Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register

[28] The main business, which spent the most time and caused the adjourning of the Court, was about the removal of New Town. They had leave, the last General Court, to look out some place for enlargement or removal, with promise of having it confirmed to them, if it were not prejudicial to any other plantation; and now they moved that they might have leave to remove to Connecticut. This matter was debated divers days, and many reasons alleged pro and con.

The principal reasons for their removal were, 1. Their want of accommodation for their cattle, so as they were not able to maintain their ministers, nor could receive any more of their friends to help them; and here it was alleged by Mr. Hooker, as a fundamental error, that towns were set so near each to other. 2. The fruitfulness and commodiousness of Connecticut, and the danger of having it possessed by others, Dutch or English. 3. The strong bent of their spirits to remove thither.

Against these it was said, 1. That, in point of conscience, they ought not to depart from us, being knit to us in one body and bound by oath to seek the welfare of this commonwealth. 2. That, in point of state and civil polity, we ought not to give them leave to depart:—being we were now weak and in danger to be assailed; the departure of Mr. Hooker would not only draw many from us, but also divert other friends that would come to us; we should expose them to evident peril, both from the Dutch, (who made claim to the same river and had already built a fort there,) and from the Indians, and also from our own state at home, who would not endure they should sit down without a patent in any place which our king lays claim unto. 3. They might be accommodated at home by some enlargement which other towns offered. 4. They might remove to Merimack or any other place within our patent. 5. The removing of a candlestick is a great judgment, which is to be avoided.

Upon these and other arguments the Court being divided, it was put to vote; and, of the Deputies, fifteen were for their departure, and ten against it. The Governor and two Assistants were for it, and the Deputy and all the rest of the Assistants were against it, (except the Secretary, who gave no vote;) whereupon no record was entered, because there were not six Assistants in the vote, as the patent requires. Upon this there grew a great difference between the Governor and Assistants and the Deputies. They would not yield the Assistants a negative voice, and the others (considering how dangerous it might