Town of Wilton

Early Development

Primarily abstracted in 2002 by Ann Mensch from History of the Town of Wilton, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire, by Abiel Abbot Livermore and Sewall Putnam, Lowell, Mass.: Marden & Rowell Printers, 1888.

SALEM-CANADA. [pp. 22-23]

The first movement towards the settlement of Wilton was made in 1735. On the 19th of June of that year a petition was presented to the General Court of Massachusetts by Samuel King and others for relief in consideration "of their sufferings" in the expedition to Canada under Sir William Phips in the year 1690. Agreeably to the old Roman method of rewarding military services by colonizing the veterans, a committee was chosen, consisting of Samuel Wells, Esq., Samuel Chandler and John Hobson, to lay out a township of the contents of six miles square, west of Narragansett, called Number Three, or Amherst, and also called Souhegan West, and return a plat thereof to this Court within twelve months for confirmation.

The following is a description of the tract of land called Salem-Canada, as laid out in May, 1736, by order of the authorities of Massachusetts Bay, and returned June 2, 1736:

"Beginning at a spruce tree and runs north by the Needle 2191 rods on province land to a hemlock marked; then runs East 1558 perch on Province land to a township adjoining to and lying north of Salem-Narragansett No. 3; then turns and runs south on said township 640 rods to a township granted to Jona Simpson and others; then turns and runs East on said township 402 pole to a stake and stones; then runs south 1467 perch on said Narrangansett town; then runs west 480 perch on Duxbury School Farm to stake and heap of stones; then turns south 13 perch on said Farm to a poplar; then runs west 1460 perch to the spruce first named."

Map of Salem-Canada, Supposed

If we suppose the distance from Duxbury School Farm to the spruce at the southwest corner of Salem-Canada (1460 rods) to be correct, that spruce must have been in what is now Wilton; the north line of Wilton being 1518 rods, would leave the spruce 58 rods east of the present west line of Wilton.

In the town clerk's office at Lyndeborough was found a copy of the Salem-Canada grant, and also a plan of the same, from which this is a copy.

The distances, etc., of the several lines on this plan were put down the same as they appeared on the plan at Lyndeborough. It may be seen that there is a discrepancy on the west line of fifty rods between the figures and the sum as written out, but it is the same in the description.

The dotted lines on this plan do not represent any lines on the plan at Lyndeborough, but represent the north line of Wilton, and the east line as far as Lyndeborough runs south.

This tract, including Lyndeborough and the north part of Wilton, received then the name of Salem-Canada. The term "Canada" was obviously given on account of the remembrance of the expedition to Canada. The prefix of "Salem" was, perhaps, due to the fact that, in the early history of the country, Essex County, Massachusetts, of which Salem was the shire town or capital, was represented as extending back westward from the seaboard to the Connecticut River, covering, of course, as may be seen by the map, the territory now occupied by the towns of Lyndeborough and Wilton. It has also been suggested that the signers of the petition to the General Court for relief were probably residents of Salem and vicinity. The town of Salem-Canada, six miles square, was to be divided into sixty-three equal shares, one of which was to be for the first settled minister, one for the ministry, and one for the school.

The conditions of settlement were that on each share, within three years, a good family should be settled; a house built eighteen feet square and seven feet stud at least; that six acres of land should be cultivated; that the inhabitants should settle a learned orthodox minister, and build and finish a convenient meeting-house for the public worship of God.

"NUMBER TWO" [pp. 24-26]

The grant of Salem-Canada in 1735 by the Massachusetts General Court and the settlements formed in it, were followed in 1749 by the grant of a new township, from the proprietors holding under charter of John Tufton Mason, to a company of purchasers, forty-six in number. Many of them never resided on property, but afterwards sold their lands to settlers coming in. These shares were drawn by lot. The deed conveying the land was dated October 1, 1749, at Dunstable, and the lots were drawn on October 16, 1749. The name first given to the new township, which included on the north a part of Salem-Canada, was "Number Two."

The following conditions were prescribed by the proprietors to the grantees:

1. Two lots of eighty acres each should be set apart to encourage the building of mills.
2. One share of two hundred and forty acres should be given to the first minister.
3. One share should be set apart for the Christian ministry.
4. One share should be given to schools.
5. The shareholders should make all roads.
6. The original proprietors should be exempt from all taxes.
7. The shareholders should settle and build houses on forty lots.
8. Each settler should pay $13.33 to aid to building up the town.
9. Those not fulfilling the conditions, except in case of an Indian war, were to forfeit their shares.
10. White pine trees were to be reserved for the British navy.

