Robert Hewes of Boston is chiefly known among students of American glass as the man who tried unsuccessfully to found a glass factory at Temple, New Hampshire, in 1780-1781. The possibility that The Corning Museum of Glass might undertake an archaeological investigation of the Temple site led the author to begin research about Hewes and his connections with American glassmaking. The chief source of information about this glasshouse has been the centennial history of the Town of Temple, written by Henry Ames Blood in 1858. Blood collected his information from local records (since destroyed) and from several elderly members of the Hewes family. More recent probing indicates that he was mistaken in some of his conclusions.

Robert Hewes was born in Boston in 1751, the only child of Robert and Ann Rose Frey Hewes. His father's family had been in New England for several generations, but his mother had been born in London. The elder Robert Hewes was proprietor of a business in Pleasant Street which advertised itself as both a slaughterhouse and a tannery. Ann Hewes died in 1761, when her son was ten, and Robert Hewes, Sr., remarried in 1770. His second wife was Deborah Waite and they had no children. Hence, when Robert Hewes, Sr., died in 1776, most of his estate was intended for his son.¹

The first mention of Robert Hewes the glassmaker in colonial records occurs when he attended a meeting of the Sons of Liberty at Dorchester on August 14, 1769.² This is the only visible manifestation of revolutionary fervor on his part. Although he must have been able-bodied (in later life he was a fencing master), he apparently did not serve in the colonial forces.

After the death of his father, Robert carried on the slaughterhouse and tannery business, and advertised it in the local paper:³

Robert Hewes takes this method to inform his Employers, both in Town and Country, that his Slaughter-House for butchering Hogs and Cattle with the greatest dispatch is compleat. He is therefore ready to serve any Gentlemen that incline to favor him with their Custom.

In spite of this apparently flourishing business, he became interested in glass manufacture before 1780. From his letters, it seems that he believed this would be of great benefit to America and, therefore, would bring him fame as well as fortune. Why he selected Temple as the site of this venture is uncertain. At no time did Hewes own land in this area and no record of a lease or rent agreement between Hewes and James Adams, the owner of the Temple site, remains in the county records. Adams, a citizen of Lincoln, Massachusetts, bought the acreage of which the factory site is part from Sarson Belcher of Boston for "Nine Hundred Pounds Lawful Money" in 1779. The deed was recorded in Boston, December 7, 1779, but was not registered in the Hillsborough County [N.H.] records until April 8, 1782.⁴ Since Hewes publicized the glasshouse widely, he could hardly have hoped to exercise "squatter's rights" on the land, but any agreement which he may have had with Adams was apparently informal. That Hewes was acquainted with Belcher, as well as with Adams, is evident from a deed in the Suffolk County records dated December 15, 1780, in which Hewes sold a plot of land and Belcher was a witness.⁵ It is probable, therefore, that Hewes learned about the Temple site from Belcher.

Hewes' source of funds is likewise obscure. Blood reports that he inherited $50,000 from his father and sank it into the project, but his father's estate seems to have amounted to only £1,358 14s.⁶ and as it was not settled until 1790, when probate was ordered by the Court of Common Pleas⁷ Hewes did not even have the use of this money. His only apparent source of income was his business.

The best account of the venture at Temple, in Hewes' own words, exists in the form of a petition presented to the Massachusetts Legislature in January, 1782, when Hewes had decided to give the matter up:⁸

To the Hon'ble Senate and the Hon'ble House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in General Court Assembled at Boston.

Humbly Sheweth That in consequence of the Glass Manufactory's failing at Germantown, your petitioner applied himself to the study of that Art and being by profession a Chimist (which is the Foundation of it) he Naturely acquired a knowledge of the Theory-and having Glass-Makers in his Service, Employed about his other business your petitioner came to a determination to attempt to carry on said Manufactory and accordingly erected a Glass House in Temple, in the state of New Hampshire, in 1780, which was Unfortunately Burnt, he erected another and went to work, but only a small Sample of Glass was produced occasioned by his Furnices failing him owing to the Damage they received from the Fire and frost.

That afterwards, in order to encourage your petitioner still to go on with said Manufacture the said State of New Hampshire granted him a Lottery, but the Lottery failed with the New Emission Money in which it was granted.

