Chapter 25

[410]Sewall,Diary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VII, 233.[411]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 73, 74.[412]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 77. "A poem, by Mrs. Emma Willard, entitled 'Bride-Stealing, a Tale of New England's Middle Ages,' is preserved in Everest'sPoets of Connecticut. It gives a poetical account of one among many instances of 'stealing the bride' that occurred in the early days of the colony."—Hollister,Hist. of Conn., I, 438, note. See alsoStiles,Windsor, 475;Weeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., I, 295; andHuntington,Celebration of the 200th Anniversary of Hadley(Northampton, 1859), 43.[413]See above, chap. x, sec. ii, p. 441, note 3.[414]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 77-79, where several instances are discussed. See alsoPrime,Along New England Roads;Weeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., II, 538.[415]Nourse,Hist. of the Town of Harvard, Mass., 1732-1893(Harvard, 1894), 498, gives details as to marriage fees received and entered in his record by the local clergyman. At first John Seccomb usually had 5 shillings; later, about 1750, his fee became "one pound old tenor;" still later generally "a dollar," or "half a dollar," and once a "pistareen." From 1760 Rev. Joseph Wheely usually records "2£ 5s." During the Revolution the ordinary charge was six shillings legal money.[416]Sack-posset was compounded of milk, spirits, and other ingredients; and it was eaten with a spoon:Sewall'sDiary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VI, 403, note. On the wonderful mixed drinks of the New England Puritans seeMrs. Earle'sdelightful chapter on "Old Colonial Drinks and Drinkers,"Customs and Fashions, 163-83; and alsoBliss,Side Glimpses from the Colonial Meeting-House, 12-28.[417]Lodge,Short History, 462, 463;cf.Sanford,Hist. of Conn., 125.Bailey,Hist. Sketches of Andover, 74-78, gives interesting details as to weddings and marriage settlements; andBrooks,Olden Time Series: Days of the Spinning-Wheel, 32, 33, reprints specimens of marriage notices taken from newspapers of the eighteenth century. On these festivities, advertisements, and settlements see alsoEarle,Customs and Fashions, 60-77.[418]Sewall'sDiary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VI, 403.[419]Ibid., VII, 253.[420]Plym. Col. Rec., XI, 13, 190;cf.Palfrey,Hist. of New England, II, 20; andBrigham,Plym. Col. Laws, 44, 272.[421]Plym. Col. Rec., XI, 189,190;cf.ibid., 52, 53. Records of births, deaths, and marriages are printedibid., VIII. The record of marriages was sometimes included in the proceedings of the general court:ibid., I.[422]In the edition of the laws, 1660, notice is to be placed "upon some post of their Meeting-house door":Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 51, 52:cf.ibid.(1672-86), 101.[423]Mass. Col. Rec., I, 275;Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 51, 52;ibid.(1672-86), 101.The meeting-house on Sunday or lecture-day was a general clearing-house for news and gossip; and not the least inviting topics were supplied by the marriage notices. "There they read, as from an old newspaper, of an intention of marriage between persons known to everybody; and although the town clerk had stood up in the congregation and screamed it at the top of his voice, it was an endless subject of comment, especially if the woman had as publicly renounced the intention—as women sometimes did."—Bliss,Colonial Times on Buzzard's Bay, 77, 78.[424]Edes, inMem. Hist. Bost., II, 315, and n. 2.[425]For instance, on May 22, 1651, such a petition from Mary Longe was allowed, provided "she be published according to law":Mass. Col. Rec., III, 232. Sept. 7, 1643, "Jacob Sheath & Margaret Webbe are permitted to joyne in marriage, though but twice published":ibid., II, 46. May 30, 1644, "without further publishment," Robert Parke "hath libertye to proceed in marriage with Alice Tompson":ibid., III, 3.[426]Mass. Col. Rec., II, 15; IV, Part I, 290;cf.ibid., I, 275, 276; andWhitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 188;ibid.(1672-86), 130. But town clerks continued to act:Salem Town Rec., 148. The office of "Clark of the writts" seems to have been created in 1641, primarily to issue summons and attachments:Mass. Col. Rec., I, 344, 345. See also "Province Laws of New Hampshire," inColl. of New Hamp. Hist. Soc., VIII, 31. Originally clerks of the writs were appointed by the general court; but later it was ordered that they should be licensed by the shire court or court of assistants. Those presented for license were first nominated in town-meeting:Mass. Col. Rec., II, 188;Dorchester Town Rec., 116;Salem Town Rec., 148, 195;Boston Town Rec.(1660-1701), 100, 103, 130, 197.Cf.Howard,Local Const. Hist., I, 90, 91, 331.[427]Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 188;ibid.(1672-86), 130;Mass. Col. Rec., II, 59.[428]See the acts of 1692 and 1696:Acts and Resolves, I, 61, 209, 210. By the former statute ministers and justices are required to make a quarterly report of marriages solemnized by them to the clerk of the sessions of the peace. The act of 1716, referred to inSewall'sDiary, provides that the town clerk shall send in to the same officer an annual transcript of marriages recorded by him. "The volume of such returns for Suffolk County has very recently (written 1882) been transferred to the custody of the city registrar of Boston."—Sewall'sDiary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VII, 112, and the note by the editors.[429]Intentions of marriage were to be published three times, or else on fourteen days' written notice: "General Lawes and Liberties of New Hamp.,"Coll. New Hamp. Hist. Soc., VIII, 23. See also the Cutt Code,Provincial Papers, I, 396, 397.[430]Doyle,English Colonies, II, 201 ff.;Lodge,Short Hist., 397 ff.;Hildreth,Hist. of U. S., I, 200;Bancroft,Hist. of U. S., I, 217, 218, 262.[431]Shirley, "Early Jurisprudence of New Hampshire,"Procds. New Hamp. Hist. Soc.(1876-84), 309.[432]Belknap,Hist. of New Hampshire, III, 211.[433]Provincial Papers, IV, 832 (1737).[434]Conn. Col. Rec., I, 47, 48 (1640), 540;Trumbull,True Blue Laws, 106. CompareThe Code of 1650(Hartford, 1836), 67, 68.[435]The Book of General Laws of 1673(Hartford, 1865), 46. TheActs and Laws(New London, 1715), 75, require three publications or eight days' posting; while by theActs and Laws(New Haven, 1769), 144-47, intentions are to be announced only eight days before the celebration "in some public Meeting or Congregation on the Lord's Day, or on some public Fast, Thanksgiving, or Lecture Day, in the Town, Parish, or Society where the Parties or either of them do ordinarily reside," or else posted eight days, as before.[436]For the law of registration seeConn. Col. Rec., I, 48, 105, 106, 551;Trumbull,op. cit., 123.[437]New Haven Col. Rec., II, 599, 600, 607;Trumbull,op. cit., 241, 242, 255;Atwater,Hist. of New Haven Colony, 363.[438]R. I. Col. Rec., I, 187;Staples,First Proceedings, 47, 48.[439]Arnold,Hist. of Rhode Island, I, 208.[440]Publication on training day seems to have been customary elsewhere in New England, doubtless that day being one of the "public times" referred to in the Massachusetts laws.