John Burton came early to Salem by way of Barbadoes. He combined the

pursuits of a farmer and a tanner. He was a sturdy old Englishman, who,

while probably holding the theological sentiments that prevailed in his

day, abhorred the spirit of persecution, and was unwilling to live

where it was allowed to bear sway. He does not appear to have been a

Quaker, but sympathized with all who suffered wrong. In 1658, he went

off in their company to Rhode Island, sharing their banishment. But his

conscience would not let him rest in voluntary flight. He came[i.152]

back in 1661, to bear his testimony against oppression. He was brought

before the Court, as an abettor and shelterer of Quakers. He told the

justices that they were robbers and destroyers of the widows and

fatherless, that their priests divined for money, and that their

worship was not the worship of God. They commanded him to keep silent.

He commanded them to keep silent. They thought it best to bring the

colloquy to a close by ordering him to the stocks. They finally

concluded, upon the whole, to let him alone; and he remained here the

rest of his life. His descendants are through a daughter (who married

William Osborne) and his son Isaac. They are numerous, under both

names. Isaac was an active and respectable citizen of the village, and

a farmer of enterprise and energy. He carried on, under a lease,

Governor Endicott's farm of over five hundred acres on Ipswich River,

and had lands of his own. In subsequent generations, this family

branched off in various directions to Connecticut, Vermont, and

elsewhere. One detachment of them went to Wilton, N.H., where the

family still remains on the original homestead. The late Warren Burton,

who was born in Wilton,—a graduate of Harvard College in the class of

1821, and well known for his invaluable services in the cause of

education, philanthropy, and letters,—was a direct descendant of John

Burton, and as true to the rights of conscience as the old tanner, who

bearded the lion of persecution in the day of his utmost wrath, and in

his very den.[i.153]

Henry Herrick, who, as has been stated, purchased the Cherry-Hill farm

of Alford, was the fifth son of Sir William Herrick, of Beau Manor

Park, in the parish of Loughborough, in the county of Leicester,

England. He came first to Virginia, and then to Salem. He was

accompanied to America by another emigrant from Loughborough, named

Cleaveland. Herrick became a member of the First Church at Salem in

1629, and his wife Edith about the same time. Their fifth son, Joseph,

baptized Aug. 6, 1645, owned and occupied Cherry Hill in 1692. He

married Sarah, daughter of Richard Leach, Feb. 7, 1667. He was a man of

great firmness and dignity of character, and, in addition to the care

and management of his large farm, was engaged in foreign commerce. As

he bore the title of Governor, he had probably been at some time in

command of a military post or district, or perhaps of a West-India

colony. His descendants are numerous, and have occupied distinguished

stations, often exhibiting a transmitted military stamp. Joseph Herrick

was in the Narragansett fight. It illustrates the state of things at

that time, that this eminent citizen, a large landholder, engaged in

prosperous mercantile affairs, and who had been abroad, was, in 1692,

when forty-seven years of age, a corporal in the village company. He

was the acting constable of the place, and, as such, concerned in the

early proceedings connected with the witchcraft prosecutions. For a

while he was under the influence of the delusion; but his strong and

enlightened mind soon led him out of it. He was one of[i.154] the

petitioners in behalf of an accused person, when intercession, by any

for any, was highly dangerous; and he was a leader in the party that

rose against the fanaticism, and vindicated the characters of its

victims. He inherited a repugnance to oppression, and sympathy for the

persecuted. His father and mother appear, by a record of Court, to have

been fined "for aiding and comforting an excommunicated person,

contrary to order."

William Nichols, in 1651, bought two hundred acres, which had been

granted to Henry Bartholomew, partly in the village, but mostly beyond

the "six-mile extent," and consequently set off to Topsfield. He had

several other lots of land. He distributed nearly all his real estate,

during his lifetime, to his son John; his adopted son, Isaac Burton;

his daughters, the wives of Thomas Wilkins and Thomas Cave; and his

grand-daughter, the wife of Humphrey Case. His only son John had

several sons, and from them the name has been widely dispersed. In a

deposition dated May 14, 1694, William Nichols declares himself "aged

upwards of one hundred years." As his will was offered for Probate Feb.

