king philip's war in marlborough part 3, the aftermath

King Phil ip’s War in

Marlborough Part 3

The Aftermath

On August 30, 1675, in the wake of an attack on Lancaster, guns and ammunition were seized from the Indians at Marlborough. Eleven Nipmuc refugees from central Massachusetts and four visitors from Natick were strung together neck to neck, marched into Boston and falsely charged with the attack and murder. In the hysteria that followed, the remaining Indians were banished from Marlborough, never to return.

In 1702, twenty seven years later, in an attempt to get back what was rightfully theirs, the Indians of Marlborough petitioned the court to have their guns and ammunition returned. There is no evidence that it ever was. In 1716, with not a whimper of protest and possibly without even the knowledge of the Indians, 5800 acres of land at Marlborough, which had wrongfully been purchased in 1684 and which sale was denied by the General Court, was now allowed. The final indignity to the Indians at Marlborough was effected. This is that story.

Where Do You Get This Stuff?

• Daniel Gookin: 17th Century Superintendent of Indians, The Doings and Sufferings of the Christian Indians of New England

• George Madison Bodge: 19th Century Historian, Soldiers of King Philip’s War

• Jean M. Obrien, 21st Century author, Dispossession by Degrees

• The Colonial Records of Marlborough

Local Histories and Websites

• Charles Hudson: 19th C, History of Marlborough• Josiah H. Temple: 19th C, History of Framingham• Wilbur F. Brigham: 19th C. History of Hudson

• Websites: (search)– Wolfwalker2003– Hassanamesit– Wamesit– Ponkapoag– Natick– Family Names

Arguments from the last chapter

• Marlborough was on the first frontier and on the first main road.

• Marlborough was the first experiment of colonists and Indians living as next door neighbors.

• An incident occurred in Marlborough which helped set the tone for King Philip’s War and created a precedent for European/Indian relations across the country.

• Marlborough was the center of colonial army activity during the first of the great wars in America. The army garrison was located on French Hill, near to the water tower.

Arguments from the last chapter• ‘The Sudbury Fight’ was the defining battle of King

Philip’s War and can be compared to Gettysburg of the Civil War.

• At the ‘Sudbury Fight’, it was the Marlborough Army Garrison that suffered the worst of the casualties.

• Two men from Marlborough’s founding families, John Howe Jr. and Eleazar Ward were killed.

• There is every evidence that Ward accompanied a ‘troop of horse’ who had come from Brookfield and was ambushed with them on Mt Ward.

• If this theory is correct, an important skirmish of the ‘Sudbury Fight’ occurred in Marlborough and there are four men buried on or near Mt Ward.

The Importance of Okommakemesit

in the Creation of Marlborough,

Northborough, Westborough,Southborough and Hudson

Relations Between Marlborough and Okommakemesit

1656-1675

The Indians of Marlborough• Chief Onamog, his wife Sarah• From Temple’s list of those owed corn in January 1676:

Isaiah Nowell, Benjamin (Bowhow),Peter Nashem’s widow, Old Nashem,Mary (River), James Wiser’s wife,Thomas, his widow, David’s widow

• From various deeds:– Abraham Spoonant, Joseph Robin, Sarah Robin,

Dorothy, Johnson, James, Joshua Ahshon, Old Robin, John Nasquamit, Benjamin Wuttanamit, James Speene, Sarah Naskonit, Josiah Harding

Timeline

• 1656 Negotiations with Indians and Apostle Eliot begin.

• 1657 John Howe comes to Whipsuppnicke, builds his house near to the Indian plantation. His house acts as an Inn for the other Sudbury landowners.

• 1658 Treaty is signed with the Indians allowing them full rights to the ‘planting field’ (area bounded by Rawlins Ave., Bolton St, Main St and Union St.). Agreement also gives the owners of the new English plantation first rights of purchase if the Indians give up their land.