This new township, which, with the new territory on the south, included on the north a portion of "Salem-Canada," received the name of "Number Two," as stated above. This name was continued until 1762, thirteen years, as the title of Salem-Canada had been for fourteen years, viz.: from 1735 to 1749. "Number One" was Mason, "Number Two," Wilton.

GRANT OF THE MASONIAN PROPRIETORS.

Extract from the deed making the grant of the township of Wilton by the Masonian Proprietors:

PROVINCE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. [pp. 32-34]

Pursuant to the Power and Authority granted and vested in me by the Proprietors of Lands purchased of John Tufton Mason Esq. in the Province of New Hampshire by their vote Passed at their meeting held at Portsmouth in said Province the 16th day of June 1749 I do by these presents on the terms and conditions hereafter expressed give and grant unto Thomas READ, Esq., Robert FLETCHER, Jun., Joseph BLANCHARD, Jun., Oliver COLEBURN, Oliver FARWELL, Jno. USHER, THomas SPAULDING, John LOVEWELL, Jun., John VARNUM, William FOSTER, the Rev. Mr. Thomas PARKER, Josiah BUTTERFIELD, Anthony EMORY, Benjamin PARKER Jun., Nehemiah ABBOT, Samuel GREELE, Benjn. FARWELL, Oliver WHITING, Jos. RICHARDSON, Benjn. FARLEY, Jno. KENDALL, Abraham KENDALL, David ADAMS, Joseph FRENCH, Eleazer BLANCHARD, Zacheus LOVEWELL, Samuel FARLEY, William CUMMINGS, Jona. POWERS, Samuel CUMMINGS, Archalaus DALE, Jacob PUTNAM, Nathaniel PUTNAM, John DALE, Stephen HERRYMAN, John SHEAD and Ephraim PUTNAM, all the right title and property of the Grantors aforesaid of in and to all that part of a township or tract of land in the Province of New Hampshire aforesaid containing five miles square Lying on the branches of Souhegan river between Peterborough and Munson bounded as follows. Beginning at the Southwest corner of the premises at a white pine tree, which is the Northwest corner of the Township No. 1 and runs from thence north five miles to a white ash marked, from thence east five miles to a stake and stones, from thence south five miles to a Chestnut tree marked, from thence west five miles to the white pine tree first mentioned which said Township is laid out, drawn for and the lotts ascertained to each grantee respectively also two lotts for encouragement for building Mills and three shares for public uses viz. one for the first settled Minister, one for the Ministry and one for the school.

In witness whereof I the Subscriber Joseph Blanchard of Dunstable have hereunto set my hand and seal this first day of October 1749. JOSEPH BLANCHARD.
 

