A Stated Meeting of the Society was held at No. 25 Beacon Street, Boston, on Thursday, 26 January, 1911, at three o’clock in the afternoon, the President, Henry Lefavour, LL.D., in the chair.
The Records of the last Stated Meeting were read and approved.
The Corresponding Secretary reported that letters had been received from the Hon. Arthur Prentice Rugg of Worcester and Mr. Edward Percival Merritt of Boston, accepting Resident Membership; from Mr. Edward Robinson of New York, accepting Corresponding Membership; and from Mr. John Pierpont Morgan of New York, accepting Honorary Membership.
Mr. Mark Antony De Wolfe Howe and Dr. Charles Pickering Putnam, both of Boston, were elected Resident Members.
Mr. William C. Lane exhibited reproductions of some pages of an ancient Irish manuscript belonging to Harvard College, recently made by the cameragraph, to show how accurately and inexpensively it is now possible to copy documents.
The Rev. Dr. William W. Fenn called attention to a book entitled Thomas Shepard, Pilgrim Father and Founder of Harvard, by the Rev. Alexander Whyte, D.D., Principal of the New College, Edinburgh; and read the following passage:
One midnight well on toward the end of his life Thomas Shepard was found lying on his face in his study in a swoon of sweat and tears, and with a copy of the New England Gazette crushed together in his lockfast hands. The reason of all that was afterwards discovered to be this. Mr. T. H.,432 Thomas Shepard’s bosom friend, was wont to have a sermon of his printed in the Gazette time about with a sermon of Shepard’s. And both the manager of the journal and all its readers were well known to Shepard to put his friend’s sermons far above his for their eloquence and for their English. It is not told how Mr. T. H. took that praise of himself and depreciation of his friend. But Shepard made no secret to God and to his own soul how he took it. For the copy of the paper that Shepard held crushed in his hands that midnight contained a specially beautiful sermon of Mr. T. H.’s. And as Shepard tried first not to see that sermon, and then turned in prayer to try to read it and could not, he quite lost all power over himself and actually fell on his face on the floor as if his New England study had been the Garden of Gethsemane (pp. 192–193).
As Dr. Fenn was unable to recall anything in Shepard’s writings that could give rise to such a scene, he wrote to Dr. Whyte asking his authority for the statement and received the following reply:
If you read between the lines you will easily see that the “anecdote” is a composition of materials gathered together out of Shepard’s so suggestive memoirs. I hope I have not gone beyond the bounds of literary liberty in taking this device for the purpose of setting this remarkable man more clearly before the eyes of a generation who do not know what they possess in Shepard.
It may not be improper to warn British readers that Shepard was not a “Pilgrim Father,” as that term is generally now employed in New England; that Shepard was not “the founder of Harvard,” as stated by Dr. Whyte in his title and on pages 104, 234, of his book; that no journal called the New England Gazette was published in New England certainly before 1783; and that no regular newspaper at all was published in New England until 1704 — or more than half a century after the death of Shepard.
I desire to present certain historical facts relating to what was considered the longitude of Boston and the neighboring New England coast in the early part of the seventeenth century, of which I have become informed since I prepared the paper “A Forgotten Prime Meridian,” lately submitted to the Society.433
In Champlain’s account of his voyages published in 1613 there are two maps that he had made of New France, a larger map, dated 1612, and a smaller map, dated 1613. Of these two maps only the one dated 1613 has marks or numbers indicating longitudes. On this map such marks and numbers are on the upper and lower margins, there being also marks and numbers on the side margins to indicate latitudes. No parallels or meridians are laid down, but equal numbers are placed opposite each other across the map, so that straight lines connecting such numbers would answer the purpose of parallels or meridians. Under this arrangement, the longitude of what is now Boston appears to be about 306°. Calling the longitude of Boston in present use 71° west, its longitude reckoned continuously east from Greenwich would be 360°–71°, or 289°. Pursuing further the method used in “A Forgotten Prime Meridian,”434 it will take a starting point about 17° to the west of Greenwich to make the meridian of Boston about 306°, as on Champlain’s map. We find that the meridian of 17° west of Greenwich passes near to Ferro, the westernmost island of the Canaries.435 The meridian of Ferro being in considerable use in Champlain’s time, as indicated in “A Forgotten Prime Meridian,”436 we are justified, I think, in concluding that for the purposes of this map the longitudes given in the margin were based upon the meridian of Ferro as the prime meridian.
Champlain’s account of his voyages to New France, published in 1632, contains a large general map covering the coasts of Canada and of what is now the northeastern United States, to a point a little south of Chesapeake Bay. This map, like the smaller map referred to above, has marks and numbers for latitude and longitude on the sides and on the upper and lower margins respectively. On this map the longitude of Boston appears to be about 305°, and evidently is also reckoned from the meridian of Ferro.437 In confirmation of this conclusion, we may here recall that this meridian was prescribed by the King of France for his subjects in 1634, in accordance with the decision of a congress of scientists assembled at Paris by Richelieu in 1630.438
Coming now to Captain John Smith’s map of New England, an explanation is important regarding the various states of the plate or plates from which the different impressions of the map were taken. Justin Winsor finds that there were ten such states, and he notes their distinctive features in numerical and chronological order.439 Our associate, Mr. Wilberforce Eames, of the Lenox Library, makes the number of states nine instead of ten, identifying Winsor’s states VII and VIII with his own state VII. There are in the Lenox Library specimens of all these nine states, collected by Mr. Lenox and Mr. Eames, and the Massachusetts Historical Society has had photographic reproductions made of all the nine states as determined by them.
The first state of Smith’s map accompanied his book, A Description of New England, which he published in London in June, 1616. This state bears no date, but all states after the first are dated 1614. Regarding the last, or state X (Eames’s state IX), Winsor among other things says:
Under the compass these words appear: He that desyres to know more of the Estate of new England lett him read a new Book of the prospecte of new England & ther he shall have Sattisfaction. Although the old date, 1614, is still kept on the plate, this inscription shows that this state followed the publication of Wood’s New England’s Prospects, 1634, and it seems to have been made for the following work: Historia Mundi, or Mercator’s Atlas … Enlarged with new Mapps and Tables by the studious industrie of Jodocus Hondy. Englished by W(ye) S(altonstall). London, Printed for Michaell Sparke and Samuel Cartwright, 1635, folio.440
It therefore appears that all the states of Smith’s map were published between the years 1616 and 1635 inclusive. Smith’s portrait, dated 1616, occupies the upper left-hand corner of the plate in all its states.
