas,  31. 
Lucee,  132. 
Lyde,  25,  58. 
Lyman,  49,  59, 128. 
Lynd,  44. 

Lynde,  19,  49,  52,  58,  62,  80. 
Lyndhurst,  65,  157. 
Lyne,  78. 
Lytherland,  3. 

Mackintosh,  101, 169. 
Mahan,  138,  140. 
Maine,  159. 
Mariner,  52. 
(  Marion,  15. 

Maryon,  141. 
Marlboro',  19. 
Marsh,  Rumney,  103. 
Mason,  25,  37,  55,  64,  82,  114,  146,  155,  156, 

157,  158,  160,  162,  165,  166,  168,  174,  175, 

176,177. 

Massachusetts.  65,  85,  88,  90,  114,  124,  125. 
Massachusetts  General  Hospital,  107, 164. 
Mass.  Hospital  Life  Insurance  Co.,  174. 
Mather,  6,  9,  61. 
Maud,  61,  62,  66,  67. 
Maverick,  34. 
May,  27,  28,  31. 
Mayer,  68. 
McNeill,  33. 
Mears,52,  53,  58,  59. 
Melvin,  172. 

Messenger,  7, 107,  113,  114,  120. 
Metcalf,  26. 

Middlecott,  44,  45,  46,  49,  77,  80,  93. 
Middlesex,  21. 
Middlesex  Company,  172. 
Middleton,  114. 
Mildam,  1,  35,  53,  148,  162. 
Millard,  78,  79, 112,  116, 117, 119,  129. 
Miller,  39,  112,  129, 130. 
Millett,  133. 
Mill  Pond,  133. 
Milner,  32. 


(  Minot,  22,  27,  38,  46,  47. 

}  Mynot,  22. 

(  Mynott,  21,  22. 
Missouri  Compromise,  168. 
Molineaux,  92. 

(  Monck,  18. 

|  Monk,  93,  102. 
Montague,  112. 
Moore,  146,  159,  161. 
Morgan,  146. 
Mors,  119. 
Morton,  53. 
Mount  Hoardam,  153, 
Mount  Pleasant,  152,  153. 
Mt.  Tom,  56,  60. 
Mt.  Vernon  Lands,  175. 

Mt.  Vernon  Proprietors,  2,  4,  5,  25,  26,  34, 
39,  109,  113,  114,  131,  146,  149,  152,  162, 
163,  164,  169,  170,  175,  176. 
Mt.  Washington,  56,  60. 
Muddy  River,  61. 
Munroe,  31. 
Murray,  160. 
Myles,  71. 
Mynot,  22. 
Mynott,  21,  22. 


See  Minot. 


Nabby,  136. 

Nahant,  55,  138. 

Napoleon,  173. 

Neck,  the,  19,  26,  27,  28,  50,  125,  126,  132, 

133,  135. 

New  England,  9,  18,  31,  136,  137,  168,  171. 
Newgale,  49,  58. 
Newgate,  or  Newdigate,  58. 
Newhall,  97,  146. 
Newport,  155. 
Newton,  176. 
New  York,  65,  160,  176. 
Norfolk,  77. 
North  Briton,  64. 
North  End,  31. 

Odlin,  3,  5,  151. 

Okey,  176. 

Oliver,  18,  38,  120, 150,  160. 

Osborn,  165. 

Osgood,  55. 

Otis,  25,  29,  41,  75,  114,  147,   155,   156,   157, 

158,  159,  160,  162,  163,  164,  165,  170,  171, 

175,  178. 
Oxenbridge,  9,  70,  73. 

Paddock, 115. 
Paige,  18,  62. 
(  Paine,  26,  80,  155. 
I  Payne,  26. 
Palmes,  21. 
Paris,  121, 166,  175. 
Parker,  27,  33,  99,  129,  169,  170,  174. 
Parkman,  49,  86,  128,  144,  174. 
Parson,  38, 56. 
Pasture,  Allen's,  41,  113,  149,  161. 

Allen's  16^  acre,  131. 

Bosworth  5  acre,  111. 

Bulfinch,  49,  50,  51,  52,  53,  62,  64,  66, 
78,  80,  86. 

Buttolph's,  21,  43,  46,  47,  112. 

Buttolph's  8^  acre,  41,  42,  43. 

Chambers,  20,  22,  23,  42,  43. 

Cooke's,  113,  161. 

Cook's,  113,  114. 

Cook's  8£  acre,  119. 

Davis  2  acre,  73. 