Timeline

• 1660 New English Plantation incorporated as Marlborough. Many of the new homesteads surround the Indian ‘Planting Field’.

• 1663 English build their first meeting house on Indian land. The Indian chief Onamog agrees to sell the land, but only with serious concessions from the English to police their animals.

Timeline• Town Meeting of March 29, 1663

– All swine to be yoked and rung (have collars and rings in their noses to prevent damage from rooting of crops)

– All cow cattle to go under the hands of a Keeper at penalty of sixpence per head

– All fences of the town shall be made up by April 15, leading men to act to police the fences.

• April 4, 1663– For ‘diverse causes and considerations’, Onamog gives deed to

the town of Marlborough for the land on which the Meeting House stands. Not included is enough land for a cemetery. Only years later, in 1706, is a portion of the land purchased (behind the present Walker Building) for the purpose of a cemetery.

Timeline• 1665 Onamog brings action against Job Tyler of

Roxbury for stealing Hay. He implicates Thomas Chandler of Andover, but this appears to be a false accusation. Tyler is fined by Daniel Gookin, Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

• 1665-1674, there is no documented troubles between Indians and English in Marlborough.

• 1674 Onamog dies. Gookin proposes building a regional Indian school, open to local English children, in the Indian Planting Field. Onamog’s widow Sarah, is in dire straits after the war, and Gookin purchases the field from her in 1677.

• April 1675 Outbreak of King Philip’s War. • August 30, 1675: Refugee Indians at Marlborough

arrested for attack on Lancaster. Colonial General Court evicts all Marlborough Indians to Natick. Arrested Indians are found innocent.

The Terrors of the English in Marlborough

• Peter Bent’s son was killed and scalped in an Indian raid on his father’s corn mill in November of 1675. In addition, his young slave Christopher Muchen was captured but was recovered when the colonial soldiers attacked an Indian encampment near present day Grafton.


• Thomas King, a Marlborough Selectman, was one of the founders of Lancaster and his son in law, William Kerley of Marlborough was brother in law to Elizabeth Kerley (sister to Mary Rowlandson), who was killed with her children in the attack of February 10, 1676. Two captive Kettle children from the same attack, escaped the Indians and showed up, near death in Marlborough in July of that year.


• The youngest son of William Ward was killed in the Sudbury Fight, and his son in law, John Howe Jr. (also the son of John Howe) was also killed.

• The Marlborough residents lost almost all of their belongings, houses, barns, cattle and means of farming in the attacks on Marlborough in March and April of 1676.

• All of these tragedies and depravations were used as justifications for the taking or wrongful purchase of Indian land.

The Problem of Land in Colonial New England

Common vs Individual Land• Common land usage was a holdover from normal

English land usage in the 17th C.• Most English farmland was held in common and

allowed poorer farmers to own their strips of farmland and to use the common tools for farming.

• The Massachusetts Bay Colony model at first allowed for large grants of individual land (depending on wealth, ie the ability to pay taxes), and large areas of common land (called the Cow Commons) for grazing.

• Most common lands were held in perpetuity unless a unanimous vote of the ‘proprietors’ allowed portions to be granted for mutually beneficial reasons.

• Reasons might include a mill or further divisions of land to all proprietors.

• Eventually, most lands became privatized to increase the tax base and to limit public upkeep.

• 1662 Proprietors of Marlborough agree to hold Cow Commons in common except with unanimous vote

• 1682 Natick Indians agree to hold all Indian lands in common.

Common Land Agreements

The Praying Indians and the Town of Marlborough in the Immediate Aftermath of the

War

The Praying Indians after the Sudbury Fight (Bodge)

• April 21, 1676: Captain Hunting ‘drew up and furnished their company of forty Indians at Charlestown‘. These were sent immediately to Sudbury where they arrived late in the day and helped to bury the dead.