Marks and numbers for parallels of latitude are shown on the right-hand margin in all states of this map, but the corresponding marks and numbers for latitude on the left-hand margin and for longitude in the upper and lower margins first appear in state IV. For both latitude and longitude, equal numbers are here placed opposite each other across the map without connecting lines, in the same way as on Champlain’s maps. These details remain unchanged in all the subsequent states. According to Winsor, state IV was supposed by Mr. Lenox to have been published with Smith’s Generall Historie, in 1624.441 It is reproduced at page 694 of Captain John Smith’s Works, edited by Arber. The meridian of 315° is not numbered at the top of the map because the space of the figures is occupied by the portrait, but the short vertical line which represents it is easily identified. By means of this and the corresponding numbered line at the bottom,442 we find that the meridian of 315° passes across Boston Harbor near its entrance, for I understand the latter to be the place where Charles River enters the open sea as on state IV of Smith’s map.
For the reasons given in “A Forgotten Prime Meridian,” the meridian of 315° and the other longitudes on Smith’s map of New England are evidently reckoned from the meridian of St. Michael’s.
On Captain John Smith’s map of Virginia, dated 1606,443 there are marks and numbers for latitude and longitude in the margins, the same as in states IV–IX (X) of his map of New England. On this map the longitude of Cape Henry is in round numbers 309½°. On modern maps the longitude of Cape Henry is close to 76°, which subtracted from 360° would make the longitude of that Cape 284°, reckoning continuously from Greenwich toward the east. Proceeding 25½° west from Greenwich, we bring the 284° up to 309½° as above. In “A Forgotten Prime Meridian”444 we found that the meridian of 26° west of Greenwich came so close to the Island of St. Michael of the Azores that we concluded that Boston’s ancient longitude of 315° was reckoned from a meridian passing through that island; and as the difference is so slight between 25½° and 26°, I conclude that the longitudes on Smith’s map of Virginia, the same as on his map of New England, are reckoned from the meridian of St. Michael’s.445
With each of the 1634, 1635, and 1639 editions of William Wood’s New Englands Prospect, is the map of The South part of New-England bearing the date of the edition which it accompanies. On all these maps there are marks and numbers for latitude on the right hand margin only. The only marks for longitude are at the bottom. These are short, vertical lines, evidently at the intervals of 5 minutes; those for the degrees and half degrees being slightly longer than the others. The only number for longitude on any of the maps is the number 315, which is placed under that one of the longer vertical lines which, extended upward, would pass across Boston Harbor somewhat to the east of the city. A reproduction of the map of 1634 accompanies this paper.
There is a further instance of allusion to the longitude of Boston in the historical account of the discovery and settlement of Charlestown and the neighboring towns, which was compiled by John Greene in the year 1664 and now forms the beginning of the first volume of the Town Records of Charlestown.446 The reference to longitude occurs in the first paragraph of Greene’s account, which I quote in his own spelling.
Captn John Smith haveing (in ye Raigne of or Soveraigne Lord James by ye Grace of God King of England, Scotland, ffrance, and Ireland Defendor of ye ffaith) made A discovery of some pts of America lighted amongst othr places upon ye opening bettwixt Cape Codd & Cape Ann scituate and lying in 315 degrs of Longitude & 42 degrs 20 mints of north Latitude where by sounding & makeing up hee fell in amongst ye Hands, and advanced up into the Massachusetts Bay till hee came up into ye River bettweene Mishaum (aftrwarwards called Charlstowne) and Shawmutt (aftrwda called Boston) & haveing made discovery of the Land, Rivrs Coves and Creekes in the sd Bay, & also taken some observations of the natures, dispositions & sundry Customes of the numerous India[ns] or Natives inhabiting the same; hee returned to England wer[e] (it was reported yt) upon his Arrivall hee prsented A mapp of th[e] Massachusets Bay to ye King, & yt the Prince (aftwards Kin[g] Charles ye first) upon enquiery & perusall of the foresd River & the scituation thereof upon the Mapp, appointed it to bee called Charles River.
We have seen that on Smith’s map of New England, Wood’s map of the South part of New-England, and in Greene’s historical account, the meridian of 315° is laid somewhat to the eastward of Boston. I think this is not inconsistent with the statement in the earlier almanacs cited in “A Forgotten Prime Meridian” that Boston’s longitude was 315°. For the purposes of navigation, after land had been sighted near the entrance to Boston Harbor, there was no further advantage in ascertaining slight changes in longitude in order to enter port and proceed up the harbor. The area from the entrance to Boston Harbor to Boston, and even to and including Cambridge, was undoubtedly considered in a general way to be in longitude 315°.
When we compare differences in longitude between certain places according to the above named older maps with such differences on modern maps in order to ascertain from what prime meridian the former longitudes were reckoned, we must not expect that such differences will agree exactly with each other. The means of ascertaining geographical positions have been vastly improved during the last three centuries, to say nothing of the additional knowledge gained from experience and observations. The consequence is that probably almost every important place now has a longitude more or less different from that assigned to it at the time of the ancient maps of Smith and others referred to. For instance, the former difference between the longitude of Ferro, or of St. Michael’s, and that of Boston, could only be expected to approximate the modern difference. But when we find such approximation, we have the further reasons as stated above and in “A Forgotten Prime Meridian” for believing that Boston’s meridian was reckoned from Ferro on Champlain’s maps, and from St. Michael’s on Smith’s map. And I may be permitted to say here that this paper should of course be read in connection with “A Forgotten Prime Meridian.”
In investigating matters connected with prime meridians founded on agonic lines — that is, lines of no declination of the compass — you may readily see that much assistance may be derived from the publications on the subject of terrestrial magnetism issued by the Coast and Goedetic Survey, which I have cited in the previous paper. It is a case where the principles of science may be applied to our better understanding of human undertakings in the past. By supplementing our study of history, of maps and of geographies, with a knowledge of the more prominent workings of terrestrial magnetism, we obtain a far more thorough comprehension of the reasons for the different prime meridians in question having been adopted, of their unsatisfactory character for the practical purposes of navigation or otherwise, and of the causes of their having been finally abandoned.