[441]This practice may be illustrated by the following anecdote concerning the marriage of Ruth Wilkinson and William Hopkins at Providence, related byMr. C. C. BeamaninHist. Coll. Essex Inst., II, 116: "The lovers could not muster courage enough to speak to the 'awful Justice,' for Mr. Wilkinson (Ruth's father) held that office so dignified in former days. In the house or office it was the custom to post up 'Intentions of Marriage.' The timid lovers, who had often looked with an envious or emulous eye upon such important steps preliminary to a 'consumation devoutly to be wished,' wrote a notice of their 'intentions,' and placing it unobserved upon the table of the 'Justice,' watched to see how it would be regarded. 'Squire Wilkinson, as they saw by a peep through the door, took up the paper, read it, and deliberately posted it up in the proper location. There were some blushes on the cheeks of Ruth that day, probably, but the desired approbation thus ingeniously obtained soon led on to marriage."[442]Arnold,Hist. of R. I., I, 260;R. I. Col. Rec., I, 330.[443]Rider'sLaws and Acts(1705), 12.[444]R. I. Col. Rec., III, 362; also inRider'sLaws and Acts(1705), 44.[445]R. I. Col. Rec., III, 436;cf.ibid., IV, 395, 396;Rider,op. cit., 50.[446]Arnold,Hist. of R. I., II, 3;R. I. Col. Rec., III, 436, 437. By this act fourteen days' notice is required of those living in the jurisdiction.[447]CompareRider'sCharter and Laws(1719), 12, 13, 47, 48;Acts and Laws(1745), 30, 31, 176, 177 (1733), 100 (registration act of 1727); andRider'sSupp. Pages to the Digest of 1730, 258, 259 (act of 1733).[448]The prescribed notice is in the following form:"Know all Men by these Presents, that A. B. of —— and C. D. of —— have declared unto me their Intention of Marriage: I do therefore hereby make public the said Intention. If any Person knows any just Cause or Impediment why these Two Persons shall not be joined together in Marriage, they may declare the same as the Law directs. Given under my Hand and Seal at —— this —— Day of ——Anno Domini——."—Acts and Laws(Newport 1767,), 172, 173.[449]The marriage certificate is in the following form:"I Hereby certify, That A. B. of —— Son of —— and C. D. of —— Daughter of —— were lawfully joined together in Marriage on the —— Day of —— Anno Domini —— by me the Subscriber."[450]Acts and Laws(Newport, 1767), 172-75.[451]See the case of Usherv.Troop (Throop), 1724-29, inMSS. Records of the Superior Court of Judicature(Mass.), 1725-30, folio 236. In 1724 John Usher, of Bristol, a minister of the Church of England, convicted in the inferior court of common pleas of marrying a couple without certificate of the town clerk, was fined 50 pounds and "forever thereafter disabled to Joyn Persons in Marriage." On appeal it was found: "If the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical of the Church of England are sufficient to support the Appellant here, in Joyning Persons together in Marriage without such certificate.... Then the Jury say the Applt is not Guilty; otherwise they say he is Guilty." The appeal was finally dismissed (1729) on default of the "appellee."[452]See chap. xviii, i.[453]"Il y avait même un tel mélange de la religion à toutes les circonstances de la vie civile, que la législation, en certaines matières, en référait à la Bible qui était, pour ainsi dire, lecorpus jurisdes émigrants dans la Nouvelle-Angleterre. La famille, où ils avaient puisé le sentiment religieux, était forte parce qu'elle était unie; et le père, qui ressemblait en quelque sorte au patriarche d'autrefois, avait une autorité incontestée qu'on aimait, car elle était composée de bienveillance et de justice."—Carlier,Le mariage aux États-Unis, 7, 8.[454]"Between these two extreme views—that of marriage as merely a civil contract and marriage as a sacrament—stands that of the Jewish law. The act of concluding marriage is there certainly also considered as a contract, which requires the consent of both parties and the performance of certain formalities, similar to other contracts, and which, under certain circumstances, can be dissolved. But, inasmuch as marriage concerns a relation which is based on morality and implies the most sacred duties, it is more than a mere civil contract."—Mielziner,The Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce, 25, 26. But "the presence of a rabbi or minister is, according to the Talmudic Law, not required at the betrothal or the nuptials. The prescribed benedictions were pronounced either by the bridegroom or by any of the friends present. Such was also the Jewish custom during the Middle Ages."—Ibid., 84.Cf.Amram,The Jewish Law of Divorce, 39.[455]SeeShirley'scomments on the Cutt Code, "Early Jurisprudence of New Hampshire,"Procds. New Hamp. Hist. Soc.(1876-84), 273 ff.[456]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 36.[457]Weeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., I, 230;Conn. Col. Rec., I, 8.[458]Weeden,loc. cit.;Stiles,Windsor, 54.[459]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 37.[460]Acts and Laws(1715), 60; see alsoConn. Col. Rec., I, 538;Trumbull,Blue Laws, 104.[461]In 1682:Weeden,op. cit., I, 272;Munro,Bristol, R. I., 115.[462]New Haven Col. Rec., II, 608;Trumbull,op. cit., 258.[463]Plym. Col. Rec., XI, 223.[464]Whitmore,Colonial Laws of Mass.(1672-86), 236, 237.[465]Ibid.(1660-72), 136.[466]Ibid., 196;ibid.(1672-86), 148;Mass. Col. Rec., I, 186.[467]MSS. Records of the County Court for Middlesex, III, 21.[468]Whitmore,op. cit.(1660-72), 260; alsoibid.(1672-86), 149. There is a copy of one of the orders sent to the constables, differing slightly in capitalization and punctuation from the above, in theMSS. Files of the County Court for Middlesex, Dec., 1668.[469]Here is the list from Marlboro:"Samuell Goodenow, from under family Gouernment, Liuing upon his oune ground."Isaius Tailer and Will Tayler, Renters...."John Howard ... out of his time ... and Entending as fast as he can to settell himselfe: so to liue under family gouernment."Rober Williams...."—MSS. Files of the County Court for Middlesex, Dec. 1668.[470]The selectmen of "Billerica" thus "strove to free themselves of all blame":"To the Honrd Court...."Whereas Aaron Jaquese, a single prson liuing in our towne, who hath for sometime liued from vnder family gouernment contrary to Court Order, being su[=m]uned by yeConstable to appear before this Honored Court: These are to enforme ... that ... Aaron Jaquese hath bin much complained of by seuerall of our inhabitants, for negligence in his calling, hauing obserued him much giuen to idleness; also shifting from house to house, & vnfaithfull to his Couenants & promises with such prsons, with whom he has engaged service, vpon which Complaints the selectmen haue endeauered acording to law, to place him foorth in service, but ca[=n]ot effect it. Our Humble request to this Hon'd Court is, that they would please to despose of ... Aaron to service, or otherwise to order something concering the same as may be effectuall to render him to a more regular Course of life, as yewisdome of this Court shall judg best. So shall we pray &c.Your humble seruants."TheMSS. Files of the County Court for Middlesex, April, 1669, also contain a certificate of the selectmen of Charlestown to the effect that John Swain had given satisfaction for orderly behavior.[471]Thus Judge Sewall went home with Widow Denison from her husband's funeral and "prayed God to keep house" with her:Diary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VII, 179 (March 26, 1718).Cf.alsoEarle,Customs and Fashions, 45, 46."The colonists married early and they married often. Widowers and widows hastened to join their fortunes and sorrows. The father and mother of Governor Winslow had been widow and widower seven and twelve weeks respectively, when they joined their families and themselves in mutual benefit, if not in mutual love. At a later day the impatient governor of New Hampshire married a lady but ten days widowed."