hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
Medford (Massachusetts, United States) 457 1 Browse Search
Benjamin Woodbridge 50 2 Browse Search
Salem (Massachusetts, United States) 34 0 Browse Search
Mathew Cradock 33 1 Browse Search
Caleb Brooks 25 3 Browse Search
John Brooks 25 7 Browse Search
Aaron Porter 23 3 Browse Search
Isaac Royall 22 4 Browse Search
Maria Gowen Brooks 22 0 Browse Search
Horace Brooks 21 1 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Medford Historical Society Papers, Volume 3.. Search the whole document.

Found 441 total hits in 181 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...
Z. Poole (search for this): chapter 1
ising by reason of said Bridge, and do in our said capacity take upon the town of Medford all the charge and care of said Bridge, which the town of Woburn was bound to do or ever shall be: In witness whereof we in our said capacity have hereunto sett our hands and seals this seventh day of July annoque Domini one thousand seven hundred and sixty-one, and in the first year of his Majestie's reign. Signed Sealed and Deilvered in presence of us Stephen Hall, [L. S.], Simon Tufts, [L. S.], Z. Poole, [L. S.], Parker, [L. S.], Willis Hall, Aaron Hall. Benjn. In 1789 the town of Medford proposed to widen the bridge and pave the market-place, and the General Court was petitioned to grant a lottery for these purposes. The petitioners were given leave to withdraw. In 1794 a number of the inhabitants of Medford petitioned the Selectmen to insert an article in the warrant for the annual town-meeting, To see if the town will build a draw in the Great bridge, or give liberty to certain
Leavitt (search for this): chapter 1
railroad, and one each at North and Grove streets, where those streets pass over said railroad. Mention should be made of those bridges that once existed in our streets over the Middlesex canal. There was one over the branch canal at Mystic avenue near Swan street, and one each over the main canal at Main street near Summer street, at Winthrop street near West street, at North street at its junction with West, Cotting, and Auburn streets, and at High street at its junction with Boston avenue. The abutments of the bridge over the canal, where crossed by the Boston & Lowell Railroad, may still be seen near the Chemical Works, on Boston avenue in the city of Somerville. Members. Number previously reported, 226. Begien, Henry M. Brown, George E. Bruce, Mrs. F. P. Buss, Charles B. Coburn, Charles F. Fuller, G. S. T. Hollis, Mrs. Mary P. Kennedy, Dr. J. S. Leavitt, Harry B. Montague, Mrs. Hattie B. Start, Mrs. Philena C. Sturtevant, James S.
John Whitmore (search for this): chapter 1
hat point was sufficient to prevent the passage of teams at high water it is more than probable that the first bridge over this creek must have been built in the early days of the settlement of the town. April 27, 1716, Deacon Thomas Willis, John Whitmore, Jonathan Tufts, Ebenezer Brooks, and John Willis were chosen a committee to view and consider what method may be most proper for the repairing of Gravelly bridge, and to report at the next meeting. June 11, 1716, the town voted to raise five pounds to repair the meeting-house and mend Gravelly bridge; in 1751 the town voted to rebuild Gravelly bridge with stone. The bridges over Marble or Meeting-house and Whitmore brooks in High street were by order of the town rebuilt of stone in 1803; these brooks where crossed by the street are not affected by the flow of the tide. All of the bridges above mentioned were originally built so as to allow fording-places at their sides for the purpose of watering horses and cattle, and they h
James Hayden (search for this): chapter 1
, and appointed a committee to prosecute the suit, and also appointed parties to attend court as witnesses. Charlestown records say that on the 26th of the 10th month, 1638, It was ordered that Mr. Walter Palmer and Richard Sprague should follow the suit at the Quarter Court against Mr. Cradock's agent, for stopping up Mistick river with a bridge, to the hindrance of boats, and exacting toll (without any orders) of cattle that go over the bridge. George Buncker, Geo. Hutchinson, and James Hayden were appointed to be at the General Court next, to witness to the concerning of Mr. Cradock's bridge. No mention is made of this suit in the records of the General Court. In 1879, when the old drawbridge was removed to prepare for the foundations of the present stone bridge, a portion of an ancient structure was found on the north side of the river, and the removal of this old structure disclosed the methods of its construction. First, there was laid in the mud at right angles with
Francis Foxcroft (search for this): chapter 1
f the conditions of the sale was that the grantees should forever maintain and keep in repair the southerly half of Mistick bridge and the causey adjoining. The records of the County Court say that March 15, 1736, the towns of Medford, Charlestown, Woburn, Reading and Malden by their respective agents appear in Court, to answer to their presentment for not repairing Mistick bridge, and the said towns plead not guilty, and move to be tried by the Court. The Court thereupon order that Francis Foxcroft, Joseph Mason, and Ephraim Williams, Esqrs., be a committee to repair the bridge mentioned in presentment, view the circumstances, and state the divisional line; consider on which side of the line the defect is, and report to the Court at their adjournment, and that the bridge be forthwith repaired by Capt. Aaron Cleveland, and the charge borne as the Court shall order, and that the committee give reasonable notice of their coming. The committee report that the said bridge, except in
