[
63]
Provided always, we think it meet that no stop be made of any the above-said abatement, so as to interfere or obstruct the performing of the present engagement respecting those bridges.
April 7, 1657: This return being made to the
Court, it was accepted by the
Court, who order that this return of the
Committee shall be presented to the next General Court, by the
Clerk of the
Court, for their confirmation and settling thereof.
This report of the
Committee was accepted, and it placed the question of the bridges on its true basis.
The plan of taxing the county, or the towns that use it, for the support of Medford Bridge, was productive of constant trouble to all concerned, and led to lingering lawsuits.
It being the only bridge over
Mystic River, it must be used by many travellers from
Salem,
Saugus,
Andover, Reading, &c.
Woburn was obliged by law to help support it, and they of that town constantly complained and objected.
Woburn records, of Oct. 28, 1690, say: “
Serg. Mathew Johnson,
Serg. John Pierce, chosen to meet the
Court's Committee, and treat with them about Mistick Bridge.”
The same records, of May, 1691, say: “The selectmen met with
Malden men and Reading men to consult about defending ourselves at the
County Court; being warned to appear there about Mistick Bridge.”
1693:
Woburn grew very emphatic, and said: “
Woburn was not concerned in the presentment of Mistick Bridge; neither would they do any thing in order to the repairing thereof, except by law they were forced thereto.”
In 1694,
Woburn was again cited by order of Court, and threatened with a fine of £ 5; yet was inflexible, and put itself in the posture of defence.
The question was tried at
Boston, and, after able attorneys had spoken on both sides, the
Court decide as follows :--
Middlesex, ss.--At the General Quarter Sessions of the Peace, holden at Charlestown, Jan. 23, 1694.
