This is a modern-English version of Old Boston Taverns and Tavern Clubs, originally written by Drake, Samuel Adams.
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.
OLD BOSTON TAVERNS AND TAVERN CLUBS
CAPTAIN JOHN MARSTON, 1715-1786
Landlord of the “Golden Ball” and “Bunch of Grapes”
CAPTAIN JOHN MARSTON, 1715-1786
Owner of the “Golden Ball” and “Bunch of Grapes”
OLD BOSTON TAVERNS
OLD BOSTON BARS
AND
AND
TAVERN CLUBS
PUB CLUBS
BY
SAMUEL ADAMS DRAKE
BY
SAMUEL ADAMS DRAKE
NEW ILLUSTRATED EDITION
NEW ILLUSTRATED EDITION
WITH AN ACCOUNT OF
“Cole’s Inn,” “The Bakers’ Arms,” and “Golden Ball”
WITH AN ACCOUNT OF
"Cole's Inn," "The Bakers' Arms," and "Golden Ball"
BY
WALTER K. WATKINS
BY
WALTER K. WATKINS
Also a List of Taverns, Giving the Names of the Various Owners
of the Property, from Miss Thwing’s Work on “The Inhabitants
and Estates of the Town of Boston,
1630-1800,” in the Possession of the
Massachusetts Historical
Society
Here’s a list of taverns, including the names of their various owners, from Miss Thwing’s work on “The Inhabitants and Estates of the Town of Boston, 1630-1800,” archived by the Massachusetts Historical Society.
W. A. BUTTERFIELD
59 BROMFIELD STREET, BOSTON
1917
W. A. BUTTERFIELD
59 BROMFIELD STREET, BOSTON
1917
Copyright, 1917, by
W. A. BUTTERFIELD.
Copyright, 1917, by W. A. BUTTERFIELD.
FOREWORD.
he Inns of Old Boston have played such a part in its history that an
illustrated edition of Drake may not be out of place at this late date.
“Cole’s Inn” has been definitely located, and the “Hancock Tavern”
question also settled.
The inns of old Boston have been so significant in its history that an illustrated edition of Drake seems fitting even now. “Cole’s Inn” has been firmly established, and the “Hancock Tavern” issue has also been resolved.
I wish to thank the Bostonian Society for the privilege of reprinting Mr. Watkin’s account of the “Bakers’ Arms” and the “Golden Ball” and valuable assistance given by Messrs. C. F. Read, E. W. McGlenen, and W. A. Watkins; Henderson and Ross for the illustration of the “Crown Coffee House,” and the Walton Advertising Co. for the “Royal Exchange Tavern.”
I want to thank the Bostonian Society for allowing me to reprint Mr. Watkin’s account of the “Bakers’ Arms” and the “Golden Ball,” and for the valuable help from Messrs. C. F. Read, E. W. McGlenen, and W. A. Watkins; Henderson and Ross for the illustration of the “Crown Coffee House,” and the Walton Advertising Co. for the “Royal Exchange Tavern.”
Other works consulted are Snow’s History of Boston, Memorial History of Boston, Stark’s Antique Views, Porter’s Rambles in Old Boston, and Miss Thwing’s very valuable work in the Massachusetts Historical Society.
Other works referred to include Snow’s History of Boston, Memorial History of Boston, Stark’s Antique Views, Porter’s Rambles in Old Boston, and Miss Thwing’s extremely valuable work in the Massachusetts Historical Society.
THE PUBLISHER.
THE PUBLISHER.
CONTENTS.
PAGE | ||
I. | On the Tavern as an Institution | 9 |
II. | The Earlier Ordinary | 19 |
III. | In Revolutionary Days | 33 |
IV. | Signboard Jokes | 52 |
V. | Appendix: Boston Taverns Until 1800 | 61 |
VI. | Cole's Tavern | 73 |
VII. | The Bakers' Arms | 76 |
VIII. | The Gold Ball Tavern | 80 |
IX. | The Hancock Tavern | 89 |
X. | List of Bars and Bar Owners | 99 |
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
Captain John Marston | Frontispiece |
PAGE | |
The Lamb's Sign | 17 |
The Heart & Crown | 18 |
Royal Exchange Pub | 24 |
Portrait of Joseph Green | 26 |
Portrait of John Dunton | 28 |
The Grape Bunch | 34 |
Cromwell Head Board Legislation | 44 |
Cromwell's Head | 44 |
The Green Dragon | 46 |
The Green Dragon Sign | 47 |
The Liberty Tree | 50 |
The Brazen Head | 51 |
The Good Woman | 52 |
The Dog and Pot | 53 |
How do I navigate this world? | 54 |
The Crown Coffee Shop | 62 |
Old Newspaper Ad | 64 |
Julien House | 65 |
The Sun Tavern | 68 |
The Three Doves | 70 |
Jolley Allen Ad | 70 |
The Bakers' Arms | 75 |
Sign of Grapes | 80 |
Golden Ball trophy | 80 |
Map showing the location of Cole’s Inn | 88 |
Coffee Maker | 90 |
Map of Boston, 1645 | 98 |
Bromfield House | 102 |
Firefighter’s Ticket | 104 |
Portrait of Governor Belcher | 106 |
Exchange Coffee House, 1808-1818 | 108 |
Exchange Coffeehouse, 1848 | 110 |
Hatch Tavern | 112 |
Lamb Tavern | 114 |
Sun Tavern (Dock Square) | 122 |
Bonners’ Map of Boston, 1722 | 124 |
I.
UPON THE TAVERN AS AN INSTITUTION.
UPON THE TAVERN AS AN INSTITUTION.
he famous remark of Louis XIV., “There are no longer any Pyrenees,” may
perhaps be open to criticism, but there are certainly no longer any
taverns in New England. It is true that the statutes of the Commonwealth
continue to designate such houses as the Brunswick and Vendome as taverns,
and their proprietors as innkeepers; yet we must insist upon the truth of
our assertion, the letter of the law to the contrary notwithstanding.
The famous remark by Louis XIV, “There are no longer any Pyrenees,” might be open to debate, but there definitely aren't any taverns in New England anymore. It's true that the laws in the Commonwealth still refer to places like the Brunswick and Vendome as taverns and their owners as innkeepers; however, we must stand by our point, regardless of the legal terminology.
No words need be wasted upon the present degradation which the name of tavern implies to polite ears. In most minds it is now associated with the slums of the city, and with that particular phase of city life only, so all may agree that, as a prominent feature of society and manners, the tavern has had its day. The situation is easily accounted for. The simple truth is, that, in moving on, the world has left the venerable institution standing in the eighteenth century; but it is equally true that, before that time, the history of any civilized people could hardly be written without making great[Pg 10] mention of it. With the disappearance of the old signboards our streets certainly have lost a most picturesque feature, at least one avenue is closed to art, while a few very aged men mourn the loss of something endeared to them by many pleasant recollections.
No one needs to waste words on the current decline that the word "tavern" brings to refined ears. These days, it’s mostly linked to the seedy parts of the city and that specific aspect of urban life, so it's safe to say that as a significant part of society and culture, the tavern has seen its better days. The situation is easy to explain. The simple fact is that as the world has progressed, it has left this once-respected institution stuck in the eighteenth century; yet it's also true that before that time, you could hardly write the history of any civilized society without mentioning it extensively. With the old signboards disappearing, our streets have undoubtedly lost a visually striking element; at least one path to art has been closed off, while a few very old men lament the loss of something they cherished due to many fond memories.
As an offset to the admission that the tavern has outlived its usefulness, we ought in justice to establish its actual character and standing as it was in the past. We shall then be the better able to judge how it was looked upon both from a moral and material stand-point, and can follow it on through successive stages of good or evil fortune, as we would the life of an individual.
As a way to balance the acknowledgment that the tavern has served its purpose, we should fairly determine its true character and status as it existed in the past. This will help us better understand how it was viewed from both a moral and practical perspective and allow us to trace its journey through various phases of prosperity or misfortune, just like we would with a person's life.
It fits our purpose admirably, and we are glad to find so eminent a scholar and divine as Dr. Dwight particularly explicit on this point. He tells us that, in his day, “The best old-fashioned New England inns were superior to any of the modern ones. There was less bustle, less parade, less appearance of doing a great deal to gratify your wishes, than at the reputable modern inns; but much more was actually done, and there was much more comfort and enjoyment. In a word, you found in these inns the pleasures of an excellent private house. If you were sick you were nursed and befriended as in your own family. To finish the story, your bills were always equitable, calculated on what you ought to pay, and not upon the scheme of getting the most which extortion might think proper to demand.”
It fits our purpose perfectly, and we're pleased to see such a respected scholar and theologian as Dr. Dwight particularly clear on this topic. He tells us that, during his time, “The best traditional New England inns were better than any of the modern ones. There was less hustle, less show, and less pretense of doing a lot to please you than at the well-known modern inns; but much more was actually accomplished, and there was far more comfort and enjoyment. In short, you found in these inns the pleasures of a great private home. If you got sick, you were cared for and supported like family. To sum it up, your bills were always fair, based on what you should actually pay, rather than on a plan to squeeze out the highest amount possible.”
Now this testimonial to what the public inn was eighty odd years ago comes with authority from one[Pg 11] who had visited every nook and corner of New England, was so keen and capable an observer, and is always a faithful recorder of what he saw. Dr. Dwight has frequently said that during his travels he often “found his warmest welcome at an inn.”
Now this account of what the public inn was like over eighty years ago comes with authority from someone[Pg 11] who visited every corner of New England, was a sharp and skilled observer, and always faithfully recorded what he experienced. Dr. Dwight often remarked that during his travels, he frequently “found his warmest welcome at an inn.”
In order to give the history of what may be called the Rise and Fall of the Tavern among us, we should go back to the earliest settlements, to the very beginning of things. In our own country the Pilgrim Fathers justly stand for the highest type of public and private morals. No less would be conceded them by the most unfriendly critic. Intemperance, extravagant living, or immorality found no harborage on Plymouth Rock, no matter under what disguise it might come. Because they were a virtuous and sober people, they had been filled with alarm for their own youth, lest the example set by the Hollanders should corrupt the stay and prop of their community. Indeed, Bradford tells us fairly that this was one determining cause of the removal into New England.
To understand the history of the rise and fall of the tavern in our society, we need to go back to the earliest settlements, to the very beginning. In our country, the Pilgrim Fathers represent the highest standards of both public and private morals. Even the harshest critics would agree with that. Intemperance, extravagant living, and immorality found no shelter on Plymouth Rock, no matter how it presented itself. Because they were a virtuous and sober people, they were deeply concerned for their own youth, fearing that the example set by the Dutch might corrupt the foundation of their community. In fact, Bradford clearly states that this was one of the main reasons for their relocation to New England.
The institution of taverns among the Pilgrims followed close upon the settlement. Not only were they a recognized need, but, as one of the time-honored institutions of the old country, no one seems to have thought of denouncing them as an evil, or even as a necessary evil. Travellers and sojourners had to be provided for even in a wilderness. Therefore taverns were licensed as fast as new villages grew up. Upward of a dozen were licensed at one sitting of the General[Pg 12] Court. The usual form of concession is that So-and-So is licensed to draw wine and beer for the public. The supervision was strict, but not more so than the spirit of a patriarchal community, founded on morals, would seem to require; but there were no such attempts to cover up the true character of the tavern as we have seen practised in the cities of this Commonwealth for the purpose of evading the strict letter of the law; and the law then made itself respected. An innkeeper was not then looked upon as a person who was pursuing a disgraceful or immoral calling,—a sort of outcast, as it were,—but, while strictly held amenable to the law, he was actually taken under its protection. For instance, he was fined for selling any one person an immoderate quantity of liquor, and he was also liable to a fine if he refused to sell the quantity allowed to be drank on the premises, though no record is found of a prosecution under this singular statutory provision; still, for some time, this regulation was continued in force as the only logical way of dealing with the liquor question, as it then presented itself.
The establishment of taverns among the Pilgrims quickly followed their settlement. Not only were they seen as a necessary addition, but as a tradition from the old country, nobody seemed to consider them bad or even a necessary evil. Travelers and visitors needed accommodations, even in the wilderness. As new villages emerged, taverns were licensed just as quickly. More than a dozen were licensed in one session of the General[Pg 12] Court. The typical licensing statement was that So-and-So is authorized to serve wine and beer to the public. The regulations were strict, but that was in line with the values of a moral, patriarchal community; however, there were no attempts to disguise the true nature of taverns like we see in modern cities to navigate around strict laws. The law maintained its authority. An innkeeper was not viewed as someone engaged in a disgraceful or immoral profession—a sort of outcast—but, while still subject to the law, they were treated with its protection. For example, they could be fined for selling an excessive amount of alcohol to one person, and they could also be fined for refusing to sell the permitted amount of alcohol to be consumed on the premises. Although there’s no record of prosecutions under this unique law, it remained in effect for some time as the most reasonable approach to the alcohol issue, as it was understood at the time.
When the law also prohibited a citizen from entertaining a stranger in his own house, unless he gave bonds for his guest’s good behavior, the tavern occupied a place between the community and the outside world not wholly unlike that of a moral quarantine. The town constable could keep a watchful eye upon all suspicious characters with greater ease when they were under one roof. Then it was his business to know[Pg 13] everybody’s, so that any show of mystery about it would have settled, definitely, the stranger’s status, as being no better than he should be. “Mind your own business,” is a maxim hardly yet domesticated in New England, outside of our cities, or likely to become suddenly popular in our rural communities, where, in those good old days we are talking about, a public official was always a public inquisitor, as well as newsbearer from house to house.
When the law also banned a citizen from hosting a stranger in their own home unless they provided a guarantee for the guest's good behavior, the tavern served as a sort of buffer between the community and the outside world, not unlike a moral quarantine. The town constable could keep a closer watch on all suspicious characters when they were under one roof. It was his job to know[Pg 13] everyone, so any hint of mystery about a person would definitely mark the stranger’s status as questionable. “Mind your own business” is a saying that hasn't fully caught on in New England, especially outside our cities, and it's not likely to become suddenly popular in our rural areas, where, in those good old days we're talking about, a public official was always both a public interrogator and a news messenger from house to house.
On their part, the Puritan Fathers seem to have taken the tavern under strict guardianship from the very first. In 1634, when the price of labor and everything else was regulated, sixpence was the legal charge for a meal, and a penny for an ale quart of beer, at an inn, and the landlord was liable to ten shillings fine if a greater charge was made. Josselyn, who was in New England at a very early day, remarks, that, “At the tap-houses of Boston I have had an ale quart of cider, spiced and sweetened with sugar, for a groat.” So the fact that the law once actually prescribed how much should be paid for a morning dram may be set down among the curiosities of colonial legislation.
On their part, the Puritan Fathers seemed to have closely monitored the tavern from the very start. In 1634, when wages and prices were fixed, sixpence was the standard cost for a meal, and a penny for a quart of beer at an inn. The landlord faced a ten-shilling fine if they charged more. Josselyn, who visited New England early on, notes that “At the taverns in Boston, I’ve had a quart of cider, spiced and sweetened with sugar, for a groat.” So, the fact that the law once specifically dictated how much to pay for a morning drink can be considered one of the curiosities of colonial legislation.
No later than the year 1647 the number of applicants for licenses to keep taverns had so much increased that the following act was passed by our General Court for its own relief: “It is ordered by the authority of this court, that henceforth all such as are to keep houses of common entertainment, and to retail wine, beer, etc., shall be licensed at the county courts of the shire where[Pg 14] they live, or the Court of Assistants, so as this court may not be thereby hindered in their more weighty affairs.”
No later than the year 1647, the number of people applying for licenses to run taverns had increased so much that our General Court passed the following act for its own relief: “It is ordered by the authority of this court, that from now on, anyone who is going to operate a place for public entertainment and sell wine, beer, etc., must be licensed at the county courts of the shire where[Pg 14] they live, or the Court of Assistants, so that this court isn’t hindered in dealing with more important matters.”
A noticeable thing about this particular bill is, that when it went down for concurrence the word “deputies” was erased and “house” substituted by the speaker in its stead, thus showing that the newly born popular body had begun to assert itself as the only true representative chamber, and meant to show the more aristocratic branch that the sovereign people had spoken at last.
A notable thing about this bill is that when it went for approval, the word “deputies” was removed and “house” was replaced by the speaker instead, indicating that the newly formed popular assembly had started to establish itself as the only genuine representative chamber, and intended to let the more aristocratic branch know that the sovereign people had finally made their voice heard.
By the time Philip’s war had broken out, in 1675, taverns had become so numerous that Cotton Mather has said that every other house in Boston was one. Indeed, the calamity of the war itself was attributed to the number of tippling-houses in the colony. At any rate this was one of the alleged sins which, in the opinion of Mather, had called down upon the colony the frown of Providence. A century later, Governor Pownall repeated Mather’s statement. So it is quite evident that the increase of taverns, both good and bad, had kept pace with the growth of the country.
By the time Philip’s war started in 1675, there were so many taverns that Cotton Mather claimed that every other house in Boston was one. In fact, the disaster of the war itself was blamed on the high number of drinking establishments in the colony. This was one of the supposed sins, according to Mather, that had brought the disfavor of Providence upon the colony. A century later, Governor Pownall echoed Mather’s words. So, it’s clear that the rise of taverns, both good and bad, matched the growth of the country.
It is certain that, at the time of which we are speaking, some of the old laws affecting the drinking habits of society were openly disregarded. Drinking healths, for instance, though under the ban of the law, was still practised in Cotton Mather’s day by those who met at the social board. We find him defending it as a common form of politeness, and not the invocation of[Pg 15] Heaven it had once been in the days of chivalry. Drinking at funerals, weddings, church-raisings, and even at ordinations, was a thing everywhere sanctioned by custom. The person who should have refused to furnish liquor on such an occasion would have been the subject of remarks not at all complimentary to his motives.
It’s clear that, during this time, many old laws about drinking in society were openly ignored. For example, toasting to healths, even though it was against the law, was still done during Cotton Mather’s time by those gathering for meals. He defended it as a typical gesture of politeness, not as a call to Heaven like it used to be in the chivalric days. Drinking at funerals, weddings, church-raisings, and even ordinations was widely accepted by custom. Anyone who refused to provide alcohol on such occasions would have faced unflattering comments about their intentions.
It seems curious enough to find that the use of tobacco was looked upon by the fathers of the colony as far more sinful, hurtful, and degrading than indulgence in intoxicating liquors. Indeed, in most of the New England settlements, not only the use but the planting of tobacco was strictly forbidden. Those who had a mind to solace themselves with the interdicted weed could do so only in the most private manner. The language of the law is, “Nor shall any take tobacco in any wine or common victual house, except in a private room there, so as the master of said house nor any guest there shall take offence thereat; which, if any do, then such person shall forbear upon pain of two shillings sixpence for every such offence.”
It’s pretty interesting to see that the colony's leaders viewed tobacco as much more sinful, harmful, and degrading than drinking alcohol. In fact, in most of the New England settlements, not just the use but also the growing of tobacco was strictly prohibited. Those who wanted to enjoy the banned plant could only do so in the most private settings. The law states, “No one shall use tobacco in any tavern or common dining place, except in a private room there, as long as the owner of the house or any guests do not take offense; if they do, then that person must stop and will be fined two shillings sixpence for each offense.”
It is found on record that two innocent Dutchmen, who went on a visit to Harvard College,—when that venerable institution was much younger than it is to-day,—were so nearly choked with the fumes of tobacco-smoke, on first going in, that one said to the other, “This is certainly a tavern.”
It’s recorded that two innocent Dutchmen, who visited Harvard College—back when that respected institution was much younger than it is today—were almost choked by the tobacco smoke as soon as they entered, prompting one to say to the other, “This is definitely a tavern.”
It is also curious to note that, in spite of the steady growth of the smoking habit among all classes of people, public opinion continued to uphold the laws directed to[Pg 16] its suppression, though, from our stand-point of to-day, these do seem uncommonly severe. And this state of things existed down to so late a day that men are now living who have been asked to plead “guilty or not guilty,” at the bar of a police court, for smoking in the streets of Boston. A dawning sense of the ridiculous, it is presumed, led at last to the discontinuance of arrests for this cause; but for some time longer officers were in the habit of inviting detected smokers to show respect for the memory of a defunct statute of the Commonwealth, by throwing their cigars into the gutter.
It’s also interesting to point out that, despite the steady increase in smoking among all social classes, public opinion kept supporting laws aimed at its restriction, even though, from today’s perspective, these laws seem quite harsh. This situation persisted until recently enough that there are still people alive who have been asked to plead “guilty or not guilty” in a police court for smoking in the streets of Boston. It’s believed that a growing sense of absurdity ultimately led to the end of arrests for this reason; however, for a while longer, officers would invite caught smokers to honor the memory of an outdated law by tossing their cigars into the gutter.
Turning to practical considerations, we shall find the tavern holding an important relation to its locality. In the first place, it being so nearly coeval with the laying out of villages, the tavern quickly became the one known landmark for its particular neighborhood. For instance, in Boston alone, the names Seven Star Lane, Orange Tree Lane, Red Lion Lane, Black Horse Lane, Sun Court, Cross Street, Bull Lane, not to mention others that now have so outlandish a sound to sensitive ears, were all derived from taverns. We risk little in saying that a Bostonian in London would think the great metropolis strangely altered for the worse should he find such hallowed names as Charing Cross, Bishopsgate, or Temple Bar replaced by those of some wealthy Smith, Brown, or Robinson; yet he looks on, while the same sort of vandalism is constantly going on at home, with hardly a murmur of disapproval, so differently does the same thing look from different points of view.
Looking at practical matters, we see that the tavern has a significant connection to its local area. First of all, since it was established around the same time as the villages, the tavern quickly became the main landmark for its neighborhood. For example, in Boston alone, names like Seven Star Lane, Orange Tree Lane, Red Lion Lane, Black Horse Lane, Sun Court, Cross Street, and Bull Lane—among others that now sound really strange to today's ears—were all taken from taverns. We wouldn’t be wrong in saying that a Bostonian in London would find the great city oddly worse if he discovered that well-known names like Charing Cross, Bishopsgate, or Temple Bar were swapped out for those of some rich Smith, Brown, or Robinson; yet, he observes with hardly a hint of disapproval as the same sort of erasure happens back home, demonstrating how differently things can appear from various perspectives.
[Pg 17]As further fixing the topographical character of taverns, it may be stated that in the old almanacs distances are always computed between the inns, instead of from town to town, as the practice now is.
[Pg 17]To further define the layout of taverns, it’s worth noting that in the old almanacs, distances were always calculated between inns, rather than from town to town like we do today.
Of course such topographical distinctions as we have pointed out began at a time when there were few public buildings; but the idea almost amounts to an instinct, because even now it is a common habit with every one to first direct the inquiring stranger to some prominent landmark. As such, tavern-signs were soon known and noted by all travellers.
Of course, the geographical differences we've mentioned started when there were few public buildings, but the idea is almost instinctive. Even now, it's common for everyone to first guide an asking stranger to some well-known landmark. Because of this, tavern signs quickly became recognized and noted by all travelers.
SIGN OF THE LAMB.
Lamb's Sign.
Then again, tavern-titles are, in most cases, traced back to the old country. Love for the old home and its associations made the colonist like to take his mug of ale under the same sign that he had patronized when in England. It was a never-failing reminiscence to him. And innkeepers knew how to appeal to this feeling.[Pg 18] Hence the Red Lion and the Lamb, the St. George and the Green Dragon, the Black, White, and Red Horse, the Sun, Seven Stars, and Globe, were each and all so many reminiscences of Old London. In their way they denote the same sort of tie that is perpetuated by the Bostons, Portsmouths, Falmouths, and other names of English origin.
Then again, tavern names are usually linked to the old country. The colonist's love for their homeland and its memories made them want to enjoy their mug of ale under the same sign they frequented back in England. It was a constant reminder for them. Innkeepers understood how to tap into this sentiment.[Pg 18] That's why you have places like the Red Lion and the Lamb, St. George and the Green Dragon, the Black, White, and Red Horse, the Sun, Seven Stars, and Globe—each one a reminder of Old London. In their own way, they represent the same kind of connection that names like Boston, Portsmouth, Falmouth, and other English-origin names continue to hold.
II.
THE EARLIER ORDINARIES.
THE EARLIER ORDERS.
s early as 1638 there were at least two ordinaries, as taverns were then
called, in Boston. That they were no ordinary taverns will at once occur
to every one who considers the means then employed to secure sobriety and
good order in them. For example, Josselyn says that when a stranger went
into one for the purpose of refreshing the inner man, he presently found a
constable at his elbow, who, it appeared, was there to see to it that the
guest called for no more liquor than seemed good for him. If he did so,
the beadle peremptorily countermanded the order, himself fixing the
quantity to be drank; and from his decision there was no appeal.
As early as 1638, there were at least two taverns, or ordinaries as they were called, in Boston. It’s clear these were not just regular taverns when you consider the methods they used to maintain sobriety and order. For instance, Josselyn mentions that when a stranger walked into one for a drink, he would soon find a constable right next to him, there to ensure that the guest ordered only as much liquor as seemed appropriate. If he ordered more, the beadle would immediately cancel the order, deciding himself how much could be consumed, and there was no way to argue with that decision.
Of these early ordinaries the earliest known to be licensed goes as far back as 1634, when Samuel Cole, comfit-maker, kept it. A kind of interest naturally goes with the spot of ground on which this the first house of public entertainment in the New England metropolis stood. On this point all the early authorities seem to have been at fault. Misled by the meagre[Pg 20] record in the Book of Possessions, the zealous antiquaries of former years had always located Cole’s Inn in what is now Merchants’ Row. Since Thomas Lechford’s Note Book has been printed, the copy of a deed, dated in the year 1638, in which Cole conveys part of his dwelling, with brew-house, etc., has been brought to light. The estate noted here is the one situated next northerly from the well-known Old Corner Bookstore, on Washington Street. It would, therefore, appear, beyond reasonable doubt, that Cole’s Inn stood in what was already the high street of the town, nearly opposite Governor Winthrop’s, which gives greater point to my Lord Leigh’s refusal to accept Winthrop’s proffered hospitality when his lordship was sojourning under Cole’s roof-tree.
The earliest known licensed inn dates back to 1634, run by Samuel Cole, a candy maker. There’s a certain interest in the location of this first public entertainment venue in the New England capital. However, early authorities seem to have been mistaken about its location. Misled by the sparse[Pg 20] records in the Book of Possessions, antiquarians of the past always placed Cole’s Inn in what is now Merchants’ Row. Since the publication of Thomas Lechford’s Notebook, a deed from 1638 has surfaced, showing that Cole sold part of his home, including a brewery. This property is located just north of the well-known Old Corner Bookstore on Washington Street. Thus, it seems clear that Cole’s Inn was situated on what was already the town's main street, almost directly across from Governor Winthrop’s house, adding significance to Lord Leigh’s choice to decline Winthrop’s offered hospitality while staying under Cole’s roof.
In his New England Tragedies, Mr. Longfellow introduces Cole, who is made to say,—
In his New England Tragedies, Mr. Longfellow introduces Cole, who says,—
“But the ‘Three Mariners’ is an orderly,
Most orderly, quiet, and respectable house.”
“But the ‘Three Mariners’ is a well-organized,
“a very neat, quiet, and respectable place.”
Cole, certainly, could have had no other than a poet’s license for calling his house by this name, as it is never mentioned otherwise than as Cole’s Inn.
Cole must have had a poet's license to name his house this way, since it's only referred to as Cole’s Inn.
Another of these worthy landlords was William Hudson, who had leave to keep an ordinary in 1640. From his occupation of baker, he easily stepped into the congenial employment of innkeeper. Hudson was among the earliest settlers of Boston, and for many years is found most active in town affairs. His name is on the[Pg 21] list of those who were admitted freemen of the Colony, in May, 1631. As his son William also followed the same calling, the distinction of Senior and Junior becomes necessary when speaking of them.
Another of these respected landlords was William Hudson, who was granted permission to run an inn in 1640. He transitioned easily from being a baker to the more fitting role of innkeeper. Hudson was one of the first settlers in Boston and was actively involved in town affairs for many years. His name appears on the[Pg 21] list of those who were admitted as freemen of the Colony in May 1631. Since his son William also pursued the same profession, it's important to distinguish between Senior and Junior when referring to them.
Hudson’s house is said to have stood on the ground now occupied by the New England Bank, which, if true, would make this the most noted of tavern stands in all New England, or rather in all the colonies, as the same site afterward became known as the Bunch of Grapes. We shall have much occasion to notice it under that title. In Hudson’s time the appearance of things about this locality was very different from what is seen to-day. All the earlier topographical features have been obliterated. Then the tide flowed nearly up to the tavern door, so making the spot a landmark of the ancient shore line as the first settlers had found it. Even so simple a statement as this will serve to show us how difficult is the task of fixing, with approximate accuracy, residences or sites on the water front, going as far back as the original occupants of the soil.
Hudson’s house is believed to have been located where the New England Bank stands now, which, if that's true, would make it the most famous tavern in all of New England, or even in the entire colonies, since that same spot later became known as the Bunch of Grapes. We will frequently refer to it by that name. In Hudson’s time, the area looked very different from what we see today. All the earlier geographical features have disappeared. Back then, the tide came almost right up to the tavern door, making the place a landmark of the old shoreline as the first settlers discovered it. Even such a simple statement highlights how challenging it is to accurately pinpoint, with any level of precision, the locations of residences or sites along the waterfront, going back to the original inhabitants of the land.
Next in order of time comes the house called the King’s Arms. This celebrated inn stood at the head of the dock, in what is now Dock Square. Hugh Gunnison, victualler, kept a “cooke’s shop” in his dwelling there some time before 1642, as he was then allowed to sell beer. The next year he humbly prayed the court for leave “to draw the wyne which was spent in his house,” in the room of having his customers get it elsewhere, and then come into his place the worse for liquor,—a[Pg 22] proceeding which he justly thought unfair as well as unprofitable dealing. He asks this favor in order that “God be not dishonored nor his people grieved.”
Next in chronological order is the establishment known as the King’s Arms. This famous inn was located at the entrance of the dock, in what is now Dock Square. Hugh Gunnison, a tavern owner, operated a “cook’s shop” from his home there well before 1642, as he was allowed to sell beer at that time. The following year, he respectfully requested permission from the court “to serve the wine consumed in his house,” instead of having his customers buy it elsewhere and then come into his place already intoxicated—a[Pg 22] situation he felt was both unfair and unprofitable. He made this request so that “God would not be dishonored nor his people hurt.”
We know that Gunnison was favored with the custom of the General Court, because we find that body voting to defray the expenses incurred for being entertained in his house “out of ye custom of wines or ye wampum of ye Narragansetts.”
We know that Gunnison was given special treatment by the General Court, as we see that this body voted to cover the expenses for being hosted at his home “from the custom of wines or the wampum of the Narragansetts.”
Gunnison’s house presently took the not always popular name of the King’s Arms, which it seems to have kept until the general overturning of thrones in the Old Country moved the Puritan rulers to order the taking down of the King’s arms, and setting up of the State’s in their stead; for, until the restoration of the Stuarts, the tavern is the same, we think, known as the State’s Arms. It then loyally resumed its old insignia again. Such little incidents show us how taverns frequently denote the fluctuation of popular opinion.
Gunnison’s house now went by the not always popular name of the King’s Arms, which it seems to have kept until the political upheaval in the Old Country prompted the Puritan leaders to order the removal of the King's arms and the installation of the State’s in their place; because, until the restoration of the Stuarts, the tavern remained, we believe, known as the State’s Arms. It then proudly took back its old insignia once more. Such small events illustrate how taverns often reflect the changing tides of public opinion.
As Gunnison’s bill of fare has not come down to us, we are at a loss to know just how the colonial fathers fared at his hospitable board; but so long as the ‘treat’ was had at the public expense we cannot doubt that the dinners were quite as good as the larder afforded, or that full justice was done to the contents of mine host’s cellar by those worthy legislators and lawgivers.
As Gunnison’s menu hasn’t survived, we’re unsure how the colonial leaders enjoyed their meals at his welcoming table; however, as long as the ‘treat’ was paid for by the public, we can safely assume the dinners were as good as the pantry allowed, and that the deserving legislators and lawgivers made the most of what was in the host's cellar.
When Hugh Gunnison sold out the King’s Arms to Henry Shrimpton and others, in 1651, for £600 sterling, the rooms in his house all bore some distinguishing name or title. For instance, one chamber was called[Pg 23] the “Exchange.” We have sometimes wondered whether it was so named in consequence of its use by merchants of the town as a regular place of meeting. The chamber referred to was furnished with “one half-headed bedstead with blew pillars.” There was also a “Court Chamber,” which, doubtless, was the one assigned to the General Court when dining at Gunnison’s. Still other rooms went by such names as the “London” and “Star.” The hall contained three small rooms, or stalls, with a bar convenient to it. This room was for public use, but the apartments upstairs were for the “quality” alone, or for those who paid for the privilege of being private. All remember how, in “She Stoops to Conquer,” Miss Hardcastle is made to say: “Attend the Lion, there!—Pipes and tobacco for the Angel!—The Lamb has been outrageous this half hour!”
When Hugh Gunnison sold the King’s Arms to Henry Shrimpton and others in 1651 for £600, every room in his house had a unique name or title. For example, one room was called[Pg 23] the “Exchange.” We sometimes wonder if it was named that because merchants used it as a regular meeting spot. This room had “one half-headed bedstead with blue pillars.” There was also a “Court Chamber,” which was likely the one used by the General Court when dining at Gunnison’s. Other rooms were named the “London” and “Star.” The hall had three small rooms or stalls with a bar nearby. This area was open to the public, but the upstairs rooms were reserved for the “quality” or those who paid for the privilege of privacy. Everyone remembers how, in “She Stoops to Conquer,” Miss Hardcastle exclaims: “Attend the Lion, there!—Pipes and tobacco for the Angel!—The Lamb has been outrageous this half hour!”
The Castle Tavern was another house of public resort, kept by William Hudson, Jr., at what is now the upper corner of Elm Street and Dock Square. Just at what time this noted tavern came into being is a matter extremely difficult to be determined; but, as we find a colonial order billeting soldiers in it in 1656, we conclude it to have been a public inn at that early day. At this time Hudson is styled lieutenant. If Whitman’s records of the Artillery Company be taken as correct, the younger Hudson had seen service in the wars. With “divers other of our best military men,” he had crossed the ocean to take service in the Parliamentary forces, in which he held the rank of ensign, returning home to[Pg 24] New England, after an absence of two years, to find his wife publicly accused of faithlessness to her marriage vows.
The Castle Tavern was another public spot run by William Hudson, Jr., located at what is now the upper corner of Elm Street and Dock Square. It’s very hard to determine exactly when this famous tavern was established, but since we have a colonial order from 1656 that mentions it housing soldiers, we can assume it was a public inn back then. At this time, Hudson is referred to as a lieutenant. If Whitman’s records of the Artillery Company are accurate, the younger Hudson had served in the wars. Along with “some of our best military men,” he had traveled across the ocean to serve in the Parliamentary forces, where he held the rank of ensign, returning to New England after two years to discover his wife was publicly accused of being unfaithful.
The presence of these old inns at the head of the town dock naturally points to that locality as the business centre, and it continued to hold that relation to the commerce of Boston until, by the building of wharves and piers, ships were enabled to come up to them for the purpose of unloading. Before that time their cargoes were landed in boats and lighters. Far back, in the beginning of things, when everything had to be transported by water to and from the neighboring settlements, this was naturally the busiest place in Boston. In time Dock Square became, as its name indicates, a sort of delta for the confluent lanes running down to the dock below it.
The presence of these old inns at the end of the town dock clearly marks this area as the business center, and it remained central to Boston's commerce until the construction of wharves and piers allowed ships to dock directly for unloading. Before that, goods were transferred using smaller boats and lighters. In the early days, when everything had to be transported by water to and from nearby settlements, this spot was naturally the busiest in Boston. Eventually, Dock Square became, as its name suggests, a kind of hub for the various streets leading down to the dock below it.
Here, for a time, was centred all the movement to and from the shipping, and, we may add, about all the commerce of the infant settlement. Naturally the vicinity was most convenient for exposing for sale all sorts of merchandise as it was landed, which fact soon led to the establishment of a corn market on one side of the dock and a fish market on the other side.
