Читать книгу: «The Bay State Monthly, Volume 3, No. 1», страница 5

SHEM DROWNE AND HIS HANDIWORK

By Elbridge H. Goss

The weird imaginings and romantic theories of our great story-teller, Hawthorne, must not be taken as veritable and indisputable history. Some of the Boston newspapers have recently run riot in this respect. Hawthorne, in his "Drowne's Wooden Image," in "Mosses from an Old Manse," says the figure of "Admiral Vernon," which has stood on the corner of State and Broad streets, Boston, for over a century, was the handiwork of one Shem Browne, "a cunning carver of wood." Upon this statement of the romancer, for there is no authentic history to warrant it, one paper, in an article entitled "A Funny Old Man," says: "Deacon Shem Drowne, the Carver. Concerning the origin of the carved figure of Admiral Vernon there can be no doubt. History, ancient records, and fiction all record the presence in Boston of one Deacon Shem Drowne, whose business it was to supply the tradesmen and tavern-keepers of the day with similar carved images to indicate their calling, or by which to identify their places of business."¹

Another, discoursing of this same image, as "Our Oldest Inhabitant," after attributing it to the same man's workmanship, states: "Deacon Shem Drowne, whose name suggests pious and patriarchal, if not nautical associations, carved the grasshopper which still holds its place over Faneuil Hall, and also the gilded Indian,² who, with his bow bent and arrow on the string, so long kept watch and ward over the Province House, the stately residence of the royal Governors of Massachusetts."³ This writer repeatedly spells the name wrong. His name was Drowne, not Droune.⁴ In "Drowne's Wooden Image," Hawthorne makes his Shem Drowne a wood-carver, plain and simple: "He became noted for carving ornamental pump heads, and wooden urns for gate posts, and decorations, more grotesque than fanciful, for mantle pieces." "He followed his business industriously for many years, acquired a competence, and in the latter part of his life attained to a dignified station in the church, being remembered in records and traditions as Deacon Drowne, the carver," and he connects him with the real Shem Drowne of history, only by speaking of him this once as "Deacon Drowne," and saying: "One of his productions, an Indian Chief, gilded all over, stood during the better part of a century on the cupola of the Province House, bedazzling the eyes of those who looked upward, like an angel of the sun;" plainly indicating that he thought the Indian was carved from wood, instead of being made, as it was, of hammered copper.

The real Shem Drowne was not a wood-carver; no authority for such a statement can be found. His trade is given as that of a "tin plate worker,"⁵ and a "cunning artificer" in metal;⁶ nowhere as a wood-carver. He was born in Kittery, Maine, in 1683. His father was Leonard Drowne, who came from the west of England to Kittery, where he carried on the ship building business until 1692, when, on account of the French and Indian wars, he removed his family to Boston, where he died, a few years after, and his grave is in the old Copp's Hill Burying Ground.⁷ At Boston Shem Browne established himself in his trade. He was elected a deacon of the First Baptist Church, in 1721. He was "often employed in Town affairs, especially in the management of Fortifications."⁸

He married Catherine Clark, one of the heirs of Nicholas Bavison, of Charlestown, who was a purchaser in the "Pemaquid Patent," or grant of the Plymouth Company, of some twelve thousand acres, to Messrs. Aldsworth and Elbridge of Bristol, England, made in 1631. Becoming interested in the claim of his wife, as one of the heirs, in 1735, he was appointed agent and attorney of the "Pemaquid Proprietors," in which capacity he acted for many years. It was sometimes called the "Drowne Claim." In 1747 he had the whole tract of land surveyed, and was instrumental in causing forty or more families to settle in that region. That he became blind, or nearly so, as early as 1762, is attested by a deed of land at Broad Cove (Bristol, Maine), made in that year to Thomas Johnston; a note in the margin of which states that it was "distinctly read to him on account of his sight;"⁹ but the signature is written in a large, plain hand. He died January 13, 1774, aged ninety-one years. He had a daughter, Sarah, who, in 1757, was married to Rev. Jeremiah Condy, who, from 1739 to 1764, was pastor of the First Baptist Church, of which church Mr. Drowne was a deacon. As a metal worker he made the grasshopper, Indian, and other vanes; but that he ever carved a pump head, urn, gate-post, "Admiral Vernon," or any other wooden image, there is not a scintilla of evidence; nothing but the figment of a romancer's brain.