The data, then, taken from Smith’s maps of New England and Virginia and from Wood’s map of the South part of New-England go to sustain the conclusion reached in “A Forgotten Prime Meridian” that in Massachusetts during the period of somewhat over sixty years after the landing at Plymouth longitude was reckoned from the so-called meridian of St. Michael’s; and that during that period, and for the anterior period back to the time of Elizabeth, the same meridian was also made use of by most English navigators and geographers as a prime meridian.
In connection with Smith’s map of, New England I should like to make brief reference to the lines of poetry thereon and to John Davies, the author; but as this is somewhat aside from the purpose of the foregoing paper, I submit what I have to communicate in the form of an appended note.
On this map, under the portrait, are the following lines:447
These are the Lines that shew thy Face; but those
That shew thy Grace and Glory, brighter bee:
Thy Faire-Discoueries and Fowle-Overthrowes
Of Salvages, much Civilliz’d by thee
Best shew thy Spirit; and to it Glory Wyn;
So, thou art Brasse without, but Golde within.
If so; in Brasse, (too soft Smiths Acts to beare)
I fix thy Fame, to make Brasse Steele outweare.
Thine, as thou art Virtues,
John Dauies. Heref:
It is interesting to read the foregoing in connection with the lines written by Ben Jonson and inscribed on the page opposite Shakespeare’s portrait at the beginning of the Shakespeare Folio of 1623. I submit those lines also in order to facilitate the comparison:448
To the Reader.
This Figure, that thou here seest put,
It was for gentle Shakespeare cut;
Wherein the Grauer had a strife
with Nature, to out-doo the life:
O, could he but haue drawne his wit
As well in brasse, as he hath hit
His face; the Print would then surpasse
All, that was euer writ in brasse.
But, since he cannot, Reader, looke
Not on his Picture, but his Booke.
John Davies, poet and writing master, was born at Hereford in or about the year 1565. He died in London in June or July, 1618, and was buried in the Church of St. Dunstan, July 6th of that year. Davies was wont to place an addition to his signature to indicate that he was of Hereford, probably that he might be distinguished from Sir John Davies (1569–1626), sometime Attorney General for Ireland, who was also an author of poems, and perhaps also from John Davies, D.D. (1570?–1644), clergyman, scholar and author.
Among Davies’s pupils in penmanship was Henry, Prince of Wales, who died in 1612. Davies wrote a great number of pieces of poetry, including some three hundred epigrams and divers commendatory verses prefixed to publications. Among the epigrams are one to Shakespeare and two to Ben Jonson. The epigram to Shakespeare is as follows:449
To our English Terence Mr. Will: Shakespeare.
Some say good Will (which I, in sport, do sing)
Had’st thou not plaid some Kingly parts in sport,
Thou hadst bin a companion for a King;
And, beene a King among the meaner sort.
Some others raile; but raile as they thinke fit,
Thou hast no rayling, but, a raigning Wit:
And honesty thou sow’st, which they do reape;
So, to increase their Stocke which they do keepe.
Davies also wrote a sonnet on Smith, which was printed in the Description of New England.450
Thomas Fuller in his History of the Worthies of England, first published in 1662, pays high tribute to Davies’s penmanship and briefly alludes to his poetic accomplishments. I quote his language in order that you may catch the spirit of humorous hyperbole in which he writes:451
John Davies of Hereford (for so he constantly styled himself) was the greatest master of the pen that England in his age beheld; for, 1. Fast-writing; so incredible his expedition. 2. Fair-writing; some minutes consultation being required to decide, whether his lines were written or printed. 3. Close-writing; a mystery indeed, and too dark for my dim eyes to discover. 4. Various writing; Secretary, Roman, Court, and Text.
The poetical fiction of Briareus the giant, who had a hundred hands, found a moral in him, who could so cunningly and copiously disguise his aforesaid elemental hands, that by mixing he could make them appear a hundred, and if not so many sorts, so many degrees of writing. Yet, had he lived longer, he would modestly have acknowledged Mr. Githings (who was his scholar, and also born in this county) to excel him in that faculty; whilst the other would own no such odious eminency, but rather gratefully return the credit to his master again.* Sure I am, when two such transcendant penmasters shall again come to be born in the same shire, they may even serve fairly to engross the will and testament of the expiring universe. Our Davies had also some pretty excursions into poetry, and could flourish matter as well as letters, with his fancy as well as with his pen. He died at London, in the midst of the reign of King James; and lieth buried in St. Giles in the Fields.452
* So informed by Master Cox, Draper in London, his executor.
Mr. Henry H. Edes read the following paper:
In an autograph dealer’s catalogue, which was sent to me last summer, I noticed an item described as a profession of faith of the Rev. Andrew Eliot. I bought it and soon after submitted it to our associate Dean Fenn. As Dr. Fenn expressed the hope that I would carry out my purpose of communicating this paper to the Society, I feel no hesitancy in offering it for consideration to-day. The text follows.
