NOTES ON COLONIAL PENOBSCOT ----------------------------------------------------------------------- USGENWEB ARCHIVES NOTICE: These electronic pages may NOT be reproduced in any format for profit or presentation by other organization or persons. Persons or organizations desiring to use this material, must obtain the written consent of the contributor, or the legal representative of the submitter, and contact the listed USGenWeb archivist with proof of this consent. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ File contributed and transcribed for use in USGenWeb Archives by David C. Young . ------------------------------------------------------------------- Sprague's Journal of Maine History pg. 18-21 The Penobscot, or eastern section of Maine was as it is well understood, one of the first portions of the new world visited by the early English explorers. It went by various names, among them being Agoucy and Norumbegue, which latter name has in recent times been changed to Norombega. The arm of the sea which runs up to the town of Penobscot between Brooksville and Castine, and which divided ancient Pentagoet into two nearly equal parts and which is now known by the name of Bagaduce River, was formerly known as Matchebignatus. The origin of this name is somewhat in doubt although it was undoubtedly an Indian word. In 1760 it was called Baggadoose; during the Revolution, Maja-bagaduce. Williamson asserts that it was named for a French officer, Major Bigavduce, but subsequently says that it might have been derived from Marchebagaduce, which he considers an Indian word meaning "No good cove. " A tradition once existed among the Penobscot tribe that the upsetting of a canoe full of Indians at some remote period caused great sorrow and distress and hence the word has been thought by some to signify a place of sorrow. (a) November 20, 1700, John Crowne by petition and memorial, (b) to the "Lords and Commissioners for Trade and Plantations" of England claimed to own the entire Penobscot Country described in his petition as follows: "That your petitioner is rightfull Proprietor of Penobscot, and other lands in America lying westward of Nova Scotia; from the river Machias on the East to the river Musconcus on the West bordering on the Pemaquid. " He claimed title by inheritance as the eldest son of William Crowne, then deceased. This memorial is a valuable historical document and recites much of the controversy regarding various contentions about these titles between the French Governor, D'Aulnev, Sir Charles La Tour and others to the Penobscot region. La Tour, by a deed dated September 20, 1656, conveyed his Penob scot title to Thomas Temple and William Crowne who left England and went to the Penobscot and took possession of their estate. Not long after their arrival Temple and Crowne divided their property by deed dated September 12, 1657; Temple taking the Nova Scotia lands and Crowne the Penobscot lands. (a) Wheeler's History of Castine, p. 15. (b) Documentary History of Maine, (Baxter's Mss.) Vol. 10, page 74. Then the memorial recites that "the said William Crowne tooke possession of Penobscot, dwelt in it and built a considerable trading house some leagues up the river, at a place anciently called the Negue ; but by himself, Crowne's point." In 1662, Temple and Crowne both returned to England and "had a hearing before King Charles, the Second, and the Lords and others of his Majestyes most honorable Privy Councell then in being. " And it is averred that the result of this hearing was that their titles were ad udged to be valid and that they were "permitted to return and repossess'em, which they did. Thomas Temple was created by the king a baronet of Nova Scotia and commissioned to be governor. Then follows this allegation: "Sir Thomas Temple, being once more governor, oppress'd the said William Crowne; and forc'd from him a lease, of Penobscot, and all the lands belonging to it; for a rent far short of the value; and two considerable rich New England merchants, were bound for the payment of ye rent and for very good reason, for they farm'd, all the said lands of Sr. Thomas Temple; but neither they nor Sr. Thomas payed the said William Crowne a farthing rent. " It is not stated how or by what means Sir Thomas "oppress'd the said William Crowne, " but he brought a legal action of some sort against Temple as appears by the following: "Then the said William Crowne sued'em before the Governours of New England, but the Governours, and merchants being all brethren of one Independent congregation in Boston in New England, ye Governours protected their brethern in their dishonesty; and pretending the dispute was, about a title of lands, which lay out of their jurisdiction, they refus'd to give ye said William Crowne