That your petitioner rebuilt his Furnace the last Summer, and made the first crown glass that was ever made in New England:

The melting Furnace is made with Stone found in this Commonwealth, the melting Potts are made with a clay found in this county, both stand the fire well, and first discovered by your petitioner, and by which means he has been able to produce the Samples now before the General Court. Likewise, great abundance may be made, enough to supply this Commonwealth, as cheap as can be had from Europe, if Public Encouragement is granted to set it up in Boston, where your petitioner has a place properly situated in Pleasant Street for the purpose.

Your petitioner therefore honorably prays that this General Court would be pleased to take the premises into consideration Namely the Service the Manufactory will be to this State, and the Trouble & Expence your petitioner has gone through to make it Certain in every Prospect, Intirely Unassisted, and greatly to the Loss of his Interest; And be pleased to Grant him a Sum sufficient to sett it up, and a Patent for Fourteen years, as he is the first discoverer of it, to make him certain in the peaceful prosecution of it, as he wishes to bring it to the Utmost Pitch of Perfection, having every workman in the Country, that he wants for the purpose, and that the said Business may be brought to perfection by your Honor's Encouragement is the Sincere Wish of your Humble Petitioner. And as in duty bound shall pray.

Boston Jan'y, 1782

This hitherto unpublished document contains a great deal of information and some food for thought. For the benefit of the archaeologists, Hewes lists three different periods of construction on the glasshouse, the latest in the summer of 1781. He mentions the fact that he had been employing glassmakers at the slaughterhouse, thus laying to rest the theory that his men were glassworking deserters from the Hessian forces. It is probable that it was the chance employment of these men which first fired his interest in the business of glassmaking. It is tempting to speculate on the origins of the workmen. Hewes himself nowhere comments on their nationality, but all of the nineteenth-century sources agree that they were German. Stiegel's Manheim glasshouse had closed on May 5, 1774,⁹ throwing a number of men out of work, but from Hewes' reference to Germantown, it is more likely that they came from among the group of glassmakers who had settled there in 1752 and operated a glasshouse intermittently until 1768.

Although he mentions that the stones for his furnace came from Massachusetts and the clay for his pots from Suffolk County, he does not say exactly from where. In another document, he says that he had to haul in stone from sixty miles away,¹⁰ and Blood speculates that their source was Uxbridge, Massachusetts. The fuel for the furnace must have come from the woods surrounding the site and the sand may have come from there, as well.

The earliest document relating to the glasshouse which has been found is a petition from Hewes to the New Hampshire legislature which was written from Hampton Falls, on the New Hampshire coast, January 1, 1781. This document gives the exact dates involved:¹¹

... having an inclination to set up a Glass Manufactory for some years past, and having in his employ a number of glass-makers that he employed about other work till the 1st of May, when he ... took them to the Town of Temple in this State, and there erected his works, solely at his own expense; but after the works were completed they accidentally took fire and burned down ... the Building was soon [re]erected and fitted for business; but the Frost having got into the furnaces by [their] being exposed to the weather they ... gave way ... grant ... a freedom from Rates on his Buildings; likewise the same freedom for his Glass-makers to encourage them in the Business; and a Bounty upon the Glass they shall make ...

The answer to Hewes' petition came back on January 2, when the committee appointed to consider it recommended to the House of Representatives that Hewes be granted the exemption from taxes, but that the bounty be postponed until he had proved he could manufacture good window glass.¹²

Hewes apparently went back to Boston after this exchange, but from there he carried on an active correspondence with the Selectmen of Temple, whom he hoped to persuade to support, or at least feed, the glassmakers and their families.

The archives of the Temple Historical Society, present owners of the factory site, contain three letters written by Hewes to the Selectmen and fortunately saved from the fire which destroyed the town records in the nineteenth century. The first of these is undated but in it he sets forth his reasons for beginning the factory:¹³

... I am allmost Determined to drop all thoughts of Prosecuting the Glass Manufactory in Temple, for why Should I Strive to Introduce a Manufactory to benefit a People, that has not Spirit Enough to Subscribe a Trifle to Incourage it, when I have mett with a Missfortune, for if the Business Ever Comes to perfection it will be a Greater Service to the Country than it Possible can to me, Even if I make my Fortune, but Gentlemen, it was not Money only that Induced me, but it was because I was Satisfied I Could do it, and in so doing Serve my Country most Assentially, more Especially your Town, You will do well Gentlemen, to Consider this is not a thing for a Moment but it is Laying a foundation for the Good of Posterity ...