East's,  148, 150,  152,  154. 

Hancock's,  118,  119. 

Lynde,  78. 

Middlecott,  49,  77,  78,  79,  86. 

Phillips,  38,  148,  152. 

Phillips,  Zachariah,  26,  37,  38,  39, 
40,  151,  158,  162. 

Phillips,  Zachariah,  nine  acre,  24. 

Russell's,  43. 


INDEX. 


185 


Pasture,  Scottow's,  44, 112. 

Scottow's  four  acre,  111. 

Sewall's,  132. 

Sewall's  Elm,  129,  147, 148, 149,  156, 

163. 

Sewell's  Elm,  131. 
Southack's,  53,  56,  58,  59. 
Southack's  two  acre,  62. 
Paque,  35. 
Pavilion  Hotel,  71. 
Paxton,  93. 
Peabody,  54,  72. 
Peapes,  151. 
Pearl-street  House,  49. 
Pell,  78. 

Pemberton,  25,  26.  59,  67. 
Penn,  21,  22,  23,  38,  70,  71,  73. 
Pennsylvania,  90. 
Pepis,  2. 

Pepperell,  45,  131. 
Perkins,  95,  109,  118, 146. 
Pepys,  2,  5,  150, 151. 
Peyps,  2. 

Philadelphia,  31,  82. 
Philip,  6. 
Phillips,  24,  25,  26,  37,  42,  67,  68,  69,  71,  81,  86, 

104,  148,  151,  162,  166,  167,  168. 
Pickering,  82,  83,  96,  133,  135,  166. 
Pickman,  165. 
Pierce,  31, 125. 
Pitts,  18. 
Place,  Ashburton,  35,  51,  53,  60,  66,  74,  87. 

Bellingbam,  67. 

Bowdoin,  98. 

Bulfinch,  49. 

Chapman,  115. 

Chauncy,  14,  15. 

Cotton,  67. 

Exchange,  48. 

Faneuil,  67. 

Franklin,  17,  122. 

Funnell,  67. 

Joy,  146. 

Liicas,  31. 

Montgomery,  177. 

Mt.  Vernon,  126,  127,  128. 

Otis,  45. 

Phillips,  67. 

Somerset,  49. 

Training,  79. 

Winthrop,  45,  133. 
Pollard,  2,  50,  80,  151. 
Pompey,  43. 
Pordage,  58. 
Portage,  58. 
Portugal,  166. 
Powell,  146. 
Pratt,  49, 165. 
Preble,  15. 
Prentice,  57. 
Prescott,  165. 
Price,  5. 
Prince,  28. 
Prior,  105. 

Providence  Depot,  35,  37. 
Probate  Office,  29, 155,  172. 
Probate  Record,  27,  38,  72,  112,  114,  119. 
Putnam,  82,  171. 
Puzzlem,  106,  107. 

Queensbury,  111. 

Quincy,  35,  41,  69,  70,  98, 155,  169. 

Railroad,  Metropolitan,  46. 

Rand,  44,  75. 

Reed,  68. 

Registry  of  Deeds,  47,  65. 

Revere  House,  49,  50,  51. 

Rice,  179. 

Richards, 74,  116, 119. 

Richardson,  33. 

Richmond,  177. 

Ridgway,  47. 

River,  Charles,  1,  2, 152, 154, 160. 


River,  North,  160. 

Robbins,  70. 

Roe,  83. 

Rogers,  80,  86,  92,  93, 98,  99,  102, 104, 117, 146, 

157. 

Rome,  86,  121, 126. 
Romilly,  101. 
Ropes,  53. 
Round  Marsh,  6. 
Row,  Colonnade,  6,  132,  176. 
Row,  Tremont,  19. 
Rowe,  11. 

Roxbury,  18,  26,  152. 
Ruggles,  129. 
Rumney  Marsh,  103. 
Runnell,  35. 
Russell,  21,  52,  66,  143. 
Rust,  29. 

Salem,  8;  20,  31,  32,  72,  100,  105,  106,  165. 
Salmon,  55. 

Saltonstall,  105,  114,  134. 
Sanderson,  15,  67. 
Sanford,  130. 
Sargent,  34,  66, 177. 
Saunders,  31,  32,  50,  51. 
Savage,  9,  26,  27,  42,  61,  62,  130. 
Savage's  (Winthrop),  5. 
Sawyer,  148,  166. 
Scipio,  43. 
Scollay,  17. 
Sconce,  11. 