24, 1696, he must have been one hundred and two years of age at his

death.

William Cantlebury was a large landholder, having purchased

three-quarters of the Corwin grant. He died June 1, 1663. His name died

with him, as he had no male issue. His property went to his daughters,

who were represented, in 1692, under the names of Small, Sibley, and

Buxton. The Flints, Popes,[i.155] Uptons, Princes, Phillipses,

Needhams, and Walcotts, had valuable farms, and appear, from the

records and documents, to have been respectable, energetic, and

intelligent people. Daniel Andrew was one of the strong men of the

village; had been a deputy to the General Court, and acted a prominent

part before and after the witchcraft convulsion. But the great family

of the village—greater in numbers and in aggregate wealth than any

other, and eminently conspicuous on both sides in the witchcraft

proceedings—remains to be mentioned.

John Putnam had a grant of one hundred acres, Jan. 20, 1641. With his

wife Priscilla, he came from Buckinghamshire, England, and was probably

about fifty years of age on his arrival in this country. He was a man

of great energy and industry, and acquired a large estate. He died in

1662, leaving three sons,—Thomas, born in 1616; Nathaniel, in 1620; and

John, in 1628. For a more convenient classification, I shall, in

speaking of this family, refer, not to the original John at all, but to

the sons as its three heads.

Thomas, the eldest, inherited a double share of his father's lands. He

was of age when he came to America, and had received a good education.

He appears to have settled, in the first instance, in Lynn, where for

several years he acted as a magistrate, holding local courts, by

appointment of the General Court. Upon removing to Salem, he was

chosen, as the town-records show, to the office of constable. This was

considered at that time as quite a distinguished position,

carrying[i.156] with it a high authority, covering the whole executive

local administration. Thomas Putnam was the first clerk of Salem

Village, and acted prominently in military, ecclesiastical, and

municipal affairs. He seems to have been a person of a quieter

temperament than his younger brothers, and led a somewhat less stirring

life. Possessing a large property by inheritance, he was not quite so

active in increasing it; but, enjoying the society and friendship of

the leading men, lived a more retired life. At the same time, he was

always ready to serve the community if called for, as he often was,

when occasion arose for the aid of his superior intelligence and

personal influence. He married first, while in Lynn, Ann, daughter of

Edward Holyoke, great-grandfather of the President of Harvard College

of that name whose son, the venerable centenarian, Dr. Edward Augustus

Holyoke, is remembered as a true Christian philosopher by the

generation still lingering on the stage. Having lost his wife on the

1st of September, 1665, he married, on the 14th of November, 1666,

Mary, widow of Nathaniel Veren; coming, through her, into possession of

property in Jamaica and Barbadoes, in which places Veren had resided,

more or less, in the prosecution of commercial business. His homestead,

as shown on the map, was occupied by his widow in 1692, and, after her

death, by her son Joseph, the father of General Israel Putnam. He had

also a town residence on the north side of Essex Street, extending back

to[i.157] the North River. Its front on Essex Street embraced the

western part of the grounds now occupied by the North Church, and

extended to a point beyond the head of Cambridge Street. He left the

eastern half of this property to his son Thomas, and the western half

to his son Joseph. To his son Edward he left another estate in the

town, on the western side of St. Peter's Street, to the north of

Federal Street.

Thomas Putnam died on the 5th of May, 1686. He left large estates in

the village to each of his children, and a valuable piece of meadow

land, of fifteen acres, to a faithful servant.

Nathaniel Putnam married Elizabeth, daughter of Richard Hutchinson,

and, besides what he received from his father, came, through his wife,

into possession of seventy-five acres. On that tract he built his house

and passed his life. The property has remained uninterruptedly in his

family. One of them, the late Judge Samuel Putnam, of the Supreme Court

of Massachusetts, enjoyed it as a country residence, and it is still

held by his children. Nathaniel Putnam was a deputy to the General

Court, and constantly connected with all the interests of the

community. He had great business activity and ability, and was a person

of extraordinary powers of mind, of great energy and skill in the

management of affairs, and of singular sagacity, acumen, and quickness

of perception. He died July 23, 1700, leaving a numerous family and a

large estate.