—Earle,op. cit., 86. On early marriages seeWeeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., II, 541, 739.[472]Earle,op. cit., 38.[473]Dunton'sLife and Errors(Westminster, 1818), I, 102, referring to Boston in 1686. InDunton'sLetters from New-England(ed. byWhitmorefor the Prince Society, Boston, 1867), 99, where this passage appears in a modified form, the age of a "thornback" is reduced to twenty-six years. The paragraph is also quoted byWeeden,op. cit., I, 299, 300; andEarle,op. cit., 38, 39.[474]Mass. Col. Rec., II, 211, 212;Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 172;ibid.(1672-86), 216.[475]Mass. Col. Rec., I, 283.[476]Ibid., II, 86.[477]MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk, 113.[478]Mass. Col. Rec., I, 198.[479]Ibid., 311.[480]MSS. Records of the County Court of Middlesex, I, 18. Apparently Edward's attempts were a failure; for on Oct. 4, 1653, he was "granted liberty to use what more effectual means he may or can to send for his wife from England":ibid., I, 32.[481]Mass. Col. Rec., III, 349, 350. But on petition, in order to present further testimony, the general court granted a respite.[482]MSS. Early Court Files of Suffolk County, No. 531. This case is also partially reported inMass. Col. Rec., IV, Part II, 84; and quoted inShirley, "Early Jurisprudence of New Hampshire,"Procds. New. Hamp. Hist. Soc.(1876-84), 310.[483]MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk, 9.[484]MSS. Early Court Files of Suffolk, No. 867.[485]MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk, 279.[486]MSS. Records of the County Court of Middlesex, III, 63.[487]MSS. Early Court Files of Suffolk, No. 527. For similar legislation seeNew Haven Col. Rec., II, 600;Trumbull,Blue Laws, 243.[488]Mass. Col. Rec., V, 4;Shirley,Early Jurisprudence of New Hamp., 310, 311. The harboring of "strangers"—and "stranger" might be a father, daughter, or son from a neighboring town—gave the good people of the colonies a great deal of trouble. See the illustrations inWeeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., I, 272; andHoward,Local Const. Hist., I, 87, 88, where the town records are cited.[489]Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 51, 171;ibid.(1672-86), 101.Cf. Mass. Col. Rec., III, 212 (1650). In 1638 John Emerson, of Scituate, was tried before the general court for abusing his wife:ibid., I, 232; the same year for beating his wife, Henry Seawall was sent for examination before the court at Ipswich:ibid., 233; and in 1663 Ensigne John Williams, of Barnstable, was fined by the Plymouth court for slandering his wife:Goodwin,Pilgrim Republic, 596.It would seem that the husband, too, really needed some legal protection. The early court records disclose the sad fact that husband-beating was painfully frequent in colonial times. Thus in Plymouth jurisdiction Joan, the wife of Obadiah Miller of Taunton, was presented "for beating and reviling her husband, and egging her children to healp her, bidding them knock him in the head, and wishing his victials might [~c]oake him."—Plym. Col. Rec., III, 75.The bad practice was not unknown among the "good wives" of Salem. For example, in 1637, at the fifth quarter court, it was decreed: "Whereas Dorothy the wyfe of John Talbie hath not only broak that peace & loue, wchought to haue beene both betwixt them, but also hath violentlie broke the king's peace, by frequent Laying hands vpon hir husband to the danger of his Life, & Condemned Authority, not co[=m]ing before them vpon command, It is therefore ordered that for hir misdemeaner passed & for prvention of future evills that are feared wilbe co[=m]itted by hir if shee be Lefte att hir Libertie. That she shall be bound & chained to some post where shee shall be restrained of hir libertye to goe abroad or comminge to hir husband till shee manefest some change of hir course.... Only it is pmitted that shee shall come to the place of gods worshipp, to enjoy his ordenances." Later "Dorothy" was punished again for a similar offense:Hist. Coll. Essex Inst., VII, 129, 187.Cf.Howard,Local Const. Hist., I, 326, 327. For further illustrations seeWeeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist, of N. E., I, 294.[490]Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 129;New Haven Col. Rec., II, 578, andTrumbull,Blue Laws, 201;Conn. Col. Rec., I, 515, andTrumbull,op. cit., 69;New Hamp. Hist. Coll., VIII, 12;Shirley,Early Jurisprudence of N. H., 311;Andros Tracts, III, 13.Cf.a similar law for early New York:Duke of Yorke's Laws, 15.[491]Plym. Col. Rec., XI, 29, 108, 190, 191.[492]For the case seeibid., III, 5: "Wee psent Jonathan Couentry ... for makeing mocion of marriage vnto Katheren Bradberey, servant vnto MrBurne, of the same town, without her master's consent, contrary to Court orders."[493]Seeibid., IV (1666/7), 140, 158, 159.[494]Goodwin,Pilgrim Republic, 598;cf.Palfrey,Hist. of New England, II, 21.[495]Goodwin,op. cit., 597.[496]Dec. 16, 1679. At a court held at Charlestown, George Parminter and his wife convicted of fornication before marriage, court respited their sentence till next court, and ordered that their parents be summoned then to appear to give answer why they denied them the consummation of their marriage for so many months after they were in order thereto:MSS. Records of the County Court of Middlesex, III, 316.[497]Acts and Laws of Conn.(New Haven, 1769), 144. Substantially the same provision appears in theCode of 1643:Trumbull,Blue Laws, 106, 107;Conn. Col. Rec., I, 92; inThe Book of General Laws, 1673(Hartford, 1865), 46; and inActs and Laws(New London, 1715), 75.[498]New Haven Col. Rec., II, 600;Trumbull,op. cit., 242.Cf.Atwater,Hist. of Col. of New Haven, 362.[499]Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 172;ibid.(1672-86), 101;Mass. Col. Rec., II, 207.Cf.Friedberg,Eheschliessung, 477, note;Newhall,Ye Great and General Court, 349-65, giving interesting examples.[500]MSS. Records of the County Court for Middlesex, I, 131.In 1662 Marmaduke Johnson, who by his own confession had a wife in England, was convicted of trying to steal the affections of the daughter of Samuel Green without his knowledge and consent; and he was ordered to join his spouse by the first oportunity:ibid., I, 206. The next year Johnson was "fined £20 unless he give security" so to depart, in the meantime being "committed until the order is performed":ibid., 249. It may be further noted that on April 7, 1674, a Marmaduke Johnson is spoken of as "late constable of Cambridge":ibid., III, 87.[501]MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk, 106.[502]Irons was fined 20 shillings, and Barnum half that sum:MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk(July 28, 1674), 255, 256. On the same day "Edward Peggy being bound over for using indirect means 'by powders or other wayes unlawfull to Engage the affections or desires of women kinde to him' and for begetting a bastard child"—in particular for illegally "drawing away the affections of two girls"—was assessed 10 pounds and put under bonds for good behavior:ibid., 261.[503]Ibid.(Feb. 4, 1674-75), 301. The records of the court of assistants inMass. Col. Rec.(Sept. 1, 1640), I, 299, 300, contain a similar case.[504]Law of 1641:Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 137.[505]Dunton,Life and Errors, I, 103;idem,Letters from New England, 101, 102.[506]Sewall'sDiary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., V, 490.