• ‘Captain Hunting’s company was soon made up to eighty men’

• ‘From the time that Capt. Hunting’s company took the field, the enemy lost heart, evidently fearing them more than the whole armies of English, which they could easily elude, or ambush or mislead.’ (Gookin)

• In the summer of 1676 this company took captive or killed about four hundred of the enemy, and did nearly all the effective work against the enemy in the closing operations of the war.

The Praying Indians after the Sudbury Fight

• On November 10, 1676, Daniel Gookin gives a full accounting of the Praying Indians. Totals 117 men, 450 women and children, 567 grand total.

• They are widely dispersed with relatively small groups in Medfield, Milton, Dorchester, Braintree, Watertown, Natick, Concord, Dunstable. Each group has an English overseer. Many are employed by the English.

• 30 remain with Capt Hunting ‘at the eastward’ (Maine)


• Jean Obrien in Dispossession by Degrees:“In 1677 the General Court directed that all

Indians within the English government of Massachusetts Bay reside in one of four Praying Towns granted to Indians: Natick, Punkapoag, Hassanamisco, and Wamesit. They

(are) appointed English overseers…”

The Role of the Mohawks

• In 1678, the Mohawks of New York attack the Praying Indian planting field at Megunko (Ashland).

• The Mohawks are greatly feared by the Algonquin Indian tribes and since the war, central Massachusetts has been abandoned by the Nipmuc tribes leaving a clear path for the Mohawks to attack Praying Indian settlements.

• The abandonment of Mt Wachusett removes any early warning system for the Indians.

• Outlying locations such as Hassanamisset and Wamesit are particularly exposed.


• Punkapoag (Canton)– History of the Town of Canton by Daniel Huntoon

“In 1726 a committee appointed by the General Court reported that it was true "that the Indian proprietors are reduced to but few families, and improve but a small quantity of their land.“”


• Wamesit (Tewksbury)– History of Chelmsford by Wilson Waters

“After King Philip's war about sixty of the praying Indians from Wamesit were removed to this island or vicinity, under the care of Jonathan Tyng. They remained there about ten years, when they removed to St. Francis in Canada.”


• Hassanamesit (Grafton)– Hassanamesit Woods, A Praying Indian

Town by Frances Clark and Dan Wells “Although Hassanamesit continued to exist

on paper, no Native residents occupied it for the next twenty years. During the 1680s the colony government decided to partition the “empty” Nipmuc territorial land for English settlement, although “the Hassanamesit men now resident at Naticke” managed to retain their claim to the abandoned village.”


• Natick

The slow dissolution of the Praying Town of Natick is covered in Jean O’brien’s insightful book Dispossession by Degrees. Driven by continual limitations on ecomomic opportunity, most of the Indian land was sold off to English proprietors and by the time of the Revolution, the town was fully under control of the English.

Marlborough Rebuilt

• Hudson:– “In 1677, John Woods, constable, preferred a

petition to the General Court setting forth that about twenty-seven families had already returned, and prayed that they might be able to call a town meeting for the management of their affairs..”

– They build a rough meeting house which needed to be enlarged only a few years after.

Marlborough Rebuilt

• Marlborough Town Records– In 1679, town meeting negotiates with Thomas

Bruce of Sudbury to build and operate a mill, probably near to the mill of Peter Bent which was abandoned at the beginning of the war.

– Mill was located along the Stoney Brook in present day Southborough.

– Bruce received a very liberal land grant and tax consideration, showing the great need the town was operating under.