Here, for a while, was the hub of all the movement to and from the shipping, and we can also say, of all the trade in the young settlement. Naturally, the area was perfect for showcasing all kinds of merchandise as it was unloaded, which quickly resulted in setting up a corn market on one side of the dock and a fish market on the other.
The Royal Exchange stood on the site of the Merchants’ Bank, in State Street. In this high-sounding name we find a sure sign that the town had outgrown its old traditions and was making progress toward more citified ways. As time wore on a town-house had been built in the market-place. Its ground floor was[Pg 25] purposely left open for the citizens to walk about, discuss the news, or bargain in. In the popular phrase, they were said to meet “on ’change,” and thereafter this place of meeting was known as the Exchange, which name the tavern and lane soon took to themselves as a natural right.
The Royal Exchange was located where the Merchants’ Bank used to be, on State Street. This fancy name indicates that the town had outgrown its old traditions and was moving towards a more urban lifestyle. Over time, a town hall was built in the marketplace. The ground floor was[Pg 25] intentionally left open for citizens to stroll, chat about the news, or negotiate deals. In common terms, people said they met “on ’change,” and from then on, this meeting spot became known as the Exchange, a name that the nearby tavern and alley soon adopted as their own.
THE ROYAL EXCHANGE TAVERN (Merchants Bank site, State Street)
The tall white building, mail coach just leaving
THE ROYAL EXCHANGE TAVERN (Merchants Bank site, State Street)
The tall white building, mail coach just leaving
A glance at the locality in question shows the choice to have been made with a shrewd eye to the future. For example: the house fronted upon the town market-place, where, on stated days, fairs or markets for the sale of country products were held. On one side the tavern was flanked by the well-trodden lane which led to the town dock. From daily chaffering in a small way, those who wished to buy or sell came to meet here regularly. It also became the place for popular gatherings,—on such occasions of ceremony as the publishing of proclamations, mustering of troops, or punishment of criminals,—all of which vindicates its title to be called the heart of the little commonwealth.
A look at the area in question shows that the decision was made with a smart outlook for the future. For instance, the house faced the town marketplace, where fairs and markets for selling local products were held on specific days. On one side, the tavern was next to the busy lane that led to the town dock. People who wanted to buy or sell would come here regularly for daily trading. It also became a spot for community gatherings—on ceremonial occasions like announcing proclamations, organizing troops, or punishing offenders—all of which justifies its reputation as the heart of the small community.
Indeed, on this spot the pulse of its daily life beat with ever-increasing vigor. Hither came the country people, with their donkeys and panniers. Here in the open air they set up their little booths to tempt the town’s folk with the display of fresh country butter, cheese and eggs, fruits or vegetables. Here came the citizen, with his basket on his arm, exchanging his stock of news or opinions as he bargained for his dinner, and so caught the drift of popular sentiment beyond his own chimney-corner.
Indeed, at this place, the rhythm of daily life throbbed with growing energy. Country folks arrived with their donkeys and baskets. In the fresh air, they set up their little stalls to attract the townspeople with displays of fresh butter, cheese, eggs, fruits, and vegetables. The locals came with baskets on their arms, trading news or opinions while haggling for their dinner, and thus picked up the pulse of public sentiment beyond their own homes.
[Pg 26]To loiter a little longer at the sign of the Royal Exchange, which, by all accounts, always drew the best custom of the town, we find that, as long ago as Luke Vardy’s time, it was a favorite resort of the Masonic fraternity, Vardy being a brother of the order. According to a poetic squib of the time,—
[Pg 26]To hang around a bit longer at the sign of the Royal Exchange, which, by all accounts, always attracted the best clientele in town, we discover that, back in Luke Vardy’s days, it was a popular hangout for the Masonic fraternity, with Vardy being a member of the order. According to a humorous poem from that time,—
“’Twas he who oft dispelled their sadness,
And filled the breth’ren’s hearts with gladness.”
“It was he who often chased away their sadness,
"And filled the brothers' hearts with joy."
After the burning of the town-house, near by, in the winter of 1747, had turned the General Court out of doors, that body finished its sessions at Vardy’s; nor do we find any record of legislation touching Luke’s taproom on that occasion.
After the town hall burned down nearby in the winter of 1747, forcing the General Court outside, they wrapped up their sessions at Vardy's; and we don't see any record of legislation regarding Luke's taproom during that time.
Vardy’s was the resort of the young bloods of the town, who spent their evenings in drinking, gaming, or recounting their love affairs. One July evening, in 1728, two young men belonging to the first families in the province quarreled over their cards or wine. A challenge passed. At that time the sword was the weapon of gentlemen. The parties repaired to a secluded part of the Common, stripped for the encounter, and fought it out by the light of the moon. After a few passes one of the combatants, named Woodbridge, received a mortal thrust; the survivor was hurried off by his friends on board a ship, which immediately set sail. This being the first duel ever fought in the town, it naturally made a great stir.
Vardy’s was the hangout for the young people of the town, who spent their evenings drinking, playing cards, or sharing stories about their love lives. On a July evening in 1728, two young men from prominent families got into a fight over cards or alcohol. A challenge was issued. Back then, swords were the weapon of choice for gentlemen. They went to a quiet spot on the Common, got ready for the duel, and fought under the moonlight. After a few exchanges, one of the fighters, named Woodbridge, suffered a fatal wound; the other was quickly taken away by his friends to a ship that immediately set sail. Since this was the first duel ever fought in the town, it created quite a commotion.
JOSEPH GREEN
Noted Boston merchant and wit, died in England, 1780
JOSEPH GREEN
Famous Boston merchant and funny guy, passed away in England, 1780
SATIRE ON LUKE TARDY OF THE ROYAL EXCHANGE TAVERN By Joseph Green at a Masonic Meeting, 1749 |
“Where’s honest Luke,—that cook from London? For without Luke the Lodge is incomplete; He was the one who often lifted their spirits. And filled the Brethren’s heart with joy. For them, his generous bowls overflowed. His table creaked under the weight. He pushed his skills to the limit for them. Their honors gratefully they share. Luke is made a brother in return, As good and true as any other; And still, even though worn out by age and wine, Preserves the token and the sign. “Winter Evening Entertainment.” |
We cannot leave the neighborhood without at least[Pg 27] making mention of the Massacre of the 5th of March, 1770, which took place in front of the tavern. It was then a three-story brick house, the successor, it is believed, of the first building erected on the spot and destroyed in the great fire of 1711. On the opposite corner of the lane stood the Royal Custom House, where a sentry was walking his lonely round on that frosty night, little dreaming of the part he was to play in the coming tragedy. With the assault made by the mob on this sentinel, the fatal affray began which sealed the cause of the colonists with their blood. At this time the tavern enjoyed the patronage of the newly arrived British officers of the army and navy as well as of citizens or placemen, of the Tory party, so that its inmates must have witnessed, with peculiar feelings, every incident of that night of terror. Consequently the house with its sign is shown in Revere’s well-known picture of the massacre.
We can't leave the neighborhood without at least making mention of the Massacre of March 5, 1770, which happened right in front of the tavern. Back then, it was a three-story brick house, thought to be a replacement for the original building that was destroyed in the huge fire of 1711. On the opposite corner of the lane stood the Royal Custom House, where a sentry was patrolling alone on that chilly night, unaware of the role he would play in the upcoming tragedy. The violent confrontation that began with the mob attacking this sentinel marked the start of a conflict that would cost many colonists their lives. At that time, the tavern welcomed newly arrived British army and navy officers, as well as locals and supporters of the Tory party, so its guests must have felt an eerie sense of anticipation during each moment of that night of chaos. Because of this, the tavern and its sign appear in Revere’s famous illustration of the massacre.
One more old hostelry in this vicinity merits a word from us. Though not going so far back or coming down to so late a date as some of the houses already mentioned, nevertheless it has ample claim not to be passed by in silence.
One more old inn in this area deserves a mention. Although it doesn't date back as far or extend as late as some of the other places we've talked about, it certainly deserves to be acknowledged.
The Anchor, otherwise the “Blew Anchor,” stood on the ground now occupied by the Globe newspaper building. In early times it divided with the State’s Arms the patronage of the magistrates, who seem to have had a custom, perhaps not yet quite out of date, of adjourning to the ordinary over the way after[Pg 28] transacting the business which had brought them together. So we find that the commissioners of the United Colonies, and even the reverend clergy, when they were summoned to the colonial capital to attend a synod, were usually entertained here at the Anchor.
The Anchor, also known as the “Blew Anchor,” was located where the Globe newspaper building now stands. In earlier times, it shared the support of the magistrates with the State’s Arms, who had a tradition—maybe still somewhat alive—of heading over to the tavern after[Pg 28] finishing their official business. This is why we see that the commissioners of the United Colonies, as well as the clergy, were typically hosted here at the Anchor when they came to the colonial capital for a synod.
This fact presupposes a house having what we should now call the latest improvements, or at least possessing some advantages over its older rivals in the excellence of its table or cellarage. When Robert Turner kept it, his rooms were distinguished, after the manner of the old London inns, as the Cross Keys, Green Dragon, Anchor and Castle Chamber, Rose and Sun, Low Room, so making old associations bring in custom.
This fact assumes a house with what we would now consider the latest upgrades, or at least having some advantages over its older competitors in the quality of its food and drinks. When Robert Turner ran it, his rooms were named like the old London inns: the Cross Keys, Green Dragon, Anchor and Castle Chamber, Rose and Sun, Low Room, creating nostalgic associations that attracted customers.
It was in 1686 that John Dunton, a London bookseller whom Pope lampoons in the “Dunciad,” came over to Boston to do a little business in the bookselling line. The vicinity of the town-house was then crowded with book-shops, all of which drove a thriving trade in printing and selling sermons, almanacs, or fugitive essays of a sort now quite unknown outside of a few eager collectors. The time was a critical one in New England, as she was feeling the tremor of the coming revolt which sent King James into exile; yet to read Dunton’s account of men and things as he thought he saw them, one would imagine him just dropped into Arcadia, rather than breathing the threatening atmosphere of a country that was tottering on the edge of revolution.
It was in 1686 that John Dunton, a London bookseller whom Pope mocked in the “Dunciad,” came to Boston to do some business in the bookselling industry. The area around the town hall was then filled with bookshops, all doing well selling printed sermons, almanacs, and essays of a kind that are now mostly unknown except to a few eager collectors. This was a critical time in New England, as it was feeling the tension of the upcoming revolt that would lead to King James's exile; yet, reading Dunton’s account of people and events as he saw them, you would think he had just landed in a peaceful paradise, rather than being in a place that was on the brink of revolution.
But it is to him, at any rate, that we are indebted for a portrait of the typical landlord,—one whom we[Pg 29] feel at once we should like to have known, and, having known, to cherish in our memory. With a flourish of his goose-quill Dunton introduces us to George Monk, landlord of the Anchor, who, somehow, reminds us of Chaucer’s Harry Bailly, and Ben Jonson’s Goodstock. And we more than suspect from what follows that Dunton had tasted the “Anchor” Madeira, not only once, but again.
But it’s to him that we owe a description of the typical landlord—one who we[Pg 29] instantly feel we would have liked to know and, having known, would remember fondly. With a flourish of his quill, Dunton introduces us to George Monk, the landlord of the Anchor, who somehow reminds us of Chaucer’s Harry Bailly and Ben Jonson’s Goodstock. We strongly suspect from what comes next that Dunton had enjoyed the “Anchor” Madeira not just once, but several times.
JOHN DUNTON, Bookseller, 1659-1733
JOHN DUNTON, Bookseller, 1659-1733
George Monk, mine host of the Anchor, Dunton tells us, was “a person so remarkable that, had I not been acquainted with him, it would be a hard matter to make any New England man believe that I had been in Boston; for there was no one house in all the town more noted, or where a man might meet with better accommodation. Besides he was a brisk and jolly man, whose conversation was coveted by all his guests as the life and spirit of the company.”
George Monk, the host of the Anchor, Dunton tells us, was “such a remarkable person that, if I hadn’t known him, it would be hard for any New Englander to believe I had been in Boston; because there wasn’t a single house in the entire town more famous, or where someone could find better hospitality. Plus, he was a cheerful and lively man, whose conversations were sought after by all his guests as the very essence and energy of the gathering.”
In this off-hand sketch we behold the traditional publican, now, alas! extinct. Gossip, newsmonger, banker, pawnbroker, expediter of men or effects, the intimate association so long existing between landlord and public under the old régime everywhere brought about a still closer one among the guild itself, so establishing a network of communication coextensive with all the great routes from Maine to Georgia.
In this casual overview, we see the traditional bar owner, now sadly gone. A gossip, a news spreader, a banker, a pawnbroker, a facilitator of people or goods, the close relationship that used to exist between the landlord and the patrons in the old days created an even tighter bond among the bar owners themselves, forming a communication network that stretched across all the major routes from Maine to Georgia.
Situated just “around the corner” from the council-chamber, the Anchor became, as we have seen, the favorite haunt of members of the government, and so acquired something of an official character and[Pg 30] standing. We have strong reason to believe that, under the mellowing influence of the punch-bowl, those antique men of iron mould and mien could now and then crack a grim jest or tell a story or possibly troll a love-ditty, with grave gusto. At any rate, we find Chief Justice Sewall jotting down in his “Diary” the familiar sentence, “The deputies treated and I treated.” And, to tell the truth, we would much prefer to think of the colonial fathers as possessing even some human frailties rather than as the statues now replacing their living forms and features in our streets.
Situated just “around the corner” from the council chamber, the Anchor became, as we've seen, the favorite hangout for government members, taking on a somewhat official vibe and[Pg 30] status. We have good reason to believe that, under the relaxing influence of the punch bowl, those old-fashioned men of strong character could occasionally crack a grim joke or tell a story or maybe even sing a love song with serious enthusiasm. In any case, we find Chief Justice Sewall noting in his “Diary” the well-known line, “The deputies treated and I treated.” And, to be honest, we would much prefer to think of the founding fathers as having some human weaknesses rather than as the statues that now replace their living forms and likenesses in our streets.
But now and then we can imagine the noise of great merriment making the very windows of some of these old hostelries rattle again. We learn that the Greyhound was a respectable public house, situated in Roxbury, and of very early date too; for the venerable and saintly Eliot lived upon one side and his pious colleague, Samuel Danforth, on the other. Yet notwithstanding its being, as it were, hedged in between two such eminent pillars of the church, the godly Danforth bitterly complains of the provocation which frequenters of the tavern sometimes tried him withal, and naïvely informs us that, when from his study windows he saw any of the town dwellers loitering there he would go down and “chide them away.”
But every now and then, we can picture the sounds of lively celebrations making the windows of some of these old inns rattle once more. We learn that the Greyhound was a respectable pub, located in Roxbury, and it dates back quite a bit; for the venerable and saintly Eliot lived on one side and his devout colleague, Samuel Danforth, on the other. Yet despite being surrounded by such prominent figures of the church, the godly Danforth bitterly complains about the annoyances that patrons of the tavern sometimes caused him, and he openly tells us that when he saw any of the townspeople hanging around from his study windows, he would go down and "scold them away."
It is related in the memoirs of the celebrated Indian fighter, Captain Benjamin Church, that he and Captain Converse once found themselves in the neighborhood of a tavern at the South End of Boston. As old comrades[Pg 31] they wished to go in and take a parting glass together; but, on searching their pockets, Church could find only sixpence and Converse not a penny to bless himself with, so they were compelled to forego this pledge of friendship and part with thirsty lips. Going on to Roxbury, Church luckily found an old neighbor of his, who generously lent him money enough to get home with. He tells the anecdote in order to show to what straits the parsimony of the Massachusetts rulers had reduced him, their great captain, to whom the colony owed so much.
It’s recounted in the memoirs of the famous Indian fighter, Captain Benjamin Church, that he and Captain Converse once found themselves near a tavern in the South End of Boston. As old friends[Pg 31], they wanted to go in and share a drink together; however, when they checked their pockets, Church could only find sixpence and Converse didn’t have a penny to his name, so they had to skip this toast to their friendship and left with parched throats. Heading over to Roxbury, Church fortunately ran into an old neighbor who kindly lent him enough money to get home. He shares this story to illustrate the tough situation the stinginess of the Massachusetts leaders had put him, their great captain, in, someone to whom the colony owed so much.
The Red Lion, in North Street, was one of the oldest public houses, if not the oldest, to be opened at the North End of the town. It stood close to the waterside, the adjoining wharf and the lane running down to it both belonging to the house and both taking its name. The old Red Lion Lane is now Richmond Street, and the wharf has been filled up, so making identification of the old sites difficult, to say the least. Nicholas Upshall, the stout-hearted Quaker, kept the Red Lion as early as 1654. At his death the land on which tavern and brewhouse stood went to his children. When the persecution of his sect began in earnest, Upshall was thrown into Boston jail, for his outspoken condemnation of the authorities and their rigorous proceedings toward this people. He was first doomed to perpetual imprisonment. A long and grievous confinement at last broke Upshall’s health, if it did not, ultimately, prove the cause of his death.
The Red Lion on North Street was one of the oldest pubs, if not the oldest, in the North End of the town. It was located close to the waterfront, with the nearby wharf and the lane leading to it both owned by the pub and sharing its name. The old Red Lion Lane is now Richmond Street, and the wharf has been filled in, making it quite difficult to recognize the old locations. Nicholas Upshall, the brave Quaker, ran the Red Lion as early as 1654. After his death, the land where the tavern and brewery stood was passed down to his children. When persecution against his group intensified, Upshall was thrown into Boston jail for openly criticizing the authorities and their harsh treatment of his people. He was initially sentenced to life in prison. A long and painful imprisonment eventually took a toll on Upshall’s health, if it didn’t ultimately cause his death.
[Pg 32]The Ship Tavern stood at the head of Clark’s Wharf, or on the southwest corner of North and Clark streets, according to present boundaries. It was an ancient brick building, dating as far back as 1650 at least. John Vyal kept it in 1663. When Clark’s Wharf was built it was the principal one of the town. Large ships came directly up to it, so making the tavern a most convenient resort for masters of vessels or their passengers, and associating it with the locality itself. King Charles’s commissioners lodged at Vyal’s house, when they undertook the task of bringing down the pride of the rulers of the colony a peg. One of them, Sir Robert Carr, pummeled a constable who attempted to arrest him in this house. He afterward refused to obey a summons to answer for the assault before the magistrates, loftily alleging His Majesty’s commission as superior to any local mandate whatever. He thus retaliated Governor Leverett’s affront to the commissioners in keeping his hat on his head when their authority to act was being read to the council. But Leverett was a man who had served under Cromwell, and had no love for the cavaliers or they for him. The commissioners sounded trumpets and made proclamations; but the colony kept on the even tenor of its way, in defiance of the royal mandate, equally regardless of the storm gathering about it, as of the magnitude of the conflict in which it was about to plunge, all unarmed and unprepared.
[Pg 32]The Ship Tavern was located at the end of Clark’s Wharf, or on the southwest corner of North and Clark streets, based on today’s layout. It was an old brick building, dating back at least to 1650. John Vyal managed it in 1663. When Clark’s Wharf was constructed, it became the main wharf in town. Large ships docked there, making the tavern a convenient spot for ship captains or their passengers, and closely tying it to the area itself. King Charles’s commissioners stayed at Vyal’s tavern when they set out to take down the pride of the colony’s rulers. One of them, Sir Robert Carr, attacked a constable who tried to arrest him in this tavern. Later, he refused to show up in court to answer for the assault, arrogantly claiming that His Majesty’s commission was above any local order. This was his way of getting back at Governor Leverett, who had insulted the commissioners by keeping his hat on while their authority was announced to the council. However, Leverett was a man experienced under Cromwell, and he had no fondness for the royalists, nor did they have for him. The commissioners blew trumpets and made official announcements, but the colony continued on its path, ignoring the royal order, as well as the brewing turmoil around it, completely unarmed and unprepared for the major conflict ahead.
III.
IN REVOLUTIONARY TIMES.
IN REVOLUTIONARY TIMES.
uch thoroughfares as King Street, just before the Revolution, were filled
with horsemen, donkeys, oxen, and long-tailed trucks, with a sprinkling of
one-horse chaises and coaches of the kind seen in Hogarth’s realistic
pictures of London life. To these should be added the chimney-sweeps,
wood-sawyers, market-women, soldiers, and sailors, who are now quite as
much out of date as the vehicles themselves are. There being no sidewalks,
the narrow footway was protected, here and there, sometimes by posts,
sometimes by an old cannon set upright at the corners, so that the
traveller dismounted from his horse or alighted from coach or chaise at
the very threshold.
Major streets like King Street, just before the Revolution, were crowded with riders, donkeys, oxen, and long trucks, along with a few one-horse carriages and coaches like those depicted in Hogarth’s realistic paintings of London life. You could also find chimney sweeps, woodcutters, market sellers, soldiers, and sailors, who are now just as outdated as the vehicles themselves. With no sidewalks, the narrow pathways were sometimes protected by posts and occasionally by an old cannon set up at the corners, so travelers would have to dismount from their horses or get out of their carriages right at the entrance.
Next in the order of antiquity, as well as fame, to the taverns already named, comes the Bunch of Grapes in King, now State Street. The plain three-story stone building situated at the upper corner of Kilby Street stands where the once celebrated tavern did. Three gilded clusters of grapes dangled temptingly over the door before the eye of the passer-by. Apart from its[Pg 34] palate-tickling suggestions, a pleasant aroma of antiquity surrounds this symbol, so dear to all devotees of Bacchus from immemorial time. In Measure for Measure the clown says, “’Twas in the Bunch of Grapes, where indeed you have a delight to sit, have you not?” And Froth answers, “I have so, because it is an open room and good for winter.”
Next in age and popularity to the taverns already mentioned is the Bunch of Grapes on King, now known as State Street. The simple three-story stone building located at the upper corner of Kilby Street stands where the once-famous tavern used to be. Three shiny clusters of grapes hung enticingly over the door, catching the eye of passersby. Besides its[Pg 34] tempting offerings, a nice scent of history surrounds this symbol, cherished by all fans of Bacchus for ages. In Measure for Measure, the clown says, “It was in the Bunch of Grapes, where indeed you have a pleasure to sit, right?” And Froth responds, “I do, because it's an open room and great for winter.”
THE BUNCH OF GRAPES
THE CLUSTER OF GRAPES
This house goes back to the year 1712, when Francis Holmes kept it, and perhaps further still, though we do not meet with it under this title before Holmes’s time. From that time, until after the Revolution, it appears to have always been open as a public inn, and, as such, is feelingly referred to by one old traveller as the best punch-house to be found in all Boston.
This house dates back to 1712, when Francis Holmes owned it, and perhaps even earlier, though we don't see it under this name before Holmes’s time. From then until after the Revolution, it seems to have always served as a public inn, and one old traveler fondly referred to it as the best place for punch in all of Boston.
When the line came to be drawn between conditional loyalty, and loyalty at any rate, the Bunch of Grapes became the resort of the High Whigs, who made it a sort of political headquarters, in which patriotism only passed current, and it was known as the Whig tavern.[Pg 35] With military occupation and bayonet rule, still further intensifying public feeling, the line between Whig and Tory houses was drawn at the threshold. It was then kept by Marston. Cold welcome awaited the appearance of scarlet regimentals or a Tory phiz there; so gentlemen of that side of politics also formed cliques of their own at other houses, in which the talk and the toasts were more to their liking, and where they could abuse the Yankee rebels over their port to their heart’s content.
When the line was drawn between conditional loyalty and unconditional loyalty, the Bunch of Grapes became the hangout for the High Whigs, who turned it into a kind of political headquarters where only patriotism was accepted, earning it the nickname Whig tavern.[Pg 35] With military presence and forceful rule ramping up public sentiment, the divide between Whig and Tory homes was marked at the entrance. Marston maintained that boundary. If anyone in scarlet uniforms or with Tory features showed up, they were met with a cold reception; so those on the Tory side formed their own groups at different taverns, where the conversations and toasts suited their taste, and they could freely criticize the Yankee rebels over their drinks.
But, apart from political considerations, one or two incidents have given the Bunch of Grapes a kind of pre-eminence over all its contemporaries, and, therefore, ought not to be passed over when the house is mentioned.
But aside from political factors, one or two events have given the Bunch of Grapes a special status above all its peers, and so they shouldn't be overlooked when mentioning the place.
On Monday, July 30, 1733, the first grand lodge of Masons in America was organized here by Henry Price, a Boston tailor, who had received authority from Lord Montague, Grand Master of England, for the purpose.
On Monday, July 30, 1733, the first grand lodge of Masons in America was set up here by Henry Price, a tailor from Boston, who had been given permission by Lord Montague, the Grand Master of England, to do so.
Again, upon the evacuation of Boston by the royal troops, this house became the centre for popular demonstrations. First, His Excellency, General Washington, was handsomely entertained there. Some months later, after hearing the Declaration read from the balcony of the Town-house, the populace, having thus made their appeal to the King of kings, proceeded to pull down from the public buildings the royal arms which had distinguished them, and, gathering them in a heap in front of the tavern, made a bonfire of them, little imagining,[Pg 36] we think, that the time would ever come when the act would be looked upon as vandalism on their part.
Again, when the royal troops evacuated Boston, this house became the hub for public demonstrations. First, General Washington was warmly welcomed there. A few months later, after the Declaration was read from the balcony of the Town Hall, the crowd, having made their appeal to the King of kings, went on to tear down the royal arms from the public buildings and piled them up in front of the tavern, turning them into a bonfire, little realizing, [Pg 36] we think, that one day this act would be seen as vandalism.
General Stark’s timely victory at Bennington was celebrated with all the more heartiness of enthusiasm in Boston because the people had been quaking with fear ever since the fall of Ticonderoga sent dismay throughout New England. The affair is accurately described in the following letter, written by a prominent actor, and going to show how such things were done in the times that not only tried men’s souls, but would seem also to have put their stomachs to a pretty severe test. The writer says:—
General Stark’s timely victory at Bennington was celebrated with even more enthusiasm in Boston because the people had been trembling with fear ever since the fall of Ticonderoga spread panic throughout New England. The situation is accurately described in the following letter, written by a prominent figure, illustrating how things were done in times that not only tested men’s resolve but also seemed to have put their stomachs to quite a tough challenge. The writer says:—
“In consequence of this news we kept it up in high taste. At sundown about one hundred of the first gentlemen of the town, with all the strangers then in Boston, met at the Bunch of Grapes, where good liquors and a side-table were provided. In the street were two brass field-pieces with a detachment of Colonel Craft’s regiment. In the balcony of the Town-house all the fifes and drums of my regiment were stationed. The ball opened with a discharge of thirteen cannon, and at every toast given three rounds were fired and a flight of rockets sent up. About nine o’clock two barrels of grog were brought out into the street for the people that had collected there. It was all conducted with the greatest propriety, and by ten o’clock every man was at his home.”
"Because of this news, we celebrated in style. At sunset, around one hundred of the town's prominent gentlemen, along with all the visitors in Boston, gathered at the Bunch of Grapes, where fine drinks and a side table were set up. In the street, there were two brass cannons with a unit from Colonel Craft’s regiment. On the Town House balcony, all the fifes and drums of my regiment were positioned. The event kicked off with a blast of thirteen cannon shots, and for each toast, three rounds were fired along with a display of rockets. Around nine o’clock, two barrels of grog were brought out into the street for the crowd that had gathered there. Everything was handled with the utmost decorum, and by ten o’clock, everyone was back at home."
Shortly after this General Stark himself arrived in town and was right royally entertained here, at that time[Pg 37] presenting the trophies now adorning the Senate Chamber. On his return from France in 1780 Lafayette was also received at this house with all the honors, on account of having brought the news that France had at last cast her puissant sword into the trembling balance of our Revolutionary contest.
Shortly after this, General Stark himself arrived in town and was warmly welcomed here, at that time[Pg 37] presenting the trophies that now decorate the Senate Chamber. When Lafayette returned from France in 1780, he was also received at this house with full honors because he brought the news that France had finally thrown her powerful sword into the shaky balance of our Revolutionary struggle.
But the important event with which the Bunch of Grapes is associated is, not the reception of a long line of illustrious guests, but the organization, by a number of continental officers, of the Ohio Company, under which the settlement of that great State began in earnest, at Marietta. The leading spirit in this first concerted movement of New England toward the Great West was General Rufus Putnam, a cousin of the more distinguished officer of Revolutionary fame.
But the significant event connected to the Bunch of Grapes isn't the hosting of a long line of notable guests; it's the formation, by several continental officers, of the Ohio Company, which marked the real beginning of settling that vast State in Marietta. The driving force behind this initial organized effort from New England towards the Great West was General Rufus Putnam, a cousin of the more famous Revolutionary officer.
Taking this house as a sample of the best that the town could afford at the beginning of the century, we should probably find a company of about twenty persons assembled at dinner, who were privileged to indulge in as much familiar chat as they liked. No other formalities were observed than such as good breeding required. Two o’clock was the hour at which all the town dined. The guests were called together by the ringing of a bell in the street. They were served with salmon in season, veal, beef, mutton, fowl, ham, vegetables, and pudding, and each one had his pint of Madeira set before him. The carving was done at the table in the good old English way, each guest helping himself to what he liked best. Five shillings per day was the usual charge, which was[Pg 38] certainly not an exorbitant one. In half an hour after the cloth was removed the table was usually deserted.
Taking this house as an example of the best the town could offer at the beginning of the century, we would likely find around twenty people gathered for dinner, enjoying as much casual conversation as they wanted. The only formalities observed were those required by good manners. Two o’clock was when everyone in town had dinner. The guests were called together by the ringing of a bell in the street. They were served seasonal salmon, veal, beef, mutton, poultry, ham, vegetables, and pudding, with each person having their pint of Madeira in front of them. The carving was done at the table in the traditional English style, with each guest serving themselves what they preferred most. The standard charge was five shillings per day, which was[Pg 38] certainly not excessive. Typically, the table was empty within half an hour after the meal was cleared.
The British Coffee-House was one of the first inns to take to itself the newly imported title. It stood on the site of the granite building numbered 66 State Street, and was, as its name implies, as emphatically the headquarters of the out-and-out loyalists as the Bunch of Grapes, over the way, was of the unconditional Whigs. A notable thing about it was the performance there in 1750, probably by amateurs, of Otway’s “Orphan,” an event which so outraged public sentiment as to cause the enactment of a law prohibiting the performance of stage plays under severe penalties.
The British Coffee-House was one of the first inns to adopt the newly introduced name. It was located at the granite building numbered 66 State Street and, as its name suggests, was firmly the hub for hardcore loyalists, just as the Bunch of Grapes, across the street, was for the staunch Whigs. A notable event there was the 1750 performance, likely by amateurs, of Otway’s “Orphan,” which sparked such public outrage that it led to the creation of a law banning the performance of stage plays with strict penalties.
Perhaps an even more notable occurrence was the formation in this house of the first association in Boston taking to itself the distinctive name of a Club. The Merchants’ Club, as it was called, met here as early as 1751. Its membership was not restricted to merchants, as might be inferred from its title, though they were possibly in a majority, but included crown officers, members of the bar, military and naval officers serving on the station, and gentlemen of high social rank of every shade of opinion. No others were eligible to membership.
Perhaps an even more significant event was the establishment in this house of the first organization in Boston to adopt the distinctive name of a Club. The Merchants’ Club, as it was called, met here as early as 1751. Its membership wasn’t limited to merchants, as you might assume from its name, although they were likely in the majority. It also included crown officials, lawyers, military and naval officers stationed here, and men of high social standing from various backgrounds. No one else was eligible for membership.
Up to a certain time this club, undoubtedly, represented the best culture, the most brilliant wit, and most delightful companionship that could be brought together in all the colonies; but when the political sky grew dark the old harmony was at an end, and a division[Pg 39] became inevitable, the Whigs going over to the Bunch of Grapes, and thereafter taking to themselves the name of the Whig Club.[1]
Up until a certain point, this club definitely represented the best culture, the sharpest wit, and the most enjoyable companionship that could be found in all the colonies. However, when political tensions rose, the old unity came to an end, and a split[Pg 39] became unavoidable, with the Whigs moving over to the Bunch of Grapes, and from then on adopting the name of the Whig Club.[1]
Under date of 1771, John Adams notes down in his Diary this item: “Spent the evening at Cordis’s, in the front room towards the Long Wharf, where the Merchants’ Club has met these twenty years. It seems there is a schism in that church, a rent in that garment.” Cordis was then the landlord.[2]
Under the date of 1771, John Adams writes in his Diary: “Spent the evening at Cordis’s, in the front room facing the Long Wharf, where the Merchants’ Club has met for twenty years. It seems there’s a split in that group, a tear in that fabric.” Cordis was the landlord at the time.[2]
Social and business meetings of the bar were also held at the Coffee-House, at one of which Josiah Quincy, Jr. was admitted. By and by the word “American” was substituted for “British” on the Coffee-House sign, and for some time it flourished under its new title of the American Coffee-House.
Social and business meetings of the bar also took place at the Coffee-House, where Josiah Quincy, Jr. was eventually admitted. Over time, the word “American” replaced “British” on the Coffee-House sign, and for a while, it thrived under its new name, the American Coffee-House.
But before the clash of opinions had brought about[Pg 40] the secession just mentioned, the best room in this house held almost nightly assemblages of a group of patriotic men, who were actively consolidating all the elements of opposition into a single force. Not inaptly they might be called the Old Guard of the Revolution. The principals were Otis, Cushing, John Adams, Pitts, Dr. Warren, and Molyneux. Probably no minutes of their proceedings were kept, for the excellent reason that they verged upon, if they did not overstep, the treasonable.
But before the clash of opinions led to the secession mentioned earlier[Pg 40], the best room in this house hosted almost nightly gatherings of a group of patriotic men who were actively bringing together all the elements of opposition into a single force. They could aptly be called the Old Guard of the Revolution. The main figures were Otis, Cushing, John Adams, Pitts, Dr. Warren, and Molyneux. It's likely that no minutes of their meetings were kept, for the very good reason that they skimmed the line of, if they didn't outright cross, treason.
His talents, position at the bar, no less than intimate knowledge of the questions which were then so profoundly agitating the public mind, naturally made Otis the leader in these conferences, in which the means for counteracting the aggressive measures then being put in force by the ministry formed the leading topic of discussion. His acute and logical mind, mastery of public law, intensity of purpose, together with the keen and biting satire which he knew so well how to call to his aid, procured for Otis the distinction of being the best-hated man on the Whig side of politics, because he was the one most feared. Whether in the House, the court-room, the taverns, or elsewhere, Otis led the van of resistance. In military phrase, his policy was the offensive-defensive. He was no respecter of ignorance in high places. Once when Governor Bernard sneeringly interrupted Otis to ask him who the authority was whom he was citing, the patriot coldly replied, “He is a very eminent jurist, and none the less so for being unknown to your Excellency.”
His skills, status at the bar, and deep understanding of the issues that were stirring up the public made Otis the leader in these discussions, where the strategies for countering the aggressive actions being taken by the government were the main focus. His sharp and logical mind, expertise in public law, strong determination, and the clever, cutting satire he wielded earned Otis the reputation of being the most disliked man on the Whig side of politics, as he was the one most feared. Whether in the House, the courtroom, the taverns, or anywhere else, Otis was at the forefront of the resistance. In military terms, his strategy was offensive-defensive. He didn’t hold back against ignorance from those in power. Once, when Governor Bernard mockingly interrupted Otis to ask who the authority was that he was quoting, the patriot coolly responded, “He is a very eminent jurist, and none the less so for being unknown to your Excellency.”
[Pg 41]It was in the Coffee-House that Otis, in attempting to pull a Tory nose, was set upon and so brutally beaten by a place-man named Robinson, and his friends, as to ultimately cause the loss of his reason and final withdrawal from public life. John Adams says he was “basely assaulted by a well-dressed banditti, with a commissioner of customs at their head.” What they had never been able to compass by fair argument, the Tories now succeeded in accomplishing by brute force, since Otis was forever disqualified from taking part in the struggle which he had all along foreseen was coming,—and which, indeed, he had done more to bring about than any single man in the colonies.
[Pg 41]It was in the Coffee-House that Otis, trying to provoke a Tory, was attacked and brutally beaten by a man named Robinson and his friends, leading to his mental breakdown and eventual exit from public life. John Adams states he was “cowardly assaulted by a well-dressed gang, with a customs commissioner leading them.” What they could never achieve through proper debate, the Tories managed to do through violence, as Otis was permanently unable to participate in the struggle he had always anticipated and, in fact, had done more than anyone else in the colonies to bring about.