I bles god that I haue bene born under the gospel and doe hear of a sauour and saluation by him: it pleased the lord to work upon my heart by the conuictions of his spirit and to shew me that I had something to doe in order to my own souls eternal saluation and blesednes in a nother world but I went on contrary to conuictions and stifiled them uery much for a long time but at length I was so much awakened and terifyed in my self that I could not resist any longer then I complyed in some measure with these conuictions that I had in me by the spirit of god and thought with my self I would not any longer stand out and fight against god but after some time I fell much from my resolutions and became cold and careles in the ways of godliness but it pleased the lord to stir me up again and to bring me to consideration of what adreadful condicion I was in while I thus continued in a state of coldness in the ways of religion and then I was brought into dreadful doughts and fears about my sencerity in the ways of religion but I haue great hopes that it was in love to my poor soul that god dealt with me after such a maner and that it was to humble me and to shew me that my own strength and all my own righteousnes was but as filthy rags and worse then nothing and that the rightousnes of the lord Jesus christ was that in which I must apear in at the day of Judgment and my hopes in this is because that by search I haue found that I did put two much trust upon my own strength but now by these fals that I haue mett with I haue seen in me a mear fountain of sin and iniquity and a wrethed body of death wthin me so that from what I haue experinced of it in me I can cry out with the apostle who shall deliuer me from this wrethed body of sin and death and by these fals I haue been almost brought to dispair of any hopes of my sencerity but god by his infinite power and through his infinite wisdom has keept me in a little hopes all along and by this hope that was in me I was keept from laying down my duty totaly though it was keept up in much coldnes and indiferency and now desire to come to the lords table and to pertake of the benifites that christ has purchased for his chosen and hope that I shal receiue of the benifites that christ has to giue to all those that wait upon him there in sencerity because he has apointed it for weak and doughting christians and desire the prayers of all gods people for me that I may have all my wants supplyed and my doughts resolued att this holy ordinance of the lords super and that my life and conuersation may shew forth that I doe adorn the profesion that I now make before the lord this day
I beleiue that there is one god in three persons father son and holy goast I beleiue that Jesus Christ is the son of god and that he took upon him our nature and came into the world and dyed a miserable and cruel death for the sins of the elect I beleiue that this was in acouenant between the father and the son from the dayes of eternity and that in fulnes of time it was all fulfiled that christ dyed and rose again the third day and asended into heauen and siteth at the right hand of god the father to make intercesion for those whom he had dyed to redeem I beleiue in the holy goast that he is god and proceedeth from the father and son and is equil with them both in wisdom and power I beliue that christ ordained churches in the world for the edifying and comforting of his chosen and to s[o] unite their hearts in love to god and also to one a nother for the strengthing and establishing of them in the ways of holynes and comfort and building them up in their most holy faith I beleiue that there is anumber of elected ones chosen in christ before the foundation of the world for which number christ dyed I beleiue that in these churches that he has ordained in the world he ordained the ordinances that is in them and sacriments which are two namly baptism and the lords super the one for the sealing to beleiuers the benifites of christs death and mediation the other to shew forth christs death and for the renewing that solemn couenant which they make in the former which they renew in the latter sacriment I beleiue that at the end of the world christ shal come to Judge the world and that the righteous shal go into life eternal but the wicked into hell to be punished with unquenchinable fire with the deuil and his angels for euer
In commenting on this document Dean Fenn says:
The writer was evidently a Calvinist believing, however, in “means” and in a limited atonement. So far as one can gather from running through Eliot’s sermons, the writer’s views as to the Lord’s Supper and “means” are in harmony with his, but the limited atonement is puzzling. Certainly, at the end of his life Eliot would not have subscribed to the doctrine, although he may have done so earlier.
Dr. Andrew Eliot’s son, Ephraim Eliot, has portrayed the character of his father. The following passage, written in 1822, is of present interest:
In principle he was what has been styled a moderate Calvinist. The doctrines laid down in the “Assembly’s Shorter Catechism” he held in high estimation. These he inculcated zealously upon the youth of his congregation, and upon his children, as long as he lived. That part of the clergy, who style themselves the liberal clergy, now take pains to disseminate an opinion that he was an Arminian. Upon this the writer does not pretend to decide; but thinks it is incorrect, or that the doctor himself did not know it; or peradventure these gentlemen are not competent judges. The creed commonly called the Apostles’ he assented to, with the exception of that part, which affirms that Christ descended into hell. For this he did not think there was scriptural authority. This part he taught his children to leave out, when they repeated that and the Lord’s prayer to him, after catechising them, which was his constant practice every Sabbath evening; and he advises in one of his printed sermons, that it should always be left out.453
As the Records of the New North Church give an unusually full account of the proceedings of the communicants in relation to the choice of a successor to the Rev. Peter Thacher as colleague to the Rev. John Webb, and as they evince the deepest interest in the doctrinal position of candidates, the following extracts are here printed for the first time from the original:
July 9th 1739
At a meeting of ye Brethren regularly warned: after solemn Supplications to ye great Head of the Cћћ, for his gracious presence and Direction, the following things were proposed to the Brethren and acted upon
It is proposed, whether the Cћћ will now proceed to to take any further step or steps towards the settlement of one or other of the worthy Persons above-mentioned, or of any other suitable Person, in the pastoral office over us.
Voted in the Affirmative.
II. Since the settlement of a Pastor, is an affair wherein the Honour of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Salvation of precious souls is most nearly concerned; and since for these Reasons, it is the indispensable Duty of every Church to introduce no man into the Pastoral Office over them, but one that, with other desireable Qualifications, is sound in the Faith of ye Gospel, and of a good conversation in Cht Jesus:
It is proposed; That ye Person upon whom the Lot may fall, be strictly examined concerning his Principles in Christianity, both doctrinal and disciplinary; and that proper care be taken to enquire into his Christian conversation: and that the Cћћ receive reasonable and Christian satisfaction in the premises, before they fully confirm said choice.
Voted in the Affirmative.
 VIII. Inasmuch as sevral of ye great & important Doctrines of Chtianity are vigorously opposed at this Day by Deists, Socinians, Arians & Arminians, and the Faith of many professors in great danger of being suburted by this means:
Voted, That it is ye Desire and Expectation of the Cћћ, That the Committee abovementioned take more especial care to enquire of ye Rd Mr Thomas Prentice concerning his soundness in these present Truths; and to desire of him the most explicit confession of his Faith concerning them.
IX. Voted, That the Rd. Mr Prentice be desired to preach one part of ye Day with us till the Committee have made the enquiries above-mentioned, and reported to ye Cћћ upon them.456
July 22nd 
At a Meeting of the Brethren regularly notified:
 II. Upon a Proposal made: Voted, That a Day of Prayer be kept to seek Light and Direction from the Great Head of the Cћћ with respect to the Call and Settlement of a suitable Person in ye Pastoral Office over us.
III. Voted, That August 12th insuing be the Day Appointed and kept for ye End abovementioned.
At a Meeting of the Brethren regularly notified: After solemn Supplications to the great Head of the Cћћ for his gracious Direction,
Voted, That Messrs Andrew Eliot & Janathan Helyer, be Desired to preach, and continue preaching with us till a Number of the Brethren shall desire another Meeting to take ye supply of the Pulpit into further Consideration
A Number of the Brethren (agreeable to the Vote of August 18th) having desired a Cћћ. meeting: A Meeting was notified, and the Brethren met regularly on this Day, and after solemn supplications to the glorious Head of the Cћћ for Light and Direction: The supply of ye Pulpit was taken into further Consideration, and after some Debate,
I The Question was put whether the Supply of ye Pulpit for some time shld be by one Candidate alone, or by Two in their Turns? Passed in the Affirmative for one only.
II. The Brethren were desired to bring in their written votes, for one Candidate to supply ye Pulpit for some time, and on counting ye votes when bro’t in, it appear’d that Mr Andrew Eliot, was chosen by a considerable majority.
