Browsing named entities in Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register. You can also browse the collection for Thomas Hooker or search for Thomas Hooker in all documents.

Your search returned 128 results in 25 document sections:

1 2 3
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Key to the plan of Cambridge in 1635 . (search)
Key to the plan of Cambridge in 1635 . Indicating the owners and occuprants of the several lots, in 1635, and in 1642. All are supposed to have been homesteads, unless otherwise designated. 1William Westwood. Forfeited; afterwards called Watch-house Hill; site of the Meeting-house from 1650 to 1833.Public Lot. 2James Olmstead.Edward Goffe. 3William Pantry.Harvard College. Uncertain whether then occupied by a house or not. 4Rev. Thomas Hooker.Rev. Thomas Shepard. 5John White. Vacant lot.Richard Champney. Vacant lot. 6John Clark. Vacant lot.Thomas Beal. Vacant lot. 7William Wadsworth. Vacant lot.Samuel Shepard. Vacant lot. 8John White.Thomas Danforth. 9John Hopkins. Vacant lot.Mark Pierce. 10John White. Vacant lot.Edward Collins. 11William Goodwin.Samuel Shepard. 12John Steele.Robert Bradish. 13William Wadsworth.Richard Champney. 14Widow Esther Muzzey.Henry Dunster. House, but apparently not a homestead. 15Daniel Abbott.Francis Moo
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Chapter 1: civil History. (search)
their habitations, or have as an addition to that which already they have, provided they doe not take it in any place to prejudice a plantation already settled. Ibid., p. 119. After examining several places, the congregation of Newtown came and accepted of such enlargement as had formerly been offered them by Boston and Watertown. Savage's Winthrop, i. 132, 142. This enlargement embraced Brookline, Brighton, and Newton. Brookline, then called Muddy River, was granted on condition that Mr. Hooker and his congregation should not remove. They did remove; and thus this grant was forfeited. But the grant of what was afterwards Brighton and Newton held good. In the settlement of the line between Cambridge and Charlestown, no indication is given how far the bounds of either extended into the country beyond the line drawn from the Governor's great lot, or the Ten Hills Farm, to the nearest part of Watertown. But the Court, March 3, 1635-6, agreed that Newe Towne bounds shall run eig
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Chapter 2: civil History. (search)
ee, a town in Essex, about forty miles from London. Company (which had begun to sit down at Mount Wollaston), by order of court, removed to Newtown. There were Mr. Hooker's Company. Savage's Winthrop, i. 87. Mr. Hooker did not arrive until more than a year later; but the members of his flock, who preceded him, in due time agaiMr. Hooker did not arrive until more than a year later; but the members of his flock, who preceded him, in due time again enjoyed his pastoral care. Before their arrival an order was adopted by the inhabitants, in regard to the paling around the common lands; the contemplated assignment of proportions, however, was not made until several months afterwards, when new inhabitants had arrived and had received grants of the common property. The date ofentered, was called Field Lane. Cow-yard Lane and Field Lane north of Harvard Street were discontinued and enclosed with the adjoining lands immediately after Mr. Hooker's company removed. The foregoing are all the highways of which I find any trace in the present bounds of Cambridge, prior to 1636. On the south side of the ri
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Chapter 3: civil History. (search)
consent, for a monthly meeting. Imprimis, That every person undersubscribed shall [meet] every first Monday in every month, within [the] meeting house, in the afternoon, within half [an hour] after the ringing of the bell; It is observable that the hour of meeting was thus early announced by the ringing of the bell. Johnson represents that, in 1636, a drum was used, because the town had as yet no bell to call men to meeting. —Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., XIV. 18. It seems unlikely that Mr. Hooker's company transported their bell, across the wilderness, to Connecticut, and the story perhaps was inaccurately reported to Johnson. The day of meeting was changed to the second Monday in the month, Oct. 1, 1639, because it was ordered by the General Court, to prevent the hindrance of the military company upon the first Monday in the month, that no other meetings should be appointed upon that day. and that every [one] that makes not his personal appearance there [and] continues there, wi
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Chapter 4: civil History. (search)
question. Peter Bulkeley. John Wilson. Thomas Hooker. Whereas John Pratt of Newe Towned in danger to be assailed; the departure of Mr. Hooker would not only draw many from us, but also d Under date of May 31, 1636, Winthrop says: Mr. Hooker, pastor of the church of New Town, and the mh eminent stars, such as were Mr. Cotton and Mr. Hooker, both of the first magnitude, though of diff which Mr. Cotton had in the colony inclined Mr. Hooker and his friends to remove to some place morop. His growing popularity, and the fame of Mr. Hooker, who, as to strength of genius and his livele General Court in their granting liberty to Mr. Hooker and his company to remove to Connecticut. Tlries had some influence upon the removal of Mr. Hooker and his friends. It is known that Winthrop ater, had commenced as early as 1635; in which Hooker and Cotton espoused opposite sides, and were a is not surprising, therefore, that Cotton and Hooker should feel that their close proximity was irr[5 more...]