Connected with this affair is an anecdote which we think merits a place along with it. It is related by John Adams, who was an interested listener. William Molyneux had a petition before the legislature which did not succeed to his wishes, and for several evenings he had wearied the company with his complaints of services, losses, sacrifices, etc., always winding up with saying, “That a man who has behaved as I have should be treated as I am is intolerable,” with much more to the same effect. Otis had said nothing, but the whole club were disgusted and out of patience, when he rose from his seat with the remark, “Come, come, Will, quit this subject, and let us enjoy ourselves. I also have a list of grievances; will you hear it?” The club expected some fun, so all cried out, “Ay! ay! let us hear your list.”
Connected to this situation is a story that we believe deserves to be mentioned. It was told by John Adams, who was an interested listener. William Molyneux had a petition before the legislature that didn't go the way he wanted, and for several evenings, he bored everyone with his complaints about his efforts, losses, sacrifices, etc., always finishing with, “It’s unacceptable for someone like me, who has acted as I have, to be treated like this,” along with much more to the same effect. Otis hadn’t said anything, but the whole group was fed up and impatient when he stood up and said, “Come on, Will, let’s change the subject and have some fun. I also have a list of complaints; do you want to hear it?” The group expected some entertainment, so they all shouted, “Yes! Yes! Let’s hear your list.”
[Pg 42]“Well, then, in the first place, I resigned the office of advocate-general, which I held from the crown, which produced me—how much do you think?”
[Pg 42]“Well, first of all, I stepped down from my position as advocate-general, which I held from the crown. Do you know how much that paid me?”
“A great deal, no doubt,” said Molyneux.
“A lot, for sure,” said Molyneux.
“Shall we say two hundred sterling a year?”
“Should we say two hundred pounds a year?”
“Ay, more, I believe,” said Molyneux.
“Aye, I believe so,” said Molyneux.
“Well, let it be two hundred. That, for ten years, is two thousand. In the next place, I have been obliged to relinquish the greater part of my business at the bar. Will you set that at two hundred pounds more?”
“Well, let it be two hundred. That, for ten years, is two thousand. Next, I’ve had to give up most of my practice at the bar. Can you value that at two hundred pounds more?”
“Oh, I believe it much more than that!” was the answer.
“Oh, I believe it a lot more than that!” was the answer.
“Well, let it be two hundred. This, for ten years, makes two thousand. You allow, then, I have lost four thousand pounds sterling?”
“Well, let's make it two hundred. Over ten years, that comes to two thousand. So, you agree that I've lost four thousand pounds sterling?”
“Ay, and more too,” said Molyneux. Otis went on: “In the next place, I have lost a hundred friends, among whom were men of the first rank, fortune, and power in the province. At what price will you estimate them?”
“Yeah, and even more,” said Molyneux. Otis continued: “Next, I’ve lost a hundred friends, including some of the most respected, wealthy, and powerful people in the province. How much do you think they’re worth?”
“D—n them!” said Molyneux, “at nothing. You are better off without them than with them.”
“Damn them!” said Molyneux, “You're better off without them than with them.”
A loud laugh from the company greeted this sally.
A loud laugh from the group responded to this comment.
“Be it so,” said Otis. “In the next place, I have made a thousand enemies, among whom are the government of the province and the nation. What do you think of this item?”
“Fine with me,” said Otis. “Next, I’ve made a thousand enemies, including the provincial and national government. What do you think about that?”
“That is as it may happen,” said Molyneux, reflectively.
"That might be how things go," Molyneux said thoughtfully.
[Pg 43]“In the next place, you know I love pleasure, but I have renounced pleasure for ten years. What is that worth?”
[Pg 43]“Next, you know I enjoy pleasure, but I haven’t indulged in it for ten years. What does that even mean?”
“No great matter: you have made politics your amusement.”
“No big deal: you’ve turned politics into your hobby.”
A hearty laugh.
A good laugh.
“In the next place, I have ruined as fine health as nature ever gave to man.”
“In addition, I have destroyed the best health that nature ever gave to anyone.”
“That is melancholy indeed; there is nothing to be said on that point,” Molyneux replied.
"That's really sad; there's nothing more to say about that," Molyneux replied.
“Once more,” continued Otis, holding down his head before Molyneux, “look upon this head!” (there was a deep, half-closed scar, in which a man might lay his finger)—“and, what is worse my friends think I have a monstrous crack in my skull.”
“Once more,” continued Otis, bowing his head before Molyneux, “take a look at this head!” (there was a deep, partially closed scar, wide enough for a person to put their finger in)—“and, what’s worse, my friends think I have a terrible crack in my skull.”
This made all the company look grave, and had the desired effect of making Molyneux who was really a good companion, heartily ashamed of his childish complaints.
This made everyone in the company look serious and successfully made Molyneux, who was actually a good friend, feel genuinely ashamed of his petty complaints.
Another old inn of assured celebrity was the Cromwell’s Head, in School Street. This was a two-story wooden building of venerable appearance, conspicuously displaying over the footway a grim likeness of the Lord Protector, it is said much to the disgust of the ultra royalists, who, rather than pass underneath it, habitually took the other side of the way. Indeed, some of the hot-headed Tories were for serving Cromwell’s Head as that man of might had served their martyr king’s. So, when the town came under martial[Pg 44] law, mine host Brackett, whose family kept the house for half a century or more, had to take down his sign, and conceal it until such time as the “British hirelings” should have made their inglorious exit from the town.
Another well-known old inn was the Cromwell’s Head, located in School Street. It was a two-story wooden building with a timeworn look, prominently displaying a grim image of the Lord Protector over the walkway. This reportedly bothered the die-hard royalists, who, to avoid passing under it, would routinely walk on the opposite side of the street. In fact, some of the fiery Tories wanted to treat Cromwell’s Head the same way that man of strength had dealt with their martyr king. So, when the town was placed under martial[Pg 44] law, the innkeeper Brackett, whose family had run the place for over fifty years, had to take down his sign and hide it until the "British hirelings" had made their shameful exit from the town.
After Braddock’s crushing defeat in the West, a young Virginian colonel, named George Washington, was sent by Governor Dinwiddie to confer with Governor Shirley, who was the great war governor of his day, as Andrew was of our own, with the difference that Shirley then had the general direction of military affairs, from the Ohio to the St. Lawrence, pretty much in his own hands. Colonel Washington took up his quarters at Brackett’s, little imagining, perhaps, that twenty years later he would enter Boston at the head of a victorious republican army, after having quartered his troops in Governor Shirley’s splendid mansion.
After Braddock’s devastating defeat in the West, a young Virginian colonel named George Washington was sent by Governor Dinwiddie to meet with Governor Shirley, who was the leading war governor of his time, much like Andrew is in ours, except that Shirley had the overall control of military operations from the Ohio River to the St. Lawrence largely in his hands. Colonel Washington settled in at Brackett’s, probably not realizing that twenty years later he would enter Boston leading a victorious republican army, after having stationed his troops in Governor Shirley’s impressive mansion.
Major-General the Marquis Chastellux, of[Pg 45] Rochambeau’s auxiliary army, also lodged at the Cromwell’s Head when he was in Boston in 1782. He met there the renowned Paul Jones, whose excessive vanity led him to read to the company in the coffee-room some verses composed in his own honor, it is said, by Lady Craven.
Major-General the Marquis Chastellux, part of Rochambeau’s auxiliary army, also stayed at the Cromwell’s Head when he was in Boston in 1782. While there, he met the famous Paul Jones, whose extreme vanity caused him to read to the group in the coffee room some verses, supposedly written in his honor by Lady Craven.
From the tavern of the gentry we pass on to the tavern of the mechanics, and of the class which Abraham Lincoln has forever distinguished by the title of the common people.
From the gentry's tavern, we move on to the tavern of the workers, and to the class that Abraham Lincoln forever called the common people.
Among such houses the Salutation, which stood at the junction of Salutation with North Street, is deserving of a conspicuous place. Its vicinity to the shipyards secured for it the custom of the sturdy North End shipwrights, caulkers, gravers, sparmakers, and the like,—a numerous body, who, while patriots to the backbone, were also quite clannish and independent in their feelings and views, and consequently had to be managed with due regard to their class prejudices, as in politics they always went in a body. Shrewd politicians, like Samuel Adams, understood this. Governor Phips owed his elevation to it. As a body, therefore, these mechanics were extremely formidable, whether at the polls or in carrying out the plans of their leaders. To their meetings the origin of the word caucus is usually referred, the word itself undoubtedly having come into familiar use as a short way of saying caulkers’ meetings.
Among such houses, the Salutation, located at the intersection of Salutation and North Street, deserves a notable mention. Its proximity to the shipyards attracted the business of the tough North End shipwrights, caulkers, gravers, sparmakers, and others—a large group that, while fiercely patriotic, also had a strong sense of community and independence in their opinions and outlooks. As a result, they needed to be approached carefully, considering their class biases, especially since they always voted as a collective. Smart politicians like Samuel Adams recognized this. Governor Phips rose to power because of it. Therefore, collectively, these tradespeople were quite a force, whether at the polls or in implementing their leaders' strategies. Their meetings are often credited with the origin of the word caucus, which likely became popular as a shorthand for caulkers' meetings.
The Salutation became the point of fusion between[Pg 46] leading Whig politicians and the shipwrights. More than sixty influential mechanics attended the first meeting, called in 1772, at which Dr. Warren drew up a code of by-laws. Some leading mechanic, however, was always chosen to be the moderator. The “caucus,” as it began to be called, continued to meet in this place until after the destruction of the tea, when, for greater secrecy, it became advisable to transfer the sittings to another place, and then the Green Dragon, in Union Street, was selected.
The Salutation became the meeting point between[Pg 46] prominent Whig politicians and shipbuilders. Over sixty key mechanics showed up for the first meeting in 1772, where Dr. Warren created a set of rules. However, a leading mechanic was always appointed as the moderator. The “caucus,” as it came to be known, kept meeting there until after the tea was destroyed, when it became necessary to move to a different location for more privacy, and the Green Dragon on Union Street was chosen.
The Salutation had a sign of the sort that is said to tickle the popular fancy for what is quaint or humorous. It represented two citizens, with hands extended, bowing and scraping to each other in the most approved fashion. So the North-Enders nicknamed it “The Two Palaverers,” by which name it was most commonly known. This house, also, was a reminiscence of the Salutation in Newgate Street, London, which was the favorite haunt of Lamb and Coleridge.
The Salutation had a sign that appealed to people's love for the quirky or funny. It showed two citizens with their hands out, bowing and scraping to each other in the most accepted way. That's why the North-Enders called it “The Two Palaverers,” which is how it became widely known. This place also reminded people of the Salutation on Newgate Street in London, which was a popular spot for Lamb and Coleridge.
The Green Dragon will probably outlive all its contemporaries in the popular estimation. In the first place a mural tablet, with a dragon sculptured in relief, has been set in the wall of the building that now stands upon some part of the old tavern site. It is the only one of the old inns to be so distinguished. Its sign was the fabled dragon, in hammered metal, projecting out above the door, and was probably the counterpart of the Green Dragon in Bishopsgate Street, London.
The Green Dragon will likely remain more popular than any of its peers. First of all, a mural plaque featuring a dragon carved in relief has been placed on the wall of the building that now exists on part of the old tavern site. It's the only one of the old inns to receive such recognition. Its sign was the legendary dragon, made of hammered metal, sticking out above the door, and it was probably similar to the Green Dragon in Bishopsgate Street, London.
THE GREEN DRAGON TAVERN
The Green Dragon Tavern
As a public house this one goes back to 1712, when[Pg 47] Richard Pullen kept it; and we also find it noticed, in 1715, as a place for entering horses to be run for a piece of plate of the value of twenty-five pounds. In passing, we may as well mention the fact that Revere Beach was the favorite race-ground of that day. The house was well situated for intercepting travel to and from the northern counties.
As a pub, this one dates back to 1712, when[Pg 47] Richard Pullen ran it; and we also see it mentioned in 1715 as a spot for registering horses to compete for a piece of silver worth twenty-five pounds. By the way, Revere Beach was the popular racing track back then. The pub was conveniently located to catch travelers heading to and from the northern counties.
THE GREEN DRAGON.
THE GREEN DRAGON.
To resume the historical connection between the Salutation and Green Dragon, its worthy successor, it appears that Dr. Warren continued to be the commanding figure after the change of location; and, if he was not already the popular idol, he certainly came little short of it, for everything pointed to him as the coming leader whom the exigency should raise up. Samuel Adams was popular in a different way. He was cool, far-sighted, and persistent, but he certainly lacked the magnetic quality. Warren was much younger, far more impetuous and aggressive,—in short, he possessed all the more brilliant qualities for leadership which Adams lacked. Moreover, he was a fluent and effective speaker, of[Pg 48] graceful person, handsome, affable, with frank and winning manners, all of which added no little to his popularity. Adams inspired respect, Warren confidence. As Adams himself said, he belonged to the “cabinet,” while Warren’s whole make-up as clearly marked him for the field.
To continue the historical connection between the Salutation and its worthy successor, the Green Dragon, it seems that Dr. Warren remained the dominant figure after the move. If he wasn't already a beloved figure, he was definitely close to it, as everything indicated he was the emerging leader that the situation demanded. Samuel Adams had a different kind of popularity. He was calm, insightful, and persistent, but he definitely lacked a certain charisma. Warren was much younger, more impulsive, and aggressive—in short, he had all the more dazzling qualities for leadership that Adams didn't possess. Additionally, he was a smooth and effective speaker, a[Pg 48] charming person, handsome, friendly, with open and engaging manners, all of which contributed to his popularity. Adams commanded respect, while Warren inspired confidence. As Adams himself said, he belonged to the “cabinet,” while Warren’s entire presence clearly marked him for active leadership.
In all the local events preliminary to our revolutionary struggle, this Green Dragon section or junto constituted an active and positive force. It represented the muscle of the Revolution. Every member was sworn to secrecy, and of them all one only proved recreant to his oath.
In all the local events leading up to our revolutionary fight, this Green Dragon group was an active and influential force. It represented the strength of the Revolution. Every member took an oath of secrecy, and only one of them broke that oath.
These were the men who gave the alarm on the eve of the battle of Lexington, who spirited away cannon under General Gage’s nose, and who in so many instances gallantly fought in the ranks of the republican army. Wanting a man whom he could fully trust, Warren early singled out Paul Revere for the most important services. He found him as true as steel. A peculiar kind of friendship seems to have sprung up between the two, owing, perhaps, to the same daring spirit common to both. So when Warren sent word to Revere that he must instantly ride to Lexington or all would be lost, he knew that, if it lay in the power of man to do it, the thing would be done.
These were the men who raised the alarm on the night before the battle of Lexington, who cleverly moved cannon right under General Gage's nose, and who bravely fought alongside the republican army in many instances. Looking for someone he could completely trust, Warren quickly picked Paul Revere for the most crucial tasks. He found him as reliable as they come. A special kind of friendship seems to have developed between the two, likely due to the shared boldness they both had. So when Warren told Revere that he needed to ride to Lexington immediately or everything would be lost, he knew that if it was within a man's power, it would be done.
Besides the more noted of the tavern clubs there were numerous private coteries, some exclusively composed of politicians, others more resembling our modern debating societies than anything else. These clubs usually[Pg 49] met at the houses of the members themselves, so exerting a silent influence on the body politic. The non-importation agreement originated at a private club in 1773. But all were not on the patriot side. The crown had equally zealous supporters, who met and talked the situation over without any of the secrecy which prudence counselled the other side to use in regard to their proceedings. Some associations endeavored to hold the balance between the factions by standing neutral. They deprecated the encroachments of the mother-country, but favored passive obedience. Dryden has described them:
Besides the more famous tavern clubs, there were many private groups, some made up entirely of politicians, while others were more like our modern debating societies. These clubs usually [Pg 49] gathered at the homes of their members, quietly influencing the political landscape. The non-importation agreement started at a private club in 1773. But not everyone was on the patriot side. The crown had equally committed supporters who met and discussed the situation openly, unlike the other side, which was advised to keep their activities secret. Some groups tried to stay neutral, criticizing the mother country's overreach but supporting passive compliance. Dryden described them:
“Not Whigs nor Tories they, nor this nor that,
Nor birds nor beasts, but just a kind of bat,—
A twilight animal, true to neither cause,
With Tory wings but Whiggish teeth and claws.”
“Not Whigs or Tories, not this or that,
Neither birds nor animals, just a kind of bat,—
A creature of twilight, loyal to no one,
"With Tory support but Whig-like teeth and claws."
It should be mentioned that Gridley, the father of the Boston Bar, undertook, in 1765, to organize a law club, with the purpose of making head against Otis, Thatcher, and Auchmuty. John Adams and Fitch were Gridley’s best men. They met first at Ballard’s, and subsequently at each other’s chambers; their “sodality,” as they called it, being for professional study and advancement. Gridley, it appears, was a little jealous of his old pupil, Otis, who had beaten him in the famous argument on the Writs of Assistance. Mention is also made of a club of which Daniel Leonard (Massachusettensis), John Lowell, Elisha Hutchinson, Frank Dana,[Pg 50] and Josiah Quincy were members. Similar clubs also existed in most of the principal towns in New England.
It should be noted that Gridley, the founder of the Boston Bar, took it upon himself in 1765 to start a law club aimed at standing up against Otis, Thatcher, and Auchmuty. John Adams and Fitch were Gridley’s top guys. They first gathered at Ballard’s, and then at each other’s offices; their “sodality,” as they called it, was focused on professional study and progress. Gridley seemed to feel a bit envious of his former student, Otis, who had outperformed him in the famous case regarding the Writs of Assistance. There is also mention of a club that included Daniel Leonard (Massachusettensis), John Lowell, Elisha Hutchinson, Frank Dana, [Pg 50] and Josiah Quincy. Similar clubs were also found in most of the major towns in New England.
The Sons of Liberty adopted the name given by Colonel Barré to the enemies of passive obedience in America. They met in the counting-room of Chase and Speakman’s distillery, near Liberty Tree.[3] Mackintosh, the man who led the mob in the Stamp Act riots, is doubtless the same person who assisted in throwing the tea overboard. We hear no more of him after this. The “Sons” were an eminently democratic organization, as few except mechanics were members. Among them were men like Avery, Crafts, and Edes the printer. All attained more or less prominence. Edes continued to print the Boston Gazette long after the Revolution. During Bernard’s administration he was offered the whole of the government printing, if he would stop his opposition to the measures of the crown. He refused the bribe, and his paper was the only one printed in America without a stamp, in direct violation of an Act of Parliament. The “Sons” pursued their measures with such vigor as to create much alarm among the loyalists, on whom the Stamp Act riots had made a lasting impression. Samuel Adams is thought to have influenced their proceedings more than any other of the leaders. It was by no means a league of ascetics, who had resolved to mortify the flesh, as punch and tobacco were liberally used to stimulate the deliberations.
The Sons of Liberty took on the name that Colonel Barré used for the opponents of passive obedience in America. They gathered in the counting-room of Chase and Speakman’s distillery, near Liberty Tree.[3] Mackintosh, the guy who led the mob during the Stamp Act riots, is likely the same person who helped toss the tea overboard. We don’t hear anything more about him after this. The “Sons” were a very democratic group, as most members were craftsmen. Among them were people like Avery, Crafts, and Edes the printer. All of them gained a degree of prominence. Edes continued to publish the Boston Gazette long after the Revolution. During Bernard’s time in office, he was offered all the government printing if he would stop opposing the crown's policies. He turned down the bribe, and his paper was the only one in America printed without a stamp, directly defying an Act of Parliament. The “Sons” carried out their plans so vigorously that it caused a lot of worry among the loyalists, who were still shaken by the Stamp Act riots. Samuel Adams is believed to have had more influence on their activities than any of the other leaders. It wasn’t a group of ascetics trying to deny themselves pleasures; they enjoyed punch and tobacco to help fuel their discussions.
THE LIBERTY TREE
The Freedom Tree
[Pg 51]No important political association outlived the beginning of hostilities. All the leaders were engaged in the military or civil service on one or the other side. Of the circle that met at the Merchants’ three were members of the Philadelphia Congress of 1774, one was president of the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts, the career of two was closed by death, and that of Otis by insanity.
[Pg 51]No significant political group survived the start of the conflict. All the leaders were involved in military or civil service on one side or the other. From the group that met at the Merchants’, three were members of the Philadelphia Congress of 1774, one was the president of the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts, two had their careers cut short by death, and Otis’s career ended due to mental illness.
IV.
SIGNBOARD HUMOR.
SIGNBOARD JOKES.
nother tavern sign, though of later date, was that of the Good Woman, at
the North End. This Good Woman was painted without a head.
Another tavern sign, though from a later time, was that of the Good Woman at the North End. This Good Woman was depicted without a head.
Still another board had painted on it a bird, a tree, a ship, and a foaming can, with the legend,—
Still another board had a painted bird, a tree, a ship, and a foaming can, with the caption,—
“This is the bird that never flew,
This is the tree which never grew,
This is the ship which never sails,
This is the can which never fails.”
“This is the bird that never flew,
This is the tree that never grew,
This is the ship that never sets sail,
"This is the can that always works."
[Pg 53]The Dog and Pot, Turk’s Head, Tun and Bacchus, were also old and favorite emblems. Some of the houses which swung these signs were very quaint specimens of our early architecture. So, also, the signs themselves were not unfrequently the work of good artists. Smibert or Copley may have painted some of them. West once offered five hundred dollars for a red lion he had painted for a tavern sign.
[Pg 53]The Dog and Pot, Turk’s Head, and Tun and Bacchus were also classic and beloved symbols. Some of the places that displayed these signs were charming examples of our early architecture. Additionally, the signs themselves were often created by skilled artists. Smibert or Copley might have painted some of them. West once offered five hundred dollars for a red lion he had painted for a tavern sign.
DOG AND POT.
Dog and pot.
Not a few boards displayed a good deal of ingenuity and mother-wit, which was not without its effect, especially upon thirsty Jack, who could hardly be expected to resist such an appeal as this one of the Ship in Distress:
Not a few boards showed a lot of creativity and common sense, which had a significant impact, especially on thirsty Jack, who could hardly be expected to ignore an offer like this one from the Ship in Distress:
“With sorrows I am compass’d round;
Pray lend a hand, my ship’s aground.”
“With sorrows I’m surrounded;
"Please help me, my ship is stuck."
We hear of another signboard hanging out at the extreme South End of the town, on which was depicted a globe with a man breaking through the crust, like a[Pg 54] chicken from its shell. The man’s nakedness was supposed to betoken extreme poverty.
We hear about another sign hanging out at the far South End of the town, featuring a globe with a man breaking through the surface, like a[Pg 54] chick hatching from its shell. The man’s nakedness was meant to symbolize extreme poverty.
So much for the sign itself. The story goes that early one morning a continental regiment was halted in front of the tavern, after having just made a forced march from Providence. The men were broken down with fatigue, bespattered with mud, famishing from hunger. One of these veterans doubtless echoed the sentiments of all the rest when he shouted out to the man on the sign, “’List, darn ye! ’List, and you’ll get through this world fast enough!”
So much for the sign itself. The story goes that early one morning a continental regiment was stopped in front of the tavern after making a forced march from Providence. The men were exhausted, covered in mud, and starving. One of these veterans definitely expressed what everyone else was feeling when he shouted to the man on the sign, “Join up, damn you! Join up, and you’ll get through this world quickly enough!”
“HOW SHALL I GET THROUGH THIS WORLD?”
“HOW AM I GOING TO MAKE IT IN THIS WORLD?”
In time of war the taverns were favorite recruiting rendezvous. Those at the waterside were conveniently situated for picking up men from among the idlers who frequented the tap-rooms. Under date of 1745, when we were at war with France, bills were posted in the town giving notice to all concerned that, “All gentlemen sailors and others, who are minded to go on a cruise off of[Pg 55] Cape Breton, on board the brigantine Hawk, Captain Philip Bass commander, mounting fourteen carriage, and twenty swivel guns, going in consort with the brigantine Ranger, Captain Edward Fryer commander, of the like force, to intercept the East India, South Sea, and other ships bound to Cape Breton, let them repair to the Widow Gray’s at the Crown Tavern, at the head of Clark’s Wharf, to go with Captain Bass, or to the Vernon’s Head, Richard Smith’s, in King Street, to go in the Ranger.” “Gentlemen sailors” is a novel sea-term that must have tickled an old salt’s fancy amazingly.
During wartime, taverns were popular spots for recruiting. The ones by the water were perfect for picking up guys among the idle patrons in the taprooms. Back in 1745, when we were at war with France, posters were put up in town announcing that, “All gentlemen sailors and others, who wish to go on a cruise off of [Pg 55] Cape Breton, on board the brigantine Hawk, Captain Philip Bass in charge, armed with fourteen cannons and twenty swivel guns, sailing alongside the brigantine Ranger, Captain Edward Fryer in charge, of similar strength, to intercept East India, South Sea, and other ships headed to Cape Breton, should go to the Widow Gray’s at the Crown Tavern, at the head of Clark’s Wharf, to join Captain Bass, or to Vernon’s Head, Richard Smith’s, on King Street, to go on the Ranger.” The term “gentlemen sailors” must have amused the seasoned sailors quite a bit.
The following notice, given at the same date in the most public manner, is now curious reading. “To be sold, a likely negro or mulatto boy, about eleven years of age.” This was in Boston.
The following notice, published on the same date in a very public way, is now fascinating to read: “For sale, a promising Black or mixed-race boy, around eleven years old.” This was in Boston.
The Revolution wrought swift and significant change in many of the old, favorite signboards. Though the idea remained the same, their symbolism was now put to a different use. Down came the king’s and up went the people’s arms. The crowns and sceptres, the lions and unicorns, furnished fuel for patriotic bonfires or were painted out forever. With them disappeared the last tokens of the monarchy. The crown was knocked into a cocked-hat, the sceptre fell at the unsheathing of the sword. The heads of Washington and Hancock, Putnam and Lee, Jones and Hopkins, now fired the martial heart instead of Vernon, Hawk, or Wolfe. Allegiance to old and cherished traditions was swept away as ruthlessly as if it were in truth but the[Pg 56] reflection of that loyalty which the colonists had now thrown off forever. They had accepted the maxim, that, when a subject draws his sword against his king, he should throw away the scabbard.
The Revolution brought about quick and significant changes to many of the old, beloved signboards. While the core idea stayed the same, their meaning was now repurposed. Down came the king’s symbols and up went the people's arms. Crowns and scepters, along with lions and unicorns, fueled patriotic bonfires or were permanently covered up. Along with them vanished the last remnants of the monarchy. The crown was smashed into a cocked hat, and the scepter fell when the sword was drawn. The portraits of Washington, Hancock, Putnam, and Lee now ignited the spirit of battle instead of Vernon, Hawk, or Wolfe. Loyalty to old and cherished traditions was swept away as mercilessly as if it were simply the [Pg 56] reflection of the loyalty that the colonists had now cast off forever. They embraced the belief that when a subject draws his sword against his king, he should discard the scabbard.
Such acts are not to be referred to the fickleness of popular favor which Horace Walpole has moralized upon, or which the poet satirizes in the lines,—
Such actions shouldn’t be blamed on the changing whims of public opinion that Horace Walpole has written about, or that the poet mocks in the lines,—
“Vernon, the Butcher Cumberland, Wolfe, Hawke,
Prince Ferdinand, Granby, Burgoyne, Keppell, Howe,
Evil and good have had their tithe of talk,
And filled their sign-post then like Wellesly now.”
“Vernon, the Butcher Cumberland, Wolfe, Hawke,
Prince Ferdinand, Granby, Burgoyne, Keppell, Howe,
Good and bad have both been widely discussed,
"And filled their signpost just like Wellesley does today."
Rather should we credit it to that genuine and impassioned outburst of patriotic feeling which, having turned royalty out of doors, indignantly tossed its worthless trappings into the street after it.
We should give credit to that genuine and passionate outburst of patriotic feeling that, after throwing royalty out, angrily tossed its worthless trappings into the street behind it.
Not a single specimen of the old-time hostelries now remains in Boston. All is changed. The demon demolition is everywhere. Does not this very want of permanence suggest, with much force, the need of perpetuating a noted house or site by some appropriate memorial? It is true that a beginning has been made in this direction, but much more remains to be done. In this way, a great deal of curious and valuable information may be picked up in the streets, as all who run may read. It has been noticed that very few pass by such memorials without stopping to read the inscriptions. Certainly, no more popular method of teaching history could well be devised. This being done, on a liberal scale, the[Pg 57] city would still hold its antique flavor through the records everywhere displayed on the walls of its buildings, and we should have a home application of the couplet:
Not a single example of the old inns is left in Boston. Everything has changed. Demolition is happening everywhere. Doesn't this lack of permanence strongly suggest the need to honor a famous place with some kind of memorial? It’s true that some progress has been made in this area, but there’s still a lot more to do. This way, many interesting and valuable pieces of information can be found in the streets for anyone to see. It has been observed that very few people walk past these memorials without stopping to read the inscriptions. Clearly, there’s no better way to teach history than this. If done on a larger scale, the[Pg 57] city would still retain its historical charm with records displayed on the walls of its buildings, and we would have a local application of the couplet:
“Oh, but a wit can study in the streets,
And raise his mind above the mob he meets.”
“Oh, but a clever person can learn out in the streets,
"and raise their thoughts above the crowd they meet."
APPENDIX.
APPENDIX.
APPENDIX.
BOSTON TAVERNS TO THE YEAR 1800.
BOSTON TAVERNS TO THE YEAR 1800.
he Anchor, or Blue Anchor. Robert Turner, vintner, came into possession
of the estate (Richard Fairbanks’s) in 1652, died in 1664, and was
succeeded in the business by his son John, who continued it till his own
death in 1681; Turner’s widow married George Monck, or Monk, who kept the
Anchor until his decease in 1698; his widow carried on the business till
1703, when the estate probably ceased to be a tavern. The house was
destroyed in the great fire of 1711. The old and new Globe buildings stand
on the site. [See communication of William R. Bagnall in Boston Daily
Globe of April 2, 1885.] Committees of the General Court used to meet
here. (Hutchinson Coll., 345, 347.)
The Anchor, or Blue Anchor. Robert Turner, a winemaker, took over the estate (formerly owned by Richard Fairbanks) in 1652, passed away in 1664, and was succeeded in the business by his son John, who ran it until his own death in 1681. Turner’s widow married George Monck, who managed the Anchor until his death in 1698; his widow continued the business until 1703, when the estate likely stopped functioning as a tavern. The building was destroyed in the major fire of 1711. The old and new Globe buildings are now on that site. [See communication of William R. Bagnall in Boston Daily Globe of April 2, 1885.] Committees of the General Court used to hold meetings here. (Hutchinson Coll., 345, 347.)
Admiral Vernon, or Vernon’s Head, corner of State Street and Merchants’ Row. In 1743, Peter Faneuil’s warehouse was opposite. Richard Smith kept it in 1745, Mary Bean in 1775; its sign was a portrait of the admiral.
Admiral Vernon, or Vernon’s Head, located at the corner of State Street and Merchants’ Row. In 1743, Peter Faneuil’s warehouse was across the street. Richard Smith ran it in 1745, and Mary Bean took over in 1775; the sign featured a portrait of the admiral.
American Coffee-House. See British Coffee-House.
**American Coffee Shop.** See *British Coffee Shop*.
Black Horse, in Prince Street, formerly Black Horse Lane, so named from the tavern as early as 1698.
Black Horse, on Prince Street, previously Black Horse Lane, named after the tavern as early as 1698.
Brazen-Head. In Old Cornhill. Though not a tavern, memorable as the place where the Great Fire of 1760 originated.
Brazen-Head. In Old Cornhill. While it’s not a tavern, it’s notable as the location where the Great Fire of 1760 started.
Bull, lower end of Summer Street, north side; demolished 1833 to make room “for the new street from Sea to[Pg 62] Broad,” formerly Flounder Lane, now Atlantic Avenue. It was then a very old building. Bull’s Wharf and Lane named for it.
Bull, lower end of Summer Street, north side; torn down in 1833 to create “the new street from Sea to [Pg 62] Broad,” which was once Flounder Lane, now Atlantic Avenue. It was an old building at that time. Bull’s Wharf and Lane were named after it.
British Coffee-House, mentioned in 1762. John Ballard kept it. Cord Cordis, in 1771.
British Coffee-House, referenced in 1762. It was run by John Ballard. Cord Cordis, in 1771.
Bunch of Grapes. Kept by Francis Holmes, 1712; William Coffin, 1731-33; Edward Lutwych, 1733; Joshua Barker, 1749; William Wetherhead, 1750; Rebecca Coffin, 1760; Joseph Ingersoll, 1764-72. [In 1768 Ingersoll also had a wine-cellar next door.] Captain John Marston was landlord 1775-78; William Foster, 1782; Colonel Dudley Colman, 1783; James Vila, 1789, in which year he removed to Concert Hall; Thomas Lobdell, 1789. Trinity Church was organized in this house. It was often described as being at the head of Long Wharf.
Bunch of Grapes. Owned by Francis Holmes, 1712; William Coffin, 1731-33; Edward Lutwych, 1733; Joshua Barker, 1749; William Wetherhead, 1750; Rebecca Coffin, 1760; Joseph Ingersoll, 1764-72. [In 1768, Ingersoll also had a wine cellar next door.] Captain John Marston was the landlord from 1775-78; William Foster, 1782; Colonel Dudley Colman, 1783; James Vila, 1789, the same year he moved to Concert Hall; Thomas Lobdell, 1789. Trinity Church was founded in this building. It was often referred to as being at the head of Long Wharf.
Castle Tavern, afterward the George Tavern. Northeast by Wing’s Lane (Elm Street), front or southeast by Dock Square. For an account of Hudson’s marital troubles, see Winthrop’s New England, II. 249. Another house of the same name is mentioned in 1675 and 1693. A still earlier name was the “Blew Bell,” 1673. It was in Mackerel Lane (Kilby Street), corner of Liberty Square.
Castle Tavern, later known as the George Tavern. Located northeast by Wing’s Lane (Elm Street), at the southeast corner by Dock Square. For details about Hudson’s marriage issues, check Winthrop’s New England, II. 249. Another establishment with the same name is referenced in 1675 and 1693. An even earlier name was the “Blew Bell,” from 1673. It was situated on Mackerel Lane (Kilby Street), at the corner of Liberty Square.
Cole’s Inn. See the referred-to deed in Proc. Am. Ant. Soc., VII. p. 51. For the episode of Lord Leigh consult Old Landmarks of Boston, p. 109.
Cole’s Inn. See the referenced deed in Proc. Am. Ant. Soc., VII. p. 51. For the story of Lord Leigh, check Old Landmarks of Boston, p. 109.
Cromwell’s Head, by Anthony Brackett, 1760; by his widow, 1764-68; later by Joshua Brackett. A two-story wooden house advertised to be sold, 1802.
Cromwell’s Head, by Anthony Brackett, 1760; by his widow, 1764-68; later by Joshua Brackett. A two-story wooden house advertised for sale, 1802.
Crown Coffee-House. First house on Long Wharf. Thomas Selby kept it 1718-24; Widow Anna Swords, 1749; then the property of Governor Belcher; Belcher sold to Richard Smith, innholder, who in 1751 sold to Robert Sherlock.
Crown Coffee-House. First building on Long Wharf. Thomas Selby ran it from 1718 to 1724; Widow Anna Swords operated it in 1749; then it belonged to Governor Belcher; Belcher sold it to Richard Smith, innkeeper, who in 1751 sold it to Robert Sherlock.
Crown Tavern. Widow Day’s, head of Clark’s Wharf; rendezvous for privateersmen in 1745.
Crown Tavern. Widow Day’s, at Clark’s Wharf; meeting spot for privateers in 1745.
THE CROWN COFFEE HOUSE (Site of Fidelity Trust Building)
THE CROWN COFFEE HOUSE (Location of Fidelity Trust Building)
[Pg 63]Cross Tavern, corner of Cross and Ann Streets, 1732; Samuel Mattocks advertises, 1729, two young bears “very tame” for sale at the Sign of the Cross. Cross Street takes its name from the tavern. Perhaps the same as the Red Cross, in Ann Street, mentioned in 1746, and then kept by John Osborn. Men who had enlisted for the Canada expedition were ordered to report there.
