PAUPER EXCLUSION MEASURES
By another vote, in 1693, no householder was allowed to take into his family, without the approbation of the selectmen, any journeyman, servant or other person, as an inmate, unless he should immediately give to the town clerk a bond, sufficient for the town's indemnity. Any person disregarding this order was made liable to a fine of 20s. a week, for every week that such inmate should be entertained, without the approbation, or the security required--the fine to be levied by a warrant from some justice of the peace, and the selectmen.
This regulation did not prove sufficient; and three or four years afterward, it was found necessary to make an additional order. The former vote was renewed, and a like penalty was also ordered. The former vote was renewed, and a like penalty was also ordered to be taken from any man, who should "let any of his housing" to any person, without the approbation of the selectmen, or security given to the town clerk. Against the persons themselves, who should come into the town to dwell, without approbation, or giving security, process should be instituted by two justices of the peace, according to the laws of England.
It was further ordered, that if any man, notwithstanding this prohibition, should take into his house or family, any person, contrary to the order, and if the person, so taken in, should ever in consequence become chargeable to the town, the individual, by whom he was first taken in, should be compelled to pay the whole expense of his maintenance.
It was voted, that Henry Dow, the town clerk, should be paid forty shillings out of the town rate, for his pains in writing for the town, during the ten years immediately preceding.
In February, 1693, Francis Page and Lieut. John Smith were chosen overseers of the poor.
The next month, Christopher Palmer and John Sanborn were chosen selectmen, to be joined with the five then in office. For many years previous, five persons had constituted the board.