Scotch,  Presbyterian,  87. 
Scotch,  Reviewer,  66,  76. 
Scott,  70,  71,  82,  126. 
(  Scotto,  7,  8,  66,  70,  78. 
|  Scottow,  44,  46,  47,  68,  78,  79,  107,  111,  112, 

116,  129. 
Sears,  72,  81,  104,  142, 147,  161,  163,  164,  169, 

170,  174,  178. 
Sebastopol,  108. 
Seven  Star  Inn,  14. 

Sewall,  4,  8,  10,  20,  29,  39,  52,  53,  59,  62,  64, 
66,  80,  84,  120,  130,  131,  146, 148,  149,  150, 
154,  156,  160. 
Shakespeare,  134. 
Shattuck,  49. 

Shaw,  2,  50,  97,  136,  137,  140. 
Shaw  &Co.'s  Express,  94. 
Shawmutt,  1. 
Shay,  87. 
Sheafe,  29,  30. 
Shelton,  62. 
Sherburne,  74,  81. 
Sherman,  129. 
Shippen,  52,  62. 
Shrimpton,  70,  93, 102,  103,  112,  116,  117,  119, 

120. 

Shurtleffs  (Description  of  Boston),  5. 
Sigma,  66,  76,  77,  105,  106,  107,  177. 
Simpkins,  107. 
Smith,  31,  79,  101. 
Snow,  2. 
Society,  Brattle  St.,  59,  87. 

Episcopalians,  9. 

Historical,  10,  68. 

Mass.  Historical,  10,  17,  20. 

Old  South,  9, 13. 

Prince,  18. 

Propagating  Gospel,  107. 
Somerset,  52. 
Somerset  Club,  72. 
Southac,  59. 
Southack,  52,  56,  61. 
South  Battery,  11. 
South  Boston  Point,  136. 
South  Cove  lots,  135. 
South  End,  31. 
Sparhawk,  26. 
Spear,  108,  109,  110. 
Spooner,  86,  92,  93. 
Spring  House,  58. 
Spurr,  108. 
Square,  Bowdoin,  20,  22,  49,  50,  59,  110. 


186 


INDEX. 


Square,  Brattle,  84. 
Cornhill,  15. 
Dock,  19. 
Hanover,  157. 
Johnson,  18. 

Louisburg,  25,  148,  149,  162. 
Pemberton,   24,   45,   52,   53,   55,  56, 
59,  60,  66,  67, 68,  69,  70,  74,  75, 
135. 

Pepper,  45. 
Pepperell,  45. 
St.  Botolph's,  67. 
Winthrop,  45. 
Staniford,  19,  20,  21,  59. 

State  House,  77,  78,  92,  93, 102,  103,  104,  107, 
110,  113,  115,  116,  117,  118,  119, 120,  121, 
122,  123,  127,  128,  129,  156, 161. 
Stevens,  50. 
St.  Christophers,  169. 
St.  Helena,  108. 
Stoddard, 103, 117. 
Stone,  76. 
Storer,  43. 
Story,  145,  174. 
Stoughton,  82. 
Street,  Allen,  21,  23,  S3. 
Allen  North,  23. 
Allen  South,  23. 
Allston,  49,  54,  86. 
Ann,  31. 
Atkinson,  32,  33. 
Bacon,  92. 

Beacon,  2,  4,  22,  24,  36,  37,  38,  45,  49, 
64,  67,  70,  71,  72,  74,  75,  77,  78,  79, 
80,  81,  86,  87,  92,  99,  109,  110,  112, 
118,  119,  120,  127,  130,  131,  132, 
136,  140,  143,  147,  148,  151,   152, 
154,   158,  160,  161,  163,  164,  166, 
169,  170,  173,  178,   179. 
Batterymarch,  11. 
Beckford,  105. 

Belknap,  39,  42,  43,  78,  107,  112,  113, 
114,  119,  127, 128,129, 131,136,158, 
161,  162. 

Bishop  Stoke,  129, 131, 143. 
Blossom,  23. 
Bow,  101. 

Bowdoin,  45,  48,  49,  78,  86,  93,  98. 
Boylston,6, 18,36. 
Brattle,  85. 
Bridge,  23. 
Broad,  11,  19,  53,  133. 
Bromfield,  177. 
Bulfinch,  49,  58,  60. 
Butolph,  43. 
Buttolph.  40,  42,  43. 
Cambridge,  19,  20,  21,  22,  23,  24,  25, 
27,  34,  35,  37,  38,  39,  40,  42,  44,  46, 
47,  49,  50,  69,  77,  80,  93,  111,  112, 
114,  162. 