John Putnam had the same indefatigable activity as[i.158] Nathaniel. He

was often deputy to the General Court, and accumulated a very great

landed property. He married Rebecca Prince, step-daughter of John

Gedney, and died on the 7th of April, 1710. He was buried with military

honors. He left a large family of sons and daughters. We shall often

meet him in our narrative, and gather the materials, as we go along, to

form an opinion of his character. The earliest rate-list in the parish

record book is for 1681. At that time the three brothers were all

living; the aggregate sum assessed upon ninety-four names was two

hundred pounds. The rate of Thomas was £10. 6_s._ 3_d._; that of

Nathaniel, £9. 10_s._; that of John, £8. No other person paid as much

as either of them.

These brothers, as well as many others of the large landholders in the

village, adopted the practice of giving to their sons and sons-in-law,

outright, by deed, good farms, as soon as they became heads of

families; so that, as the fathers advanced in life, their own estates

were gradually diminished; and, when unable any longer to take an

active part in managing their lands, they divided up their whole

remaining real estate, making careful contracts with their children for

an adequate maintenance, to the extent of their personal wants and

comfort. Joseph Houlton did this: so did the widow Margery Scruggs, old

William Nichols, Francis Nurse, and many others. In his last years,

John Putnam was on the rate-list for five shillings only, while all his

sons and daughters were assessed severally in large sums. In this way

they had the satisfac[i.159]tion of making their children independent,

and of seeing them take their places among the heads of the community.

Where this practice was followed, there were few quarrels in families

over the graves of parents, and controversies seldom arose about the

provisions of wills. In some cases no wills were needed to be made. It

is apparent, that, in many respects, this was a wise and good practice.

It was, moreover, a strictly just one. As the sons were growing to an

adult age, they added, by their labors, to the value of lands,—inserted

a property into them that was truly their own; and their title was duly

recognized. In a new country, land has but little value in itself; the

value is imparted by the labor that clears it and prepares it to yield

its products. In 1686, Nathaniel Putnam testified that for more than

forty years he had lived in the village, and that in the early part of

that time unimproved land brought only a shilling an acre, while a cow

was worth five pounds. In 1672, the rate of taxation on unimproved land

was a half penny per acre, and, for land on which labor had been

expended, a penny per acre. In 1685 it was taxed at the rates of three

shillings for a hundred acres of wild land, and one penny an acre for

"land within fence." The relative value of improved land constantly

increased with the length of time it had been under culture. It may be

said that labor added two-thirds to the value of land, and that he who

by the sweat of his brow added those two-thirds, to that extent owned

the land. An industrious young man went out into his[i.160] father's

woods, cut down the trees, cleared the ground, fenced it in, and

prepared it for cultivation. All that was thus added to its value was

his creation, and he its rightful owner. The right was recognized, and

full possession given him, by deed, as soon as he had opened a farm,

and built a house, and brought a wife into it.

The effect of this was to anchor a family, from generation to

generation, fast to its ancestral acres. It strengthened the ties that

bound them to their native fields. Its moral effect was beyond

calculation. When a young man was thus enabled to start in life on an

independent footing, it made a man of him while he was young. It

invested him with the dignity of a citizen by making him feel his share

of responsibility for the security and welfare of society. It gave

scope for enterprise, and inspiration to industry, at home. It led to

early marriages, under circumstances that justified them. Joseph

Putnam, the youngest son of Thomas, at the age of twenty years and

seven months, took as his bride Elizabeth, daughter of Israel Porter,

and grand-daughter of William Hathorne, when she was sixteen years and

six months old. We shall see what a valuable citizen he became; and she

was worthy of him. A large and noble family of children grew up to

honor them, one of the youngest of whom was Israel Putnam, of

illustrious Revolutionary fame.

Though there were descendants of this family in every company of

emigrants that went forth from[i.161] Salem Village, in all directions,

in every generation, to Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Maine,

and all parts of the New England, Middle, Western, and Pacific States,

there is about as large a proportionate representation of the name

within the precincts of Salem Village to-day, as there ever was. Fifty

Putnams are at present voters in Danvers, on a list of eight hundred

names,—one-sixteenth of the whole number. The rate-schedule of 1712

shows almost precisely the same proportion.

