Page:The Granite Monthly Volume 9.djvu/165

Rh GOD in Dunstable was not erected within the Line limitted in the Order of this Court of June 6th 1747, the Inhabitants of Groton and Nottingham have lost the Benefit of Incorporation with the Town of Dunstable: Therefore

Voted, That a Meeting House for the publick Worship of GOD be erected as soon as may be on the East Side of the Road that leads from Capt. Cummins to Simon Thompson's, where the Timber for such a House now lies, agreeable to a Vote of the said Town of Dunstable on the 26th of May last; and that the said Inhabitants of Groton and Nottingham be and continue to be set off and annexed to the Town of Dunstable, to do Duty and receive Priviledge there, their Neglect of Compliance with the said Order of June 6th 1747, notwithstanding, unless the major Part of the Inhabitants and rateable Estate belonging to said Groton and Nottingham respectively, shall on or before the first Day of September next in writing under their Hands, transmit to the Secretary's Office their Desire not to continue so incorporated with the town of Dunstable as aforesaid; provided also, That in Case the said Inhabitants of Groton and Nottingham shall signify such their Desire in Manner and Time as aforesaid, they be nevertheless subjected to pay and discharge their Proportion of all Publick Town or Ministerial Rates or Taxes hitherto granted or regularly laid on them; excepting the last Sum granted for building a Meeting House. And that the present Town Officers stand and execute their Offices respectively until the Anniversary Town-Meeting at Dunstable in March next. Sent up for Concurrence.

[Journal of the House of Representatives (pages 46, 47), June 26, 1749.]

Whereas the Great & Generall Court of the the [sic] Province of the Massachusetts Bay in June Last, On the Petitions of Dunstable & Nottingham has Ordered that the Inhabitants of Groton and Nottingham, Which by Order of the sᵈ Court the 6ᵗʰ of June 1747 Were On Certain Conditions Annexed to sᵈ Dunstable & (Which Conditions not being Complyed with) be Annexed to sᵈ. Dunstable to do duty & Receive priviledge there their neglect of Complyance notwithstanding. Unless the major part of the Inhabitants and ratable Estate belonging to the sᵈ. Groton & Nottingham respectively Shall on or before the first day of September next in Writing under their hands Transmitt to the Secretarys Office their desire not to Continue so Incorporated With the town of Dunstable as aforesᵈ. Now therefore Wee the Subscribers Inhabitants of Groton & Nottingham Sett of as aforesᵈ. do hereby Signifie Our desire not to Continue so Incorporated with the town of Dunstable as aforesᵈ. but to be Sett at Liberty As tho that Order of Court had not ben passed

Dated the 10ᵗʰ day of July 1749

[Massachusetts Archives, cxv, 515.]

A manuscript plan of Dunstable, made by Joseph Blanchard, in the autumn of 1748, and accompanying these papers among the Archives (cxv, 519), has considerable interest for the local antiquary.

In the course of a few years some of these Groton signers reconsidered the matter, and changed their minds. It appears from the following communication that the question of the site of the meeting-house had some influence in the matter:—