SCHEDULE OF LOTS DRAWN BY THE GRANTEES
GRANTEES	Draught	Lot No.	Range	Lot No.	Range	Lot No.	Range
Minister	6	12	7	17	10	20	4
Ministry	28	17	2	8	8	9	1
Mill lots	67	13	4	14	4	..	..
School lots	42	12	9	10	9	10	1
Nehemiah ABBOT	43	13	9	3	1	16	1
David ADAMS	56	17	1	..	..	..	..
Eleazer BLANCHARD	60	11	6	1	9	1	6
Joseph BLANCHARD, Jr.	2	8	4	8	3	20	2
Joseph BLODGETT	17	5	5	5	6	3	7
Joseph BLODGETT	51	16	7	13	5	..	..
Josiah BUTTERFIELD	35	17	7	14	2	17	6
Ezra CARPENTER	22	12	6	17	3	15	1
Oliver COLBURN	3	10	6	1	10	16	3
John COMBS	16	4	3	8	2	9	2
Jonathan CUMMINGS	23	3	2	4	2	11	3
Samuel CUMMINGS	66	6	2	5	2	6	1
William CUMMINGS	64	2	2	4	1	5	1
Peter POWERS & A. DALE	27	7	8	7	7	7	1
Archalaus DALE	71	16	6	..	..	..	..
John DALE	68	16	2	21	2	..	..
Anthony EMORY	36	15	2	2	8	3	8
Benjamin FARLEY	50	19	8	18	6	..	..
Samuel FARLEY	63	20	9	11	7	11	9
Benjamin FARWELL	46	16	9	9	6	19	9
Oliver FARWELL	7	11	5	2	7	1	2
Robert FLETCHER, Jr.	1	9	4	9	3	11	4
Robert FLETCHER, Jr.	61	18	2	19	2	19	1
William FOSTER	32	7	10	20	8	10	7
Samuel FOWLE	19	13	3	13	2	12	10
Joseph FRENCH	57	4	7	5	7	6	10
Samuel GREELE	45	9	8	9	9	8	7
Stephen HERRYMAN	70	17	4	15	4	..	..
Humphrey HOBBS	14	4	4	6	3	10	2
Abraham KENDALL	53	19	5	..	..	..	..
John KENDALL	52	5	9	6	8	14	5
John LOVEWELL, Jr.	10	8	6	2	10	1	5
Zacheus LOVEWELL	62	20	10	10	5	7	9
Benjamin PARKER, Jr.	40	11	8	10	8	13	10
Mr. Thomas PARKER	34	18	7	19	7	18	3
Thomas PARKER, Jr.	24	3	3	12	2	7	2
Jonathan POWERS	65	2	3	2	4	2	1
Peter POWERS	12	13	7	16	10	20	1
Peter POWERS	41	13	8	14	8	20	6
Peter POWERS	55	16	4	18	4	15	3
Peter POWERS & A. DALE	27	7	8	7	7	7	1
Ephraim PUTNAM	72	16	3	..	..	..	..
Jacob PUTNAM	69	15	5	18	5	..	..
Nathaniel PUTNAM	72	16	3	..	..	..	..
Joseph RICHARDSON	48	17	5	16	5	..	..
John SHEAD	49	14	6	15	6	..	..
Thomas SPALDING	9	18	1	13	1	14	1
John USHER	8	6	5	6	6	1	1
John VARNUM	25	3	4	1	3	2	5
Oliver WHITING	47	6	4	7	4	7	3

 

SCHEDULE OF LOTS DRAWN BY THE GRANTORS
GRANTORS	Draught	Lot No.	Range	Lot No.	Range	Lot No.	Range
Theodore ATKINGON, Esq.	44	14	9	14	10	20	5
Joseph BLANCHARD, Esq.	13	5	4	10	3	4	8
George JAFFREY, Esq.	33	18	8	17	8	9	7
Matthew LIVERMORE, Esq.	38	4	9	4	10	5	10
S. SOLLY & C. MARCH, Esq.	59	6	9	8	9	19	9
John Tufton MASON, Esq.	54	14	7	15	7	14	3
Nathaniel MESERVE & others	31	18	9	17	9	20	7
John MOFFATT, Esq.	29	5	8	6	7	8	1
Daniel PIERCE & Mary MOORE	37	2	9	3	9	3	10
Jotham ODIORNE, Esq.	11	12	4	12	3	12	1
Thomas PARKER, Esq.	4	9	5	8	10	9	10
William PARKER, Esq.	21	12	5	19	10	18	10
Daniel PIERCE & Mary MOORE	37	2	9	3	9	3	10
Joshua PIERCE, Esq.	18	4	5	4	6	1	7
S. SOLLY & C. MARCH, Esq.	59	6	9	8	9	19	9
Thomas WALLINGFORD, Esq.	15	5	3	11	2	7	6
John WENTWORTH, Jr.	26	3	5	2	6	3	6
M. H. WENTWORTH, Esq.	5	7	5	8	5	1	4
Mark H. WENTWORTH, Esq.	58	15	9	15	10	20	3
Richard WILBIRD, Esq.	39	12	8	15	8	16	8

The schedule of the lots drawn is certified thus: The afore-written lists were drawn and finished at Dunstable, the 16th day of October 1749. Copy examined for JOS. BLANCHARD, Proprietors' Clerk.

[Note: The names in the above tables have been placed into alphabetical order by surname, rather than in the order lots were drawn as appears in Livermore &  Putnam's history.]

INDIANS. [pp. 17-20]

The Indians of the vicinity of Wilton consisted principally of the Pawtucket tribe, who had their headquarters at, and perhaps their designation from, Pawtucket Falls on the Merrimack River, in Lowell, Massachusetts; the Pennacooks, who frequented the region about Amoskeag Falls on the same river in Manchester, New Hampshire; and the Souhegans, who either took their name from, or gave their name to, the Souhegan River.