The following letter to his nephew, Honorable Solomon Drowne of Providence, Rhode Island, is here printed by the kindness of Henry T. Drowne, Esq., of New York, who has many of the old papers of the Drowne families. It was written soon after his nephew's marriage, and is an interesting document; full of a sympathetic and kindly spirit; showing that the customs of his church, the Baptist, of that day, were very similar to those of the Evangelical churches of to-day; and gives an instance of "Catholic Christian Spirit" worthy of note. The use of the colon instead of the period is also noticeable:

BOSTON [Massachusetts],

August y^e 18, 1732.

Loving Kinsman:

Yours I received and have considered the Contents, and pray that your spouse may be directed and assisted by the grace and holy spirit of God to live in all good conscience before Him and this being the indispensable Duty of everyone when come to the use of Reason, with all seriousness to search the Scriptures, from thence to learn our Duty; and, then with Humility to devote ourselves to God, which is our reasonable Service; and, this being the awfulest solemnity that poor mortal man ever transacts in, whilst in this world: being to enter into Covenant with the Most High God. In the Concernment of a precious soul for a vast Eternity, ought to be entered upon with earnest prayer to God for his grace, that it may be sufficient for us, and that His strength might be made perfect in weakness: As for the order in which our Church admits Members into Communion: the Person who desires to joyn to the Church stands propounded a fortnight, in which time inquiry is made concerning their Life and Conversation: then they appear before the Church, make Confession, with their mouth, of their Repentance toward God, and their faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ: and, if nothing appears by information contrary to their Confession, then they are approved of by a vote of the Church, with all readiness; and so partake of the Holy ordinances—Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

Our breaking-bread day is always on the first Sabbath in every month, and, always on the Friday before it, we have a Church Meeting, which is carried on by prayer, in order to prepare for our approach to the Lord's table: at which Meetings those are sometimes heard and sometimes on the Sabbath, as circumstances best serve—so that any Person at a Distance may send to our minister to propound them to the Church timely, and order their coming, so as to partake of both ordinances on the same day: The Reverend Mr. Cotton of Newton, on occasion of a man of his Parish desiring to join in Communion with our Church, gave him a Letter of Recommendation, not as a member with him, but as of one in Judgment of Charity qualified by the grace of God to be received amongst us: which the Church received as a mark of his Catholic Christian Spirit.

That you and your spouse may be directed to do what may be most for the glory of God: and for your own Peace and Comfort, both for time and Eternity: that you may both walk in all the commands and ordinances of the Lord blameless is the Prayer and Desire of your loving uncle.

SHEM DROWNE.

Two of the three best known weather vanes made by Drowne, are still on duty; and one, the Indian chief, which for so many years decked the Province House, is now the property of the Massachusetts Historical Society, in one of the rooms of which it is to be seen, still swinging on its original pivot. From the sole of his foot to the top of his plume, it is four feet, six inches; and from his elbow to tip of arrow, four feet; weight forty-eight pounds.

The old grasshopper on Fanueil Hall¹⁰ was made in 1742, and has veered with the winds and been beaten by the storms of one hundred and forty odd years. It was last repaired in 1852, when there was found within it a much-defaced paper, only a part of which could be read:

SHEM DROWNE MADE ITT

May 25, 1742

To my Brethren and Fellow Grasshoppers

Fell in y^e year 1755 Nov 15th day from y^e Market by a great Earthquake … sing … sett a … by my old Master above.

Again Like to have Met with my Utter Ruin by Fire, but hopping Timely from my Publick Situation came of with Broken bones, and much Bruised, Cured and again fixed....

Old Master's Son Thomas Drowne June 28th, 1763. And Although I now promise to Play … Discharge my Office, yet I shall vary as ye wind.¹¹

The other one still in use is the old "Cockerel" of Hanover Street Church fame. This was made for the New Brick Church in 1721, and is the oldest of the three. It held its position on this church and its successors, one of which was long known as the "Cockerel Church," for one hundred and forty-eight years, when it was raised on the Shepard Memorial Church of Cambridge, where it now is. "It measures five feet four inches from bill to tip of tail, and stands five feet five inches from the foot of the socket to the top of comb, and weighs one hundred and seventy-two pounds."¹²

Possibly some other specimens of the handiwork of this good Deacon Shem Drowne are still in existence. Who knows?