From a reference in this letter to a lottery, it probably can be dated around January 27, 1781, when Hewes petitioned the New Hampshire legislature for permission to run a lottery to raise money for the glasshouse.¹⁴ This was not an unusual proceeding — such lotteries in support of public works and infant industries were often advertised in contemporary newspapers. The Lottery Act was passed by the legislature on March 30, 1781 "to authorize certain persons to raise Two Thousand Pounds the New Emission to enable one Robert Hewes to carry on the manufacturing of Glass in the Town of Temple." The managers of the lottery were Francis Blood, Timothy Farrar, and Jacob Abbot, leading citizens of Temple and nearby New Ipswich.¹⁵

In the meantime, Simeon Ashley, Hewes' overseer at the glasshouse, sent an urgent request to the Selectmen for an answer to Hewes' letter. They responded by voting a loan of £3,000 to be collected in two months and advanced on good security.¹⁶ Hewes wrote again on March 11, saying that he needed the money most urgently and that he had no wish to get further in debt by accepting a loan unless they would accept the lottery as security.¹⁷

It is evident from this exchange of letters that the workmen and their families stayed in Temple instead of going back to Boston to work in the slaughterhouse. Apparently this was thought to be cheaper than moving them. The exact status of Ashley has not yet been determined, but the only other connection he seems to have had with Hewes occurred in November, 1787, when Simeon Ashley of Springfield sued Hewes for a debt of £156 11s. 9d. and was awarded a plot of land in Boston in payment.¹⁸ Whether this debt was left from the period he served Hewes in Temple is not clear.

The Selectmen answered Hewes' letter, but their reply can only be conjectured; Hewes wrote to them again as follows:¹⁹

I find we Come to a better Understanding, and if I Can be Supplyed with money on Loan Upon the Strength of the Lottery and not Risk all I have is all that I want. I giveing an Obbligation to Prosecute the Glass Manufactory ... I should be Glad the Nesesity's of my Glass Makers may be Looked to and Supplyed ... Boston March 24, 1781.

One of the more interesting mysteries in the study of the factory's finances is the exact role played by the citizens of New Ipswich, five or six miles south of Temple. A history of that community, published in 1852, has the following story:²⁰

... establishment was on a very small scale; ... he practically effected nothing and after a while concluded to leave town. But some of the most prominent men became interested in the matter, and a meeting was called to investigate the thing; when it was agreed to form a company (or society as it was then called) to enable him to erect more extensive works, and to extend the business ... Among the leaders in the enterprise were Dea. Isaac Appleton [the bearer of one of the Selectmen's messages to Hewes], Charles Barrett, Judge Champney, Reuben Kidder, and Judge Farrar [Timothy Farrar, one of the lottery managers].

Unfortunately, the town archives do not record this meeting, and no documents have been found to support it. Hewes rebuilt the factory in the spring of 1781, but whether this activity was financed by the Temple loan, or by money subscribed in New Ipswich cannot be determined. The lottery was advertised in the Independent Chronicle and Universal Advertiser, Boston:²¹

The General Court of the State of New Hampshire, having established a lottery, for the purpose of affording assistance and encouragement to Mr. ROBERT HEWES, of Boston, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in setting up and carrying on the manufacture of Glass, in the town of Temple, in the state of New Hampshire, and appointed Timothy Farrar, Jacob Abbot and Francis Blood, Esq., directors, who are sworn to the faithful discharge of the trust reposed in them.
The following SCHEME is accordingly offered to the public, which it is hoped will meet with the approbation and encouragement.
Glass-Works Lottery
CLASS the FIRST
Consists of 12,000 TICKETS, at 2 Dollars of the New Emission each ...