The Merrimack River and the branches flowing into it were the chief hunting and fishing grounds of these bands of Native people. They were a nomadic people, moving from place to place, as the necessity of food and shelter dictated, or as hostilities with other tribes required. No permanent Indian settlement seems to have been made within the limits of Wilton, as far as known, though they traversed the country for game. They left few traces behind them. The one certain memento in Wilton is the name of the principal stream, the Souhegan, or, as spelled in some early documents, "Sowhagon,", signifying, "the river of the plains."

So far as is known, no person belonging to Wilton was carried into captivity or killed by the Indians within the limits of the town.

When Indian attacks were threatened, the settlers fled to neighboring garrisons. Danger existed for about ten years. One garrison was in Milford, on the north bank of the Souhegan River. Another was in Lyndeborough. The apprehensions of the pioneers were so great that in 1744 they sent the following petition, which tells its own story, to the Governor and Council of the Province of New Hampshire:

PETITION FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE INDIANS.

To his Excellency Benning Wentworth Esq., Governor and Commander-in-Chief of his Majesties Province of New Hampshire.

The petition of the inhabitants of Salem-Canada in said Province Humbly shews, That your petitioners live in a place Greatly exposed to the Indians and have not men Sufficient for to Defend us. That tho' there be but few of us, yet we have laid out our estates, to begin in this place, so that we shall be extremely hurt if we must move off, for we have by the Blessing of God on our labors, a fine crop of corn on the ground, and tho' we have a Garrison in the town Built by Order of Maj. Lovell, yet we have nobody empowered so much as to set a watch among us, nor men to keep it: we would pray your Excellency that we may have some assistance from the Government, in sending us some souldiers to Guard and Defend us as in your wisdom you shall think proper.

Though we are but newly added to this Government, yet we pray your Excellency not to disregard us, but to assist us, that we may keep our estates and do service for the government hereafter. And your Petitioners, as in duty Bound will ever pray.

John Cram, Jr., John Cram, David Stevenson, John Dale, Ephraim Putnam, Abraham Leman, Joseph Cram, Samuel Leman, John Stevenson, Jonathan Cram, Benjamin Cram

Salem-Canada, June 26, 1744.

What action, if any, was taken by the Governor is not known. The presumption is that he had few soldiers to spare for such a purpose -- to guard and defend a handful of settlers who had taken their lives in their hands, and had gone out into the wilderness beyond the protection of civilization.

At any rate, the Indians made no raids on the peaceable inhabitants of Salem-Canada of which any record remains. Transient hunters occasionally called on the settlers at a long period subsequent, but they gave no molestation. Though the reign of the Native peoples over the Wilton area has passed, lasting memorials are found in the names they gave to our lakes, streams and mountains; the Monadnock, Souhegan, Contoocook, Nashua, Merrimack, Pawtucket and Pemigewasset.

EARLY WARS.

For a period of about one hundred years the French and Indians, from King William's Ten Years' War, 1688, to Queen Anne's War, 1703, closed by the Peace of Utrecht, 1713, and followed by other attacks, down from 1755 to 1773, kept the New England settlements in a constant state of alarm and warfare.

The terror of these wars was that the Indians were readily influenced to become allies of the French, and, officered by Europeans, employed to carry havoc through New England and New York. They lay in wait as the settlers left their block-houses in the morning to go out to their fields for their day's work, or made night hideous as they dashed into some lone settlement with terrible war-whoop, firing the houses, tomahawking men, and carrying the women and children into captivity. These incursions kept the whole country in a state of feverish alarm and terror, and suspended regular business. The pioneers, after great sacrifices, were often obliged to abandon their improvements, made at great cost, and take refuge in the cities or in the fortified towns to escape. It was a guerilla warfare of the most terrible character.

Nor were the early settlers of New England altogether innocent in the matter. Many regarded the Indians as evil, and in some measure a religious duty to rid them from the land.

But, as elsewhere said, Wilton bore but a small part in this fearful Indian warfare. No tribe permanently occupied her territory. But few of her sons engaged in the French and Indian wars.

Among the troops that were raised to reinforce the army after the battle of Lake George, September, 1755, in Captain James Todd's company is found the name of Ephraim Buterfield; time of enlistment September 22, time of discharge December 13, 1755.