Edward Putnam, whom we shall meet again, was baptized July 4, 1654.

After serving as deacon of the church from its organization, a period

of forty years, he resigned on account of advancing age; and in 1733,

as he was entering on his eightieth year, gave this account of his

family: "From the three brothers proceeded twelve males; from these

twelve males, forty males; and from these forty males, eighty-two

males: there were none of the name of Putnam in New England but those

from this family." With respect to their situation in life, he remarks:

"I can say with the Psalmist, I have been young, and now am old; yet I

have not seen the righteous forsaken, nor their seed begging bread

except of God, who provides for all. For God hath given to the

generation of my fathers a generous portion, neither poverty nor

riches." When the infirmities of age prevented his longer partaking in

the worship of the Lord's Day, this good old man relinquished his

residence near the church, and removed to his original homestead,

in[i.162] the neighborhood of his children, which had then been

included in the new town of Middleton. His will is dated March 11,

1731. It was offered in Probate, April 11, 1748. After making every

reasonable deduction, in view of his share of responsibility for the

earlier proceedings in the witchcraft prosecutions, we may participate

in the affection and veneration with which this amiable and

gentle-hearted man was regarded by his contemporaries.

The provisions of his will contain items which so strikingly illustrate

his character, and give us such an insight of the domestic life of the

times, that a few of them will be presented. According to the prevalent

custom, he had given good farms to his several children when they

became heads of families. In his will, he distributes the residue of

his real estate among them with carefulness and an equal hand,

describing the metes and bounds of the various tracts with great

minuteness, so as to prevent all questions of controversy among them.

He gives legacies in money to his daughters, ten pounds each; and, to

his grand-daughters, five pounds each. To one of his five sons, he

gives his "cross-cut saw." This was used to saw large logs crosswise,

having two handles worked by two persons, and distinguished from the

"pit saw," which was used to saw logs lengthwise. All his other tools

were to be divided among his sons, to one of whom he also gives his

cane; to another, his "Great Bible;" to another, "Mr. Jeremiah

Burroughs's Works;" to another, "Mr. Flavel's Works;" and, to the

other, his[i.163] "girdle and sword." To one of them he gives his desk,

and "that box wherein are so many writings;" to another, his "share in

the iron-works;" and to another, his share "in the great timber chain."

This, with other evidence, shows that there was a boom, and

arrangements on a large scale for the lumbering business, at that time,

on Ipswich River. The provisions for his wife were very considerate,

exact, and minute, so as to prevent all possibility of there being any

difficulty in reference to her rights, or of her ever suffering want or

neglect. He gives to her, absolutely and for her own disposal, the

residue of his books and all his "movable estate" in the house and out

of it, including all "cattle, sheep, swine," the whole stock of the

homestead farm, agricultural implements, and carriages. He makes it the

duty of one of his sons to furnish her with all the "firewood" she may

want, with ten bushels of corn-meal, two bushels of English meal, four

bushels of ground malt, four barrels of good cider,—he to find the

barrels—as many apples "as she shall see cause," and nine or ten score

weight of good pork, annually: he was to "keep for her two cows, winter

and summer," and generally to provide all "things needful." The will

specifies, apartment by apartment, from cellar to garret, one-half of

the house, to be for her accommodation, use, and exclusive control, and

half of the garden. The sons were to pay, in specified proportions, all

his funeral charges. One of the sons was to pay her forthwith four

pounds in money; and they were severally to deliver to her

annu[i.164]ally, in proportions expressly stated, ten pounds for pocket

money. When the relative value of money at that time is considered, and

the other particulars above named taken into account, it will be

allowed that he was faithful and wise in caring for the wife of his

youth and the companion of his long life. There is no better criterion

of the good sense and good feeling of a person than his last will and

testament. The result of a quite extensive examination is a conviction

that the application of this test to the early inhabitants of Salem

Village is most creditable to them, particularly in the tender but

judicious and effectual manner in which the rights, comfort,

independence, and security of their wives were provided for.