[410]Sewall,Diary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VII, 233.

[411]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 73, 74.

[412]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 77. "A poem, by Mrs. Emma Willard, entitled 'Bride-Stealing, a Tale of New England's Middle Ages,' is preserved in Everest'sPoets of Connecticut. It gives a poetical account of one among many instances of 'stealing the bride' that occurred in the early days of the colony."—Hollister,Hist. of Conn., I, 438, note. See alsoStiles,Windsor, 475;Weeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., I, 295; andHuntington,Celebration of the 200th Anniversary of Hadley(Northampton, 1859), 43.

[413]See above, chap. x, sec. ii, p. 441, note 3.

[414]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 77-79, where several instances are discussed. See alsoPrime,Along New England Roads;Weeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., II, 538.

[415]Nourse,Hist. of the Town of Harvard, Mass., 1732-1893(Harvard, 1894), 498, gives details as to marriage fees received and entered in his record by the local clergyman. At first John Seccomb usually had 5 shillings; later, about 1750, his fee became "one pound old tenor;" still later generally "a dollar," or "half a dollar," and once a "pistareen." From 1760 Rev. Joseph Wheely usually records "2£ 5s." During the Revolution the ordinary charge was six shillings legal money.

[416]Sack-posset was compounded of milk, spirits, and other ingredients; and it was eaten with a spoon:Sewall'sDiary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VI, 403, note. On the wonderful mixed drinks of the New England Puritans seeMrs. Earle'sdelightful chapter on "Old Colonial Drinks and Drinkers,"Customs and Fashions, 163-83; and alsoBliss,Side Glimpses from the Colonial Meeting-House, 12-28.

[417]Lodge,Short History, 462, 463;cf.Sanford,Hist. of Conn., 125.Bailey,Hist. Sketches of Andover, 74-78, gives interesting details as to weddings and marriage settlements; andBrooks,Olden Time Series: Days of the Spinning-Wheel, 32, 33, reprints specimens of marriage notices taken from newspapers of the eighteenth century. On these festivities, advertisements, and settlements see alsoEarle,Customs and Fashions, 60-77.

[418]Sewall'sDiary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VI, 403.

[419]Ibid., VII, 253.

[420]Plym. Col. Rec., XI, 13, 190;cf.Palfrey,Hist. of New England, II, 20; andBrigham,Plym. Col. Laws, 44, 272.

[421]Plym. Col. Rec., XI, 189,190;cf.ibid., 52, 53. Records of births, deaths, and marriages are printedibid., VIII. The record of marriages was sometimes included in the proceedings of the general court:ibid., I.

[422]In the edition of the laws, 1660, notice is to be placed "upon some post of their Meeting-house door":Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 51, 52:cf.ibid.(1672-86), 101.

