Joseph Dow's History of Hampton: EXCLUSION OF PAUPERS -- THE CITIZEN ON SQUAMSCOTT PATENT
EXCLUSION OF PAUPERS
This regulation was made to avoid the support of paupers; for by a law of the colony, then in force, if a person not having a family, should be resident in any town in the colony, more than three months, without being formally notified of the town's unwillingness that he should remain, he should, if needy, be provided for and relieved by such town.
No particular reason is assigned for passing such a vote at this time, but one may be inferred, from another vote passed at the same meeting, relation to one Christopher Gould, subjecting any person who should receive him into his family, to the fine specified in the former vote.
THE CITIZEN ON SQUAMSCOTT PATENT
The part of the common whence these logs had been taken is now included within the limits of Exeter. It had hitherto been considered as a part of Hampton, and it evidently belonged to this town according to several acts of the General Court, in which the boundaries of the two towns were described. But not long after this a controversy arose concerning tract of land near the borders of these towns, in which this portion was probably included. Of this controversy and its result, some account will be given farther on.