[Pg 63]Cross Tavern, at the corner of Cross and Ann Streets, 1732; Samuel Mattocks advertised in 1729 two young bears that were "very tame" for sale at the Sign of the Cross. Cross Street got its name from the tavern. It might be the same as the Red Cross on Ann Street, mentioned in 1746, which was run by John Osborn. Men who signed up for the Canada expedition were instructed to report there.
Dog and Pot, at the head of Bartlett’s Wharf in Ann (North) Street, or, as then described, Fish Street. Bartlett’s Wharf was in 1722 next northeast of Lee’s shipyard.
Dog and Pot, located at the beginning of Bartlett’s Wharf on Ann (North) Street, or as it was then called, Fish Street. Bartlett’s Wharf was situated in 1722 just northeast of Lee’s shipyard.
Concert Hall was not at first a public house, but was built for, and mostly used as, a place for giving musical entertainments, balls, parties, etc., though refreshments were probably served in it by the lessee. A “concert of musick” was advertised to be given there as early as 1755. (See Landmarks of Boston.) Thomas Turner had a dancing and fencing academy there in 1776. As has been mentioned, James Vila took charge of Concert Hall in 1789. The old hall, which formed the second story, was high enough to be divided into two stories when the building was altered by later owners. It was of brick, and had two ornamental scrolls on the front, which were removed when the alterations were made.
Concert Hall wasn't originally a public venue; it was built mostly as a space for musical performances, dances, parties, and similar events, even though the lessee probably served refreshments there. A “concert of music” was advertised to take place there as early as 1755. (See Landmarks of Boston.) Thomas Turner operated a dance and fencing school there in 1776. As mentioned, James Vila took over Concert Hall in 1789. The old hall, which was on the second floor, was tall enough to be converted into two stories when the building was later modified by new owners. It was made of brick and featured two decorative scrolls on the front, which were removed during the renovations.
Great Britain Coffee-House, Ann Street, 1715. The house of Mr. Daniel Stevens, Ann Street, near the drawbridge. There was another house of the same name in Queen (Court) Street, near the Exchange, in 1713, where “superfine bohea, and green tea, chocolate, coffee-powder, etc.,” were advertised.
Great Britain Coffee-House, Ann Street, 1715. The residence of Mr. Daniel Stevens, Ann Street, close to the drawbridge. There was another establishment with the same name on Queen (Court) Street, near the Exchange, in 1713, where “superfine bohea, and green tea, chocolate, coffee powder, etc.,” were advertised.
George, or St. George, Tavern, on the Neck, near Roxbury line. (See Landmarks of Boston.) Noted as early as 1721. Simon Rogers kept it 1730-34. In 1769 Edward Bardin took it and changed the name to the King’s Arms. Thomas Brackett was landlord in 1770.[Pg 64] Samuel Mears, later. During the siege of 1775 the tavern was burnt by the British, as it covered our advanced line. It was known at that time by its old name of the George.
George, or St. George, Tavern, on the Neck, close to the Roxbury line. (See Landmarks of Boston.) It was mentioned as early as 1721. Simon Rogers ran it from 1730 to 1734. In 1769, Edward Bardin took over and renamed it the King’s Arms. Thomas Brackett was the landlord in 1770.[Pg 64] Samuel Mears managed it afterward. During the siege of 1775, the British burned the tavern since it was on our front line. At that time, it was still referred to by its original name, the George.
Golden Ball. Loring’s Tavern, Merchants’ Row, corner of Corn Court, 1777. Kept by Mrs. Loring in 1789.
Golden Ball. Loring’s Tavern, Merchants’ Row, corner of Corn Court, 1777. Run by Mrs. Loring in 1789.
General Wolfe, Town Dock, north side of Faneuil Hall, 1768. Elizabeth Coleman offers for sale utensils of Brew-House, etc., 1773.
General Wolfe, Town Dock, north side of Faneuil Hall, 1768. Elizabeth Coleman is selling brewing utensils, etc., 1773.
Green Dragon, also Freemason’s Arms. By Richard Pullin, 1712; by Mr. Pattoun, 1715; Joseph Kilder, 1734, who came from the Three Cranes, Charlestown. John Cary was licensed to keep it in 1769; Benjamin Burdick, 1771, when it became the place of meeting of the Revolutionary Club. St. Andrews Lodge of Freemasons bought the building before the Revolution, and continued to own it for more than a century. See p. 46.
Green Dragon, also known as Freemason’s Arms. By Richard Pullin, 1712; by Mr. Pattoun, 1715; Joseph Kilder, 1734, who came from the Three Cranes, Charlestown. John Cary was licensed to operate it in 1769; Benjamin Burdick, 1771, when it became the meeting spot for the Revolutionary Club. St. Andrews Lodge of Freemasons purchased the building before the Revolution and continued to own it for over a century. See p. 46.
Hancock House, Corn Court; sign has Governor Hancock’s portrait,—a wretched daub; said to have been the house in which Louis Philippe lodged during his short stay in Boston.
Hancock House, Corn Court; the sign features a portrait of Governor Hancock—a terrible painting; it's said to be the house where Louis Philippe stayed during his brief visit to Boston.
Hat and Helmet, by Daniel Jones; less than a quarter of a mile south of the Town-House.
Hat and Helmet, by Daniel Jones; less than a quarter of a mile south of the Town Hall.
Indian Queen, Blue Bell, and —— stood on the site of the Parker Block, Washington Street, formerly Marlborough Street. Nathaniel Bishop kept it in 1673. After stages begun running into the country, this house, then kept by Zadock Pomeroy, was a regular starting-place for the Concord, Groton, and Leominster stages. It was succeeded by the Washington Coffee-House. The Indian Queen, in Bromfield Street, was another noted stage-house, though not of so early date. Isaac Trask, Nabby, his widow, Simeon Boyden, and Preston Shepard kept it. The Bromfield House succeeded it, on the Methodist Book Concern site.
Indian Queen, Blue Bell, and —— were located at the site of the Parker Block on Washington Street, which used to be Marlborough Street. Nathaniel Bishop managed it in 1673. After stagecoaches started running into the countryside, this place, then run by Zadock Pomeroy, became a regular departure point for the Concord, Groton, and Leominster stages. It was later replaced by the Washington Coffee-House. The Indian Queen on Bromfield Street was another famous stagehouse, although it wasn’t as old. Isaac Trask, his widow Nabby, Simeon Boyden, and Preston Shepard ran it. The Bromfield House took its place on the site of the Methodist Book Concern.
BOSTON NEWS-LETTER, FEB. 15, 1770
BOSTON NEWSLETTER, FEB. 15, 1770
COLUMBIAN CENTINEL. DEC. 11, 1799
COLUMBIAN CENTINEL. DEC. 11, 1799
COLUMBIAN CENTINEL, JAN. 1, 1800
COLUMBIAN CENTINEL, JAN. 1, 1800
JULIEN HOUSE.
JULIEN HOUSE.
Julien’s Restorator, corner of Congress and Milk streets. One of the most ancient buildings in Boston, when taken down in 1824, it having escaped the great fire of 1759. It stood in a grass-plot, fenced in from the street. It was a private dwelling until 1794. Then Jean Baptiste Julien opened in it the first public eating-house to be established in Boston, with the distinctive title of “Restorator,”—a crude attempt to turn the French word restaurant into English. Before this time such places had always been called cook-shops. Julien was a Frenchman, who, like many of his countrymen, took refuge in America during the Reign of Terror. His soups soon became famous among the gourmands of the town, while the novelty of his cuisine attracted custom. He was familiarly nicknamed the “Prince of Soups.” At Julien’s[Pg 66] death, in 1805, his widow succeeded him in the business, she carrying it on successfully for ten years. The following lines were addressed to her successor, Frederick Rouillard:
Julien’s Restorator, at the corner of Congress and Milk streets. One of the oldest buildings in Boston, it was taken down in 1824 after having survived the great fire of 1759. It stood in a grassy area, fenced off from the street. It was a private residence until 1794. Then Jean Baptiste Julien opened the first public dining place in Boston, cleverly named “Restorator,” an attempt to adapt the French word restaurant into English. Before this, such establishments were always referred to as cook-shops. Julien was a Frenchman who, like many others from his homeland, sought refuge in America during the Reign of Terror. His soups quickly became famous among the food lovers in town, while the uniqueness of his cuisine drew in customers. He was commonly referred to as the “Prince of Soups.” After Julien’s[Pg 66] death in 1805, his widow took over the business and successfully ran it for another ten years. The following lines were addressed to her successor, Frederick Rouillard:
JULIEN’S RESTORATOR.
I knew by the glow that so rosily shone
Upon Frederick’s cheeks, that he lived on good cheer;
And I said, “If there’s steaks to be had in the town,
The man who loves venison should look for them here.”
’Twas two; and the dinners were smoking around,
The cits hastened home at the savory smell,
And so still was the street that I heard not a sound
But the barkeeper ringing the Coffee-House bell.
“And here in the cosy Old Club,”[4] I exclaimed,
“With a steak that was tender, and Frederick’s best wine,
While under my platter a spirit-blaze flamed,
How long could I sit, and how well could I dine!
“By the side of my venison a tumbler of beer
Or a bottle of sherry how pleasant to see,
And to know that I dined on the best of the deer,
That never was dearer to any than me!”
JULIEN’S RESTAURANT.
I could tell by the glow on Frederick's cheeks that he was really enjoying himself;
I said, “If there are steaks in town,
The guy who loves venison should definitely check this place out.”
It was two o'clock, and the dinners were steaming all around,
People rushed home, drawn by the delicious smell,
And the street was so quiet I could only hear
The bartender ringing the Coffee-House bell.
“And here in the cozy Old Club,”[4] I exclaimed,
“With a tender steak and Frederick’s best wine,
While under my plate a spirit-flame burned,
How long could I stay, and how well could I eat!”
“Next to my venison, a glass of beer,
Or a bottle of sherry would be so nice to have,
And knowing I had the best of the deer,
That was never worth more to anyone than me!”
King’s Head, by Scarlet’s Wharf (northwest corner Fleet and North streets); burnt 1691, and rebuilt. Fleet Street was formerly Scarlet’s Wharf Lane. Kept by James Davenport, 1755, and probably, also, by his widow. “A maiden dwarf, fifty-two years old,” and only twenty-two inches high, was “to be seen at Widow Bignall’s,” next door to the King’s Head, in August, 1771. The old King’s Head, in Chancery Lane, London, was the[Pg 67] rendezvous of Titus Oates’ party. Cowley the poet was born in it.
King’s Head, located at Scarlet’s Wharf (northwest corner of Fleet and North streets); burned down in 1691 and was rebuilt. Fleet Street used to be called Scarlet’s Wharf Lane. It was managed by James Davenport in 1755, and likely by his widow afterward. “A maiden dwarf, fifty-two years old,” who was only twenty-two inches tall, was “on display at Widow Bignall’s,” next to the King’s Head, in August 1771. The old King’s Head, on Chancery Lane in London, was the[Pg 67] meeting place for Titus Oates’ group. Cowley the poet was born there.
Lamb. The sign is mentioned as early as 1746. Colonel Doty kept it in 1760. The first stage-coach to Providence put up at this house. The Adams House is on the same site, named for Laban Adams, who had kept the Lamb.
Lamb. The sign was mentioned as early as 1746. Colonel Doty managed it in 1760. The first stagecoach to Providence stopped at this house. The Adams House is located on the same site, named after Laban Adams, who used to run the Lamb.
Lion, formerly Grand Turk. In Newbury, now Washington, Street. (See Landmarks of Boston.) Kept by Israel Hatch in 1789.
Lion, previously Grand Turk. Located on Washington Street in Newbury. (See Landmarks of Boston.) Run by Israel Hatch in 1789.
Light-House and Anchor, at the North End, in 1763. Robert Whatley then kept it. A Light-house tavern is noted in King Street, opposite the Town-House, 1718.
Light-House and Anchor, at the North End, in 1763. Robert Whatley was the owner at that time. A Light-house tavern is mentioned on King Street, across from the Town-House, in 1718.
Orange Tree, head of Hanover Street, 1708. Jonathan Wardwell kept it in 1712; Mrs. Wardwell in 1724; still a tavern in 1785. Wardwell set up here the first hackney-coach stand in Boston.
Orange Tree, at the top of Hanover Street, 1708. Jonathan Wardwell owned it in 1712; Mrs. Wardwell took over in 1724; it was still a tavern in 1785. Wardwell established the first hackney-coach stand in Boston here.
Philadelphia, or North End Coffee-House, opposite the head of Hancock’s Wharf. Kept by David Porter, father of the old Commodore and grandfather of the present Admiral. “Lodges, clubs, societies, etc., may be provided with dinners and suppers,—small and retired rooms for small company,—oyster suppers in the nicest manner.” Formerly kept by Bennet. Occupied, 1789, by Robert Wyre, distiller.
Philadelphia, or North End Coffee-House, across from the end of Hancock’s Wharf. Run by David Porter, father of the old Commodore and grandfather of the current Admiral. “Lodges, clubs, societies, etc., can be catered to with dinners and suppers—small, private rooms for intimate gatherings—oyster suppers done exquisitely.” Previously managed by Bennet. In 1789, it was occupied by Robert Wyre, a distiller.
Punch Bowl, Dock Square, kept by Mrs. Baker, 1789.
Punch Bowl, Dock Square, run by Mrs. Baker, 1789.
Queen’s Head. In 1732 Joshua Pierce, innholder, is allowed to remove his license from the sign of the Logwood Tree, in Lynn Street, to the Queen’s Head, near Scarlet’s Wharf, where Anthony Young last dwelt.
Queen’s Head. In 1732, Joshua Pierce, the innkeeper, was permitted to transfer his license from the sign of the Logwood Tree on Lynn Street to the Queen’s Head, close to Scarlet’s Wharf, where Anthony Young last lived.
Roebuck, north side of Town Dock (North Market Street). A house of bad repute, in which Henry Phillips killed Gaspard Dennegri, and was hanged for it in 1817. Roebuck passage, the alley-way through to Ann Street,[Pg 68] took its name from the tavern. It is now included in the extension northward of Merchants’ Row.
Roebuck, on the north side of Town Dock (North Market Street). A disreputable establishment where Henry Phillips murdered Gaspard Dennegri and was executed for it in 1817. Roebuck passage, the alley that leads to Ann Street,[Pg 68] got its name from the tavern. It is now part of the northern expansion of Merchants’ Row.
Rose and Crown, near the fortification at Boston Neck. To be let January 25, 1728: “enquire of Gillam Phillips.” This may be the house represented on Bonner’s map of 1722.
Rose and Crown, near the fort at Boston Neck. Available for rent January 25, 1728: “ask Gillam Phillips.” This might be the house shown on Bonner’s map from 1722.
Red Lion, North Street, corner of Richmond. Noticed as early as 1654 and as late as 1766. John Buchanan, baker, kept near it in 1712.
Red Lion, North Street, at the corner of Richmond. Recorded as early as 1654 and as late as 1766. John Buchanan, a baker, operated nearby in 1712.
Royal Exchange, State Street, corner Exchange. An antique two-story brick building. Noticed under this name, 1711, then kept by Benjamin Johns; in 1727, and also, in 1747, by Luke Vardy. Stone kept it in 1768. Mrs. Mary Clapham boarded many British officers, and had several pretty daughters, one of whom eloped with an officer. The site of the Boston Massacre has been marked by a bronze tablet placed on the wall of the Merchants’ Bank, opposite a wheel-line arrangement of the paving, denoting where the first blood of the Revolution was shed. It was the custom to exhibit transparencies on every anniversary of the Massacre from the front of this house. The first stage-coach ever run on the road from Boston to New York was started September 7, 1772, by Nicholas Brown, from this house, “to go once in every fourteen days.” Israel Hatch kept it in 1800, as a regular stopping-place for the Providence stages, of which he was proprietor; but upon the completion of the turnpike he removed to Attleborough.
Royal Exchange, State Street, corner Exchange. An old two-story brick building. Noted under this name in 1711, then run by Benjamin Johns; in 1727, and again in 1747, by Luke Vardy. Stone managed it in 1768. Mrs. Mary Clapham hosted many British officers and had several lovely daughters, one of whom ran away with an officer. The site of the Boston Massacre has been marked by a bronze plaque placed on the wall of the Merchants’ Bank, across from a wheel-line pattern in the paving, indicating where the first blood of the Revolution was spilled. It was customary to display transparencies every anniversary of the Massacre from the front of this house. The first stagecoach ever to travel the route from Boston to New York began on September 7, 1772, by Nicholas Brown, from this house, “to go once every fourteen days.” Israel Hatch operated it in 1800, serving as a regular stop for the Providence stages, which he owned; but after the turnpike was completed, he moved to Attleborough.
Salutation, North Street, corner Salutation. See p. 45. Noticed in 1708; Samuel Green kept it in 1731; William Campbell, who died suddenly in a fit, January 18, 1773.
Salutation, North Street, corner Salutation. See p. 45. Noted in 1708; Samuel Green ran it in 1731; William Campbell, who passed away unexpectedly from a fit, January 18, 1773.
Seven Stars, in Summer Street, gave the name of Seven Star Lane to that street. Said to have stood on part of the old Trinity Church lot. “Near the Haymarket” 1771, then kept by Jonathan Patten.
Seven Stars, located on Summer Street, named that street Seven Star Lane. It was said to have been on part of the old Trinity Church lot. “Near the Haymarket” in 1771, it was then run by Jonathan Patten.
THE SUN TAVERN (Dock Square)
THE SUN TAVERN (Dock Square)
[Pg 69]Shakespeare, Water Street, second house below Devonshire; kept by Mrs. Baker.
[Pg 69]Shakespeare, Water Street, the second house below Devonshire; run by Mrs. Baker.
Ship, corner Clark and North streets; kept by John Vyall, 1666-67; frequently called Noah’s Ark.
Ship, at the corner of Clark and North streets; run by John Vyall, 1666-67; often referred to as Noah’s Ark.
Ship in Distress, vicinity of North Square.
Ship in Distress, near North Square.
Star, in Hanover Street, corner Link Alley, 1704. Link Alley was the name given to that part of Union Street west of Hanover. Stephen North kept it in 1712-14. It belonged to Lieutenant-Governor Stoughton.
Star, on Hanover Street, at the corner of Link Alley, 1704. Link Alley was what they called the section of Union Street west of Hanover. Stephen North ran it from 1712 to 1714. It was owned by Lieutenant-Governor Stoughton.
State’s Arms, also King’s Arms. Colonel Henry Shrimpton bequeathed it to his daughter Sarah, 1666. Hugh Gunnison sold it to Shrimpton in 1651, the tavern being then the King’s Arms.
State’s Arms, also known as King’s Arms. Colonel Henry Shrimpton left it to his daughter Sarah in 1666. Hugh Gunnison sold it to Shrimpton in 1651, and at that time, the tavern was called King’s Arms.
Sun. This seems to have been a favorite emblem, as there were several houses of the name. The Sun in Batterymarch Street was the residence of Benjamin Hallowell, a loyalist, before it became a tavern. The estate was confiscated. General Henry Dearborn occupied it at one time. The sign bore a gilded sun, with rays, with this inscription:
Sun. This appears to have been a popular symbol, as there were multiple houses with this name. The Sun on Batterymarch Street was once the home of Benjamin Hallowell, a loyalist, before it turned into a tavern. The property was taken over. General Henry Dearborn lived there at one point. The sign displayed a gilded sun, with rays, along with this inscription:
“The best Ale and Porter
Under the Sun.”
“The best beer and stout
Under the Sun.”
Upon the conversion of the inn into a store the sign of the sun was transferred to a house in Moon Street. The Sun in Dock Square, corner of Corn Court, was earlier, going back to 1724, kept by Samuel Mears, who was “lately deceased” in 1727. It was finally turned into a grocery store, kept first by George Murdock, and then by his successor, Wellington. A third house of this name was in Cornhill (Washington Street), in 1755. Captain James Day kept it. There was still another Sun, near Boston Stone, kept by Joseph Jackson in 1785.
Upon the conversion of the inn into a store, the sign of the Sun was moved to a house on Moon Street. The Sun in Dock Square, at the corner of Corn Court, was previously run by Samuel Mears, who had "recently passed away" in 1727. It was eventually turned into a grocery store, first run by George Murdock and then by his successor, Wellington. A third establishment with this name was located in Cornhill (Washington Street) in 1755, managed by Captain James Day. There was yet another Sun, near Boston Stone, operated by Joseph Jackson in 1785.
[Pg 70]Swan, in Fish, now North Street, “by Scarlett’s Wharf,” 1708. There was another at the South End, “nearly opposite Arnold Welles’,” in 1784.
[Pg 70]Swan, in Fish, now North Street, “by Scarlett’s Wharf,” 1708. There was another one at the South End, “almost directly across from Arnold Welles’,” in 1784.
Three Horse-Shoes, “in the street leading up to the Common,” probably Tremont Street. Kept by Mrs. Glover, who died about 1744. William Clears kept it in 1775.
Three Horse-Shoes, “on the street leading up to the Common,” probably Tremont Street. Run by Mrs. Glover, who passed away around 1744. William Clears ran it in 1775.
White Horse, a few rods south of the Lamb. It had a white horse painted on the signboard. Kept by Joseph Morton, 1760, who was still landlord in 1772. Israel Hatch, the ubiquitous, took it in 1787, on his arrival from Attleborough. His announcement is unique. (See Landmarks of Boston, pp. 392, 393.)
White Horse, a short distance south of the Lamb. It had a white horse painted on the sign. Managed by Joseph Morton in 1760, who was still the landlord in 1772. Israel Hatch, who was everywhere, took over in 1787 when he arrived from Attleborough. His announcement is one of a kind. (See Landmarks of Boston, pp. 392, 393.)
BOSTON NEWS-LETTER, MAY 27, 1773
BOSTON NEWSLETTER, MAY 27, 1773
COLE’S INN
COLE'S INN
THE BAKERS’ ARMS
THE BAKERS' ARMS
THE GOLDEN BALL TAVERN
THE GOLDEN BALL TAVERN
BY
BY
WALTER K. WATKINS
WALTER K. WATKINS
AND
AND
THE HANCOCK TAVERN
HANCOCK TAVERN
BY
BY
E. W. McGLENEN
E. W. McGLENEN
VI.
SAMUEL COLE’S INN.
Samuel Cole's Inn.
Samuel Cole came to Boston in the fleet with Governor Winthrop, and he with his wife Ann were the fortieth and forty-first on the list of original members of the First Church. He requested to become a freeman October 19, 1630, and was sworn May 18, 1631. He was the ninth to sign the roll of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company in 1637 and in the same year was disarmed for his religious views. In 1636 he contributed to the maintenance of a free school and in 1656 to the building of the town house. In 1652 he was one of those chosen to receive monies for Harvard College. In 1634 he opened the first ordinary, or inn. It was situated on Washington Street, nearly opposite the head of Water Street. Here, in 1636, Sir Henry Vane, the governor, entertained Miantonomo and two of Canonicus’s sons, with other chiefs. While the four sachems dined at the Governor’s house, which stood near the entrance to Pemberton Square, the chiefs, some twenty in all, dined at Cole’s Inn. At this time a treaty of peace was concluded here between the English and the Narragansetts.
Samuel Cole came to Boston with Governor Winthrop's fleet, and he and his wife Ann were the fortieth and forty-first on the list of original members of the First Church. He requested to become a freeman on October 19, 1630, and was sworn in on May 18, 1631. He was the ninth to sign the roll of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company in 1637 and was disarmed that same year due to his religious beliefs. In 1636, he contributed to the support of a free school and in 1656 to the construction of the town house. In 1652, he was one of those selected to receive funds for Harvard College. In 1634, he opened the first ordinary, or inn, located on Washington Street, almost directly across from the head of Water Street. Here, in 1636, Sir Henry Vane, the governor, hosted Miantonomo and two of Canonicus’s sons, along with other leaders. While the four sachems dined at the Governor’s residence, which was near the entrance to Pemberton Square, about twenty chiefs dined at Cole’s Inn. During this time, a peace treaty was finalized between the English and the Narragansetts.
[Pg 74]In 1637, in the month of June, there sailed into Boston Harbor the ship Hector, from London, with the Rev. John Davenport and two London merchants, Theophilus Eaton and Edward Hopkins, his son-in-law, two future governors of Connecticut. On the same vessel was a young man, a ward of King Charles I., James, Lord Ley, a son of the Earl of Marlborough (who had just died). He was also to hold high positions in the future and attain fame as a mathematician and navigator.
[Pg 74]In June 1637, the ship Hector arrived in Boston Harbor from London, carrying Rev. John Davenport and two London merchants, Theophilus Eaton and Edward Hopkins, who was his son-in-law and would later become governors of Connecticut. Also on board was a young man, James, Lord Ley, a ward of King Charles I., and the son of the deceased Earl of Marlborough. He would go on to hold significant positions and gain recognition as a mathematician and navigator.
The Earl of Marlborough, while in Boston, was at Cole’s Inn, and while he was here was of sober carriage and observant of the country which he came to view. He consorted frequently with Sir Henry Vane, visiting with him Maverick, at Noddle’s Island, and returning to England with Vane in August, 1637.
The Earl of Marlborough, while in Boston, stayed at Cole’s Inn. During his time there, he behaved himself well and paid attention to the country he came to explore. He often spent time with Sir Henry Vane, visiting Maverick at Noddle’s Island, and returned to England with Vane in August 1637.
His estate in England was a small one in Teffont Evias, or Ewyas, Wilts, near Hinton Station, and in the church there may still be seen the tombs of the Leys. He also had a reversion to lands in Heywood, Wilts.
His estate in England was a small one in Teffont Evias, or Ewyas, Wilts, near Hinton Station, and in the church there may still be seen the tombs of the Leys. He also had a reversion to lands in Heywood, Wilts.
In 1649 he compounded with Parliament for his lands and giving bond was allowed to depart from England to the plantations in America.
In 1649, he made a deal with Parliament regarding his lands and, after signing a bond, was allowed to leave England for the colonies in America.
On the restoration of Charles II. in 1661, the Earl returned to England and in the next year was assisted by the King to fit out an expedition to the West Indies. In 1665 he commanded “that huge ship,” the Old James, and in the great victorious sea fight of June 3 with the Dutch was slain, with Rear Admiral Sansum, Lords Portland, Muskerry, and others.
On the restoration of Charles II in 1661, the Earl went back to England, and the following year, the King helped him put together an expedition to the West Indies. In 1665, he commanded that massive ship, the Old James, and in the major victorious naval battle on June 3 against the Dutch, he was killed, along with Rear Admiral Sansum, Lords Portland, Muskerry, and others.
[Pg 75]He died without issue and the title went to his uncle, in whom the title became extinct, to be revived later in the more celebrated Duke, of the Churchill family.
[Pg 75]He died without any children, and the title passed to his uncle, but it became extinct with him, only to be revived later by the more famous Duke from the Churchill family.
It was shortly after the Earl’s departure that Cole was disarmed for his sympathy for his neighbor on the south, Mrs. Ann Hutchinson, and he was also fined at the same time for disorders at his house. In the following spring he was given permission to sell his house, to which he had just built an addition, and he disposed of it to Capt. Robert Sedgwick in February, 1638.
It was soon after the Earl left that Cole was penalized for sympathizing with his neighbor to the south, Mrs. Ann Hutchinson, and he was also fined at the same time for disturbances happening at his home. The next spring, he was allowed to sell his house, to which he had just added an extension, and he sold it to Capt. Robert Sedgwick in February 1638.
Cole then removed to a house erroneously noted by some as the first inn, situated next his son-in-law, Edmund Grosse, near the shore on North Street. This he sold in 1645 to George Halsall and bought other land of Valentine Hill.
Cole then moved to a house mistakenly identified by some as the first inn, located next to his son-in-law, Edmund Grosse, near the shore on North Street. He sold this house in 1645 to George Halsall and purchased other land from Valentine Hill.
THE BAKERS’ ARMS
THE BAKERS' ARMS
VII.
THE BAKERS’ ARMS.
The Bakers' Arms.
Predecessor of the Green Dragon.
Forerunner of the Green Dragon.
Thomas Hawkins, biscuit baker, and a brother of James Hawkins, bricklayer, was born in England in 1608. He was a proprietor in Boston in 1636; his wife Hannah was admitted to the church there in 1641, and that year his son Abraham, born in 1637, was baptized. His home lot was on the west side of Washington Street, the second north of Court Street. He also had one quarter of an acre near the Mill Cove, and a house bought in 1645 from John Trotman.
Thomas Hawkins, a biscuit baker and brother of James Hawkins, a bricklayer, was born in England in 1608. He owned property in Boston in 1636; his wife Hannah was admitted to the church there in 1641, and that year their son Abraham, born in 1637, was baptized. Their home lot was on the west side of Washington Street, the second lot north of Court Street. He also owned a quarter of an acre near Mill Cove and a house purchased in 1645 from John Trotman.
In 1662 James Johnson, glover, sold three quarters of an acre of marsh and upland, bounded on the north and east by the Mill Cove, to Hawkins. The latter was living by the Mill Cove by this time in a house built in 1649, and beside keeping his bake house he kept a cook shop, and also entertained with refreshments his customers by serving beer. A mortgage of the property, in 1663, to Simon Lynde discloses, besides the dwelling and bake house, a stable, brew house, outhouses, and three garden plots on the upland. In 1667 Hawkins was furnished £200 by the Rev. Thomas Thacher to cancel this mortgage. The property extended from the Mill Pond to Hanover Street, and was[Pg 77] bounded north by Union Street, and was 280 feet by 104 feet—about two thirds of an acre in area.
In 1662, James Johnson, a glover, sold three-quarters of an acre of marsh and upland, with the Mill Cove to the north and east, to Hawkins. By this time, Hawkins was living by the Mill Cove in a house built in 1649. In addition to operating his bakehouse, he ran a cook shop and served refreshments to his customers, including beer. A mortgage on the property in 1663 to Simon Lynde revealed, aside from the dwelling and bakehouse, a stable, brew house, outhouses, and three garden plots on the upland. In 1667, the Rev. Thomas Thacher provided Hawkins with £200 to pay off this mortgage. The property stretched from the Mill Pond to Hanover Street, was[Pg 77] bordered to the north by Union Street, and measured 280 feet by 104 feet—about two-thirds of an acre.
Thacher had married Margaret, widow of Jacob Sheafe and daughter of Henry Webb, a wealthy merchant. Mrs. Sheafe had a daughter, Mehitabel, who married her cousin, Sampson Sheafe. Mr. Thacher assigned the mortgage to Sampson Sheafe, and on 31 October, 1670, the time of payment having expired, Sheafe obtained judgment for possession of the property, which had become known as the “Bakers’ Arms,” which Hawkins had kept since 1665 as a house of entertainment.
Thacher had married Margaret, the widow of Jacob Sheafe and daughter of Henry Webb, a wealthy merchant. Mrs. Sheafe had a daughter, Mehitabel, who married her cousin, Sampson Sheafe. Mr. Thacher transferred the mortgage to Sampson Sheafe, and on October 31, 1670, when the payment was due, Sheafe got a legal ruling for possession of the property, which had come to be known as the "Bakers’ Arms," a tavern that Hawkins had run since 1665.
Hawkins had married a second wife, and in January, 1671, Rebecca Hawkins deeded her rights in the property to Sheafe. 15 May, 1672, Hawkins petitioned the General Court, and complained that he had been turned out of doors and his household property seized by Sheafe; that his houses and land were worth £800, and that Sheafe had only advanced £175. He asked for an appraisement, and the prayer of the petitioner was allowed.
Hawkins had married a second wife, and in January 1671, Rebecca Hawkins transferred her rights to the property to Sheafe. On May 15, 1672, Hawkins petitioned the General Court, complaining that Sheafe had evicted him and seized his household belongings; that his houses and land were worth £800, while Sheafe had only contributed £175. He requested an appraisal, and the petitioner's request was granted.
In 1673 Hawkins sued Sheafe in the County Court for selling some brewing utensils, a pump, sign, ladder, cooler and mash fat (wooden vessel containing eight bushels) taken from the brew house. He also objected to items in Sheafe’s account against him, such as “Goodman Drury’s shingling the house and Goodman Cooper whitening it.” At this time we find two dwelling houses on the lot. The easterly house Sheafe sold in May, 1673, to John Howlet, and this became known as the Star Tavern.
In 1673, Hawkins took Sheafe to the County Court for selling some brewing tools, including a pump, a sign, a ladder, a cooler, and a mash fat (a wooden container that holds eight bushels) taken from the brewery. He also disputed charges in Sheafe’s account against him, such as “Goodman Drury's work on the house and Goodman Cooper's painting it.” At this time, there were two houses on the lot. Sheafe sold the eastern house in May 1673 to John Howlet, which became known as the Star Tavern.
[Pg 78]On 10 April, 1673, Sampson Sheafe sold to William Stoughton the west portion of the Hawkins property.
[Pg 78]On April 10, 1673, Sampson Sheafe sold the western part of the Hawkins property to William Stoughton.
In 1678 Mrs. Hawkins petitioned the General Court in the matter, and also the town to sell wine and strong water, on account of the weak condition of her husband and his necessity. 11 June, 1680, the General Court allowed her eleven pounds in clear of all claims and incumbrances. Hawkins having died, she had married, 4 June, 1680, John Stebbins, a baker. Stebbins died 4 December, 1681, aged 70, and the widow Rebecca Stebbins was licensed as an innkeeper in 1690.
In 1678, Mrs. Hawkins asked the General Court for permission, as well as the town, to sell wine and strong liquor due to her husband's poor health and their needs. On June 11, 1680, the General Court granted her eleven pounds, cleared of all claims and debts. After Hawkins passed away, she married John Stebbins, a baker, on June 4, 1680. Stebbins died on December 4, 1681, at the age of 70, and the widow Rebecca Stebbins was licensed as an innkeeper in 1690.
In 1699 the widow Stebbins, then 77 years old, testified as to her husband Thomas Hawkins having the south-east corner or sea end of half a warehouse at the Draw Bridge foot, which he purchased from Joshua Scotto and which Hawkins sold in 1657 to Edward Tyng. That Hawkins had used it for the landing and housing of corn for his trade as a baker. That he had bought the sea end for the convenience of vessels to land. It is probable the portion sold to Stoughton had but a frontage of two hundred and four feet on Union Street. Sheafe had torn down part of the building and made repairs, and had as tenant of the “Bakers’ Arms” Nicholas Wilmot. Wilmot came to Boston about 1650. In 1674 he was allowed by the town to sell beer and give entertainment, and in 1682 he was licensed as an innholder.
In 1699, widow Stebbins, then 77 years old, testified about her husband Thomas Hawkins owning the southeast corner or sea end of half a warehouse at the foot of the Draw Bridge. He bought it from Joshua Scotto, and Hawkins sold it in 1657 to Edward Tyng. Hawkins used it for landing and storing corn for his baking business. He bought the sea end for easier access for vessels to unload. It's likely the portion sold to Stoughton only had a frontage of two hundred and four feet on Union Street. Sheafe had torn down part of the building and made repairs, and Nicholas Wilmot was the tenant of the "Bakers’ Arms." Wilmot came to Boston around 1650. In 1674, the town allowed him to sell beer and provide entertainment, and in 1682, he was licensed as an innkeeper.
By his wife Mary he had Elizabeth, who married (1) Caleb Rawlins, an innkeeper, who died in 1693, and (2) Richard Newland; Abigail, who married Abraham Adams, an innkeeper; Hannah, who married[Pg 79] Nathaniel Adams of Charlestown, blockmaker; Mary, who married John Alger; and Ann, the youngest, who married Joseph Allen. There were also two sons, Samuel and John Wilmot. Nicholas Wilmot died in 1684, and his widow in a very short time married Abraham Smith, to assist in carrying on the tavern.
By his wife Mary, he had Elizabeth, who married (1) Caleb Rawlins, an innkeeper who died in 1693, and (2) Richard Newland; Abigail, who married Abraham Adams, another innkeeper; Hannah, who married[Pg 79] Nathaniel Adams of Charlestown, a blockmaker; Mary, who married John Alger; and Ann, the youngest, who married Joseph Allen. There were also two sons, Samuel and John Wilmot. Nicholas Wilmot died in 1684, and shortly after, his widow married Abraham Smith to help manage the tavern.