judgement, upon a bond made by their owne brethren, in their owne towne of Boston, nay they rejected a verdict given by one of their owne juryes, at the tryall, in behalfe of the said William Crowne ; By vertue of the aforesaid partiall and corrupt judgement; Sr. Thomas Temple, and the said merchants, enjoy'd the said William Crowne estate, and payd him nothing for it." This state of affairs existed until 1668 when King Charles ceded Nova Scotia to the rench, and "sent a commissioner under the great seale, to Sir Thomas Temple to deliver it. " Then it says: "Sr. Thomas being at that time, in possession of Penobscot, and all the lands belonging to it, by vertue of the aforesaid lease. presum'd to deliver'em all to the French, pretending they were a part of Nova Scotia; which lie knew to be false, but they were the estate of the said William Crowne. Therefore to impoverish, and totally disable the said William Crowne, from following him to England, and sueing him there, for the many hundred pounds he owed him, for nonpayment of rent, he gave up Penobscot, and all the lands belonging to it, to the French, for which, when he came to England, King Charles sent him to ye Tower." This memorial had hardly been penned before the war of the Spanish Succession, or as American history calls it, "Queen Anne's War," was raging which lasted until 1713, when it terminated by the treaty of Utrecht (1713) which resulted in the cession of all of ancient Acadia by the French government to Great Britain. This included all of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and as the English contended, all of the French possessions in Maine as well. This latter claim was, however, denied by the French and continued a matter of dispute between the two governments until Wolfe settled it all by capturing Quebec. Jeremiah Dummer, (a) the agent in England for the Massachusetts Bay Colony, advocated to the Board of Trade the propriety of colonizing disbanded soldiers on some of the lands "Eastward of the Kennebec River." One of his letters urging this, addressed to "Mr. Secretary Addington," is dated at Whitehall, April 5, 1715. Several other letters and memorials were addressed by him to the Board at different times of the same import. As all know, the claim of the Massachusetts Colony to anything east of the Kennebec was not sustained by the English government. The various memorials, petitions, letters and other documents pertaining to the subject are not only of historical value but some of them are entertaining as well. On June 6, 1717, Thomas Coram contributed to the contention a memorial in answer to the statements of Drunmer, in which (a) Documentary History of Maine, (Baxter's Mss.) Vol. 9, P. 357. he had said that "near a third part of the said lands, viz: the tract lying between Penobscot and Kennebec was more than sixty years since purchased Bona Fide of the Indian Natives by Numbers of English People, with the consent of the Kings, Governors and Government from time to time & confirmed by grants from the Council of Plymouth." Coram most humbly "To which the underwritten Thomas begs leave to make the following observation. New England "The inhabitants of the Massachusetts Bay in by their Charter from King Charles the first being limited to a Tract of land between Merrimack & Charles Rivers & three Miles each Side above one hundred miles distant from the nearest part of the land now in Question, without permission from the Crown to settle in any other part of his Majtys Land or the Lands of the Indians. "It appears that to confirm any Settlement of Purchase made of land from the Indians, it was necessary to have his Majtys Authority, Nevertheless the New Englanders as well as others, Traders & fishermen tempted by the Conveniencys of said land to settle themselves thereon in the time of unnatural Rebellion in Great Britain, when the King had no Govr there, practisd so with the Indian Natives of the Land now propos'd to be settled, that debauching them with strong Liquors they drew in the Indians to execute Deeds for large Quantities of Land, whether their own or his Majtys, without any valuable consideration for the same, knowing nothing of the Intents of these Writings. But when the Indians became sensible of the Deceit put upon them, they were so exasperated, that waging War with the New England Men, they destroy'd with fire & Sword, the Purchasers & their families by wch not only the said Land was laid desolate, as it remains to this day, but many other Towns & Villages near it in New England have been laid waste, in revenge of the Deceit put upon them by those pretended Purchasers from time to time, who in truth cou'd not know whether the Persons signing their Deeds were the Possessors, or had the powers to dispose of those Lands."