The advertisement goes on to give a chart showing the different amounts available as prizes ranging from 4 to 800 dollars and then states, "The Great Advantage the Manufacture of GLASS would be to the country in general, and the probability of its failing when brought near to perfection, unless public encouragement should in this way be granted, will, no doubt, occasion a rapid sale of the Tickets." On the ticket it is called merely "Glass-Works Lottery" to "encourage the manufactory of GLASS."²²

The lottery seems to have been a victim of the inflation brought on by the Revolution, still in progress. The managers reported its failure to the New Hampshire legislature the following year: ²³

... were obligated to take back the Tickets, by reason of the failure of the paper Currency ... were appointed by the General Court without their previous Solicitation or knowledge; and having expended a considerable sum of money in printing said Tickets & c... humbly pray the Hon'ble court to ... refund ... such sums of money as they have been necessitated to expend on account of said lottery ...

In spite of the lottery's failure, the factory was rebuilt and it did produce some glass. However, Hewes did not advertise it in Boston before October 29, 1781:²⁴

New-England GLASS-WORKS.
Temple, State of New-Hampshire
ROBERT HEWES
Takes this Method to inform the Public, that his Glass Works are at last compleated and answers the End Designed: where Gentlemen may be supplied with any Vessels for chemestry, or any other Use, Also, Crown Glass is made to perfection.
N.B. Good Encouragement given to any Foreign Glass Maker if any there be.

A search of newspaper files has failed to uncover any other advertisements for the "New England Glass-Works at Temple.”

Although the ad would seem to indicate that the business was functioning, Hewes' petition to the Massachusetts legislature in which he included that he wished to relocate the Temple factory in Boston was dated January, 1782, only two months after the ad quoted above. Exactly what happened during those two months to make Hewes abandon the factory in Temple is not clear. He may have had continued technical and financial difficulties, and just given up. The committee studying this petition recommended that another lottery be set up and this act was passed by the Massachusetts legislature on March 1, 1783, a year later. “An Act for Raising by Lottery the Sum of Three Thousand Pounds, for the Purpose of Building a Glass House and Promoting the Manufacture of Crown and Other Glass in Boston.” Included in the text was the provision that “Robert Hewes shall have the sole and exclusive Right of carrying on the Manufacture of Crown and other Glass within this Commonwealth, for the Term of seven Years from the Date of this Act.”²⁵

The fate of the glassworkers is unknown. Blood has an elaborate story about how the “thirty-two glass-blowing, smoke-puffing Dutchmen” were warned out of Temple by the Selectmen so that the town would not have to support them, and he describes an action by the Boston Selectmen to make Temple pay for the men's support, but no mention of this peculiar controversy could be found in the Boston Town Records. Hewes evidently planned to employ the same workmen in the Pleasant Street glasshouse which he proposed to build in his petition of January, 1782, and it is unlikely that he would have left them in Temple to starve.

It is not possible to ascertain what kinds of glass were made at Temple. Hewes advertised crown glass and several types of bottles, but since it is not known for how many weeks the factory was in production, it is hard to know how much might have been made there. Excavation can perhaps clarify this situation.

The glasshouse itself, according to Blood, was “65 feet square”; Francis Cragin was the master builder. As the glasshouse was rebuilt once and possibly twice, it is impossible to say which of these buildings this description fits. The first factory was built in May, 1780, burned down almost immediately and was rebuilt during the summer. A third building might have been built in 1781. The furnaces were constructed in May, 1780 and fell apart that fall. They were rebuilt in the summer of 1781.

The 1783 act of the Massachusetts legislature granted Hewes a monopoly until 1790. However, the lottery was never run and Hewes did not build a glasshouse on Pleasant Street. On the contrary, he continued to advertise his slaughterhouse and store all during the time in which he was associated with the Temple glasshouse and continuously afterwards until 1795.²⁶

In July, 1787, he was a member of the “Company to Establish a Glass Manufacture in Boston,”²⁷ a concern which later became the successful Boston Glass Manufactory. The General Court of Massachusetts at this time repealed the 1783 lottery act which incorporated Hewes' monopoly, and passed a new act which granted the infant company limited tax exemption and a fifteen-year monopoly on glassmaking in the state if they carried out their plans.²⁸