[423]Mass. Col. Rec., I, 275;Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 51, 52;ibid.(1672-86), 101.The meeting-house on Sunday or lecture-day was a general clearing-house for news and gossip; and not the least inviting topics were supplied by the marriage notices. "There they read, as from an old newspaper, of an intention of marriage between persons known to everybody; and although the town clerk had stood up in the congregation and screamed it at the top of his voice, it was an endless subject of comment, especially if the woman had as publicly renounced the intention—as women sometimes did."—Bliss,Colonial Times on Buzzard's Bay, 77, 78.

[423]Mass. Col. Rec., I, 275;Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 51, 52;ibid.(1672-86), 101.

The meeting-house on Sunday or lecture-day was a general clearing-house for news and gossip; and not the least inviting topics were supplied by the marriage notices. "There they read, as from an old newspaper, of an intention of marriage between persons known to everybody; and although the town clerk had stood up in the congregation and screamed it at the top of his voice, it was an endless subject of comment, especially if the woman had as publicly renounced the intention—as women sometimes did."—Bliss,Colonial Times on Buzzard's Bay, 77, 78.

[424]Edes, inMem. Hist. Bost., II, 315, and n. 2.

[425]For instance, on May 22, 1651, such a petition from Mary Longe was allowed, provided "she be published according to law":Mass. Col. Rec., III, 232. Sept. 7, 1643, "Jacob Sheath & Margaret Webbe are permitted to joyne in marriage, though but twice published":ibid., II, 46. May 30, 1644, "without further publishment," Robert Parke "hath libertye to proceed in marriage with Alice Tompson":ibid., III, 3.

[426]Mass. Col. Rec., II, 15; IV, Part I, 290;cf.ibid., I, 275, 276; andWhitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 188;ibid.(1672-86), 130. But town clerks continued to act:Salem Town Rec., 148. The office of "Clark of the writts" seems to have been created in 1641, primarily to issue summons and attachments:Mass. Col. Rec., I, 344, 345. See also "Province Laws of New Hampshire," inColl. of New Hamp. Hist. Soc., VIII, 31. Originally clerks of the writs were appointed by the general court; but later it was ordered that they should be licensed by the shire court or court of assistants. Those presented for license were first nominated in town-meeting:Mass. Col. Rec., II, 188;Dorchester Town Rec., 116;Salem Town Rec., 148, 195;Boston Town Rec.(1660-1701), 100, 103, 130, 197.Cf.Howard,Local Const. Hist., I, 90, 91, 331.

[427]Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 188;ibid.(1672-86), 130;Mass. Col. Rec., II, 59.

[428]See the acts of 1692 and 1696:Acts and Resolves, I, 61, 209, 210. By the former statute ministers and justices are required to make a quarterly report of marriages solemnized by them to the clerk of the sessions of the peace. The act of 1716, referred to inSewall'sDiary, provides that the town clerk shall send in to the same officer an annual transcript of marriages recorded by him. "The volume of such returns for Suffolk County has very recently (written 1882) been transferred to the custody of the city registrar of Boston."—Sewall'sDiary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VII, 112, and the note by the editors.

[429]Intentions of marriage were to be published three times, or else on fourteen days' written notice: "General Lawes and Liberties of New Hamp.,"Coll. New Hamp. Hist. Soc., VIII, 23. See also the Cutt Code,Provincial Papers, I, 396, 397.

[430]Doyle,English Colonies, II, 201 ff.;Lodge,Short Hist., 397 ff.;Hildreth,Hist. of U. S., I, 200;Bancroft,Hist. of U. S., I, 217, 218, 262.

[431]Shirley, "Early Jurisprudence of New Hampshire,"Procds. New Hamp. Hist. Soc.(1876-84), 309.

[432]Belknap,Hist. of New Hampshire, III, 211.

[433]Provincial Papers, IV, 832 (1737).

[434]Conn. Col. Rec., I, 47, 48 (1640), 540;Trumbull,True Blue Laws, 106. CompareThe Code of 1650(Hartford, 1836), 67, 68.

[435]The Book of General Laws of 1673(Hartford, 1865), 46. TheActs and Laws(New London, 1715), 75, require three publications or eight days' posting; while by theActs and Laws(New Haven, 1769), 144-47, intentions are to be announced only eight days before the celebration "in some public Meeting or Congregation on the Lord's Day, or on some public Fast, Thanksgiving, or Lecture Day, in the Town, Parish, or Society where the Parties or either of them do ordinarily reside," or else posted eight days, as before.

[436]For the law of registration seeConn. Col. Rec., I, 48, 105, 106, 551;Trumbull,op. cit., 123.

[437]New Haven Col. Rec., II, 599, 600, 607;Trumbull,op. cit., 241, 242, 255;Atwater,Hist. of New Haven Colony, 363.

[438]R. I. Col. Rec., I, 187;Staples,First Proceedings, 47, 48.

[439]Arnold,Hist. of Rhode Island, I, 208.

[440]Publication on training day seems to have been customary elsewhere in New England, doubtless that day being one of the "public times" referred to in the Massachusetts laws.

[441]This practice may be illustrated by the following anecdote concerning the marriage of Ruth Wilkinson and William Hopkins at Providence, related byMr. C. C. BeamaninHist. Coll. Essex Inst., II, 116: "The lovers could not muster courage enough to speak to the 'awful Justice,' for Mr. Wilkinson (Ruth's father) held that office so dignified in former days. In the house or office it was the custom to post up 'Intentions of Marriage.' The timid lovers, who had often looked with an envious or emulous eye upon such important steps preliminary to a 'consumation devoutly to be wished,' wrote a notice of their 'intentions,' and placing it unobserved upon the table of the 'Justice,' watched to see how it would be regarded. 'Squire Wilkinson, as they saw by a peep through the door, took up the paper, read it, and deliberately posted it up in the proper location. There were some blushes on the cheeks of Ruth that day, probably, but the desired approbation thus ingeniously obtained soon led on to marriage."

[442]Arnold,Hist. of R. I., I, 260;R. I. Col. Rec., I, 330.

[443]Rider'sLaws and Acts(1705), 12.

[444]R. I. Col. Rec., III, 362; also inRider'sLaws and Acts(1705), 44.

[445]R. I. Col. Rec., III, 436;cf.ibid., IV, 395, 396;Rider,op. cit., 50.

