hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
Abraham Touro 41 1 Browse Search
Mystick River (Massachusetts, United States) 40 0 Browse Search
Peter C. Brooks 40 0 Browse Search
Joseph Prout 26 2 Browse Search
Matthew Cradock 24 0 Browse Search
John H. Hooper 22 0 Browse Search
Salem (Massachusetts, United States) 20 0 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 18 0 Browse Search
Jonathan Dunster 18 0 Browse Search
J. H. Hooper 18 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Medford Historical Society Papers, Volume 23.. Search the whole document.

Found 49 total hits in 30 results.

1 2 3
Noddle's Island (Massachusetts, United States) (search for this): chapter 14
interest is revived by examination of original documents in the Massachusetts Archives, of which the following is copy: To the Honble Lt. Governer & Council & Representatives in Genl Court Afsembled The Humble petition of the Inhabitants of the Towne of Medford Showeth That Whereas Your Petitioners have hitherunto been necefsitated for want of a Grist mill within the sd Towne to carry their Corne to be ground as far as Charlestowne or Watertowne and sometimes to Boston and Noddles Island, Whereby many times before they can get their meal home, it costs them as much as the Corne was worth. And Whereas there is a very Suitable place upon the River A little above Mistick Bridge where A Mill may be Erected to the Easg of your Petitioners And Advantage And Convenience of places Adjacent And without damage to the Passage of Boats Timber Rafts &c Wherefore yor most humble Petitioners Prav this Honble Court to to grant them the Privilege of Setting up A Mill on the River in the
Marble Brook (Massachusetts, United States) (search for this): chapter 14
Medford's first gristmill Without doubt Medford people were served by the Broughton come-mill across the river above Menotomie brooke, but that was not in Medford territory. If the statement of our historian is correct, the Wade mill on Marble brook was the first. He says of it,This was used for grinding grain and sawing timber. But no mention of it as a gristmill is found in the settlement of the Wade estate, which speaks of saw-mill pond and the saw mill. (This in 1689.) Writing in 1855, he also said of another: There was a mill a short distance below Wear bridge, but who built it, or how long it stood, we have not been able to discover. The place is yet occupied. He quoted from Medford records the favorable action of the town about gristmills in two places, and added of the first: This was not successful, nor was the following,. . . We ask, was Mr. Brooks correct in these statements? and reply that he was regarding one just below Wear bridge, and wish he had
Medford (Massachusetts, United States) (search for this): chapter 14
to Vol. XVII, p. 15 (where a description and occasion of discovery is related), we are confident that the old oak frame, brought to light in 1911, was none other than that of Medford's first gristmill, erected soon after 1698. The map or plan of Charlestown Linefeilde (across the river), one of the oldest known, shows two islands near the Medford side at this spot, which certainly was a suitable place. In 1865 the United States engineers made an elaborate survey of the entire river and Mystic lower pond, with purpose of making the latter a fresh water basin for the use of the navy. That plan (a copy of which is at the State House), shows an island in line with the Medford side, with the river curving inland around it. We think that this carefully made map, on which the various depths of water are given, showing an island at the very place where the old frame was found, to be excellent testimony as to suitable place, and the remains unearthed, a refutation of its being unsuccess
Charlestowne (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 14
5 and 42, are articles relative to this matter, in which interest is revived by examination of original documents in the Massachusetts Archives, of which the following is copy: To the Honble Lt. Governer & Council & Representatives in Genl Court Afsembled The Humble petition of the Inhabitants of the Towne of Medford Showeth That Whereas Your Petitioners have hitherunto been necefsitated for want of a Grist mill within the sd Towne to carry their Corne to be ground as far as Charlestowne or Watertowne and sometimes to Boston and Noddles Island, Whereby many times before they can get their meal home, it costs them as much as the Corne was worth. And Whereas there is a very Suitable place upon the River A little above Mistick Bridge where A Mill may be Erected to the Easg of your Petitioners And Advantage And Convenience of places Adjacent And without damage to the Passage of Boats Timber Rafts &c Wherefore yor most humble Petitioners Prav this Honble Court to to grant the
Per Joseph Prout (search for this): chapter 14
n and leave thereto allowed The wch is offered to consideration per Joseph Prout. There is still another, much smaller in size and closely written, in which Mr. Prout's queryes are answered and disposed of. After the above petition was folded it was endorsed on the back In Council June 28, 1698. Respited until the next Son The General Court then, and for many years, met in two sessions each year, and the Council's action deferred action and gave time for the consideration of Mr. Prout's side of the matter. At the next session favorable action was taken as follows: Dec 26. 1698 Resolved That the petitioners be allowed what they hereiroughton and Wade. Twenty-three years before, a verdict had been given against the former in favor of Symmes, whose meadows above Mistick ponds were flooded. Yet Prout, who was then (in 1698) proprietor, declared thirty or forty years of use, which covered nearly the time since Broughton began. We find no evidence that Brought
