Browsing named entities in HISTORY OF THE TOWN OF MEDFORD, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, FROM ITS FIRST SETTLEMENT, IN 1630, TO THE PRESENT TIME, 1855. (ed. Charles Brooks). You can also browse the collection for Woburn (Massachusetts, United States) or search for Woburn (Massachusetts, United States) in all documents.

Your search returned 21 results in 4 document sections:

HISTORY OF THE TOWN OF MEDFORD, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, FROM ITS FIRST SETTLEMENT, IN 1630, TO THE PRESENT TIME, 1855. (ed. Charles Brooks), Chapter 1: (search)
rd, until 1640, was surrounded by Charlestown, which embraced Malden, Stoneham, Woburn, Burlington, Somerville, a part of Cambridge, West Cambridge, and Medford. At ide of said Medford, bounded easterly on Malden line, northerly on Stoneham and Woburn line, westerly on the line betwixt Mr. Symmes' and Gardner's farm, running ther and those on the northerly side, bounded northerly on Stoneham, on the town of Woburn and by the northerly bounds of Mr. William Symmes' farm, and easterly on Maldenst of the present road which leads from West Medford to the ancient boundary of Woburn. It was on the farm occupied by Mr. Thompson, forty or fifty rods south of whar name. How they came by their present appellative is this. Young Baldwin, of Woburn, afterwards a colonel, and father of Loami, was an intimate friend of young Tho each week, these two thirsty and ambitious students walked from their homes in Woburn to bring back with them from Cambridge the teachings of the learned professor.
HISTORY OF THE TOWN OF MEDFORD, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, FROM ITS FIRST SETTLEMENT, IN 1630, TO THE PRESENT TIME, 1855. (ed. Charles Brooks), Chapter 2: (search)
lers from Salem, Saugus, Andover, Reading, &c. Woburn was obliged by law to help support it, and theat town constantly complained and objected. Woburn records, of Oct. 28, 1690, say: Serg. Mathew Jto appear there about Mistick Bridge. 1693: Woburn grew very emphatic, and said: Woburn was not cept by law they were forced thereto. In 1694, Woburn was again cited by order of Court, and threate to be by the respective towns of Charlestown, Woburn, Malden, Reading, and Medford, according to thck Bridge as follows: Charlestown, £ 64. 14s.; Woburn, Malden, Reading, and Medford, each £ 17. 12s. 3d.; total, £ 135. 3s. To this award Woburn, Malden, and Reading objected, and therefore appealed.d bridge. May 13, 1761: Voted to treat with Woburn, Reading, and Malden, concerning Medford Bridgwith the General Court, if there be reason. Woburn, as we have seen, always contended most stoutlle). So troublesome grew this litigation, that Woburn paid to Medford a certain sum to be released f[3 more...]
HISTORY OF THE TOWN OF MEDFORD, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, FROM ITS FIRST SETTLEMENT, IN 1630, TO THE PRESENT TIME, 1855. (ed. Charles Brooks), Chapter 3: (search)
tituted and established within the Plymouth and Massachusetts Colonies before the year 1655, without any more formal act of incorporation. Among the oldest are the following: Plymouth, 1620; Salem, 1629 ; Charlestown, 1629; Boston, 1630; Medford or Mystic, 1630; Watertown, 1630; Roxbury, 1630; Dorchester, 1630 ; Cambridge or Newton, 1633; Ipswich, 1634; Concord, 1635; Hingham, 1635; Newbury, 1635; Scituate, 1636; Springfield, 1636; Duxbury, 1637; Lynn, 1637; Barnstable, 1639; Taunton, 1639; Woburn, 1642; Malden, 1649. London, May 22, 1629: On this day the orders for establishing a government and officers in Massachusetts Bay passed, and said orders were sent to New England(. Although, in the first settlement of New England, different sections of country were owned and controlled by Companies in England, yet the people here claimed and exercised a corporate power in the elections of their rulers and magistrates. This was the case with Medford. To show what form of government
HISTORY OF THE TOWN OF MEDFORD, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, FROM ITS FIRST SETTLEMENT, IN 1630, TO THE PRESENT TIME, 1855. (ed. Charles Brooks), chapter 18 (search)
emov. to Middlet., Ct., and left heirs.  4John, b. Oct. 1, 1654.  5Samuel, b. May 1, 1658; remov. to Lexington, Ct., and left heirs.  6Abigail, b. July 3, 1660; m.----Wilcox.  7Sarah, b. Mar. 7, 1662; m. William Locke.   He m., 2d, Margaret Harty, Nov. 10, 1666, who d. Mar. 1, 1686; and had--  8Margaret, b. Sept. 9, 1668; m. Thomas Carter.  9Frances, b. Mar. 3, 1671; m. Jonathan Tompson.  10Thomas, b. 1673; lived in Killingly, Ct., and had issue.  11Joseph, b. c. 1675; lived in Woburn, Ct., and had issue.   The earliest mentioned person by the name of Whitmore I have yet met with is John of Stamford, who was living in Wethersfield in 1639. He was killed by the Indians in 1648, leaving a son, John. I have some reason to suspect that he was the father of all of the name here, and that the following will give about the record of his children's births:--   Thomas, b. 1615; the ancestor of the Wetmores.   Ann, b. (?) 1621; m. George Farrar.   Mary, b. (?) 1623;