[446]Arnold,Hist. of R. I., II, 3;R. I. Col. Rec., III, 436, 437. By this act fourteen days' notice is required of those living in the jurisdiction.

[447]CompareRider'sCharter and Laws(1719), 12, 13, 47, 48;Acts and Laws(1745), 30, 31, 176, 177 (1733), 100 (registration act of 1727); andRider'sSupp. Pages to the Digest of 1730, 258, 259 (act of 1733).

[448]The prescribed notice is in the following form:"Know all Men by these Presents, that A. B. of —— and C. D. of —— have declared unto me their Intention of Marriage: I do therefore hereby make public the said Intention. If any Person knows any just Cause or Impediment why these Two Persons shall not be joined together in Marriage, they may declare the same as the Law directs. Given under my Hand and Seal at —— this —— Day of ——Anno Domini——."—Acts and Laws(Newport 1767,), 172, 173.

[448]The prescribed notice is in the following form:

"Know all Men by these Presents, that A. B. of —— and C. D. of —— have declared unto me their Intention of Marriage: I do therefore hereby make public the said Intention. If any Person knows any just Cause or Impediment why these Two Persons shall not be joined together in Marriage, they may declare the same as the Law directs. Given under my Hand and Seal at —— this —— Day of ——Anno Domini——."—Acts and Laws(Newport 1767,), 172, 173.

[449]The marriage certificate is in the following form:"I Hereby certify, That A. B. of —— Son of —— and C. D. of —— Daughter of —— were lawfully joined together in Marriage on the —— Day of —— Anno Domini —— by me the Subscriber."

[449]The marriage certificate is in the following form:

"I Hereby certify, That A. B. of —— Son of —— and C. D. of —— Daughter of —— were lawfully joined together in Marriage on the —— Day of —— Anno Domini —— by me the Subscriber."

[450]Acts and Laws(Newport, 1767), 172-75.

[451]See the case of Usherv.Troop (Throop), 1724-29, inMSS. Records of the Superior Court of Judicature(Mass.), 1725-30, folio 236. In 1724 John Usher, of Bristol, a minister of the Church of England, convicted in the inferior court of common pleas of marrying a couple without certificate of the town clerk, was fined 50 pounds and "forever thereafter disabled to Joyn Persons in Marriage." On appeal it was found: "If the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical of the Church of England are sufficient to support the Appellant here, in Joyning Persons together in Marriage without such certificate.... Then the Jury say the Applt is not Guilty; otherwise they say he is Guilty." The appeal was finally dismissed (1729) on default of the "appellee."

[452]See chap. xviii, i.

[453]"Il y avait même un tel mélange de la religion à toutes les circonstances de la vie civile, que la législation, en certaines matières, en référait à la Bible qui était, pour ainsi dire, lecorpus jurisdes émigrants dans la Nouvelle-Angleterre. La famille, où ils avaient puisé le sentiment religieux, était forte parce qu'elle était unie; et le père, qui ressemblait en quelque sorte au patriarche d'autrefois, avait une autorité incontestée qu'on aimait, car elle était composée de bienveillance et de justice."—Carlier,Le mariage aux États-Unis, 7, 8.

[454]"Between these two extreme views—that of marriage as merely a civil contract and marriage as a sacrament—stands that of the Jewish law. The act of concluding marriage is there certainly also considered as a contract, which requires the consent of both parties and the performance of certain formalities, similar to other contracts, and which, under certain circumstances, can be dissolved. But, inasmuch as marriage concerns a relation which is based on morality and implies the most sacred duties, it is more than a mere civil contract."—Mielziner,The Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce, 25, 26. But "the presence of a rabbi or minister is, according to the Talmudic Law, not required at the betrothal or the nuptials. The prescribed benedictions were pronounced either by the bridegroom or by any of the friends present. Such was also the Jewish custom during the Middle Ages."—Ibid., 84.Cf.Amram,The Jewish Law of Divorce, 39.

[455]SeeShirley'scomments on the Cutt Code, "Early Jurisprudence of New Hampshire,"Procds. New Hamp. Hist. Soc.(1876-84), 273 ff.

[456]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 36.

[457]Weeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., I, 230;Conn. Col. Rec., I, 8.

[458]Weeden,loc. cit.;Stiles,Windsor, 54.

[459]Earle,Customs and Fashions, 37.

[460]Acts and Laws(1715), 60; see alsoConn. Col. Rec., I, 538;Trumbull,Blue Laws, 104.

[461]In 1682:Weeden,op. cit., I, 272;Munro,Bristol, R. I., 115.

[462]New Haven Col. Rec., II, 608;Trumbull,op. cit., 258.

[463]Plym. Col. Rec., XI, 223.

[464]Whitmore,Colonial Laws of Mass.(1672-86), 236, 237.

[465]Ibid.(1660-72), 136.

[466]Ibid., 196;ibid.(1672-86), 148;Mass. Col. Rec., I, 186.

[467]MSS. Records of the County Court for Middlesex, III, 21.

[468]Whitmore,op. cit.(1660-72), 260; alsoibid.(1672-86), 149. There is a copy of one of the orders sent to the constables, differing slightly in capitalization and punctuation from the above, in theMSS. Files of the County Court for Middlesex, Dec., 1668.

[469]Here is the list from Marlboro:"Samuell Goodenow, from under family Gouernment, Liuing upon his oune ground."Isaius Tailer and Will Tayler, Renters...."John Howard ... out of his time ... and Entending as fast as he can to settell himselfe: so to liue under family gouernment."Rober Williams...."—MSS. Files of the County Court for Middlesex, Dec. 1668.

[469]Here is the list from Marlboro:

"Samuell Goodenow, from under family Gouernment, Liuing upon his oune ground.

"Isaius Tailer and Will Tayler, Renters....

"John Howard ... out of his time ... and Entending as fast as he can to settell himselfe: so to liue under family gouernment.

"Rober Williams...."—MSS. Files of the County Court for Middlesex, Dec. 1668.