Corne (search for this): chapter 14
the register, Vol. XVII, pp. 15 and 42, are articles relative to this matter, in which interest is revived by examination of original documents in the Massachusetts Archives, of which the following is copy: To the Honble Lt. Governer & Council & Representatives in Genl Court Afsembled The Humble petition of the Inhabitants of the Towne of Medford Showeth That Whereas Your Petitioners have hitherunto been necefsitated for want of a Grist mill within the sd Towne to carry their Corne to be ground as far as Charlestowne or Watertowne and sometimes to Boston and Noddles Island, Whereby many times before they can get their meal home, it costs them as much as the Corne was worth. And Whereas there is a very Suitable place upon the River A little above Mistick Bridge where A Mill may be Erected to the Easg of your Petitioners And Advantage And Convenience of places Adjacent And without damage to the Passage of Boats Timber Rafts &c Wherefore yor most humble Petitioners Prav
Grant (search for this): chapter 14
h year, and the Council's action deferred action and gave time for the consideration of Mr. Prout's side of the matter. At the next session favorable action was taken as follows: Dec 26. 1698 Resolved That the petitioners be allowed what they herein pray for provided that they agree with the parties that own the land on either side the sd River where the Mill is to stand and that they do not hinder the passage of Boats Timber Rafts &c and that it doth not interfere with any former Grant or right to ye sd stream Sent up for concurrence Nathal Byfield Speaker. The reader will do well to consider that in 1698 Medford was, though seventy years from its first settlement, but an insignificant place, and had grown but little. Only two bridges gave passage across the river in its entire length, but they were sufficient for all needs. With a cornemill on the Menotomy side, what was the need of another a quarter mile up stream on the Medford side of the river? And why was
Peter C. Brooks (search for this): chapter 14
he favorable action of the town about gristmills in two places, and added of the first: This was not successful, nor was the following,. . . We ask, was Mr. Brooks correct in these statements? and reply that he was regarding one just below Wear bridge, and wish he had told more of the occupation of '55. On what he based forever pray &c Medford May 30 1698. In the name of & by the order of the selectmen Stephen Willis Towne Clerk By examination of Medford records we find Mr. Brooks' quotation practically correct, under date of May 30, 1698. At a meeting of the frehders and other inhabitents of Medford legally convened put to vote whetthat might have been appropriately called Mistick bridge, and the suitable place where a mill may be erected would lie a little above it, and tally exactly with Mr. Brooks' short distance below Wear bridge (or rather the location of Wear bridge), to which travel was diverted ten years after the petition for this mill was made.
Nathal Byfield Speaker (search for this): chapter 14
the consideration of Mr. Prout's side of the matter. At the next session favorable action was taken as follows: Dec 26. 1698 Resolved That the petitioners be allowed what they herein pray for provided that they agree with the parties that own the land on either side the sd River where the Mill is to stand and that they do not hinder the passage of Boats Timber Rafts &c and that it doth not interfere with any former Grant or right to ye sd stream Sent up for concurrence Nathal Byfield Speaker. The reader will do well to consider that in 1698 Medford was, though seventy years from its first settlement, but an insignificant place, and had grown but little. Only two bridges gave passage across the river in its entire length, but they were sufficient for all needs. With a cornemill on the Menotomy side, what was the need of another a quarter mile up stream on the Medford side of the river? And why was it a matter of town or public action, instead of private enterprise
Governer (search for this): chapter 14
on of '55. On what he based his statement not successful, we must remain ignorant. To our certain knowledge all vestige of any such structure had vanished prior to 1870. Possibly one of those incendiary fires so common in the sixties may have removed it. In the register, Vol. XVII, pp. 15 and 42, are articles relative to this matter, in which interest is revived by examination of original documents in the Massachusetts Archives, of which the following is copy: To the Honble Lt. Governer & Council & Representatives in Genl Court Afsembled The Humble petition of the Inhabitants of the Towne of Medford Showeth That Whereas Your Petitioners have hitherunto been necefsitated for want of a Grist mill within the sd Towne to carry their Corne to be ground as far as Charlestowne or Watertowne and sometimes to Boston and Noddles Island, Whereby many times before they can get their meal home, it costs them as much as the Corne was worth. And Whereas there is a very Suitable
1 2 3