Events leading up to the Indian Land Sales

• Gookin:– “…some of the people of those parts (Marlborough)

have very lately, in the spring of 1677, not only taken away the fencing stuff from about the Indians’ lands, but taken away some cart loads of their young apple trees and planted them in their own lands. And when some of those Indians made some attempts to plant (by order from authority) upon their own lands in the spring 1677, some person of that place expressly forbid them, and threatened them if they came there to oppose them…”

Events leading up to the Indian Land Sales

• Hudson:– In May 1677, Thomas Beaman, Josiah Sawyer, John Bowker,

Josiah Howe, John Witherbee, Joseph Daby, Thomas Martin, Samuel Stow, Samuel Winch, John Haynes, and Samuel Bush, inhabitants of Marlborough, Lancaster and Sudbury, preferred a petition to the General Court, setting forth that the Marlborough Indians, during the recent war, had been perfidious, and had taken part with the enemy, and so had forfeited their title to the Plantation of Ockoocangansett; and that they, the petitioners, had been in their country’s service, and had hazarded their lives against the common enemy, and had suffered in their estates by having their habitations burnt, so that they were unable to comfortably to provide for themselves and families;- wherefore they ‘humbly pray that this Hon. Court would be pleased to grant unto these your petitioners, the said tract of land, or upon moderate terms, grant sale of said lands…”

– “But as humble and devoted as these petitioners professed to be, the Court did not see fit to grant their request.”

Indian Land Sales of Developed Property

• Gookin land purchase of the Indian Planting Field, May 1677

• Stow purchase of land along Concord Rd in May, 1683

• Multiple Martin purchases of land along Bolton St into Hudson

Permission of Sarah Conomog to Sell Land

• “Sarah Onnamog widow and relict of Onnamage late the Ruler and Saggamore of Whipsuffrage the Indian plantation neare Marlborow hath liberty from this Court to sell and alienate into any English person it wil buy the same her late husbands home lot and orchards and about 60 acres of woodland & meadow adjoining to the same so yet the whole exceed not one hundred acres provided Mr. Gookin and Mr. Eliot consente and approve the bargain on behalfe of the Indian woman & order assign & lay out the land and the payment to be secured for the said widow for the maintenance of her selfe and Children.”

• June 3, 1681


• The Gookin Deed– Among the names on the deed are Sarah Conomog,

Old Robin, Josiah Nowell, John Nasquamit, Benjamin Wuttanamit, James Speene, Sarah Naskonit, Josiah Harding

– Deed dated May 2, 1677– Sold for ‘diverse considerations’ especially ‘the love

and duty we owe to our honored Magistrate’– Included 100 acres of Planting Field, 10 acres of

Fort Meadow, and 10 acres of Long Meadow


• The Stow deed– Samuel Stow, of Concord had moved to Marlborough

by the outbreak of the war and was probably a member of the Marlborough militia.

– The land was undoubtedly prime farmland, perhaps apple orchard

– Deed dated May 17, 1683– 20 acres along Concord Rd for 6 pounds money and

6 pounds corn (12 shillings per acre)– Among the signers are Great James, Piam Boahu,

Andrew Piteme, James Atnet, Thomas Waban


• The Martin Deeds (the Howe family papers)– 3 copies of deeds with slight differences describing

the same land –20 acres, Great James– 12 acre deed-Great James– Letter from Gookin clarifying the land of Joshua

Assant, deed of Joshua Assant, 3 acres– 6 acres –Benjamin Bohow– 8 acres- Benjamin Bohow– Letter from Great James confirming sales and

clarifying larger sale of other Indian lands– Total of 49 acres.

Thomas Martin

• Originally from Charlestown, listed as ‘shoemaker’

• He, too, was living in Marlborough at the outbreak of the war and probably also served in the militia.

• His daughter Dorothy married Joseph Howe


• The 20 acre deeds of Great James– All describe the same land with the same boundaries. One is

dated March 15, 1683, for 5 pounds, Great James and John Woomscom only.