The tavern, even at this time, was of some size, and additions had perhaps been built by Stoughton. The rooms were designated by names, as in the taverns of Old England. In the chamber called the “Cross Keys” met the Scots Charitable Society, a benefit society for the residents of Scottish birth and sojourners from Scotland, two of the officers keeping each a key of the money box. The most noted of the chambers was that of the “Green Dragon,” which at about this time gave the name of “Green Dragon” to the tavern. There were also the “Anchor,” the “Castle,” the “Sun,” and the “Rose” chambers, which were also the names of other taverns in the town at that period. One cold December night in 1690, just after midnight, a fire occurred in the “Green Dragon,” and it was burnt to the ground and very little of its contents saved. Snow on the houses in the vicinity was the means of preventing the spread of the flames, with the fact that there was no wind at the time. Within a year or two the tavern was rebuilt by Stoughton and again occupied by Abraham Smith, who died in 1696, leaving an estate of £273: 19: 5. His widow, Mary Smith, died shortly after her husband. In her will she freed her negro women Sue and Maria, and the deeds of manumission are recorded in the Suffolk Deeds.
The tavern was fairly large for its time, and it might have been expanded by Stoughton. The rooms were labeled with names like those in the taverns of Old England. In the room known as the “Cross Keys” met the Scots Charitable Society, a benefit organization for people of Scottish descent and visitors from Scotland, with two officers each holding a key to the money box. The most famous room was the “Green Dragon,” which around this time gave its name to the tavern. There were also the “Anchor,” the “Castle,” the “Sun,” and the “Rose” rooms, which were also the names of other taverns in town at that time. One cold December night in 1690, just after midnight, a fire broke out in the “Green Dragon,” burning it to the ground and leaving very little of its contents intact. Snow on the nearby houses helped prevent the flames from spreading, along with the lack of wind at the time. Within a year or two, Stoughton rebuilt the tavern, which was again run by Abraham Smith, who died in 1696, leaving behind an estate valued at £273: 19: 5. His widow, Mary Smith, passed away shortly after her husband. In her will, she freed her enslaved women Sue and Maria, and the manumission deeds are recorded in the Suffolk Deeds.
VIII.
THE GOLDEN BALL TAVERN.
The Golden Ball Tavern.
In the manuscript collections of the Bostonian Society is a plan showing the earliest owners of the land bordering on the Corn Market. On the site now the south corner of Faneuil Hall Square and Merchants’ Row is noted the possession of Edward Tyng. Another manuscript of the Society, equally unique, is an apprentice indenture of Robert Orchard in 1662. In the account of Orchard, printed in the Publications of the Society, Vol. IV, is given the continued history of Tyng’s land after it came into the possession of Theodore Atkinson. In the history of the sign of the Golden Ball Tavern we continue the story of the same plot of land.
In the manuscript collections of the Bostonian Society, there’s a plan showing the first owners of the land around the Corn Market. On the site that is now the southeast corner of Faneuil Hall Square and Merchants’ Row, the land is noted as being owned by Edward Tyng. Another unique manuscript from the Society is an apprentice indenture for Robert Orchard from 1662. The account of Orchard, printed in the Publications of the Society, Vol. IV, details the ongoing history of Tyng’s land after it was taken over by Theodore Atkinson. The history of the sign of the Golden Ball Tavern continues the story of the same piece of land.
Originally owned by Edward Tyng, and later by Theodore Atkinson, and then by the purchase of the property by Henry Deering, who married the widow of Atkinson’s son Theodore. All this was told in the Orchard article.
Originally owned by Edward Tyng, then by Theodore Atkinson, and later by Henry Deering, who bought the property after marrying the widow of Atkinson’s son Theodore. All this was discussed in the Orchard article.
It was about 1700 that Henry Deering erected on his land on the north side of a passage leading from Merchants’ Row, on its west side, a building which was soon occupied as a tavern. Samuel Tyley, who had kept the Star in 1699, the Green Dragon in 1701, and [Pg 81]later the Salutation at the North End, left this last tavern in 1711 to take Mr. Deering’s house in Merchants’ Row, the Golden Ball.
It was around 1700 when Henry Deering built a structure on his land on the north side of a passage leading from Merchants’ Row, on its west side, which quickly turned into a tavern. Samuel Tyley, who had managed the Star in 1699, the Green Dragon in 1701, and later the Salutation at the North End, left this last tavern in 1711 to take over Mr. Deering’s place in Merchants’ Row, the Golden Ball.
SIGN OF THE BUNCH OF GRAPES
Now in the Masonic Temple
SIGN OF THE BUNCH OF GRAPES
Now in the Masonic Temple
SIGN OF THE GOLDEN BALL
Now in the possession of the Bostonian Society
SIGN OF THE GOLDEN BALL
Now in the hands of the Bostonian Society
Henry Deering died in 1717, and was buried with his wife on the same day. He had been a man greatly interested in public affairs. In 1707 he had proposed the erection of a building for the custody of the town’s records; at the same time he proposed a wharf at the foot of the street, now State Street, then extending only as far as Merchants’ Row. This was soon built as “Boston Pier” or “Long Wharf.” He also presented a memorial for the “Preventing Disolation by Fire” in the town.
Henry Deering died in 1717 and was buried with his wife on the same day. He was a man deeply involved in public affairs. In 1707, he suggested building a facility to store the town's records. At the same time, he proposed a wharf at the end of the street, now known as State Street, which then only went as far as Merchants’ Row. This was quickly built and became known as “Boston Pier” or “Long Wharf.” He also presented a proposal for “Preventing Desolation by Fire” in the town.
In the division of Deering’s estate in 1720 the dwelling house in the occupation of Samuel Tyley, known by the name of the Golden Ball, with privilege in the passage on the south and in the well, was given his daughter Mary, the wife of William Wilson. Mrs. Wilson, in her will drawn up in 1729, then a widow, devised the house to her namesake and niece, Mary, daughter of her brother, Capt. Henry Deering. At the time of Mrs. Wilson’s death in 1753 her niece was the wife of John Gooch, whom she married in 1736. Samuel Tyley died in 1722, while still the landlord of the Golden Ball.
In the division of Deering’s estate in 1720, the house occupied by Samuel Tyley, known as the Golden Ball, along with access to the passage on the south and the well, was given to his daughter Mary, who was married to William Wilson. Mrs. Wilson, who was a widow when she wrote her will in 1729, bequeathed the house to her namesake and niece, Mary, the daughter of her brother, Capt. Henry Deering. By the time Mrs. Wilson passed away in 1753, her niece was married to John Gooch, whom she had wed in 1736. Samuel Tyley died in 1722 while still being the landlord of the Golden Ball.
The next landlord of whom we have knowledge was William Patten, who had taken the Green Dragon in 1714. In 1733 he was host at the Golden Ball, where he stayed till 1736, when he took the inn on West Street, opposite the schoolhouse, and next to the estate later known as the Washington Gardens.
The next landlord we know about was William Patten, who took over the Green Dragon in 1714. In 1733, he was the host at the Golden Ball, where he remained until 1736, when he took the inn on West Street, across from the schoolhouse, next to the property that later became known as the Washington Gardens.
[Pg 82]He was succeeded by Humphrey Scarlett, who died January 4, 1739-40, aged forty-six, and is buried on Copp’s Hill with his first wife Mehitable (Pierce) Scarlett. He married as a second wife Mary Wentworth. By the first wife he had a daughter Mary (b. 1719), who married Jedediah Lincoln, Jr., and by the second wife a son named Humphrey. When the son was a year old, in 1735, two negro servants of Scarlett, by name Yaw and Caesar, were indicted for attempting to poison the family one morning at breakfast, by putting ratsbane or arsenic in the chocolate. Four months after Scarlett’s death his widow married William Ireland.
[Pg 82]He was succeeded by Humphrey Scarlett, who died on January 4, 1739-40, at the age of forty-six and is buried on Copp’s Hill with his first wife, Mehitable (Pierce) Scarlett. He married Mary Wentworth as his second wife. With his first wife, he had a daughter named Mary (b. 1719), who married Jedediah Lincoln, Jr., and with his second wife, he had a son named Humphrey. When the son was a year old, in 1735, two Black servants of Scarlett, named Yaw and Caesar, were indicted for attempting to poison the family one morning at breakfast by putting rat poison or arsenic in the chocolate. Four months after Scarlett’s death, his widow married William Ireland.
Richard Gridley, born in Boston in 1710, was apprenticed to Theodore Atkinson, merchant, and later became a gauger. In 1735 he kept a tavern on Common Street, now Tremont Street. Here by order of the General Court he entertained four Indians, chiefs of the Pigwacket tribe, at an expense of £40 “for drinks, tobacco, victuals, and dressing.” Five pounds of this was for extra trouble. The Committee thought the charges extravagant and cut him down to £33 for their entertainment from June 28 to July 9. In 1738 he took the Golden Ball. His fame in later years, at Louisburg and elsewhere, as an engineer and artillery officer is well known.
Richard Gridley, born in Boston in 1710, was apprenticed to Theodore Atkinson, a merchant, and later became a gauger. In 1735, he ran a tavern on Common Street, now Tremont Street. By order of the General Court, he hosted four Indians, chiefs of the Pigwacket tribe, at a cost of £40 “for drinks, tobacco, food, and accommodations.” Five pounds of that was for extra effort. The Committee found the charges excessive and reduced his payment to £33 for their stay from June 28 to July 9. In 1738, he took the Golden Ball. His later reputation as an engineer and artillery officer at Louisburg and other places is well known.
Gridley was followed as landlord in 1740 by Increase Blake. He was born in Dorchester in 1699 and married Anne, daughter of Edward and Susanna (Harrison) Gray. Her parents are noted in Boston history for their ownership of the rope-walks at Fort Hill. Blake, a tinplate worker, held the office of sealer of[Pg 83] weights and measures, and in 1737 leased a shop of the town at the head of the Town Dock. He later lived near Battery March, and was burned out in the fire of 1760.
Gridley was succeeded as landlord in 1740 by Increase Blake. He was born in Dorchester in 1699 and married Anne, the daughter of Edward and Susanna (Harrison) Gray. Her parents are noted in Boston history for owning the rope-walks at Fort Hill. Blake, a tinplate worker, served as the sealer of[Pg 83] weights and measures, and in 1737 he leased a shop from the town at the head of the Town Dock. He later lived near Battery March and lost his home in the fire of 1760.
In 1715 there was born in Salem John Marston. He married in 1740 Hannah Welland, and by her had three daughters. In 1745, at the first siege of Louisburg, he was a first lieutenant in the fifth company, commanded by Capt. Charles King, in Colonel Jeremiah Moulton’s regiment. His wife having died, he married her sister, Mrs. Elizabeth (Welland) Blake. His second wife died, and he married in 1755 Elizabeth Greenwood. He was landlord at the Golden Ball as early as 1757. In 1760 he purchased a house on the southwest corner of Hanover and Cross streets, and later other property on Copp’s Hill. He is said to have been a member of the “Boston Tea Party.” During the Revolution he was known as “Captain” Marston, and attended to military matters in Boston, supplying muskets to the townspeople as a committeeman of the town. He continued to keep a house of entertainment and went to the Bunch of Grapes in 1775. There he was cautioned in 1778 for allowing gaming in his house, such as playing backgammon. He died in August, 1786, while keeping the Bunch of Grapes on King, now State Street, and there he was succeeded by his widow in retailing liquors. He left an estate valued at £2000.
In 1715, John Marston was born in Salem. He married Hannah Welland in 1740, and they had three daughters. In 1745, during the first siege of Louisburg, he served as a first lieutenant in the fifth company, led by Capt. Charles King, in Colonel Jeremiah Moulton’s regiment. After his wife passed away, he married her sister, Mrs. Elizabeth (Welland) Blake. His second wife also died, and in 1755, he married Elizabeth Greenwood. He was the landlord of the Golden Ball as early as 1757. In 1760, he bought a house on the southwest corner of Hanover and Cross streets, and later acquired more property on Copp’s Hill. He is said to have been a member of the “Boston Tea Party.” During the Revolution, he was known as “Captain” Marston and took care of military matters in Boston, supplying muskets to the townspeople as a committeeman. He continued to operate a tavern and went to the Bunch of Grapes in 1775. In 1778, he was warned for allowing gaming in his establishment, like backgammon. He died in August 1786 while running the Bunch of Grapes on King, now State Street, and his widow took over the business of selling liquor. He left behind an estate worth £2000.
Benjamin Loring, born in Hingham in 1736, married Sarah Smith in Boston in 1771. During the Revolution he kept the Golden Ball. He died in the spring of[Pg 84] 1782, and his widow succeeded him and kept the tavern till her death in 1790.
Benjamin Loring, born in Hingham in 1736, married Sarah Smith in Boston in 1771. During the Revolution, he ran the Golden Ball. He passed away in the spring of[Pg 84] 1782, and his widow took over and managed the tavern until her death in 1790.
From the inventory of her estate it appears that the house consisted, on the ground floor, of a large front room and small front room, the bar and kitchen, and closets in the entry. A front and a back chamber, front upper chamber, and another upper chamber and garret completed the list of rooms. On the shelves of the bar rested large and small china bowls for punch, decanters for wine, tumblers, wine glasses, and case bottles. There also was found a small sieve and lemon squeezer, with a Bible, Psalm, and Prayer Books. On the wall of the front chamber hung an old Highland sword.
From the inventory of her estate, it seems that the house had, on the ground floor, a large front room, a small front room, the bar and kitchen, and closets in the entry. There was also a front and a back chamber, a front upper chamber, and another upper chamber and attic, completing the list of rooms. On the shelves of the bar were large and small china bowls for punch, decanters for wine, tumblers, wine glasses, and case bottles. There was also a small sieve and a lemon squeezer, along with a Bible, Psalms, and prayer books. An old Highland sword hung on the wall of the front chamber.
The cash on hand at the widow’s death consisted of 4 English shillings, 20 New England shillings, 10 English sixpences, a French crown, a piece of Spanish money, half a guinea, and bank notes to the value of £4: 10. In one of the chambers was 8483 Continental paper money, of no appraised value.
The cash available at the widow's death included 4 English shillings, 20 New England shillings, 10 English sixpences, a French crown, a piece of Spanish currency, half a guinea, and bank notes worth £4: 10. In one of the rooms was 8483 Continental paper money, which had no appraised value.
Benjamin Loring, at his death, left his share of one half a house in Hingham to be improved for his wife during her life, then to his sisters, Abigail and Elizabeth, and ultimately to go to Benjamin, the son of his brother Joseph Loring of Hingham. The younger Benjamin became a citizen of Boston, a captain of the “Ancients,” and a colonel in the militia. He started in business as a bookbinder and later was a stationer and a manufacturer of blank books, leaving quite a fortune at his death in 1859. His portrait is displayed in the Armory of the Artillery Company. A portrait[Pg 85] of the elder Loring (the landlord of the Golden Ball) shows him with a comely face and wearing a tie-wig.
Benjamin Loring, at his death, left his share of half a house in Hingham to be used by his wife during her lifetime, then to his sisters, Abigail and Elizabeth, and finally to go to Benjamin, the son of his brother Joseph Loring of Hingham. The younger Benjamin became a resident of Boston, a captain of the “Ancients,” and a colonel in the militia. He started his career as a bookbinder and later became a stationer and a manufacturer of blank books, leaving behind a considerable fortune at his death in 1859. His portrait is displayed in the Armory of the Artillery Company. A portrait[Pg 85] of the elder Loring (the landlord of the Golden Ball) depicts him with an attractive face and wearing a tie-wig.
The Columbian Centinel of December 3, 1794, had the following advertisement:
The Columbian Centinel of December 3, 1794, had the following advertisement:
For sale, if applied for immediately, The Noted Tavern in the Street leading from the Market to State street known by the name of the Golden Ball. It has been improved as a tavern for a number of years, and is an excellent stand for a store. Inquire of Ebenezer Storer, in Sudbury Street.
For sale, if you apply right away, The Noted Tavern on the street leading from the Market to State Street, known as the Golden Ball. It has been run as a tavern for several years and is a great spot for a store. Inquire with Ebenezer Storer on Sudbury Street.
Mr. Storer acted as the agent of Mary, wife of the Rev. Benjamin Gerrish Gray, of Windsor, N. S., who was the heiress of Mary Gooch, who resided at Marshfield, Mass., at the time of her death. Mr. Gray was a son of Joseph Gray of Boston and Halifax, N. S., a loyalist. Mary, the heiress, was a daughter of Nathaniel Ray Thomas, a loyalist of Marshfield, who had married Sally Deering, a sister of Mary Gooch of Marshfield.
Mr. Storer was the agent for Mary, the wife of Rev. Benjamin Gerrish Gray from Windsor, N.S., who inherited from Mary Gooch, who lived in Marshfield, Mass., when she passed away. Mr. Gray was the son of Joseph Gray from Boston and Halifax, N.S., a loyalist. Mary, the heiress, was a daughter of Nathaniel Ray Thomas, a loyalist from Marshfield, who had married Sally Deering, the sister of Mary Gooch from Marshfield.
The property was sold by Mrs. Gray, June 9, 1795, to James Tisdale, a merchant, who bought also adjoining lots. It was at this time that the Golden Ball disappeared from Merchants’ Row, where it had hung as a landmark for about a century. Tisdale soon sold his lots to Joseph Blake, a merchant, who erected warehouses on the site.
The property was sold by Mrs. Gray on June 9, 1795, to James Tisdale, a merchant, who also bought the neighboring lots. It was at this time that the Golden Ball vanished from Merchants’ Row, where it had served as a landmark for around a century. Tisdale quickly sold his lots to Joseph Blake, another merchant, who built warehouses on the site.
There was still an attraction in the Golden Ball, however, and in 1799 we find it swinging in Wing’s Lane, now Elm Street, for Nathan Winship. He was the son of Jonathan, and born in Cambridge. In 1790 he was living in Roxbury. He died in 1818, leaving a daughter Lucy. He had parted with the Golden Ball long before his death.
There was still a draw to the Golden Ball, though, and in 1799 we find it hanging in Wing’s Lane, now Elm Street, for Nathan Winship. He was the son of Jonathan and was born in Cambridge. By 1790, he was living in Roxbury. He passed away in 1818, leaving behind a daughter named Lucy. He had sold the Golden Ball long before his death.
[Pg 86]In 1805 there was erected in South Boston a building by one Garrett Murphy. It stood on Fourth Street, between Dorchester Avenue and A Street, and here he displayed the Golden Ball for five years, as his hotel sign. Just a century ago, in 1810, for want of patronage, it became a private residence. About 1840 the hotel was reopened as the South Boston Hotel.
[Pg 86]In 1805, a building was put up in South Boston by Garrett Murphy. It was located on Fourth Street, between Dorchester Avenue and A Street, and he used the Golden Ball as his hotel sign for five years. Exactly a hundred years ago, in 1810, due to a lack of customers, it turned into a private home. Around 1840, the hotel reopened as the South Boston Hotel.
From South Boston the Golden Ball rolled back to Elm Street, and in 1811 hung at the entrance of Joseph Bradley’s Tavern. From this Golden Ball started the stages for Quebec on Mondays at four in the morning. They arrived at Concord, N. H., at seven in the evening. Leaving there at four Tuesday morning, they reached Hanover, N. H., at two in the afternoon, and continuing on arrived at Haverhill, N. H., near Woodsville, at nine Wednesday evening.
From South Boston, the Golden Ball rolled back to Elm Street, and in 1811 it hung at the entrance of Joseph Bradley’s Tavern. From this Golden Ball, stages to Quebec left on Mondays at four in the morning. They arrived in Concord, N.H., at seven in the evening. Leaving there at four Tuesday morning, they reached Hanover, N.H., at two in the afternoon, and after continuing on, they arrived in Haverhill, N.H., near Woodsville, at nine Wednesday evening.
The next appearance of the Golden Ball was on Congress Street, where at No. 13 was the new tavern of Thomas Murphy in 1816.
The next appearance of the Golden Ball was on Congress Street, where at No. 13 was the new tavern of Thomas Murphy in 1816.
Henry Cabot, born 1812, was a painter, and first began business at 2 Scollay’s Building in 1833. He removed to Blackstone Street in 1835, where he was located at various numbers till 1858, when he went to North Street. He resided in Chelsea from 1846 till his death in 1875. The occupation of this owner of the Golden Ball was that of an ornamental sign and standard painter. His choice of a sign was not according to the traditions of his trade, and did not conform with the painters’ arms of the London Guild Company, which were placed on the building in Hanover Street by an earlier member of that craft. It was no worse[Pg 87] choice, however, than a sign which some of us may recall as swinging on Washington Street, near Dock Square, fifty years ago, “The Sign of the Dying Warrior, N. M. Phillips, Sign Painter.”
Henry Cabot, born in 1812, was a painter who started his business in 1833 at 2 Scollay’s Building. In 1835, he moved to Blackstone Street, where he had various addresses until 1858, when he relocated to North Street. He lived in Chelsea from 1846 until his death in 1875. This owner of the Golden Ball was primarily an ornamental sign and standard painter. His choice of a sign didn’t follow the traditions of his trade and didn’t match the painters’ arms of the London Guild Company, which had been placed on a building in Hanover Street by an earlier member of that craft. However, it was no worse[Pg 87] than a sign that some of us might remember swinging on Washington Street, near Dock Square, fifty years ago, “The Sign of the Dying Warrior, N. M. Phillips, Sign Painter.”
The Golden Ball was the sign anciently hung out in London by the silk mercers, and was used by them to the end of the eighteenth century. Mr. Cabot’s choice of a location to start his business life was more appropriate than his sign, as in the block of shops, owned by the town, connecting on the west side of the Scollay’s Building, had been the paint shop of Samuel, brother of Christopher Gore.
The Golden Ball was an old sign displayed in London by silk merchants and was used until the end of the eighteenth century. Mr. Cabot’s choice of where to begin his business was more fitting than his sign, as in the row of shops owned by the town, located on the west side of Scollay’s Building, had been the paint shop of Samuel, brother of Christopher Gore.
COFFEE URN USED IN THE GREEN DRAGON.
COFFEE URN USED IN THE GREEN DRAGON.
This interesting relic was given to the Bostonian Society during 1915. It is a coffee urn of Sheffield ware, formerly in the Green Dragon Tavern, which stood on Union Street from 1697 to 1832, and was a famous meeting place of the Patriots of the Revolution. It is globular in form and rests on a base, and inside is still to be seen the cylindrical piece of iron which, when heated, kept the delectable liquid contents of the urn hot until imbibed by the frequenters of the tavern. The Green Dragon Tavern site, now occupied by a business structure, is owned by the St. Andrew’s Lodge of Free Masons of Boston, and at a recent gathering of the Lodge on St. Andrew’s Day the urn was exhibited to the assembled brethren.
This fascinating artifact was donated to the Bostonian Society in 1915. It’s a coffee urn made of Sheffield ware, which used to be at the Green Dragon Tavern, a well-known meeting spot for the Revolution Patriots that stood on Union Street from 1697 to 1832. The urn is round in shape and sits on a base. Inside, there’s still a cylindrical piece of iron that, when heated, kept the delicious liquid inside the urn warm until it was enjoyed by the tavern's visitors. The site of the Green Dragon Tavern, now home to a business building, is owned by the St. Andrew’s Lodge of Free Masons of Boston. At a recent gathering of the Lodge on St. Andrew’s Day, the urn was displayed to the members present.
When the contents of the tavern were sold, the urn was bought by Mrs. Elizabeth Harrington, who then kept a famous boarding house on Pearl Street, in a building owned by the Quincy family. In 1847 the house was razed and replaced by the Quincy Block, and Mrs. Harrington removed to High Street and from there to Chauncey Place. Some of the prominent men of Boston boarded with her for many years. At her death the urn was given to her daughter, Mrs. John R. Bradford, and it has now been presented to the Society by Miss Phebe C. Bradford of Boston, granddaughter of Mrs. Elizabeth Harrington.
When the tavern's contents were sold, the urn was purchased by Mrs. Elizabeth Harrington, who ran a well-known boarding house on Pearl Street, in a building owned by the Quincy family. In 1847, the house was demolished and replaced by the Quincy Block, and Mrs. Harrington moved to High Street and then to Chauncey Place. Some of Boston's prominent men boarded with her for many years. Upon her passing, the urn was given to her daughter, Mrs. John R. Bradford, and it has now been donated to the Society by Miss Phebe C. Bradford of Boston, the granddaughter of Mrs. Elizabeth Harrington.
MAP SHOWING LOCATION OF COLE’S INN, WITH WHICH HANCOCK TAVERN HAS BEEN CONFOUNDED
Dotted lines indicate the present Williams Court (Pie Alley)
MAP SHOWING LOCATION OF COLE’S INN, WHICH HAS BEEN CONFUSED WITH HANCOCK TAVERN
Dotted lines indicate the current Williams Court (Pie Alley)
IX.
THE HANCOCK TAVERN.
THE HANCOCK TAVERN.
“As an old landmark the Hancock Tavern is a failure. There was not an old window in the house; the nails were Bridgewater nails, the timbers were mill-sawed, and the front of it was of face brick, which were not made even in 1800. At the time of the Revolution it was merely a four-room dwelling house of twelve windows, and the first license ever given to it as an inn was in 1790. The building recently demolished was erected during the years 1807 to 1812.”
“As an old landmark, the Hancock Tavern is a failure. There wasn’t an old window in the place; the nails were Bridgewater nails, the timbers were sawed at a mill, and the front was made of face brick, which hadn’t even been made in 1800. At the time of the Revolution, it was just a four-room house with twelve windows, and it first received an inn license in 1790. The building that was recently torn down was built between 1807 and 1812.”
With the above words, Edward W. McGlenen, city registrar, effectually settled the question June 3, 1903, at a meeting of the New England Historic Genealogical Society, as to the widely credited report that it was in the Hancock Tavern, which for many years stood on Corn Court, the members of the Boston Tea Party met, disguised themselves as Indians, and from there journeyed to Griffin’s Wharf, where they threw overboard the obnoxious tea.
With the above words, Edward W. McGlenen, the city registrar, effectively settled the question on June 3, 1903, at a meeting of the New England Historic Genealogical Society, regarding the widely believed report that it was in the Hancock Tavern, which stood for many years on Corn Court, where the members of the Boston Tea Party met, dressed as Indians, and from there went to Griffin’s Wharf, where they dumped the hated tea overboard.
It was a special meeting of the society called to hear the report of a special committee appointed “to consider the question of the circumstances attending the formation and execution of the plans for what is known as the Boston Tea Party.” This committee was made[Pg 90] up of men who for years had been students of that very subject, and the result of their researches is interesting and conclusive. William C. Bates was chairman, and his associates were Edward W. McGlenen, the Rev. Anson Titus, William T. Eustis, and Herbert G. Briggs. The members of the society were present in large numbers, and Marshall P. Wilder Hall was well filled.
It was a special meeting of the society called to hear the report from a special committee appointed “to look into the circumstances surrounding the planning and execution of what is known as the Boston Tea Party.” This committee was made[Pg 90] up of individuals who had studied this topic for years, and the findings of their research are both interesting and conclusive. William C. Bates served as chairman, with his associates including Edward W. McGlenen, the Rev. Anson Titus, William T. Eustis, and Herbert G. Briggs. Many society members attended, and Marshall P. Wilder Hall was well filled.
William C. Bates, as chairman of the special committee, spoke of the endeavors of himself and colleagues to avoid ground covered by historians. He said that places of rendezvous for the “Mohawks” are to some extent known, for over half a dozen of the members have left to their descendants the story of where they met and costumed themselves. The four Bradlees met at their sister’s house, corner of Hollis and Tremont streets; Joseph Brewer and others at the foot of Summer Street; John Crane in a carpenter shop on Tremont Street opposite Hollis; Joseph Shedd and a small party in his house on Milk Street, where the Equitable Building now stands; and James Swan in his boarding house on Hanover Street. In the testimony of the descendants, down to 1850 at least, there was no mention of the Hancock Tavern. The place of origin of the Tea Party and who first proposed it are matters of considerable discussion. Many of the party were members of St. Andrew’s Lodge of Masons, which owned the Green Dragon Inn, and the lodge records state that the meeting held on the night of the Tea Party had to be adjourned for lack of attendance, “public matters being of greater importance.”
William C. Bates, as the chair of the special committee, talked about the efforts he and his colleagues made to avoid repeating what historians have already covered. He mentioned that the meeting spots for the “Mohawks” are somewhat known, as over half a dozen members have shared the stories of where they gathered and got dressed up. The four Bradlees met at their sister’s house at the corner of Hollis and Tremont streets; Joseph Brewer and others gathered at the foot of Summer Street; John Crane was in a carpenter shop on Tremont Street across from Hollis; Joseph Shedd hosted a small group at his house on Milk Street, where the Equitable Building now stands; and James Swan was at his boarding house on Hanover Street. According to descendants’ testimonies up to at least 1850, there was no reference to the Hancock Tavern. The origins of the Tea Party and who initially proposed it are topics of much debate. Many attendees were part of St. Andrew’s Lodge of Masons, which owned the Green Dragon Inn, and the lodge records indicate that the meeting on the night of the Tea Party had to be postponed due to a lack of attendance, “since public matters were more important.”
SHEFFIELD PLATE URN
Used in the Green Dragon Tavern, now in possession of the Bostonian Society
SHEFFIELD PLATE URN
Used in the Green Dragon Tavern, now owned by the Bostonian Society
[Pg 91]It is not surprising that so much secrecy has been maintained, because of the danger of lawsuits by the East Indian Company and others. The members of the St. Andrew’s Lodge were all young, many under twenty, the majority under thirty.
[Pg 91]It's not surprising that so much secrecy has been kept due to the risk of lawsuits from the East India Company and others. The members of St. Andrew's Lodge were all young, many under twenty, and most were under thirty.
Mr. McGlenen’s report as to his investigations was especially interesting, settling, as it did, three distinct questions which had been undecided for many years—the location of the inn of Samuel Cole, the location of his residence, and the much mooted point as to whether the “Mohawks” met at the Hancock Tavern for the preparatory steps toward the Boston Tea Party.
Mr. McGlenen's report on his investigations was particularly interesting, as it resolved three distinct questions that had been unresolved for many years—the location of Samuel Cole's inn, the location of his residence, and the widely debated issue of whether the "Mohawks" gathered at the Hancock Tavern to take the preliminary steps for the Boston Tea Party.
All three questions were based on a statement printed in the souvenir of the Hancock Tavern, reading as follows:
All three questions were based on a statement printed in the souvenir of the Hancock Tavern, which read as follows:
On the south side of Faneuil Hall is a passageway through which one may pass into Merchants’ row. It is Corn court, a name known to few of the present day, but in the days gone by as familiar as the Corn market, with which it was connected. In the center of this court stands the oldest tavern in New England. It was opened March 4, 1634, by Samuel Cole. It was surrounded by spacious grounds, which commanded a view of the harbor and its shipping, for at that time the tide covered the spot where Faneuil Hall now stands. It was a popular resort from the beginning, and was frequented by many foreigners of note.
On the south side of Faneuil Hall is a passageway that leads into Merchants’ Row. It’s called Corn Court, a name not well-known today, but in the past, it was as familiar as the Corn Market it was connected to. In the middle of this court stands the oldest tavern in New England. It was opened on March 4, 1634, by Samuel Cole. It used to have spacious grounds with a view of the harbor and its shipping, since, at that time, the tide covered the area where Faneuil Hall now stands. It was a popular hangout from the start and was visited by many notable foreigners.
The seeming authority for these statements and others, connecting it with pre-revolutionary events, said Mr. McGlenen, appears in Rambles in Old Boston by the Rev. E. G. Porter, pages 67 and 68, evidently based on a newspaper article written by William Brazier Duggan, M.D., in the Quincy Patriot for August[Pg 92] 28, 1852, and to a novel entitled The Brigantine by one Ingraham, referring to legendary lore. None of these statements can be confirmed. The confusion has been caused by the statement made many years ago and reprinted as a note in the Book of Possessions, Vol. II, Boston Town Records, that somewhere near the water front Samuel Cole kept an inn; but Letchford’s Note Book, the Town Records, and the Suffolk Deeds prove to the contrary.
The apparent authority behind these claims and others that link them to pre-revolutionary events, according to Mr. McGlenen, can be found in Rambles in Old Boston by Rev. E. G. Porter, on pages 67 and 68. This work seems to rely on a newspaper article by William Brazier Duggan, M.D., published in the Quincy Patriot on August[Pg 92] 28, 1852, and a novel called The Brigantine by someone named Ingraham, which refers to local legends. None of these claims can be verified. The confusion stems from a statement made many years ago and later included as a note in the Book of Possessions, Vol. II, Boston Town Records, suggesting that Samuel Cole operated an inn near the waterfront. However, Letchford’s Note Book, the Town Records, and the Suffolk Deeds demonstrate the opposite.
Samuel Cole’s Inn was kept by him from 1634 to 1638, when he sold out by order of the Colony Court. He purchased a residence near the town dock seven years later. It adjoined the Hancock Tavern lot, and was bounded on the west by the lot originally in the ownership of Isaac Gross, whose son Clement kept the Three Mariners, an ale house which stood west of Pierse’s Alley (Change Avenue) and east of the Sun Tavern.
Samuel Cole’s Inn was managed by him from 1634 to 1638, when he sold it under the orders of the Colony Court. He bought a house near the town dock seven years later. It was next to the Hancock Tavern lot and was bordered on the west by the lot that Isaac Gross originally owned, whose son Clement ran the Three Mariners, a bar that was located west of Pierse’s Alley (Change Avenue) and east of the Sun Tavern.
It is impossible to connect the Hancock Tavern with any pre-Revolutionary event. It was a small house, as described in the Direct Tax of 1798, of two stories, of two rooms each, built of wood, with twelve windows, value $1200. It was first licensed in 1790, and the earliest reference found in print is in the advertisement for the sale of lemons by John Duggan, in the Columbian Centinel in 1794.
It’s impossible to link the Hancock Tavern to any pre-Revolutionary events. It was a small building, as noted in the Direct Tax of 1798, consisting of two stories with two rooms on each floor, made of wood, and had twelve windows, valued at $1200. It received its first license in 1790, and the earliest printed mention found is in an advertisement for the sale of lemons by John Duggan in the Columbian Centinel in 1794.
As to Cole’s Inn, from the records of the Massachusetts Bay Colony Court, it appears that Samuel Cole kept the first inn or ordinary within the town of Boston. In 1638 the court gave him liberty to sell his house for an inn. This he did, disposing of it to[Pg 93] Robert Sedgwick of Charlestown, as shown in Letchford’s Note Book. The town records show that in 1638 Edward Hutchinson, Samuel Cole, Robert Turner, Richard Hutchinson, William Parker, and Richard Brackett were ordered to make a cartway near Mr. Hutchinson’s house, which definitely locates Samuel Cole on the old highway leading to Roxbury, i.e. Washington Street (Town Records, Vol. II, Rec. Com. Report, p. 38).
As for Cole’s Inn, records from the Massachusetts Bay Colony Court indicate that Samuel Cole operated the first inn or ordinary in Boston. In 1638, the court allowed him to sell his house to operate as an inn. He sold it to [Pg 93] Robert Sedgwick of Charlestown, as noted in Letchford’s Note Book. The town records show that in 1638, Edward Hutchinson, Samuel Cole, Robert Turner, Richard Hutchinson, William Parker, and Richard Brackett were instructed to create a cartway near Mr. Hutchinson’s house, which confirms Samuel Cole's location on the old highway leading to Roxbury, namely Washington Street (Town Records, Vol. II, Rec. Com. Report, p. 38).
The Book of Possessions shows in the same report that Valentine Hill had one house and garden bounded with the street on the east, meeting house and Richard Truesdale on the north, Capt. Robert Sedgwick on the south, and the prison yard west.
The Book of Possessions reports that Valentine Hill owned a house and garden bordered by the street to the east, a meeting house and Richard Truesdale to the north, Capt. Robert Sedgwick to the south, and the prison yard to the west.
Major Robert Sedgwick’s house and garden bounded with Thomas Clarke, Robert Turner and the street on the east, Mr. Hutchinson on the south, Valentine Hill on the north, and Henry Messinger west.
Major Robert Sedgwick's house and garden were bordered by Thomas Clarke, Robert Turner, and the street to the east, Mr. Hutchinson to the south, Valentine Hill to the north, and Henry Messinger to the west.
