08.08.2013 Views

History of Northampton, Massachusetts, from its settlement in 1654;

History of Northampton, Massachusetts, from its settlement in 1654;

History of Northampton, Massachusetts, from its settlement in 1654;

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

1676.] KING PHILIP'S WAR—ATTACK ON NORTHAMPTON. 311<br />

age and Mr. Russell agree <strong>in</strong> the statement that five houses<br />

and. five barns were burned, the latter add<strong>in</strong>g that one was<br />

"with<strong>in</strong> the fortification." From the records <strong>of</strong> land<br />

grants to the sufferers <strong>in</strong> the Indian war <strong>of</strong> 1675 and 1676,<br />

it is possible to name the persons whose build<strong>in</strong>gs were<br />

burned, and consequently to designate their home lots.<br />

The only house destroyed with<strong>in</strong> the palisades was that <strong>of</strong><br />

William Holton, who lived on Pleasant Street, very near<br />

the dwell<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> Robert Bartlett. It is conjectured that the<br />

defences were broken through <strong>in</strong> this immediate vic<strong>in</strong>ity.<br />

John Holton, son <strong>of</strong> William and brother <strong>of</strong> Thomas who<br />

was sla<strong>in</strong>, had a war grant <strong>of</strong> a small lot, conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g sixty<br />

rods on Meet<strong>in</strong>g House Hill, and to his brother Samuel was<br />

given a lot very near it <strong>of</strong> the same size. Neither <strong>of</strong><br />

these young men had been granted home lots previously,<br />

though both had married. Why these grants, named as Indian<br />

war grants, were made to the sons while the father was<br />

still liv<strong>in</strong>g, and their residence was with<strong>in</strong> the fortifica-<br />

tions, is not clear.<br />

The other build<strong>in</strong>gs burned at this time, all <strong>of</strong> which<br />

were without the l<strong>in</strong>e <strong>of</strong> palisades, were those <strong>of</strong> Alexander<br />

Alvord, who lived probably <strong>in</strong> the vic<strong>in</strong>ity <strong>of</strong> what is<br />

now known as Pomeroy Terrace ; John Alexander, who<br />

occupied what was known <strong>in</strong> later years as the Edw<strong>in</strong> Clark<br />

estate on Bridge Street ; Samuel Allen, who lived on K<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Street, on the lot afterwards owned and occupied by<br />

Rev. Mr. Hooker, and later by the late Eliphalet Williams<br />

and Matthew Clesson, who owned the lot on which H.<br />

R. H<strong>in</strong>ckley now resides.<br />

Each <strong>of</strong> these persons received war grants<br />

Location <strong>of</strong> the War<br />

Grants to the at tliis time. Alexander Alvord's was on<br />

sons.<br />

Hawley Street, near the site <strong>of</strong> the Chicago<br />

Beef Co.'s warehouse; John Alexander's<br />

was on K<strong>in</strong>g Street near the house now occupied by John<br />

Parnell ;<br />

Samuel Allen was granted a small lot on Meet<strong>in</strong>g<br />

House Hill, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g the site <strong>of</strong> the present Court House.<br />

Matthew Clesson's lot <strong>of</strong> sixty rods, was west <strong>of</strong> K<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Street, on the brook above Park. There was some disagreement<br />

between Clesson and the town authorities <strong>in</strong> reference<br />

to this grant. In 1703, he was given a home lot <strong>of</strong><br />

;

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!