III. Voted, That said Eliot be desired to preach with us the eight following Sabbaths.
December 28, 1741.
At a Meeting of the Brethren, regularly notified, for the further Supply of the Pulpit.
After solemn supplications to the Great Head of the Cћћ for Light & Direction.
I. Voted, To chuse a fit Person to Preach with us the two following Sabbaths.
II. Voted, That Mr Andrew Eliot be desired to preach one part of the Day the two next Sabbaths.
III. Voted, To proceed to the choice of a suitable Person to settle with us in the Pastoral Office, on Monday January 11th next ensuing.
IV. Voted, That this Meeting be Adjourned to said Day, The Brethren to meet at 11 o’th Clock A. M. and that our Brethren of the congregation be desired to meet at ye Meeting House at 3 o’clock in the Afternoon on said Day, That the Church may communicate their choice to them and (if it may be) obtain their concurrence with us in said choice.
January 11th 1741, 2.
The Brethren being met by adjournment at 11 o’Clock A. M. agreeable to their own vote of December 28th for the choice of a Pastor:
After solemn Supplications to the Great and Glorious Head of the Cћћ for Light & Direction; and a Short Exhortation to the Brethren to act agreeable to their holy Profession in an Affair of so great Importance:
I. The Brethren proceeded to give in their written votes for the choice of a Pastor: and upon numbering and sorting the votes, it appeared that Mr Andrew Eliot, had a majority of 63 out of 82, to be our Pastor.
II. But before the vote was published to the Brethren they were desired by a handy vote to express how far they were disposed to sit down easy by the Majority on whomsoever the Lot should fall, whereupon (as far as we could discern) there was (excepting * one) a unanimous lifting up of ye hands of ye Brethren.
* Laterly Gee459 who voted for Mr Eliot
 III. Voted, That the Committee to be chosen to treat with Mr Eliot about his settlement with us in the work of ye Ministry treat with him according to ye Rules agreed upon by ye Brethren, relating to the Settlement of a Pastor, at their Meeting July 9. 1739. and not receive an affirmative answer, till said Eliot had complied with the Desire of the Brethren exprest in them.
IV. Voted, That the Pastor, Elders & Deacons with our Brethren Mess.rs Peleg Wiswal, William. Parkman and William Owen, be a committee of the Cћћ on this occasion, and make their Report to the Brethren in convenient time.
At 4 o’Clock P. M.
The Brethren of the Congregation met at the Desire of Cћћ; and after solemn Supplications &c The Pastor laid before them the choice the Cћћ had made of Mr Eliot to be their Pastor; and then desired said Brethren to express how far they cou’d concur with ye Church in said choice: and upon bringing in their written Votes, it appeared that 72 out of 80 Voters, exprest their ready Concurrence with their Brethren of the Chh in this important Affair; and no one present exprest ye least uneasiness at ye Transactions of ye Day.460
The Brethren being desired to tarry after the Congregation was dismissed; The Pastor communicated to them a Confession of Faith he had received from Mr Andrew Eliot, in compliance with the Desires of the Church: which Confession was distinctly Read, and accepted as satisfactory to the Brethren, by a unanimous Lifting up of their Hands.
Mr Andrew Eliot gave us an Answer in the Affirmative to the Invitation we had given him to settle with [us] in the Evangelical Ministry.
A Day of Prayer kept by the Cћh and Congregation for the more plentifull Out-pourings of the Holy Spirit on ourselves and others.
April 14th 1742.
The Reverend Mr Andrew Eliot ordained to the Pas-toral office over us in the Lord. The Cћћs sent to, and assisting in this important Affair, were the Old-Church, The Old North-Cћћ, the Old South-Chh, The Cћћ meeting in Brattle-Street, and the Cћћ meeting in the New-Brick meeting House in middle-Street, all in Boston; and the first Cћћ of Christ in Cambridge.
Mr. Eliot was born in Boston 25 December, 1719, was educated at the Boston Latin School, graduated at Harvard College in 1737, and died in Boston 13 September, 1778. The Records of the First Church in Cambridge, under Admissions, contain this entry:
1738 Aug. 13 Sir Eliot Andrew, — Student461
In the Records of the New North Church, under Admissions to Full Communion, we find:
1742 March 14 Rd. Andrew Eliot by Dismission from Cambridge462 (p. 20).
Whether the paper which is now before us was read to the Church in Cambridge when Mr. Eliot was admitted to its fellowship in 1738 or to the New North Church on his admission to it in 1742, or whether it is the “Confession of Faith” referred to above as having been “distinctly Read, and accepted as Satisfactory to the Brethren” on 21 February, 1741–12, is a question which may appropriately be referred to the clerical members of the Society.
I wish to bring to your attention an old document which may interest you, as it has me, because of its form as well as for the names of so many interesting people mentioned in it. Though I do not remember to have seen before a bond of this form, our associate Professor Kittredge kindly informs me that it is in the regular old form of such bonds for loans. It will be noted that the forfeiture is about double the sum borrowed. It is the kind of document which Shakspere had in mind when he made Macbeth say: “I’ll make assurance double sure, and take a bond of fate.” The document follows.