THE WEDDING IN YE DAYS LANG SYNE

By Rev. Anson Titus

The story of courtship and marriage is ever fascinating. It is new and fresh to the hearts of the youthful and aged. A few words upon the marriage day in the early New England will not be without interest. September 9, 1639, the General Court of Massachusetts Bay Colony passed a law ordering intentions of marriage to be published fourteen days at the public lecture, or in towns where there was no lecture the "intention" was to be posted "vpon some poast standinge in publique viewe." On this same day it was ordered that the clerks of the several towns record all marriages, births and deaths. This was a wise provision. It at once taught the people of the beginning and of the designed stability of the new-founded government.

The course of true love did not run smooth in these early days any more than to-day. Parents were desirous of having sons and daughters intermarry with families of like social standing and respectability. But the youth and maid often desired to exercise their own freedom and choice. On May 7, 1651, the General Court ordered a fine and punishment against those who "seeke to draw away y^e affections of yong maydens." In the time of Louis XV, of France, the following decree was made: "Whoever by means of red or white paint, perfumes, essences, artificial teeth, false hair, cotton, wool, iron corsets, hoops, shoes, with high heels, or false tips, shall seek to entice into the bonds of marriage any male subject of his majesty, shall be prosecuted for witchcraft, and declared incapable of matrimony." The fathers of New England may have made foolish laws, but this one in France at a later time goes beyond them. The seductive charms of the sexes they deemed could not be trusted. Wonderment often comes to us of the thoughts and manners of the sage law-makers when their youthful hearts were reaching out after another's love.

The marriage day was celebrated with decorum. The entire community were conversant of the proposed marriage, for the same had been read in meeting and posted in "publique viewe." The earliest lawmakers of the Colony were pillars in the church, and though they did not regard marriage an ordinance over which the church had chief to say, yet they desired an attending solemnity. In 1651 it was ordered that "there shall be no dancinge vpon such occasions," meaning the festivities, which usually followed the marriage, at the "ordinary" or village inn.

The marriage of widows made special laws needful. Property was held in the name of the husband. The wife owned nothing, though it came from the meagre dowry of her own father. When the husband died the widow had certain rights as long as she "remained his widow." These rights were small at best, though the estate may have been accumulated through years of their mutual toil and hardships. We have notes of a number of cases, but give only a few. We omit the names of the contracting parties. "T– C– of A– and H– B– of S–, widow were married together, September y^e 28th, 1748, before O– B– J.P. And at ye same time y^e s^d H– solemnly declared as in y^e presence of Almighty God & before many witnesses, that she was in no way in possession of her former husband's estate of whatever kind soever neither possession or reversion." An excellent Deacon married an elderly matron, Dorothea –, and before the Justice of Peace "Y^e s^d Dorothea declared she was free from using any of her former husband's estate, and so y^e s^d Nathaniel [the Deacon] received her." The following declarations are not without interest. "Y^e s^d John B– declared before marriage that he took y^e s^d Hannah naked and had clothed her & that he took her then in his own clothes separate from any interest of her former husbands." Again a groom declares: "And he takes her as naked and destitute, not having nor in no ways holding any part of her former husband's estate whatever." We have also the declaration of a widower on marrying a widow in 1702, who had property in her own name, probably gained by will, "that he did renounce meddling with her estate." These declarations evidence that the widow relinquished, and that the groom received her without the least design upon the estate. It has been intimated that in a few instances these declarations became a "sign," but we can hardly credit it. The "rich" widow was taken out of the matrimonial problem.

The following affidavit is spread on the town records of Amesbury:

"Whereas Thomas Challis of Amesbury in y^e County of Essex in y^e Province of y^e Massachsetts Bay in New England, and Sarah Weed, daughter of George Weed in y^e same Town, County and Province, have declared their intention of taking each other in marriage before several public meetings of y^e people called Quakers in Hampton and Amesbury, and according to y^t good order used amongst them whose proceeding therein after a deliberate consideration thereof with regard to y^e righteous law of God and example of his people recorded in y^e holy Scriptures of truth in that case, and by enquiry they appeared clear of all others relating to marriage and having consent of parties and relations concerned were approved by said meeting.

