Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register

[207] etc.; “that this petition is predicated on the feeble pretence that there is not any public highway leading to the west end of said Bridge,—an highway which Mr. Craigie has ever had it in his power, by a petition to the town, to attain, and which is now ordered by a vote of the town, by removing every obstacle to be laid out and established.” This remonstrance was effectual; the committee, to whom the petition was referred, reported that “it is inexpedient for the Legislature to appoint any Committee to view or mark out any of the highways aforesaid;” and the report was accepted.

Agreeably to the vote of the town, before recited, the Selectmen laid out a road over the lands of Hill and others, so as to make a continuous avenue from Canal Bridge to Cambridge Common; and the road was accepted by the town July 10, 1809. But this was not satisfactory to Mr. Craigie;¹ and on the following day (July 11) he presented a petition to the Court of Sessions, that a road might be “laid out from the west end of the Canal Bridge in a straight line through the lands of Andrew Craigie, Henry Hill, Aaron Hill,² Rufus Davenport, Royal Makepeace, William Winthrop, Harvard College, and John Phillips, over what is called Foxcroft Street, to the Common in said Cambridge, and over and across said Common to or near the house of Deacon Josiah Moore,” which “road is already made over the whole of it, except a few rods only.” This petition was referred to a committee, who reported in its favor, Aug. 1, 1809; whereupon another committee was appointed, who reported Sept. 11, the laying out of the road, with a schedule of land damages amounting to $2,055; whereof the sum of $1,327 was awarded to Andrew Craigie, and $292 to William Winthrop.

The town, considering it to be unreasonable that Mr. Craigie should claim and receive damages for land used in the construction of a road which he so much desired, and for which he had so long been earnestly striving, petitioned the Court of Sessions in December, 1809, for the appointment of a jury, “to determine whether any and what damages said Craigie has sustained by means of said road,” alleging “that in fact said Craigie sustained no damages.” At the next term of the Court, in March, 1810, it was ordered that a jury be empanelled, and at the next term in June, Edward Wade, Coroner, returned the verdict of the