Why Medford?
Resulting from a search for other matters, Mr. John Albree writes us:— ‘Incidentally I came across a reference to the meeting of the Massachusetts Historical Society, of which I copied the record and enclose it herein. His theory seems plausible at least, and is new to me. It may be that it has sufficient novelty for the Register.’Mr. Brooks offered some remarks on the origin of the name of the town of Medford, tracing it through the Cradock family— the original owners of the plantation on the Mystic river—to the manor of Metford in Staffordshire in England, also owned by the same family.
The change from Metford to Medford, Mr. Brooks said, could not be explained. The name was written in different ways in the town records, but, since 1715, was invariably spelt as at present time.[From proceedings of >Massachusetts Historical Society, Meeting of July, 1858.]
Extract from diary of Rev. Charles Brooks, Medford
July 15th, 1858. Today I met with the Mass. Hist. Soc'y and gave an account of the origin of the name of Medford. Perhaps it will not be misplaced, if recorded here. For substance I stated as follows:— After three years search in England I have received some facts from Mr. Somerby, which together with some in my possession, seem to settle the question. Mathew Cradock, first Governor of the ‘Massachusetts Bay in New England,’ owned several separate parcels of land in Staffordshire, England. On one of these he used to reside for a few weeks in summer. He called it his ‘Manor of Metford.’ This name seems to have given place to that of ‘Mayford,’ now used to designate that locality. [p. 46] Of the four ships, which came with Governor Winthrop in 1630, two, the Ambrose and Jewel, were owned by Governor Cradock. His farmers, shipwrights and fishermen came in them, and some of these men doubtless from his ‘Manor of Metford’. When a name was needed for their new home on the banks of the Mystic, how natural it was to propose that of ‘Metford’; thus giving them something of home familiarity in the wilderness, besides being a graceful tribute to the Governor, their employer and friend. That the name thus proposed was adopted, is proved from the fact that the large grant of land, made to Governor Cradock by the General Court, March 4, 1634, was called by the Cradock family ‘Our Manor of Metford in New England,’ thus being in contradistinction to the ‘Manor of Metford’ in Staffordshire. That the laborers, sent by Governor Cradock, should not have known exactly how to spell the name they had brought with them and had given to their American home is not strange; and as there were very few occasions for writing it the true orthography was left, as in several other cases, to chance. That chance, or something worse, had much to do in this matter, is proved by the fact that uniformity in spelling the name did not obtain till 1715, eighty-five years after the first settlement! In the early records it was variously spelled and probably according to the different methods of pronouncing the name. The early leasing and sale of these lands confirm the above suppositions. March 1, 1644 (the year in which Governor Cradock died) his widow rents half of her ‘Manor in Metford in New England’ to Edward Collins; thus indicating a distinction between the two ‘Manors’. June 2, 1652, after the death of the widow, the heirs of Governor Cradock give a quitclaim deed of said land to Ed. Collins; and in that instrument it is called ‘Meadford in New England’; thus indicating a variation of the name from ‘Metford’ in Staffordshire. The Cradock family adopt the American orthography, because their ‘deed’ was to take effect and be recorded here. Both of these facts thus mutually confirm the supposition that it was first called ‘Metford’ by Governor Cradock's men, after ‘Metford’ in Staffordshire, but suffered orthographical manglings in its Americanization. Why it came to assume its present form I cannot discover. It is spelled in three different ways in the town records up to 1715, after which date it is uniformly written ‘Medford’.