[470]The selectmen of "Billerica" thus "strove to free themselves of all blame":"To the Honrd Court...."Whereas Aaron Jaquese, a single prson liuing in our towne, who hath for sometime liued from vnder family gouernment contrary to Court Order, being su[=m]uned by yeConstable to appear before this Honored Court: These are to enforme ... that ... Aaron Jaquese hath bin much complained of by seuerall of our inhabitants, for negligence in his calling, hauing obserued him much giuen to idleness; also shifting from house to house, & vnfaithfull to his Couenants & promises with such prsons, with whom he has engaged service, vpon which Complaints the selectmen haue endeauered acording to law, to place him foorth in service, but ca[=n]ot effect it. Our Humble request to this Hon'd Court is, that they would please to despose of ... Aaron to service, or otherwise to order something concering the same as may be effectuall to render him to a more regular Course of life, as yewisdome of this Court shall judg best. So shall we pray &c.Your humble seruants."TheMSS. Files of the County Court for Middlesex, April, 1669, also contain a certificate of the selectmen of Charlestown to the effect that John Swain had given satisfaction for orderly behavior.

[470]The selectmen of "Billerica" thus "strove to free themselves of all blame":

"To the Honrd Court....

"Whereas Aaron Jaquese, a single prson liuing in our towne, who hath for sometime liued from vnder family gouernment contrary to Court Order, being su[=m]uned by yeConstable to appear before this Honored Court: These are to enforme ... that ... Aaron Jaquese hath bin much complained of by seuerall of our inhabitants, for negligence in his calling, hauing obserued him much giuen to idleness; also shifting from house to house, & vnfaithfull to his Couenants & promises with such prsons, with whom he has engaged service, vpon which Complaints the selectmen haue endeauered acording to law, to place him foorth in service, but ca[=n]ot effect it. Our Humble request to this Hon'd Court is, that they would please to despose of ... Aaron to service, or otherwise to order something concering the same as may be effectuall to render him to a more regular Course of life, as yewisdome of this Court shall judg best. So shall we pray &c.

Your humble seruants."

TheMSS. Files of the County Court for Middlesex, April, 1669, also contain a certificate of the selectmen of Charlestown to the effect that John Swain had given satisfaction for orderly behavior.

[471]Thus Judge Sewall went home with Widow Denison from her husband's funeral and "prayed God to keep house" with her:Diary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., VII, 179 (March 26, 1718).Cf.alsoEarle,Customs and Fashions, 45, 46."The colonists married early and they married often. Widowers and widows hastened to join their fortunes and sorrows. The father and mother of Governor Winslow had been widow and widower seven and twelve weeks respectively, when they joined their families and themselves in mutual benefit, if not in mutual love. At a later day the impatient governor of New Hampshire married a lady but ten days widowed."—Earle,op. cit., 86. On early marriages seeWeeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., II, 541, 739.

"The colonists married early and they married often. Widowers and widows hastened to join their fortunes and sorrows. The father and mother of Governor Winslow had been widow and widower seven and twelve weeks respectively, when they joined their families and themselves in mutual benefit, if not in mutual love. At a later day the impatient governor of New Hampshire married a lady but ten days widowed."—Earle,op. cit., 86. On early marriages seeWeeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., II, 541, 739.

[472]Earle,op. cit., 38.

[473]Dunton'sLife and Errors(Westminster, 1818), I, 102, referring to Boston in 1686. InDunton'sLetters from New-England(ed. byWhitmorefor the Prince Society, Boston, 1867), 99, where this passage appears in a modified form, the age of a "thornback" is reduced to twenty-six years. The paragraph is also quoted byWeeden,op. cit., I, 299, 300; andEarle,op. cit., 38, 39.

[474]Mass. Col. Rec., II, 211, 212;Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 172;ibid.(1672-86), 216.

[475]Mass. Col. Rec., I, 283.

[476]Ibid., II, 86.

[477]MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk, 113.

[478]Mass. Col. Rec., I, 198.

[479]Ibid., 311.

[480]MSS. Records of the County Court of Middlesex, I, 18. Apparently Edward's attempts were a failure; for on Oct. 4, 1653, he was "granted liberty to use what more effectual means he may or can to send for his wife from England":ibid., I, 32.

[481]Mass. Col. Rec., III, 349, 350. But on petition, in order to present further testimony, the general court granted a respite.

[482]MSS. Early Court Files of Suffolk County, No. 531. This case is also partially reported inMass. Col. Rec., IV, Part II, 84; and quoted inShirley, "Early Jurisprudence of New Hampshire,"Procds. New. Hamp. Hist. Soc.(1876-84), 310.

[483]MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk, 9.

[484]MSS. Early Court Files of Suffolk, No. 867.

[485]MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk, 279.

[486]MSS. Records of the County Court of Middlesex, III, 63.

[487]MSS. Early Court Files of Suffolk, No. 527. For similar legislation seeNew Haven Col. Rec., II, 600;Trumbull,Blue Laws, 243.

[488]Mass. Col. Rec., V, 4;Shirley,Early Jurisprudence of New Hamp., 310, 311. The harboring of "strangers"—and "stranger" might be a father, daughter, or son from a neighboring town—gave the good people of the colonies a great deal of trouble. See the illustrations inWeeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist. of N. E., I, 272; andHoward,Local Const. Hist., I, 87, 88, where the town records are cited.

[489]Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 51, 171;ibid.(1672-86), 101.Cf. Mass. Col. Rec., III, 212 (1650). In 1638 John Emerson, of Scituate, was tried before the general court for abusing his wife:ibid., I, 232; the same year for beating his wife, Henry Seawall was sent for examination before the court at Ipswich:ibid., 233; and in 1663 Ensigne John Williams, of Barnstable, was fined by the Plymouth court for slandering his wife:Goodwin,Pilgrim Republic, 596.It would seem that the husband, too, really needed some legal protection. The early court records disclose the sad fact that husband-beating was painfully frequent in colonial times. Thus in Plymouth jurisdiction Joan, the wife of Obadiah Miller of Taunton, was presented "for beating and reviling her husband, and egging her children to healp her, bidding them knock him in the head, and wishing his victials might [~c]oake him."—Plym. Col. Rec., III, 75.The bad practice was not unknown among the "good wives" of Salem. For example, in 1637, at the fifth quarter court, it was decreed: "Whereas Dorothy the wyfe of John Talbie hath not only broak that peace & loue, wchought to haue beene both betwixt them, but also hath violentlie broke the king's peace, by frequent Laying hands vpon hir husband to the danger of his Life, & Condemned Authority, not co[=m]ing before them vpon command, It is therefore ordered that for hir misdemeaner passed & for prvention of future evills that are feared wilbe co[=m]itted by hir if shee be Lefte att hir Libertie. That she shall be bound & chained to some post where shee shall be restrained of hir libertye to goe abroad or comminge to hir husband till shee manefest some change of hir course.... Only it is pmitted that shee shall come to the place of gods worshipp, to enjoy his ordenances." Later "Dorothy" was punished again for a similar offense:Hist. Coll. Essex Inst., VII, 129, 187.Cf.Howard,Local Const. Hist., I, 326, 327. For further illustrations seeWeeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist, of N. E., I, 294.

