HomeMy WebLinkAbout2037.7 Letter, Topographical Survey Commission to Governor of Massachusetts regarding the Waltham-Lexington boundary, November 6, 1895 C:O11111101a-om(th of fflassachusetts.
TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY COMMISSION.
Office, Commonwealth Building, 11 Mt, Vernon Street,
HENRY L. WHITING,
DESMOND FITZGERALD, Commissioners.
ALFRED E. BURTON,
November 6th, 5
To His Excellency
Frederick T.Greenhalge
Governor of 1=1assachusetts .
Your cohn_lissioners beg leave to present the folluTiin- report
in reference to the requirements of the act of the General Court
below cited, as follows: -
Chapter 229,Acts of 1595.
An act to locate and define the boundary line bet"reen the
city of Walthm Cant. tthe of Lexington.
Section 1 . The commissioners on the topo�;ra,phical survey and
map of 11assachusetts, a.fter hea,ri.ig parties interested, upon proper
notice, a,re hereby authorized and directed to locate and defi-ne
the true boundary line between the city of W,-_ltha.,m and tllhc town
of LexinGton) and to Y-nark said boundary line by appropriate
monuments . The boundary line thus located and defined shall be
the true and correct boun-'ar y line between said city of
and said town of Lexington.
Section 2. This act shall take effect upon its passo.ge.
Approved lurch 27, 1395 .
2
In execution of the work assigned to there the commissioners
r��ve due notice to parties interested of a hearing to be given by
U o
their board at the City Hall in Waltham on Wednesday the fifteenth
of May current .
At this hearing v�,,rious . stateiaents were made in regard to
the location and marking of the points defining the boundary line
between the city of Waltham and the town of Lexington.
Reference was made to the establishment of this line as far
back Ns 1635, defined at one end by a "poplar tree" on the north
west shore of the "Great Fresh Pond" , and, " from the tree up into
the country north west by west upon a straight line by a meridian
compass" . No evidence was given as to more definate data affect-
ing the initial points or the direction of this line of boundary:
and further than this, on examination of the ground in question
the commissioners were unable to deterL?irie eiti.er the initi2.1-
points or the direction of the line referred to .
The identity and correct position of the initial points of
the boundary line between Waltham and Lexington, a,s at present
marked and defined were questioned,but testimony was given as to
the permanent existence of the position of these points and the
monument s L rking them during the la St 3�: 1 ears, and other testi-
mony certifying to 55 years.
Another question of boundary was raised in reference to the
location a-id extent of a tract of land said to be within the
. territory of the 'city of Waltham and foi-i-iierl;r belon in- to Iiatthew
Bridge:. . No definite evidence was given a to the location, exte3Lt
or iila,rking of this tract of land. The question of boundary,how-
ever, involved both legislative and municipal action in relation
to this tract of land and the cormnissi.oners deemed it their duty
to investigate fully the ler al bea,rin[-s of the case, and to this
end referred the natter to a professional conveyancer who reported
as follows :
"As the result of my investigation of the contention between
the towns of Lexington and W Jltham I beg leave to report that so
fe,r as appears of record, I an unable to definitely locate ghat is
commonly known as the 'I atthew Bridge Farm' . `there is, however,no
doubt but that the property is located within either the limits
of the present city of Waltham or the town of Belmont, and is not
a part of the town of Lexington.
Originally that part-;of the country now called Lexington,
was known as the North Parish of CaTibridge, and was set off as such
Decer7ber 16th, 1691,bsing described as follows :- TBeginning at the
fir„t run of water or swEunp place, over which is a bridge or gray,
o � tLe south side of. Francis Whitten, ore' s house towards the town
of Ca abridge, across the neck of land between the Woburn line and
that of Watertewn,upon a South-west and North-east course# .
On the 20th day of 1:larch, 1712, the North Parish of Cambridge was
incorporated as the town of Lexington. Liatthew Bridge was the
first Town Clerk of that town.
On the 26th day of I.Aarch, 1755,Matthew Bridge petitioned the
General Court as follows: ' That he is very inconveniently situated
for attending public worship of God in either of the meeting
houses of Cambridge, and much more comriodiously situated for the
meeting house in Waltham, and .prays that lie alp.,' his estate riay be
set off to the town of Waltham' ,which petition .was granted June
lst, 1755, in which decree it also appears that the estate of
Matthew Bridge comprised some fourteen or fifteen acres .
On I arch 18th, 1859, the town of Belmont was incorporated,
being comprised of certain portions of the towns of Watertown,
Wa,lthmn and West Cambridge, in the description of which is set
forth the fact that the North-westerly boundary line of the town
of Lel1tiont , runs to a certain stone post; ' said post being at the
extreme south-east corner of Lexington' , from which the inevitable
conclusion must be that as Lexington was set off from Carlbrid�;e
1,1 1712,which was forty-three years prior to the filing of the
petition of I,,Iatthew Bridge to have his property incorporated into
the town of Waltham,which property, at that later date was set
forth as being in Cambridge,iiiust have been in that portion of
Cambride not set off as Lexington, a,nd as there does not appear
ever
to have^been `aiy change made in the boundary line between Lexing-
ton and Waltham since the incorporation of the former in 1712,
and as the North-westerly line of Belmont defined by the Statute
5
of 1859, ran up to the Lexington line, the farm of Matthew Bridge
must have been in that part of Wa,lthaau adjoining Cambridge,which,
was absorbed by the for__.ation of the tow. of Bell:Ecnt, and is to-day
a part of that town.
Therefore, as the duty of your Board is tc define the lime
between Lexington and Waltham. only, I fail to discover any reason
ashy you should consider the question of title to the Bridge Farrel
at L"111 it being entirely within the town of Belmont" .
After due consideration of all the evidence given in the case
your commissioners are of the opinion that there in not sufficient
cause for changing the position of the bounds already in existence
and ° deter.-lined by triangulation" and which for so rimy y ear=s
have been acknowledged. as marking the boundary line between the
city of Walthami and the town of Lexington.
n
Therezore, your cGrEaIissicners hereby locate and define the
boundary line between the city of Waltham and the town of Lexing-
ton to be as follows : -
Beginning at a point corunon to the adjoining municipalities
Of Waltha1;1, Lexingten and Lincoln and marked by an appropriate
stone monument having the letters W.L .L. cut thereonand situated.
in North Latitude 420 25' 28: 18 and in West Longitude 71 ° 161 030.80
and run,.aing thence in a straight line the true course of which is
South 66 ° 081 East a distance of 16529 .9 feet to a point common
to the adjoining muni.cipalities of W,Flthas_i, Lexington and Belmont
G
and marked. b; an appropriate stone monument havinf; t .e letters
W.L .L. cut triereon situated in North Latitude 42 ° 24' 22:07 and
4Jest Lon it,dde 710 12' 4-2;31 . Said line to be hereafter regarded
as the true and correct boundary line between the city of Waltham
and the torn of Lexington.
Respectfu11y submitted,