Know all men by these presents that Wee Uriah Leonard of Taunton in the County of Bristol in New England Bloomer as Principall, and Stephen Marick of Taunton aforesd Husbandman, and Nathanael Hall of Boston in New England aforesd Physitian as Suertyes, are held and stand firmely bound and Obliged unto Peter Sergeant of Boston aforesd Esq’ Benjamin Browne of Salem in New England aforesaid Mercht and Obadiah Gill of Boston afore’sd Shipwright as Executors to the Last will and Testament of Capn Thomas Smith, Late of Boston aforesd Marriner decd in the ffull and just summe of One hundred and Ninetyone pounds Current money of New England To be paid unto the said Peter Sergeant, Benjamin Browne, and Obadiah Gill as Exers aforesd or to either or any of them their or either or any of their Certaine Attorney Executors Administors or assignes to and for the only proper Use and behoofe of the Children of the sd Thomas Smith decd, To the which payment well &. truely to be made Wee bind ourselves and each & every of us by himself joyntly and severally for the whole and in the whole our and each & every of our heires Executors and Administors firmely by these presents Sealed with our seals Dated the Seaventeenth day of January Anno Domi 1695/6 Annoqr RRs Gullieɫ tertij Anglicæ &c Septimo
The Condition of this present Obligac̄ōn̄ is such that if the Above-bound Uriah Leonard, Stephen Marick and Nathanael Hall or either or any of them their or either or any of their heires Executors or admrs shall and doe well and truely pay or cause to be paid unto ye abovenamed Peter Sergeant, Benjamin Browne and Obadiah Gill as Exrs aforesd; or to either or any of them their or either or any of their heires Exrs admrs certaine Attorney or assignes in Boston aforesd for the Use aforesd, the full and just summe of Fifty and Nine Pounds in the Now prsent Current money of New England in manner and Forme following That is to say three pounds thereof on or before the Seaventeenth day of January Which will be in the Yeare of our Lord 1696/7 and the Summe of Three pounds more thereof on or before the Eighteenth day of January which will be in the Yeare of our Lord 1697/8 and the remaining Summe of Fifty three pounds thereof on or before the Seaventeenth day of January Which will bee in the yeare of our Lord One thousand Six hundred Ninety and Eight/9 without fraud coven or farther delay That then this present Obligac̄ōn̄ to be utterly, Void and of none Effect, Butt if default happen to be made in any or either of the sd payments Contrary to the True intent hereof Then to abide and remaine in Full force strength and Virtue.
Signed Sealed & Deliud in prsence of us
Uriah Leonard [Seal]
Stephen Marick [Seal]
Eliezer Moody Scr:
Nath Hall [Seal]
Uriah Leonard was of that family of Leonards of whom it was said, “where you can find Iron works there you will find a Leonard.” They were interested at Lynn, Rowley Village, Braintree, Taunton, and later at Canton. They were strong, long-lived and successful men. James, father of Uriah, was at Lynn in 1651 and at Braintree in 1652; and with his brother Henry he established the forge at Taunton (now Raynham), having obtained permission from the town in 1652.463
Uriah was born April 10, 1662, and married June 1, 1685, Elizabeth Caswell, born January 10, 1664–65, daughter of Thomas Caswell of Taunton, by whom he had several children.
King Philip had a summer place near the forge, and the Rev. Peres Fobes, in his description of Raynham, says: “Philip and these Leonards, it seems, long lived in good neighbourhood, and often traded with each other: and such was Philip’s friendship, that as soon as the war broke out, which was in 1675, he gave out strict orders to all his Indians, never to hurt the Leonards.” But for all that, when about thirteen or fourteen, —
Uriah Leonard … as he was riding from Taunton to the forge in this place, was discovered and fired upon by the Indians. He instantly plucked off his hat, swung it around, which startled his horse, and in full career, he reached the forge dam without a wound; but several bullets were shot through the hat he held in his hand, and through the neck of the horse near the mane, from which the blood on both sides gushed and ran down on both legs.464
In the cellar under the old Leonard house the head of King Philip was deposited for a considerable time. James, the father, died in 1691 and Uriah sold his portion of the iron works in 1699.
Stephen Merrick was the son of William Merrick, who came from Wales to Charlestown in the spring of 1636. Stephen was born in Eastham, May 12, 1646, where he married December 28, 1671, Mercy, daughter of Edward Bangs. In 1672 he moved to Norwich, Connecticut, where he bought a plantation and where he was constable in 1681 and county sheriff in 1685. His wife died and he married January 25, 1691–92, Anna Wilbore at Taunton. He was a man of importance in Taunton and left a large property, when he died there in 1705. He had many dealings with the old iron works, and the old books show that he received iron for money in the settlement of his accounts and as dividend on his share in the works. His will was made in 1696 and among the preliminary statements he says, “but purposing to goe forth to walk in the present expedition on foot against the Indian enemy.” In his will, besides devising the personal property, he says: “As to all my land and priviledges lying within the Township of Norwich I give it to my three daughters.” He, however, provides that his wife may sell any part or the whole of those lands, in case of necessity.465
Nathaniel Hall,466 baptized in Yarmouth February 8, 1646, was son of John Hall, who came from Coventry in Warwickshire to Charlestown in 1630. John was on the list of church members in Charlestown, July 30, 1630; made a freeman May 14, 1634; and was a resident of Barnstable in 1640. He was constable in Barnstable and highway surveyor and member of the grand inquest in Yarmouth, where he died at an advanced age in 1696.
His son, Nathaniel, married Anna, daughter of the Rev. Thomas Thornton of Yarmouth. He was a corporal in the first expedition against the Indians at Mount Hope in June, 1675. In the second expedition, in 1676, he was a sergeant under Captain John Gorham; and was severely wounded at the Great Swamp Fight. For this, the Court, July 7, 1681, allowed him a pension of fifteen pounds and all fines imposed on persons in Yarmouth who were convicted of selling spirituous liquors by retail. June 9, 1683, five pounds were allowed him for his continued lameness; and it is recorded June 5, 1684, that forty pounds had been paid to him in money, and he was offered an annual pension of £5. In final settlement of his claim, £30 more were raised and an annual pension of £6 per annum for life was offered, which he accepted June 2, 1685.467
He was granted by the Court —
the sole liberty and priveledge of keeping a house of public entertainment in Yarmouth, to retail all sorts of strong drink, without further license during the natural life of said Hall, with one half of all the fines taken of any English person for retailing strong drink, without license, in said Yarmouth.
He was constituted an agent to prosecute all offenders, and all others were forbidden to sell wines or spirituous liquors. It was only at his house that travellers could obtain a lodging and, in consequence, it was thronged with customers and became the resort of the intemperate and undesirable. In two years he became dissatisfied, and his very pious wife disgusted, with the business, so on September 17, 1690, he sold out to Joseph Taylor, who was later complained of and fined four pounds. This led to litigation between Hall and Taylor, but through a legal quibble Hall finally prevailed.
In February 1886–87, when Hall was contemplating a removal to Boston, Richard Henchman, the schoolmaster in Yarmouth, in a letter to Dr. Increase Mather, says:
There is in this town one Mr. Nathaniel Hall, a man descended of eminently religious parents: who were very happy in all their children, being nine sons, men whom this Nathaniel is reckoned to excel, who, in the late wars, received a wound (the bullet remaining in his body) that has taken away, in a great measure, the use of one of his arms.