Now these certify whom it may concern y^t for y^e full accomplishment of their intention, this twenty-second day of September being y^e year according to our account 1727, then they the s^d Thom^s Challis and Sarah Weed appeared in a public assembly of y^e afores^d people and others met together for that purpose at their public meeting-house in Amesbury afores^d and then and there he y^e s^d Thom^s Challis standing up in y^e s^d assembly taking y^e s^d Sarah Weed by y^e hand did solemnly declare as followeth:

Friends in y^e fear of God and in y^e presence of this assembly whom I declare to bear witness, that I take this my Friend Sarah Weed to be my wife promising by y^e Lord's assistance to be unto her a kind and loving husband till death, or to this effect; and then and there in y^e s^d assembly she y^e said Sarah Weed did in like manner declare as follweth: Friends in y^e fear of God and presence of this assembly whom I declare to bear witness that I take this my Friend Thom^s Challis to be my husband promising to be unto him a faithful and loving wife till death separate us, or words of y^e same effect. And y^e s^d Thom^s Challis and Sarah Weed, as a further confirmation thereof did then and there to these presents set their hands, she assuming y^e name of her husband. And we whose names are hereto subscribed being present amongst others at their solemnizing Subscription in manner afores^d have hereto set our names as witness."

Then follow the names of groom and bride, relatives on either side, and then the names of members in the assembly, first the "menfolks," then the "womenfolks." The names all told are forty-one. Among them is that of Joseph Whittier, which name with those of Challis and Weed have long been honored names in Amesbury.

The marriage gift to the husband on the part of his parents was usually a farm, a part of the homestead; the dowry to the young bride from her parents was a cow, a year's supply of wool, or something needful in setting up house-keeping. If the homestead farm was not large the young couple were brave enough to encounter the labors and toils of frontier life, and begin for themselves on virgin soil and amid new scenes. It required bravery on the part of the young bride. But there were noble maidens in those days. The cares and duties of motherhood soon followed, but the house-cares and the maternal obligations were performed to the admiration of later generations. The fathers and mothers of New England were strong and hardy. Their praises come down to us. Witnesses new and ancient testify of their worth and royalty of character.

A REMINISCENCE OF COL. FLETCHER WEBSTER

In a private conversation with the writer not long since General Marston, of New Hampshire, related the following story:

"On the morning of the thirtieth of August, 1862, before sunrise, I was lying under a fence rolled up in a blanket on the Bull Run battle-field. It was the second day of the Bull Run battle. My own regiment, the Second New Hampshire Volunteers, had been in the fight the day before and had lost one-third of the entire regiment in killed and wounded.

"While so lying by the fence some one shook me and said, 'Get up here.' In answer I said, without throwing the blanket from over my head, 'Who in thunder are you?' The answer was made, 'Get up here and see the Colonel of the Massachusetts Twelfth.'

"The speaker then partly pulled the blanket off my head and I saw that it was Colonel Fletcher Webster; whereupon I arose, and we sat down together and I sent my orderly for coffee.

"We sat there drinking the coffee and talking about his father, Daniel Webster, and he told me about his father going up to Franklin every year and always using the same expression about going. He would say 'Fletcher, my son, let us go up to Franklin to-morrow; let us have a good time and leave the old lady at home. Let us have a good old New Hampshire dinner—fried apples and onions and pork.' At about that time the Adjutant of Colonel Webster's regiment came along and told him that the General commanding his brigade wanted to see him. Colonel Webster replied that he would be there shortly.

"As he sat there on the blanket with me he took hold of his left leg just below the knee with both hands and said: 'There, I will agree to have my leg taken off right there for my share of the casualties of this day.' I replied: 'I would as soon be killed as lose a leg; and the chances are a hundred to one that you won't be hit at all.' 'Well,' said he as he gave me his hand, 'I hope to see you again; goodbye.' I never saw him again. He was killed that day. His extreme sadness, his depression, was perhaps indicative of a conviction or presentiment of some impending misfortune."