There is no evidence that Hewes was associated with this company longer than two months, as his name is signed in their account book only in July and August of 1787. The agreement for the company was “to be executed between Mr. Hewes, as undertaker for carrying on said Manufacture and the Company” which consisted of ten businessmen, some of whom were Hewes' neighbors on Newbury Street. At the organizing meeting, it was also voted “that Mr. Jonathan Amory & Mr. Higginson be a Committee to find a spot of ground proper to Build the necessary 'Works upon and report to the Company what terms it may be procured at.” Evidently, Hewes had given up the idea of having his next glasshouse on Pleasant Street. In August, two entries signed by Hewes record payment he received for “ten Hogsheads Kelp” delivered to the “Proprietors of the Glass Manufactory.” The following entry was not signed, but has been considered to refer to Hewes: “Boston, Oct. 1, 1787 Received of Edward Payne ... Forty two pounds to enable me to proceed to the Southward to procure workmen ...”²⁹ It is a provocative entry, no matter to whom it refers, and it would be of interest to know if the Boston concern was bent on enticing workers from the South Jersey area, or possibly from Amelung's factory in Maryland.

The next reference to Hewes' continuing interest in glass comes in a letter written May 7, 1788 and published in the Pennsylvania Gazette. This describes the East Hartford, Connecticut, venture of the Pitkin family, assisted by Hewes.³⁰

The prospects we have in bringing the manufactory of WINDOW GLASS to great perfection in this state of Connecticut are evident to everyone who wishes to promote so useful an undertaking — The gentlemen that are concerned in this useful business are men of much wealth and highly spirited in their undertakings; and have no doubt they can make glass of equal quality with any imported from Europe, and much cheaper. The wood in this state is large and very plenty; ... the materials for glass are also plenty, and can be had on reasonable terms ... They have a capital of 14,000$ and will increase it to 20,000 ... Their manufactory house is built of stone, is 4 stories high, and wide enough to admit of any length vehicle. Robert Hughes, [sic] from Boston, is chief artisan and super-do of the works; his abilities are not confined to the glass manufactory above, he is the master of others equally as useful, and which will also meet with proper encouragement in due time ... to the great honor of those gentlemen who are his present benefactors.

That winter, Hewes exhibited some of his Pitkin glass in Boston, and the fact was duly noted in several newspapers:

Several bottles, and a piece of crown glass, manufactured at East-Hartford, have been brought to this town-Some of these a correspondent has seen, and for smoothness, elegance of form, and transparency, he is of opinion are very little inferiour to the best imported. This manufactory is conducted by ROBERT HEWES, late of this town. Dec. 4, 1788.³¹

GLASS MANUFACTORY As Mr. Hewes has had the pleasure a second time to exhibit a specimen of his CROWN GLASS in this town, he takes this method to inform his friends and the publick, that they may be supplied with whole sheets of CROWN GLASS, DIME JOHNS, or any other large bottles, by leaving their names, and the size and form of said Bottles, with Mr. William Cunningham, near Liberty Pole, where a sample of his Sheets of Crown Glass is to be seen. Dec. 17, 1788.³²

Since this advertisement speaks of this as the second time that Hewes has exhibited glass in Boston, it is possible that the first time was in 1782 when he showed the Massachusetts legislature the sample of glass he had made at Temple. In spite of this "specimen" from East-Hartford, the Pitkin's factory failed to prosper and in May, 1791, when they petitioned the Connecticut legislature for aid, they made it clear that they blamed much of their trouble on Hewes:³³

That your memorialists have since the year 1783, expended very large sums of money in erecting a glass house and other buildings, purchasing stock & tools, procuring workmen, and etc. in order to carry the manufactory of Glass into effect, that they have been greatly imposed upon by pretending workmen mere imposters; particularly in the year 1788 your memorialists at the instigation of one Robert Hews (or Hewes) of Boston expended about two thousand dollars for the purpose of improving said glass factory to no purpose & wholly lost to your memorialists.