Being unable to do any business requiring physical strength, aided by his father-in-law the Rev. Mr. Thornton (who was a physician as well as a minister), he spent his spare time in studying surgery and medicine. He became quite skilful and performed several difficult operations with success. In 1687 he had recovered in a great measure from the effects of his wounds and proposed to remove to Boston and establish himself as a physician in that town. In 1689 he was captain of a body of troops about Casco Bay and on September 21, 1689, under Major Benjamin Church, he “fought with great bravery” in the defence of Falmouth.468 In this engagement, his company was first engaged and did efficient service and lost most men. When Church was about to return home, —
It is Ordered that Capt Nathaniell Hall is to take Charge as Commander in Chief of those fforces that are left for the defence of the abovesaid three Townes [Falmouth, Scarborough, and Saco], Those Soildiers that belong to ffort Loyall only to be under the Commander of sd ffort.469
In a petition to Lieutenant-Governor Stoughton, the Council and General Court, held at Boston, June 13, 1695, he says that he was greatly importuned by Sir William Phips to serve in an expedition to Pemaquid, when the fort was building there, when the Governor (Phips) and Major Richards promised him not less than six pounds per month, but that, after twenty-six weeks service, on his return, with leave and order, he has not received more than five pounds per month. This he considered grievous. He also says that he —
had served with his own Medicines in the Cure of many sick & wounded seamen & soldiers on their Return from Canada, he made conscience to charge in his Account as reasonably as could be afforded, & the Surgeons that were appointed to audite his Accompt, found it reasonable: Yet notwithstanding, he received but twenty two pounds, whereas his account amounted to twenty seven pounds odd money … by an Act of a General Court holden at Plimouth, [he] formerly had a Pension allowed him during life, in compensation for the loss of the use of one of his Armes, which was occasioned by a dangerous wound he received at the Narraganset-ffight, but has fallen short of five pounds year of said Pension, ever since the arrival of Sir Edmond Andross; yet has he not been backward to pay all rates and taxes imposed on him, nor would he now appear, if he could comfortably comply with what his rates and engagements are.
His account was —
ffor Wages at Pemaquid
ffor what he did for sick & wounded men
By Arreares of Pension 9 yeares
The petition was read November 30, 1695, and it was voted —
That Cap’ Nath: Hall shall haue fifty pounds paid out of the Treasury of this Province in ffull for his Wages at Pemaquid (yet due) & for what he did for Sick and wounded men, and for all he demands for his stypend or pension of fiue pounds a yeare duering his life (or in Plymouth late Colony) — But his Lycence granted him to keep an Ordinary in Yarmouth in the County of Barnstable by ye late General Court in Plymouth is Still to Remaine to him & his Assigns According to that Courts Grant.471
He was a practising physician in Hingham very early in the eighteenth century and probably succeeded Dr. John Cutler, who removed before 1700.472 In 1713 he sold his home in Hingham, between South Street and the meeting-house of the First Parish, to Joshua Tucker, and moved to Lewes, Sussex County, Pennsylvania, where he was said to be living in 1716. He had no children. His name appears in the Boston tax lists in 1691 and as an inhabitant in 1695.473
Peter Sergeant, merchant, came in 1667 from London. On September 25, 1677, “Libertie was granted to Mr. Petr Serjeant to set vp a Lime kilne vpon the clay hill neere Fox hill, If it be done with the aduice & approbation of Deacon Eliott;” and August 30, 1680, it was ordered that Peter Sergeant “be paide for six halfe barrlls of powdr made vse of, for blowinge vp of houses in the last greate Fire.”474
surprised with the people’s sudden taking up arms; in the first motion whereof we were wholly ignorant, being driven by the present accident, are necessitated to acquant your Excellency, that for the quieting and securing of the people inhabiting in this country from the iminent dangers they many ways lie open and exposed to, and tendering your own safety, we judge it necessary you forthwith surrender and deliver up the Government and Fortifications, to be preserved and disposed according to order and direction from the Crown of England, which suddenly is expected may arrive; promising all security from violence to yourself or any of your gentlemen, or soldiers in person and estate; otherwise we are assured they will endeavor the taking of the Fortifications by storm, if any opposition be made.475
He was appointed one of the Commissioners for the special Court of Oyer and Terminer for the trial of the witches for the counties of Suffolk, Essex, Middlesex, June 13, 1692. He occupied many other positions of trust and responsibility. He built and occupied the building, afterward purchased by the Province, as a residence for the governors, later known as the Province House. His first wife died November 10, 1700, and he married October 9 of the following year Mary, widow of Sir William Phips; and December 19, 1706, he married, third, Mehitable, widow of Thomas Cooper. He died February 8, 1714.476
Benjamin Brown was the son of William Brown. He married Mary, the daughter of John Hicks, a nonconformist minister in England, in 1686, in which year she came with the Rev. Charles Morton and settled in Charlestown. Her father, who had a brother, George Hicks, D.D., of a Yorkshire family, and Dean of Worcester, was executed at Revington Green April, 13, 1686, on the charge of being concerned in Monmouth’s Rebellion. Benjamin Brown was a man of much influence in Salem and was selectman, deputy to the General Court several times; justice of the court of sessions and one of the assistants, 1701–1703. His wife and two children died before he did. He died December 7, 1708, and left a large property, estimated at £30,000. Felt says, “He lived to be useful. He was an ornament to his town and country.”477
Obadiah Gill was a man of prominence in the Colony and served in various offices: constable, surveyor of highways, selectman, assessor, etc.; until, when elected selectman March 11, 1700, he declined to serve. After the great fire of 1676, a fire engine had been imported from England, the first in Boston, and on January 27, 1678–79, he was appointed a member of the first company which had charge of it. With others, February 8, 1687–88, he was fined one silver mark for refusing to lay hands upon the Bible in swearing and on March 30, 1688, he was imprisoned for not paying the fine, but he paid it and “lay not one night in prison.”478
Thomas Smith married Rebecca, daughter of Habakkuk Glover and Hannah Eliot, daughter of the Apostle Eliot, who were married May 4, 1653.479 Glover was a tanner and a man of good estate, made freeman 1650. On February 19, 1673, Habakkuk Glover and wife Hannah deeded to Thomas Smith and Rebecca, wife of Thomas Smith, mariner, one half of his house, now in possession of said Smith, and a portion of a garden plot, near the Castle Tavern (corner of Elm Street and Dock Square). He reserved the other half of the house, then in his possession, for his own use.480
On May 1, 1685, Sewall records: “Mr. Tho. Smith from Barbados brings the Honourable Francis Bond, one of His Majesty’s Council for that Island, and of a great Estate, also one Mr. Middleton; Former comes to recover his health.” Again September 15, 1685: “Mr. Bond . . . sails in Mr. Smith.” April 22, 1686, he writes: “Mr. Tho. Smith comes to Nantasket; was much feared to be lost.” November 8, 1688, again: “Capt. Tho. Smith dies about 5. mane; buried Nov. 10. Where the Corps was set was the room where first my Father Hull had me to see the manner of the Merchants, I suppose now above twelve years agoe.… Mr. Serjt and Benj. Brown led the widow; buried in the old burying-place.”481
His will, dated October 30, 1688, contains many bequests.482
William Hubbard came to Boston in 1630 with his father William, who settled in Ipswich in 1635, where he was one of the wealthiest and most respectable of the first inhabitants. William was born in England and graduated in the first class from Harvard in 1642. In 1656 he became the colleague of the Rev. Thomas Cobbet, minister in Ipswich. He continued to officiate until 1703, but the church records show that on August 2, 1702, “The Rev’d Mr. Hubbard detained the Brethren of the Church and signified and declared his inability (thro age) to carry on the work of the ministry any longer among them, and desired that they would take care and procure help to carry on sd work.”483 Of his History of the Indian Wars, it has been said, “If, in the seventeenth century, was produced in America any prose work which, for its almost universal diffusion among the people, deserves the name of an American classic, it is this work.”484 His History of New England remained in manuscript until 1815. John Dunton, in writing to his wife, describes him thus: “His writing of the History of the Indian Wars shews hime to be a person of good parts and understanding. He is a sober, grave and well accomplished man — a good preacher (as all the town affirm, for I did n’t hear him) and one that lives according to his preaching.”