In the campaign of 1757, in the roll of Captain Richard Emery's company we find the name of Henry Parker, Jr., and Josiah Parker, whose father settled on lot No. 7, in the third range. Henry was massacred at Fort William Henry when captured by the French and Indians under General Montcalm.

In the campaign of 1758, in the roll of Captain Nehemiah Lovewell's company is found the name of James Mann, one of the earliest settlers in the southwest part of Wilton, also Philip Putnam, Ephraim Butterfield and Alexander Milliken. They were out about six months in the service.

The above enlistments are all we find recorded in the old documents as belonging to Wilton.

1858 Map of Wilton, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire

WILTON PROPER. [pp. 25-27]

On June 18, 1761, the following petition was addressed to Governor Benning Wentworth:

PETITION FOR INCORPORATION.

To HIs Excellency. Benning Wentworth, Esq., Governor, & c., in the Province of New Hampshire, and the Honorable His Majesty's Council of said Province:

The petition of us the subscribers being Inhabitants of a tract of Land in said Province of the contents of five miles square called and known by the name of Number 2, which Township bounds northerly on Lyndeborough, westerly and Southerly on Peterborough Slip and Number 1, Easterly on ye Masons Grant not taken up; which Tract of land is considerably settled and improved, and is this year Taxed to the Province with other towns.

We would therefore Humbly request of your Excell'y and Honors that we may be Incorporated into a Township and be invested with such Privileges and Immunities as other Towns have and do enjoy in this Province, for ye more easy carrying on our Public affairs & c. and that the said Corporation may be Bounded according to the Grant of the said Township and your Petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray, & c. June 18, 1761.

James Mann. Henry Snow. John Cram. William Gibson. Jonathan Stevens. William Kinkeid. Haezial Hamblet. William Mansur. Elexander Milieen. Robert Smith. John Dale. William Vance. John Burton. Robert Renker. Philip Putnam. David Barker. Ebenezer Perry. John Davidson. Jonathan Greele. Benjamin Thompson. Hugh Smylie.
Samuel Mansur. Jacob Putnam.

The prayer of the petitioners was granted, the lands were surveyed, and the town was incorporated June 25, 1762, under the name of Wilton, derived from an ancient borough in Wiltshire, England. This act of incorporation was to continue in force till January 1, 1765. The first town meeting was held June 27, 1762. A second act of incorporation was granted January 2, 1765, signed by Hon. Benning Wentworth, Governor of the Province of New Hampshire, "to have continued until HIs Majesty's pleasure shall be further known." As His Majesty and His Majesty's successors have, so far as is known, taken no exception to it, it is presumed this act of incorporation remains valid to the present day.

ADDITION OF PART OF WILTON TO TEMPLE.

In 1768 a petition was addressed to the Governor and Council by the inhabitants of Peterborough Slip, Slipton or Sliptown, the part of Peterborough lying east of the mountains called Pack or Petit Monadnock, to have one mile of the west part of Wilton, and extending the length of the town five miles, added to Peterborough Slip to form an independent town. To compensate for this slice of a mile wide being taken off of Wilton, the petitioners also prayed that one mile wide of territory might be added to the town on the east. The people of Wilton addressed the authorities with a counter-petition asking that Peterborough Slip itself might be added to Wilton, and deprecating any addition on the east. But the petitioners of the Peterborough Slip prevailed over the Wiltonians, and a tract, half a mile wide and five miles long, was taken from Wilton and added to Peterborough Slip, constituting the town of Temple.

Thus after all these changes of names and boundaries, of Salem-Canada, "Number Two," Wilton five miles square, and Wilton four and a half miles wide by five miles long, as at present constituted, we have the proprietary and territorial history of the town of Wilton up to the present time.

Printed Resources:
1 Hurd, D. Hamilton. (Supervisor of Compilation). History of Hillsborough County, New Hampshire. Philadephia: J. W. Lewis & Co. 1885.

2 Map of Hillsborough County, New Hampshire, from actual Surveys, by J. Chace, Jr. Boston: Smith, Mason & Co., 1858.

3 Abiel Abbot Livermore and Sewall Putnam. (Authors). History of the Town of Wilton, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire. Lowell, Mass.: Marden & Rowell Printers, 1888.

---