This is the last indication of Hewes' interest in the manufacture of glass — if he was connected with any further such ventures, the records have not come to light. He went back to Boston, and continued to advertise his business there although he was much in debt. He was sued in 1787 by Simeon Ashley, who had managed the Temple factory for him, and again in 1789 by Benjamin Thompson.³⁴ During the latter suit, Hewes' worth was estimated at £494 by the Court and that sum was granted to Thompson in partial payment of the debt. Shortly after this, in 1790, Hewes was ordered by the Court of Common Pleas to settle his father's estate and presumably at that time he took formal possession of the slaughterhouse. In 1796, the Boston Directory listed him as a “soap boiler, glue and rozin maker,”³⁵ but he had given up this business by 1800. The Boston Direct Tax Records for 1798 give the following information: “Robert Hewes owner, Robert Hewes & Peter Barnard, occupiers; wooden dwelling; west on Newbury Street; south on Essex Street; Shop, 429 sq. feet, brick; Barn, 270 sq. feet, wood; wood house, 300 sq. feet, wood. Land, 3,744 sq. feet, house 670 sq. feet, 3 stories, 26 windows, Value $3,500.”³⁶

He continued to operate the store, where he manufactured and sold Poland Starch, until the 1820's. In 1802, he published Rules & Regulations for Sword Exercises of Cavalry and, in 1804, Formations & Movements of Cavalry.³⁷ Where he learned these skills is not known, but from 1803 until 1825, the Boston Directory lists him as a fencing master or a “teacher of sword exercise” in several different locations. In 1820, when he was sixty-nine, he added surgery to the list of his accomplishments and from that year until his death in 1830 he is listed in the Directories as a surgeon-bonesetter. He was serious about his new occupations and advertised for pupils of fencing:³⁸

SWORD EXERCISE, in all its various branches, for Cavalry and Infantry, scientifically explained and taught by ROBERT HEWES, at his room over Boylston Market—particularly the art of Defence, with the Cut and Thrust-Uniting the French, Scotch, and Austrian methods into one System. Hours of attendance from nine to twelve A.M.. and from three to six P.M. Also the art of Defence with a Cane may be learnt in a little time, and at small expense.

He died in July, 1830, and obituaries in the Columbian Centinel and the Boston Weekly Messenger list him as “Long known as a celebrated bonesetter and fencing master.”³⁹ His estate was administered, with some difficulty, by Gilbert Clark, and after the will was probated in 1831, the sum of $4,645.53 was parceled out among Hewes' selected heirs (he had no children).⁴⁰

By the time he died, his early efforts to establish a viable American glass industry had long been forgotten, but although he was never personally successful in his glassmaking ventures, he must be given some credit for keeping the idea alive, and it is at least possible that the Boston Glass Manufactory would never have been founded without his guiding hand. Hewes is a character of some interest in his own right, and the excavation of his glasshouse in Temple may yet provide us with useful information on the history of American glassmaking.

Note added in proof:

Since this ms. was completed, I have obtained a copy of the Act of 1787. The following are previously unpublished excerpts:⁴¹

Whereas it appears that the means adopted in and by the Act referred to, in the title hereof, did not answer the purposes intended; and that Robert Hewes, for whose use the lottery aforesaid, was granted, and to whom was given the exclusive right of manufacturing Glass within this Commonwealth, for the term of seven years, from the date of the said Act, has relinquished every privilege and advantage to which he was entitled in and by the said Act:

Be it therefore enacted ... That the Act aforesaid, ... is repealed, and rendered null and void.

... Henry Higginson, Merchants, and the aforesaid Robert Hewes ... have formed a Co-partnership, and raised a fund, for the purpose of erecting a Glass House, and manufacturing all sorts of Glass, within this Commonwealth: provided they can be secured in the exclusive right of such manufacture for the term of fifteen years. And whereas it appeals to this Court, that such manufacture would be greatly advantageous to this Commonwealth: therefore be it enacted ...⁴²

The Act went on to grant a fifteen year monopoly, a five year freedom from tax, exemption from military duty for the workmen and a fine of five hundred pounds for any person who attempted to manufacture glass in defiance of the monopoly. All this was on the provision that no less than three thousand pounds be spent on the project, that it be working within two years, and that “Glass Ware, to the annual amount of five hundred pounds, at the least” be manufactured. Since Robert Hewes, and his heirs, are repeatedly mentioned in this Act, along with the businessmen, the fact that his association with them was apparently severed within a year is most puzzling.