He married first Margaret, daughter of the Rev. Nathaniel Rogers, and secondly Mary Pearce, widow of Samuel Pearce. The latter marriage was very objectionable to the church, because they did not consider her of sufficient distinction to be the minister’s wife. He expended his patrimony, which was large, and left his widow in indigence, at his death, September 14, 1704. At a town meeting, March 14, 1709–10, it was voted that £20 money be added to town rates for supplying Mrs. Hubbard in her distressed condition. She died the next year.
Eliezer Moody appears to have been an assistant to John Hayward, “Scr.,” for we find him witnessing legal documents with him, as early as 1677, as servant.485 Later he generally signs himself as servant, sometimes as servant to John Hayward Scr., occasionally as Eliezer Moody, and at times adding a final “e” to his name. Some time in 1684 he seems to have left the service of Hayward, after which he subscribes himself Eliezer Moody Scr. In addition to other duties, he appears to have given lessons in writing, for under date of May 14, 1688, Sewall records, “Put Sam to Eliezer Moodey to learn to write.”486 He was made a freeman in 1690 and March 11, 1694–95, he was appointed constable, but refused to serve and paid his fine. On March 12, 1696, he witnessed an agreement of Samuel Bridge to build a shop under the Town House.487
The Rev. Charles E. Park spoke as follows:
Two mural tablets have recently been placed in the nave of the First Church in Boston — one to the memory of Thomas Oliver,488 a ruling elder under the Rev. John Cotton; the other to the memory of Robert Treat Paine, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. The inscriptions on these tablets are as follows:
Arrived in Boston 5 June 1632
A Ruling Elder in this Church
Died 1 January 1657–58
Respected as Town Officer
Trusted as Chirurgeon
Beloved as Neighbor and Friend
His Memory has been Honored
Patriot Statesman Jurist
Delegate from Massachusetts
he signed the
Declaration of Independence
Attorney-General of the Commonwealth
Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court
to the Cause of Civil Liberty
led him to share in
the Boldest Action of his Time
Learned in the Law
he helped to establish the
Sound Judicial Traditions of the
and gave to her service
The Best Years of a Long Life
When the inscription on the Paine tablet was being written, a question arose as to the authorship of a “Sketch of the Character of the late Hon. Robert Treat Paine, LL.D., extracted from a Sermon, delivered at the First Church in Boston, the Sabbath after his decease,” which appeared in a leaflet of four pages without a title-page. This question was settled by the finding of the following paragraph in the Columbian Centinel of Wednesday, May 18, 1814:
The funeral Sermon of the late venerable Judge Paine, preached by the Rev. Mr. M’Kean, on Sunday, had for its text a passage of scripture most happily appropriate to the character of that distinguished Patriot and Judge — Job XXIX. 14 — “I put on righteousness and it clothed me, my judgment was a robe and a diadem” (p. 2/4).
The following letter, drawn from the Harvard College archives, gives an interesting account of the ownership of the portrait of the Rev. Samuel Willard, Vice-President of Harvard College from 1700 to 1707. The writer was that Robert Treat Paine who was known in his family as “the astronomer.” He was born in 1803, graduated at Harvard in 1822, and died in 1885. He was a grandson of Robert Treat Paine (H. C. 1749) the Signer, and a son of Robert Treat Paine (H. C. 1792) the poet, — Mr. Justice Paine’s second son, who died in 1811. Two daughters of Judge Paine — Mary, wife of Elisha Clapp, and Maria Antoinette, wife of Samuel Greele — died early in 1842, which accounts for the fact stated in the letter, that the portrait of Mr. Willard came in that year into the possession of the Judge’s grandchildren.
The text of the letter follows:
Boston, May 23, 1842.
For the President and Corporation of Harvard College.
A portrait of the Rev. Samuel Willard for many years the pastor of the Old South Church in this city and from 1701–1707 the President of Harvard College having recently come into my possession, I take the liberty hereby to tender the same to your acceptance.
According to the information uniformly given me, this portrait was the property of his eldest daughter, Mrs. Abigail Treat, who about the time of her death, which took place in 1747, gave it to her grandson, the late Judge Paine; in 1814 it became the property of his children and within a few weeks last past, his grandchildren.
I have been the more inclined to offer you this portrait in consequence of having been informed that no other of President Willard is known to exist.
Believe me Gentlemen
your obedt sevt.
Robert Treat Paine.
Mr. Farwell exhibited a copy of the Rev. Samuel Willard’s book entitled The Fountain Opened, printed at Boston in 1700 by Bartholomew Green and John Allen for Samuel Sewall, Jr.