Castle,  26,  27,  50. 
•   Cedar,  West,  25. 
Central,  133. 
Centre,  40,  41, 148. 
Chambers,  19,  20,  21,  23,  35,  59. 
Charles,  2,  4,  6,  24,  26,  35,  36,  37,  148, 

162, 163,  178,  179. 
Charter,  20,  28,  29,  100. 
Chestnut,  148,  162,  163,  164, 176,  178. 
Clapboard,  114. 
Common,  19, 131. 
Common,  The,  7. 
Commercial,  11,  12. 
Congress,  19. 
Cornhill,  18,  53. 
Court,  7,  8,  19,  52,  58,  60.  61,  68,  107, 

125. 

Court,  or  Bowling  Green,  52. 
Coventry,  129,  131,  149,  164. 
Derne,   46,  47,  93,  102,  109,  110,  116, 

117,  123. 
Devonshire,  18. 
Dover,  27,  28,  31. 
Eaton,  21. 


Street,  Edinboro',  135. 

Eliot,  36,  43,  44,  45. 

Elliot,  43,  45. 

Essex,  105. 

Exchange,  103. 

Fleet,  11. 

Friend,  23. 

Garden,  40. 

Gardner,  45. 

George,  43, 112, 157, 158. 

Gravel,  23. 

Green,  19,  22,  23. 

Grove,  24,  40. 

Grove,  North,  23. 

Hancock,  42,  43,  46,  47,  77,  78,  79,  102, 

104,  110,  111,  112,  113,  114,  115, 

128. 

High,  32,  33. 
Hill,  25. 
Hollis,  44. 
Holyoke,  44. 
Hutchinson,  33. 
Houchin,  45. 

Howard,  52,  53,  56,  58,  59,  74,  87. 
Hull,  20,  29,  30. 
India,  133. 
Joy,  43,  119,  120,  129,  130,  132,  136, 

141,  146. 
Kilby,  114. 
King,  18,  19,  61. 
Leverett,  1,  22,  23,  34,  156. 
Lewis,  31. 

Lindall,  or  Lane,  48. 
Lynde,  20. 
Market  North,  132. 
South,  132. 
Marlboro',  19. 
Mason,  6, 

May,  24,  25,  40,  41,  163. 
McLean,  23. 

Middlecott.  44,  45,  48,  86,  93. 
Milk,  33. 
Mt.  Vernon,  25,  45, 92,  98,  99, 102, 109, 

112,  113,  114,  118,  119,  126,  128, 

131,  132,  145,   146,  147,  148,  161, 

162,  164,  165,  170. 
Mylne,  14, 15. 

Myrtle,  35,  39,  40,  42,  112, 114. 
Nassau,  19. 
Newbury,  19, 
North,  19. 
Olive,  114,  157, 164. 
Orange,  19,  27,  44. 
Park,  71,  98,  132,  178. 
Pearl,  33,  35,  36,  47, 
Pinckney,  23,  25,  26,  34,  85,  47,  114, 

148,  149,  161,  162,  165. 
Pinkney,  113. 
Pleasant,  6,  36. 
Pond,  130. 
Poplar,  1,  23,  35,  47. 
Prince,  29,  30. 
Purchase,  32,  35,  37. 
Queen,  19,  61. 
Russell,  21. 

North,  38. 
South,  42. 
Salem,  20,  30. 
School,  7,  8,  115. 
Sea,  57. 
Sentry,  6. 

Sewall,  129,  143, 146,  149, 163. 
Short,  25. 

Snowhill,  20,  28,  29,  30. 
Somerset,  52,  53,  54,  55,  56,  58,  60,  64, 

69,  71,  74,  75,  77,  80,  120,  141. 
Southack,  25,  40. 
Spruce,  148. 
Staniford,  20, 

State,  13,  15,  18,  19,  31,  98,  114. 
Stoddard,  58. 
Sudbury,  52,  61. 
Summer,  14,  15,  32. 
Sumner,  114. 


INDEX. 


187 


Street,  Tay,  48, 110. 

Temple,  46,  47,  48,  99, 109,  110,  128. 

Treamount,  59. 

Tremont.  6,  7,  8,  13,  14,  19,  22,  43,  52, 
56,  58,  59,  60,  68,  70,  71,  125. 

Turner,  112,  114. 

Vine,  23. 