---

This article was published in the Journal of Glass Studies, Vol. 12 (1970), 140–148.

---

1. Eben Putnam, Lieutenant Joshua Hewes, A New England Pioneer and Some of His Descendants, privately printed, 1913, p. 323.

2. Ibid., p. 324.

3. Independent Chronicle and Universal Advertiser, Boston, Sept. 25, 1777.

4. Hillsborough County Land Records, 9, p. 4, April 8, 1782.

5. Suffolk County Registry of Deeds, Boston, Grantor Index, December 15, 1780, Hewes to Clark.

6. Putnam, op. cit., p. 323.

7. Suffolk County Registry of Deeds, Boston, Grantor Index, Sept. 6, 1790.

8. Massachusetts Archives, 187, pp. 292-293½.

9. Helen and George S. McKenrin, American Glass, New York, 1950, p. 84.

10. Ms. letter, Hewes to Temple Selectmen, undated, Temple Historical Society.

11. Town Papers, Collection of 1880, X. #212, New Hampshire Records Center, Concord, New Hampshire.

12. House journals of New Hampshire, 11, p. 698, New Hampshire Archives.

13. Ms. letter, Hewes to Temple Selectmen, undated, Temple Historical Society.

14. Laws of New Hampshire, IV, 1776-1784, p. 367.

15. Ibid.

16. Henry Ames Blood, History of Temple, N.H., Boston, 1860, p. 168.

17. Ms. letter, Hewes to Temple Selectmen, March 11, 1781, Temple Historical Society.

18. Suffolk County Registry of Deeds, Grantor Index. Nov. 10, 1787, Hewes to Ashley.

19. Ms. letter, Hewes to Temple Selectmen, March 24, 1781, Temple Historical Society.

20. Frederick Kidder and Augustus A. Gould, The History of New Ipswich, Boston, 1852, p. 222.

21. May 17, 24, 31, 1781.

22. Blood, op. cit., p. 171.

23. Town Papers, Collection of 1880, X, #214, New Hampshire Records Center.

24. Boston Gazette and the Country Journal, October 29, 1781.

25. Laws and Acts of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, March 1, 1783, Vol. 1782, Chap. 48, reprinted, 1890.

26. Independent Chronicle and Universal Advertiser, Boston, October 25, 1781; October, November, 1782; June, November, December, 1783, etc. through June 9, 1794.

27. Ms. S-15, Glass Manufactory, Boston, Receipt Book, 1787-1794, Boston Athenaeum, 1st page.

28. Helen and George S. McKearin, Two Hundred Years of American Blown Glass, 1950, p. 19.

29. Ms. S-15, op. cit., Boston Athenaeum, 2nd page.

30. Pennsylvania Gazette, May 28, 1788. Extract from a letter from a gentleman in East-Hartford to his friend in Boston, dated May 7, 1788. I am indebted to Kenneth M. Wilson for this reference to the Pitkin Glass Works and for the one cited in note 33.

31. Independent Chronicle and Universal Advertiser, Boston, Dec. 4, 1788.

32. Ibid., Dec. 18, 25, 1788; Jan. 1, 1789. The same ad appeared in the Columbian Centinel, Boston, Dec. 17, 1788.

33. Industry, Second Series, 1147-1820, II, Ms. pp. 38a, 38b, 38c, Connecticut Archives, Connecticut State Library.

34. Suffolk County Registry of Deeds, Bk. 153, p. 276, January 9, 1789.

35. Boston Directory, printed by Manning and Loring for John West, No. 75 Cornhill, June, 1796, p. 56.

36. A Report of the Record Commissioners of the City of Boston Containing the Statistics of the United States Direct Tax of 1798, As Assessed on Boston; and the Names of the Inhabitants of Boston in 1790, As Collected for the First National Census, Boston, 1890, p. 373.

37. Putnam, op. cit., p. 324.

38. Columbian Centinel, Boston, April 5, 1826

39. Boston Weakly Messenger, July 22, 1830.

40. Suffolk Probate, 128a. 2.198.

41. See above, p. 145.

42. Laws and Acts of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, July 6, 1787, chapter 13, reprinted 1890.

Published on June 11, 2013