Landmarks in Ancient Dover, New Hampshire by Mary P. Thompson, Durham, N.H. ©1892, Printed by the Republican Press Association, Concord, N.H. LANDMARKS:Durham NAMES: ADAMS, Rev. Hugh; CHARLES I; MASON, Capt. John; GORGES, Sir Ferdinando; CECILIUS; This name was given to the Oyster River parish when it was in- corporated as a town May 15, 1732. It included the present township of Lee till the latter was incorporated Jan. 16, 1766, and a part of Newmarket, ceded to the town July 2, 1870. The name of Durham was apparently given at the request of the Rev. Hugh Adams, then the minister at Oyster River. In his address to the General Court in 1738, he says this parish "was chartered into the township of Durham" in answer to his petition "for its privileges and said name, as therein pleaded for." (See N.H. Prov. Papers, V:35.) The name of Durham may have been chosen in order to commemorate the palatine form of government originally accorded to the New Hampshire settlement, if credit is to be given to the so-called Charter of Charles I to Capt. John Mason, Aug. 19, 1635, granting him the province of New Hampshire, "with power of government and as ample jurisdiction and prerogatives as used by the bishop of Durham." (Ibid, 1: 37.) The Bishops of Durham, England, it will be remembered, formerly exercised the semi-regal powers of a count palatine. It does not appear, however, that Capt. Mason or his heirs ever attempted to exercise such prerogatives in New Hampshire. Similar powers were also conferred on Sir Ferdinando Gorges in the Royal Charter of April 3, in the fifteenth year of the reign of Charles I, granting him the Province of Maine, with "all the Powers, Rights, Fran- chisses, Immunities, Royalties, & Priviledges wch are enjoyed or ought to be enjoyed by the Bishop of Dureseme in the county Palatine of Duresme." (See Baxter's Sir Ferdinando Gorges. 3: 304.) The first government established in Maryland was also palatinate, according to the charter from Charles I to Cecilius, the second Lord Baltimore, June 20, 1632, conferring on him prerogatives as ample as those exercised by the Bishop of Durham, which, as implied above, fell little short of royalty inself. PG 67 - Submitted by C. Parziale **************************************************************************** * * * * Notice: Printing the files within by non-commercial individuals and libraries is encouraged, as long as all notices and submitter informa- tion is included. Any other use, including copying files to other sites requires permission from submitters PRIOR to uploading to any other sites. We encourage links to the state and county table of contents. * * * * The USGenWeb Project makes no claims or estimates of the validity of the information submitted and reminds you that each new piece of information must be researched and proved or disproved by weight of evidence. It is always best to consult the original material for verification.