Valentine Hill granted, March 20, 1645, to William Davies, his house and garden bounded on the south with the ordinary now in the possession of James Pen (Suffolk Deeds, Vol. I, p. 60). This presumably is Cole’s Inn, then in the possession of Robert Sedgwick, and occupied by James Pen.
Valentine Hill granted, March 20, 1645, to William Davies, his house and garden bordered on the south by the tavern currently owned by James Pen (Suffolk Deeds, Vol. I, p. 60). This is likely Cole’s Inn, which was then owned by Robert Sedgwick and occupied by James Pen.
The question of Cole’s residence was easily settled by Mr. McGlenen, when he read from deeds showing that in 1645 Valentine Hill sold to Samuel Cole a lot of land near the town dock. Samuel Cole died in 1666, and in his will left his house and lot to his daughter Elizabeth and son John. This property is on the corner of Change Avenue and Faneuil Hall Square,[Pg 94] and is now occupied by W. W. Rawson as a seed store.
The issue of Cole’s residence was quickly resolved by Mr. McGlenen when he referenced deeds indicating that in 1645, Valentine Hill sold a plot of land near the town dock to Samuel Cole. Samuel Cole passed away in 1666, and in his will, he bequeathed his house and land to his daughter Elizabeth and son John. This property sits at the intersection of Change Avenue and Faneuil Hall Square,[Pg 94] and is currently being used by W. W. Rawson as a seed store.
The Hancock Tavern is a distinct piece of property. Mr. McGlenen read from deeds which proved that the land was first owned by John Kenerick of Boston, yeoman, and was first sold to Robert Brecke of Dorchester, merchant, on January 8, 1652. It was again sold to Thomas Watkins of Boston, tobacco maker, in 1653; by him in 1679 to James Green of Boston, cooper; by him to Samuel Green of Boston, cooper, in 1712; and by him willed to his sons and daughter in 1750.
The Hancock Tavern is a unique piece of property. Mr. McGlenen read from deeds that showed the land was initially owned by John Kenerick of Boston, a farmer, and was first sold to Robert Brecke of Dorchester, a merchant, on January 8, 1652. It was then sold to Thomas Watkins of Boston, a tobacco maker, in 1653; from him to James Green of Boston, a cooper, in 1679; then to Samuel Green of Boston, also a cooper, in 1712; and he passed it on to his sons and daughter in 1750.
The eastern portion of the original lot (that situated east of the one on which the Hancock Tavern, just demolished, was located) was sold by Samuel Green’s heirs to Thomas Handasyd Peck in 1759. The Hancock Tavern lot itself was then sold to Thomas Bromfield, merchant, in February, 1760. The deed says: “A certain dwelling house, with the land whereon the same doth stand.” Bromfield in 1763 sold it to Joseph Jackson of Boston, who owned it at the time of the Revolution, and disposed of it on August 19, 1779, to Morris Keith, a Boston trader. Morris Keith, or Keefe, died in April, 1783, aged 62, leaving a widow and two children, Thomas and Mary. The son died in 1784, the widow in 1785, leaving the daughter Mary to inherit the property. The inventory describes Morris Keefe as a lemon dealer, and the house and land in Corn Court as worth £260.
The eastern part of the original lot (the one located east of where the Hancock Tavern, just torn down, was situated) was sold by Samuel Green’s heirs to Thomas Handasyd Peck in 1759. The Hancock Tavern lot itself was then sold to merchant Thomas Bromfield in February 1760. The deed states: “A certain dwelling house, with the land whereon the same doth stand.” Bromfield sold it in 1763 to Joseph Jackson of Boston, who owned it during the Revolution, and sold it on August 19, 1779, to Morris Keith, a trader from Boston. Morris Keith, or Keefe, passed away in April 1783 at the age of 62, leaving behind a widow and two children, Thomas and Mary. The son died in 1784, the widow in 1785, leaving their daughter Mary to inherit the property. The inventory lists Morris Keefe as a lemon dealer, and the house and land in Corn Court as valued at £260.
Mary Keefe married John Duggan, May 24, 1789, and in 1790 John Duggan was granted a license to retail liquor at his house in Corn Court. This is the[Pg 95] earliest record of a license being granted to the Hancock Tavern, so called. Mary Duggan deeded the property to her husband in January, 1795, a few weeks before her death. In 1796 John Duggan married Mary Hopkins. He died April 21, 1802, leaving three children—Michael, born 1797; William, born 1799, and John Adams, born 1802. Mary (Hopkins) Duggan then married William Brazier in 1803. He died ten years later.
Mary Keefe married John Duggan on May 24, 1789, and in 1790 John Duggan received a license to sell liquor at his house on Corn Court. This is the[Pg 95] earliest record of a license being granted to the Hancock Tavern, as it was called. Mary Duggan transferred the property to her husband in January 1795, just a few weeks before she died. In 1796, John Duggan married Mary Hopkins. He passed away on April 21, 1802, leaving behind three children—Michael, born in 1797; William, born in 1799; and John Adams, born in 1802. Mary (Hopkins) Duggan then married William Brazier in 1803. He died ten years later.
The record commissioners’ reports, No. 22, page 290, show the following inventory for 1798:
The record commissioners’ reports, No. 22, page 290, show the following inventory for 1798:
John Duggan, owner and occupier; wooden dwelling; west on Corn Court; south on Moses Gill; north on James Tisdale. Land: 1024 square feet; house: 448 square feet; 2 stories, 12 windows; worth |
$1200 |
Duggan’s advertisement in the Columbian Centinel of October 11, 1794, reads:
Duggan’s ad in the Columbian Centinel from October 11, 1794, says:
Latest imported lemons—In excellent order, for sale, by John Duggan, at his house, at the sign of Gov. Hancock outside the market.
Latest imported lemons—In great condition, for sale, by John Duggan, at his place, at the sign of Gov. Hancock outside the market.
His address in the Boston Directory for 1796 is: “John Duggan, lemon dealer, Corn court, S. side market.”
His address in the Boston Directory for 1796 is: “John Duggan, lemon dealer, Corn court, S. side market.”
In 1795, Duggan, who is described as an innholder, and his wife deeded this property to Daniel English, who, on the same day, deeded it back to John, in order that he might have a clear title.
In 1795, Duggan, referred to as an innkeeper, and his wife transferred this property to Daniel English, who, on the same day, transferred it back to John so that he could have a clear title.
“From these investigations,” said Mr. McGlenen, “I think it is clear that as an old landmark the Hancock Tavern is a failure.”
“From these investigations,” said Mr. McGlenen, “I think it’s clear that as an old landmark the Hancock Tavern is a failure.”
[Pg 96]The Rev. Anson Titus then made his report of personal investigations relating to the Tea Party itself. He said that the only sure thing is this—that something happened in Boston on the evening of December 16, 1773. Beyond this to make statements is dangerous. Details of the affair were not subject of public conversation, because of the danger of prosecution and legal action. It was at the very edge of treason to the King. It is certain that there were a great crowd of visitors in Boston that night from the country towns who had been informed of what to expect and had come for a purpose. Secrecy was the word and obedience was the command.
[Pg 96]Rev. Anson Titus then shared his findings from personal investigations regarding the Tea Party itself. He stated that the only certainty is this—something significant occurred in Boston on the evening of December 16, 1773. Beyond this, making further statements is risky. Details of the event were not openly discussed due to the threat of prosecution and legal consequences. It was considered borderline treason against the King. It is clear that there was a large crowd of visitors in Boston that night from surrounding towns who had been tipped off about what to expect and came with a specific purpose. Secrecy was essential, and compliance was mandatory.
Mr. Titus quoted from the Boston papers of that time and from Gov. Hutchinson’s letters, but declared that it was impossible to learn of the names of the actual members of the party. He said that the “Mohawks were men familiar with the vessels and the wharves. It is generally recognized that they were Masons.”
Mr. Titus referenced the Boston newspapers from that time and letters from Gov. Hutchinson, but he stated that it was impossible to find out the names of the actual members of the group. He mentioned that the “Mohawks were guys who knew the ships and the docks. It's widely accepted that they were Masons.”
“In conclusion, as we began,” he said, “in 1908, as in 1822, very little is known concerning the real participants of the Boston Tea Party. The lifelong silence on the part of those knowing most of the party is most commendable and patriotic. It was a hazardous undertaking, even treason, and long after American independence was gained, if proof which would have had the least weight in court had been found, there would have been claims for damages by the East India Company or the Crown against our young republic, which would have been obliged to meet them. The affair was[Pg 97] a turning point in the history of American liberty, and glad ought we all to be that there is no evidence existing connecting scarcely an individual, the town of Boston, or the province with the Boston Tea Party.
“In conclusion, as we started,” he said, “in 1908, just like in 1822, not much is known about the actual people involved in the Boston Tea Party. The lifelong silence from those who knew the most about the event is truly commendable and patriotic. It was a risky move, even seen as treason, and long after America gained its independence, if any evidence that could hold up in court had been found, the East India Company or the Crown would have sought compensation from our young republic, which would have had to pay up. This event was[Pg 97] a pivotal moment in the history of American liberty, and we should all be grateful that there’s no evidence linking hardly anyone, the city of Boston, or the province to the Boston Tea Party.
LIST OF TAVERNS AND TAVERN OWNERS.
This list is taken from Miss Thwing’s work on the Inhabitants and Estates of the Town of Boston, 1630-1800, in possession of the Massachusetts Historical Society. There also may be found the authority for each statement and further details. It does not include many inns mentioned in advertisements in the papers of the eighteenth century, nor the names of many licensed innkeepers whose hostelry had no sign.
This list comes from Miss Thwing’s book Inhabitants and Estates of the Town of Boston, 1630-1800, held by the Massachusetts Historical Society. It also contains the sources for each statement and additional details. It doesn’t include many inns mentioned in advertisements in 18th-century newspapers, nor does it list many licensed innkeepers whose inns didn’t have a sign.
The Colony records state that in 1682 persons annually licensed in Boston to keep taverns and sell beer shall not exceed six wine taverns, ten innholders, and eight retailers for wine and strong liquors out of doors. In 1684, as this was not enough for the accommodation of the inhabitants, the county court licensed five or six more public houses. In 1687 all licenses for public houses to be granted only to those persons of good repute, and have convenient houses and at least two beds to entertain strangers and travellers. In Boston the approbation of the Treasurer must be secured. The regulations of inns are given in detail in the records.
The Colony records say that in 1682, the number of people licensed in Boston to run taverns and sell beer shouldn’t exceed six wine taverns, ten innkeepers, and eight outdoor retailers for wine and hard liquor. In 1684, since this wasn’t enough to accommodate the residents, the county court granted licenses to five or six more public houses. In 1687, all licenses for public houses could only be given to individuals of good standing, who had suitable premises with at least two beds to host strangers and travelers. In Boston, approval from the Treasurer also had to be obtained. The details regarding the regulations for inns are provided in the records.
[Pg 100]Admiral Vernon, see Vernon’s Head.
Admiral Vernon, see Vernon’s Head.
American Coffee-House, see British Coffee-House.
American Coffee Shop, see British Coffee Shop.
Anchor, also called Blue Anchor, east side of Washington Street, between State and Water streets (site of the Globe Building). In the Book of Possessions Richard Fairbanks (innkeeper) had house and garden here. In 1646 he was licensed to keep a house of entertainment, and in 1652 sold his estate to Robert Turner, who was licensed in 1659, and his widow Penelope in 1666. His son John Turner inherited, and was licensed in 1667. In 1680 George Monk on his marriage with Lucy, widow of Turner, succeeded. Monk married a second wife, Elizabeth Woodmancy, who succeeded him in 1691, and kept the inn until 1703, when she sold the estate to James Pitts. In 1708 a neighboring estate bounded on the house “formerly the Anchor Tavern.” From James Pitts the owners were Benjamin Bagnal, in 1724-25; William Speakman, 1745; 1746 Alice Quick, who bequeathed to her nephew Thomas Knight in 1761; and Mary Knight was the owner in 1798.
Anchor, also known as Blue Anchor, is located on the east side of Washington Street, between State and Water streets (the site of the Globe Building). In the Book of Possessions, Richard Fairbanks (innkeeper) owned a house and garden here. In 1646, he was granted a license to run a tavern, and in 1652, he sold his property to Robert Turner, who received his license in 1659, with his widow Penelope taking over in 1666. Their son John Turner inherited the property and was licensed in 1667. In 1680, George Monk, upon marrying Lucy, the widow of Turner, took over. Monk later married a second wife, Elizabeth Woodmancy, who succeeded him in 1691 and operated the inn until 1703, when she sold the property to James Pitts. In 1708, a nearby property was described as bounded on the house “formerly the Anchor Tavern.” After James Pitts, the owners included Benjamin Bagnal in 1724-25; William Speakman in 1745; Alice Quick in 1746, who left it to her nephew Thomas Knight in 1761; and Mary Knight owned it in 1798.
Bair, Washington Street, between Dock Square and Milk Street. In 1722 Elizabeth Davis was licensed at the Bair in Cornhill. As she was the owner of the Bear at the Dock this may have been a mistake.
Bair, Washington Street, between Dock Square and Milk Street. In 1722, Elizabeth Davis was granted a license for the Bair in Cornhill. Since she owned the Bear at the Dock, this might have been an error.
Bear, see Three Mariners.
Bear, check out Three Mariners.
Baker’s Arms, in 1673 the house of John Gill was on the southwest corner of Hanover and Union streets, “near the Baker’s Arms.” This was possibly then the name of the Star Tavern or the Green Dragon.
Baker’s Arms, in 1673 the home of John Gill was on the southwest corner of Hanover and Union streets, “near the Baker’s Arms.” This might have been the name of the Star Tavern or the Green Dragon at that time.
Baulston. William Baulston had a grant of land in 1636-37 on the west side of Washington Street, between Dock Square and Court Street. In June, 1637, he was licensed to keep a house of entertainment. In 1638 he sold to Thomas Cornewell, who was licensed to keep an inn in room of William Baulston. In 1639-40 the property was bought by Edward Tyng.
Baulston. William Baulston was granted land in 1636-37 on the west side of Washington Street, between Dock Square and Court Street. In June 1637, he was authorized to run a tavern. In 1638, he sold the property to Thomas Cornewell, who was then given permission to operate an inn in place of William Baulston. In 1639-40, Edward Tyng purchased the property.
[Pg 101]Bite, see Three Mariners.
Bite, see Three Mariners.
Black Horse, Prince Street. It is commonly asserted that the early name of Prince Street came from a tavern of that name, but thus far no such tavern has been found on the records. Black Horse Lane was first mentioned in 1684.
Black Horse, Prince Street. It's often said that the original name of Prince Street came from a tavern of that name, but so far no records of such a tavern have been found. Black Horse Lane was first mentioned in 1684.
Black and White Horse, locality not stated. In 1767 Robert Sylvester was licensed.
Black and White Horse, location not mentioned. In 1767, Robert Sylvester was granted a license.
Blue Anchor, Washington Street, see Anchor.
Blue Anchor, Washington Street, see Anchor.
Blue Anchor, in 1760, “land where the Blue Anchor was before the fire near Oliver’s Dock.”
Blue Anchor, in 1760, “the land where the Blue Anchor used to be before the fire close to Oliver’s Dock.”
Blue Anchor, locality not stated. In 1767 a man lodged at the Blue Anchor.
Blue Anchor, location not specified. In 1767, a man stayed at the Blue Anchor.
Blue Bell, west side of Union Street, between Hanover and North streets. In 1663 John Button conveys to Edmund Jacklin his house, known as the Blue Bell.
Blue Bell, on the west side of Union Street, between Hanover and North streets. In 1663, John Button sold his house, known as the Blue Bell, to Edmund Jacklin.
Blue Bell, southwest corner of Battery March and Water streets. The land on which this tavern stood was originally a marsh which the town let to Capt. James Johnson in 1656, he to pay an annual amount to the school of Boston. Part of this land was conveyed by Johnson to Thomas Hull. This deed is not recorded, but in 1674 in the deed of Richard Woodde to John Dafforne the west bounds were in part on land now of Deacon Allen and Hugh Drury, formerly of Thomas Hull, the house called the Blew Bell. In 1673 the house was let to Nathaniel Bishop. In the inventory of the estate of Hugh Drury in 1689 his part is described as one half of that house Mr. Wheeler lives in and cooper’s shop. In the partition of his estate in 1692 there was set off to his grandson Thomas Drury one half of house and land commonly called the Castle Tavern, the said house and land being in partnership with Henry Allen. In the division of Allen’s estate in 1703, the house and land is set off to his widow Judith. In 1707 Judith Allen and[Pg 102] Thomas Drury make a division, the west half being assigned to Judith Allen and the east half to Drury. Judith Allen died in 1722, and in 1723 her son Henry conveyed to Robert Williams the westerly part of the estate, consisting of dwelling house, land, and cooper’s shop. Williams deeds to his son Robert Williams, and the estate was in the family many years.
Blue Bell, on the southwest corner of Battery March and Water streets. The land where this tavern was located used to be a marsh that the town leased to Capt. James Johnson in 1656, who agreed to pay an annual fee to the school of Boston. Johnson transferred part of this land to Thomas Hull. Although this deed isn't recorded, in 1674, the deed from Richard Woodde to John Dafforne mentioned the western boundaries as being partly on land that now belongs to Deacon Allen and Hugh Drury, which was previously owned by Thomas Hull, where the house called the Blue Bell stood. In 1673, the house was rented to Nathaniel Bishop. In the inventory of Hugh Drury's estate in 1689, his share is noted as one half of the house where Mr. Wheeler lived, along with a cooper's shop. In the division of his estate in 1692, half of the house and land commonly known as the Castle Tavern was assigned to his grandson Thomas Drury, which was owned in partnership with Henry Allen. When Allen's estate was divided in 1703, the house and land were allotted to his widow Judith. In 1707, Judith Allen and [Pg 102] Thomas Drury divided the property, with the western half going to Judith Allen and the eastern half to Drury. Judith Allen passed away in 1722, and in 1723, her son Henry sold the western part of the estate, which included a dwelling house, land, and a cooper's shop, to Robert Williams. Williams then deeded it to his son Robert Williams, and the estate remained within the family for many years.
Brazen Head, east side of Washington Street, between State and Water streets. Jan. 2, 1757, a soldier was taken with the smallpox at widow Jackson’s at the Brazen Head. March 20, 1760, the great fire broke out here. Mrs. Jackson was not a property owner, but leased the premises.
Brazen Head, on the east side of Washington Street, between State and Water streets. On January 2, 1757, a soldier contracted smallpox at widow Jackson’s at the Brazen Head. On March 20, 1760, a major fire broke out here. Mrs. Jackson did not own the property but leased the space.
Brewers’ Arms, east side of Washington Street, between Bedford and Essex streets. In 1696 Sarah, widow of Samuel Walker, mortgages the house called the Brewers’ Arms in tenure of Daniel Elton (innholder).
Brewers’ Arms, on the east side of Washington Street, located between Bedford and Essex streets. In 1696, Sarah, the widow of Samuel Walker, mortgages the property known as the Brewers’ Arms, which is managed by Daniel Elton (innkeeper).
British Coffee-House, north side of State Street, between Change Avenue and Merchants’ Row. In the Book of Possessions James Oliver was the owner of this estate. Elisha Cooke recovers judgment against Oliver, and sells to Nicholas Moorcock in 1699. Moorcock conveys to Charles Burnham in 1717, whose heirs convey to Jonathan Badger in 1773. Badger deeds to Hannah Cordis in 1775 “The British Coffee-House.” In 1780 the heirs of Badger confirm to Joseph Cordis “The American Coffee-House,” and Cordis sells to the Massachusetts Bank in 1792. Cord Cordis was the innkeeper in 1771 and John Bryant was licensed in 1790. In 1798 this was a brick building, three stories, twenty-six windows, value $12,000.
British Coffee-House, on the north side of State Street, between Change Avenue and Merchants’ Row. In the Book of Possessions, James Oliver owned this property. Elisha Cooke takes legal action against Oliver and sells it to Nicholas Moorcock in 1699. Moorcock then transfers it to Charles Burnham in 1717, whose heirs pass it on to Jonathan Badger in 1773. Badger sells “The British Coffee-House” to Hannah Cordis in 1775. In 1780, Badger's heirs confirm the transfer of “The American Coffee-House” to Joseph Cordis, who sells it to the Massachusetts Bank in 1792. Cord Cordis was the innkeeper in 1771, and John Bryant was licensed in 1790. By 1798, this was a three-story brick building with twenty-six windows, valued at $12,000.
Bromfield House, Bromfield Street, see Indian Queen.
Bromfield House, Bromfield Street, see Indian Queen.
BROMFIELD HOUSE ON THE SITE OF THE “INDIAN QUEEN”
36-38 Bromfield Street
BROMFIELD HOUSE ON THE SITE OF THE “INDIAN QUEEN”
36-38 Bromfield Street
Bull, foot of Summer Street. In the Book of Possessions Nicholas Baxter had house and garden here. In 1668 he conveyed this to John Bull and wife Mary, the daughter of [Pg 103]his wife Margaret. Baxter died in 1692, and in his will recites this deed and divides his personal property between his daughter Mary, wife of John Swett, and John and Mary Bull. In 1694 and 1704 Mary Swett attempted to regain the estate, but Bull gained his case each time. John Bull died in 1723, and in 1724 his son Jonathan buys the shares of other heirs. Jonathan died while on a visit to England in 1727 or 1728, and his will, probated in 1728-29, gives one third of his estate to his wife, and two thirds to his children, Elizabeth, John, and Samuel. Both sons died before coming of age, and Elizabeth inherited their shares. She married Rev. Roger Price, and they went to England. She died in 1780, and in 1783 her eldest son and daughter returned to Boston to recover the property which Barret Dyer, who had married Elizabeth, widow of John Bull, had attempted to regain. John Bull was licensed as innkeeper from 1689 to 1713, when his widow Mary succeeded. In 1757 Mr. Bean was the landlord, and in 1766 the house was let to Benjamin Bigelow. In 1798 William Price was the owner and Bethia Page the occupier. A wooden house of two stories, thirty-one windows, value $2000. The site is now covered by the South Station.
Bull, at the foot of Summer Street. In the Book of Possessions, Nicholas Baxter had a house and garden here. In 1668, he transferred this to John Bull and his wife Mary, the daughter of [Pg 103], his wife Margaret. Baxter died in 1692, and in his will, he mentions this deed and splits his personal property between his daughter Mary, who is married to John Swett, and John and Mary Bull. In 1694 and 1704, Mary Swett tried to reclaim the estate, but each time, Bull won his case. John Bull died in 1723, and in 1724, his son Jonathan purchased the shares of the other heirs. Jonathan died while visiting England in 1727 or 1728, and his will, probated in 1728-29, allocates one third of his estate to his wife and two thirds to his children, Elizabeth, John, and Samuel. Both sons died before reaching adulthood, and Elizabeth inherited their shares. She married Rev. Roger Price, and they moved to England. She died in 1780, and in 1783, her oldest son and daughter returned to Boston to recover the property which Barret Dyer, who married Elizabeth, the widow of John Bull, had tried to reclaim. John Bull was licensed as an innkeeper from 1689 to 1713, when his widow Mary took over. In 1757, Mr. Bean was the landlord, and in 1766, the house was rented to Benjamin Bigelow. By 1798, William Price was the owner and Bethia Page was the occupant. It was a wooden two-story house with thirty-one windows, valued at $2000. The site is currently occupied by the South Station.
Bunch of Grapes, southeast corner of State and Kilby streets. The early possession of William Davis, who sold to William Ingram in 1658. Ingram conveyed “The Bunch of Grapes” to John Holbrook in 1680; Adm. of Holbrook to Thomas Waite in 1731; Waite to Simon Eliot in 1760; Eliot to Leonard Jarvis in 1769; Jarvis to Joseph Rotch, Jr., in 1772; Francis Rotch to Elisha Doane, 1773; his heirs to Isaiah Doane, 1786. In 1798 it was a brick store. June 7, 1709, Francis Holmes was the keeper and was to billet five soldiers at his house of public entertainment. In 1750 kept by Weatherhead, being noted, said Goelet, as the best punch house in Boston. In 1757 one captain and one[Pg 104] private soldier to be billeted at Weatherhead’s. 1764 to 1772 Joseph Ingersol licensed. In 1790 Dudley Colman licensed. In 1790 James Bowdoin bequeathes house called “The Bunch of Grapes” to his wife. This was on the west corner of Kilby and State streets.
Bunch of Grapes, southeast corner of State and Kilby streets. Originally owned by William Davis, who sold it to William Ingram in 1658. Ingram transferred “The Bunch of Grapes” to John Holbrook in 1680; the administration of Holbrook went to Thomas Waite in 1731; Waite sold to Simon Eliot in 1760; Eliot transferred it to Leonard Jarvis in 1769; Jarvis sold it to Joseph Rotch, Jr., in 1772; Francis Rotch sold to Elisha Doane in 1773; his heirs passed it on to Isaiah Doane in 1786. By 1798, it was a brick store. On June 7, 1709, Francis Holmes was the keeper and was required to accommodate five soldiers at his public house. In 1750, it was run by Weatherhead, who was noted by Goelet as the best punch house in Boston. In 1757, one captain and one[Pg 104] private soldier were to be billeted at Weatherhead’s. From 1764 to 1772, it was licensed to Joseph Ingersol. In 1790, Dudley Colman was licensed. In the same year, James Bowdoin bequeathed the house known as “The Bunch of Grapes” to his wife. This was located on the west corner of Kilby and State streets.
Castle, west corner of Dock Square and Elm Street. In the Book of Possessions William Hudson, Jr., had house and garden here. May 20, 1654, a street leading from the Castle Tavern is mentioned (Elm Street). Hudson sold off parts of his estate and in 1674 he conveyed to John Wing house, buildings, etc., commonly called Castle Tavern. In 1677 Wing mortgages to William Brown of Salem “all his new built dwelling house, being part of that building formerly known as the Castle Tavern.” The estate was forfeited, and in 1694 Brown conveys to Benjamin Pemberton mansion heretofore called the Castle Tavern, since the George Tavern, subject to Wing’s right of redemption. In his will of 1701-02 John Wing devises to his son John Wing the housing and land lying near the head of the town dock which he purchased of Capt. William Hudson, together with the brick messuage, formerly known by the name of the George Tavern, which has an encumbrance of 1000 pounds, due William Browne, now in possession of Benjamin Pemberton. In 1708 Wing releases the estate to Pemberton. In 1710 the heirs of Pemberton convey to Jonathan Waldo, and the succeeding owners were: Thomas Flucker, 1760; in the same year it passes to Isaac Winslow and Moses Gill; Gill to Caleb Loring, 1768; Nathaniel Frazier, 1771; David Sears, 1787; William Burgess, 1790; Nathaniel Frazier, 1792; John and Jonathan Amory, 1793. In 1798 Colonel Brewer was the occupier. A brick house, two stories, twelve windows, value $4000.
Castle, at the west corner of Dock Square and Elm Street. In the Book of Possessions, William Hudson, Jr. owned a house and garden here. On May 20, 1654, a street leading from the Castle Tavern is mentioned (Elm Street). Hudson sold off parts of his property, and in 1674 he transferred to John Wing the house, buildings, etc., commonly known as Castle Tavern. In 1677, Wing mortgaged to William Brown of Salem “all his newly built dwelling house, which is part of the building formerly known as the Castle Tavern.” The property was forfeited, and in 1694, Brown transferred to Benjamin Pemberton the mansion previously called the Castle Tavern, now known as the George Tavern, subject to Wing’s right of redemption. In his will from 1701-02, John Wing bequeaths to his son John Wing the housing and land near the head of the town dock that he purchased from Capt. William Hudson, along with the brick house, formerly called the George Tavern, which has an encumbrance of 1000 pounds owed to William Brown, now controlled by Benjamin Pemberton. In 1708, Wing transferred the estate to Pemberton. In 1710, Pemberton's heirs conveyed it to Jonathan Waldo, and the following owners were: Thomas Flucker in 1760; in the same year it went to Isaac Winslow and Moses Gill; Gill sold to Caleb Loring in 1768; then Nathaniel Frazier in 1771; David Sears in 1787; William Burgess in 1790; Nathaniel Frazier again in 1792; and John and Jonathan Amory in 1793. In 1798, Colonel Brewer was the resident. A brick house, two stories, twelve windows, worth $4000.
Castle, Battery March and Water streets, see Blue Bell.
Castle, Battery March and Water streets, see Blue Bell.
FIREMAN’S TICKET NOTIFYING OF MEETING AT COLEMAN’S (Bunch of Grapes)
FIREMAN’S TICKET NOTIFYING OF MEETING AT COLEMAN’S (Bunch of Grapes)
Castle, northeast corner of North and Fleet streets. [Pg 105]The early possession of Thomas Savage, John Crabtree acquires, and in 1654 conveys to Bartholomew Barnard. Barnard sells to Edward Cock in 1672-73; Cock to Margaret Thatcher, who conveys to William Colman in 1679. Colman to William Everden in 1694-95, who mortgages to Francis Holmes. Holmes conveys to John Wentworth in 1708. In 1717 John Wentworth conveys to Thomas Lee house known as the “Castle Tavern, occupied by Sarah Hunt.” In 1768 Thomas Love and wife Deborah (Lee) deed to Andrew Newell, the “Castle Tavern,” and the same year Newell to Joseph Lee. In 1785 Joseph Lee conveys to Joseph Austin the “King’s Head Tavern.” In 1798 owned and occupied by Austin. House of three and two stories, twenty-five windows, value $3000.
Castle, northeast corner of North and Fleet streets. [Pg 105] Initially owned by Thomas Savage, who later transfers it to John Crabtree. In 1654, Crabtree sells it to Bartholomew Barnard. Barnard sells it to Edward Cock in 1672-73; Cock then sells it to Margaret Thatcher, who transfers it to William Colman in 1679. Colman sells to William Everden in 1694-95, who mortgages it to Francis Holmes. Holmes transfers it to John Wentworth in 1708. In 1717, John Wentworth transfers it to Thomas Lee, who owns the building known as the “Castle Tavern,” occupied by Sarah Hunt. In 1768, Thomas Love and his wife Deborah (Lee) deed the “Castle Tavern” to Andrew Newell, and that same year, Newell sells it to Joseph Lee. In 1785, Joseph Lee conveys it to Joseph Austin, who owns and occupies it by 1798. The house has three and two stories, twenty-five windows, valued at $3000.
Castle, locality not stated. In 1721 Adrian, widow of John Cunningham, was licensed at the Castle, and in 1722 Mary English.
Castle, location not specified. In 1721, Adrian, the widow of John Cunningham, was granted a license at the Castle, and in 1722, Mary English received the same.
Cole, Samuel Cole’s inn, west side of Washington Street, corner of Williams Court, site of Thompson’s Spa. In 1633-34 Samuel Cole set up the first house of common entertainment. In 1635 he was licensed to keep an ordinary, and in 1637-38 had leave to sell his house for an inn to Robert Sedgwick. In 1646 James Penn was licensed here. Lt. William Phillips acquired the property, and in 1656-57 mortgages “The Ship Tavern.” He conveys it to Capt. Thomas Savage in 1660. The later owners were Ephraim Savage, 1677-78; Zachariah Trescott, 1712; Nicholas Bouve, 1715; John Comrin, 1742; Jonathan Mason, 1742; James Lloyd, 1763, in whose family it remained many years.
Cole, Samuel Cole’s inn, located on the west side of Washington Street at the corner of Williams Court, the former site of Thompson’s Spa. In 1633-34, Samuel Cole established the first place for public entertainment. By 1635, he was granted a license to operate an ordinary, and in 1637-38, he received permission to sell his establishment as an inn to Robert Sedgwick. In 1646, James Penn was licensed here. Lt. William Phillips took ownership of the property, and in 1656-57, he mortgaged “The Ship Tavern.” He transferred it to Capt. Thomas Savage in 1660. Subsequent owners included Ephraim Savage, 1677-78; Zachariah Trescott, 1712; Nicholas Bouve, 1715; John Comrin, 1742; Jonathan Mason, 1742; and James Lloyd, 1763, who kept it in his family for many years.
Concert Hall, south corner of Hanover and Court streets. In the Book of Possessions Jeremiah Houchin had house and garden here. His widow sold to Thomas Snawsell in 1670, and Snawsell to John Russell in 1671;[Pg 106] Eleazar Russell to John Gardner and Priscilla Hunt in 1689-90; the heirs of Gardner to Gilbert and Lewis Deblois in 1749; Deblois to Stephen Deblois in 1754, and he to William Turner in 1769; Turner conveyed to John and Jonathan Amory in 1789. In 1798 John Amory was the owner and James Villa the occupier. A brick house, three stories, thirty windows, value $3000. Villa had been a tenant, and was licensed as an innkeeper for some years. Before it became a tavern the hall was used for various purposes—for meetings, musical concerts, and by the Grand Masons.
Concert Hall, south corner of Hanover and Court streets. In the Book of Possessions, Jeremiah Houchin owned a house and garden here. His widow sold it to Thomas Snawsell in 1670, and Snawsell sold it to John Russell in 1671;[Pg 106] Eleazar Russell sold to John Gardner and Priscilla Hunt in 1689-90; the heirs of Gardner sold to Gilbert and Lewis Deblois in 1749; Deblois sold to Stephen Deblois in 1754, and he sold it to William Turner in 1769; Turner transferred it to John and Jonathan Amory in 1789. In 1798, John Amory was the owner and James Villa was the occupant. It was a brick house with three stories and thirty windows, valued at $3000. Villa had been a tenant and had a license to operate as an innkeeper for several years. Before it became a tavern, the hall was used for various purposes—meetings, musical concerts, and by the Grand Masons.
Cromwell’s Head or Sign of Oliver Cromwell, north side of School Street. In the Book of Possessions Richard Hutchinson was the owner of land here. Abraham Brown acquired before 1658; Sarah (Brown) Rogers inherits in 1689-90, and in 1692 Gamaliel Rogers conveyed to Duncan McFarland; Mary (McFarland) Perkins inherits, and John Perkins deeds to Joseph Maylem in 1714; John Maylem inherits in 1733, and the next owner is Elizabeth (Maylem) Bracket, wife of Anthony Bracket. In 1764 Elizabeth Bracket was licensed at her house in School Street, and Joshua Bracket was licensed in 1768. In 1796 Abigail Bracket conveyed to John Warren, who was the owner in 1798, and Henry Vose the occupier. A wooden house, three stories, thirty windows, value $6000.
Cromwell’s Head or Sign of Oliver Cromwell, on the north side of School Street. In the Book of Possessions, Richard Hutchinson owned land here. Abraham Brown acquired it before 1658; Sarah (Brown) Rogers inherited it in 1689-90, and in 1692, Gamaliel Rogers sold it to Duncan McFarland; Mary (McFarland) Perkins inherited it, and John Perkins transferred it to Joseph Maylem in 1714; John Maylem inherited it in 1733, and the next owner was Elizabeth (Maylem) Bracket, who was married to Anthony Bracket. In 1764, Elizabeth Bracket was licensed to operate at her house on School Street, and Joshua Bracket received a license in 1768. In 1796, Abigail Bracket sold it to John Warren, who was the owner in 1798, with Henry Vose as the occupier. It's a wooden house with three stories and thirty windows, valued at $6000.
Crown Coffee-House, north side of State Street, the first house on Long wharf (site of the Fidelity Trust Co. building). Jonathan Belcher was a proprietor of Long Wharf, which was extended from State Street in 1710. In 1749 his son Andrew Belcher conveyed to Richard Smith “The Crown Coffee-House,” Smith to Robert Shellcock in 1751, and the administrator of Shellcock to Benjamin Brown in 1788. In 1798 stores covered the site. In 1714 Thomas Selby was licensed as an innholder at the Crown [Pg 107]Coffee-House, and he died here in 1727. In 1729 William Burgess was licensed, and in 1730 and 1733 Edward Lutwych; 1762 Rebecca Coffin; 1766 Richard Bradford; and in 1772 Rebecca Coffin.
