nold's brook there is a saw and grist mill. But the supply of water during the summer, is not sufficient to keep them in operation.

CURIOSITIES. About a mile north of the meeting house, a little west of the road leading to Rutland, is a spring, the water from which divides, a few rods from its source; a part running westerly empties into Jennison's brook, and thence passes into Connecticut river. The other part flows northeasterly into the stream from Hasnebumskit pond and thence into the Merrimack. About a mile southeast of the meeting house, there is a house so situated that the water from the eves on the west side passes into Connecticut river, while that from the east side flows through Kettle brook into Blackstone river.

The waters of Hasnebumskit pond, which, as has before been said, flow eventually into the Merrimack, are separated from the head of Arnold's brook, which empties into the Blackstone, by a strip of land but a few rods wide.

About a mile and a quarter from the meeting house, and a short distance west of the road leading to Rutland, is a meadow or swamp, of some extent, across which is a natural causeway, composed of gravel and stones, extremely hard and firm, while on each side the mud is very soft and deep. The surface of this causeway is nearly on a level with that of the swamp, though at one end, for some rods, it is lower and the mud extends quite across it in that part. It is about twelve feet wide, and stretches across the swamp from one side to the other, a distance of perhaps a hundred rods. Its direction is not in a straight line, but a little curved. Its width and appearance are very uniform. It has been observed by the present and former proprietors, that the surface of this swamp, in some parts,is several feet lower than formerly and that it continues to sink gradually.

POPULATION. The population of this town has never been large and has not increased very much for many years. In 1790, the number was 558, and in 1820, it amounted to no more than 613 making an increase of only 55 in thirty years. There are, at present, but ninety nine dwelling houses in this town, and even some of these are not occupied. The increase of the population has been retarded and other inconveniences experienced in consequence of an unusually large proportion of the lands having been owned by non-residents.

SETTLEMENT, HISTORY, &C.-The principal part of Paxton originally belonged to Rutland and Leicester; the line between which

towns formerly passed a little north of where Paxton meeting house now stands. A strip of land, about two miles wide and four long, on the north part of Leicester, and a like quantity from the south part of Rutland, was formed into a distinct district, and incorporated as such by an act of "the Great and General Court" by the name of "The District of Paxton," on the 12th day of February, A. D. 1765. The first warrant for a town meeting found on the District Records is from John Murry, Esq. directed to Phinehas Moore, requiring him to warn a meeting of the Inhabitants for the choice of officers, dated the 25th of Feb. 1765. The first town, or rather district meeting was holden on the 11th of March, 1765, at the house of Mr. John Snow, where the proper officers were chosen and the district organized. In consequence of Paxton having been taken, as before observed, from other towns, there is some difficulty in collecting many facts in relation to its first settlement, without blending the history of the one more with that of the others than comports with the design of this sketch. Indeed it is not known in what year the first families were established in this place. But it is probable that permanent settlements were made within its limits, a few years after those in Rutland and Leicester, which happened about the year 1720. It is certain, that before the year 1746, there were several families in Paxton, and some considerable improvements made. For, about this time, from certain family records, it appears, there were two or three families located in the southwesterly part of the town. In 1748, Josiah Livermore, and his brother Jason Livermore, removed from Weston to that part of the town, to lands upon which there had been some improvements made. About the same time, Abijah Bemis settled in the same neighborhood, from Weston or Waltham. Near them was also Wm. Thompson and one or two of his sons. It is highly probable that the other parts of the town were settled as early, or, perhaps, earlier than the time above mentioned. The settlement of the town was never interrupted by Indian depredation, or by any other calamity, but progressed gradually until all the lands were taken up.' What the number of inhabitants was at the time of incorporation, does not appear. But it must have been some hundreds; for of the one thousand men raised in the counties of Worcester and Hampshire, in the year 1756, to succour General Winslow against the French and Indians, five* men went from what is now Paxton.

*Their names were Ezekiel Bellows, Jacob Wicker, Jason Livermore, David Wicker, and John Wicker. They were under Brigadier Ruggles' command, and a part, if not the whole, were employed at Crown Point, Ticonderoga, and Fort Edward, at different times during the war.

At what time Paxton assumed all the privileges of a town, does not appear from the Records. At first it was incorporated only as a district; and indeed, it is very uncertain whether it has ever been constituted a town by any direct Legislative act. For several years the inhabitants gave their votes for Representatives in the town of Leicester.

By the following extracts from the Records of Paxton, it seems that it took the name and began to exercise all the powers and privileges of a Town, some time between the 11th of Sept. 1775, and the 19th of Feb. 1776; for under the first date, we find, "at a meeting of the District of Paxton," &c. and a warrant bearing the latter date, is the first one directed to the "Constable of the Town of Paxton." At this meeting, holden March 4th, 1776, they voted to pay to the administratrix of "the late Mr. Thomas Denny, (formerly representative from Leicester,) the sum of £1 15s and 9d which is the proportion of this town of the sum of £7 10s, being the said Denny's expenses at the General Court, in the months of May and June, in the year 1774."