Walnut,  131,  132,  140,  143,  144,  145, 
147,  148,  161,  162,  163,  164, 166. 

Washington,  6,  8,  13,  16,  18,  19,  26, 
27,  31,  107, 139. 

Wiltshire,  23. 

Winter,  13, 19,  155. 
Strong,  100. 
Stuart,  156. 
Sturgis,  71. 
Sudbury,  31. 

Sullivan,  7,  160,  162,  176,  177. 
Sumner,  54,  104,  168. 
Swan,  148,  162,  165, 175, 176,  177. 
Swett,  35,  38,  42, 162. 
Swift,  117. 

Tappan,  18,  146. 

Tay,  46,  47,  48. 

Taylor,  44. 

Temple,  48,  86,  110. 

Ten  Hills  Farm,  48. 

Thacher,  71,  72,73. 

Thatcher,  29,  30. 

Thaxter,  42. 

Thayer,  148,  164. 

Thebes,  173. 

Thompson,  72,  74,  77,  107, 112,  119,  120. 

Thorndike,  136,  146. 

Thurston,  98,  99, 100,  145. 

Ticknor,  93. 

Tilley,  25,  33, 162. 

Todd,  134. 

Tomlinson,  93. 

Torrey,  31. 

Townsend,  71,  72. 

Transcript,  3,  9,  60,  66, 105. 

Trecothick,  93. 

Tremont  House,  6. 

Tremont  Row,  53,  55,  58,  59,  61,  66,  67,  68,  69, 

70,  72,  87. 

Truesdale,  116,  129. 
Tuckerman,  31, 141. 
Tudor,  81,  136,  137. 
Turell,  29. 
Turner,  21,  44,  46,  75,  77,  78,  79,  80,  92,  93, 

102, 103, 104,  105,  106,  107,  112, 116, 117. 
Tyler,  35.  96,  97,  146. 
Tyler  &  Caswell's  ropewalk,  35. 
Tyng,  56,  59. 

United  States  Navy,  77. 
Urann,  40,  41. 
Usher,  66. 

Valley  Achor,  59. 

Acre,  5fl,  60. 
Vane,  61,  68. 
Vassal,  62. 

Vassall,  59,  64,  69,  74. 
Vaughan,  17. 
Vermont,  76. 
Viall,  2, 151. 


Vinal,  136,  160,  161, 169. 
Virginia,  77. 

Wadsworth,130. 

Wait,  14,  15. 

Waite,  14. 

Walcott,  66. 

Waldo,  47,  66. 

Walewski,  168. 

Walker,  3,  6. 

Wall,  52. 

Warren,  174. 

Washington,  125,  126,  145. 

Watertown,  58,  80. 

Wayland,  176. 

Webb,  3«. 

Webster,  31,  53,  55,  86, 144, 174. 

Welles,  176. 

Wells,  35. 

Wendell,  11. 

Western  Avenue,  1 . 

West  Roxbury,  136. 

Whall,  100, 

Wharf  A's,  82. 

Brown's,  29. 

Capen,  57. 

Captain  Scarlet's,  11. 

Central,  11, 12,  53. 

Drake's,  57,  94. 

Fosters,  11. 

Hancock's,  136. 

India,  11, 17,  53. 

Island  South,  12. 

Long,  11, 12,  134. 

Old, 11. 

Prentice,  32. 

Rowes,  11. 
-  Russia,  32. 

T,  12. 

Wharton,  46,  93. 
Wheaton,  47. 
Wheelright,  131. 
Wheelwright,  34, 139,  114, 132,  148,  149,  157, 

161, 162. 

Wheetland,  106. 
Whetcomb,  130. 
Whetcombe,  130. 
White,  31. 
Wiggin,  80. 
Wigejlesworth,  166. 
Wilde,  96. 
Wilkes,  62,  64,  65. 
Willes,  82. 
Williams,  2,  5,  24  ,27,  28,  38,  112,   132,   149, 

150,  151,  152,  177. 
Williamson,  90. 
Willis,  43. 
Wilson,  1,  42,  129. 
Windsor,  76. 
Wing,  66,  71,  73,  74, 119. 
Winthrop,  3,  5,  8,  35,  42,  48,  66,  86,  124,  166, 

167,  168. 
Wiswall,  18. 
Witherle,  27. 
Woodward,  158. 
Wyard,  14. 
Wyre,  14. 

Yeale,  52, 

Yeamans,  103, 104, 107, 112, 113, 117.