Crown Coffee-House, on the north side of State Street, was the first building on Long Wharf (the site of the Fidelity Trust Co. building). Jonathan Belcher owned Long Wharf, which was extended from State Street in 1710. In 1749, his son Andrew Belcher transferred ownership of “The Crown Coffee-House” to Richard Smith, who sold it to Robert Shellcock in 1751, and then Shellcock's administrator passed it to Benjamin Brown in 1788. By 1798, stores were built on the site. In 1714, Thomas Selby was licensed as an innkeeper at the Crown [Pg 107]Coffee-House, and he passed away there in 1727. In 1729, William Burgess received a license, followed by Edward Lutwych in 1730 and 1733; Rebecca Coffin in 1762; Richard Bradford in 1766; and again, Rebecca Coffin in 1772.
Dolphin, east side of North Street, at the foot of Richmond Street. Nicholas Upshall was the owner of the land in 1644. He deeds to his son-in-law William Greenough in 1660. Henry Gibbs and wife Mercy (Greenough) inherit in 1694-95. In 1726-27 Henry Gibbs conveys to Noah Champney “The Dolphin Tavern.” John Lowell and wife Sarah (Champney) inherit, and deed to Neil McIntire in 1753, McIntire to Neil McIntire of Portsmouth in 1784, and he to William Welsh in 1785, Welsh to Prince Snow in 1798. In 1798 it was a wooden house of two stories and eleven windows, value $600. The Dolphin Tavern is mentioned by Sewall in 1718. In 1726-27 Mercy Gibbs was licensed; in 1736 Alice Norwood, and 1740 James Stevens.
Dolphin, east side of North Street, at the foot of Richmond Street. Nicholas Upshall owned the land in 1644. He transferred it to his son-in-law William Greenough in 1660. Henry Gibbs and his wife Mercy (Greenough) inherited it in 1694-95. In 1726-27, Henry Gibbs sold “The Dolphin Tavern” to Noah Champney. John Lowell and his wife Sarah (Champney) inherited it and transferred it to Neil McIntire in 1753, who then passed it on to Neil McIntire of Portsmouth in 1784, and he sold it to William Welsh in 1785, who then sold it to Prince Snow in 1798. In 1798, it was a two-story wooden house with eleven windows, valued at $600. The Dolphin Tavern is mentioned by Sewall in 1718. In 1726-27, Mercy Gibbs was licensed; in 1736, Alice Norwood; and in 1740, James Stevens.
Dove, Sign of the, northeast corner of Boylston and Tremont streets. In the Book of Possessions Thomas Snow was the owner, and in 1667 he mortgages his old house to which the Sign of the Dove is fastened. William Wright and wife Milcha (Snow) inherit and in 1683 convey to Samuel Shrimpton, the heirs of Shrimpton to Adam Colson in 1781, Colson to William Cunningham in 1787, Cunningham to Francis Amory in 1793, Amory to Joseph Head in 1795.
Dove, Sign of the, northeast corner of Boylston and Tremont streets. In the Book of Possessions, Thomas Snow was the owner, and in 1667 he mortgaged his old house to which the Sign of the Dove is attached. William Wright and his wife Milcha (Snow) inherited it and in 1683 transferred it to Samuel Shrimpton, then the heirs of Shrimpton to Adam Colson in 1781, Colson to William Cunningham in 1787, Cunningham to Francis Amory in 1793, and Amory to Joseph Head in 1795.
Drum, Sign of the, locality not stated. In 1761 and 1776 mentioned in the Town Records.
Drum, Sign of the, location not specified. Mentioned in the Town Records in 1761 and 1776.
Exchange, northwest corner of State and Exchange streets. In 1646 Anthony Stoddard and John Leverett deed to Henry Shrimpton house and land. His son Samuel inherits in 1666, and in 1697-98 Samuel Shrimpton, Jr., inherits “the Exchange Tavern.” He mortgages to Nicholas Roberts in 1703, and the administrators of Roberts[Pg 108] convey to Robert Stone in 1754 “the Royal Exchange Tavern.” In 1784 Daniel Parker and wife Sally (Stone) convey to Benjamin Hitchbone. In 1798 Israel Hatch was the occupier. A brick house, four stories, thirty windows, value $12,000. In 1690-91 the Exchange Tavern is mentioned by Judge Sewall. In 1714 Rowland Dike petitioned for a license. In 1764 Seth Blodgett was licensed, 1770 Mr. Stone, 1772 Daniel Jones, 1776 Benjamin Loring, 1788 John Bowers, 1798 Israel Hatch.
Exchange, northwest corner of State and Exchange streets. In 1646, Anthony Stoddard and John Leverett sold a house and land to Henry Shrimpton. His son Samuel inherited it in 1666, and in 1697-98, Samuel Shrimpton, Jr., inherited “the Exchange Tavern.” He took out a mortgage with Nicholas Roberts in 1703, and the administrators of Roberts[Pg 108] sold “the Royal Exchange Tavern” to Robert Stone in 1754. In 1784, Daniel Parker and his wife Sally (Stone) sold it to Benjamin Hitchbone. By 1798, Israel Hatch was living there. The property is a four-story brick house with thirty windows, valued at $12,000. In 1690-91, Judge Sewall mentioned the Exchange Tavern. In 1714, Rowland Dike applied for a license. In 1764, Seth Blodgett was licensed, followed by Mr. Stone in 1770, Daniel Jones in 1772, Benjamin Loring in 1776, John Bowers in 1788, and Israel Hatch in 1798.
Exchange Coffee-House, southeast corner of State and Devonshire streets. In the Book of Possessions the land was owned by Robert Scott. The house was built in 1804 and burnt in 1818; rebuilt in 1822 and closed as a tavern in 1854.
Exchange Coffee-House, southeast corner of State and Devonshire streets. In the Book of Possessions, the land was owned by Robert Scott. The house was built in 1804 and burned down in 1818; it was rebuilt in 1822 and closed as a tavern in 1854.
Flower de Luce, west side of North Street, between Union and Cross streets. In 1675 Elizabeth, widow of Edmund Jackson, mortgages her house, known by the name of Flower de Luce, in tenure of Christopher Crow.
Flower de Luce, on the west side of North Street, between Union and Cross streets. In 1675, Elizabeth, the widow of Edmund Jackson, mortgaged her house, called Flower de Luce, which Christopher Crow was renting.
George, west side of Washington Street, near the Roxbury line. The land was a grant of the town to James Penn in 1644. In 1652 he deeds, as a gift, five acres to Margery, widow of Jacob Eliot, for the use of her children. In 1701 Eliezer Holyoke and wife Mary (Eliot) convey to Stephen Minot. In 1701-02 Minot petitions for a license to keep an inn or tavern at his house, nigh Roxbury gate. This is disapproved. In 1707 the George Tavern is mentioned. In 1708-09 Samuel Meeres petitions to sell strong drink as an innholder at the house of Stephen Minot, in the room of John Gibbs, who is about to quit his license, and in 1722-23 he was still an innholder there. In 1726 Simon Rogers was licensed. In 1733 Stephen Minot, Jr., inherits the George Tavern, now in occupation of Simon Rogers. In 1734-35 occupied by Andrew Haliburton. In 1768 Gideon Gardner was licensed. Stephen Minot, Jr., conveys to [Pg 109]Samuel and William Brown in 1738; William Brown to Aaron Willard in 1792. In 1770 Thomas Bracket was approved as a taverner in the house on the Neck called the King’s Arms, formerly the George Tavern, lately kept by Mrs. Bowdine. Aug. 1, 1775, the George Tavern was burnt by the Regulars, writes Timothy Newell in his diary.
George, on the west side of Washington Street, near the Roxbury line. The land was granted to James Penn by the town in 1644. In 1652, he gifted five acres to Margery, the widow of Jacob Eliot, for her children. In 1701, Eliezer Holyoke and his wife Mary (Eliot) transferred the property to Stephen Minot. In 1701-02, Minot requested a license to operate an inn or tavern at his house near the Roxbury gate, but this was denied. In 1707, the George Tavern was mentioned. Between 1708-09, Samuel Meeres applied to sell alcoholic drinks as an innkeeper at Stephen Minot's house, taking over from John Gibbs, who was about to give up his license, and in 1722-23, he was still running the inn there. In 1726, Simon Rogers received a license. In 1733, Stephen Minot, Jr. inherited the George Tavern, which was then occupied by Simon Rogers. In 1734-35, it was occupied by Andrew Haliburton. In 1768, Gideon Gardner was licensed. Stephen Minot, Jr. transferred the property to [Pg 109]Samuel and William Brown in 1738; William Brown then sold it to Aaron Willard in 1792. In 1770, Thomas Bracket was approved as an innkeeper in the establishment on the Neck known as the King’s Arms, which was formerly the George Tavern and had most recently been run by Mrs. Bowdine. On August 1, 1775, Timothy Newell noted in his diary that the George Tavern was burned by the Regulars.
THE EXCHANGE COFFEE HOUSE, 1808-1818 (Congress Square)
THE EXCHANGE COFFEE HOUSE, 1808-1818 (Congress Square)
George, corner Dock Square and Elm Street, see Castle.
George, at the corner of Dock Square and Elm Street, check out Castle.
Globe, northeast corner of Commercial and Hanover streets. In the Book of Possessions the estate of William Douglass. Eliphalet Hett and wife Ann (Douglass) inherit; Nathaniel Parkman and wife Hannah (Hett) inherit. In 1702 Hannah Parkman conveys to Edward Budd; Budd to James Barnard in 1708. Barnard to John Greenough in 1711. In the division of the Greenough estate this was set off to William and Newman Greenough. Greenough to Joseph Oliver in 1779. Oliver to Henry H. Williams in 1788. In 1741 and 1787 the Globe Tavern is mentioned in the Town Records.
Globe, northeast corner of Commercial and Hanover streets. In the Book of Possessions, the estate of William Douglass. Eliphalet Hett and his wife Ann (Douglass) inherit; Nathaniel Parkman and his wife Hannah (Hett) inherit. In 1702, Hannah Parkman transfers the property to Edward Budd; Budd sells it to James Barnard in 1708. Barnard sells it to John Greenough in 1711. When the Greenough estate is divided, this property was allocated to William and Newman Greenough. Greenough sells it to Joseph Oliver in 1779. Oliver sells it to Henry H. Williams in 1788. The Globe Tavern is mentioned in the Town Records in 1741 and 1787.
Goat, locality not stated; in 1737 mentioned in the inventory of Elisha Cooke.
Goat, location not specified; in 1737 noted in the inventory of Elisha Cooke.
Golden Ball, northwest corner of Merchants’ Row and Corn Court. Edward Tyng was the first owner of the land, Theodore Atkinson acquired before 1662, and conveys to Henry Deering in 1690. In 1731 part of Deering’s estate was the house known as the “Golden Ball,” now occupied by Samuel Tyley. Mary (Deering) Wilson inherits and bequeathes to her niece Mary (Deering), wife of John Gooch. In 1795 Benjamin Gerrish Gray and wife Mary (Gooch) convey to James Tisdale house known by the name of the Golden Ball Tavern. In 1798 stores covered the site. In 1711 Samuel Tyley petitions for renewal of his license upon his removal from the Salutation to Mr. Deering’s house in Merchants’ Row. In 1757 it was kept by John Marston.
Golden Ball, northwest corner of Merchants' Row and Corn Court. Edward Tyng was the first owner of the land, which Theodore Atkinson acquired before 1662 and then transferred to Henry Deering in 1690. In 1731, part of Deering’s estate included the house known as the “Golden Ball,” which was then occupied by Samuel Tyley. Mary (Deering) Wilson inherited it and left it to her niece Mary (Deering), who was married to John Gooch. In 1795, Benjamin Gerrish Gray and his wife Mary (Gooch) transferred ownership to James Tisdale for the house known as the Golden Ball Tavern. By 1798, the site was covered with stores. In 1711, Samuel Tyley applied for a renewal of his license after moving from the Salutation to Mr. Deering’s house on Merchants' Row. In 1757, it was run by John Marston.
[Pg 110]Grand Turk, Sign of, Washington Street, between Winter and Boylston. In 1789 Israel Hatch (innholder).
[Pg 110]Grand Turk, Sign of, Washington Street, between Winter and Boylston. In 1789, Israel Hatch (innkeeper).
Green Dragon, west side of Union Street, north of Hanover. In the Book of Possessions James Johnson owned three fourths of an acre on the mill pond. The next estate that separated him from Hanover Street was owned by John Davis. In 1646 Johnson deeds to Thomas Marshall, and Marshall to Thomas Hawkins. In 1645 John Davis deeds to John Trotman, whose wife Katherine on the same day conveys to Thomas Hawkins. In 1671 Hawkins mortgages to Samson Sheafe, and January, 1671-02, the property is delivered to Sheafe. In 1672-03 Sheafe deeds part to John Howlett (see Star Tavern), bounded northwest by William Stoughton. No deed is recorded to Stoughton. Stoughton died in 1701, and this estate fell to his granddaughter Mehitable, wife of Capt. Thomas Cooper. She later married Peter Sargent and Simeon Stoddard. In 1743 her son Rev. William Cooper conveys the brick dwelling called the Green Dragon Tavern to Dr. William Douglass. On the division of the estate of Douglass this fell to his sister Catherine Kerr, who in 1765 deeds to St. Andrews Lodge of Free Masons. In 1798 it is described as a brick dwelling, three stories, thirty-nine windows, with stable, value $3000. In 1714 William Patten, late of Charlestown, petitions to sell strong drink as an innholder at the Green Dragon in the room of Richard Pullen, who hath quitted his license there.
Green Dragon, on the west side of Union Street, north of Hanover. According to the Book of Possessions, James Johnson owned three-fourths of an acre on the mill pond. The next property that separated him from Hanover Street was owned by John Davis. In 1646, Johnson transferred ownership to Thomas Marshall, who then transferred it to Thomas Hawkins. In 1645, John Davis transferred ownership to John Trotman, whose wife Katherine, on the same day, conveyed it to Thomas Hawkins. In 1671, Hawkins mortgaged the property to Samson Sheafe, and in January 1671-02, the property was delivered to Sheafe. In 1672-03, Sheafe transferred part of the property to John Howlett (see Star Tavern), bounded northwest by William Stoughton. There is no recorded deed for Stoughton. Stoughton died in 1701, and this estate passed to his granddaughter Mehitable, who was married to Capt. Thomas Cooper. She later married Peter Sargent and Simeon Stoddard. In 1743, her son Rev. William Cooper transferred the brick dwelling called the Green Dragon Tavern to Dr. William Douglass. Upon the division of Douglass's estate, it went to his sister Catherine Kerr, who in 1765 transferred it to St. Andrews Lodge of Free Masons. In 1798, it was described as a three-story brick dwelling with thirty-nine windows and a stable, valued at $3000. In 1714, William Patten, formerly of Charlestown, petitioned to sell alcohol as an innkeeper at the Green Dragon, replacing Richard Pullen, who had quit his license there.
Gutteridge Coffee-House, north side of State Street, between Washington and Exchange streets. Robert Gutteridge was a tenant of Hezekiah Usher in 1688, and was licensed in 1691. In 1718 Mary Gutteridge petitions for the renewal of her late husband’s license to keep a public coffee-house.
Gutteridge Coffee-House, on the north side of State Street, between Washington and Exchange streets. Robert Gutteridge was a tenant of Hezekiah Usher in 1688 and got his license in 1691. In 1718, Mary Gutteridge requested the renewal of her late husband’s license to operate a public coffee-house.
EXCHANGE COFFEE-HOUSE, 1848
From State Street, looking south down Congress Square
EXCHANGE COFFEE-HOUSE, 1848
From State Street, looking south down Congress Square
[Pg 111]Half Moon, southwest side of Portland Street. Henry Pease was the owner of the land in the Book of Possessions. He conveys to Thomas Matson in 1648, and Joshua Matson to Edward Cricke in 1685. In 1705 his widow Deborah Cricke conveys to Thomas Gwin house commonly called “The Half Moon.” In 1713 Gwin sells to William Clarke. The children of Sarah (Clarke) Kilby inherit and deed to John Bradford in 1760. His heirs were owners in 1798. A brick house, two stories, thirty-nine windows, value $4000.
[Pg 111]Half Moon, on the southwest side of Portland Street. Henry Pease owned the land in the Book of Possessions. He transferred it to Thomas Matson in 1648, and then Joshua Matson sold it to Edward Cricke in 1685. In 1705, his widow, Deborah Cricke, transferred it to Thomas Gwin for the house commonly called “The Half Moon.” In 1713, Gwin sold it to William Clarke. Sarah (Clarke) Kilby’s children inherited it and transferred it to John Bradford in 1760. His heirs were the owners in 1798. It’s a two-story brick house with thirty-nine windows, valued at $4,000.
Hancock, Corn Court. This property was acquired by John Kendric, who sells to Robert Breck in 1652-53. Later owners, Thomas Watkins 1653, James Green 1659, Samuel Green 1712, Thomas Bromfield 1760, Joseph Jackson 1763. Jackson deeds to Morris Keefe in 1779, whose daughter Mary, wife of John Duggan, inherits in 1795. In 1798 it was a wooden house, two stories, twelve windows, value $1200.
Hancock, Corn Court. This property was bought by John Kendric, who sold it to Robert Breck in 1652-53. Later owners included Thomas Watkins in 1653, James Green in 1659, Samuel Green in 1712, Thomas Bromfield in 1760, and Joseph Jackson in 1763. Jackson transferred ownership to Morris Keefe in 1779, whose daughter Mary, the wife of John Duggan, inherited it in 1795. In 1798, it was a two-story wooden house with twelve windows, valued at $1200.
Hatch, east side Tremont Street, between West and Boylston streets. The land was a grant of the town to Richard Bellingham in 1665. Martin Sanders acquires and deeds to Æneas Salter, and Salter to Sampson Sheaf in 1677. Jacob Sheaf to Abiah Holbrook in 1753. Adm. of Rebecca Holbrook to Israel Hatch in 1794. 1796 Israel Hatch (innkeeper).
Hatch, on the east side of Tremont Street, between West and Boylston streets. The land was granted by the town to Richard Bellingham in 1665. Martin Sanders buys it and transfers it to Æneas Salter, who then sells it to Sampson Sheaf in 1677. Jacob Sheaf passes it to Abiah Holbrook in 1753. The administrator of Rebecca Holbrook transfers it to Israel Hatch in 1794. In 1796, Israel Hatch is noted as an innkeeper.
Hawk, Summer Street. In 1740 mentioned in the Town Records.
Hawk, Summer Street. Mentioned in the Town Records in 1740.
Horse Shoe, east side of Tremont Street, between School and Bromfield streets. In the Book of Possessions this was part of the land of Zaccheus Bosworth. His daughter Elizabeth and her husband John Morse convey to John Evered, alias Webb, in 1660; Webb to William Pollard in 1663. John Pollard deeds to Jonathan Pollard in 1722 the “Horse Shoe Tavern.” In 1782 the heirs of Pollard[Pg 112] convey to George Hamblin, who occupied it in 1798. A wooden house, two stories, eleven windows, value $1500. In 1738 Alex Cochran was licensed here.
Horse Shoe, on the east side of Tremont Street, between School and Bromfield streets. In the Book of Possessions, this land was owned by Zaccheus Bosworth. His daughter Elizabeth and her husband John Morse sold it to John Evered, also known as Webb, in 1660; Webb then sold it to William Pollard in 1663. John Pollard transferred ownership to Jonathan Pollard in 1722 for the “Horse Shoe Tavern.” In 1782, Pollard's heirs[Pg 112] sold it to George Hamblin, who was living there in 1798. It was a two-story wooden house with eleven windows, valued at $1500. In 1738, Alex Cochran was granted a license here.
Indian Queen, later Bromfield House, south side of Bromfield Street. The possession of William Aspinwall, who deeds the land to John Angier in 1652, and in the same year it passes to Sampson Shore and Theodore Atkinson; Atkinson to Edward Rawson in 1653-54; Rawson to Robert Noaxe, 1672; Noaxe to Joseph Whitney, 1675; Whitney to Edward Bromfield, 1684; Edward Bromfield, Jr., to Benjamin Kent, 1748; Ex. of Kent to Henry Newman, 1760; Newman to John Ballard, 1782. In 1798 it was occupied by Abel Wheelock, Trask, and Brown. A brick and wooden house, two stories, thirty-four windows, value $4500, with a stable.
Indian Queen, later Bromfield House, on the south side of Bromfield Street. It was owned by William Aspinwall, who transferred the land to John Angier in 1652. That same year, it changed hands to Sampson Shore and Theodore Atkinson; Atkinson sold it to Edward Rawson in 1653-54; Rawson transferred it to Robert Noaxe in 1672; Noaxe sold it to Joseph Whitney in 1675; Whitney passed it on to Edward Bromfield in 1684; Edward Bromfield, Jr. conveyed it to Benjamin Kent in 1748; the executor of Kent sold it to Henry Newman in 1760; Newman transferred it to John Ballard in 1782. By 1798, it was occupied by Abel Wheelock, Trask, and Brown. It's a two-story brick and wooden house with thirty-four windows, valued at $4500, which includes a stable.
Julien Restorator, northwest corner of Milk and Congress streets. In the Book of Possessions John Spoor had a house and one acre here, which he mortgaged to Nicholas Willis in 1648. In 1648-49 Henry Bridgham sold a house on Washington Street to John Spoore, so it may be possible that they exchanged lots. In 1655 Bridgham was the owner. He died in 1681, and his widow in 1672. In 1680 his estate was divided among his three sons. John, the eldest, settled in Ipswich, inherited the new house, and that included the west portion. In 1719 he deeds his share to his nephew Joseph Bridgham, who in 1734-35 conveys to Francis Borland, then measuring 106 ft. on Milk Street. Borland also bought a strip of James Dalton in 1763, which addition reached the whole length of the lot, which has been abridged by the laying out of Dalton’s Lane (Congress Street). Francis Borland died in 1763, and left the Milk Street estate to his son Francis Lindall Borland, who was absent and feared to be dead. Jane Borland married John Still Winthrop, and in 1765 the estate was divided among [Pg 113]the Winthrop children. These heirs conveyed the Congress Street corner to Thomas Clement in 1787, and in 1794 he sold it to Jean Baptiste Gilbert Payplat dis Julien (restorator). Julien died in 1806, and his heirs conveyed it in 1823 to the Commercial Co. The house was taken down in 1824. In 1798 it was a wooden dwelling, three stories, eighteen windows, value $6000.
Julien Restorator, northwest corner of Milk and Congress streets. In the Book of Possessions, John Spoor had a house and one acre here, which he mortgaged to Nicholas Willis in 1648. In 1648-49, Henry Bridgham sold a house on Washington Street to John Spoor, so they might have exchanged lots. By 1655, Bridgham was the owner. He passed away in 1681, and his widow died in 1672. In 1680, his estate was divided among his three sons. John, the eldest, settled in Ipswich, inherited the new house, which included the west portion. In 1719, he deeded his share to his nephew Joseph Bridgham, who, in 1734-35, transferred it to Francis Borland, measuring 106 ft. on Milk Street. Borland also purchased a strip from James Dalton in 1763, adding to the entire length of the lot, which was shortened by the creation of Dalton’s Lane (Congress Street). Francis Borland died in 1763 and left the Milk Street estate to his son Francis Lindall Borland, who was absent and presumed dead. Jane Borland married John Still Winthrop, and in 1765 the estate was divided among [Pg 113] the Winthrop children. These heirs transferred the Congress Street corner to Thomas Clement in 1787, and in 1794 he sold it to Jean Baptiste Gilbert Payplat dis Julien (restorator). Julien died in 1806, and his heirs transferred it in 1823 to the Commercial Co. The house was demolished in 1824. In 1798, it was a wooden building, three stories tall, with eighteen windows, valued at $6000.
VIEW OF TREMONT STREET, SHOWING THE “HATCH TAVERN” IN FRONT OF THE “HAYMARKET THEATRE”
From an original painting by Robertson, now in the Boston Public Library
VIEW OF TREMONT STREET, SHOWING THE “HATCH TAVERN” IN FRONT OF THE “HAYMARKET THEATRE”
From an original painting by Robertson, now in the Boston Public Library
King’s Arms, west side of Washington Street, between Brattle and Court streets. Nearly all of the original lot was taken for the extension of Washington Street, and the exact location obliterated. It was one of the estates at the head of the Dock. In the Book of Possessions, owned by Hugh Gunnison, who in 1646 was licensed to keep a house of entertainment. Oct. 28, 1650, he mortgages the estate called the King’s Arms, and in 1651 conveys it to John Samson, Henry Shrimpton, and William Brenton (see Suff. Deeds, Lib. 1, fol. 135, where there is an interesting and complete inventory). Henry Shrimpton gets possession of the whole, and in his will, 1666, bequeathes to his daughter Sarah Shrimpton “the house formerly called the States Arms.” In 1668-69 Eliakim Hutchinson, on his marriage with Sarah Shrimpton, puts the estate in trust for his wife, “heretofore called the King’s Arms.” He also enlarged the estate by buying adjoining land of the William Tyng and Thomas Brattle estates. By the will of Eliakim Hutchinson in 1718, and that of his wife in 1720, the whole estate went to their son William Hutchinson, who in 1721 devised to his son Eliakim Hutchinson. Eliakim still further enlarged the estate. He was a Loyalist, and his estate was confiscated. In 1782 the government conveyed part of it to Thomas Green and the remainder to John Lucas and Edward Tuckerman.
King’s Arms, on the west side of Washington Street, between Brattle and Court streets. Almost the entire original lot was taken for the expansion of Washington Street, and the exact location is now gone. It was one of the properties at the head of the Dock. In the Book of Possessions, it was owned by Hugh Gunnison, who was licensed in 1646 to operate a tavern. On October 28, 1650, he mortgaged the estate known as the King’s Arms, and in 1651, he transferred it to John Samson, Henry Shrimpton, and William Brenton (see Suff. Deeds, Lib. 1, fol. 135, which has an interesting and complete inventory). Henry Shrimpton took possession of the entire property, and in his will of 1666, he left to his daughter Sarah Shrimpton “the house previously called the States Arms.” In 1668-69, Eliakim Hutchinson, upon marrying Sarah Shrimpton, put the estate in trust for his wife, “previously known as the King’s Arms.” He also expanded the estate by purchasing adjacent land from the William Tyng and Thomas Brattle estates. According to the will of Eliakim Hutchinson in 1718, and that of his wife in 1720, the entire estate went to their son William Hutchinson, who in 1721 bequeathed it to his son Eliakim Hutchinson. Eliakim further enlarged the estate. He was a Loyalist, and his property was seized. In 1782, the government transferred part of it to Thomas Green and the rest to John Lucas and Edward Tuckerman.
King’s Arms, west side of North Street, between Sun Court and Fleet Street. The lot of Thomas Clarke in the[Pg 114] Book of Possessions, which he sold to Launcelot Baker in 1648, and Baker to George Halsey in 1648, the trustees of Halsey to Evan Thomas in 1656, “The King’s Arms.” In 1680 his widow Alice Thomas mortgages the house formerly known as King’s Arms, and she sells it in 1698 to Joseph Bill.
King’s Arms, on the west side of North Street, between Sun Court and Fleet Street. The property of Thomas Clarke in the [Pg 114] Book of Possessions, which he sold to Launcelot Baker in 1648, and Baker sold to George Halsey in 1648, then the trustees of Halsey sold it to Evan Thomas in 1656, “The King’s Arms.” In 1680, his widow, Alice Thomas, mortgaged the house that was formerly known as the King’s Arms, and she sold it in 1698 to Joseph Bill.
King’s Arms, on the Neck, see George.
King’s Arms, on the Neck, see George.
King’s Head, northeast corner of North and Fleet streets, see Castle.
King’s Head, at the northeast corner of North and Fleet streets, see Castle.
Lamb and White Lamb, west side of Washington Street, between West and Boylston streets, on the site of the Adams House, the original lot of Richard Brocket, which he deeds to Jacob Leger in 1638; and Ann Leger, widow, to John Blake in 1664; Blake to Edward Durant in 1694; Durant to Jonathan Waldo the southern part in 1713-14; Jonathan Waldo, Jr., to Samuel Cookson in 1780; Cookson to Joel Crosby in 1795. In 1798 Joel Crosby was the owner and occupier of the Lamb Tavern. A wooden building of two stories, twenty-four windows, value $4200. In 1738 it was mentioned in the Town Records, and in 1782 Augustus Moor was licensed there.
Lamb and White Lamb, located on the west side of Washington Street, between West and Boylston streets, stands on the site of the Adams House. This was originally Richard Brocket's lot, which he transferred to Jacob Leger in 1638. Ann Leger, his widow, then sold it to John Blake in 1664; Blake passed it on to Edward Durant in 1694; Durant sold the southern part to Jonathan Waldo in 1713-14; Jonathan Waldo, Jr., transferred it to Samuel Cookson in 1780; and Cookson sold it to Joel Crosby in 1795. By 1798, Joel Crosby was the owner and maintaining the Lamb Tavern, a two-story wooden building with twenty-four windows, valued at $4,200. It was noted in the Town Records in 1738, and Augustus Moor received a license there in 1782.
Lighthouse, 1766, mentioned in the Town Records. It was not far from the Old North Meeting House.
Lighthouse, 1766, mentioned in the Town Records. It wasn't far from the Old North Meeting House.
Lion, Sign of, Washington Street, between Winter and Boylston streets. 1796 Henry Vose (innholder).
Lion, Sign of, Washington Street, between Winter and Boylston streets. 1796 Henry Vose (innkeeper).
Logwood Tree, Sign of, south side of Commercial Street, between Hanover and North streets. The lot of John Seabury in the Book of Possessions, which he deeds to Alex Adams in 1645, Adams to Nathaniel Fryer in 1653-54, and Fryer to John Scarlet in 1671. Scarlet to Joseph Parminter in 1671-72. In 1734-35 Hannah Emmes, sister of Parminter, conveys to John Read the house known as the “Sign of the Logwood Tree”; Read to Thomas Bently in 1744, and Bently to Joshua Bently 1756. In 1798 it was [Pg 115]occupied by Captain Caswell. A wooden house, two stories, fourteen windows, value $1000. In 1732 mentioned in the Town Records. See also Queen’s Head.
Logwood Tree, Sign of, on the south side of Commercial Street, between Hanover and North streets. The lot originally owned by John Seabury in the Book of Possessions, which he transferred to Alex Adams in 1645, Adams to Nathaniel Fryer in 1653-54, and Fryer to John Scarlet in 1671. Scarlet sold it to Joseph Parminter in 1671-72. In 1734-35, Hannah Emmes, Parminter's sister, transferred the house known as the “Sign of the Logwood Tree” to John Read; Read sold it to Thomas Bently in 1744, and Bently transferred it to Joshua Bently in 1756. In 1798 it was [Pg 115]occupied by Captain Caswell. It was a wooden house, two stories high, with fourteen windows, valued at $1000. Mentioned in the Town Records in 1732. See also Queen’s Head.
THE LAMB TAVERN (The Adams House Site)
THE LAMB TAVERN (The Adams House Site)
Marlborough Arms and Marlborough Head, south side of State Street, east of Kilby Street. In 1640 William Hudson was allowed to keep an ordinary. His son conveys this in 1648 to Francis Smith, and Smith to John Holland. Judith Holland conveys to Thomas Peck in 1656; Thomas Peck, Jr., to James Gibson, 1711. In 1722 Mary Gibson deeds to her children “house named Marlborough next the Grapes.” James Gibson to Roger Passmore, 1741; Passmore to Simon Eliot, 1759; Eliot to Leonard, 1760; Jarvis to Benjamin Parker, 1766; John Erving acquires and deeds to William Stackpole, 1784. In 1798 it had been converted into a brick store. Elisha Odling was licensed in 1720, Sarah Wormal in 1721, and Elizabeth Smith 1722.
Marlborough Arms and Marlborough Head, on the south side of State Street, east of Kilby Street. In 1640, William Hudson got permission to run a tavern. His son transferred this to Francis Smith in 1648, and Smith passed it on to John Holland. Judith Holland transferred it to Thomas Peck in 1656; Thomas Peck, Jr., to James Gibson in 1711. In 1722, Mary Gibson deeded it to her children as the “house named Marlborough next the Grapes.” James Gibson sold it to Roger Passmore in 1741; Passmore sold it to Simon Eliot in 1759; Eliot sold it to Leonard in 1760; Jarvis sold it to Benjamin Parker in 1766; John Erving acquired it and deeded it to William Stackpole in 1784. By 1798, it had been converted into a brick store. Elisha Odling was licensed in 1720, Sarah Wormal in 1721, and Elizabeth Smith in 1722.
Mitre, east side of North Street, at the head of Hancock Wharf (Lewis Wharf), between Sun Court and Fleet Street. The lot of Samuel Cole in the Book of Possessions, which he conveys to George Halsey in 1645; Halsey to Nathaniel Patten, 1654; Patten to Robert Cox, 1681; Cox to John Kind, 1683-84; Jane Kind to Thomas Clarke (pewterer), 1705-06; Clarke to John Jeffries, 1730. His nephew David Jeffries inherits in 1778, from whom it went to Joseph Eckley and wife Sarah (Jeffries). In 1782 heirs of John Jeffries owned house “formerly the Mitre Tavern.” In 1798 the house had been taken down.
Mitre, on the east side of North Street, at the beginning of Hancock Wharf (Lewis Wharf), between Sun Court and Fleet Street. The property of Samuel Cole in the Book of Possessions, which he transferred to George Halsey in 1645; Halsey to Nathaniel Patten, 1654; Patten to Robert Cox, 1681; Cox to John Kind, 1683-84; Jane Kind to Thomas Clarke (pewterer), 1705-06; Clarke to John Jeffries, 1730. His nephew David Jeffries inherited in 1778, from whom it passed to Joseph Eckley and his wife Sarah (Jeffries). In 1782, the heirs of John Jeffries owned the house “formerly the Mitre Tavern.” By 1798, the house had been demolished.
Noah’s Ark, southwest corner North and Clarke streets. The early possession of Capt. Thomas Hawkins. He was lost at sea, and his widow married (2) John Fenn and (3) Henry Shrimpton. In 1657 William Phillips conveys to Mary Fenn the house called Noah’s Ark, the property of her first husband Thomas Hawkins, and which her son-in-law John Aylett had mortgaged to William Hudson, by[Pg 116] whom it was sold to William Phillips. In 1657 Mary Fenn conveys to George Mountjoy, and in 1663 Mountjoy to John Vial. In 1695 Vial deeds to Thomas Hutchinson. In 1713 the house was known as Ship Tavern, heretofore Noah’s Ark, in part above and in part below the street called Ship Street.
Noah’s Ark, southwest corner of North and Clarke streets. Originally owned by Capt. Thomas Hawkins. He was lost at sea, and his widow remarried (2) John Fenn and (3) Henry Shrimpton. In 1657, William Phillips transfers the house known as Noah’s Ark, which belonged to her first husband Thomas Hawkins, to Mary Fenn. Her son-in-law John Aylett had mortgaged it to William Hudson, by[Pg 116] whom it was sold to William Phillips. In 1657, Mary Fenn transfers it to George Mountjoy, and in 1663, Mountjoy transfers it to John Vial. In 1695, Vial conveys it to Thomas Hutchinson. By 1713, the house was known as Ship Tavern, previously Noah’s Ark, located both above and below the street named Ship Street.
North Coffee-House, North Street. Dec. 12, 1702, Edward Morrell was licensed.
North Coffee-House, North Street. Dec. 12, 1702, Edward Morrell was granted a license.
North End Coffee-House, northwest side of North Street, between Sun Court and Fleet Street. The land of Capt. Thomas Clarke in the Book of Possessions. Elisha Hutchinson and wife Elizabeth (Clarke) inherit. Edward Hutchinson conveys to Thomas Savage in 1758. John Savage inherits, and deeds to Joseph Tahon in 1781, Tahon to Robert Wier in 1786, Wier to John May in 1795 the “North End Coffee-House.” In 1782 Capt. David Porter was licensed to keep a tavern at the North End Coffee-House. In 1798 John May was owner and occupier. A brick house, three stories, forty-five windows, value $4500.
North End Coffee-House, located on the northwest side of North Street, between Sun Court and Fleet Street. The property belonged to Capt. Thomas Clarke, as recorded in the Book of Possessions. Elisha Hutchinson and his wife Elizabeth (Clarke) inherited it. Edward Hutchinson transferred it to Thomas Savage in 1758. John Savage inherited it and then deeded it to Joseph Tahon in 1781. Tahon sold it to Robert Wier in 1786, and Wier passed it on to John May in 1795, naming it the “North End Coffee-House.” In 1782, Capt. David Porter was granted a license to run a tavern at the North End Coffee-House. By 1798, John May was the owner and resident. It was a three-story brick building with forty-five windows, valued at $4500.
