The Bay State Monthly. Volume 1, No. 6, June, 1884. Various
of Jacob Houghton and others, of the North-easterly part of the Town of Lancaster, praying the like. As also a Petition of sundry of the Inhabitants of the South-west part of the North-east Quarter of the Township of Lancaster, praying they may be continued as they are. Pass'd in Council, viz. In Council, June 21, 1731. Read, and Ordered, That this Report be accepted.
Sent down for Concurrence. Read and Concurred.
[Journal of the House of Representatives (page 52), June 22, 1731.]
The original copy of the petition for Harvard is now probably lost; but in the first volume (page 53) of "Ancient Plans Grants &c." among the Massachusetts Archives, is a rough plan of the town, with a list of the petitioners, which may be the "Schedule" referred to in the extract from the printed Journal. It appears from this document that, in forming the new town, forty-eight hundred and thirty acres of land were taken from the territory of Groton; and with the tract were nine families, including six by the name of Farnsworth. This section comprised the district known, even now, as "the old mill," where Jonas Prescott had, as early as the year 1667, a gristmill. The heads of these families were Jonathan Farnsworth, Eleazer Robbins, Simon Stone, Jr., Jonathan Farnsworth, Jr., Jeremiah Farnsworth, Eleazer Davis, Ephram Farnsworth, Reuben Farnsworth, and [torn] Fransworth, who had petitioned the General Court to be set off from Groton. On this plan of Harvard the names of John Burk, John Burk, Jr., and John Davis, appear in opposition to Houghton's petition.
The town of Harvard took its name from the founder of Harvard College, probably at the suggestion of Jonathan Belcher, who was governor of the province at the time and a graduate of the college.
To his Excellency Jonathan Belcher Esqr. Capt General and Governour in Chief The Honble. The Council and the Honourable House of Representatives of His Majestys Province of the Massachusetts Bay in New England in General Court Assembled by Adjournment Decembr 16 1730
The Memorial of Jonas Houghton Simon Stone Jonathan Whitney and Thomas Wheeler Humbly Sheweth
That upon their Petition to this Great and Honourable Court in October last [the 9th] praying that a Certain Tract of Land belonging to Lancaster Stow and Groton with the Inhabitants thereon may be Erected into a Distinct and Seperate Township (and for Reasons therein Assigned) your Excellency and Honours were pleased to Order that the petitioners Serve The Towns of Lancaster Groton and Stow with a Copy of their said Petition that they may shew Cause if any they have on the first Thursday of the next Sessions why the prayers thereof may not be granted.
And for as much as this great and Honble. Court now Sitts by Adjournment and the next Session may be very Remote And your Memorialists have attended the Order of this Honble: Court in serving the said Several Towns with Copys of the said Petition And the partys are attending and Desirous the hearing thereon may be brought forward ye former order of this Honl Court notwithstanding.
They therefore most humbly pray your Excellency & Honours would be pleased to Cause the hearing to be had this present Session and that a Certain day may be assigned for the same as your Excellency & Honours in your great wisdom & Justice shall see meet.
And your Memorialists as in Duty bound Shall Ever pray.
JONAS HOUGHTON
SIMON STOON JUNER
JONATHAN WHITNEY
THOMAS WHELER
In the House of Reptives Decr 17, 1730 Read and in Answer to this Petition Ordered That the Petrs give Notice to the Towns of Lancaster Groton and Stow or their Agents that they give in their Answer on the twenty ninth Instt. why the Prayer of the Petition within referred to may not be granted.
Sent up for Concurrence
J QUINCY Spkr:
In Council Dec. 18, 1730; Read and Concur'd.
J WILLARD Secry
[Massachusetts Archives, cxiv, 6-8.]
The next dismemberment of the Groton grant took place in the winter of 1738-39, when a parcel of land was set off to Littleton. I do not find a copy of the petition for this change, but from Mr. Sartell's communication it seems to have received the qualified assent of the town.
To his Excellency Jonathan Belcher Esqr Captain General & Governour in Chief &c the Honorable Council and House of Representatives in General Court assembled at Boston January 1, 1738.
May it please your Excellency and the Honorable Court.
Whereas there is Petition offered to your Excellency and the Honorable Court by several of the Inhabitants of the Town of Groton praying to be annexed to the Town of Littleton &c.
The Subscriber as Representative of said Town of Groton and in Behalf of said Town doth hereby manifest the Willingness of the Inhabitants of Groton in general that the Petitioners should be annexed to the said Town of Littleton with the Lands that belong to them Lying within the Line Petitioned for, but there being a Considerable Quantity of Proprietors Lands and other particular persons Lying within the Line that is Petitioned for by the said Petitioners. The Subscriber in Behalf of said Town of Groton & the Proprietors and others would humbly pray your Excellency and the Honorable Court that that part of their Petition may be rejected if in your Wisdom you shall think it proper and that they be sett off with the lands only that belong to them Lying within the Line Petitioned for as aforesaid, and the Subscriber in Behalf of the Town of Groton &c will as in Duty Bound ever pray &c.
NATHANIEL SARTELL
[Massachusetts Archives, cxiv, 300.]
John Jeffries, Esq; brought down the Petition of Peter Lawrence and others of Groton, praying to be annexed to Littleton, as entred the 12th ult. Pass'd in Council, viz. In Council January 4th, 1738. Read again, together with the Answer of Nathanael Sartell, Esq; Representative for the Town of Groton, which being considered, Ordered, That the Prayer of the Petition be so far granted as that the Petitioners with their Families & Estates within the Bounds mentioned in the Petition be and hereby are set off from the Town of Groton, and are annexed to and accounted as part of the Town of Littleton, there to do Duty and receive Priviledge accordingly.
Sent down for Concurrence. Read and concur'd.
[Journal of the House of Representatives (page 86), January 4, 1738.]
In the autumn of 1738, many of the settlers living in the northerly part of Groton, now within the limits of Pepperell, and in the westerly part of Dunstable, now Hollis, New Hampshire, were desirous to be set off in a new township. Their petition for this object was also signed by a considerable number of non-resident proprietors, and duly presented to the General Court. The reasons given by them for the change are found in the following documents:—
To His Excellency Jona. Belcher Esqr. Captain General and Governour in Chief &c The Honble. the Council and House of Reptives in General Court Assembled at Boston November the 29th 1738
The Petition of the Subscribers Inhabitants and Proprietors of the Towns of Dunstable and Groton.
Humbly Sheweth
That your Petitioners are Situated on the Westerly side Dunstable Township and the Northerly side Groton Township those in the Township of Dunstable in General their houses are nine or ten miles from Dunstable Meeting house and those in the Township of Groton none but what lives at least on or near Six miles from Groton Meeting house by which means your petitioners are deprived of the benefit of preaching, the greatest part of the year, nor is it possible at any season of the year for their familys in General to get to Meeting under which Disadvantages your petrs has this Several years Laboured, excepting the Winter Seasons for this two winters past, which they have at their Own Cost and Charge hired preaching amongst themselves which Disadvantages has very much prevented peoples Settling land there.
That there is a Tract of good land well Situated for a Township of the Contents of about Six miles and an half Square bounded thus, beginning