[4-1672] [Petition relative to Boundaries, 1785.] State of New) The Honble the Senate and house of RepresentHampshire atives convened at portsmouth in the state aforesaid the Tenth day of June Anno Domini 1785. The petition of the Proprietors of the Town of Cockermouth in said State of New Hampshire Most Humbly sheweth That in October Anno Domini 1780 The State made an act intitled "An Act to servey & establish the bounds of sundry towns in the Counties of Strafford & Grafton" which towns are particularly mentioned in said Act And also in & by said Act among other things impowering Ebenezer Thompson Esq' & others as Committee to survey & lay out by proper metes & bounds the following towns viz-Rumney, Wentworth, Warren, Plymouth, Campton, Piermont & Orford. And a return of s Survey being made into the Secretaries Office under the hands of sa Committee or any three or more of them in one year from the passing said Act, should be binding & conclusive in Law upon all persons upon certain conditions & limitations therein mentioned And whereas the running the lines of the aforesd towns, your Petitioners apprehend will be very detrimental to the town of Cockermouth for the following reasons viz-First, That altho' said Act sets forth that public notice had been given & no person had appeared to oppose the same yet that the Proprietors of Cockermouth who are mentioned in said Act & are materially concerned in the Issue of running lines, never were notified, neither was said Cockermouth ever notified as a town. Secondly-That the lines of the towns of Lyme, Dorchester & Cockermouth were all surveyed by order of the Honorable the Superior Court of the Province of New Hampshire, more than ten years ago, which surveys were made use of in trials of actions at law then depending between the said Proprietors of Cockermouth & Plymouth, And that agreeable to said Surveys, said proprietors of Cockermouth recovered in all said Actions, & have constantly possessed, occupied & improved said land, paid the taxes thereof, & defended the same against the Common Enemy throughout a tedious war & that a considerable part of the land in said Cockermouth has been sold for State & proprietory taxes within that time— Thirdly-That by the return of the Committee who were authorised by the before mentioned Act, your petitioners are informed, the said town of Plymouth will have one line of about two miles in length more than their Charter gives them,— whereas in fact it appears that they should come to a point, & leave out the said line of two miles, whereby a very large tract of land is included, more than Plymouth Charter contains. Wherefore your Petitioners humbly pray a day of hearing may be assigned them and that in the mean time the said town of Plymouth may be ordered not to make any assesments upon the poles and estates of the inhabitants within the Claim of the township of Cockermouth, until the boundaries of sd Plymouth & Cockermouth shall be established by the General Court, and that your Excellency & Honors would be pleased to pass such further order thereon as you in your wisdom shall think fitAnd your petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray R: Cutts Shannon Edmund Shattuck Committee June 10th 1785 [4-168] It is agreed between the Comtees of Cockermouth & Plymouth that the Petition concerning the boundarys shall be farther postponed to the next Session of the gen' Court in Concord which may happen after the first wednesday of June next. May 10th 1787. Sam' Hobart Noah Worcester R: Cutts Shannon S Livermore for Plym for Cockermouth [For documents relative to foregoing, see Vol. XI, page 723.-ED.] [4-169] [Petition for change of Name of Town.] State of Newhampshire Grafton ss To the Honarabel the General Cort to be holden at Concord within and for said state on the first WednesDay of June Next the petition of the Inhabetants of the town of Cockermouth in the County and State afore said Humbly Sheweth that whereas we the Inhabetants of Sa Town have for a Long time been Dissatisfied with the Name of Cockermouth being afixed to said Town these are therefore to in form your Honours that the Inhabetents of Sd town by there Legal meeting Did meet in town meeting in S Cockermouth on the Eleventh Day of march 1788 and by their unamus voice agree to and Voted to petition this Honourable Court to Change the Name of S town from that of Cockermouth to that of Danbury as by their Vote on sd 11th Day of march may more fully appear these are therefore to pray your Honours that by an act of your Honours the Name of sd Cockermouth may be Vacated and that the Name of Danbury be affixed thereto and Known in Law as Such and your petitioners as in Duty bound Shall Ever pray Signed by order of the town Cockermouth may 30th 1788 Eb' Kendell) Select men [In H. of Rep., June 9, 1788, the petitioners were granted leave to bring in a bill.