Orange Tree, northeast corner of Hanover and Court streets. Land first granted to Edmund Jackson, Thomas Leader acquires before 1651, and his heirs deed to Bozoon Allen in 1678. Allen conveys in 1700 to Francis Cook “the Orange Tree Inn.” Benjamin Morse and wife Frances (Cook) inherit. John Tyng and wife Mary (Morse), daughter of Benjamin, inherit. John Marshall and other heirs of Tyng owners in 1785 and 1798, when it was unoccupied. A wooden house, three stories, fifty-three windows, value $4000. In 1712 Jonathan Wardell, who had married Frances (Cook), widow of Benjamin Morse, was licensed, and from 1724 to 1746 Mrs. Wardell was licensed.
Orange Tree, northeast corner of Hanover and Court streets. The land was initially granted to Edmund Jackson, then acquired by Thomas Leader before 1651, and his heirs sold it to Bozoon Allen in 1678. Allen transferred ownership in 1700 to Francis Cook of “the Orange Tree Inn.” Benjamin Morse and his wife Frances (Cook) became the inheritors. John Tyng and his wife Mary (Morse), who was the daughter of Benjamin, inherited it next. In 1785 and 1798, John Marshall and other heirs of Tyng owned it when it was unoccupied. It was a wooden house, three stories tall, with fifty-three windows, valued at $4,000. In 1712, Jonathan Wardell, who had married Frances (Cook), the widow of Benjamin Morse, received a license, and from 1724 to 1746, Mrs. Wardell held a license as well.
Peacock, west side of North Street, between Board Alley and Cross Street, on the original estate of Sampson Shore, who conveyed to Edwin Goodwin in 1648, and he to[Pg 117] Nathaniel Adams. In 1707-08 Joseph and other children of Nathaniel Adams deed to Thomas Harris house and land near the Turkey or Peacock. In 1705 Elihu Warden owns a shop over against the Peacock Tavern. Sept. 26, 1709, Thomas Lee petitions to keep a victualling house at a hired house which formerly was the Sign of the Turkie Cock.
Peacock, on the west side of North Street, between Board Alley and Cross Street, was originally part of Sampson Shore's estate, who sold it to Edwin Goodwin in 1648, and he passed it on to[Pg 117] Nathaniel Adams. In 1707-08, Joseph and other children of Nathaniel Adams transferred ownership of a house and land near the Turkey or Peacock to Thomas Harris. In 1705, Elihu Warden owned a shop across from the Peacock Tavern. On September 26, 1709, Thomas Lee requested permission to operate a tavern at a rented property that used to be called the Sign of the Turkie Cock.
Peggy Moore’s Boarding House, southwest corner of Washington and Boylston streets. On the original estate of Jacob Eliot. His daughter Hannah Frary inherits, Abigail (Frary) Arnold inherits, and then Hannah (Arnold), wife of Samuel Welles. In 1798 Samuel Welles owner, and he with Mrs. Brown and Peggy Moore occupiers. A wooden house, two stories, and seventy-one windows, value $10,000.
Peggy Moore’s Boarding House, at the southwest corner of Washington and Boylston streets. Located on the original property of Jacob Eliot. His daughter Hannah Frary inherits it, then Abigail (Frary) Arnold inherits it, and later Hannah (Arnold), wife of Samuel Welles. In 1798, Samuel Welles was the owner, along with Mrs. Brown and Peggy Moore as the residents. It’s a two-story wooden house with seventy-one windows, valued at $10,000.
Pine Tree, Dock Square. In 1785 Capt. Benjamin Gorham was licensed on Dock Square, at the house known by the name of the Pine Tree Tavern. Gorham bought a house in 1782 of John Steel Tyler and wife Mary (Whitman), situated on northwest side of North Street, between Cross Street and Scott Alley, which he sold in 1786 to John Hinckley.
Pine Tree, Dock Square. In 1785, Captain Benjamin Gorham received a license for Dock Square, at the building known as the Pine Tree Tavern. Gorham purchased a house in 1782 from John Steel Tyler and his wife Mary (Whitman), located on the northwest side of North Street, between Cross Street and Scott Alley, which he sold in 1786 to John Hinckley.
Punch Bowl, Sign of the, Dock Square. 1789 Mrs. Baker (innholder).
Punch Bowl, Sign of the, Dock Square. 1789 Mrs. Baker (innkeeper).
Queen’s Head, Fleet Street. April 19, 1728, Anthony Young petitions to remove his license from the Salutation in Ship Street to the Sign of the Swan in Fleet Street, and set up the Sign of the Queen’s Head there. Nov. 28, 1732, Joseph Pearse petitions to remove his license from the house where he lives, the Sign of the Logwood Tree in Lynn Street, to the house near Scarlett’s Wharf at the Sign of the Queen’s Head, where Anthony Young last dwelt.
Queen’s Head, Fleet Street. April 19, 1728, Anthony Young requests to transfer his license from the Salutation in Ship Street to the Sign of the Swan in Fleet Street, and establish the Sign of the Queen’s Head there. Nov. 28, 1732, Joseph Pearse requests to transfer his license from his current residence, the Sign of the Logwood Tree in Lynn Street, to the house near Scarlett’s Wharf at the Sign of the Queen’s Head, where Anthony Young previously lived.
Red Cross, southwest corner of North and Cross streets. In 1746 John Osborn (innholder) bought land of Tolman Farr, to whom it had descended from Barnabas Fawer, who[Pg 118] bought it of Valentine Hill in 1646. The children of Osborn sold it in 1756 to Ichabod Jones, whose son John Coffin Jones inherited.
Red Cross, at the southwest corner of North and Cross streets. In 1746, John Osborn (innkeeper) purchased land from Tolman Farr, who inherited it from Barnabas Fawer, who[Pg 118] obtained it from Valentine Hill in 1646. Osborn's children sold it in 1756 to Ichabod Jones, whose son John Coffin Jones inherited it.
Red Lyon, northeast corner of North and Richmond streets. Nicholas Upshall was the owner in 1644. Nov. 9, 1654, Francis Brown’s house was near the Red Lyon. Joseph Cock and wife Susannah (Upshall) inherit half in 1666, Edward Proctor and wife Elizabeth (Cock) inherit in 1693-94 half of the Red Lyon Inn, John Proctor deeds to Edward Proctor in 1770, Proctor to Charles Ryan in 1790, Ryan to Thomas Kast in 1791, Kast to Reuben Carver in 1794. In 1798 William T. Clapp was occupier. A brick and wooden dwelling, three and two stories, twenty-four windows, value $2500. In 1763 mentioned in the Town Records.
Red Lyon, at the northeast corner of North and Richmond streets. Nicholas Upshall owned it in 1644. On November 9, 1654, Francis Brown’s house was close to the Red Lyon. In 1666, Joseph Cock and his wife Susannah (Upshall) inherited half of it, and in 1693-94, Edward Proctor and his wife Elizabeth (Cock) inherited the other half of the Red Lyon Inn. John Proctor transferred his interest to Edward Proctor in 1770, Proctor sold it to Charles Ryan in 1790, Ryan transferred it to Thomas Kast in 1791, and Kast sold it to Reuben Carver in 1794. By 1798, William T. Clapp was the occupant. It was a brick and wooden building, three and two stories high, with twenty-four windows, valued at $2500. In 1763, it was mentioned in the Town Records.
Red Lyon, Washington Street, see Lion. 1798 James Clark (innholder).
Red Lyon, Washington Street, see Lion. 1798 James Clark (innkeeper).
Rising Sun, Washington Street, between School and Winter streets. 1800 Luther Emes (innholder).
Rising Sun, Washington Street, between School and Winter streets. 1800 Luther Emes (innkeeper).
Roebuck, east side of Merchants’ Row (Swing Bridge Lane) a grant of land to Leonard Buttles in 1648-49. He sold to Richard Staines in 1655, whose widow Joyce Hall deeds to Thomas Winsor in 1691; Winsor mortgages to Giles Dyer in 1706, who deeds the same year to Thomas Loring; Loring to John Barber in 1712; Barber to John Pim in 1715. Samuel Wright and wife Mary (Pim) inherit. Jane Moncrief acquires, and conveys to William Welch in 1793, Welch to William Wittington in 1794. In 1798 William Wittington, Jr., was the occupier. House of brick and wood, three stories, nineteen windows, value $2500. In 1776 Elizabeth Wittington was licensed as an innholder at the Roebuck, Dock Square. In 1790 William Wittington at the Sign of the Roebuck was next to John Sheppard.
Roebuck, on the east side of Merchants’ Row (Swing Bridge Lane) was a land grant to Leonard Buttles in 1648-49. He sold it to Richard Staines in 1655, whose widow, Joyce Hall, transferred it to Thomas Winsor in 1691; Winsor then mortgaged it to Giles Dyer in 1706, who subsequently transferred it to Thomas Loring that same year; Loring sold it to John Barber in 1712; Barber sold it to John Pim in 1715. Samuel Wright and his wife Mary (Pim) inherited it. Jane Moncrief acquired the property and conveyed it to William Welch in 1793, and Welch sold it to William Wittington in 1794. In 1798, William Wittington Jr. was the occupant. The house was made of brick and wood, three stories high, with nineteen windows, valued at $2500. In 1776, Elizabeth Wittington received a license to operate an inn at the Roebuck, Dock Square. In 1790, William Wittington at the Sign of the Roebuck was located next to John Sheppard.
Roebuck, Battery March. July 29, 1702, house of[Pg 119] Widow Salter at the Sign of the Roebuck, nigh the South Battery.
Roebuck, Battery March. July 29, 1702, Widow Salter's house at the Sign of the Roebuck, near the South Battery.
Rose and Crown, southwest corner of State and Devonshire streets. Thomas Matson was an early owner of the land. He deeds to Henry Webb in 1638, Webb to Henry Phillips in 1656-57. His widow Mary deeds to her son Samuel “the Rose and Crown” in 1705-06, Gillum Phillips to Peter Faneuil in 1738, George Bethune and wife Mary (Faneuil) to Abiel Smith in 1787. In 1798 a brick house, three stories, forty-four windows, value $9000. Dec. 29, 1697, a lane leading from the Rose and Crown Tavern (Devonshire Street).
Rose and Crown, southwest corner of State and Devonshire streets. Thomas Matson was one of the first owners of the land. He transferred it to Henry Webb in 1638, and Webb passed it to Henry Phillips in 1656-57. His widow, Mary, gave “the Rose and Crown” to her son Samuel in 1705-06. Gillum Phillips sold it to Peter Faneuil in 1738, and George Bethune and his wife Mary (Faneuil) transferred it to Abiel Smith in 1787. In 1798, there was a three-story brick house with forty-four windows, valued at $9000. On Dec. 29, 1697, a lane led from the Rose and Crown Tavern (Devonshire Street).
Royal Exchange, State Street, see Exchange.
Royal Exchange, State Street, see Exchange.
Salutation, northeast corner of North and Salutation streets. James Smith acquired the land at an early date. He deeds to Christopher Lawson, and Lawson to William Winburne in 1664; Winburne to John Brookins in 1662 “the Salutation Inn.” Elizabeth, widow of Brookins, married (2) Edward Grove, who died in 1686, and (3) William Green. In 1692 William Green and wife Elizabeth convey to William Phipps house called the Salutation. Spencer Phipps inherits in 1695, Phipps to John Langdon in 1705, the heirs of Langdon to Thomas Bradford in 1766, Bradford to Jacob Rhodes in 1784, house formerly “the Two Palaverers.” In 1798 it was occupied by George Singleton and Charles Shelton. A wooden house, two stories, thirty-five windows, value $2500. In 1686 Edward Grove was licensed, Samuel Tyley in 1711, Elisha Odling 1712, John Langdon, Jr., 1714. In 1715 he lets to Elisha Odling, Arthur Young 1722, Samuel Green 1731, Edward Drinker 1736. In 1757 called Two Palaverers. William Campbell licensed 1764, Francis Wright 1767, Thomas Bradford 1782, Jacob Rhodes 1784.
Salutation, northeast corner of North and Salutation streets. James Smith acquired the land early on. He sold it to Christopher Lawson, who then sold it to William Winburne in 1664; Winburne sold it to John Brookins in 1662, and the place was known as “the Salutation Inn.” Elizabeth, Brookins' widow, married (2) Edward Grove, who died in 1686, and (3) William Green. In 1692, William Green and his wife Elizabeth transferred ownership to William Phipps for the house called the Salutation. Spencer Phipps inherited it in 1695, and then it went to John Langdon in 1705, then to Langdon's heirs to Thomas Bradford in 1766, and Bradford sold it to Jacob Rhodes in 1784, which was formerly known as “the Two Palaverers.” In 1798, George Singleton and Charles Shelton occupied it. It was a two-story wooden house with thirty-five windows, valued at $2500. In 1686, Edward Grove was granted a license, Samuel Tyley in 1711, Elisha Odling in 1712, and John Langdon, Jr. in 1714. In 1715 he leased to Elisha Odling, Arthur Young in 1722, Samuel Green in 1731, and Edward Drinker in 1736. In 1757, it was called Two Palaverers. William Campbell was licensed in 1764, Francis Wright in 1767, Thomas Bradford in 1782, and Jacob Rhodes in 1784.
Schooner in Distress and Sign of the Schooner,[Pg 120] North Street, between Cross and Richmond streets. 1761 mentioned in the Town Records.
Schooner in Distress and Sign of the Schooner,[Pg 120] North Street, between Cross and Richmond streets. 1761 mentioned in the Town Records.
Seven Stars, northwest corner of Summer and Hawley streets. The possession of John Palmer. His widow Audrey deeds to Henry Rust in 1652; Rust to his son Nathaniel, 1684-85; Nathaniel to Robert Earle, 1685; Earle to Thomas Banister, 1698, house being known by the name of Seven Stars; Samuel Banister to Samuel Tilly, 1720; Tilly to William Speakman, 1727; Speakman to Leonard Vassal, 1728; Vassal to John Barnes and others for Trinity Church.
Seven Stars, northwest corner of Summer and Hawley streets. Owned by John Palmer. His widow Audrey transfers it to Henry Rust in 1652; Rust to his son Nathaniel, 1684-85; Nathaniel to Robert Earle, 1685; Earle to Thomas Banister, 1698, the house becoming known as Seven Stars; Samuel Banister to Samuel Tilly, 1720; Tilly to William Speakman, 1727; Speakman to Leonard Vassal, 1728; Vassal to John Barnes and others for Trinity Church.
Ship, North Street, see Noah’s Ark.
Ship, North Street, see Noah's Ark.
Ship, Washington Street, see Cole’s Inn.
Ship, Washington Street, see Cole’s Inn.
Ship, Sign of, west side of North Street, between Sun Court and Fleet Street. The original possession of Thomas Joy, who sold to Henry Fane, and Fane to Richard Way in 1659-60, Thomas Kellond 1777, Robert Bronsdon 1678-79, William Clarke 1707-08, Joseph Glidden 1728, and his heirs to John Ballard 1781. In 1789 John Ballard was innkeeper here. The Executor of Ballard conveys to John Page, and Page to George R. Cushing of Hingham in 1797. In 1798 it was a wooden building, three stories, twenty-nine windows, value $1850, and occupied by Ebenezer Knowlton, Ziba French, and John Daniels.
Ship, Sign of, on the west side of North Street, between Sun Court and Fleet Street. Originally owned by Thomas Joy, who sold it to Henry Fane, and Fane then sold it to Richard Way in 1659-60, followed by Thomas Kellond in 1777, Robert Bronsdon in 1678-79, William Clarke in 1707-08, Joseph Glidden in 1728, and his heirs to John Ballard in 1781. By 1789, John Ballard was the innkeeper here. Ballard's executor transferred ownership to John Page, who then sold it to George R. Cushing of Hingham in 1797. In 1798, it was a three-story wooden building with twenty-nine windows, valued at $1850, and was occupied by Ebenezer Knowlton, Ziba French, and John Daniels.
Shippen’s Crane, Dock Square. 1739 John Ballard licensed as retailer.
Shippen's Crane, Dock Square. 1739 John Ballard approved as a retailer.
Star, northwest corner of Hanover and Union streets. The lot of John Davis in the Book of Possessions. He deeds to John Trotman in 1645, whose wife Katherine deeds on the same day to Thomas Hawkins. In 1671 Hawkins mortgages to Sampson Sheafe, and in 1671-72 the property is delivered to Sheafe. 1672-73 Sheafe conveys to John Howlet, and in 1676 Susannah, wife of Howlet, deeds to Andrew Neale. 1709-10 the heirs of[Pg 121] Neale deed to John Borland house by the name of “the Star,” now occupied by Stephen North and Charles Salter. John Borland inherits 1727. Jonathan Simpson and wife Jane (Borland) convey to William Frobisher in 1787. In 1798 it was a wooden house, two stories, twenty-eight windows, value $3000. Frobisher and Thomas Dillaway were the occupiers. 1699 the fore street leading to Star Inn mentioned. 1700 house near the Star Ale House. In 1722 John Thing was licensed. 1737 house formerly the Star Tavern in Union Street.
Star, northwest corner of Hanover and Union streets. The lot of John Davis in the Book of Possessions. He transfers ownership to John Trotman in 1645, whose wife Katherine transfers on the same day to Thomas Hawkins. In 1671, Hawkins mortgages to Sampson Sheafe, and in 1671-72 the property is handed over to Sheafe. From 1672-73, Sheafe transfers to John Howlet, and in 1676, Susannah, Howlet's wife, transfers to Andrew Neale. In 1709-10, the heirs of [Pg 121] Neale transfer to John Borland, the house known as “the Star,” now occupied by Stephen North and Charles Salter. John Borland inherits in 1727. Jonathan Simpson and his wife Jane (Borland) transfer to William Frobisher in 1787. In 1798, it was a wooden house, two stories, with twenty-eight windows, valued at $3000. Frobisher and Thomas Dillaway were the occupants. In 1699, the fore street leading to Star Inn is mentioned. In 1700, there was a house near the Star Ale House. In 1722, John Thing was licensed. In 1737, the house formerly known as the Star Tavern on Union Street.
State’s Arms, Washington Street. See King’s Arms.
State’s Arms, Washington Street. See King’s Arms.
Sun, Faneuil Hall Square. In the Book of Possessions Edward Bendall had house and garden here. He mortgaged to Symon Lynde, who took possession in 1653. His son Samuel Lynde inherits in 1687, and his heirs make a division in 1736. Joseph Gooch and others convey to Joseph Jackson in 1769 the Sun Tavern. Jackson’s widow Mary inherits in 1796 and occupied the house with others in 1798, when it was a brick house, three stories, twenty-two windows, value $8000. 1694-95 street running to the dock by the Sun Tavern. 1699-1700 now occupied by James Meeres. 1709 owned by Samuel Lynde, now in possession of Thomas Phillips. 1757 Capt. James Day was licensed.
Sun, Faneuil Hall Square. In the Book of Possessions Edward Bendall had a house and garden here. He mortgaged it to Symon Lynde, who took over in 1653. His son Samuel Lynde inherited it in 1687, and his heirs divided it in 1736. Joseph Gooch and others transferred ownership of the Sun Tavern to Joseph Jackson in 1769. Jackson’s widow Mary inherited in 1796 and lived in the house with others in 1798, when it was a brick building with three stories, twenty-two windows, worth $8000. A street leading to the dock by the Sun Tavern existed from 1694-95. From 1699-1700, it was occupied by James Meeres. In 1709, it was owned by Samuel Lynde, who then transferred it to Thomas Phillips. In 1757, Capt. James Day received a license for it.
Sun, west side of Washington Street, between Brattle and Court streets. In 1782 Gillum Taylor deeds his estate to John Hinckley bounded south by the land in possession of Benjamin Edes, late the Sun Tavern.
Sun, west side of Washington Street, between Brattle and Court streets. In 1782, Gillum Taylor transferred his property to John Hinckley, bordered to the south by the land owned by Benjamin Edes, formerly the Sun Tavern.
Swan, west side of Commercial Street, near the Ferry. In 1651 Thomas Rucke mortgages his house called The Swan, which he bought of Christopher Lawson in 1648, and he of Thomas Buttolph, who was the original owner.
Swan, on the west side of Commercial Street, close to the Ferry. In 1651, Thomas Rucke took out a mortgage on his house named The Swan, which he purchased from Christopher Lawson in 1648, and Lawson bought it from Thomas Buttolph, the original owner.
Swan, Sign of the, see Queen’s Head. In 1708 Fish Street (North Street) extends to the Sign of the Swan by Scarlett’s Wharf.
Swan, Sign of the, see Queen’s Head. In 1708, Fish Street (North Street) goes all the way to the Sign of the Swan near Scarlett’s Wharf.
[Pg 122]Swann, locality not stated. 1777 mentioned in Town Records.
[Pg 122]Swann, location not specified. Mentioned in Town Records in 1777.
Three Crowns, North Street, between Cross and Richmond streets. 1718 Thomas Coppin licensed. 1735 mentioned in the Town Records.
Three Crowns, North Street, between Cross and Richmond streets. 1718 Thomas Coppin licensed. 1735 mentioned in the Town Records.
Three Horse Shoes, west side of Washington Street, between School and Bromfield streets. The original possession of William Aspinwall, who deeds land to John Angier in 1652. The heirs of Edmund Rangier to William Turner in 1697. Turner to George Sirce in 1713. William Gatcomb and wife Mary (Sirce) inherit. In 1744 Philip Gatcomb mortgages house known by the Sign of the Three Horse Shoes; William Gatcomb to Gilbert Deblois, Jr., in 1784; Lewis Deblois to Christopher Gore, 1789; Gore to James Cutler and Jonathan Amory, 1793; Cutler to Jonathan Amory, Jr., 1797.
Three Horse Shoes, on the west side of Washington Street, between School and Bromfield streets. This was originally owned by William Aspinwall, who transferred the land to John Angier in 1652. The heirs of Edmund Rangier then passed it to William Turner in 1697. Turner sold it to George Sirce in 1713. William Gatcomb and his wife Mary (Sirce) inherited it. In 1744, Philip Gatcomb mortgaged the house known as the Sign of the Three Horse Shoes; William Gatcomb sold it to Gilbert Deblois, Jr., in 1784; Lewis Deblois transferred it to Christopher Gore in 1789; Gore sold it to James Cutler and Jonathan Amory in 1793; Cutler then sold it to Jonathan Amory, Jr., in 1797.
Three Mariners, south side of Faneuil Hall Square. The original possession of Isaac Grosse. Thomas Grosse conveys to Joseph Pemberton in 1679, and Joseph to Benjamin Pemberton in 1701-02 “the Three Mariners.” In 1701-02 occupied by Edward Bedford. In 1712 the executor of Benjamin Pemberton deeds to Benjamin Davis the house known by the name of the “Three Mariners.” In 1723 the house of Elizabeth, widow of Benjamin Davis, known as “Bear Tavern,” conveyed to Henry Whitten, Whitten to John Hammock in 1734-35, Ebenezer Miller and wife Elizabeth (Hammock) to William Boyce in 1772, Boyce to William Stackpole in 1795 the house known as the “Bear Tavern.” In 1798 it was a wooden house, three stories, fourteen windows, value $5000, and occupied by Peter Richardson. In the nineteenth century it was known as the “Bite.”
Three Mariners, on the south side of Faneuil Hall Square. Originally owned by Isaac Grosse. In 1679, Thomas Grosse transferred it to Joseph Pemberton, who then passed it on to Benjamin Pemberton between 1701 and 1702, calling it “the Three Mariners.” By 1701-02, Edward Bedford was occupying it. In 1712, the executor of Benjamin Pemberton sold the house known as the “Three Mariners” to Benjamin Davis. In 1723, Elizabeth, the widow of Benjamin Davis, sold the house, referred to as “Bear Tavern,” to Henry Whitten, who then transferred it to John Hammock in 1734-35. Ebenezer Miller and his wife Elizabeth (Hammock) sold it to William Boyce in 1772, and Boyce sold it to William Stackpole in 1795, calling it the “Bear Tavern.” By 1798, it was a wooden house with three stories, fourteen windows, valued at $5000, and occupied by Peter Richardson. In the nineteenth century, it was known as the “Bite.”
Three Mariners, at the lower end of State Street. 1719 Thomas Finch licensed.
Three Mariners, at the bottom of State Street. 1719 Thomas Finch licensed.
THE SUN TAVERN (Dock Square) ABOUT 1900
THE SUN TAVERN (Dock Square) AROUND 1900
Two Palaverers, see Salutation.
Two Talkers, see Salutation.
Union Flag, Battery March. 1731 William Hallowell’s house, known by the name of Union Flag. Possibly not a tavern.
Union Flag, Battery March. 1731 William Hallowell’s house, known as the Union Flag. It may not be a tavern.
Vernon’s Head and Admiral Vernon, northeast corner of State Street and Merchants’ Row. The early possession of Edward Tyng, who sold to James Everill 1651-52, and he to John Evered alias Webb in 1657. Webb conveyed to William Alford in 1664. Peter Butler and wife Mary (Alford) inherit, and deed to James Gooch in 1720. In 1760 John Gooch conveys to Tuthill Hubbard the “Vernon’s Head.” In 1798 it was a brick store. In 1745 Richard Smith was licensed, Thomas Hubbard 1764. In 1766 William Taunt, who has been at the Admiral Vernon several years, prays for a recommendation for keeping a tavern at the large house lately occupied by Potter and Gregory near by. Sarah Bean licensed 1774, Nicholas Lobdell 1776 and 1786, John Bryant 1790.
Vernon’s Head and Admiral Vernon, located at the northeast corner of State Street and Merchants’ Row. Originally owned by Edward Tyng, who sold it to James Everill in 1651-52, and then to John Evered alias Webb in 1657. Webb transferred it to William Alford in 1664. Peter Butler and his wife Mary (Alford) inherited it and sold it to James Gooch in 1720. In 1760, John Gooch sold “Vernon’s Head” to Tuthill Hubbard. By 1798, it had become a brick store. In 1745, Richard Smith received a license, followed by Thomas Hubbard in 1764. In 1766, William Taunt, who had been running the Admiral Vernon for several years, requested a recommendation for operating a tavern at the large house recently occupied by Potter and Gregory nearby. Sarah Bean was licensed in 1774, Nicholas Lobdell in 1776 and 1786, and John Bryant in 1790.
White Bear, Sign of, location not stated. 1757 mentioned in the Town Records.
White Bear, Sign of, location not specified. Mentioned in the Town Records in 1757.
White Horse, west side of Washington Street, between West and Boylston streets. Land owned by Elder William Colburne in the Book of Possessions. Moses Paine and wife Elizabeth (Colburne) inherit. Thomas Powell and wife Margaret (Paine) inherit. In 1700 Powell conveys to Thomas Brattle the inn known as the White Horse. William Brattle mortgages to John Marshall in 1732, and Marshall deeds to Jonathan Dwight in 1740. William Bowdoin recovers judgment from Dwight and conveys to Joseph Morton in 1765; Morton to Perez Morton, 1791. In 1798 it was occupied by Aaron Emmes. A wooden house, two stories, twenty-six windows, value $9000. In 1717 Thomas Chamberlain was licensed, William Cleeres in 1718,[Pg 124] Mrs. Moulton 1764, Israel Hatch 1787, Joseph Morton 1789, Aaron Emmes 1798.
White Horse, on the west side of Washington Street, between West and Boylston streets. The land was owned by Elder William Colburne in the Book of Possessions. Moses Paine and his wife Elizabeth (Colburne) inherited it. Thomas Powell and his wife Margaret (Paine) inherited next. In 1700, Powell sold the inn known as the White Horse to Thomas Brattle. William Brattle mortgaged it to John Marshall in 1732, and Marshall transferred it to Jonathan Dwight in 1740. William Bowdoin won a judgment against Dwight and transferred it to Joseph Morton in 1765; Morton passed it to Perez Morton in 1791. By 1798, it was occupied by Aaron Emmes. It was a wooden house, two stories high, with twenty-six windows, valued at $9000. In 1717, Thomas Chamberlain was licensed, followed by William Cleeres in 1718,[Pg 124] Mrs. Moulton in 1764, Israel Hatch in 1787, Joseph Morton in 1789, and Aaron Emmes in 1798.
White Horse, Sign of the, Cambridge Street, near Charles River Bridge. 1789 Moses Bradley (innkeeper).
White Horse, Sign of the, Cambridge Street, near Charles River Bridge. 1789 Moses Bradley (innkeeper).
Footnotes:
References:
[1] Cordis’s bill for a dinner given by Governor Hancock to the Fusileers at this house in 1792 is a veritable curiosity in its way:—
[1] Cordis’s bill for a dinner hosted by Governor Hancock for the Fusileers at this house in 1792 is quite a fascinating document in its own right:—
£ | s. | p. | |||||
136 | Bowls of Punch | 15 | 6 | ||||
80 | Dinners | 8 | |||||
21 | Bottles of Sherry | 4 | 14 | 6 | |||
Brandy | 2 | 6 |
[2] A punch-bowl on which is engraved the names of seventeen members of the old Whig Club is, or was, in the possession of R. C. Mackay of Boston. Besides those already mentioned, Dr. Church, Dr. Young, Richard Derby of Salem, Benjamin Kent, Nathaniel Barber, William Mackay, and Colonel Timothy Bigelow of Worcester were also influential members. The Club corresponded with Wilkes, Saville, Barré, and Sawbridge,—all leading Whigs, and all opponents of the coercive measures directed against the Americans.
[2] A punch bowl engraved with the names of seventeen members of the old Whig Club is, or was, owned by R. C. Mackay of Boston. In addition to those already mentioned, Dr. Church, Dr. Young, Richard Derby from Salem, Benjamin Kent, Nathaniel Barber, William Mackay, and Colonel Timothy Bigelow from Worcester were also key members. The Club communicated with Wilkes, Saville, Barré, and Sawbridge—all prominent Whigs who opposed the forceful measures aimed at the Americans.
[3] Liberty Tree grew where Liberty Tree Block now stands, corner of Essex and Washington Streets.
[3] Liberty Tree grew where Liberty Tree Block is now located, at the corner of Essex and Washington Streets.
Text of Illustrations:
Text of Illustrations:
Daniel Jones of Boston,
Hereby informs his Customers and others that he has
Opened a TAVERN in Newbury-Street,
at the Sign of the HAT and HELMET, which is less
than a Quarter of a Mile South of the Town-House:
Where Gentlemen Travellers and others will be kind-
ly entertained, and good Care taken of their Horses.
He hath Accommodation for private and Fire-
Clubs, and will engage to furnish with good Liquors
and Attendance: Coffee to be had when called for, &c.
The House to be supplied with the News-Papers for
the Amusement of his Customers.
N. B. Knapp’d and plain Bever and Beveret Hats,
in the newest Taste, made and sold by said JONES.
Daniel Jones of Boston,
Hereby informs his customers and others that he has
Opened a tavern on Newbury Street,
at the sign of the Hat and Helmet, which is less
than a quarter of a mile south of the Town Hall:
Where gentlemen travelers and others will be treated
well, and their horses will be well cared for.
He has accommodations for private and fire
clubs, and will promise to provide good drinks
and service: Coffee will be available upon request, etc.
The house will be stocked with newspapers for
the enjoyment of his customers.
P.S. Knitted and plain beaver and beaveret hats,
in the latest styles, made and sold by said Jones.
STAGES.
The public are informed, that the Of-
fice of the New-York Mail, and Old Line Stages, is re-
oved from State-street, to Najor King’s tavern near the
Market, which they will leave at 8 o’clock, A. M. every
day (Sundays excepted). Also, Albany Stage Office is kept
at the same place. The Stage will leave it every Monday
and Thursday at 8 o’clock, A M.
The apartment in State-Street, lately occupied for the
above purpose, is to be let. Apply to Major King.
December 11
STAGES.
The public is informed that the New York Mail and Old Line Stages Office has moved from State Street to Major King's tavern near the Market. They will leave every day at 8:00 AM (except Sundays). Additionally, the Albany Stage Office is located at the same place. The Stage will depart every Monday and Thursday at 8:00 AM.
The space on State Street that was recently used for this purpose is available for rent. Interested parties can contact Major King.
December 11
New-York and Providence Mail STAGES,
Leave Major Hatches, Royal Ex-
change Coffee House, in State-Street, every morning
at 8 o’clock, arrive at Providence at 6 the same day; leave
Providence at 4 o’clock, for New-York, Tuesdays, Thurs-
days and Saturdays. Stage Book kept at the bar for the en-
trance of the names. Expresses forwarded to any part of the
continent at the shortest notice, on reasonable terms; horses
kept ready for that purpose only. All favors gratefully ac-
knowledged by the Public’s most humble servant.
Jan 1. STEPHEN FULLER, jun.
New York and Providence Mail STAGES,
Leave Major Hatches, Royal Ex-
change Coffee House, on State St., every morning
at 8 AM, arriving in Providence by 6 PM the same day; leave
Providence at 4 PM for New York on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. A stage book is available at the bar for
taking names. Express deliveries are sent to any part of the
continent at short notice and reasonable rates; horses
are kept ready for this purpose only. All favors are gratefully ac-
knowledged by the Public’s most humble servant.
Jan 1. STEPHEN FULLER, jun.
Jolley Allen,
Advertises all his good old Friends,
Customers and others,
That he has again opened Shop, opposite to the
Three Doves in Marlborough-Street, Boston:
And has for Sale, at the lowest Prices, the fol-
lowing Articles;
Muscovado Sugars of various Sorts
and Prices, single, middle and double refined
English Loaf Sugars, lately imported, Pepper,
Bohea Tea, Coffee, Spices of all Sorts, Indigo,
Raisins, Currants, Starch, Ginger, Copperas,
Allum, Pipes of all Sorts, best Durham Flour
of Mustard, and most other Kinds of Groceries
too many to enumerate, which he will sell from
the largest to the smallest Quantities.—Likewise
a very large and compleat Assortment of Liver-
pool and Staffordshire Ware, which he will
engage to sell by the Crate, or single Piece, as
low as any Store in Town.—Playing Cards,
Wool Cards, Seive Bottoms, a few Pieces of
Oznabrigs and Ticklenburgs, No.4 and No.12.
Pins, a few Pieces of Sooses, Damasks, Sterrets,
Loretto’s, Burdetts, Brunswicks, Mozeens,
for Summer Waistcoats, &c. &c. &c.
Also, at said Allen’s may be had, genteel
Boarding and Lodging for six or eight Persons
if should be wanted, for a longer or shorter Season,
likewise good Stabling for ten Horses and Car-
riages.
N. B. If any Person inclines to hire the above
Stable, and Place for Carriages, they may have
a Lease of the same for 19 Years or less Time
from the said Allen, and if wanted, on the same
Premises can be spared, Room for forty or fifty
Horses and Carriages: It is as good a Place for
Horse and Chaise Letting as any in Boston.
Jolley Allen,
Wants to let all his good old friends,
Customers and others,
Know that he has reopened his shop, across from the
Three Doves on Marlborough Street, Boston:
And he has for sale, at the lowest prices, the follow-
ing items;
Muscovado sugars of various types
and prices, single, middle, and double refined
English loaf sugars, recently imported, pepper,
Bohea tea, coffee, spices of all types, indigo,
raisins, currants, starch, ginger, copperas,
alum, pipes of all kinds, the best Durham flour
of mustard, and many other kinds of groceries
too numerous to list, which he will sell in
quantities from the largest to the smallest.—Also,
a very large and complete assortment of Liver-
pool and Staffordshire ware, which he will
sell by the crate or as individual pieces, as
cheap as any store in town.—Playing cards,
wool cards, sieve bottoms, a few pieces of
Oznabrigs and Ticklenburgs, No.4 and No.12.
Pins, a few pieces of sooses, damasks, sterrets,
Loretto’s, Burdetts, Brunswicks, mozeens,
for summer waistcoats, etc., etc., etc.
Also, at Allen's you can find nice
boarding and lodging for six or eight people
if needed, for a longer or shorter stay,
and good stabling for ten horses and car-
riages.
N.B. If anyone is interested in renting the above
stable and carriage space, they can have
a lease for 19 years or less from Allen, and if needed,
there is room for forty or fifty
horses and carriages on the same premises: It’s as good a place for
horse and carriage rentals as any in Boston.
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!