Stephen Hall (search for this): chapter 1
d, the southerly half of Mistick bridge and the causey adjoining became a charge to the town of Medford (the town tried in vain to secure the help of other towns in caring for the said south part of said bridge), and Samuel Brooks, Esq., Lieut. Stephen Hall, Jr., and Joseph Tufts were chosen a committee to manage affairs relating to the said southerly half of Mistick bridge and the causey adjoining. Medford town records say that July 25, 1757,Samuel Brooks, Esq., Stephen Hall, Esq., and Capt. Cf we in our said capacity have hereunto sett our hands and seals this seventh day of July annoque Domini one thousand seven hundred and sixty-one, and in the first year of his Majestie's reign. Signed Sealed and Deilvered in presence of us Stephen Hall, [L. S.], Simon Tufts, [L. S.], Z. Poole, [L. S.], Parker, [L. S.], Willis Hall, Aaron Hall. Benjn. In 1789 the town of Medford proposed to widen the bridge and pave the market-place, and the General Court was petitioned to grant a lotter
Nicholas Davidson (search for this): chapter 1
m this day in regard to his charge in building the bridge, and the county is to finish it at the charge of the public, Mr. Davidson and Lieut. Sprague to see it done and to bring in their bill of charges. This action of the General Court shows thadock's agent, as will be shown by the following action of the Court: Oct. 27, 1648. In answer to the petition of Nic. Davidson in behalf of Mr. Cradock for the repairing and maintaining of Mistick bridge by the County, the said Mr. Davidson being Mr. Davidson being sent for, the evidence he can give being heard and examined with the records of the General Court, it appears that the General Court did engage for an exemption from rates for that year, and finishing the same on their own charges, which accordingly the Court thereon, can be inferred by the record five years later. May 18, 1653. Upon a petition presented by Mr. Nicholas Davidson in behalf of Mr. Cradock, in reference to Mistick bridge, it is ordered by this Court and hereby declared that, i
Jonathan Tufts (search for this): chapter 1
s present shape in 1892; its care and maintenance is now a charge to the city of Medford and the town of Arlington. Gravelly bridge. Gravelly bridge is located in Salem street over Gravelly creek, and as the flow of the tide at that point was sufficient to prevent the passage of teams at high water it is more than probable that the first bridge over this creek must have been built in the early days of the settlement of the town. April 27, 1716, Deacon Thomas Willis, John Whitmore, Jonathan Tufts, Ebenezer Brooks, and John Willis were chosen a committee to view and consider what method may be most proper for the repairing of Gravelly bridge, and to report at the next meeting. June 11, 1716, the town voted to raise five pounds to repair the meeting-house and mend Gravelly bridge; in 1751 the town voted to rebuild Gravelly bridge with stone. The bridges over Marble or Meeting-house and Whitmore brooks in High street were by order of the town rebuilt of stone in 1803; these bro
Aaron Porter Oct (search for this): chapter 1
r what he had previously done towards its construction, by freeing him from County rates for one year; and it was ordered to be finished at the public expense, and, as we shall see, the Court ordered it to be repaired from time to time thereafter, at the expense of the Province. The records of the General Court say that Oct. 10th. 1641 it is ordered that Lieut. Sprague and Edward Converse should repair the bridge at Medford over Mistick river, and the same be paid for out of the Treasury. Oct 17th. 1643. Mr. Edward Tomlins should have 22 pounds to repair Mistick bridge, to make it strong and sufficient, for which sum of 22 pound he hath undertaken it. At a General Court at Boston, for elections the 6th. of the 3rd. month 1646. Ralph Sprague and Edward Converse are appointed to view tile bridge at Mistick, and what charge they conceive meet to be presently expended for the making it sufficient and prevent the ruin thereof, or by further delay to endanger it, by agreeing with
Walter Palmer (search for this): chapter 1
level; its approach on the south side of the river over the marsh was by means of a causeway. The town of Charlestown brought a suit against Governor Cradock's agent for obstructing the river with a bridge, to the hindrance of boats, and exacting toll for cattle that passed over the bridge, and appointed a committee to prosecute the suit, and also appointed parties to attend court as witnesses. Charlestown records say that on the 26th of the 10th month, 1638, It was ordered that Mr. Walter Palmer and Richard Sprague should follow the suit at the Quarter Court against Mr. Cradock's agent, for stopping up Mistick river with a bridge, to the hindrance of boats, and exacting toll (without any orders) of cattle that go over the bridge. George Buncker, Geo. Hutchinson, and James Hayden were appointed to be at the General Court next, to witness to the concerning of Mr. Cradock's bridge. No mention is made of this suit in the records of the General Court. In 1879, when the old
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...