—ED.] [4-170] [Petition of Cockermouth People for a new Town, 1791.] His Excellency the President, The Hon. Senate & House of Representatives for the State of New Hampshire in Gen' Court convened. The petition of us the Subscribers humbly sheweth, that the Southeasterly part of the Town of Cockermouth (by its natural formation is so situated that a connection with the Southwesterly part of Plymouth (in all matters) would render it exceedingly advantageous to us inhabitants of said Cockermouth.— Wherefore we pray that a certain part of said Cockermouth (beginning at the Southwesterly corner of the lot Number sixteen in the first range & first division in said Cockermouth thence running North thirty degrees East to Rumney line which makes about a mile in width) may be set off from said Cockermouth, annexed to and incorporated with that part of said Plymouth now petitioned for as a New Township And your petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray [4-170] [Petition of Plymouth People for a New Town, 1791.] His Excellency the President, the Honble Senate & House of Representatives for the State of New Hampshire in Gen1 Court convened The petition of us the subscribers humbly sheweth, that by a late establishment of the boundaries of the Town of Plymouth (of which we are Inhabitants) our connection with said Town of Plymouth is rendered exceeding difficult, as the road at present is new and in a great measure unoccupied, and the length of way from the principal part of us nearly six miles to the now Centre of said Plymouth. And further that the greater part of us have been at a great expence in settling a Gospel Minister & supporting the Gospel among ourselves without any assistance of the Town of Plymouth aforesaid, & having previously obtained approbation of the inhabitants of said Plymouth by a unanimous vote herewith inclosed and preferred to your Honors signifying that our desires may be fully gratified Wherefore we pray, that such a part of said Plymouth as is expressed by metes and bounds in said vote herewith preferred by the bearer William Cummings may be set off & incorporated into a Township and that we the Inhabitants of the same may be invested with Town privileges in such way as your Honours in wisdom may Judge fit and we your Honours petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray— Feb. 24 1792 Serv'd the select men of Plymouth with a true Copy per Wm Cumings Feb. 18th 1792 the Petitioners comply'd with ye within order of Court by serving us with an attested Copy ) Selectmen of sd Cockermouth Wm Cumings for 1791 Edm Shattuck Sam Goodhue Jr March 1792 Selectmen for sd Cockermouth for 1792 [The foregoing petitions were granted, and the portions of the two towns asked for were set off and incorporated into the town of Hebron.-ED.] [4-171] [Capt. Edmund Shattuck's Resignation, 1791.] To His Excellency the President of the State of New Hampshire The request of your Petitioner humbly sheweth that for many years even from infancy of the Town of Cockermouth, he has born a large Share of the hardships not only of settling a new Town, but has for considerable time Sustained the Trust of Capt of the Company of militia in s Cockermouth and inasmuch as he is in advanced age prays that he may be releas'd from military exercises & your Excellency's Petitioner as in duty bound ever prayeth Cockermouth Jany 5th 1791 Ed Shattuck Capt [4-172] [Petition to have the Name of the Town changed to Groton, 1796.] The Honble Senate & house of Representatives of the State of New Hampshire in Gen' Court convened The Petition of us the Subscribers humbly sheweth That, Whereas the Inhabitants of the Town of Cockermouth at a late Town Meeting unanimously manifested their Desire that the Name of said Town of Cockermouth might be altered and another Name for said Town Substituted in Stead therof Wherefore we pray that your Honours would gratify the Inhabitants of said Cockermouth and order by act of the Hon' Gen' Court that said Town be Called Groton-This your Petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray Cockermouth Nov. 24th 1796 [The foregoing petition was granted by an act passed December 7, 1796.-ED.] HAMPSTEAD. Previous to the establishment of the line between this state and Massachusetts, the territory comprising this town was considered as parts of Haverhill and Amesbury, and went by the name of Timberlane. |