It would seem that the husband, too, really needed some legal protection. The early court records disclose the sad fact that husband-beating was painfully frequent in colonial times. Thus in Plymouth jurisdiction Joan, the wife of Obadiah Miller of Taunton, was presented "for beating and reviling her husband, and egging her children to healp her, bidding them knock him in the head, and wishing his victials might [~c]oake him."—Plym. Col. Rec., III, 75.

The bad practice was not unknown among the "good wives" of Salem. For example, in 1637, at the fifth quarter court, it was decreed: "Whereas Dorothy the wyfe of John Talbie hath not only broak that peace & loue, wchought to haue beene both betwixt them, but also hath violentlie broke the king's peace, by frequent Laying hands vpon hir husband to the danger of his Life, & Condemned Authority, not co[=m]ing before them vpon command, It is therefore ordered that for hir misdemeaner passed & for prvention of future evills that are feared wilbe co[=m]itted by hir if shee be Lefte att hir Libertie. That she shall be bound & chained to some post where shee shall be restrained of hir libertye to goe abroad or comminge to hir husband till shee manefest some change of hir course.... Only it is pmitted that shee shall come to the place of gods worshipp, to enjoy his ordenances." Later "Dorothy" was punished again for a similar offense:Hist. Coll. Essex Inst., VII, 129, 187.Cf.Howard,Local Const. Hist., I, 326, 327. For further illustrations seeWeeden,Ecc. and Soc. Hist, of N. E., I, 294.

[490]Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 129;New Haven Col. Rec., II, 578, andTrumbull,Blue Laws, 201;Conn. Col. Rec., I, 515, andTrumbull,op. cit., 69;New Hamp. Hist. Coll., VIII, 12;Shirley,Early Jurisprudence of N. H., 311;Andros Tracts, III, 13.Cf.a similar law for early New York:Duke of Yorke's Laws, 15.

[491]Plym. Col. Rec., XI, 29, 108, 190, 191.

[492]For the case seeibid., III, 5: "Wee psent Jonathan Couentry ... for makeing mocion of marriage vnto Katheren Bradberey, servant vnto MrBurne, of the same town, without her master's consent, contrary to Court orders."

[493]Seeibid., IV (1666/7), 140, 158, 159.

[494]Goodwin,Pilgrim Republic, 598;cf.Palfrey,Hist. of New England, II, 21.

[495]Goodwin,op. cit., 597.

[496]Dec. 16, 1679. At a court held at Charlestown, George Parminter and his wife convicted of fornication before marriage, court respited their sentence till next court, and ordered that their parents be summoned then to appear to give answer why they denied them the consummation of their marriage for so many months after they were in order thereto:MSS. Records of the County Court of Middlesex, III, 316.

[497]Acts and Laws of Conn.(New Haven, 1769), 144. Substantially the same provision appears in theCode of 1643:Trumbull,Blue Laws, 106, 107;Conn. Col. Rec., I, 92; inThe Book of General Laws, 1673(Hartford, 1865), 46; and inActs and Laws(New London, 1715), 75.

[498]New Haven Col. Rec., II, 600;Trumbull,op. cit., 242.Cf.Atwater,Hist. of Col. of New Haven, 362.

[499]Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 172;ibid.(1672-86), 101;Mass. Col. Rec., II, 207.Cf.Friedberg,Eheschliessung, 477, note;Newhall,Ye Great and General Court, 349-65, giving interesting examples.

[500]MSS. Records of the County Court for Middlesex, I, 131.In 1662 Marmaduke Johnson, who by his own confession had a wife in England, was convicted of trying to steal the affections of the daughter of Samuel Green without his knowledge and consent; and he was ordered to join his spouse by the first oportunity:ibid., I, 206. The next year Johnson was "fined £20 unless he give security" so to depart, in the meantime being "committed until the order is performed":ibid., 249. It may be further noted that on April 7, 1674, a Marmaduke Johnson is spoken of as "late constable of Cambridge":ibid., III, 87.

[500]MSS. Records of the County Court for Middlesex, I, 131.

In 1662 Marmaduke Johnson, who by his own confession had a wife in England, was convicted of trying to steal the affections of the daughter of Samuel Green without his knowledge and consent; and he was ordered to join his spouse by the first oportunity:ibid., I, 206. The next year Johnson was "fined £20 unless he give security" so to depart, in the meantime being "committed until the order is performed":ibid., 249. It may be further noted that on April 7, 1674, a Marmaduke Johnson is spoken of as "late constable of Cambridge":ibid., III, 87.

[501]MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk, 106.

[502]Irons was fined 20 shillings, and Barnum half that sum:MSS. Records of the County Court of Suffolk(July 28, 1674), 255, 256. On the same day "Edward Peggy being bound over for using indirect means 'by powders or other wayes unlawfull to Engage the affections or desires of women kinde to him' and for begetting a bastard child"—in particular for illegally "drawing away the affections of two girls"—was assessed 10 pounds and put under bonds for good behavior:ibid., 261.

[503]Ibid.(Feb. 4, 1674-75), 301. The records of the court of assistants inMass. Col. Rec.(Sept. 1, 1640), I, 299, 300, contain a similar case.

[504]Law of 1641:Whitmore,Col. Laws of Mass.(1660-72), 137.

[505]Dunton,Life and Errors, I, 103;idem,Letters from New England, 101, 102.

[506]Sewall'sDiary, in 5Mass. Hist. Coll., V, 490.

Back to Index Next