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Chapter 5: civil History. (search)
l General. the New Town named Cambridge. printing-press. Bond of Stephen Daye to Jose Glover. It has already been mentioned in the preceding chapter, that Mr. Hooker and a large proportion of his church removed from New Town in 1635 and 1636; and that Mr. Shepard with another company purchased their houses and lands. Among r; but resided in Watertown. Immediately after the arrival of Mr. Shepard's company, they became prominent in municipal affairs, although the larger part of Mr. Hooker's company did not remove until six months afterwards. I quote again from the Town Records:— Nov. 23, 1635. At a general meeting of the whole town, there e magistrates, and with the consent of their congregations, did agree to reduce them to two days, viz.: Mr. Cotton one Thursday, or the 5th day of the week, and Mr. Hooker at New Town the next 5th day; and Mr. Warham at Dorchester one 4th day of the week, and Mr. Welde at Roxbury, the next 4th day. This arrangement was not effect
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Chapter 6: civil History. (search)
d removal to Weathersfield, Conn. Letter from Winthrop to Hooker. Letter from Hooker to Shepard. depreciation in the valuHooker to Shepard. depreciation in the value of property. danger of general bankruptcy. reasons for removing. Sir Henry Vane. grant of Shawshine to Cambridge. remut. To such removal they were advised and encouraged by Mr. Hooker, whose eldest daughter had become the second wife of Mr. Shepard in 1637. How far Mr. Hooker may have been influenced by family considerations, or how far by that spirit of emulative evidence. Very probably Gov. Winthrop intended that Mr. Hooker should make a personal application of his general remarkJohn Winthrop, Esq., vol. II., p. 421. Two years later, Mr. Hooker wrote an earnest letter to Mr. Shepard, which was long pick, desired to provide, as appears by another letter from Hooker to Shepard, without date: Touching your business at Matabeus such, that he may shew us such mercy. Totus tuus, T. Hooker. Nov. 2th. 1640. I writ another letter, because h
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Chapter 8: civil History. (search)
eive that the honor of God and of this Court is more concerned in providing against the laying waste an ancient town and church of Christ, settled in this place for more than forty years, than any of us can be to our personal interest;—nothing that we here enjoy as to our outward accommodation being so attractive as that we should be forced here to continue, if we be disabled to maintain God's ordinances. Yet for evidence of the truth of what we thus assert we might allege the removing of Mr. Hooker and the whole church with him to Hartford, and that for this very reason, because they foresaw the narrowness of the place was such that they could not live here. Also the endeavor of Mr. Shepherd and the church with him, before his death, to remove in like manner, and that for no other reason but this, because they saw, after many years hard labor and expense of their estates that they brought with them from England, that they could not live in this place. Also we may add, that the Comm
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Chapter 15: ecclesiastical History. (search)
ical History. First meeting-house. Rev. Thomas Hooker and Rev. Samuel Stone. first Church orgwhen the Braintree Company, otherwise called Mr. Hooker's company, were directed by the Court to remfor religious worship, before the arrival of Mr. Hooker's company; and for a whole year afterwards, until Mr. Hooker himself arrived, this flock probably had no pastor nor stated teacher. Meantime, Pringing of the bell. The connection between Mr. Hooker and the Braintree company is related by Mathin England, attended the ministry of the Reverend Thomas Hooker, who, to escape fines and imprisonmown, they expressed their earnest desires to Mr. Hooker, that he would come over into New England, aarrived at Boston September 4, 1633. . . . . Mr. Hooker, on his arrival at Boston, proceeded to Newttown; the second was Joanna, daughter of Rev. Thomas Hooker, and mother of Samuel (H. C. 1658), minition of his becoming successor to the famous Mr. Hooker. He preached his first sermon at Hartford, [4 more...]
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register, Genealogical Register (search)
k Street. Mr. Butler removed to Hartford, with Hooker, was a Deacon, and d. in 1684, leaving wife Elr Brattle Square. He removed to Hartford, with Hooker, and d. in 1648 or 1649; had sisters, West andd land in Camb. 1635. She was sister of Rev. Thomas Hooker, and was probably the widow Dorothy Chesm Copford Hall in Essex, in company with Rev. Thomas Hooker, was admitted freeman in 1634, elected a Wilson, Jr., of Medfield. The character of Mr. Hooker has deservedly been held in reverence in Newyoke Street, which was the former residence of Hooker, Shepard, and Mitchell, and afterwards of the e south side of the river, 1635. He rem. with Hooker to Hartford, where he was Constable in 1641. Sand pious men. It was successively occupied by Hooker, Shepard, Mitchell, President Leverett, and thers) 2 May 1636, and removed to Hartford, with Hooker. He was a Deacon of the Church, Juror in 1639itted freeman 1634, removed to Hartford with Mr. Hooker in 1636, and there d. 20 July 1663. Farmer.[25 more...]
1 2 3