Town of Dublin, NH - When Was the Dublin Cemetery Established?

On behalf of the Cemetery Trustees, I’ve been researching what limited information is available to me from various historical sources to at least offer comments to John Harris’ letter which challenged the Cemetery’s establishment date. As I understand his concern, there seems to be confusion between when the cemetery was initially established vs. when the first recorded burial took place. The signage at the Cemetery reflects a 1751 date, using the wording “since” and “established”. Per John’s letter, the first “recorded” burial was for Joseph Twitchell in 1767, and I presume he believes that the 1751 signage is incorrect.

In reviewing the small amount of materials available which deal with Dublin’s earliest history, I concluded that the established cemetery date differs from the first recorded burial date, and that settlement activity in Dublin well prior to 1767 undoubtedly experienced some level of mortality with burials (now and perhaps always) in unmarked graves within lands reserved for public use.

To began, the signage for the cemetery, reflecting “since 1751” is worded on a state-logo sign at the Main Entrance which was ordered by Henry Allison, then Cemetery Superintendent, over 48 years ago (1961). The 1751 date on the secondary signage at the Hearse House was derived from the Main Entrance sign. Mr. Allison. per his genealogy in the latest Town History, seems to have been a respected academic and heavily involved in Town History, and my starting point was an assumption that he had researched the dating prior to ordering the sign and had some logical basis for the determination that 1751 was an accurate date for inclusion on a sign commemorating the establishment of the Cemetery.

o In 1746, the legal heir of John Mason sold his grant rights to a group of 12 investors known as the “Masonian Proprietors”. (Today, the term “proprietors” would be perhaps called “land speculators.) The area in question had numerous legal challenges which were subsequently resolved, either via payments or quitclaim deeds to Towns such as Portsmouth and Exeter which had been settled earlier on land owned by Mason for which he had received no payment.

including the setting aside of certain portions to support the Minister, schools, and a requirement to construct “a good, convenient Meeting House” near the center of town with 10 acres reserved for public use.

o In June of 1750, the area was divided into 220 lots (to satisfy another condition of the grant) and a draw lottery was conducted to apportion the area to individuals wishing to buy into the grant. At this point, it appears that the Masonian Proprietors still had some legal claim to the land they had sold, presumably to ensure that certain conditions of the sale were honored by the new Dublin Proprietors.

o On November 23, 1750, the Masonian Proprietors released all claims for the land sold to the Dublin Proprietors. However, it was apparent that some errors were made when the town lots were apportioned, and that corrections would have to be made. Given the lateness of the release, I suspect that the corrections were done the following year, 1751.

o At the time of the drawing, the presumed center of Town which was supposedly reserved for the Meeting House and acreage for public and ministerial use was apparently overlooked. In a manuscript entitled “Early Dublin-The Proprietors/Masonian and Township/Ad Gloriam Priorum” by Samuel Carroll Derby, it was noted that the above oversight was corrected (but no date given). It appears that the area which we know today as “Cemetery Lands”, are located around a junction point of 3 lots-Range V, lot 11, and Range VI, lots 10 and 11. One of the corrections converted the lot known as range V, lot 11 from private ownership to a ministerial lot on the basis that is was near the center of the Town (and an obligation to construct a Meeting House within a set time frame was a grant condition of sale.)

In addition, I am uncertain as to how to make the distinction between “Ministerial lands” and land reserved for Public Use, since Church and State were not separated until about 1820 and the Meeting House area served both. I am assuming that Mr. Allison used 1751 as the date the lots were corrected . Since the custom of the times generally favored burials on public lands in the proximity of (a future) Meeting House, I believe Mr. Allison concluded that the Cemetery was established at the time of the lot corrections. I do not believe any paperwork supporting Mr. Allison’s research is currently available.

assumed lot correction date) as to when the cemetery areas were reserved within lands set aside for the Meeting House. At this time, Dublin as an entity was established, notwithstanding the lack of settlement until around 1752 (William

Thornton). Starting as early as 1751, lots were being sold, and within 5 years almost half of the original lots had changed ownership, and Matthew Thornton owned about 33% of the entire town. Interestingly, none of the 40 Dublin Proprietors ever settled here, but sold their holdings over time to interested settlers.

departure of William Thornton due to “fear of the Indians” lost him his title as the “First Permanent Settler”, the Town Histories suggest that the assumed 1762 date for the “First Permanent English Settler” should not be interpreted to mean that settlement had not begun much earlier.

a) In Leonard’s 1855 Town History, he states “it is known that some families from Peterborough were residents here before the close of the French War” (Quebec fell in 1759, Montreal and all of Canada in 1760), and that records reflect work on Town Roads as early as 1760 although these workers may have been seasonal with an intent to relocate permanently at a later time. Even if we (erroneously) consider the 1762 date as the first “post Thornton” settlement date, I personally believe, given the high mortality rates of the time, that the “first recorded burial in the cemetery was that of Joseph Twitchell in 1767” as noted by Mr. Harris was not the first death in Dublin, and that, by custom, some burials would have taken place in the future Meeting House vicinity, on public lands whose location was known.

Leonard, (who came to Dublin in 1820 and possibly had first hand accounts from individuals who were young children at the time of first settlement), states that the first settlers referenced above (after Thornton) were Scotch-Irish families, who elected not to remain in Dublin and seem to have been “forgotten” in Dublin’s historical records.

o In the 2^nd History of Dublin, in which Rev. Josiah L. Seward continued and expanded the earlier Leonard History of 1855 to 1917, it was suggested that there are “two or three hundred graves within the cemetery which have never been marked” in addition to the 1136 graves which had positive identification.

Pond (Range 1. lot 10). He was apparently buried slightly to the Southeast of he early part of the burial ground “near where the hearse house formally stood”. My assumption is that his unmarked grave was either in the expanded South area or Carriage Lane area of the cemetery or where Rt. 101 is located-we will never know.

o The Town Histories indicate that the Cemetery has been used from the time of the first settlement. When the first burial date occurred is unclear, based on the above. We do know that, in 1764, it was voted to fix the precise location of the Meeting House (within cemetery lands) ( Range VI, lot 11) as well as clear an area for burial purposes and a training field, which I assume to be the 10 acres for public use which includes the original Town Common., pound, and the earliest sections of the cemetery.

Given the fact that these areas were recognized as early as 1751 as being the Town Center requiring a 10 acre public use reserve, confirmed in 1764 with the charge to locate the first Meeting House specifically within that area, I believe that Mr. Allison, in his signage wording, was correct in that the Cemetery location was established for the town within his indicated date. Mr. Harris’s date of the first “recorded” burial is also considered correct, unless new records emerge which shows earlier activity. I personally believe that the area was used for burials prior to 1767, based on early mortality statistics and settlement activity within Dublin.

It is frustrating to try to untangle this, based on a scarcity of written data, particularly from the 1750-1770 period in our history. Per Town Archivist Nancy Campbell, many records are missing, including the first Clerk’s Book which could have essential information to help fill in the blanks.

The Cemetery Trustees do have a responsibility and interest to maintain accurate signage within the cemetery. I think that the minimal signage now present, as currently worded, is not wrong, but a more comprehensive sign which offers a more complete history would be welcome. We would be happy to work with any interested individual or group who would be willing to raise the necessary funds to provide and install appropriate alternate or supplementary signage which would detail the cemetery’s rich history. Thanks.