– Second and third include ‘widow of Tupkoowinnin’, for 6 pounds ten shillings one undated, the other dated July 2, 1683. (story of Tupkoowinnin is contained in Part 2. Probably explains her inclusion in this deed)

– Original date of the transaction was May 19, 1680– Sarah Conomog seeks permission to sell 60 acres of land in

1681. This might have been seen as a necessary precondition for the sale.

– 6 pounds, ten shillings or 6.5 shillings per acre


• The 12 acre deed of Great James– Great James and John Woomscom– For a ‘valuabell’ sum of money– Dated April 18, 1684– References land purchased of David’s widow

and the widow of Josiah Hardin


• 3 acre deed of Joshua Ashon– Joshua Assant was implicated in the attack on the

family of Thomas Eames during the war. Although others were convicted and executed for the crime, Joshua, fighting with the Praying Indian Army, was exonerated.

– After one of the land sales, Joshua complains to Gookin that part of the land was his.

– Gookin sends a letter to Martin explaining that 9 or 10 acres rightfully belonged to Joshua.

– Martin purchases 3 acres from Joshua for twenty four shillings (8 shillings per acre)

– Date of deed March 15, 1683


• 8 acre deed of Benjamin Bohow (of Pompocitticut) and Sarah his wife.– 3 pounds (7.5 shillings per acre)– Dated April 14, 1684


• 6 acre deed of Benjamin Bohow (of Wamesit) and Sarah his wife.– 44 shillings (7.33 shillings per acre)– Transcription undated, but does say 1684– All deeds give permission to feed cattle and

cut wood on Common Indian lands

The Problem of the Proprietors of Marlborough

• In 1684 the proprietors of Marlborough see the Indian lands, promised to them in the agreement of 1658, being sold to outsiders, possibly with the complicity of Daniel Gookin.

• In addition, there is pressure to confirm all deeds, since the Royal Crown has revoked the Mass Bay Charter and questioned the validity of all land transfers in the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

• The feeling is that if there isn’t a confirmed deed soon, the Indian land may be lost for all time, possibly to a new or adjoining town.

Governor Edmund Andros

• Edmund Andros is made Governor of Massachusetts in 1686. Among other unpopular rules, he abolishes the power of town meetings.

• So hated is he, that when King James II is deposed in 1689, Governor Andros is taken prisoner and exiled from Massachusetts.

The Problem of the Indians of Natick

• Conventional Indian procedure was to allow the Sachem to handle land transfers. This explains both Great James and Sarah as primary sellers in Marlborough.

• But the actions of Great James after the war led many in the Indian community to believe that Great James was enriching himself at the expense of the community.

• In 1682, the Indians agree that all land sales will be done in common. Possibly because the prior Marlborough land sales had been agreed to in 1680, they were exempt.

The Transfer of the Balance of Okommakemesit 1684-1716

• In 1684, Marlborough proprietors submit a petition to the General Court asking license to purchase the remaining Indian land in Marlborough, (5800 acres), citing the first-purchase rights in the 1658 agreement.

• A similar Indian petition by Thomas Waban and Great James, citing ‘need and necessity’ accompanies the Marlborough petition.

• The license is denied by the Court


• Undeterred, a deed is produced that contains the consent of about half of the male Indians at Natick. Deed is for 31 pounds or about 1.28 pennies per acre.

• A counter petition is signed by the other half of the males led by Thomas Tray and other of the rulers. It references the 1682 agreement to only sell with common consent and argues that Thomas Waban and Great James are keeping all the money to themselves.

• Daniel Gookin and John Eliot write a carefully constructed denunciation of the sellers, calling them ‘Drunken and debauched’ and calling the Marlborough buyers ‘bold, prsumptious & covetous men.’ They further infer that unrighteous land sales might lead to another war.

• The General Court renders the sale null and void.


• Hudson:– October 1686, begin the distribution of land

giving 30 acres of upland to each of about 52 proprietors. (1,560 acres)

– December 1686 ‘probably to avoid collision with the General Court, it was voted that Maj. Hincksman and others who had a claim against the Colony, should have a thousand acres of land’


• Hudson:– ‘Feeling uneasy about the title to their lands, the

proprietors, under their own hand in 1693, agreed that their grants of land shall stand good to all intents and purposes, if they be attested by John Brigham, their clerk.’