In the third generation, the three Putnam families began to give their

sons to the general service of the country in conspicuous public

stations, and in the professional walks of life. Their names appear on

the page of history and in the catalogues of colleges. Major-General

Israel Putnam was a grandson of the first Thomas. On the 14th of May,

1718, Archelaus, a grandson of John, and son of James, died at

Cambridge, while an undergraduate. Benjamin, a son of Nathaniel, in his

will, presented for Probate, April 25, 1715, says, "I give my son

Daniel one hundred and fifty pounds for his learning." Daniel lived and

died in the ministry, at North Reading. His name heads the list of more

than thirty—all, it is probable, of this family—in the last Triennial

Catalogue of Harvard University.[i.165]

The brightest name in the annals of Salem Village, though frequently

referred to, has not yet been presented for your contemplation. I shall

hold it up and keep it in your view by a somewhat detailed description,

not only because it is necessary to a full understanding of our

subject, but because it is good to gaze upon a life of virtue; to pause

while beholding a portrait beaming with beneficence, and radiant with

all excellent, beautiful, and attractive affections.

Nathaniel Ingersoll was about eleven years old at the death of his

father. His mother married John Knights, of Newbury, who became the

head of her household, and continued to carry on the Townsend Bishop

farm for several years. Governor Endicott, the friend and neighbor of

Richard Ingersoll, took Nathaniel, while still a lad, into his family.

In a deposition made in Court, June 24, 1701, Nathaniel Ingersoll says,

"I went to live with Governor Endicott as his servant four years, on

the Orchard Farm." At that time, the term "servant" had no derogatory

sense connected with it. It merely implied the relations between an

employer and the employed, without the least tint of the feeling which

we associate with the condition of servility. Here was a youth, who, by

his father's will, was the owner of a valuable estate of seventy-five

acres in the immediate neighborhood, voluntarily seeking the privilege

of entering the service of his father's friend, because he thereby

would be better qualified, when old enough, to enter upon his own

estate. Governor Endicott's political duties were[i.166] not then

regarded as requiring him to live in Boston; and his usual residence

was at the Orchard Farm, where he was making improvements and

conducting agricultural operations upon so large a scale that it was

the best school of instruction anywhere to be found for a young person

intending to make that his pursuit in life. Young John Putnam, as has

been stated, was there for the same purpose, under similar

circumstances.

Having built a house and barn, and provided the necessary stock and

materials, Nathaniel Ingersoll went upon his farm when about nineteen

years of age. Soon after, probably, he married Hannah Collins of Lynn,

who, during their long lives, proved a worthy helpmeet. His house was

on a larger scale than was usual at that time. One of its rooms is

spoken of as very large; and the uses to which his establishment was

put, from time to time, prove that it must have had capacious

apartments. Its site is shown on the map. The road from Salem to

Andover passed it, not at an angle as now, but by a curve. The present

parsonage of Danvers Centre stands on the lot. But Ingersoll's house

was a little in the rear of the site occupied by the present parsonage.

It faced south. In front was an open space, or lawn, called Ingersoll's

Common. Here he lived nearly seventy years. During that long period,

his doors were ever open to hospitality and benevolence. His house was

the centre of good neighborhood and of all movements for the public

welfare. His latch-string was always out[i.167] for friend or stranger.

In a military sense, and every other sense, it was the head-quarters of

the village. On his land, a few rods to the north-east, stood the

block-house where watch was kept against Indian attacks. There a

sentinel was posted day and night, under his supervision. The spot was

central to the several farming settlements; and all meetings of every

kind took place there. To accommodate the public, he was licensed to

keep a victualling-house; also to sell beer and cider by the quart "on

the Lord's Day." This last provision was for the benefit of those who

came great distances to meeting, and had to find refreshment somewhere

between the services. To meet the occasions arising out of this

business, he probably had a separate building. Indeed, the evidence, in

the language used in reference to it, is quite decisive that there was

an "ordinary," distinct from the dwelling-house. The location was

thought to render such an establishment necessary, and his character

secured its orderly maintenance.

Salem Witchcraft, Volumes I and II With an Account of Salem Village and a History of Opinions on Witchcraft and Kindred Subjects · 第 12 / 72 段