Glimpses of the Past: History of the River St. John, A.D. 1604-1784Raymond, W. O. (William Odber)
History
Glimpses of the Past: History of the River St. John, A.D. 1604-1784
Raymond, W. O. (William Odber)
New Brunswick -- History; Saint John River Valley (Me. and N.B.)
[87] The second contract, or Articles of Partnership, entered into by
William Hazen, Leonard Jarvis, James Simonds and James White
is printed in Collections of the N. B. Hist. Soc., Vol. I. p.
191. It is entered also in the book of records of the old
County of Sunbury. The original document bears the following
certificate, "Registered by me March 9th, 1782, Ja. Simonds,
Dep'y Reg'r."
Under the new contract Hazen and Jarvis were to have a half interest
in the business, James Simonds one-third and James White one-sixth,
and all the lands on the River St. John that had been granted to any
or either of the partners (Mr. Simonds' lot in Maugerville excepted)
were to be put into the common stock and divided in the following
proportions, namely, one-half to Hazen and Jarvis, one-third to
Simonds and one-sixth to White. The same division was to be made of
any lands that should thereafter be obtained by the members of the
company, either individually or collectively, during the continuance
of the partnership.
Mr. Simonds sailed from St. John for Newburyport in the schooner
Eunice on the 4th March, 1767, but owing to head winds he was twenty
days in arriving at his destination. He submitted to Hazen and Jarvis
the accounts of the business at St. John for the three years of the
company's operations and then repaired to Haverhill, about fourteen
miles distant, to visit his relations. On his return he was
accompanied by his sister Sarah and by his young bride, Hannah
Peabody, who were about to settle with him at St. John. On his arrival
at the store of Hazen and Jarvis, the new contract was presented to
him for his signature. The proposition relative to the division of
lands led to "a warm altercation and dispute." Hazen and Jarvis
positively declined to continue in the business or to furnish supplies
unless they were allowed an interest in the lands. They stated
further that the goods on board the schooner Eunice should not leave
Newburyport, nor would they furnish anything for the spring trade but
insist upon immediate payment of the balance due them unless Mr.
Simonds should execute the contract. Much as he disliked the proposal
the situation of Mr. Simonds did not admit of delay. He was anxious to
settle his family at St. John, his workmen and tenants needed his
supervision and the Indian trade for the season would be lost unless
the goods on board the Eunice were delivered as speedily as possible.
Under these circumstances he deemed it best to sign the contract.
Hazen & Jarvis claimed the company were at this time indebted to them
in the sum of L3,135, but in the subsequent proceedings in the court
of chancery this was disputed by Mr. Simonds and the statements of the
parties interested are so much at variance that it is difficult to
determine the exact truth in the matter.
James White declined to sign the new contract stating:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account