– (From about this time, residents were buying and selling Indian land for which they had no clear title.)

– In a meeting in February of 1703, ‘it was voted that they would try to come into a way for the confirmation of their land’.

– Again in February 1709 they voted ‘that they would make articles to bind themselves into a covenant, whereby what we do may stand in force’.

Deed of Land from John and Nathaniel Johnson to

John Barnes Sr. 1706• 30 acres of land granted for a first

division to Solomon Johnson in the six thousand acres of land last purchased of the Indians

• For ‘divers good causes and waighty considerations’

• Infers that the Indian sale was (lately) permitted by the General Court

Just To Give You An Idea

• In 1663, residents of Marlborough were assigned a fine of sixpence per cattle seen roaming without a Keeper.

• In 1665 Job Tyler was assigned a fine of 2 shillings six pence and (for the hay) 10 shillings for stealing hay from the Indians.

• In 1684 the people of Marlborough bought 5800 acres of land from Indians that did not have the right to sell it, for 31 pounds, or 1.284 pennies per acre.

• What’s the value of that land today?


• Finally, experiencing great pressure from the western part of the town for separation, which had been building up for about 20 years, yet not wanting to permit it until the Indian lands were officially settled, the people of Marlborough receive confirmation of title from the General Court in 1716.

• Hudson and Brigham both say 1719, but this is in error.

The Road to the Formation of Westborough

Timeline continued

• 1705 Vote of Proprietors of Marlborough to divide the Cow Commons among themselves.

• 1709 Marlborough common lands allowed to be divided to individuals by General Court.

• 1715 Indians at Natick agree to break up common lands to individuals.

• By 1715, about 30 families are living on Indian land.• Aug 1716 Without any apparent discussion with the

Indians at Natick, the 1684 sale of Okommakemesit now allowed.

• 1717 Westborough breaks off from Marlborough.

The Aftermath

• Shortly after, first Westborough (1717), then Southborough (1727) were separated from Marlborough.

• Northborough was set off from Westborough in 1775.

• Hudson, which included most of the Indian lands, was set off from Marlborough in 1866.

So What Did the Descendants of the Marlborough Purchasers

Think?

• Charles Hudson, History of Marlborough– “…the poor Indians were, to some extent at

least, defrauded in the bargain.”– “But the people of Marlborough have at least

this apology; they acted in accordance with the spirit of the age.”

So What Did the Descendants of the Marlborough Purchasers

Think?• Wilbur Brigham, History of Hudson

– “Here was ten square miles of land, on part of which, the town of Hudson now stands, that had been traveled only, over Indian paths. In violation of every sentiment of justice to the Indians and respect to law, bounds were to be fixed, and highways laid out.”

– “Their illegal acquirement of the land made them uneasy, they had no rockedribbed and rockbound title. An original wrong could not be compacted into right by simple declarations and votes…”

King Philip’s WarAn Appraisal

• King Philip’s War could not have been won without the aid of the Mohegan, Mohawk, and Praying Indian tribes.

• The incident at Marlborough wherein fifteen Indians were falsely accused of the attack at Lancaster in the summer of 1675, helped to lengthen the war, and was probably the primary reason that Marlborough was laid waste.

King Philip’s WarAn Appraisal

• The Sudbury Fight was the defining battle of the war and most likely included a skirmish in Marlborough.

• The greater part of the casualties of the battle came from the Marlborough Army Garrison.

• The destruction which accompanied the Sudbury Fight was far greater in Marlborough than the earlier, March attack.

• The illegal purchase of the Indian land in Marlborough was fraudulent and remains a stain on our proud history.

Thank YouAnyone who would l ike clarif ication or would l ike

to comment, feel free to email me at [email protected]

king philip's war in marlborough part 3, the aftermath

Education

creation of marlborough

marlborough army garrison

remaining indians

mt ward

old robin

civil war

eleazar ward

chapterthe sudbury fight