Back to previous section -- Forward to next chapter -- Return to Table of Contents

OWNERSHIP OF THE COW-COMMONS

Near the beginning of the following year, a measure of great importance to the inhabitants was consummated, the design of which was to settle for all future time the question of ownership of a large tract of ungranted lands, known as the COW COMMONS, and to determine severally the shares of the proprietors. This measure was not adopted hastily, as it had been under consideration more than two years, but had constantly met with strenuous opposition. There were in the town, as has already been stated, two parties, that on various subjects were very far from harmonizing, either in their opinions or their practices. Great bitterness of feeling prevailed, originating, indeed, from different sources, but fomented and cherished, to a considerable extent, by a single individual; a person of acknowledged ability, shrewd, calculating, of indomitable energy,- but, in the estimation of many, an unprincipled demagogue; one who knew the law well, as his friends claimed,-for he had both friends and followers;-but who, in the estimation of his opponents, was so fond of litigation, and so constant in his attendance upon the courts, as a party litigant, a witness, or an agent, that, in their quaint language, he was said to be "more meeter to follow the courts than to follow his work."

At length the vexed question relative to these commons came fully and fairly before the town at a meeting holden expressly for this purpose, February 23, and warned ten days beforehand. After mature deliberation, a majority of the voters present decided upon, and adopted a plan, which they hoped would be satisfactory and final. But agitation was not yet at an end. Just before the time of the meeting, Edward Colcord,-the person so notorious for stirring up strife,-went out of town, and was absent till after the meeting. On his return, "he found himself greaued at the Towns act that passed, becase he was not in the first place considered, and [he] gayned many to side with him, whose speaker he was."

Those opposed to the measure had recourse to the General Court for redress. At the May session, a petition was presented, signed by John Moulton and Edward Colcord, setting forth that great injustice had been done in the division of the commons, inasmuch as some persons with seven children, and paying forty or fifty shillings to a rate, had not so many beasts-lease as others with but two children, and paying not ten shillings to a public rate; and they asked for the appointment of "indifferent gentlemen of o^r neighboring townes to heere our sayd greauances and obserue any answer that may be made hereunto."

Against this petition, a remonstrance was presented, signed by William Howard in behalf of the town, in which he makes use of this language: "Our deferances have been so long and tedious, as that they euen make our spirits to droop under them." After stating the action of the town, and the course pursued by Colcord, he concludes as follows:

"Our humble request is that this honored Court would please to appoint the hearing and determination of the matter to any court in a juditiall waye,-except onely the Court of Paschataqua,- or to our honored magistratts whom we haue chosen as our Judges in these or the like casses, unto whom I trust we shall willingly submit and rest foreuer obliged to the honored Court for their fauer herein."

The action of the Court appears from the record: M^r Samu: Dudly, M^r Edw^d Rawson, M^r W^m Paine and M^r Carleton are appointed to search and examine all differences at Hampton, & make returne of what they shall do or find in y^e p^rmises to y^e next siting of this C^rte, & [they] haue hereby pow^r on oath to examine witnesses."

The report of this committee has not been found, but the arrangement made by the town, relative to the commons, was never set aside by the Court. It was afterwards slightly modified by the town, so far as related to the land on the south side of Taylor's river, for the purpose of allowing a due share of commonage to the five farms, all of which lay in that part of the town.

The record of the vote assigning to individuals their respective rights in the cow commons, is as follows:

"The 23 : 12 mo, 1645." [ i.e., Feb. 23, 1646.]
"Itt is ordered y^t there shal be only reserued to the power of the freemen of Hampton 200 acres of ground for them to dispose of hereafter as they shall see just cause besids thatt thatt is already granted to seuerall persons : all other grounds are hereby ordered to bee common to the town of Hampton foreuer, excepting only and always reserueing to the power of the freemen the liberty of ordering both feedage and sweepage. And the land as aforesayd is deuided into one hundred and forty seven shares, and giuen to the seuerall lots and p^rsons hereafter mentioned, excepting only and always reserueing to the seuerall farmes a due p^rportion of comonage, to them and euery of them answarable to their seuerall p^rportions of ground, and thatt on thatt partt of the towne on which the seuerall farmes doe ly ; the names of all the seuerall p^rsons thatt the residue of all the comons aboue s^d are giuen and confermed unto, are as followeth:"

A true and p^rfect List of the Shares of the Common, Granted unto the p^rprietors of House Lotts, as followeth : 23 : 12 mo. 1645.

Ant: Taylor	2	shares		Tho: Sleeper	1	[share]
Hen: Greene	2			Tho: Chase	2
Ed: Colcord	2			John Philbrick	1
Jef: Mingay	3			Our Teachers lott	2
Sam: Getchell	1			Hen: Sayword	1
Tho: Louitt	3			The Almis Lot	3
John Marrian	2			John Brown	2	besides his farme
Hen: Ambrose	3			Will: Samborn	2
Tho: Ward	3			Acqil: Chase	1
Gill: Fuller	2			Will: ffifield	2
Will: English	3	[1st lot]		Wid: Bristow	1
Abra: Perkins	3			Moses Cocks	2
Isa: Perkins	3			John Wedgwood	2
ffran: Peabody	3			Edm: Jonson	3
Will: Coule	1			Chr: Hussey	2	besides his farme
Phile: Dalton	3			Mr Bachiler	2	besides his farme
Mary Hussey	1			John Sanborn	2
Willi: Marston	3			Will: ffuller	3
Tho: Marston	2			James Davis Senr	3
Robe: Page	3			Our Teacher	3	besides his farme
Will: Moulton	2	2 lotts		Rich: Swaine	3
Will: Moulton	3	2 lotts		Will: Swaine	2
Will: Eastow	3			John Crosse	2
Mor: Hobes	2			Will: English	2	[2nd lot]
Will: Palmer	3			Rob: Tuck	3
John Moulton	3			ffran: Swaine	2
Tho: Moulton	3			Rob: Sayword	1	1
Ye Elders Lott	3			Will: Howard	3	2 lotts
Hen: Moulton	2			Will: Howard	2	2 lotts
Hen: Dowe	3			Wal: Roper	3

 

Of the one hundred forty-seven shares provided for in this arrangement, eleven were retained by the town to meet future exigencies. But by this act of the town, there was not any actual division of the land, but merely a settlement of the question of ownership, and of the amount of interest that the proprietors severally had in these undivided lands. It was intended that the whole should still be held in common, but that whatever income or profits might be derived from them, whether by feedage or sweepage, should be divided among the owners according to their respective shares, or rights, in the commons.

In accordance with this arrangement, whenever any portions of the commons were subsequently surveyed, lotted out, and disposed of, such portions were divided into one hundred forty-seven shares, and distributed by lot, and in due proportions, to the original proprietors or their legal representatives. Hence, too, in the conveyance of any of these rights, or shares, whether by will or by deed, there was no transfer of any particular tract, or lot, of land, but of so many one hundred forty-sevenths of the whole of the commons, as there were shares mentioned in the instrument of conveyance.

END OF CHAPTER 1

Back to previous section -- Forward to next chapter -- Return to Table of Contents