*

The record of the proceedings of the next meeting, held May 23d, 1776, is the first attested by the Clerk, as Town Clerk, all the former ones bearing the attestation of the District Clerk. At a meeting on the 3d of March, 1777, it was "voted, that Mr. Abra. ham Smith, our present Representative, use his influence in the General Assembly that the act passed last year altering the Representation of this state may be repealed." This is the first mention made of the town's having a Representative in the Legislature; and it is probable that Mr. Smith was the first ever sent from Paxton, though no record was made of his election. There is, however, a warrant dated May 13th, 1776, for calling a meeting on the 23d of that month, for the purpose of choosing "a person to represent them in the great and General Court," that year, "agreeably to a precept directed" to the town for that purpose. This warrant was not recorded until 1779, and it does not appear whether any meeting was holden or proceedings had.

These facts are mentioned, principally for the purpose of ascertaining the time when Paxton did, in fact, become a town, or began to exercise all the rights and powers of one; which, from the foregoing circumstances, must have happened some time in the year 1776.

*Mr. Smith was an inhabitant of Paxton and had held many of the highest offices in the District.

ECCLESIASTICAL PROCEEDINGS.-The establishment of a church and proper provision for public worship, as was generally the case in Massachusetts, were among the first objects attended to by the inhabitants of Paxton, after their incorporation. For, at the first meeting after the organization of the District, holden on the first day of April, 1765, a vote passed to build a meeting house, and at subsequent ones, during the same year, arrangements were made for carrying this vote into effect; a committee was also chosen, and £13 6s. 8d. was appropriated for the purpose of procuring the Gospel to be preached in that place during the winter of that year.

The meeting house was raised and finished, at least in part, that year, and a larger sum raised to procure preaching.

Some exertions were made, at this time, to have an Episcopal church established in this town, but they were unsuccessful. It is probable, however, that this may have been one cause why a regular Congregational church was not sooner gathered and organized; for it appears this event did not happen until the 3d of September, 1767.*

Rev. Silas Biglow, a gentleman highly esteemed for his intellectual and moral worth, was invited by the district and church in May, or June, to settle "in the work of the Gospel ministry among them;" and was ordained as their first Clergyman on the 21st of October following. The ministry of Mr. Biglow was highly satisfactory to his parishioners, and much good feeling and unanimity existed in the society until his death; which happened on the 16th of November, 1769.

On the 28th of November, of the next year, Rev. Alexander Thayer was ordained as successor to Mr. Biglow. He continued in office until the 14th of August, 1782, when he was dismissed by an ecclesiastical council, mutually chosen by the parties. The town agreeing to pay him £40 within three weeks, and the amount of his salary which was due.

The connexion between Mr. Thayer and his society, at least during a part of the time, was unhappy. Were it possible to detail all the causes of dissatisfaction, they would not afford the reader, at this day, profit or pleasure. There were, however, two principal ones, which it may not be improper to mention. Mr. Thayer, in his political sentiments, was suspected to be somewhat favorably

*The covenant bears the above date, and was subscribed by the following persons; Phinehas Moore, John Snow, Jason Livermore, David Davis, Benjamin Sweetser, Silas Biglow, (Pastor elect,) Samuel Man, Oliver Witt, Stephen Barret, and Samuel Brown.

disposed to the royalist party. This suspicion, whether well or ill founded, was sufficient to create a degree of coldness, and, in some instances, a fixed dislike, especially among those, who, from other causes, had become disaffected. This dislike was heightened by another circumstance, which more immediately effected their interest. Mr. Thayer's salary was fixed at the time of his settlement at £66 13s. 4d. After the depreciation of the currency of the coun. try, Mr. Thayer wished his pay to be so increased that he might receive a sum equal in value to his original compensation. This was not always done, though several grants were made for his relief at different times. But political animosities, and the unceasing demands for money to support the war, prevented the inhabitants from giving that aid to their clergyman, which, perhaps, was justly due, and under other circumstances would have been readily afforded.

The society became much divided before the settlement of another Clergyman, particularly in relation to Rev. John Foster,* who, after a long and warm contention among the members of the church and society, was ordained, on the 8th of September, 1785. The malecontents subsequently separated from the old society, and a new church was formed.

Mr. Foster continued the clergyman of Paxton until 1789, whea he was dismissed. After this, exertions were made to re-unite the two societies and churches, which was finally effected on the 27th of May, 1793, and on the 5th of November, of the next year, the Rev. Daniel Grosvenor, who had been before that time settled it Grafton, was installed. For some years the society remained quiet and apparently well pleased with this gentleman. But the "root of

"We,

Some idea may be formed of the opposition made to the settlement of Mr. Foster, from the following protest of several of his opponents. the subscribers, inhabitants of the town of Paxton, do, hereby, solemnly, sin cerely, and wholly protest and declare against the proceedings to be had and taken by the inhabitants of the said town of Paxton, now assembled in town meeting, in consequence of a warrant signed by a major part of the selectmen of said town of Paxton, as illegal, unlawful, and unconstitutional, and unprecedented. And we, the subscribers, do further solemnly protest and declare, that we will not, directly or indirectly, be at any cost or charge, or pay any money that shall be assessed on us, the subscribers, for settlement or salary that the inhabitants of said town of Paxton shall agree to give Mr. John Foster, except it is taken from us by force, as it is our opinion that the constitution will not admit of any such precedent. And we request that this protest may be read in the said town meeting, and recorded with the records in said town of Paxton. As witness ours, this thirteenth day of December, Anno Domini, 1784." Signed by twenty of the inhabitants.

There is another, of similar import, dated Dec. 20, 1784, signed by eighteen, a part of whom are the same who signed the first. In this they assign as a reason for their opposition, that "in our opinion said Foster is not learned, nor orthodox, neither of good report."