OLD DORCHESTER

By Charles M. Barrows

The quaint old Puritan annalist, James Blake, wrote as a preface to his book of records:

"When many most Godly and Religious People that Dissented from y^e way of worship then Established by Law in y^e Realm of England, in y^e Reign of King Charles y^e first, being denied y^e free exercise of Religion after y^e manner they professed according to y^e light of God's Word and their own consciences, did under y^e Incouragment of a Charter Granted by y^e S^d King, Charles, in y^e Fourth Year of his Reign, A.D. 1628, Remoue themselues & their Families into y^e Colony of y^e Massachusetts Bay in New England, that they might Worship God according to y^e light of their own Consciences, without any burthensome Impositions, which was y^e very motive & cause of their coming; Then it was, that the First Inhabitants of Dorchester came ouer, and were y^e first Company or Church Society that arriued here, next y^e Town of Salem who was one year before them."

Nonconformity, then, was the "very motive and cause" which settled Dorchester, the oldest town but one in Puritan New England, and planted there a sturdy yeomanry to whom freedom of conscience was more than home and dearer than life. Nor was this "vast extent of wilderness" to which they succeeded by right of purchase from the heirs of Chickatabat any such narrow area as that of the same name, recently annexed to the city of Boston. It extended from what is now the northern limit of South Boston to within a hundred and sixty rods of the Rhode Island line, thus giving the township a length of about thirty-five miles "as y^e road goethe." The late Ellis Ames, of Canton, a competent authority, says the town "was formerly bounded by Boston, Roxbury, Dedham, Wrentham, Taunton, Bridgewater and Braintree," so that its history is the history of a large part of the towns in Norfolk county and a portion of Bristol. The manner in which the original territory has been gradually reduced is thus told by Mr. Ames: "Milton was set off in 1662; part of Wrentham, in 1724: Stoughton, in 1726; Sharon, in 1765; Foxborough, in 1778; Canton, in 1797; strips were also set off to Dedham, probably, in 1739; and before the whole was annexed, portions of the northern part of the town were set off to Boston, at two several times: in 1804 and in 1855." Since that date another portion has been severed to make the northern quarter of Hyde Park. Honorable John Daggett, the historian of Attleborough, which was then a part of the Rehoboth North Purchase, says there was a dispute concerning the boundary between Dorchester and that town, which was finally settled by a conference of delegates, held at the house of one of his ancestors.

Why those "most Godly and Religious People" chose to settle where they did rather than on the Charles river, as at first intended, Mr. Blake proceeds to tell us in his annals. He says they made the voyage from England to New England in a vessel of four hundred tons, commanded by Captain Squeb, and that they had "preaching or expounding of the Scriptures every day of their passage, performed by Ministers." Contrary to their desires, the ship discharged them and their goods at Nantasket, but they procured a boat in which part of the company rowed into Boston harbor and up the Charles river, "until it became narrow and shallow," when they went ashore at a point in the present village of Watertown. But after exploring the open lands about Boston, they finally made choice of a neck of land "joyning to a place called by y^e Indians Mattapan," because it formed a natural inclosure for the cattle they had brought with them, and which, if turned into the open land, would be liable to stray and be lost. This little circumstance fixed the original settlement on the marsh now known as Dorchester Neck.

The honor of the name Dorchester appears to belong to Rev. John White, minister of a town of the same name in the mother country, who planned and encouraged the exodus to America. But the hardy little band of exiles who received the title from old Cutshumaquin, the successor of Chickatabat, little knew what their wild territory was destined to become in the course of a hundred years. They were loyal subjects of the English throne, building their log cabins and rude meeting-house on Allen's Plain under protection of a charter from King Charles; there they hoped to found a permanent town, where the worship of God should be maintained in accordance with the dictates of the Puritan conscience, without interference of churchman, Roman Catholic, Baptist, or Quaker. There was room in the unexplored forests to the south for pasturage and for the overflow, whenever, as Cotton Mather said when the whole state contained less than six thousand white inhabitants, "Massachusetts should be like a hive overstocked with bees."

The first meeting-house in Dorchester, a very unpretentious structure of logs and thatch, was completed in 1631, and no free-holder was allowed to plant his domicile farther than the distance of half a mile from it, without special permission of the fathers of the town. It stood near the intersection of the present Pleasant and Cottage streets, and that portion of the former highway between Cottage and Stoughton streets is supposed to have been the first road laid out in the early settlement. Shortly after, this road was extended to Five Corners in one direction, and to the marsh, then called the Calf Pasture, in the other. The present names of these extensions are Pond street and Crescent avenue. From Five Corners a road was subsequently laid out running, north-east to a point a little below the Captain William Clapp place, where there was a gate which closed the entrance to Dorchester Neck, where the cattle were pastured. It was on this street that Rev. Richard Mather, the first minister of the town, Roger Williams, of Rhode Island fame, and other distinguished citizens resided. The next undertaking in the way of public improvements was the building of two important roads, one leading to Penny Ferry, thus opening a highway of communication with the sister Colony at Plymouth; the other leading to Roxbury, Brookline and Cambridge.

