The Bay State Monthly, Volume 1, No. VI. June, 1884 | Page 6

Court. It is an interesting fact to know that in their petition (General Court Records, x, 216, February 11, 1717, in the office of the secretary of state) they speak of having in their possession at that time the original plan of the town, made by Danforth in the year 1668, though it was somewhat defaced. In the language of the Records, it was said to be "with the Petitioner," which expression in the singular number may have been intentional, referring to John Shepley, probably the older one, as certainly the more influential, of the two agents. This plan was also exhibited before the General Court on June 18, 1713, according to the Records (ix, 263) of that date.
The case, as presented by the agents, was as follows:--
A petition of John Sheply & John Ames Agents for the Town of Groton Shewing that the General Assembly of the Province did in the year 1655, Grant unto M'r Dean Winthrop & his Associates a Tract of Land of Eight miles quare for a Plantation to be called by the name of Groton, that Thom's & Jonathan Danforth did in the year 1668, lay out the said Grant, but the Plat thereof through Neglect was not returned to the Court for Confirmation that the said Plat th? something defaced is with the Petitioner, That in the Year 1713 M'r Samuel Danforth Surveyour & Son of the abovesaid Jonathan Danforth, at the desire of the said Town of Groton did run the Lines & make an Implatment of the said Township laid out as before & found it agreeable to the former. W'h. last Plat the Petitioners do herewith exhibit, And pray that this Hon'ble Court would allow & confirm the same as the Township of Groton.
In the House of Represent'ves; Feb. 10. 1717. Read, Read a second time, And Ordered that the Prayer of the Petition be so far granted that the Plat herewith exhibited (Alth? not exactly conformable to the Original Grant of Eight Miles quare) be accounted, accepted & Confirmed as the Bounds of the Township of Groton in all parts, Except where the said Township bounds on the Township of Littleton, Where the Bounds shall be & remain between the Towns as already stated & settled by this Court, And that this Order shall not be understood or interpreted to alter or infringe the Right & Title which any Inhabitant or Inhabitants of either of the said Towns have or ought to have to Lands in either of the said Townships
In Council, Read & Concur'd, Consented to Sam'll Shute
[General Court Records (x, 216), February 11, 1717, in the office of the secretary of state.]
The proprietors of Groton felt sore at the loss of their territory along the Nashobah line in the year 1714, although it would seem without reason. They had neglected to have the plan of their grant confirmed by the proper authorities at the proper time; and no one was to blame for this oversight but themselves. In the autumn of 1734 they represented to the General Court that in the laying out of the original plantation no allowance had been made for prior grants in the same territory, and that in settling the line with Littleton they had lost more than four thousand acres of land; and in consideration of these facts they petitioned for an unappropriated gore of land lying between Dunstable and Townsend.
The necessary steps for bringing the matter before the General Court at this time were taken at a town meeting, held on July 25, 1734. It was then stated that the town had lost more than twenty-seven hundred and eighty-eight acres by the encroachment of Littleton line; and that two farms had been laid out within the plantation before it was granted to the proprietors. Under these circumstances Benjamin Prescott was authorized to present the petition to the General Court, setting forth the true state of the case and all the facts connected with it. The two farms alluded to were Major Simon Willard's, situated at Nonacoicus or Coicus, now within the limits of Ayer, and Ralph Reed's, in the neighborhood of the Ridges; so Mr. Butler told me several years before his death, giving Judge James Prescott as his authority, and I carefully wrote it down at the time. The statement is confirmed by the report of a committee on the petition of Josiah Sartell, made to the House of Representatives, on June 13, 1771. Willard's farm, however, was not laid out before the original plantation was granted, but in the spring of 1658, three years after the grant. At this time Danforth had not made his plan of the plantation, which fact may have given rise to the misapprehension. Ralph Reed was one of the original proprietors of the town,