In Josselyn's description of the town soon after its settlement may be read:

"Six myles from Braintree lyeth Dorchester, a frontire Town, pleasantly situated and of large extent into the maine land, well watered with two small rivers, her body and wings filled somewhat thick with houses, … accounted the greatest town heretofore in New England, but now giving way to Boston."

Through what hardships and privations this infant freehold was maintained can be understood by those only, who have read the records of the colonial struggle against a sterile soil, a rigorous climate, grim famine, hostile Indians, and a total lack of all the appliances and comforts of civilization. The years 1631 and 1632 were a period of great distress to the Dorchester farmers, on account of the failure of their crops and supplies of provision, and Captain Clapp wrote concerning it: "Oh! y^e Hunger that many suffered and saw no hope in an Eye of Reason to be Supplied, only by Clams & Muscles, and Fish; and Bread was very Scarce, that sometimes y^e very Crusts of my Fathers Table would have been very sweete vnto me; And when I could have Meal & Water & Salt, boyled together, it was so good, who could wish better. And it was not accounted a strange thing in those Days to Drink Water, and to eat Samp or Homine without Butter or Milk. Indeed it would have been a very strange thing to see a piece of Roast Beef, Mutton, or Veal, tho' it was not long before there was Roast Goat."

In 1740, the same year that Whitefield visited New England, on his evangelistic mission, the crops were again cut off by untimely frosts, and Mr. Blake wrote in his annual entry-book: "There was this year an early frost that much Damnified y^e Indian Corn in y^e Field, and after it was Gathered a long Series of wett weather & a very hard frost vpon it, that damnified a great deal more."

It is not unfair to suppose that the habits of rigid economy learned in this school of adversity influenced the passage of the celebrated law against wearing superfluities, quite as much as their austere prejudice against display. Be that as it may, the attention of the court was called to the dangerous increase of lace and other ornaments in female attire, and, after mature deliberation, it seemed wise to them to pass the following wholesome law:

"Whereas there is much complaint of the wearing of lace and other superflueties tending to little use, or benefit, but to the nourishing of pride, and exhausting men's estates, and also of evil example to others; it is therefore ordered that henceforth no person whatsoever shall prsume to buy or sell within this jurisdiction any manner of lace to bee worne ore used within o^r limits.

"And no taylor or any other person, whatsoever shall hereafter set any lace or points vpon any garments, either linnen, woolen, or any other wearing cloathes whatsoever, and that no p'son hereafter shall be imployed in making any manner of lace, but such as they shall sell to such persons but such as shall and will transport the same out of this jurisdiction, who in such a case shall have liberty to buy and sell; and that hereafter no garment shall be made w^th short sleeves, whereby the nakedness of the arm may be discovered in the bareing thereof, and such as have garments already made w^th short sleeves shall not hereafter wear the same, unless they cover their armes with linnen or otherwise; and that hereafter no person whatsoever shall make any garment for women, or any of their sex, w^th sleeves more than halfe an elle wide in y^e widest place thereof, and so proportionable for bigger or smaller persons; and for the p^r sent alleviation of immoderate great sleeves and some other superfluities, w^ch may easily bee redressed w^th out much pr udice, or y^e spoile of garments, as immoderate great briches, knots of ribban, broad shoulder bands and rayles, silk lases, double ruffes and caffes, &c."

But the court did not confine itself to prescribing the size of a lady's sleeves, or the trimming she might wear on her dress: it passed other timely laws to restrain the idle and vicious and preserve good order throughout the community. It was ordered in 1632 "that y^e remainder of Mr. (John) Allen's strong water, being estimated about two gallandes, shall be deliuered into y^e hands of y^e Deacons of Dorchester for the benefit of y^e poore there, for his selling of it dyvers tymes to such as were drunke by it, knowing thereof."